Recruitment Mafia IV: Dawn of the Clans (End Game)

[Ricochet]

Why have you been voting nutella since D3, Marsh? You've barely replied to her three times and never stated any suspicion.

[Marmot]

Why have you been voting nutella since D3, Marsh? You've barely replied to her three times and never stated any suspicion.

Day 3 was for reasons. Day 4 is just a placeholder so I can see the poll.

[Ricochet]

Why have you been voting nutella since D3, Marsh? You've barely replied to her three times and never stated any suspicion.

Day 3 was for reasons. Day 4 is just a placeholder so I can see the poll.

Where were reasons, though?

[Marmot]

Why have you been voting nutella since D3, Marsh? You've barely replied to her three times and never stated any suspicion.

Day 3 was for reasons. Day 4 is just a placeholder so I can see the poll.

Where were reasons, though?

Unstated, yo.

[Scotty]

There's the vague and unhelpful Marmot from Watchmen I've grown suspicious of all over again!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmRU50azMRI

[unfurl]

Bye Golden, I hope you get you wish to comeback to the game

I hope people today will act more reasonable. For me yesterdays lynch was rather disturbing and I do not understand some of the way over the top antics that are being employed during this game. It is distracting and for me very unhelpful.

I want to hunt baddies - there have been recruits and there are recruiters. I am done hearing about how Neutrals can be bad. I am sorry but Neutrals are Neutrals. How can you be a bad Neutral? Makes no sense.

If you would like to discuss possible recruiters/recruitees then quote this and list your top two suspects that you feel fit the bill.

I dont trust MP or bwt, I think you know that
I think aapje has dissapear from the map, so I think thats weird, even if he was not trying to hunt baddies he was participating with questions

I dont know if the Golden vs Boomsland, can give us some clues, like where people trying to save Boomslang by votting Golden, or is Boomslang a neutral and he just happend for people to place votes too?

Also rey voted for himself, but before the thread was lock, he changed his vote to Golden making it a tie, something to consider

[Scotty]

Happy Birthday BR

Golden I am terribly sorry. King Arthur all over again. Tonight I will pull the quote up and sig it for you. That said, I did not frame you.

Some people can't read the spoiler tage on their skin, and that post is too long to quote, so I will link it:

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... d7#p171628

I don't know the last time YOU framed someone, Scotty (or you, for that matter,too, Sorsha) but the last time I framed someone, I was their biggest defender in the thread. I avenged their death. I carefully avoided the thread when their biggest detractors were there. I watched them die and the point of the frame was not them being dead (although that was a bonus)~ the point was all the civvie cred I got by sticking up for them. Framing someone by killing their loudest opponent, and then attacking them for it is a losing maneouver, becasue, um, they were framed and everyone knows it, doh. This popped into my mind when someone came into the thread, I believe it was Sorsha, but not 100% sure, I will check when not on phone, and made that post about how she had not played for a while, and maybe her memory was faulty, but gee, when someone was framed, didn't their framers hound them most in the thread? Who WERE those people? It popped into my head that the one being framed was ME, lol. But I blew that off, becasue I was really pretty sure Maybe I should not have, and maybe it was just a gut reaction i had to a passing remark, not unlike the reaction I had to Goldens post about Epis death.

I am looking forward to the comparing the reactions of all those who seemed to think an unrecruited Bass lynch was OK to THIS lynch. I really am. I am ready to call hypocrite if the rejoicing for Bass' death is replaced by dirges for Goldens. No one is sorrier for Goldens death than I, and I think he knows that knowing the history we have.

Linki~ yeah, I really wish Wilgy would stop using MPs avatar. It's disconcerting.

I actually agree with you points- if I were framing, I would go about it much more subtler: dropping hints for other people to look at, not realyl being a detractor, but being suspicious nonetheless. But that's just me, not necessarily how everyone would frame someone.

In this case, Golden did himself in on many occasions by over-answering (and in timmer's case, under-answering lol) so the results of the frame are looking slightly inconclusive. I still have to look at Boomslang and reywaS, who I recognize as Golden's biggest detractor.

My next step is to look at who didn't vote Golden yesterday, but had a negative view of him in the thread that could have flung droplets of gasoline on the impending fire.

linki @unfurl: aapje did say he was looking to start doing baddie hunting by now, so that is definitely something to watch for...

[Marmot]

There's the vague and unhelpful Marmot from Watchmen I've grown suspicious of all over again!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmRU50azMRI

Yeah, sorry. I wasn't really around much yesterday, and I guess I didn't say much either.

Why's everyone voting Boomslang?

[unfurl]

MM and Unfurl. I miss you. Help me out and vot Sorsha

Why are you looking at Sorsha?

[unfurl]

Happy Birthday Black Rock, I hope you have a great day!

[Scotty]

@HOSTS Do you let the thread know every time a team has recruited, or is it just assumed? Like in that last contest, was someone recruited to Ahriman and Caelia?

And happy birthday Black Rockkkkkk

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Why's everyone voting Boomslang?

I made a case. It's not far back in my posts. Tell me what you think.

I'll look into other options when I get home.

[Tangrowth]

Okay, I'm here for just a few minutes in between tasks/errands. Should have time to post some replies.

Happy Birthday, BR!!!!

[Canucklehead]

@Boomslang voters: Does JJJ's ISO case adequately cover all the reasons why you chose to vote for Boom? Or are there other points you want to add?

[Typhoony]

Happy Birthday, BR

[Canucklehead]

I'm keeping my vote on TinyBubbles for now, and will do so until she actually engages with (or even ACKNOPWLEDGES) the concerns that have been raised about her, by me and others.

[Canucklehead]

@Boomslang voters: Does JJJ's ISO case adequately cover all the reasons why you chose to vote for Boom? Or are there other points you want to add?

JJJ seems to be stepping up admirably to take the scrutiny about the rush of Boomslang votes..... and I REALLY am very itchy about how other Boomslang bandwagoners are just letting him do so....

[Tangrowth]

Alright folks, here are my responses to things!

Spoiler: show

I would have been disappointed if Golden had been lynched yesterday because he is hands down the player in this game who is being forthright and completely honest about his intentions and I believe him. I think he is neutral. I think his actions make sense given that he baited Epi. However, I think despite the fact that Golden is doing whatever he can to lay his heart out there, players are taking advantage of him as an easy target. In contrast, Bass seemed very shifty, and only seemed to give opinions on anything once he was prompted to do so, with the exception of his wacky theory on me which I already told him didn't make sense because he was alleging I said the opposite of what I really said.

Are you saying that you think that everyone that addressed and voted for Golden only did so to take advantage of an easy target? No one's thoughts on Golden were legitimate?

reywaS, no, I am not saying that at all. I think the fact that Golden has decided to lay out his intentions completely in the thread, the fact that he can't ever stop talking to anyone that mentions his name (I can relate, I have this problem too), and is such a high poster with an incredible reputation, all make him a relatively easy target in this game for mafia to take advantage of it.

I do not think that everyone has done that, since that would be impossible, and it's inevitable that some players legitimately thought that Golden killed Epi. I just think that Golden has made it easier for them to think that based on the way he's conducted himself and the fact that players are scrutinizing his many posts very heavily. Does that make sense?

Spoiler: show

Observation 7: I think JJJ demanding that Bass post reads of ten players or else be lynched was super unfair and put Bass in a very difficult spot. Mafia is about detecting the bad guys, not forcing players to dance for your amusement under threat of death. I don't like it. I don't know if it makes JJJ bad, but I don't like it.

I think this mindset is counter-intuitive. You're right that it put Bass in a difficult spot -- that was the point. Prior to that interaction he had said exactly nothing about players not named Bass or MP; I sought to change that. There were two reasons for this:

1.) His responses might have improved or worsened his standing before I placed my vote. I was toying with a number of votes at that point and Bass was the frontrunner. I needed some way of inspiring content from him that might influence my decision. One response which he was free to make, which I honestly expect from an innocent mindset, is "No, JJJ. I'm not going to post reads for you because X." Somewhat akin to DH's response to MP's request for a rainbow.

