A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [END GAME]

#501

#502

Metalmarsh89 wrote:What are you talking about zebra?

I interpreted that to mean you suspected him for other reasons. Was its true meaning that you didn't suspect him at all?

#503

If it is, I call bullshit. If you didn't suspect him at all you should have and would have made that abundantly clear.

#504

a2thezebra wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:2 hours to go, and only 6 out of 25 players have voted.

this is gonna be a fun EoD
I forgot about you. Second to MM you look the worst in hindsight. You defended my reasoning while defending the disingenuous opportunistic behavior from the others. Then when I clarified their positions you didn't say anything to me until I commented positively on Scotty's suspicion of you. Very bad looking.

linki - The only successful policy lynches are pure luck, but everyone who advocated for them always pretends they weren't in fact policy lynches afterwards. That's how it always goes.

I'm sorry, but I don't agree with your assessment of the others acting in a "disingenuous oppurtunistic" way. Do you have anything against me other than me not agreeing with you?

#505

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Sorsha wrote:I'm leaning DDL with my vote. The call for a policy lynch/vig kill on snow dog for starters. Then after that the arguing game theory just stands out more to me than anything else anyone else has done.
Was he arguing by himself?

No, I guess I should say I agreed more with the stances he was arguing against than the ones he was arguing for.

#506

Especially considering you were the first to voice suspicion of him for his claim of not reading his role card.

linki - Way to misrepresent. I never suspect people for not agreeing with me. I clarified their positions for you and if you naturally disagreed then you would have responded by voicing your disagreement. Instead you didn't respond at all.

#507

As long as you don't policy-lynch me for escaping too many lynches...

Linki: I've never suspected Snow Dog. I winked and told him he'd get my vote on Day 0, and that's all I can remember.

#508

Quin wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:
Quin wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:Quin, you did not respond at all to Snow Dog's initial comment, you were present made some other jokey posts at the time, but no response at all to his original post. Then when he came back and said what he was doing, you quickly chimed in and said you thought that was what he was doing. Why no response to it immediately?

Golden, you had a similar thing, explained away Snow Dog's post after he had already explained what he was doing in that post. Any reason you felt the need?
I didn't respond to Snow Dog initially because I didn't think that his joke was worth the discussion. I didn't anticipate that it'd become such a hot topic. I was posting in catch-up when I put in my two cents, so I didn't know that he'd said anything about it since until I was practically finished.

Spacedaisy wrote:As of right now, my vote will not be going to JoH, Soneji, DDL, LC, or Zebra.

I can't say who might have been lurking without posting at all, but the people who posted without commenting on any of the various playstyle arguments that were going on hot and heavy during Day 0. But I can say that Quin posted without participating, as did Glorf and sprityo.
This isn't true. I gave my input on both Luffy and zebra. And even then, I don't know why involvement in arguments about playstyles are a point of parity.
I'll look back to see if I mischaracterized your behavior during that particular period of time. And your answer is actually exactly the one I was looking for. When I read the initial reaction I had a knee jerk bad feeling about you surrounding it, but when I looked back at it I realized you had only a brief time in thread after Snow Dog's joke and then you came back right after he cleared it up.

It's a point to me because my interest is in who was there during these intense exchanges, but did not engage in it at the time. I think baddies are more likely to lay low, especially on Day 0/1 and I am looking to cast my vote on one of these type players. Someone who is here but not fully engaging. Don't get your panties in a bunch, friend. I questioned you because I felt like you were someone who it applied to even though I didn't feel like you were a real suspect. I wanted to see how you answered just the same.

Ok, I checked back and I think you misunderstood what I was doing. I specifically was looking at the period of time between when Snow Dog made the initial joke and then when he clarified. I was looking at the conversation in that time. I think that once Snow Dog clarifies it, from that point forward anything said can pretty much be dismissed. It's easy for baddies to jump in and just say, oh yeah that's what I thought he was doing. Yes you did engage in the conversation afterwards, specifically about DDL and his part in the suspicion cast around about Snow Dog as a result of his joke. But this was outside the time frame I was specifically looking at which is why I included you. Again though, I think you were mostly missing during the most intense of it so I don't really consider you someone I would vote for.
Just going off time stamps so I can satiate your concerns; I wasn't mostly missing, I wasn't there full stop.

