Per the underline, you seem to assert that they're civvies. Or actually, now that I'm looking at it a bit closer, I suppose all you're asserting is that they were "convinced they were right". Anyway, that's why I asked.bea wrote:I would like to hear more from LC regarding everyone else. For me, personally, his lazor focus on JJ is either a) he's that convinced he's right or b) baddie tactic.
So he could either be like Sorsha and BR was regarding Lorab -
Or like lorab was in being super not happy about almost being lynched and then never answering any of my questions hoping it would all blow under the table.
I see peeps are looking at MM...good, because after seeing 3J's case and seeing Sorsha come at me for not being "aggressive" enough...check this out...
Now what did Sorsha say again?Metalmarsh89 wrote:And to add, Matt did propose the same case that you did, that I slipped, and must be mafia. But he took a pretty hesitant approach to it. The Matt I remember from Talking Heads would have dogged me all day and all game over something like that.
Knowing I'm civvie, alarm bells are ringing right now. Even though Marmot made his comment days and days ago, it feels like they've been talking about how I've been "less aggressive" in chat, and that's how they can get an easy lynch out of me.Sorsha wrote:Maybe he has a team helping to reign in his aggressiveness this game?
I don't know if "aggressiveness" is the right word for it. His "Matt-ness" maybe?
Fyi, since Talking Heads, I've been "less aggressive" in every game I've played. True story. After Epignosis completely ripped me a new one in that game, then in the following two games MacD proposed a policy lynch on me, I've learned to stfu.
But wait, Matt! You can't possibly just be using that example to link Sorsha and MM, can you? Naaah.
There's more!
At one point, after I accuse MM of being a baddie w/o giving a reason, Sorsha keeps asking me what I'm talking about, and how she super wants to know what my thoughts are...so I say...
Then Sorsha replies...Matt wrote:I'm not trying to policy lynch MM.
Anyway, it's not much, but this caught my eye...
This is a closed set up, and though there are most likely two teams of baddies, I think there's also a possibility that there is a big team of 7 or 8 like there was in Talking Heads.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Which team do you think he is on?JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I think I'm cool with lynching llama first. I hope I don't forget by the time I have to vote.Ricochet wrote:LoRab and llama have not butted heads over who is the better writer and poster.
confirmed fishy
But Marmot automatically assumes two teams.
Orly?Sorsha wrote:@Matt- that was the same thing I noticed about MM but I'm not convinced that assuming there is more than one baddie team in a 30 player game is enough to convince me he's guilty.
That's the same thing you noticed, eh?
Anyway, I'm down with an MM lynch. And if he's bad, look at Sorsha. Hell, if he ain't bad, look at Sorsha. She's bein' tricksy. Did she vote for Lorab the day Lorab was actually lynched? I don't recall.
Oh, btw, right before Sorsha starts chattin' away on how I've been less aggressive, what did MM post out of nowhere earlier this phase?
Sweet. So MM, you and Sorsha decided today was the day to go all in on me, huh?Metalmarsh89 wrote:Boom diggity.Matt wrote:RIH LLama.
FZ - I was thinking that you were most likely Golden's Monopoly play buddy. But if that were true, then why the never ending defense of 3J? I don't think I've played with a civ LC since I came back for Mafia, but he seems pretty legit to me in this game. I think it's odd that he's simply asking people to talk about his case, and now people are calling him bad.
bea - Do you believe Sorsha/BR to be good this game?
Voting for Dolphin Army