He chose to provide responses. The effort was appreciated, but the content of that effort did not make me feel better. I wasn't the only one to feel that way.

2.) In the event of a baddie flip by Bass, having a number of baseline reads from him would have been very useful information post-mortem. I didn't want him to get away with having only established minor links with MP and yourself.

What I find dubious, llama, is that you don't seem willing to grant that what I was doing was directly relevant to "detecting bad guys". I wasn't forcing Bass to "dance for my amusement" at all.

JaggedJimmyJay, I agree that your question to Bass was not at all mean, manipulative, or anything like that. Baddie hunts have to happen. Bass was hardly issuing opinions on anyone all game.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 31#p170831
Spacedaisy, this is an excellent post on unfurl. I'm surprised it hasn't received even more attention than it has this cycle.

I find myself in agreement; unfurl is definitely one of my highest mafia reads at the moment.

Spoiler: show

Linki: Does TinyBubbles normally have more significant posts than what she's displayed in this game? Because I think this is the first time I've ever played with her. Even still, the content I've seen would hardly suggest she is "emotionally invested" whatsoever.

birdwithteeth, never sure that anyone answered your question here. TinyBubbles' post count seems comparable, for the most part, to other games I've played with her and witnessed from her. I do find merit in much of the suspicion surrounding her, however, since I believe her content is different from what I've typically seen, though not drastically.

Spoiler: show

Rey, the answer to your question is:

No, I do not think you are a shitty player, I think you are Azura.

I am going to be lynched today. Everyone will know that those who insist I'm bad are wrong, and then you should examine those people's motives and posts very carefully...

You should note that SVS said 'the civ golden she knows would fight not to get recruited bad' and then ignore the posts that point to me doing exactly that - including me trying to get epi killed. JJJ even outlined it very carefully - how me getting epi killed looks very much like an effort to not be recruited bad (this is definitely one part of my motivation). SVS next post is immediately after. She said she couldn't believe the level of my emotional manipulation, and she is very happy with her vote. She claims to be an expert in my civilian game, but she has been wilfully blind to everything I've given her to see I am playing exactly that game. SVS has mostly seemed sincere before, but she has demonstrated a particular hardheadedness that I'm beginning to find convenient. Her initial suspicion on me I found very easy to believe, but her refusal to hear any rebuttal is something I think everyone should be interested in.

Rey - I'll admit his recent self-vote makes me wonder. He has begun to sound a lot like me, telling me what I should know about him 'full well', which is a favourite of mine when I'm frustrated. Which might be a good sign for him. Nevertheless, his posts should be scrutinised. He found weak reasons to jump on me on both days, and he recently claimed I've been misrepresenting him on the matter of 'motivation' when I've been raising it over and over again for days and he hasn't responded to it once until now. It's hard to misrepresent someone on something when they don't represent themselves on it to begin with. Again, though, his explanation for what he meant by 'motivation' meshes with his actions. Maybe I've been harsh on rey.

Boomslang - I recommend everyone iso him, but particularly JJ. He has been pretty consistent on me, and his logic seems overall sound, but he hasn't talked about a lot else. Take the G-Man kill into account when you read it. Could be nothing, but I think this is very interesting when I did it.

DH - Read the number of interactions between DH and I before he declared he was scared of me, and see if any of you think that was a genuine statement. It didn't bother me because DH has said all sorts of random things today, and I took his vote for me as a neutral vote that was no skin off his nose. But then he started going after me for the difference between him being scared and a threat, and the more I pushed him on it, the less sincere I felt he was. Finally the dam burst and we got some honestly from him, which can only be a good thing. But everyone should consider whether any of you were legitimately scared of me killing you when DH said he was, and then consider how little interaction we'd actually had towards each other before then, and wonder what is going on there...

That's all. I think Dom's vote for me was really very genuine. Other votes haven't bothered me at all.

If I have the chance to vote again and think there is a realistic chance of my survival in doing so, then I will. I will say that my self vote is not that I WANT out. I really don't. It's just that I don't have a lot of faith that there is anything I can do to claw this back.

What do players think of this post by Golden, now knowing that he's unrecruited?

Spoiler: show

MP, I think Azura forcing votes on Golden is perfectly compatible with the type of "wanting him gone from a distance" you bring up. Also, the more she targeted people who were undecided or opposed to a Golden lynch, the more effective her force would be.

I'm not asking for confirmation (you could only hint at it, after all, but not make any open statement), your reply is duly noted, but I'll also keep in mind my own interpretation. For one thing, this forced viewpoint puts you in a better light, because if you were actually genuine in your crazy cyan mode, that makes me feel worse 'bout you. I have a few other people in mind, as well. For a moment, I thought Golden himself was punished to vote himself, poor guy, but then he didn't stick to it, so his moments of defeatism looks to be confirmed genuine.

But... I was serious about crazy cyan.
Rico, I agree that sideline Azura + voting others to vote for Golden are compatible. Which players come to mind with "wanting him gone from a distance" and playing on the sidelines? For me, I'd say unfurl, TinyBubbles, and aapje.

What do all of you players think?

Spoiler: show

Also I'm no longer a sock. Sorry bro...

DrW, don't sweat it! Sock bros for life in spirit.

Spoiler: show

Bye Golden, I hope you get you wish to comeback to the game

I hope people today will act more reasonable. For me yesterdays lynch was rather disturbing and I do not understand some of the way over the top antics that are being employed during this game. It is distracting and for me very unhelpful.

I want to hunt baddies - there have been recruits and there are recruiters. I am done hearing about how Neutrals can be bad. I am sorry but Neutrals are Neutrals. How can you be a bad Neutral? Makes no sense.

If you would like to discuss possible recruiters/recruitees then quote this and list your top two suspects that you feel fit the bill.

I dont trust MP or bwt, I think you know that
I think aapje has dissapear from the map, so I think thats weird, even if he was not trying to hunt baddies he was participating with questions

I dont know if the Golden vs Boomsland, can give us some clues, like where people trying to save Boomslang by votting Golden, or is Boomslang a neutral and he just happend for people to place votes too?

Also rey voted for himself, but before the thread was lock, he changed his vote to Golden making it a tie, something to consider

unfurl, why don't you trust me? I remember your D1 vote for me, but if I recall correctly, you've hardly mentioned me again until now.

Re: the bolded/underlined, so... does this mean you suspect rey for that or what? You just say it's something to consider. So what do you think of it?

[Tangrowth]

Also, here is my Boomslang response I was typing up last night and tried to submit but then the thread was locked:

So, MP. If not Golden, who're you thinking? I've spent too much time this phase defending Golden's honor (so've you). Help me decide who should die instead. Obviously Boomslang was my prior inclination. He just made a post. Does that post make you feel anything?

It makes me feel a very small something. Indignant neutral? Hmmm...

Good question, sir. I agree we need to avoid talking about Golden and discuss actual other candidates.

I'm working on responding to some other posts in another window as we speak, but I can keep chatting here.

Regarding Boomslang... OK, here's where my mind is at. I can understand why everyone finds his indignant self-vote suspicious. I even find it somewhat suspicious. However, I know Boomslang quite well. He was one of my groomsmen at my wedding (along with birdwithteeth, Devin, and Russ).

I also know his RL is busy. Regarding his mafia meta, in past games he never was one to be a super high poster, but to contribute a couple times a cycle when he really felt he had something to say. With that said, he's somewhat of an enigma for me from a meta standpoint, since he hasn't played TOO many mafia games, and he's returning from a hiatus with this game and Angry Birds. So my judgment of him relies on RL meta, not mafia meta really.

I'm literally torn right down the middle with my thoughts on Boomslang:

1) Half of me finds the fact that Boomslang has consistently been on Golden and hardly contributed much else to be opportunistic. Part of me also sees his self-vote perhaps as a frustrated Azura or Azura teammate since it appears to me that team is absolutely trying to take advantage of Golden (assuming Golden is not on that team) and use him as a free lynch today.