When I say point of parity, and I might be misunderstanding you, but your list of who you won't vote seems to be justified based on the fact that they engaged in arguments about playstyles. Can you elaborate more specifically on what exactly is motivating your reads there?

That does satiate my concerns, it illustrates it. I was not worried about people who were absent. I was worried about people who were present without engaging. Going by time stamps alone you fit that but only barely.

Yes I can elaborate. Why would a baddie put them into an intense debate over playstyle that is likely to net them very little profit on Day 0? It seems unlikely in my experience as a baddie that they would. I am not saying I believe them to be civilian. I am saying they would not be my most likely candidate for my Day 1 vote. Don't mistake my saying I am not voting them for me giving them a civilian read. I have no real read on them, I just think it is more likely that the baddies sat back and let these intense dramas ab out playstyle go on without them having to weigh in. Consider it, if you are bad and everyone arguments mafia ideology rather than suspects, why would you want to get into that? You would draw needless attention to yourself. Rather I see many more baddies sit back and let the civs go to town on stupid playstyle debates and eventually vote for each other as a result.

Thus I am looking at people who were here without contributing significantly to the conversation, either by weighing in on the discussion (which I really thought was pointless if I am honest) or by saying it is pointless and trying to redirect conversation to who might be a suspect or things that could actually help us to decide who to lynch.

Linki @MM:It is flimsy because I am quite fond of you Marmot! Stop it!
Linki @Quin: I actually cannot remove you from the pool because you fit the profile exactly. But I can say you are the last one I would consider out of the pool.

Linki @LC: It is only because you were very engaged. Frankly I find you most suspicious of the highly engaged people, but I can't adequately justify why.

That was a lot of linki...

#509

I'm going to go party bye

linki @ MM - Wowwwwwwwwwwww who do you think is going to believe that

#510

Oh also, MM I laughed really hard at your response to my offer of giving you my vote.

#511

Snow Dog wrote:I randomised and voted DDL, k?

I really wish he wouldn't do it a second time because I'm tired of making excuses for him, but this is Snow Dog making fun of Vompatti.

#512

Sorsha wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Sorsha wrote:I'm leaning DDL with my vote. The call for a policy lynch/vig kill on snow dog for starters. Then after that the arguing game theory just stands out more to me than anything else anyone else has done.
Was he arguing by himself?
No, I guess I should say I agreed more with the stances he was arguing against than the ones he was arguing for.

You do you. I don't even know what he said about game theory (or if I should even bother looking).

Linki: The people who read my post history.

#513

EBWOP: My post should have read, "That doesn't satiate my concerns, it illustrates it."

#514

In case it isn't apparent, I'm way behind. I saw the date of the lynch post, but didn't consider the time.

Ten dollars says Eloh misses the vote tonight.

#515

Long Con wrote:
Sorsha wrote:I'm leaning DDL with my vote. The call for a policy lynch/vig kill on snow dog for starters. Then after that the arguing game theory just stands out more to me than anything else anyone else has done.
How rare do you feel a successful policy lynch is?

Depends on how you quantify success.

I'm not a fan of actual policy lynch but rather bluntly calling out what I think is poor play. Anybody who lets you policy lynch then won't stop the thing after getting lynched imo. But you'll at least get them to think about it and either defend it or change their ways.

If I'm suspicious of Golden, and I'm not entirely sure at this point, it's for saying some of my logic that I don't think is bad is bad and for defending Zebra.

I don't agree about the contradiction that Epi sees in lecture (let's say "inform about meta") vs accuse.

#516

Sorsha wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Sorsha wrote:I'm leaning DDL with my vote. The call for a policy lynch/vig kill on snow dog for starters. Then after that the arguing game theory just stands out more to me than anything else anyone else has done.
How rare do you feel a successful policy lynch is?
I don't recall ever seeing a successful one. It's not done here on the syndicate too much, at least not the games I've played.

