Game Over -The Syndicate Mafia

[Ben Linus]

Metalmarsh 2 analysis:

Spoiler: show

He begins the game on Day 0 by listing people he won't be voting for. His criteria was seemingly that he didn't want to vote for people who hadn't appeared yet. However, the below quote convinces him to not vote Cookie 2, but instead vote either Long Con 2 or Synonym 2.

You are correct, cookie. I was trying to begin discussion, not stifle it. The act that Synonym talked about the skin of his sock account doesn't bother me as much as him saying that there are five baddies among us. How would he know that unless he was one of them.

The next player he won't vote for is Dom, for this reason.

I believe it is a common mafia strategy to call out names in the beginning of the game to gauge reactions

I don't believe it is a common strategy at all

He then clarifies that he won't vote for the real Dom because he believes the real Dom was involved in the lynch stop. Next he disputes boo 2's illogical assertion that because there are 25 players someone MUST be playing as their own sock.

He then appears to have been "Timmer cursed", turning this post into borderline nonsense:

timmer, this is ridiculous tbqh.
timmer hasn't given a single reason to suspect timmer other than that timmer has been acting like timmer in order to try and last longer in a gme that timmer has, lately, been NK'd in a lot for very little reason.

The next day he asks people why they suspect Long Con 2, and in a response to why people don't suspect him, he says that there is virtually no reason to suspect him, and all suspicion thrown his way has been unsubstantiated.

He is asked by Golden 2 about what his contributions for the day are. Votes, suspicions, plans, anything. Metalmarsh 2 states that he's been ignored, saying that he's asked questions and participated, but people have been rude. Later that day, when Synonym 2 was excited about Long Con 2 flipping scum, Metalmarsh 2 is one of the first to bring up the possibility of two baddie teams. Literally 14 hours later nobody had responded to that statement and he quotes himself asking if anybody wanted to contribute to his post. After this, SVS 2 responds by saying that it's the same question as "How does Synonym know if there are five baddies" and Metalmarsh 2 disputes the equality of the two statements. This goes on, and ends with Metalmarsh 2 lamenting his fate of being ignored and then treated suspiciously.

Metalmarsh 2 asks Epignosis 2 how in response to his statement about being curious towards MM2's posts.

Reywas 2 asks people why they're voting Synonym 2, and Metalmarsh 2 responds saying Syn 2's immediate declaration of innocence after Long Con 2 flipped scum is premature at best, as we don't know if there are multiple baddie teams, independent roles, recruiter roles, etc. Reywas 2 misconstrues this and begins preaching that Synonym 2 is most likely not on Long Con 2's team, which is something Metalmarsh 2 has stated repeatedly.

Metalmarsh 2 appears to be genuinely frustrated at everyone ignoring him. For this reason I don't believe he's on a scum team, or at least a scum team with teammates, as literally a fourth of the game ignored him. While it is common for baddies to not interact with each other very much in thread, he has been asking questions that have been flat-out ignored, and his consistently ignored status appears uncoordinated. While I don't know if he's necessarily civilian, I'm pretty confident that he's not scum.

Metalmarsh 2, do you think Reywas 2 was intentionally redirecting your question to avoid discussing the possibility of multiple baddie teams and/or independent roles, or do you think he misinterpreted your statement?

What do YOU think, and why are you asking Metalmarsh 2 about it? Trying to act interested in his thoughts?

[2 Stupid Dogs]

HOSTS how are seemers designed? Do they get assigned different random roles upon flip?

They pick their own

This is what was actually said about how the seemer works.

I still don't get why Golden 2 and Sig 2 are trying to drag the sock/player thing into it. There is no reason to think those do not show up exactly as they are. Golden 2 is GG, BR2 was juliets, one of them is the real tracker, and the other is a seemer who, on being lynched, chose to show up as a seemer.

All of that fits into the explanation Roxy actually gave about how the seemer in this game is designed. Anything else is stuff you are adding yourselves, without basing it on anything either hostess has said in the thread.

I believe "Sig" was still implying that he had a chat with the Hosts in which they told him seemers pick player identities.

I didn't drag anything into it, I was weighing in on the player identity vs sock debate and the odds of that. And if seemers can pick a player identity, then I believe it is a tweak to the mechanics, considering that there are no roles (characters) in addition to the socks. There is no 'Bilbo Baggins" for a seemer to show up as a character, because there are no characters added to the socks, just the socks.

Otherwise, if what you say is the *sole* standard for seemers in this game (picking powers), then yes, the conflict between which "BR" and myself is the civ tracker is real.

Sure, but your question was more encompassing than that, since you also asked how seemers are designed. If there was anything else to it, I think Roxy would have mentioned it.

I do not see a reason why, if there were more to it than that, and Roxy chose not to share it in thread, she would share it in PMs with Sig 2, unless he is a seemer. And if he's a seemer, I don't think after getting that information he would then turn around and start dropping it in the thread, since that does not benefit him at all.

abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

[Jack Shephard]

For what it's worth I don't think Golden 2 has been acting very Gamer Guy-esque. I have another player in mind for his sock.

It's called role playing.

[Jack Shephard]

HOSTS how are seemers designed? Do they get assigned different random roles upon flip?

They pick their own

This is what was actually said about how the seemer works.

I still don't get why Golden 2 and Sig 2 are trying to drag the sock/player thing into it. There is no reason to think those do not show up exactly as they are. Golden 2 is GG, BR2 was juliets, one of them is the real tracker, and the other is a seemer who, on being lynched, chose to show up as a seemer.

All of that fits into the explanation Roxy actually gave about how the seemer in this game is designed. Anything else is stuff you are adding yourselves, without basing it on anything either hostess has said in the thread.

I believe "Sig" was still implying that he had a chat with the Hosts in which they told him seemers pick player identities.

I didn't drag anything into it, I was weighing in on the player identity vs sock debate and the odds of that. And if seemers can pick a player identity, then I believe it is a tweak to the mechanics, considering that there are no roles (characters) in addition to the socks. There is no 'Bilbo Baggins" for a seemer to show up as a character, because there are no characters added to the socks, just the socks.

Otherwise, if what you say is the *sole* standard for seemers in this game (picking powers), then yes, the conflict between which "BR" and myself is the civ tracker is real.

Sure, but your question was more encompassing than that, since you also asked how seemers are designed. If there was anything else to it, I think Roxy would have mentioned it.

I do not see a reason why, if there were more to it than that, and Roxy chose not to share it in thread, she would share it in PMs with Sig 2, unless he is a seemer. And if he's a seemer, I don't think after getting that information he would then turn around and start dropping it in the thread, since that does not benefit him at all.

abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

Why would "Sig" be a seemer? That'd be like the third candidacy already, besides mine and "BR" based on events. Also, I doubt the seemer needs clarifications on how his seeming works. Unless his intention is phoning it in.

[Ben Linus]

For what it's worth I don't think Golden 2 has been acting very Gamer Guy-esque. I have another player in mind for his sock.

It's called role playing.

Nerd alert!

[2 Stupid Dogs]

I did not say I think he is a seemer, I said the only reason I think Roxy would give him information about how the role works in a pm that she wasn't willing to say in thread is if it was his role.

Meaning, I don't think he got any information from Roxy in pm, and that he either misread or misunderstood what was actually said in the thread, or he is making stuff up.

abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

[Young Lady]

Like I said, I'm looking over BR2's posts in relation to the civvie tracker and seemer situation.

Both BR2 posts here suggest to me that she was wary of Golden 2 because of his civvie tracker reveal, but did not outright distrust him for it. She was acknowledging that he isn't confirmed as civ and it's easy to see why now, but she wasn't condemning him. If her attitude changed on this then that would be very telling, because I think it's pretty likely she would have tracked Golden 2 some time after his reveal.

Welcome back and congrats on your rezz Golden 2, assuming of course that you are good. I'll be gone to see about the horses part of the day tomorrow but will be back in plenty of time for discussion.

What do you mean "assuming of course that you are good" he is writeup mod-confirmed as town are you serious

BR2 slipping into my scum reads.

What do you mean he is write-up mod-confirmed as town? You mean because his role was revealed as town? Wasn't there conversation earlier in the game about there being a possible seemer in this game because it was in the host survey? Personally, I will have some doubt about any death that is a civ death because of that risk. Something I learned from past mafia playing.

One thing I notice is a couple mentions of Blooper 2 when nobody else was talking about Bloops really. This quote is snipped from a bigger post about LC2 and Syn as well. The way BR2 just kind of dropped this Bloops mention in there might be indicative of some kind of inside information, but it's hard to say.

Those are my thoughts as they stand right now. There are some other interesting people like Blooper 2 but I'd like to see some more behavior.

She did vote for her fake hubbie tho. If she knew something about Bloops then she didn't press the issue very much.

I have decided to vote for LC 2. I'm uncomfortable with his insinuation that other lynches can be avoided, even if he only affected one of the two lynches he was involved in prior to this point. Will this lynch be avoided too? I don't know but it's worth it to me to find out. With that said, I'm sorry sweetheart that I have to vote this way but you know as well as I that you would vote for me if the situation were reversed.

Actually this post might not work with that little theory about Bloops. BR2 was still exploring the civ possibility even if she wasn't sure.

Well that was pretty easy. The only people Long Con mentioned in regards to suspicions was SVS 2 for tunneling, blooper 2 for her posting, and syn. Just for the sake of transparency I also called blooper 2's behavior as odd. We could say from this look back that SVS 2 and Blooper 2 are likely to be civs but we don't know if we have 1 or 2 mafia teams. I didn't see Long Con 2 defending or talking good about anyone. I hope someone else will take a look back on his posts and make sure i didn't miss anything. From what I saw I don't know that there are any take aways from what he posted (or she posted).

Spoiler because it's a big post. BR2 came out with this thorough review of Elo. It reads very objectively to me, so I think BR2 was really suspicious of Elo but probably not with inside info.