2) The other half of me can actually get inside Boomslang's head and see where he's coming from, but mostly because I know him well. Boomslang is a sharp guy. He's really good at strategy games. I can see why he thinks self-voting is absolutely absurd, since he has a similar perspective to mine on the matter. Consistently with that, he voted for me after I self-voted on Day 1 of Angry Birds (but I won't mention more since that game is ongoing; I just wanted to demonstrate that fact). So I can easily see a scenario in which a neutral, or even civilian, Boomslang doesn't want to bother to pick up the WIFOM that Golden is laying down, doesn't trust him at all, and thus is voting for him. I can absolutely see this. If that is the case, and if Golden isn't bad, then Boomslang is an alternate option for mafia shenanigans, assuming this vote continues to be that specific two-man race.

If I had to pick one of the two candidates at gunpoint, I'd actually pick number 2, and assess that Boomslang is a neutral being utilized by the mafia.

Linki: ...and it appears this topic is locked. Crap. I forgot about that. I'll just add this to the other content I'm writing in other windows, I suppose, and post it later.

[Tangrowth]

Alright, folks, gotta run. Be back tonight or tomorrow night, not sure yet.

[unfurl]

Spoiler: show

Bye Golden, I hope you get you wish to comeback to the game

I hope people today will act more reasonable. For me yesterdays lynch was rather disturbing and I do not understand some of the way over the top antics that are being employed during this game. It is distracting and for me very unhelpful.

I want to hunt baddies - there have been recruits and there are recruiters. I am done hearing about how Neutrals can be bad. I am sorry but Neutrals are Neutrals. How can you be a bad Neutral? Makes no sense.

If you would like to discuss possible recruiters/recruitees then quote this and list your top two suspects that you feel fit the bill.

I dont trust MP or bwt, I think you know that
I think aapje has dissapear from the map, so I think thats weird, even if he was not trying to hunt baddies he was participating with questions

I dont know if the Golden vs Boomsland, can give us some clues, like where people trying to save Boomslang by votting Golden, or is Boomslang a neutral and he just happend for people to place votes too?

Also rey voted for himself, but before the thread was lock, he changed his vote to Golden making it a tie, something to consider

unfurl, why don't you trust me? I remember your D1 vote for me, but if I recall correctly, you've hardly mentioned me again until now.

Re: the bolded/underlined, so... does this mean you suspect rey for that or what? You just say it's something to consider. So what do you think of it?

I said I was gonna keep open mind about you, but it does not mean I trust you, Gaining my trust is something someone ever harldy able to do
Maybe is just a clash of style, but I think you are a very agrresive player and you like to corner people so at the end they end up looking suspicios and then if they turn out they were neutral, you can wash the blood of your hand, hey they were acting certain way, is not your fault, example bass lynch, and if you are able to lynch me then I will another players that you will go, hey she was acting weird is her fault

I do want to hear what rey has to said first, why he changed his vote toward golden right before the thread was lock?

[thellama73]

I'm keeping my vote on TinyBubbles for now, and will do so until she actually engages with (or even ACKNOPWLEDGES) the concerns that have been raised about her, by me and others.

Vote registered for TinyBubbles.

[Black Rock]

@HOSTS Do you let the thread know every time a team has recruited, or is it just assumed? Like in that last contest, was someone recruited to Ahriman and Caelia?

And happy birthday Black Rockkkkkk

Yes we are going to. I am still waiting on a team leader to finish the last recruitment contest. Slow Leader is slow.

[thellama73]

Regarding Boomslang... OK, here's where my mind is at. I can understand why everyone finds his indignant self-vote suspicious. I even find it somewhat suspicious. However, I know Boomslang quite well. He was one of my groomsmen at my wedding (along with birdwithteeth, Devin, and Russ).

I also know his RL is busy. Regarding his mafia meta, in past games he never was one to be a super high poster, but to contribute a couple times a cycle when he really felt he had something to say. With that said, he's somewhat of an enigma for me from a meta standpoint, since he hasn't played TOO many mafia games, and he's returning from a hiatus with this game and Angry Birds. So my judgment of him relies on RL meta, not mafia meta really.

I'm literally torn right down the middle with my thoughts on Boomslang:

1) Half of me finds the fact that Boomslang has consistently been on Golden and hardly contributed much else to be opportunistic. Part of me also sees his self-vote perhaps as a frustrated Azura or Azura teammate since it appears to me that team is absolutely trying to take advantage of Golden (assuming Golden is not on that team) and use him as a free lynch today.

2) The other half of me can actually get inside Boomslang's head and see where he's coming from, but mostly because I know him well. Boomslang is a sharp guy. He's really good at strategy games. I can see why he thinks self-voting is absolutely absurd, since he has a similar perspective to mine on the matter. Consistently with that, he voted for me after I self-voted on Day 1 of Angry Birds (but I won't mention more since that game is ongoing; I just wanted to demonstrate that fact). So I can easily see a scenario in which a neutral, or even civilian, Boomslang doesn't want to bother to pick up the WIFOM that Golden is laying down, doesn't trust him at all, and thus is voting for him. I can absolutely see this. If that is the case, and if Golden isn't bad, then Boomslang is an alternate option for mafia shenanigans, assuming this vote continues to be that specific two-man race.

If I had to pick one of the two candidates at gunpoint, I'd actually pick number 2, and assess that Boomslang is a neutral being utilized by the mafia.

Equivocate much, MP?

[Bubbles]

rip golden, and happy birthday black rock!
also canucklehead what concerns? if you mean my comment about being emotionally invested, it's based not only on this game but every game since the first, i felt like golden was always targeted for being talkative and often ended up in(what seemed to be) arguments, i was uncomfortable. i dont know what else to tell you, the amount of posts a person makes doesnt relate directly to how affected they are by the game, everyone has different limits and different expectations.

[unfurl]

Rico, I agree that sideline Azura + voting others to vote for Golden are compatible. Which players come to mind with "wanting him gone from a distance" and playing on the sidelines? For me, I'd say unfurl, TinyBubbles, and aapje.

What do all of you players think?

Seriously MP,wow,
Golden was among the players, that was ok with how Im playing, he did thought I was just being me
why on earth I would want him gone? ask yourself that
you are clearly think Im some mastefull evil mind, or you want others to think that

[DharmaHelper]

Regarding Boomslang... OK, here's where my mind is at. I can understand why everyone finds his indignant self-vote suspicious. I even find it somewhat suspicious. However, I know Boomslang quite well. He was one of my groomsmen at my wedding (along with birdwithteeth, Devin, and Russ).

I also know his RL is busy. Regarding his mafia meta, in past games he never was one to be a super high poster, but to contribute a couple times a cycle when he really felt he had something to say. With that said, he's somewhat of an enigma for me from a meta standpoint, since he hasn't played TOO many mafia games, and he's returning from a hiatus with this game and Angry Birds. So my judgment of him relies on RL meta, not mafia meta really.

I'm literally torn right down the middle with my thoughts on Boomslang:

1) Half of me finds the fact that Boomslang has consistently been on Golden and hardly contributed much else to be opportunistic. Part of me also sees his self-vote perhaps as a frustrated Azura or Azura teammate since it appears to me that team is absolutely trying to take advantage of Golden (assuming Golden is not on that team) and use him as a free lynch today.

2) The other half of me can actually get inside Boomslang's head and see where he's coming from, but mostly because I know him well. Boomslang is a sharp guy. He's really good at strategy games. I can see why he thinks self-voting is absolutely absurd, since he has a similar perspective to mine on the matter. Consistently with that, he voted for me after I self-voted on Day 1 of Angry Birds (but I won't mention more since that game is ongoing; I just wanted to demonstrate that fact). So I can easily see a scenario in which a neutral, or even civilian, Boomslang doesn't want to bother to pick up the WIFOM that Golden is laying down, doesn't trust him at all, and thus is voting for him. I can absolutely see this. If that is the case, and if Golden isn't bad, then Boomslang is an alternate option for mafia shenanigans, assuming this vote continues to be that specific two-man race.