Me neither.

Btw- did you screenshot the day 0 poll results?

No, sorry, I saw that you were looking for them... maybe you can reconstruct them by looking through the thread?

Fun!

I don't think they were that important.

a2thezebra wrote:linki - The only successful policy lynches are pure luck, but everyone who advocated for them always pretends they weren't in fact policy lynches afterwards. That's how it always goes.

I like that.

#517

Spacedaisy wrote:Oh also, MM I laughed really hard at your response to my offer of giving you my vote.

I'm going with a low/non poster to vote today. Who should I pick?

#518

I'll read and vote. I have to be up anyway.

#519

a2thezebra wrote:Especially considering you were the first to voice suspicion of him for his claim of not reading his role card.

linki - Way to misrepresent. I never suspect people for not agreeing with me. I clarified their positions for you and if you naturally disagreed then you would have responded by voicing your disagreement. Instead you didn't respond at all.

Because, frankly, I thought the entire Snow Dog debate meant nothing, and I gleaned literally nothing from it. I didn't think it had any value, and I'm just as confused of the alignment of anyone involved as I was before.

I forgot to respond, because I didn't care enough about it to. I didn't fall one way or the other, so I didn't agree or disagree with your "clarifications."

#520

Spacedaisy wrote:Working on that now Sorsh.

Glorf, were you part of the Monkey Island game in which the not reading the role card thing originated?

No, my friend, I was not and nor did I follow it at all. I will confess however that I tried to do that myself once but my curiosity got the better of me...

#521

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:Oh also, MM I laughed really hard at your response to my offer of giving you my vote.

I'm going with a low/non poster to vote today. Who should I pick?

I may just join you. I have no real suspicions right now, I'm just lame. Nothing about any of the main arguments today struck me as particularly bad. I didn't even read the latest one between Golden and Jack. Total tl;dr. Sorry guys!

#522

@SpaceDaisy

In the interest of fairness, I will debate and analyze game theory to the ends of time cause I really like it.

So I'm not a baddie but I'd be doing much of this culture reading/mechanic strategy debate anyhow.

#523

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:@SpaceDaisy

In the interest of fairness, I will debate and analyze game theory to the ends of time cause I really like it.

So I'm not a baddie but I'd be doing much of this culture reading/mechanic strategy debate anyhow.

I refuse to accept this statement at face value.

#524

Long Con wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:Oh also, MM I laughed really hard at your response to my offer of giving you my vote.

I'm going with a low/non poster to vote today. Who should I pick?
I may just join you. I have no real suspicions right now, I'm just lame. Nothing about any of the main arguments today struck me as particularly bad. I didn't even read the latest one between Golden and Jack. Total tl;dr. Sorry guys!

No, go away. That was my idea (that I stole from Scotty).

#525

I've read the thread and am all caught up which is good news, the bad news is I have no mafia reads. Golden, SD, Jack, and Glorf are looking good, I didn't get much from DDL and Snow dog and Zebra arguing. I've also read the thread again and see like nothing. Like plenty happened, just nothing stuck out.

However, I'm also leaning to DDL since the main thing I disliked is a policy lynch I despise these and it seems like it is a more mafiaish thing to do, but I'm still unsure, I feel like that's an easy vote for people who aren''t caught up and mafia.

#526

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:Oh also, MM I laughed really hard at your response to my offer of giving you my vote.

I'm going with a low/non poster to vote today. Who should I pick?
I may just join you. I have no real suspicions right now, I'm just lame. Nothing about any of the main arguments today struck me as particularly bad. I didn't even read the latest one between Golden and Jack. Total tl;dr. Sorry guys!
No, go away. That was my idea (that I stole from Scotty).

We used to be homies.

#527

I (for once in my life) believe Spacedaisy is good. If she is bad and fooled me, well good. She did well.

#528

sig wrote:I've read the thread and am all caught up which is good news, the bad news is I have no mafia reads. Golden, SD, Jack, and Glorf are looking good, I didn't get much from DDL and Snow dog and Zebra arguing. I've also read the thread again and see like nothing. Like plenty happened, just nothing stuck out.