Spoiler: show

Elochin:

First couple of posts were joking in sock mode.

Third post says she doesn't want to vote for LC or Synonym. Then quotes Cookie on Cookie's sig 2 suspicion, but goes on to say she won't vote for sig 2 either but will vote for MM for a non-existent reason for voting Synonym. I'll have to go back and look at that but my memory of reading early in the game is that MM 2 was acting very much like MM 1 and not having a good reason to vote sounds very MM 1. MM seems to be hiding behind the sock i think so maybe Elochin's vote here isn't bad.

Fourth and fifth posts - turtle bread and night vote for Super Meat Boy.

Sixth post - says there is not enough on Scotty and TH to draw a conclusion as to whether they are suspicious. Says it looks like Dom 2 is baddie hunting. Believes people jumped on Long Con for his case which isn't any good. Says she agrees with Cookie in her vote post but i don't see a vote post. Only Cookie interaction seems to be the sig 2 info which she said she disagreed with. Thinks Synonym's reactions are frustrated civ behavior. Says she doesn't know why her previous vote should be a problem - she doesnt vote for people she thinks are civ and she doesnt vote for people simply because of bandwagons. For me, this sounds reasonable. It may not have been right but I don't think she's the only one who felt this way about either LC or Synonym.

Seventh post - RIP post and votes for Biblical.

Eight post - Says she can see why Long Con is getting so many votes. First, comments on the lynch surviving power being more likely baddie than civ. Second, his evasion of questioning (barring info dumping). Third, weird reply to Cobalt 2's questioning (it depends). Says her mind has changed from what it was before and she now will vote for LC. Did she change her mind? I can't think of a good reason to suspect she didn't except she voted for LC second to last and so may have decided to join in for civ cred. I need to think this through a little more before I can give a definitive opinion. Her reasons for changing her mind are good ones but that late vote is definitely a ping.

Ninth post - Congrats to people who voted LC from the beginning. Votes American Gods.

I will be interested in others opinions are in whether she really changed her mind or voted LC for the civ credit.

Then there were her two big posts reviewing Cookie. She put a lot of work into this, she summarized every Cookie post. I do wonder if she knew something from her role and she was trying to build an influential case on Cookie. She had less nice to say than she did about Elo, and the sheer effort is important too. juliets didn't go to this much trouble for anyone else. I'm curious what other people think of this. I should also say though that at the end of the review she seemed open to differing opinions.

I don't know if this has changed my feelings a lot on any players, but it might for someone else so tell me what you think. She could have just wanted to reveal her role via being lynched because of how it might implicate Golden 2.

[2 Stupid Dogs]

I did not say I think he is a seemer, I said the only reason I think Roxy would give him information about how the role works in a pm that she wasn't willing to say in thread is if it was his role.

Meaning, I don't think he got any information from Roxy in pm, and that he either misread or misunderstood what was actually said in the thread, or he is making stuff up.

abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

Actually, now that I think on it a bit more, maybe he is the seemer.

I do still think you are an independent, with a power sponge type ability, and you just lucked out and found the civ resser or seemer N1, and the other on N2. That would allow you to seem like a seemer given the BR result, and also res yourself, which FS did say would be allowed.

abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

[2 Stupid Dogs]

I hadn't really been thinking of that angle SVS 2, but that makes sense to me.

She, or the person she replaced, must have tracked at least one person she talked about being suspicious of; Blooper 2, Elohcin 2, and Cookie 2, and found them to have targeted the person who was killed on that night. It would be another reason her being lynched would be useful.

I think I need to read her more again myself thinking this way now.

abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

[Sockys2023]

Plus the mafia influenced circumstances of his death.

Might I ask where you acquired that information? Unless I missed something, all they did was kill him. I don't remember seeing anything else.

Was that a scum slip?

Surely you don't think so little of me. Here I was with you in my civ list, and you go and say something like that. The nerve of some people.

Am I wrong in assuming that Mafia made that kill?

[2 Stupid Dogs]

Well, first thing I notice is the exchange between BR2 and Blooper 2 started on N2, with Blooper 2 asking BR2 when she thought she would be caught up. BR2 said later she found the question odd, so that may have been enough for BR2 to have tracked Blooper 2 that night.

She also specified it was not her ISOs that she wanted us to look at, which I think means if she did track Elohcin 2 or Cookie 2, she did not find that they targeted anyone who was NKed.

So of the three, if she wanted one of them lynched, I think it must be Blooper 2.

[Young Lady]

Well, first thing I notice is the exchange between BR2 and Blooper 2 started on N2, with Blooper 2 asking BR2 when she thought she would be caught up. BR2 said later she found the question odd, so that may have been enough for BR2 to have tracked Blooper 2 that night.

She also specified it was not her ISOs that she wanted us to look at, which I think means if she did track Elohcin 2 or Cookie 2, she did not find that they targeted anyone who was NKed.

So of the three, if she wanted one of them lynched, I think it must be Blooper 2.

That's true, I had forgotten about that earlier exhange between BR2 and Bloops. I think BR2 was still pretty new to the game at that point too, so that may have been all she needed to decide on a target (instead of basing it on the whole thread that she was still trying to process). It's hard to tell with the timing of the reywaS/juliets switch.

[Young Lady]

Lynch me. I pushed for my own lynch when I was frustrated. If this will clear the air and make the game more easy to work through for town, then lynch me and get me out of the way. But I will NEVER let you hear the end of it when I flip town because I've told the truth the whole god damn game.

But if you're going to do it: DO IT NOW. I will NOT put up with me being the target of unfounded, biased suspicion for another four fucking days if you aren't gonna follow through. Put your money where your mouth is or back the fuck up off me. Kay? Kay.

TBH Syn I am inclined to believe you and I won't vote you. I think you will get lynched though if you keep asking for it, and if I'm right that will not help the civ cause. If you feel nobody is listening to you, then maybe you'd be better served ignoring your accusers and just baddie hunting.

[Young Lady]

Can people explain why they want to vote synonym 2? Apparently I'm missing something.

I think he has been quick to say "There's no way I can be bad NOW!" for almost no reason. We have no idea if there's independents, multiple baddie teams, recruitments, etc.... why should we trust him based on one flip of LC?

I don't like that you're not even acknowledging his part in the LC2 lynch, especially while nearly being lynched himself. You're right that it doesn't mean he is automatically civ, but when we don't know anything about the setup it should at least help his case a little bit because of the very reason you keep preaching. We have no idea if there's multiple baddie teams, there might not be. If we encounter a reason to think there are then that'll hurt his standing some, but we haven't yet.

[2 Stupid Dogs]

Can people explain why they want to vote synonym 2? Apparently I'm missing something.

I think he has been quick to say "There's no way I can be bad NOW!" for almost no reason. We have no idea if there's independents, multiple baddie teams, recruitments, etc.... why should we trust him based on one flip of LC?

I don't like that you're not even acknowledging his part in the LC2 lynch, especially while nearly being lynched himself. You're right that it doesn't mean he is automatically civ, but when we don't know anything about the setup it should at least help his case a little bit because of the very reason you keep preaching. We have no idea if there's multiple baddie teams, there might not be. If we encounter a reason to think there are then that'll hurt his standing some, but we haven't yet.

I don't like that people who do not suspect him are so quick to forget that he did not know the civilian win condition, and that his explanations for how he actually did were very, very bad. Just saying.

abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

[Young Lady]

Can people explain why they want to vote synonym 2? Apparently I'm missing something.

I think he has been quick to say "There's no way I can be bad NOW!" for almost no reason. We have no idea if there's independents, multiple baddie teams, recruitments, etc.... why should we trust him based on one flip of LC?

I don't like that you're not even acknowledging his part in the LC2 lynch, especially while nearly being lynched himself. You're right that it doesn't mean he is automatically civ, but when we don't know anything about the setup it should at least help his case a little bit because of the very reason you keep preaching. We have no idea if there's multiple baddie teams, there might not be. If we encounter a reason to think there are then that'll hurt his standing some, but we haven't yet.

I don't like that people who do not suspect him are so quick to forget that he did not know the civilian win condition, and that his explanations for how he actually did were very, very bad. Just saying.

abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

I'm not convinced he didn't know the civ win con. Besides, I'm not sure how he's supposed to blurt out info from his role without breaking the rules. What has you so convinced to the contrary? Sorry I'm sure you've covered this already, but I haven't engaged you on it personally.

[Celeste]

About the prospect of a seemer, regardless of the mechanics or your view of the rezz, everybody seems to just ignore the quaint possibility of power forcing or target switching, and I think exercising caution is warranted.

[Celeste]

If Black Rock was town, genuinely town, I'd question why the executed jumped on Cookie, like she was the Grand Vizier of Cookies.

[Lunatella]

Metalmarsh 2, do you think Reywas 2 was intentionally redirecting your question to avoid discussing the possibility of multiple baddie teams and/or independent roles, or do you think he misinterpreted your statement?

What do YOU think, and why are you asking Metalmarsh 2 about it? Trying to act interested in his thoughts?

I think you read what Metalmarsh 2 had said and decided to misconstrue hiis words in order to discourage him from talking about it further. At that point MM2 had, multiple times, stopped contributing when others were ignoring him. This is, of course, giving you the benefit of the doubt that you can both read and understand English, and you haven't given me any indication otherwise, so I'm inclined to believe you understood what he was saying.

I'm asking Metalmarsh 2 about it so that he will give his thoughts about it? Maybe you have telepathy, but I don't, so I ask people what they think. Also, how would you know if I'm "acting" interested in his thoughts or legitimately are interested in his thoughts? Are you assuming that I don't care? If so, why?

[Kent Brockman]

If Black Rock was town, genuinely town, I'd question why the executed jumped on Cookie, like she was the Grand Vizier of Cookies.

When did this happen, Cobalt? Can you point it out to me?