If I had to pick one of the two candidates at gunpoint, I'd actually pick number 2, and assess that Boomslang is a neutral being utilized by the mafia.

Equivocate much, MP?

I too love guacamole.

[Canucklehead]

rip golden, and happy birthday black rock!
also canucklehead what concerns? if you mean my comment about being emotionally invested, it's based not only on this game but every game since the first, i felt like golden was always targeted for being talkative and often ended up in(what seemed to be) arguments, i was uncomfortable. i dont know what else to tell you, the amount of posts a person makes doesnt relate directly to how affected they are by the game, everyone has different limits and different expectations.

This is a non-answer. If you had actually read my post (and those of other people who have commented), you'd know that my thoughts about you had little to do with post count, and everything to do with a contradiction between your claim of being "emotionally invested" and the CONTENT (not the quantity) of your posts, which bear absolutely no evidence of anything I would ever classify as "emotional investment". Obviously, "everyone has different limits and different expectations".... but that has nothing to do with my suspicions of you. To put it more plainly, I am suspicious of what appears to me to be an attempt by you to *seem* involved in the game and to present yourself as such ("Guyyyyyssssss I'm SO EMOTIONALLY invested! Emotions! I feel things about this game!"), juxtaposed with the lack of substantive content in any of your posts and (most importantly) your refusal to acknowledge any of the suspicions and comments about you, which an "emotionally invested" person would not do, and (more tellingly) which a *civ* would not do. I think you were hoping to float by under the radar by ignoring things said about you and focusing on the Big Emotional Things, like Golden's Saga of Bullsuit Drama. I think your interactions with Llama on Day 1 may have made you an appealing target for a baddie recruiter. I think you've been recruited and are hiding.
I'm sorry that you "don't know what else to tell me". I feel like a good place to start might be to tell me who you're suspicious of, what you think about llama's continuing suspicion of you, why you haven't addressed anyone's comments about you before now..... you know, basic bullsuit like that.

[Tangrowth]

Spoiler: show

Bye Golden, I hope you get you wish to comeback to the game

I hope people today will act more reasonable. For me yesterdays lynch was rather disturbing and I do not understand some of the way over the top antics that are being employed during this game. It is distracting and for me very unhelpful.

I want to hunt baddies - there have been recruits and there are recruiters. I am done hearing about how Neutrals can be bad. I am sorry but Neutrals are Neutrals. How can you be a bad Neutral? Makes no sense.

If you would like to discuss possible recruiters/recruitees then quote this and list your top two suspects that you feel fit the bill.

I dont trust MP or bwt, I think you know that
I think aapje has dissapear from the map, so I think thats weird, even if he was not trying to hunt baddies he was participating with questions

I dont know if the Golden vs Boomsland, can give us some clues, like where people trying to save Boomslang by votting Golden, or is Boomslang a neutral and he just happend for people to place votes too?

Also rey voted for himself, but before the thread was lock, he changed his vote to Golden making it a tie, something to consider

unfurl, why don't you trust me? I remember your D1 vote for me, but if I recall correctly, you've hardly mentioned me again until now.

Re: the bolded/underlined, so... does this mean you suspect rey for that or what? You just say it's something to consider. So what do you think of it?

I said I was gonna keep open mind about you, but it does not mean I trust you, Gaining my trust is something someone ever harldy able to do
Maybe is just a clash of style, but I think you are a very agrresive player and you like to corner people so at the end they end up looking suspicios and then if they turn out they were neutral, you can wash the blood of your hand, hey they were acting certain way, is not your fault, example bass lynch, and if you are able to lynch me then I will another players that you will go, hey she was acting weird is her fault

I do want to hear what rey has to said first, why he changed his vote toward golden right before the thread was lock?

Thanks for the response

I'm on phone while waiting to get my Texas vehicle tags and such

Where did you get that impression about me that I skirt responsibility for my vote and blame the victim? I always am forthright in taking responsibility for my votes, so I find your accusation to be strange. If you're referring to Bass, I was obviously wrong about him being mafia, and have never claimed it was his fault that I voted for him. I did explain my suspicion clearly and why he received my vote and why I wasn't particularly heartbroken over his death, but I never once claimed to shirk responsibility for my vote.

[Tangrowth]

Regarding Boomslang... OK, here's where my mind is at. I can understand why everyone finds his indignant self-vote suspicious. I even find it somewhat suspicious. However, I know Boomslang quite well. He was one of my groomsmen at my wedding (along with birdwithteeth, Devin, and Russ).

I also know his RL is busy. Regarding his mafia meta, in past games he never was one to be a super high poster, but to contribute a couple times a cycle when he really felt he had something to say. With that said, he's somewhat of an enigma for me from a meta standpoint, since he hasn't played TOO many mafia games, and he's returning from a hiatus with this game and Angry Birds. So my judgment of him relies on RL meta, not mafia meta really.

I'm literally torn right down the middle with my thoughts on Boomslang:

1) Half of me finds the fact that Boomslang has consistently been on Golden and hardly contributed much else to be opportunistic. Part of me also sees his self-vote perhaps as a frustrated Azura or Azura teammate since it appears to me that team is absolutely trying to take advantage of Golden (assuming Golden is not on that team) and use him as a free lynch today.

2) The other half of me can actually get inside Boomslang's head and see where he's coming from, but mostly because I know him well. Boomslang is a sharp guy. He's really good at strategy games. I can see why he thinks self-voting is absolutely absurd, since he has a similar perspective to mine on the matter. Consistently with that, he voted for me after I self-voted on Day 1 of Angry Birds (but I won't mention more since that game is ongoing; I just wanted to demonstrate that fact). So I can easily see a scenario in which a neutral, or even civilian, Boomslang doesn't want to bother to pick up the WIFOM that Golden is laying down, doesn't trust him at all, and thus is voting for him. I can absolutely see this. If that is the case, and if Golden isn't bad, then Boomslang is an alternate option for mafia shenanigans, assuming this vote continues to be that specific two-man race.

If I had to pick one of the two candidates at gunpoint, I'd actually pick number 2, and assess that Boomslang is a neutral being utilized by the mafia.

Equivocate much, MP?

Huh?

[Marmot]

Why's everyone voting Boomslang?

I made a case. It's not far back in my posts. Tell me what you think.

I'll look into other options when I get home.

Thanks, I will. I'm still catching up on Day 3 stuff, but I've got plenty of free time tomorrow (Saturday).

[Tangrowth]

Rico, I agree that sideline Azura + voting others to vote for Golden are compatible. Which players come to mind with "wanting him gone from a distance" and playing on the sidelines? For me, I'd say unfurl, TinyBubbles, and aapje.

What do all of you players think?

Seriously MP,wow,
Golden was among the players, that was ok with how Im playing, he did thought I was just being me
why on earth I would want him gone? ask yourself that
you are clearly think Im some mastefull evil mind, or you want others to think that

Unfurl you keep espousing content as if I shouldn't be questioning anything you do and that I should just trust that you have sincere motives, sorry but that's not mafia so I think if you were civ or neutral you would understand why I'm questioning you.

From what I recall you barely committed to the Golden debacle so that's why I named you off the top of my head. I can ISO you later to confirm if you want.

Why on earth would you want golden gone? That's a ridiculous question since you could ask that of anyone. His interests might not have aligned with yours perhaps?

[Tangrowth]

rip golden, and happy birthday black rock!
also canucklehead what concerns? if you mean my comment about being emotionally invested, it's based not only on this game but every game since the first, i felt like golden was always targeted for being talkative and often ended up in(what seemed to be) arguments, i was uncomfortable. i dont know what else to tell you, the amount of posts a person makes doesnt relate directly to how affected they are by the game, everyone has different limits and different expectations.