However, I'm also leaning to DDL since the main thing I disliked is a policy lynch I despise these and it seems like it is a more mafiaish thing to do, but I'm still unsure, I feel like that's an easy vote for people who aren''t caught up and mafia.

He could be policy lynched on the policy that policy lynches are bad.

#529

Epignosis wrote:I (for once in my life) believe Spacedaisy is good. If she is bad and fooled me, well good. She did well.

Will you join MP in eating a hat if she's bad?

#530

Epignosis wrote:I (for once in my life) believe Spacedaisy is good. If she is bad and fooled me, well good. She did well.

Spoiler: show

#531

Glorfindel wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:North, one of the greatest movies of all time.
Zebs!!!

Fun fact Glorf always civ reads Zebra, I don't know why he doesn't do the same to me.

I think it has something to do with cowboys? :P

I will look over really quick the Soneji and Zebra thing, Soneji makes a good point, but I want to ISO Zebra for a moment.

linki:

That is a good point, stop making me think so late on my break.

#532

Long Con wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:Oh also, MM I laughed really hard at your response to my offer of giving you my vote.

I'm going with a low/non poster to vote today. Who should I pick?
I may just join you. I have no real suspicions right now, I'm just lame. Nothing about any of the main arguments today struck me as particularly bad. I didn't even read the latest one between Golden and Jack. Total tl;dr. Sorry guys!
No, go away. That was my idea (that I stole from Scotty).
We used to be homies.

ikr

#533

sig wrote:linki: That is a good point, stop making me think so late on my break.

What's a good point? I can't see a good point made since your previous post.

#534

a2thezebra wrote:If it is, I call bullshit. If you didn't suspect him at all you should have and would have made that abundantly clear.

Disagree.

Agree with your thoughts on policy lynches.

Re: "Funny how Jack thinks Snow was joking when he never said that during our exchange."

Well, I've never played with Snow before and hadn't played in Monkey Island. I have seen players claim to be actually playing without reading their pm. *shrug*

With context, things are more clear. Your posts, too.

Epignosis wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:I randomised and voted DDL, k?
I really wish he wouldn't do it a second time because I'm tired of making excuses for him, but this is Snow Dog making fun of Vompatti.

Appreciated. So I take this to mean Snow's vote is not random per Snow himself?

Spacedaisy wrote:EBWOP: My post should have read, "That doesn't satiate my concerns, it illustrates it."

EBWOP means what?

insertnamehere wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:Especially considering you were the first to voice suspicion of him for his claim of not reading his role card.

linki - Way to misrepresent. I never suspect people for not agreeing with me. I clarified their positions for you and if you naturally disagreed then you would have responded by voicing your disagreement. Instead you didn't respond at all.
Because, frankly, I thought the entire Snow Dog debate meant nothing, and I gleaned literally nothing from it. I didn't think it had any value, and I'm just as confused of the alignment of anyone involved as I was before.

I forgot to respond, because I didn't care enough about it to. I didn't fall one way or the other, so I didn't agree or disagree with your "clarifications."

Nothing to you, maybe. Nothing for alignments today, maybe.

Lots of useful information about how different players play the game. Very worthwhile to me.

#535

Long Con wrote:
sig wrote:linki: That is a good point, stop making me think so late on my break.
What's a good point? I can't see a good point made since your previous post.

This is a good point.

#536

EBWOP = edit by way of post

Since you cannot edit posts themselves.

#537

Spacedaisy wrote:
Quin wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:
Quin wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:Quin, you did not respond at all to Snow Dog's initial comment, you were present made some other jokey posts at the time, but no response at all to his original post. Then when he came back and said what he was doing, you quickly chimed in and said you thought that was what he was doing. Why no response to it immediately?

Golden, you had a similar thing, explained away Snow Dog's post after he had already explained what he was doing in that post. Any reason you felt the need?
I didn't respond to Snow Dog initially because I didn't think that his joke was worth the discussion. I didn't anticipate that it'd become such a hot topic. I was posting in catch-up when I put in my two cents, so I didn't know that he'd said anything about it since until I was practically finished.