And tbh, based on gameplay, I still think Golden was the real tracker. But I could see him fooling me as well.

[Gunther]

I'm surprised to see so much doubt around a Golden lynch. I feel like it is the obvious thing to do, I can't understand why Juliet would get herself lynched and lie, but I also find a lot of the theories that have been put out there confusing.

If there is someone out there who genuinely thinks we should not vote golden today, could you give me a really clear summary of why I shouldn't assume he is bad?

The two of every role thing doesn't work to me because there are 25 of us which is not even.

[Kent Brockman]

Why do you think someone was more likely to "try to get herself lynched" if she is a civ?

Without that double tracker flip, I would not be considering a Golden lynch. How can you be so sure?

[Sockys2023]

The two of every role thing doesn't work to me because there are 25 of us which is not even.

Do you know how many different roles are in this game? I dont recall this being specified as a role madness game, so there could very well only be double of a few specific roles, and then some roleless.

I mean I'm not putting a lot of stock into it, but sometimes you have to look at the weird shit to make sure you encompass all possibilities, however unlikely they may be.

[Kent Brockman]

Cookie

Votes

• Day 1 - Sig 2
  Day 2 - Sig 2
  Day 3 - Sig 2

Looking at just her votes, Cookie looks consistent, but also may be a victim of tunnel vision, forced or otherwise. Long Con has taken tons of votes each day, and was finally lynched Day 3. Yet Cookie has voted Sig each of these days. Anyway, now to look through her posts to see what they reveal.

Day 0, Cookie makes a good point about the information in the Day 0 poll. I think this looks good for her.

Spoiler: show

We did. The Hostess says the Day Zero poll has a point, and that a few people had info, so i think we are playing already. Paying attention to who voted what, and whatnot.

If you have never played a game of ours then know to choose your poll choice wisely!
At least two people have info on the poll.

We just don't know whether they are good or bad, so not really sure how knowing that people have info makes much of a difference.

Day 1, Cookie points out something that catches her eye from Synonym. This is a very meticulous thing she catches, but she calls Synonym out for "recognizing what multiple sock accounts look like". This doesn't make any sense to me, as each player would not be logging into different sock accounts, even if they had baddie teammates.

Also, Cookie asks Long Con a question that looks almost forced, what with the capitalized "DID". I'll be keeping an eye on their interactions as I continue.

Yea, I tend to use capitalization for emphasis where I would use it in speech, like others use bold. It is hard to format on phone though, so i capslock.

Spoiler: show

If it's all truly randomized then I don't see why someone couldn't be their own sock. I don't know if there's any way of knowing though or of gaining anything from wondering about it.

I must have missed the part where Roxy and/or Fingersplints said that the roles were randomized. But I agree, it's not worth worrying about right now. We need to use our time wisely. Cookie, do you have any suspicions yet?

Trying to stifle discussion?

Well, perhaps I am mistaken, but I thought he was trying to start discussion. But what do I know?

And one thing did catch my eye, but it is a little thing, and I don't want to molehill<mountain. I did think it odd that Synonym said this:

Why is the forum on boring skin in the sock accounts?

Like he knew what was happening in more than one sock account. But he could be assuming the socks are just set up this way if he never played with socks here before. As i said, it's a minor thing, just something I noticed. It has mostly been joking posts, so it is easy to read into minor things, I think. I am not sure I would have even mentioned it, but Long Con specifically asked me.

Why DID you specifically ask me, Long Con?

Later on, Cookie comments again on Long Con asking her a question specifically. She then states that Long Con has given her the heebie-jeebies more than Synonym's posts had.

At the bottom of this post, Cookie introduces a new suspicion of Sig for his open defense of Synonym. Here's the problem with this accusation. Cookie has already stated a mild suspicion (or ping, whatever you want to call it) of Synonym, but then she suspects Sig also for defending Synonym, being that "mafia defend a civilian for credit when he gets lynched". This caught my eye, as it could be a forced suspicion.

Also, the progression of Cookie's suspicion is interesting. It started with a mild ping. It then became a mild suspicion. It then reached the point of a downright accusation. This whole progression is all based around a single post (as Cookie herself acknowledged in her vote post), that Cooke presumably continued to reread and develop stronger and stronger feelings with each read. I call it interesting because I don't know how I feel about this yet.

Spoiler: show

As I have been reading back, I found myself agreeing with Timmer much of the time, until I got to this:

I'll be voting for someone who is trying to tell me I can't talk about what I want to talk about.

You should talk about Gamer Guy and why he is a member of the mafia.

Yeah, that's a good point.

Why is it a good point? Llama made a post pointing a finger at someone for no reason, and you think he made a good point? Did you forget the sarcastic color coding?

I actuially already addressed this somewhere, i will look for that.

It made me recall that something else he said caught my eye:

Yet at the end of this post you say you had not noticed what I ahd said, yet you are being reminded of things i said by readoing other things i siad?

If it's all truly randomized then I don't see why someone couldn't be their own sock. I don't know if there's any way of knowing though or of gaining anything from wondering about it.

I must have missed the part where Roxy and/or Fingersplints said that the roles were randomized. But I agree, it's not worth worrying about right now. We need to use our time wisely. Cookie, do you have any suspicions yet?

Trying to stifle discussion?

While I did not agree that Long Con appeared to be trying to stifle, this post did remind me that he DID seem to solicit my opinion specifically for no real reason. Like maybe if I brought up a name and he ran with it, and a townie got lynched, it would somehow be my fault.

Syn, I was the one who brought up the forum skin thing. It seemed an odd thing to say. You didn't say "my" socks skin, you said "the forums sock skins" like you knew more than one was the light colour. It really was weird, but I may never have brought it up had I not been directly asked. Which kind of freaked me out a bit.

The point of all this? I agree with Timmer except when I don't. And Long Con has given me the heebie jeebies more than Syn, actually. But still not sure where I plan to vote. Also I agree with Syn that I think TGG sounds pretty civ so far, but I have just skimmed. I need to read again in more depth.

The other thing that got me was Sig saying he would look at anyonje who looked at Syn for what he considered to be a dumb reason. Wat? That was a very gauntlet-y post to make. While it could be genuine town outrage, it could also be a Mafia tactic. I have seen Mafia openly defending someone who turned up town for the cred. That is hard to say though since we don't know if we have one Mafia or two.

I looked back, and Syn 2 listed five names, he never said "are the five baddies" or anything that would be a true ping. I will be eyeing people who push that as a slip.

Also, isn't a "ping" an individual thing? What pings one person might not ping another? Who is to say what a "true" ping is? You?

Maybe I am just reacting to your tone. I hope to hear more from you, other than this you have not really said much.

When I read Synonym's post in which he listed the five names, my thoughts were "five mafia? Did I miss something?" I then looked on page 1 where Roxy said the roles would be listed eventually and still saw no such roles. I thought, "how did he come up with this number of five? Maybe he knows there are five and so he listed five people subconsciously." I then put my theory out there for discussion. I believe it is a common mafia strategy to call out names in the beginning of the game to gauge reactions. These two things put together cause me pause. Also, please note that Synonym has yet to give reason for calling out the five players that he did even though I have asked him to explain why he thought those five players specifically were mafia.

Linki: Welcome Dr Wilgy. Good to have you Sir.

I don't believe it is a common strategy at all.

Well, maybe he's just doing a poor job of "being" Long Con, and that is how they do things is nis neck of the woods

I cannot count all the games I have played where people vote for really weak, dumb reasons on day one. And one thing I HAVE seen as a common baddie tactic is to make someone have to overdefend their weak day one suspicion, and soon no one is talking about anything else, so the ping gets lynched. And when that weak day one ping flips civ, they turn on the person whom they forced to defend his weak day one suspicion and attack then THEM for their "better than random" day one ping. It's a pretty good day one strategy for a Mafia.

So, to parapharase Metalmarsh, I am not going to vote for Long Con OR Synonym. Since I have to go to work now, and may or may not be back before the poll ends, I AM going to vote for Sig. His post, the only on topic one I believe him to have made so far, felt EXACTLY like that kind of thing to me. Self righteous indignation over a day one ping seems a bit overdone, no?

VOTES FOR SIG

Linki w/TGG, this is the last thing he said, the post I am voting him for:

I looked back, and Syn 2 listed five names, he never said "are the five baddies" or anything that would be a true ping. I will be eyeing people who push that as a slip.

I hope he answers you, too.

A little vote analyses here. This looks good for Cookie. She looks specifically at the players who could have had a major impact on the lynch, but chose not to: those players being Elohcin and reywaS. This has even more implications since Long Con has flipped as bad.

Spoiler: show

I voted for fight club.

That was an unexpected result. Since the hostesses were not saying what led to a "no Lynch" the fact that Syn volunteered that bit about the switch is intriguing. My initial response was, "Well, that seems a pretty civ move". My second response was, "Which is exactly why I would do it myself if I were bad" so . He could be telling the truth; lynch pardon is a very typical civ power. He could also be a non lynchable baddie for all we know BUT that is somewhat risky as Roxy said the roles would be revealed "eventually".

The votes that most got my attention were Elohcin voting for Metalmarsh as voter 23, and reywaS voting for Epig as voter 25. the 24th voter tied the lynch, so either 23 or 25 could have broken the tie, since Long Con, voter 24, was a self preservation voter. Both safe votes, although I cannot criticize as I am not sure I would have voted for either of them myself. So I want to check if either of them had any opinion before they voted.

I want to reread sigs posts from today after I voted.

Cookie also proposes the idea of an unlynchable baddie. I find this idea farfetched. A lynch is the civvies most powerful (and sometimes only) tool to eliminate baddies. If a baddie is unlynchable, the civvies just can't win, especially in a closed-game setup where such things are not at least made aware to civilians.

Really Dom?? You have never heard of a baddie that can't be lynched until his teammates are dead? I know I clarified this point earlier, not sure if it was before or after you made this post, so BOTD on my part, but this looks like you are stretching to find reasons to suspect me here.