This is a non-answer. If you had actually read my post (and those of other people who have commented), you'd know that my thoughts about you had little to do with post count, and everything to do with a contradiction between your claim of being "emotionally invested" and the CONTENT (not the quantity) of your posts, which bear absolutely no evidence of anything I would ever classify as "emotional investment". Obviously, "everyone has different limits and different expectations".... but that has nothing to do with my suspicions of you. To put it more plainly, I am suspicious of what appears to me to be an attempt by you to *seem* involved in the game and to present yourself as such ("Guyyyyyssssss I'm SO EMOTIONALLY invested! Emotions! I feel things about this game!"), juxtaposed with the lack of substantive content in any of your posts and (most importantly) your refusal to acknowledge any of the suspicions and comments about you, which an "emotionally invested" person would not do, and (more tellingly) which a *civ* would not do. I think you were hoping to float by under the radar by ignoring things said about you and focusing on the Big Emotional Things, like Golden's Saga of Bullsuit Drama. I think your interactions with Llama on Day 1 may have made you an appealing target for a baddie recruiter. I think you've been recruited and are hiding.
I'm sorry that you "don't know what else to tell me". I feel like a good place to start might be to tell me who you're suspicious of, what you think about llama's continuing suspicion of you, why you haven't addressed anyone's comments about you before now..... you know, basic bullsuit like that.

I'll vote Tiny right now. I too have been consistently dissatisfied with her responses.

Vote registered for tinybubbles

[Scotty]

Continuing from last night:

Boomslang: I looked through JJJ's ISO on Boom, since it's written out all spic and span nicely in his post history. As far as Boom's dealings with Golden are concerned, it's even thinner than I remembered. Boom has a total of 18 posts.
Day 1:

Spoiler: show

I tend to judge people as individuals not as reputations. My best game of all time was Rabbits SOT, I was a ... civvie. We had a large civ BTS group, and we worked pretty well together. That team has been my gold standard of what a team should be. Not so much for the individuals (although they all were awesome and people in the Mafia community that I <3 maybe a bit more than most) but for the way we worked together. I would want cohesion more than anything, really. Team players, no Prima Donnas.

What was your theory?

That a good choice for a first lynch might be someone who has a reputation for surviving deep and not getting caught when bad, since a baddie might try to recruit someone that gave them the best shot at winning. Someone like DF or DP, for example, who frequently fly under the radar. Or someone like Typhoony or llama who can often survive deep on their wily skills by not being too civvish to NK nor too baddie-looking to get lynched.

But if I look at my own psyche, I'd probably just pick people who I felt I could have fun with too. Or that I really wanted to have btsc with because I hadn't yet, or something.

Man, I'm always skeptical about the previous-game knowledge thing. If people have distinctive playstyles, that's great for them, but roles are always random. Maybe you tend to remember the conniving liar's FEB roles more vividly, but that's a confirmation bias; lying can be used just as effectively to promote the civ cause. So going after someone based on "reputation" alone just doesn't seem right.

Boom addresses Golden's playstyle in finding someone suspicious based on their "reputation". He disagrees that people known to go deep into games should be lynched first. Sure, ok. That's a legit opinion to have, I suppose.

Spoiler: show

Argh, I can't even comprehend the amount of posting that's going on here. Two big things stick out to me, and I want to confirm that I share the suspicions previously raised.

But I certainly think epi and I are not going to be on the same side at any point in this game. Recruiters would be daft to recruit us both on to the same side at this point.

The "certainly" is certainly a key word. Because the only way you'd know that for certain would be to be a recruiter yourself. At this point, the low-level animosity you've already established would be perfect for shedding suspicion of teamwork over time. I think you're being far too rash to discount that possibility.

The second is the continued insistence of some players, most recently Roxy, that this is not a good vs. evil game. It's written right there in the rules: civvie groups 1 and 2, baddie groups 1 and 2. There are lynches by civs and NKs by baddies that happen regardless of position. This is very clear, and I don't see why anyone would deny it except to sow confusion.

Boom says that a key word "certainly" stands out to him in his reread of Day 1. It seems like a very small word to latch onto, a la Epi latching onto weird grammar/syntax/adverbs at the beginning of Bullets over Broadway to catch a baddie. He mentions Golden's "low-level animosity" toward Epi as a perfect cover to distance himself from Epi over time if they were recruited to the same team. Boom doesn't like how sure Golden is at the lack of possibility in that happening.
This also is legit thinking. Suspicions are so far so good, I'd say.

Spoiler: show

Now that we've got this MP/Llama stuff, can be return to talking about Golden? The whole "I baited the baddies into a making the kill for me" line seems... unlikely to me. How could he have known that Epi was on the baddie team opposite from the one making the kill, unless he himself was on the baddie team making the kill?

After going after MP and llama a few posts before this, he wants to go back to Golden, and wonders why no one is talking about the Golden conspiracy! As JJJ said to this point, this doesn't imply that Golden knew that Epi was bad, and in fact Golden reiterates later that just having Epi in the game wasn't conducive to Golden's success in the game. In line with his thinking from the last suspicion, it seems Boom has this complex that sees Golden as "knowing" information that implicates him as a baddie. I don't think Golden's actions fully support it, but I can also see where Boom would be thinking so if he's in that one-track mind atm.

Spoiler: show

Been away for most of today, and don't have time to catch up completely. However, I noted that Dr. Wilgy finally came through on the explanation and seemed to do a good job of it. Briefly looking at things, I'm really very pinged by G-Man changing votes to Bass despite claiming that this change "has very little to do with any suspicion of Bass." I'm more pinged by him saying this move is to "keep Golden around." As I'm already suspicious of Golden, this claim makes me want to ensure that Golden doesn't stick around. *votes Golden*

linki: Heh, Dr. Wilgy is on call all day every day.

Day 2 rolls around and he doesn't have time to catch up completely. But he does get suspicious of G-Man for changing his vote to Bass in order to "keep Golden around." Instead of simply voting G-Man for this thought, he wants to just eliminate the source of G-Man's switch and votes Golden instead.
So he's punishing Golden for G-Man defending him. Interesting. If you're uber suspicious of someone, why wouldn't you vote for them instead of the person they're potentially trying to save? It's almost as if the entire post is fluff reasoning just to be able to vote Golden again. I would say this is a lazy vote, although it's in line with his suspicions of Golden all game thus far.

Spoiler: show

Facts: Golden expressed sincere desire to see Epignosis killed. Epignosis is killed on night 1 by Azura.

How Golden and his new cheerleader MovingPictures come off to me:

"Hey, guys, look I know that I/Golden am/is responsible for Azura (A confirmed baddie) killing Epignosis when literally the only person going after Epig was Golden, but he's getting a bad rap and I think everyone just needs to trust the guy. I promise he's not bad. You're crazy for going after him. Actually, you read as bad to me because you aren't giving Golden a free pass."


It's insanity. lol

THIS.

Nice emoticon. Further agreement with reywaS in the craziness of the situation with cheerleader MP and Golden WIFOMing his way out of it. I would like an original thought from Boom here, but eh.

Spoiler: show

Hey Boomslang!

Vote Boomslang

aapje is going to murder me

I'm sorry, I didn't think I had to defend my points on Golden when the guy is literally asking to be lynched. That's all I needed to know for today, honestly.
*votes Golden*

Here he could give 2 shits about responding to points made against him for voting Golden since Golden is doing himself in anyway. His mind is completely made up, and I would wager it was days ago.

Could Boom have set up Golden? I don't think so. He dropped light suspicion, but being such a low poster I see him more as a follower than a leader in that regard. His points against Golden, though often wrong and minimal, aren't completely unfounded. So out of all the voters, he and SVS so far have the most genuine matching of his through-line. It's things like this that didn't have me initially voting him in the Golden v Boom lynch. There's certainly a case posed against him in JJJ, and that has merit as well, but I don't see anything more than committing to voting Golden early and often.

reywaS: Here we go.

Day 1, he gets the popcorn out and enjoys watching the Epi v. Golden match.

Spoiler: show

@rey - exactly. That's why I find it very hard to see BWT as coming from a genuine place. I am, however, very familiar with being a popular day one target for suspicion from baddies, they love to find semantic ways of getting votes on to me.

linki @epi - ok. I'm not responding to you any more. I do not agree that you are shooting straight. It takes a special kind of cajones to have a lie as the fundamental basis of your accusation and call it shooting straight.