Spacedaisy wrote:As of right now, my vote will not be going to JoH, Soneji, DDL, LC, or Zebra.

I can't say who might have been lurking without posting at all, but the people who posted without commenting on any of the various playstyle arguments that were going on hot and heavy during Day 0. But I can say that Quin posted without participating, as did Glorf and sprityo.
This isn't true. I gave my input on both Luffy and zebra. And even then, I don't know why involvement in arguments about playstyles are a point of parity.
I'll look back to see if I mischaracterized your behavior during that particular period of time. And your answer is actually exactly the one I was looking for. When I read the initial reaction I had a knee jerk bad feeling about you surrounding it, but when I looked back at it I realized you had only a brief time in thread after Snow Dog's joke and then you came back right after he cleared it up.

It's a point to me because my interest is in who was there during these intense exchanges, but did not engage in it at the time. I think baddies are more likely to lay low, especially on Day 0/1 and I am looking to cast my vote on one of these type players. Someone who is here but not fully engaging. Don't get your panties in a bunch, friend. I questioned you because I felt like you were someone who it applied to even though I didn't feel like you were a real suspect. I wanted to see how you answered just the same.

Ok, I checked back and I think you misunderstood what I was doing. I specifically was looking at the period of time between when Snow Dog made the initial joke and then when he clarified. I was looking at the conversation in that time. I think that once Snow Dog clarifies it, from that point forward anything said can pretty much be dismissed. It's easy for baddies to jump in and just say, oh yeah that's what I thought he was doing. Yes you did engage in the conversation afterwards, specifically about DDL and his part in the suspicion cast around about Snow Dog as a result of his joke. But this was outside the time frame I was specifically looking at which is why I included you. Again though, I think you were mostly missing during the most intense of it so I don't really consider you someone I would vote for.
Just going off time stamps so I can satiate your concerns; I wasn't mostly missing, I wasn't there full stop.

When I say point of parity, and I might be misunderstanding you, but your list of who you won't vote seems to be justified based on the fact that they engaged in arguments about playstyles. Can you elaborate more specifically on what exactly is motivating your reads there?
That does satiate my concerns, it illustrates it. I was not worried about people who were absent. I was worried about people who were present without engaging. Going by time stamps alone you fit that but only barely. I get that you're trying to analyse from the starting point of when Snow Dog first posted, but I think you'd be better off starting from when Snow Dog's post actually became significant, because people aren't going to weigh in on everything they read until there's a reason to do so.

Yes I can elaborate. Why would a baddie put them into an intense debate over playstyle that is likely to net them very little profit on Day 0? Because I'd be hard pressed to try and get a lynch wagon going on someone based on a clash with someone else's playstyle. Those are rooted in personal belief, not alignment. and It seems unlikely in my experience as a baddie that they would. I am not saying I believe them to be civilian. I am saying they would not be my most likely candidate for my Day 1 vote. Don't mistake my saying I am not voting them for me giving them a civilian read. I have no real read on them, I just think it is more likely that the baddies sat back and let these intense dramas ab out playstyle go on without them having to weigh in. Consider it, if you are bad and everyone arguments mafia ideology rather than suspects, why would you want to get into that? Same as I said earlier, plus some. If it doesn't make you read better to others, it surely doesn't make you read worse. The extra content goes a long way in masking your behaviour, and the extra activity it brings to the thread isn't bad either. I guess it's just as much strategic behaviour as it is personal preference. You would draw needless attention to yourself. Rather I see many more baddies sit back and let the civs go to town on stupid playstyle debates and eventually vote for each other as a result. If that's your experience, I can't fault you for your thinking. Ironically this might just come down to different playstyles Thus I am looking at people who were here without contributing significantly to the conversation, either by weighing in on the discussion (which I really thought was pointless if I am honest) or by saying it is pointless and trying to redirect conversation to who might be a suspect or things that could actually help us to decide who to lynch.