Spoiler: show

Why? Do you expect us to believe you at face value? Perhaps you are an unlynchable baddie. Perhaps you are a baddie with a lynch save. We don't know the roles; there are a lot of "perhaps".

What happens if Long Con comes in here and say the same thing you said?

And I don't think she is tunneling. She does not seem horrible.

Cookie then has a run-in with Synonym. I think there is a strong possibility that Synonym is civilian at this point, but not definite. I still find it odd the Cookie continues to push the idea of an unlynchable baddie, especially with Synonym claiming the lynch was pardoned from him.

In the second to last quote here, Cookie accused Synonym of being single-minded. This is a bit hypocritical since Cookie has already stated three times that there could be an unlynchable baddie. Alarm bells are going off in my head right now.

Spoiler: show

Are you a new player? This is Mafia, we call each other liar all the time. That's sort of the point.

I kind of feel the hostility is one sided, and not really personal.

@Syn, we call each other liars. That is a major feature of Mafia. You don't strike me a a nub (thanks for ignoring my prior post on this point) so you would not have made it far in mafia getting this offended at being accused of lying. Initially i felt that you vs. LC was civ civ, but your fairly hostile reaction here has gotten a raised brow from me.

Linki, but we have to trust you to take your word for it. Obviously that is lacking since you were tied for most votes. There sould be an unlynchable baddie role. that is just as common as a civ with a lynch stop.

Syn, there could be vote manips, there could be all sorts of things. The blanket insistence you have on laying one scenario on the table and getting pissed that others don't buy it wholesale bothers me. It is true that your outrage seems real, but Mafia can get just as outraged at suspicion as town.

SEE? GM SAYS TIES ARE RANDOMIZED.

fucking THANK YOU.

The hosts also said that the lynch was not a tie.

Oh. Were the votes equal? Do we have a record of that? Cuz if so someone's got a double whammy power on my train.

I'll post @ Cookie when I get home.

I look forward to it, even though I will be afk shortly. This is because i really did not think that anything Lacey said or did was all that provacative or really all that aggressive, and you got pretty severely in her face. Like in an intimidating way. It felt very much like seeing a hidden monster with their claws out. I came into the night thinking it could be a Mafia play on both you and LC, but your reaction to lacey ...

I did not think she said anything that unreasonable. Then saying things like, "I will only explain this once", doesn't help.

Mama bear makes an appearance in this post, getting on Cobalt and others for using names like "Scum Con", etc. Moving on from that, at the beginning, she backs off of her suspicions of Long Con and Synonym, saying she is not convinced of either. A bit waffly if you ask me, but I guess it is still Night 1 at this point.

Spoiler: show

Cookie is a Scum Con teammate. She keeps going on about the possibility that Synonym is scum that can't be lynched. How would civilians win if scum can't be lynched? There are no role powers listed here. So how does Cookie suppose that? Is there a townie killer to take out the person who can't be lynched?

Cookie and Long Con are scum.

Wow it's pretty neat that several of you are all calling Long Con "Scum Con". So clever, I see what you did there

And um, no, sorry. Wherever it is that you play musy have a very limited repertoire of roles. I have played LOTS of games where one of the baddie teams had a member, generally the Don, who could not be lynched until all other members of the team were dead. And I am not pushing it; I am presenting it as one possible alternative to Syns "Hey, I stopped the lynch on myself! Am I civ or what, because the only possible possibility for me surviving a lynch is a civ possibility. And you must be bad if you don't believe me" schtick.

He could be right; I was by no means convinced he was bad. But I really hate the way he is throwing it down as proof in game with no known roles which means it is no such thing.

And I am by no means convinced that Long Con is bad either. Remember this post, which I don't recall you or Syn or sig commenting on?

When I read Synonym's post in which he listed the five names, my thoughts were "five mafia? Did I miss something?" I then looked on page 1 where Roxy said the roles would be listed eventually and still saw no such roles. I thought, "how did he come up with this number of five? Maybe he knows there are five and so he listed five people subconsciously." I then put my theory out there for discussion. I believe it is a common mafia strategy to call out names in the beginning of the game to gauge reactions. These two things put together cause me pause. Also, please note that Synonym has yet to give reason for calling out the five players that he did even though I have asked him to explain why he thought those five players specifically were mafia.

Linki: Welcome Dr Wilgy. Good to have you Sir.

I don't believe it is a common strategy at all.

Well, maybe he's just doing a poor job of "being" Long Con, and that is how they do things is nis neck of the woods

I cannot count all the games I have played where people vote for really weak, dumb reasons on day one. And one thing I HAVE seen as a common baddie tactic is to make someone have to overdefend their weak day one suspicion, and soon no one is talking about anything else, so the ping gets lynched. And when that weak day one ping flips civ, they turn on the person whom they forced to defend his weak day one suspicion and attack then THEM for their "better than random" day one ping. It's a pretty good day one strategy for a Mafia.

So, to parapharase Metalmarsh, I am not going to vote for Long Con OR Synonym. Since I have to go to work now, and may or may not be back before the poll ends, I AM going to vote for Sig. His post, the only on topic one I believe him to have made so far, felt EXACTLY like that kind of thing to me. Self righteous indignation over a day one ping seems a bit overdone, no?

VOTES FOR SIG

Linki w/TGG, this is the last thing he said, the post I am voting him for:

I looked back, and Syn 2 listed five names, he never said "are the five baddies" or anything that would be a true ping. I will be eyeing people who push that as a slip.

I hope he answers you, too.

That is what yesterday looked like to me, the bold italicized part. You have never seen that before? I will vote for Sig tomorrow, too, and will probably keep doing so until he or I are dead. Or maybe for you. To be honest, I am not 100% sure you are not buddying up to Syn, strong possibility.

Can we please lynch Sig tomorrow? Synonym, will you help me?

Why?

iirc he was one of the earliest to call Scum Con on his bullshit.

Scum Con again. Can you & Fauxbalt not resort to name calling? Thanks

And isn't proclaiming that Long Con is pretty much a proven baddie (which is what you are trying to do, right?) putting the cart before the horse? Let's find out if he is before we start making value judgments based on proximity to him, eh? Just like I am not damning YOU for sigs fairly bad looking (in my opinion) Day One posts, even though he was defending YOU.

While I DO believe sig is bad, and probably Fauxbalt with him, I am not as sure about you. A lot of Day One felt civ/civ to me, like what I outlined up there. Certainly Long Con felt backed into a corner forced to defend a dopey day one ping. Like 99.5% of day one pings are. I have the stats to prove that...somewhere In any case, if you are civ, you should be careful about the company you keep. First you're hanging with people who think calling people names is an awesome way to make them look bad, then next thing you know, you're hanging on a street corner shooting up.

True story, it happens all the time.

Let's see if I can get this straight. Cookie finds Synonym genuine here. She calls LC's ping of him on Day 1 weak, and so will suspect anyone for blaming him? I think I missed a connection here, but she has backed off of Long Con and Synonym entirely and gone after people who are suspecting Long Con (but not those suspecting Synonym). Conveniently, Sig is in this group.

Cookie was very interested in looking at the late voters in the Day 1 lynch, but has lost interest. I guess her reads up to this point match up with the lack of interest in looking at the Day 1 votes.

Spoiler: show

Sorry I was afk yesterday, it was a beautiful day and I had no other plans... so I spent most or it outside. It is supposed to rain today, but I should be around more, even if by phone.

I am seeing more of a civ/civ thing going on here than anything. Like I said, I suspect the people trying to blame LC for a weak day one ping on Synonym, who has sounded more genuine than not, (even if BOTH of them have said things I find questionable) as a way to set up a bang,bang way of lynching two townies in a row.

So once again, VOTING FOR SIG

Cookie created a formula here, and stated that she cannot imagine a mafia Synonym making such an argument. But she then says that she has never seen a civilian say such a thing. Two contradictory statements here.

Spoiler: show

You are correct, cookie. I was trying to begin discussion, not stifle it. The act that Synonym talked about the skin of his sock account doesn't bother me as much as him saying that there are five baddies among us. How would he know that unless he was one of them.

And for reference,this is the post that has me feeling most town about Long Con. Had it been me in this position, as a Mafia, at this point I would have agreed with Cookie (me) and latched onto her reasons for thinking Syn might be bad, and make my own secondary, thus being able to blame her for the eventual lynch of Synonym. Instead he blew off my thoughts, and reiterated his own. I don't see a baddie doing that, at least not an experienced one, and from his posts I think LC has been around the Mafia block.

I recall feeling this way very clearly since this was right after LC had asked me if *I* had any suspicions, which kind of freaked me out a bit. Why was he singling me out? But this reply made me feel all kinds of better.

For Syn, it is more of an over all tone. He sounds sincere about kidding around, and sincerely pissed, not faux baddie pissed. This post went far for me towards feeling that way:

Can we please lynch Sig tomorrow? Synonym, will you help me?

Why?

iirc he was one of the earliest to call Scum Con on his bullshit.

While I disagree with his conclusion (for me, anyone coming out and saying "I will vote/suspect anyone who votes/suspects *X* because of the stoopid ideas of *Y*", as sig did, ESPECIALLY on Day One when we ALL have stoopid ideas to be almost ALWAYS have been said by a Mafia) I can't imagine an actual Mafia Syn saying this about LC. He is coming out and saying that, in his opinion, LCs ideas are actually bullshit, not true. If he knew that Long Con was actually right, and Syn was bad, I don't know that he would have said this so baldly. Like i said, tone. But it reads sincere to me, even If I disagree with him here.

Personally I think we should all vote for Sig. Because now that I am thinking about it, I don't think I have EVER heard a town aligned player say something like: "I will vote/suspect anyone who votes/suspects *X* because of the stoopid ideas of *Y*". Have ANY of you ever said something like this when you are town? On Day One?