I will not be responding to any more of your posts until you acknowledge that you actually understand that 1) SVS never asked why I would recruit and 2) that is not the question I was answering.

linki 2 BWT - ok, that I can kind of read as genuine and understand.

linkie to everyone enjoying epi vs golden. Last time it happened, I was good and epi was bad. Then I get into it with LC. LC is bad, golden is good. When people get into it like this with me, anyone who still is pretending to genuinely believe they think I'm bad is worth lynching imo. Epi knows full well he is wrong. He is enjoying it as much as you.

I have had many run ins with you in the past. You read as civvie Golden that I remember. BWT, Epig I'm on the fence. I have been away from mafia for almost a year now, so there's that.

Initially views Golden as civvie, but not sure about BWT.

Spoiler: show

Spoiler: show

I agree it needs to end. I would plead with people, vote me or epi. I honestly don't care which. Either epi loses, or he is proven wrong. Both will be satisfactory.

Nah. Nice try.

Make people think it has to be me or your, and if I'm wrong, then I have to be bad.

False dilemma. Mafia strategy 101. Get out of here with that.

Y'all go on and vote the way your conscience leads.

I'm not sure that makes him mafia. i've said things like that as a civvie and so has Golden.

reywaS slightly defends Golden by saying he says declarative statements like Golden did as a civ.

I can see why he is worked up - been there so many times myself. Being suspected for bs reasons sucks especially if they are using twisted logic - "like it has nothing to do with the question - it is how you answered the question" silly Day 1 stuff as per normal. Honestly would be better off just randomizing a vote.

suspecting someone because of how they answered a question is using twisted logic? I disagree.

@dom - Not uncomfortable, but yeah I prefer to vote people I think could be bad. I do think epi could be bad.

But I certainly think epi and I are not going to be on the same side at any point in this game. Recruiters would be daft to recruit us both on to the same side at this point. So there is no value to me in epi living past today. I do not think he is civ. I think he has done some things which could mean he is bad. I think there are also neutral explanations for his behaviour. I don't mind seeing him lynched be he bad or neutral.

And, I see why you are confused because my response to JJ looks weird, it's because I read his question wrong. I thought he asked for motives that were not anti-town, hence my response to him about 'if epi was neutral'.

As for mafia motives, can think of two possibilities. One, he was thinking of recruiting me given we worked well together in Guess Who and creating distance first was a tactic to achieve it. Two, he was not thinking of recruiting me and so why not cast suspicion on me.

I'll be honest, I suspect the real reason epi won't back off his suspicion is much simpler. He has been busy with work starting up, lord of the realms, helping Simon with Angry Birds. I think he misread SVS question in the first place. But he is not the kind of person to back off because he misreads (or to admit he read something wrong), and so he just finds other ways to justify his suspicion.

Others can decide for themselves, I just don't have fun when people make up bs to accuse me of being bad. Lynching epi would restore balance to the force, and make the game more fun for me right now. That's my primary motive.

But my secondary motive is that, yes, I think he has given some cause to think he is bad. Particularly the post where he responded to me suggesting that everyone vote for either him or me, just after he voted for me and said we needed to 'end it'. He backtracked something chronic with that post. Called my tactics mafia 101, said I was setting some kind of trap, but wanted everyone to 'vote with their conscience' and not feel they had to vote for me, the person he thinks is bad?

Whatever comes, my original hope for today was that a lynch stop is used so no-one dies. But if epi gets the most votes, I think the lynch should be allowed to go through. Same for BWT. Those two have both given me reasons to think they could be bad.

linki @ SVS - you are completely right that I have made no entry into the contest to be recruited as a baddie and will not do so. SVS has had experience in the past of my warning baddie teams outright that if they recruit me I'll bus them all, which is a pretty effective tool to prevent baddie recruitment I can assure you. In a game called recruitment mafia I think doing something like that is not in the spirit of the game, so I will be the best I can of whatever I will be, but I will be far more excited to be recruited civ than bad.

I'm ok with DH talking about his poop, provided it is in nauseating brown. I understand unfurl's frustration with the lack of OT green.

you certainly don't think you two will end up on the same side? How can you possibly be certain of this when it has been well established that recruiters do not get to pick that way. The recruiters are not picking names directly and will not know exactly who they are recruiting until it is done. This is the first thing you've said in this game so far that makes me

The start of his suspicion: Golden's "certainty" that Epi and he will never be on the same team this game. How could Golden know that he wouldn't be on the same side? This is the same thing that Boom latched onto.

Spoiler: show

Linki: Golden, am I reading through the lines of your post correctly when I say that you'd like to lynch Epi because it would make the game more fun for you? Seriously dude, think about that for a second and then realize that it's not a good strategy to follow.

In a game where 30 of us are still neutral, why is taking out another person who I do not believe is civ and do not believe I will ever be on the same team as a bad strategy?

How could you possibly be so sure of this?

Doesn't like Golden certainty again.

Spoiler: show

I always hunt baddies as indy/neutral

or appear to lol

Ok..

Spoiler: show

Put it this way, boomslang. Epi being on my team will not stop me killing him if I have the chance. Anyone who chose to recruit us both to the same team is making an error.

What if that happens accidentally?

Golden is being willfully ignorant of that possibility it seems, Typhoony.

He remarks that Golden is not open to the possibility of ever being on the same team.

Spoiler: show

might could be

Why? Whats the baddie motive?

I don't know. But the only way your idea about never being on Epig's team in this game makes any sense is if you are a recruiter. It still doesn't make sense for you to say this, but it's the only way it makes sense for you to think it...that you had some sort of control over the event. I dunno. Why do you keep saying you are so sure you will not be on his team?

You are telling me that is is 'well established' that recruiters don't have control over the recruits. If that is true, what sense does it make that me being a recruiter would make any odds to my certainty?

It HAS been established that recruiters don't get to pick a name to recruit every time because of the host post saying as much. That alone should tell you that you can't 100% guarantee that the two of you won't end up on a team. Are you really going to ignore this? You are smarter than that. You know very well that you can't make that guarantee but you continue to pretend like it is a legit perspective.

Golden is a recruiter in reywaS' eyes. He latched onto the certainty of never being on a team with Epi as reywaS' basis for voting Golden day 1. This adds up and makes sense from his perspective.

For like the next 10 posts he continually repeats this flak he has with Golden and is starting to get PO'd. Golden is not genuine, "full of shit" and votes reywaS as a NO U. From here on out, reywaS continues to press Golden like a dog scratching madly to get at a chewtoy he sees through a sliding glass door.

Spoiler: show

Kadaj aka Cabbage posted in our thread!!!! He is suspicious of the nub aapje - we should all vote aapje

jk


Teeth's non lynch - I totally get the reasons for the votes he got - but tbh he often plays slightly wacky and different than other players - Idk if I would have voted him but prob not. So The Judge ended the day early. But have we determined why no one was not lynched? I may have not gone back far enough in my catch up

Sorry I went quiet. I'm at a baseball game right now Go Reds!

But yeah, fairly disappointed about going out on Day 1 in my first game back. Not much I can do about it though. Good luck civs!

Here before lynch end Teeth says "Good Luck Civ's" - is it meant to be a mindfuck or he is hinting at being recruited? If he is implying he was recruited I would venture to say he was prob recruited as a baddie - him saying "Go Civs" just feels unnatural at this stage of this game.

Golden/Rey - I do not get Rey's points about Golden and tbf they read as forced. You say you did not call him bad but then what is this:

might could be

Reads that you think he "might could be" bad. Ergo he is bad - is the point I got when catching up. You also said he did not seem sincere - does that in and of itself make him bad Rey? Please elaborate more than you have - use little words so I can be sure to understand

you certainly don't think you two will end up on the same side? How can you possibly be certain of this when it has been well established that recruiters do not get to pick that way. The recruiters are not picking names directly and will not know exactly who they are recruiting until it is done. This is the first thing you've said in this game so far that makes me

You and I clearly have a different view of well established. If it was well established, as you say, why would that comment make you ponder anyway? Would it make me bad to have said it?

might could be

forced? How? You are implying that I forced myself to share my opinion on Golden? So, I saw Golden's ideas, and rather than the opinion being genuine I forced myself on day one to go after him? To what end? Why in the world would I, after nearly a year long hiatus from playing mafia, force myself to go after Golden?

If you quote me with more specific posts that feel forced to you, I will respond to them in kind. You went the really broad and vague route, so that's how I responded.

As for the "might could be" post. I heard that phrase on The Wire, and I like using it whenever I can. lol. I was NOT (obviously) saying that Golden is bad. If I was saying, in that post, that Golden WAS bad, I would have said something more along the lines of "Golden is bad". "Might could be" meaning that I'm not ruling it out.

Day 2 starts. Interesting that he does not want to admit that he thinks Golden is bad, even though he's been adamant in voting against Golden's genuineness. If he were not genuine, what would that mean besides being bad? I'm not sure I see the difference.
Either way, his rhetoric has changed slightly. He comes off as less accusatory and cordial towards Golden at first. Even calling his gameplay "slick" in the next post.

Spoiler: show

Can someone please recruit G-Man? He deserves it.

@rey - I agree it's the motivation, not the action, that matters. That's why I kept asking why does it make me bad? You've claimed I've done certain things, but you haven't provided any motivation for why I would do them when bad. You've just said they don't read genuine. But why would I lie about those things?

That's also why I went back to epi setting out the exact thought process behind the post where he claimed I gave four different answers to what I would do when recruiting. Epi did not seem interested in motivation either, even though the obvious motive for me even starting that particular conversation was to see if we could narrow down the field of potential baddie recruits so as to better find a baddie, but he also declined to provide any motive for why it would be a bad thing to do.

But whatever. Sometimes people tunnel in on you and you don't think it is entirely logical. When I really understood where you were coming from, I found your suspicion on me genuine. I can't disagree that in trying to get you to see what I was saying, I was skimming over some of the points you were trying to raise, because I was trying to get you to see that there was no baddie motivation for your allegation. But nm.

for what it's worth, I'm not interested in voting for you at current.

Huh. Why the change in Day 2?

Spoiler: show

golden do you really think MP was civ recruited already?

Bass, I really think you haven't.

I was just looking for a yes or no.

I have no particular view as to the likelihood of MP being civ. It's not why I was setting out to save him. I just didn't like the way he took three votes for what I see as poor reasons very early in the day.

@SVS - thank you I just wanted to know either way. And I do know you <3 me and I you, but I honestly don't blame anyone if they were mad at me about epi, because I feel guilty about it myself.

I can understand why having acted roguish might make people feel uncomfortable (especially people who know me well). I feel like it's how all neutrals are probably playing, and I'm just overt about it.

Wait, so now you feel guilty about it? You have seemed pretty confident that it was in your best interest to make that move up until now. Why do you feel guilty now?

I have tried to give you the benefit of the doubt after the bold move on day 1, but you keep saying things that set off my bad-dar.

He comes back around after Golden feels guilty about inadvertently getting Epi killed N1. His "bad-dar" is bipping again. Convinces him to vote Golden again Day 2.

So reywaS strongly suspects Golden to be a recruiter Day 1, then gives him the BotD in Day 2 before Golden says he felt guilty, and switched it over on account of the continued insincerity.

Spoiler: show

I can definitely see how you (or anyone) would view Golden as a threat at this point. He basically stopped short of calling the Epignosis kill "a demonstration".

I do see the irony in SVS seeing me as a threat and wants to vote me, essentially because I did what I could to get rid of the person I thought was a threat.

Um I am voting for you, but if you do not get lynched, I will not try to get the baddies to kill you.

Well I think I've made it very clear epi was a one off too, but it doesn't stop everyone pretending like I'm going to do it to them next.

This type of attitude is a big reason why I don't trust you, Golden. You admittedly make this big, bold move to Epignosis killed on Day 1, and then you act like everyone is being unfair to you by not trusting your intentions. Do you really see the scrutiny on you as unfair?

In a way, he brings up Golden's emotional plea of unfairness in the cards.

reywaS sees himself getting worked up, and probably pops some Vicodin or something.

Spoiler: show

"Out of reywaS' 124 posts, I'd reckon 60% of them are about Golden (I'm guesstimating). I would expect it very easy and safe to tunnel into one person for a time"

A response to this particular snippet from Scotty's earlier post. You are right. I have been focusing on Golden a lot. I tend to get tunnel vision in mafia games when someone's posts get stuck in my head. In the past it can be a flaw of my game play style. But, I'm not always wrong when I get fixated on someone. A particular RM game comes to mind...Reality TV Mafia. I remember having a particularly over the top case of tunnel vision in that game, but I did sniff out DharmaHelper and Golden as 2 of the 4 mafiosos in the game...but for every time that I am correct in that case, there are a few instances where I was just flat out wrong. I realize this. This is why I tempered my suspicion of Golden in between Days 1 and 2, but he reignited my suspicion with the things he said in the 2nd half of Day 2. Right or wrong that is the only way I know how to play when I am not on a baddie team. I tend to have a lot more trouble when I am because in my head everything I think to write just sounds forced. A handful of people in this game know this about me. Golden is one of those people, which is why the 2 "no u's" he's flung at me in this game don't ring true to me. In Zany Dex's Superman game on RM, this dynamic was on display where I was Clark Kent and Golden was independent and eventually merged with the mafia team (and won). I got tunnel vision in that game too. I think I was wrong in that case, but regardless I got a lot of flack in that game for it.

He responds to my initial suspicion of him with a good follow-up. He admits to having tunnel vision and "tempering his suspicion" of Golden between D1 and D2. So whether he is right or wrong, he feels like sticking to his guns. Stubborn, but makes sense.

Spoiler: show

"Out of reywaS' 124 posts, I'd reckon 60% of them are about Golden (I'm guesstimating). I would expect it very easy and safe to tunnel into one person for a time"

A response to this particular snippet from Scotty's earlier post. You are right. I have been focusing on Golden a lot. I tend to get tunnel vision in mafia games when someone's posts get stuck in my head. In the past it can be a flaw of my game play style. But, I'm not always wrong when I get fixated on someone. A particular RM game comes to mind...Reality TV Mafia. I remember having a particularly over the top case of tunnel vision in that game, but I did sniff out DharmaHelper and Golden as 2 of the 4 mafiosos in the game...but for every time that I am correct in that case, there are a few instances where I was just flat out wrong. I realize this. This is why I tempered my suspicion of Golden in between Days 1 and 2, but he reignited my suspicion with the things he said in the 2nd half of Day 2. Right or wrong that is the only way I know how to play when I am not on a baddie team. I tend to have a lot more trouble when I am because in my head everything I think to write just sounds forced. A handful of people in this game know this about me. Golden is one of those people, which is why the 2 "no u's" he's flung at me in this game don't ring true to me. In Zany Dex's Superman game on RM, this dynamic was on display where I was Clark Kent and Golden was independent and eventually merged with the mafia team (and won). I got tunnel vision in that game too. I think I was wrong in that case, but regardless I got a lot of flack in that game for it.

Thanks for the response, yo!

Asa follow up: What is your opinion of Golden now? Is he still your main lynch candidate?

Yes, but I'm not married to it. I'm going to force myself away from being fixated on him to see other points of view. If I don't have new suspicions or if Golden doesn't convince me that I'm wrong, I will vote for him again on Day 3 by default. But I'm not reserving myself to that outcome.

He says he will look at other points of view on the matter of baddies, but if he doesn't see better arguments, he will vote Golden again.

Now that Golden is out of the picture and off his proverbial back, I'm wondering what his reads of other people look like. If he is even still playing. His last post said he was catching up, and that was Thursday. And that was after threatening to jump ship with this game due to the perceived "bullshit" voting that was happening.