In any case, back later.

Night 2, suddenly Cookie changes her mind and can't see either Synonym or LC as civilian. She mentions no reason to change her mind about LC, but thinks that Synonym knows something about the Day One lynch (which Synonym has been saying ever since Day One), and that Sig does too. I don't know what posts Cookie might be talking about here, but this is the first time she's brought anything new up about Sig since her Day One vote.

Spoiler: show

I know I have been flogging the "civ/civ" horse pretty hard, but even i am having a hard time thinking either of you are civ at this point, LC & Syn. Especially you, Syn, since you & Sig both seem to know something about the Day One lynch that the rest of us don't.

If Cookie is civilian, she needs to be a little more careful. I don't know if she is right or not, but focusing she hasn't shown interest in looking at players other than Sig.

Also, what happened to her suspicions of Synonym/LC? Why would she vote Synonym for a meltdown when she found such feelings to be genuine. This whole post is too preemptive to me, and isn't productive.

Spoiler: show

Welcome back and congrats on your rezz Golden 2, assuming of course that you are good. I'll be gone to see about the horses part of the day tomorrow but will be back in plenty of time for discussion.

What do you mean "assuming of course that you are good" he is writeup mod-confirmed as town are you serious

BR2 slipping into my scum reads.

What do you mean he is write-up mod-confirmed as town? You mean because his role was revealed as town? Wasn't there conversation earlier in the game about there being a possible seemer in this game because it was in the host survey? Personally, I will have some doubt about any death that is a civ death because of that risk. Something I learned from past mafia playing.

Personally, I agree that nothing is confirmed; I plan to take it on a case by case basis. I think it is rather unlikely, though possible. He seemed pretty civ to me.If we knew how many Mafias there were, we could get a better feel for this. If only one, it is especially unlikely that he is bad. It could be a crazy power ploy to gain a role civ cred, especially if the rezzer was on their team, but it would be a big risk to use up powers that way this early. Plus MOST of the time, the rezzer is a civ power. Someone had said earlier that they usually use the Seemer to throw doubt into a lynch, and I agree, but if a Seemer is NKed, they still use it.

But yeah, unknown roles, anything is possible, so even with Host posts, no one or nothing is confirmed for realz.

I am, as usual,planning to vote for Sig unless Syn melts down & calls me stupid again. I liked that so much!

Cookie still "wonders" about LC, but commits to a Sig vote anyway. I realize that LC already had 11 votes so was a sure lynch though, so it doesn't matter that much.

Spoiler: show

I am voting for Sig, as I expected I would do. Nothing I read today was very compelling either way on LC vs. Syn. Just like something other than a lynch save on Day One could have saved Syn, I have seen civ lynch switches, but admittedly far fewer civ than bad. The lynch switch is what has made me really wonder about LC, since I felt he was pushed ino a corner to defend a weak day one ping.

And I felt sig was the first to make a substantial push that way with his third post of the game, which was pretty hyperbole-esque imo. So still sticking with Sig.

This was never the case. Cookie had never mentioned Sig's and LC's names together. Sig and Synonym, yes. Synonym and LC, yes. But never Sig and LC. Also, Cookie's read on Sig never changed. On the other hand, her reads of Synonym and LC were constantly fluctuating. This comment reads as bullshit to me.

No, but I did mention him & Syn together. Selective reading? I thought both were being set up, and said so repeatedly

Spoiler: show

Yay! Good job LC voters

And Sig, since a big part of my suspicion of you was based on LC being set up since he really did not seem that nefarious (and being Eloh explains that), I will have to reevaluate that.

Addendum: Wow, I can't believe I never noticed Cookie's posts up until now. Objectively, she has been quite involved, even if she's not been in the middle of it all. Subjectively, I've got a very strong baddie read from her. If the day ended now, she would get my vote.

I voted for Sig becasue I suspected him, i kinda still do. Eloh is a homegroen Syndicate player, no stranger to aggressive teammate bussing.


I HATE the freaking spoiler tag, it makes it impossible to reply to things. But this is a starting point. Dom, i think you are looking for a reason to suspect me and you are making mountains out of molehills. Yes, i said i thught the suspicion on LC was trumped up, I also thought it was trumped up on Synonym.

Linki, Roxy would not have roleless roles at her home forum. One of those trackers was a seemer, mark my words on that.

[2 Stupid Dogs]

Can people explain why they want to vote synonym 2? Apparently I'm missing something.

I think he has been quick to say "There's no way I can be bad NOW!" for almost no reason. We have no idea if there's independents, multiple baddie teams, recruitments, etc.... why should we trust him based on one flip of LC?

I don't like that you're not even acknowledging his part in the LC2 lynch, especially while nearly being lynched himself. You're right that it doesn't mean he is automatically civ, but when we don't know anything about the setup it should at least help his case a little bit because of the very reason you keep preaching. We have no idea if there's multiple baddie teams, there might not be. If we encounter a reason to think there are then that'll hurt his standing some, but we haven't yet.

I don't like that people who do not suspect him are so quick to forget that he did not know the civilian win condition, and that his explanations for how he actually did were very, very bad. Just saying.

abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

I'm not convinced he didn't know the civ win con. Besides, I'm not sure how he's supposed to blurt out info from his role without breaking the rules. What has you so convinced to the contrary? Sorry I'm sure you've covered this already, but I haven't engaged you on it personally.

Then I'd ask you to go back and read the exchange he and I had once more, it seems pretty clear to me, and given that he has consistently taken at least a few votes, I don't think I am the only one.

Are you a civilian? Are you honestly telling me you couldn't think of a very simple way to answer the question without it being outty? I asked the hostesses if I could bring it up in thread before I asked it, and they said yes. I don't think they'd have done that if they felt it was a question that would result in breaking the rules if answered.

Everything Syn2 has said and done has me convinced.

abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

[Celeste]

abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

Some of us are lazy.
Some of us happen to be clever.
Do not believe those who are are quick to make excuses.
Inna-gadda-da-vida, baby
Now I'm just dropping deuces.

I suck at raps.

[Gunther]

Why do you think someone was more likely to "try to get herself lynched" if she is a civ?

Without that double tracker flip, I would not be considering a Golden lynch. How can you be so sure?

But there was a double tracker flip, of course without that I would not be considering a golden lynch either.

linki @ boo - boo, I had the sense you were one of those who most agreed with me about lynching golden. Do you now feel it's possible there are two trackers?

I do get the point, if the idea here is that it is possible that neither are seemers, I get it. I was coming at it from the perspective that one had to be bad and I couldn't rationalise juliet as being bad. In fact I'm pretty certain juliet isn't bad, I don't see that kind of tactic coming from her... someone like llama maybe but from juliet that move feels sincere.

[Kent Brockman]

I don't think there were two trackers, I think one of them was a seemer.

And I think that move would depend not just on Juliets but on her teammates. If they can dream it, juliets will do it. She is not an evil mastermind herself, but she IS the best team player ever, and she is gamer to try almost anything if it helps her team.

[Gunther]

OK, cookie, two questions

1) If Juliet is bad, can you think of a plausible motive for making the move?

2) If we give golden the benefit of the doubt, how are we to figure out his trustworthiness long term?

[Prisoner 509378]

Metalmarsh 2 analysis:

Spoiler: show

He begins the game on Day 0 by listing people he won't be voting for. His criteria was seemingly that he didn't want to vote for people who hadn't appeared yet. However, the below quote convinces him to not vote Cookie 2, but instead vote either Long Con 2 or Synonym 2.

You are correct, cookie. I was trying to begin discussion, not stifle it. The act that Synonym talked about the skin of his sock account doesn't bother me as much as him saying that there are five baddies among us. How would he know that unless he was one of them.

The next player he won't vote for is Dom, for this reason.

I believe it is a common mafia strategy to call out names in the beginning of the game to gauge reactions

I don't believe it is a common strategy at all

He then clarifies that he won't vote for the real Dom because he believes the real Dom was involved in the lynch stop. Next he disputes boo 2's illogical assertion that because there are 25 players someone MUST be playing as their own sock.

He then appears to have been "Timmer cursed", turning this post into borderline nonsense:

timmer, this is ridiculous tbqh.
timmer hasn't given a single reason to suspect timmer other than that timmer has been acting like timmer in order to try and last longer in a gme that timmer has, lately, been NK'd in a lot for very little reason.

The next day he asks people why they suspect Long Con 2, and in a response to why people don't suspect him, he says that there is virtually no reason to suspect him, and all suspicion thrown his way has been unsubstantiated.

He is asked by Golden 2 about what his contributions for the day are. Votes, suspicions, plans, anything. Metalmarsh 2 states that he's been ignored, saying that he's asked questions and participated, but people have been rude. Later that day, when Synonym 2 was excited about Long Con 2 flipping scum, Metalmarsh 2 is one of the first to bring up the possibility of two baddie teams. Literally 14 hours later nobody had responded to that statement and he quotes himself asking if anybody wanted to contribute to his post. After this, SVS 2 responds by saying that it's the same question as "How does Synonym know if there are five baddies" and Metalmarsh 2 disputes the equality of the two statements. This goes on, and ends with Metalmarsh 2 lamenting his fate of being ignored and then treated suspiciously.

Metalmarsh 2 asks Epignosis 2 how in response to his statement about being curious towards MM2's posts.

Reywas 2 asks people why they're voting Synonym 2, and Metalmarsh 2 responds saying Syn 2's immediate declaration of innocence after Long Con 2 flipped scum is premature at best, as we don't know if there are multiple baddie teams, independent roles, recruiter roles, etc. Reywas 2 misconstrues this and begins preaching that Synonym 2 is most likely not on Long Con 2's team, which is something Metalmarsh 2 has stated repeatedly.

Metalmarsh 2 appears to be genuinely frustrated at everyone ignoring him. For this reason I don't believe he's on a scum team, or at least a scum team with teammates, as literally a fourth of the game ignored him. While it is common for baddies to not interact with each other very much in thread, he has been asking questions that have been flat-out ignored, and his consistently ignored status appears uncoordinated. While I don't know if he's necessarily civilian, I'm pretty confident that he's not scum.

Metalmarsh 2, do you think Reywas 2 was intentionally redirecting your question to avoid discussing the possibility of multiple baddie teams and/or independent roles, or do you think he misinterpreted your statement?

I find it unlikely that if Black Rock 2 believed that there was only one civilian Tracker, and if she was that singular civilian Tracker, she would wait days before contesting Golden 2 in any way aside from planting a seed. After seeing the flip and knowing that juliets was behind the sock, do those actions add up more than they seem to without that knowledge? I'm unfamiliar with the player and I'm trying not to discount playstyle differences.

I appreciate your interest in me. You might be the first person all game to actually care about my thoughts and not just be condescending and rude to me because I chose to role-play more to see if I'd live longer (I did).

I definitely have an eye on Rey. I might vote for him, but I also find Syn and Cookie a tad suspicious as well. I am very unclear of anything having to do with this seemer business. I don't know TGG well enough to really have an opinion.

What do YOU think, and why are you asking Metalmarsh 2 about it? Trying to act interested in his thoughts?

PING.

Can people explain why they want to vote synonym 2? Apparently I'm missing something.

I think he has been quick to say "There's no way I can be bad NOW!" for almost no reason. We have no idea if there's independents, multiple baddie teams, recruitments, etc.... why should we trust him based on one flip of LC?

I don't like that you're not even acknowledging his part in the LC2 lynch, especially while nearly being lynched himself. You're right that it doesn't mean he is automatically civ, but when we don't know anything about the setup it should at least help his case a little bit because of the very reason you keep preaching. We have no idea if there's multiple baddie teams, there might not be. If we encounter a reason to think there are then that'll hurt his standing some, but we haven't yet.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME
GOOD BYE
READ MY POSTS I AM SO DONE WITH YOU PEOPLE

[Kent Brockman]

OK, cookie, two questions

1) If Juliet is bad, can you think of a plausible motive for making the move?

2) If we give golden the benefit of the doubt, how are we to figure out his trustworthiness long term?

Sure. If their won cons are dead or alive, it might be worth the sacrifice to get rid of an info role, an aggressive one at that. Have you never taken a dive for your team? JUliets is a team player, i can see her doing that if need be. But i don't know the baddie win cons, and while I know Roxy may be flexible that way, I also know Splints hates win dead or alive win cons. So that could be a factor too. I would like to believe neither was bad, but I find that too implausible.

And we really can't be sure, can we? No more than we can be sure about you or anyone else. You have to go on your gut and what the thread tells you. The thread told me that I don't think Golden is bad. Then again, i did not think LC was bad either, lol, so

But I don't want to lynch someone over something that is by no means proved.

[Prisoner 509378]

SVS 2, since apparenlty, I haven't made it clear ENOUGH that I DO NOT think Syn is on LC2's team and that I am suspicious of him because he wanted instant exoneration from all suspicion because he lynched a baddie, here's some condensed reading for you.
TBH I'm pretty sick of the way people have treated me this game. It's not even a personal thing, it's just annoying and I have never been ignored like this. I have never been treated like this-- but socks bring out the worst, I guess.

So, please, read these posts and tell me where I "don't even acknowledge his place in LC's lynch". Get your facts straight because you're looking MIGHTY bad to me right about now.

I guess that's fair but I think it's highly unlikely he's on LC2's team and I think we're better off pursuing other leads. My two cents: I think Syn 2 is just indignant re: interactions with LC2 and the thread at large, and felt genuinely vindicated by the LC2 flip.

I don't think he's on LC2's team....

Can people explain why they want to vote synonym 2? Apparently I'm missing something.

I think he has been quick to say "There's no way I can be bad NOW!" for almost no reason. We have no idea if there's independents, multiple baddie teams, recruitments, etc.... why should we trust him based on one flip of LC?

NO UR RIGHT IM TOTALLY SCUM AFTER BEING RIGHT ABOUT LONG CON FOR THE ENTIRE FUCKING GAME

BYE

oh do we know there's only one baddie team?

anything?????

This interpretation isn't far removed from "how does Synonym know there are five baddies?"

Yes, it is.

Synonym quietly exonerating themself from any further suspicion by subtly putting this forward is very different than a slip that I thought might have merit on Day 1.


Start actually reading my posts, please.

How was Synonym "quietly exonerating himself"? He shouted at everyone in caps lock. I think you have to fish in this Syn post to arrive at the point you made, and I felt the same way about LC2's accusation of Syn on day 1. Hence the comparison.

What do you mean by the last sentence? What suggests to you that I'm not reading your posts?

No you don't have to *fish* to come to the conclusion that in a game where we do not know any role breakdowns, Synonym used his right standing on ONE issue to exonerate him for the rest of the game. That is suspicious to me. We don't know if there's independents, neutrals, recruiters, a second baddie team... we just don't know. Being right about one baddie does not exclude you from those other groups. In some cases, it wouldn't even exclude you from being in the group you were right about! But hey-- dismiss me, everyone. Just like you have all fucking game.

NO UR RIGHT IM TOTALLY SCUM AFTER BEING RIGHT ABOUT LONG CON FOR THE ENTIRE FUCKING GAME

BYE

oh do we know there's only one baddie team?

anything?????

This interpretation isn't far removed from "how does Synonym know there are five baddies?"

Yes, it is.

Synonym quietly exonerating themself from any further suspicion by subtly putting this forward is very different than a slip that I thought might have merit on Day 1.


Start actually reading my posts, please.

NO UR RIGHT IM TOTALLY SCUM AFTER BEING RIGHT ABOUT LONG CON FOR THE ENTIRE FUCKING GAME

BYE

oh do we know there's only one baddie team?

anything?????

Don't know but if there is one I'm not on it.

@Bass 2, that wasn't what I had in mind when I asked, no. But sure.

I'm glad I made a new friend! Are you going to pursue Synonym 2 even though events seem to indicate he was bussed by Long Con 2?

BITCH WHET?

how do you know ther's only one team?

NO UR RIGHT IM TOTALLY SCUM AFTER BEING RIGHT ABOUT LONG CON FOR THE ENTIRE FUCKING GAME

BYE

oh do we know there's only one baddie team?

anything?????

[Gunther]

But i don't know the baddie win cons, and while I know Roxy may be flexible that way, I also know Splints hates win dead or alive win cons.

Hey, Lacey, what do you make of that!

[Ben Linus]

Metalmarsh 2 analysis:

Spoiler: show

He begins the game on Day 0 by listing people he won't be voting for. His criteria was seemingly that he didn't want to vote for people who hadn't appeared yet. However, the below quote convinces him to not vote Cookie 2, but instead vote either Long Con 2 or Synonym 2.

You are correct, cookie. I was trying to begin discussion, not stifle it. The act that Synonym talked about the skin of his sock account doesn't bother me as much as him saying that there are five baddies among us. How would he know that unless he was one of them.

The next player he won't vote for is Dom, for this reason.

I believe it is a common mafia strategy to call out names in the beginning of the game to gauge reactions

I don't believe it is a common strategy at all

He then clarifies that he won't vote for the real Dom because he believes the real Dom was involved in the lynch stop. Next he disputes boo 2's illogical assertion that because there are 25 players someone MUST be playing as their own sock.

He then appears to have been "Timmer cursed", turning this post into borderline nonsense:

timmer, this is ridiculous tbqh.
timmer hasn't given a single reason to suspect timmer other than that timmer has been acting like timmer in order to try and last longer in a gme that timmer has, lately, been NK'd in a lot for very little reason.

The next day he asks people why they suspect Long Con 2, and in a response to why people don't suspect him, he says that there is virtually no reason to suspect him, and all suspicion thrown his way has been unsubstantiated.

He is asked by Golden 2 about what his contributions for the day are. Votes, suspicions, plans, anything. Metalmarsh 2 states that he's been ignored, saying that he's asked questions and participated, but people have been rude. Later that day, when Synonym 2 was excited about Long Con 2 flipping scum, Metalmarsh 2 is one of the first to bring up the possibility of two baddie teams. Literally 14 hours later nobody had responded to that statement and he quotes himself asking if anybody wanted to contribute to his post. After this, SVS 2 responds by saying that it's the same question as "How does Synonym know if there are five baddies" and Metalmarsh 2 disputes the equality of the two statements. This goes on, and ends with Metalmarsh 2 lamenting his fate of being ignored and then treated suspiciously.

Metalmarsh 2 asks Epignosis 2 how in response to his statement about being curious towards MM2's posts.

Reywas 2 asks people why they're voting Synonym 2, and Metalmarsh 2 responds saying Syn 2's immediate declaration of innocence after Long Con 2 flipped scum is premature at best, as we don't know if there are multiple baddie teams, independent roles, recruiter roles, etc. Reywas 2 misconstrues this and begins preaching that Synonym 2 is most likely not on Long Con 2's team, which is something Metalmarsh 2 has stated repeatedly.

Metalmarsh 2 appears to be genuinely frustrated at everyone ignoring him. For this reason I don't believe he's on a scum team, or at least a scum team with teammates, as literally a fourth of the game ignored him. While it is common for baddies to not interact with each other very much in thread, he has been asking questions that have been flat-out ignored, and his consistently ignored status appears uncoordinated. While I don't know if he's necessarily civilian, I'm pretty confident that he's not scum.

Metalmarsh 2, do you think Reywas 2 was intentionally redirecting your question to avoid discussing the possibility of multiple baddie teams and/or independent roles, or do you think he misinterpreted your statement?