After writing that all out, I am not wholly convinced that reywaS any of the Golden voters here framed him. But rather, if any of them are bad, that they were opportunistic and took advantage of an already flailing Golden. I can actually see reywaS and SVS, Golden's two biggest detractors, civs. That may change if they got recruited at some point, but I'm not seeing it. Of all of them, MP's cheerleading angle turned 180 vote against Golden is pretty fishy, but that's still a slight stretch. Again, I think our best bet is to look at people that mentioned Golden offhand but didn't vote him (or didn't vote at all).

Names that come to mind:
TinyBubbles
DH
Dom
LoRab

[DharmaHelper]

Again, I think our best bet is to look at people that mentioned Golden offhand but didn't vote him (or didn't vote at all).

Names that come to mind:
TinyBubbles
DH
Dom
LoRab

So, you're kidding right?

[Roxy]

Hosts would've said sumptin.

Roxyyyyyyyyyy!!!! High five!!
And I want a hug from you rey
SVS high fiiiiiiive!!!!

[Roxy]

Roxy, who are your suspects right now?

You and nutella.

[Scotty]

Again, I think our best bet is to look at people that mentioned Golden offhand but didn't vote him (or didn't vote at all).

Names that come to mind:
TinyBubbles
DH
Dom
LoRab

So, you're kidding right?

Sorry, I should clarify.

Didn't vote for him Day 3.

Yes, I know you and others voted for him earlier on.

[DharmaHelper]

Again, I think our best bet is to look at people that mentioned Golden offhand but didn't vote him (or didn't vote at all).

Names that come to mind:
TinyBubbles
DH
Dom
LoRab

So, you're kidding right?

Sorry, I should clarify.

Didn't vote for him Day 3.

Yes, I know you and others voted for him earlier on.

So, are you fucking with me or what?

[DharmaHelper]

Vote registered to Golden

[Scotty]

You took that from my mouth. Were you recruited and are now actually playing DH?

I've been playing, I just haven't been playing how I usually play.

And why is that? Is it the different format of game? OR something more devious??

[Roxy]

I hope people today will act more reasonable. For me yesterdays lynch was rather disturbing and I do not understand some of the way over the top antics that are being employed during this game. It is distracting and for me very unhelpful.

I want to hunt baddies - there have been recruits and there are recruiters. I am done hearing about how Neutrals can be bad. I am sorry but Neutrals are Neutrals. How can you be a bad Neutral? Makes no sense.

If you would like to discuss possible recruiters/recruitees then quote this and list your top two suspects that you feel fit the bill.

If the first paragraph was mainly about MP, then my personal impression of it is that his vote was forced (you'll notice his vote stayed on Golden) and then he decided to go batshit about it in sign of protest instead of having to adopt a more conventional tactic. It wasn't elegant, but he would have been in a much tighter spot making a serious case against Golden after treating him as genuine the past phases. Azura (or the punisher?) must have clearly taken advantage of this.

I'll think of the angle you're suggesting as well, in addition to scanning Golden's voters, but right now I don't feel I have strong leads as to who would be a recruiter/recruitee/recruit material.

Why does it have to be someone that voted golden?

I am suprised you don't have any opinions on who has been recruited - you have opinions on everything else.

[nutella]

Happy birthday to our lovely ladies BR and Bea!!

@Boomslang voters: Does JJJ's ISO case adequately cover all the reasons why you chose to vote for Boom? Or are there other points you want to add?

I explained my reasonings in this post:

alright, I'm back. Took a few breaks from catching up to do other stuff, and I also had a brief bit of internet trouble, but all is well now.

I am going to switch my vote to Boomslang. I know it's an easy bandwagon to hop on, but I'm not really quite feeling it with Rey -- I do not like the way he is playing at all, but I'm less convinced that it actually makes him bad. I could still see it but I'm much more skeptical that he would act this way if he really were the guilty party. And I definitely see potential baddie in Boomslang. He's been pretty under the radar and as JJJ has shown a lot of his posts have been pretty easy contributions. Particularly this post by JJJ gives some good examples of why Boomslang looks like a baddie trying to blend in. But the real nail in the coffin was when this happened:

Let's try voting for myself! Seems to give you a get-out-of-jail free card these days!

Because, I mean, seriously?


And idk what's happening with MP, but my best guess is that his vote has been forced or he's cursed in some way. Looking at just the Position 5 powers and Position 3 powers (in case it's a day power) I don't see anything that could be a posting curse except maybe the Keeper of Order -- "punisher" -- so it could be that and/or Azura's force-vote thing. He is acting pretty damn crazy.

So, yes, I agreed with JJJ's reasonings about Boomslang's "easy" and largely unoriginal contributions, and that he's been generally blendy. His self-vote post raised my ping off the charts. And then he switched his vote to Golden when he saw how close the votes were (when the self-vote turned out to not be, in fact, a get-out-of-jail-free card.) -- to be fair I guess anyone would try to save themselves, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's also a baddie teammate of his among the later few Golden votes.

He has still not responded to JJJ's or my suspicion and has basically not defended himself at all. I think he is likely to be a baddie who's been trying to blend in all game and once he started getting some attention he tried to act all cool and aloof instead of responding adequately.

I will consider MP's insight though, since I really don't know Boomslang. I could possibly be convinced that he's neutral, but my vote is staying on him for now as he is my strongest suspicion. I may switch to Bubbles if she continues her pattern of not responding to accusations about her and not really contributing much otherwise. At this point I would like to hear more from both of them. Also DH -- he's contributed zilch.


Linki @ Roxy -- have you explained your suspicion of me? Is it just leftover from the bass lynch discussion? And, care to explain why you suspect JJJ as well?

[DharmaHelper]

You took that from my mouth. Were you recruited and are now actually playing DH?

I've been playing, I just haven't been playing how I usually play.

And why is that? Is it the different format of game? OR something more devious??

I refuse to take you seriously.

[Scotty]

Vote registered to Golden

Oh damn, I'm sorry, you did vote for him. That was in the abbreviated poll the first half of Day 3 and I was only going off of the one Long Con posted, which you forgot to vote again. (Did he say those counted?)

I'll be sure to look more into you as well if that is what you wish. I do remember you had a beef with Golden as well.

[nutella]

DH, you seem to refuse to take ANYTHING seriously. Why won't you respond to the people bringing up your name, and why have you not contributed a single original thought or any kind of substantial discussion for the entire game?

[DharmaHelper]

Vote registered to Golden

Oh damn, I'm sorry, you did vote for him. That was in the abbreviated poll the first half of Day 3 and I was only going off of the one Long Con posted, which you forgot to vote again. (Did he say those counted?)

I'll be sure to look more into you as well if that is what you wish. I do remember you had a beef with Golden as well.

So to be clear, first you tried to lump me into a group I had no business being in, and that made me suspicious, but now that I've shown you were wrong to do that, You think I should be looked at for being in the group that was less suspicious. Cool.

Vote Scotty

[DharmaHelper]

DH, you seem to refuse to take ANYTHING seriously. Why won't you respond to the people bringing up your name, and why have you not contributed a single original thought or any kind of substantial discussion for the entire game?

Who has brought me up that I haven't responded to?

[Roxy]

Can someone explain the case on Boomslang for me? I don't get it.

I sincerely doubt that S~V~S had nefarious motives for her pursuit of Golden. She seemed convinced to me, and unswayable in typical SVS fashion.

I think MP's whole Golden cheerleading followed by over the top Golden mourning feels fake, but I agree that it looks like his vote was forced. Doesn't mean he's not on the other baddie team though. Happy birthday, BR!

This game is so weird. Weird enough, in fact, for us to agree on something

But I do agree with everygthing you posted EXCEPT that MP stated he was NOT forced to vote Golden - now what are your thoughts?

[Scotty]

I also don't like the non-chalance in Tiny Bubble's posts. They haven't been quantitative but more importantly they haven't been qualitative.

Vote registered for Tiny Bubbles.

linki- lol DH. you funny. I'll get to you when I get some time.