I find it unlikely that if Black Rock 2 believed that there was only one civilian Tracker, and if she was that singular civilian Tracker, she would wait days before contesting Golden 2 in any way aside from planting a seed. After seeing the flip and knowing that juliets was behind the sock, do those actions add up more than they seem to without that knowledge? I'm unfamiliar with the player and I'm trying not to discount playstyle differences.

I appreciate your interest in me. You might be the first person all game to actually care about my thoughts and not just be condescending and rude to me because I chose to role-play more to see if I'd live longer (I did).

I definitely have an eye on Rey. I might vote for him, but I also find Syn and Cookie a tad suspicious as well. I am very unclear of anything having to do with this seemer business. I don't know TGG well enough to really have an opinion.

What do YOU think, and why are you asking Metalmarsh 2 about it? Trying to act interested in his thoughts?

PING.

lol you're playing right into Bass 2's hand. And I know that's not gonna win me any brownie points with you but I'm saying it cuz it's the truth.

My problem with Bass 2's post is that he asked a leading question of Metalmarsh 2 expecting a certain answer. He's placating MM2 by asking his opinion when MM2 has felt slighted/ignored and he asks it in a way that he hopes will lead to MM2 suspecting me. Bass acknowledges that MM2 is feeling ignored and in the same post asks MM2 a question about me hoping to simultaneously drum up suspicion of me and get on MM2's good side. That's baddie manipulation straight up.

There was no misconstruing happening in my post intentional or otherwise. I realize MM2 doesn't think Syn 2 is on LC2's baddie team, and my point stands that finding baddies on that team is our best lead right now. If evidence pops up that there's a second baddie team we can start looking that way but it's unproductive at this moment and I don't care if you think I'm bad for saying that.

[Ben Linus]

OK, cookie, two questions

1) If Juliet is bad, can you think of a plausible motive for making the move?

2) If we give golden the benefit of the doubt, how are we to figure out his trustworthiness long term?

If Golden 2 is a civvie then we need to make him the baddie's problem. They'll either need to kill him because he's got a powerful role or else he'll start to figure things out.

If Golden 2 is a baddie then he'll need to help us lynch some baddies or we're gonna lose faith in him.

I'm uncomfortable making that judgment at this stage in the game. I don't think juliets was bad tbh. That's not a move she makes if she's a baddie. My concern is that it's possible there's 2 civvie trackers and I want to let it play out. Either way, Golden 2 owes us a baddie sooner rather than later.

[Ben Linus]

One problem I've got with Golden 2 is his kitschy posts leading up to the LC 2 flip. He posted those How I Met Your Mother memes and finished up with the classic "Dary!" as if he was already expecting the result. I mean what was Golden 2 gonna post if LC2 flipped civ? That was bizarre IMO.

[Gunther]

Rey, I see your point in how we can test golden long term. He catches us baddies or we lynch him, and in the mean time the baddies have to know that if they leave him alive he rats them out. It's a good plan.

What do you think of the thing I quoted from cookie, above?

[Ben Linus]

Rey, I see your point in how we can test golden long term. He catches us baddies or we lynch him, and in the mean time the baddies have to know that if they leave him alive he rats them out. It's a good plan.

What do you think of the thing I quoted from cookie, above?

You quoted her twice so not sure specifically what you're referring to. I think she's wrong that juliets makes that move as a baddie but that's just a difference of opinion. I like the way Cookie 2 is trying to think things through and I don't think she's bad.

[Celeste]

If Black Rock was town, genuinely town, I'd question why the executed jumped on Cookie, like she was the Grand Vizier of Cookies.

When did this happen, Cobalt? Can you point it out to me?

And tbh, based on gameplay, I still think Golden was the real tracker. But I could see him fooling me as well.

A beautiful code does elicit fear going high in jumping kicks.

Lick my nearest old portal quickly.

Really, say that unusual vitality welcomes X-Men.

Yes.

Zumba.

I want to lynch Dom.

[Kent Brockman]

But i don't know the baddie win cons, and while I know Roxy may be flexible that way, I also know Splints hates win dead or alive win cons.

Hey, Lacey, what do you make of that!

I was wondering who might grab at that

I know my own win conditions, i don't know that the baddies have the same ones. Epignosis regularly has civs win dead or alive, baddies have to be alive. just becasue the civvies have one set of win cons, does not mean it is identical for the baddies, especially with these hosts

Linki; Cobalt while I would prefer not to lick your old portals, I might be on board for that last part, No U-ey as that may sound.

[Kent Brockman]

I was planning to reread him tonight anyhow, then while doing so I ran into that novel he wrote about me full of, frankly, trumpery. So I will finish my reread and post thoughts in the AM.

[Prisoner 509378]

Metalmarsh 2 analysis:

Spoiler: show

He begins the game on Day 0 by listing people he won't be voting for. His criteria was seemingly that he didn't want to vote for people who hadn't appeared yet. However, the below quote convinces him to not vote Cookie 2, but instead vote either Long Con 2 or Synonym 2.

You are correct, cookie. I was trying to begin discussion, not stifle it. The act that Synonym talked about the skin of his sock account doesn't bother me as much as him saying that there are five baddies among us. How would he know that unless he was one of them.

The next player he won't vote for is Dom, for this reason.

I believe it is a common mafia strategy to call out names in the beginning of the game to gauge reactions

I don't believe it is a common strategy at all

He then clarifies that he won't vote for the real Dom because he believes the real Dom was involved in the lynch stop. Next he disputes boo 2's illogical assertion that because there are 25 players someone MUST be playing as their own sock.

He then appears to have been "Timmer cursed", turning this post into borderline nonsense:

timmer, this is ridiculous tbqh.
timmer hasn't given a single reason to suspect timmer other than that timmer has been acting like timmer in order to try and last longer in a gme that timmer has, lately, been NK'd in a lot for very little reason.

The next day he asks people why they suspect Long Con 2, and in a response to why people don't suspect him, he says that there is virtually no reason to suspect him, and all suspicion thrown his way has been unsubstantiated.

He is asked by Golden 2 about what his contributions for the day are. Votes, suspicions, plans, anything. Metalmarsh 2 states that he's been ignored, saying that he's asked questions and participated, but people have been rude. Later that day, when Synonym 2 was excited about Long Con 2 flipping scum, Metalmarsh 2 is one of the first to bring up the possibility of two baddie teams. Literally 14 hours later nobody had responded to that statement and he quotes himself asking if anybody wanted to contribute to his post. After this, SVS 2 responds by saying that it's the same question as "How does Synonym know if there are five baddies" and Metalmarsh 2 disputes the equality of the two statements. This goes on, and ends with Metalmarsh 2 lamenting his fate of being ignored and then treated suspiciously.

Metalmarsh 2 asks Epignosis 2 how in response to his statement about being curious towards MM2's posts.

Reywas 2 asks people why they're voting Synonym 2, and Metalmarsh 2 responds saying Syn 2's immediate declaration of innocence after Long Con 2 flipped scum is premature at best, as we don't know if there are multiple baddie teams, independent roles, recruiter roles, etc. Reywas 2 misconstrues this and begins preaching that Synonym 2 is most likely not on Long Con 2's team, which is something Metalmarsh 2 has stated repeatedly.

Metalmarsh 2 appears to be genuinely frustrated at everyone ignoring him. For this reason I don't believe he's on a scum team, or at least a scum team with teammates, as literally a fourth of the game ignored him. While it is common for baddies to not interact with each other very much in thread, he has been asking questions that have been flat-out ignored, and his consistently ignored status appears uncoordinated. While I don't know if he's necessarily civilian, I'm pretty confident that he's not scum.

Metalmarsh 2, do you think Reywas 2 was intentionally redirecting your question to avoid discussing the possibility of multiple baddie teams and/or independent roles, or do you think he misinterpreted your statement?

I find it unlikely that if Black Rock 2 believed that there was only one civilian Tracker, and if she was that singular civilian Tracker, she would wait days before contesting Golden 2 in any way aside from planting a seed. After seeing the flip and knowing that juliets was behind the sock, do those actions add up more than they seem to without that knowledge? I'm unfamiliar with the player and I'm trying not to discount playstyle differences.

I appreciate your interest in me. You might be the first person all game to actually care about my thoughts and not just be condescending and rude to me because I chose to role-play more to see if I'd live longer (I did).

I definitely have an eye on Rey. I might vote for him, but I also find Syn and Cookie a tad suspicious as well. I am very unclear of anything having to do with this seemer business. I don't know TGG well enough to really have an opinion.

What do YOU think, and why are you asking Metalmarsh 2 about it? Trying to act interested in his thoughts?

PING.

lol you're playing right into Bass 2's hand. And I know that's not gonna win me any brownie points with you but I'm saying it cuz it's the truth.

My problem with Bass 2's post is that he asked a leading question of Metalmarsh 2 expecting a certain answer. He's placating MM2 by asking his opinion when MM2 has felt slighted/ignored and he asks it in a way that he hopes will lead to MM2 suspecting me. Bass acknowledges that MM2 is feeling ignored and in the same post asks MM2 a question about me hoping to simultaneously drum up suspicion of me and get on MM2's good side. That's baddie manipulation straight up.

There was no misconstruing happening in my post intentional or otherwise. I realize MM2 doesn't think Syn 2 is on LC2's baddie team, and my point stands that finding baddies on that team is our best lead right now. If evidence pops up that there's a second baddie team we can start looking that way but it's unproductive at this moment and I don't care if you think I'm bad for saying that.

I think I found a potential second lead.


You literally did not care about this until you started getting flak for it. Why?
I don't trust Bass, but that doesn't mean he's always wrong.


So tbqh, what you're saying boils down to the following:
I don't care about MetalMarsh 2.

So, guess what? I don't care about anything you say. I don't anymore. You guys have been beyond rude to me this game. You all practically beg me to participate more else I be suspected-- when I do, you all ignore me. Every single one of you. I have commented on a more diverse selection of topics than any of you, so honestly, screw you. I'm not a stupid person. I don't blindly trust Bass, but I do think he is right here-- you deliberately tried to make it seem like I wasn't acknowledging Syn's role in LC's lynch (much like SVS). That is a fact. You cannot pretend like it didn't happen.
So, Rey, kindly get your facts straight. Synonym isn't the innocent little angel you have campaigned him to be. If he's bad, you're on his team.

Can't wait to be night killed.

[2 Stupid Dogs]

But i don't know the baddie win cons, and while I know Roxy may be flexible that way, I also know Splints hates win dead or alive win cons.

Hey, Lacey, what do you make of that!

I do not even have the words. It's a thing of beauty.

abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

[Sockys2023]

linki @ boo - boo, I had the sense you were one of those who most agreed with me about lynching golden. Do you now feel it's possible there are two trackers?

Of course I think It's possible. I'm the one who brought it up.

I am not 100% on it though. It is only speculation after all.

for the record, I am confused that Gamer Guy 2 came back from the dead and has yet to make an appearance. He is a confirmed civ, which is a very powerful position to be in. Why is he not taking advantage of it?

Lastly, a seemer appears as a different player when killed right? Assuming that Golden is the seemer, wouldnt we be lynching him for inconclusive results as he would just appear as something other than the seemer again? We would gain neither peace of mind or useful information from it from how I look at it.

[Ben Linus]

Metalmarsh 2 analysis:

Spoiler: show

He begins the game on Day 0 by listing people he won't be voting for. His criteria was seemingly that he didn't want to vote for people who hadn't appeared yet. However, the below quote convinces him to not vote Cookie 2, but instead vote either Long Con 2 or Synonym 2.

You are correct, cookie. I was trying to begin discussion, not stifle it. The act that Synonym talked about the skin of his sock account doesn't bother me as much as him saying that there are five baddies among us. How would he know that unless he was one of them.

The next player he won't vote for is Dom, for this reason.

I believe it is a common mafia strategy to call out names in the beginning of the game to gauge reactions

I don't believe it is a common strategy at all

He then clarifies that he won't vote for the real Dom because he believes the real Dom was involved in the lynch stop. Next he disputes boo 2's illogical assertion that because there are 25 players someone MUST be playing as their own sock.

He then appears to have been "Timmer cursed", turning this post into borderline nonsense:

timmer, this is ridiculous tbqh.
timmer hasn't given a single reason to suspect timmer other than that timmer has been acting like timmer in order to try and last longer in a gme that timmer has, lately, been NK'd in a lot for very little reason.

The next day he asks people why they suspect Long Con 2, and in a response to why people don't suspect him, he says that there is virtually no reason to suspect him, and all suspicion thrown his way has been unsubstantiated.

He is asked by Golden 2 about what his contributions for the day are. Votes, suspicions, plans, anything. Metalmarsh 2 states that he's been ignored, saying that he's asked questions and participated, but people have been rude. Later that day, when Synonym 2 was excited about Long Con 2 flipping scum, Metalmarsh 2 is one of the first to bring up the possibility of two baddie teams. Literally 14 hours later nobody had responded to that statement and he quotes himself asking if anybody wanted to contribute to his post. After this, SVS 2 responds by saying that it's the same question as "How does Synonym know if there are five baddies" and Metalmarsh 2 disputes the equality of the two statements. This goes on, and ends with Metalmarsh 2 lamenting his fate of being ignored and then treated suspiciously.

Metalmarsh 2 asks Epignosis 2 how in response to his statement about being curious towards MM2's posts.

Reywas 2 asks people why they're voting Synonym 2, and Metalmarsh 2 responds saying Syn 2's immediate declaration of innocence after Long Con 2 flipped scum is premature at best, as we don't know if there are multiple baddie teams, independent roles, recruiter roles, etc. Reywas 2 misconstrues this and begins preaching that Synonym 2 is most likely not on Long Con 2's team, which is something Metalmarsh 2 has stated repeatedly.

Metalmarsh 2 appears to be genuinely frustrated at everyone ignoring him. For this reason I don't believe he's on a scum team, or at least a scum team with teammates, as literally a fourth of the game ignored him. While it is common for baddies to not interact with each other very much in thread, he has been asking questions that have been flat-out ignored, and his consistently ignored status appears uncoordinated. While I don't know if he's necessarily civilian, I'm pretty confident that he's not scum.

Metalmarsh 2, do you think Reywas 2 was intentionally redirecting your question to avoid discussing the possibility of multiple baddie teams and/or independent roles, or do you think he misinterpreted your statement?

I find it unlikely that if Black Rock 2 believed that there was only one civilian Tracker, and if she was that singular civilian Tracker, she would wait days before contesting Golden 2 in any way aside from planting a seed. After seeing the flip and knowing that juliets was behind the sock, do those actions add up more than they seem to without that knowledge? I'm unfamiliar with the player and I'm trying not to discount playstyle differences.

I appreciate your interest in me. You might be the first person all game to actually care about my thoughts and not just be condescending and rude to me because I chose to role-play more to see if I'd live longer (I did).

I definitely have an eye on Rey. I might vote for him, but I also find Syn and Cookie a tad suspicious as well. I am very unclear of anything having to do with this seemer business. I don't know TGG well enough to really have an opinion.

What do YOU think, and why are you asking Metalmarsh 2 about it? Trying to act interested in his thoughts?

PING.

lol you're playing right into Bass 2's hand. And I know that's not gonna win me any brownie points with you but I'm saying it cuz it's the truth.

My problem with Bass 2's post is that he asked a leading question of Metalmarsh 2 expecting a certain answer. He's placating MM2 by asking his opinion when MM2 has felt slighted/ignored and he asks it in a way that he hopes will lead to MM2 suspecting me. Bass acknowledges that MM2 is feeling ignored and in the same post asks MM2 a question about me hoping to simultaneously drum up suspicion of me and get on MM2's good side. That's baddie manipulation straight up.

There was no misconstruing happening in my post intentional or otherwise. I realize MM2 doesn't think Syn 2 is on LC2's baddie team, and my point stands that finding baddies on that team is our best lead right now. If evidence pops up that there's a second baddie team we can start looking that way but it's unproductive at this moment and I don't care if you think I'm bad for saying that.

I think I found a potential second lead.


You literally did not care about this until you started getting flak for it. Why?
I don't trust Bass, but that doesn't mean he's always wrong.


So tbqh, what you're saying boils down to the following:
I don't care about MetalMarsh 2.

So, guess what? I don't care about anything you say. I don't anymore. You guys have been beyond rude to me this game. You all practically beg me to participate more else I be suspected-- when I do, you all ignore me. Every single one of you. I have commented on a more diverse selection of topics than any of you, so honestly, screw you. I'm not a stupid person. I don't blindly trust Bass, but I do think he is right here-- you deliberately tried to make it seem like I wasn't acknowledging Syn's role in LC's lynch (much like SVS). That is a fact. You cannot pretend like it didn't happen.
So, Rey, kindly get your facts straight. Synonym isn't the innocent little angel you have campaigned him to be. If he's bad, you're on his team.

Can't wait to be night killed.

Kindly get your facts straight at well. I'll take a page out of your playbook and tell you to READ MY POSTS before simply assuming that I don't care about your input. Your righteous indignation at me is misplaced. I think your input is misguided because looking for a baddie outside of LC2's suspected teammates = less of a chance of lynching a baddie.

[Gunther]

But i don't know the baddie win cons, and while I know Roxy may be flexible that way, I also know Splints hates win dead or alive win cons.

Hey, Lacey, what do you make of that!

I was wondering who might grab at that

I know my own win conditions, i don't know that the baddies have the same ones. Epignosis regularly has civs win dead or alive, baddies have to be alive. just becasue the civvies have one set of win cons, does not mean it is identical for the baddies, especially with these hosts

It's just that it stood out like a sore thumb it was the biggest ping I've had in this game for sure.

Not that I disagree with your overall sentiment, it's just that 'splints hates win dead or alive win cons' thing... I mean...

[Kent Brockman]

But i don't know the baddie win cons, and while I know Roxy may be flexible that way, I also know Splints hates win dead or alive win cons.

Hey, Lacey, what do you make of that!

I was wondering who might grab at that

I know my own win conditions, i don't know that the baddies have the same ones. Epignosis regularly has civs win dead or alive, baddies have to be alive. just becasue the civvies have one set of win cons, does not mean it is identical for the baddies, especially with these hosts

Linki; Cobalt while I would prefer not to lick your old portals, I might be on board for that last part, No U-ey as that may sound.

Rico^^^

Ever play an Epignosis game? Ever play a Roxy & Splints game before? Think divergent win cons are not possible?

Do you have an opinion on Dom? Reading back on him there is something that I find off about him, but can't really place a finger on it.

[Lunatella]

Are you as game as I am for a Reywas 2 lynch MM2? Also, game aside, I'm sorry you're getting upset, I'll try to more actively engage with you.

Reywas 2, you're right that I was manipulative. I wanted to get Metalmarsh 2 back into the thread because it seemed he was being intentionally ignored. Manipulation is an underrated civilian tool, loaded questions can get you some surprisingly useful answers from people you don't even ask.

I couldn't help but notice that Cobalt 2 was the only one to vote so far, 20 hours before phase end. That's much different than the previous days, and I assume it's because people are afraid of throwing the first stone in the wrong place, so to speak, where as until today there were very obvious wagons that people could flock to. I'll take that burden off your hands for you, aren't I such a nice guy?

[Gunther]

I'm not saying the win conditions could not be divergent. I'm saying like it sounded like you did not know the civ win condition.

My opinion on Dom 2 is that if I had to put money on any one person being civilian, he would be my choice. Maybe it's just because I think I know who is behind the sock and I feel they are being their civvie self.

[Kent Brockman]

You read that thay way? I was clearly talking about the bad win cons. I don't know if they have the same ones as I do.

And oddly, I think I know the person behind the sock too, and I feel totally different than you do. Like totally.