Linki @MM:It is flimsy because I am quite fond of you Marmot! Stop it!
Linki @Quin: I actually cannot remove you from the pool because you fit the profile exactly. But I can say you are the last one I would consider out of the pool.

Linki @LC: It is only because you were very engaged. Frankly I find you most suspicious of the highly engaged people, but I can't adequately justify why.

That was a lot of linki...

#538

I'm losing the will to read posts as big as the ones that Quin just posted.

#539

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I'm losing the will to read posts as big as the ones that Quin just posted.

At least they're mildly coherent this time.

#540

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Long Con wrote:
sig wrote:linki: That is a good point, stop making me think so late on my break.
What's a good point? I can't see a good point made since your previous post.
This is a good point.

That is a good point.

And I mean policy lynching DDL for wanting to policy lynch Snow Dog, I'd never thought of it that way.

#541

sig wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:North, one of the greatest movies of all time.
Zebs!!!
Fun fact Glorf always civ reads Zebra, I don't know why he doesn't do the same to me. I think it has something to do with cowboys? :P

I will look over really quick the Soneji and Zebra thing, Soneji makes a good point, but I want to ISO Zebra for a moment.

linki: That is a good point, stop making me think so late on my break.

Fun Fact correction, my friend: I always Town read Zebs when she is Town. I never explicitly said when I made that post above that I thought she was (it was simply a heartfelt greeting for someone for whom I have a lot of affection and respect). Having said that, I have pretty much subsequently come to the conclusion that she is in fact Town.

As for you, you are completely accurate in your assumption: Fool me once, shame on you...

#542

sig wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Long Con wrote:
sig wrote:linki: That is a good point, stop making me think so late on my break.
What's a good point? I can't see a good point made since your previous post.
This is a good point.
That is a good point.

And I mean policy lynching DDL for wanting to policy lynch Snow Dog, I'd never thought of it that way.

How embarrassing!

It was my good point he meant!

#543

Glorfindel wrote:
sig wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:North, one of the greatest movies of all time.
Zebs!!!
Fun fact Glorf always civ reads Zebra, I don't know why he doesn't do the same to me. I think it has something to do with cowboys? :P

I will look over really quick the Soneji and Zebra thing, Soneji makes a good point, but I want to ISO Zebra for a moment.

linki: That is a good point, stop making me think so late on my break.
Fun Fact correction, my friend: I always Town read Zebs when she is Town. I never explicitly said when I made that post above that I thought she was (it was simply a heartfelt greeting for someone for whom I have a lot of affection and respect). Having said that, I have pretty much subsequently come to the conclusion that she is in fact Town.

As for you, you are completely accurate in your assumption: Fool me once, shame on you...

Like I said always. :P

Who do you plan to vote for Glorf?

Also while Soneji points sounded good reading his side of things, when I ISOd Zebra all I saw was really policy talk. She defended Snow Dog, which I don't think is that odd and went after Jack. Nothing really lynch worthy.

Also yeah LC, but just a little. :P

#544

Scotty wrote:Oh, and I will not vote for jack, soup, or Marco on day 1 because I have never played with you before and I'm pretty sure a few of you are new here and I ain't gonna just throw you out like an old cold bowl of Pho

Is this normal for Scotty?

#545

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:@SpaceDaisy

In the interest of fairness, I will debate and analyze game theory to the ends of time cause I really like it.

So I'm not a baddie but I'd be doing much of this culture reading/mechanic strategy debate anyhow.

I dislike this post, I say the same thing when I'm mafia.

#546

sig wrote:
Jackofhearts2005 wrote:@SpaceDaisy

In the interest of fairness, I will debate and analyze game theory to the ends of time cause I really like it.

So I'm not a baddie but I'd be doing much of this culture reading/mechanic strategy debate anyhow.
I dislike this post, I say the same thing when I'm mafia.

That you aren't a baddie?

#547

I'm back and catching up

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:HOLDEN! Don't mafia and drive! The game is not worth your life or that of anyone else on the road...
I realize it's a flimsy excuse, but I only do it on the highway when there aren't cars around.

THIS. See guys? It's not so bad if there's no one around. Or parked at a red light. Right guys?

#548

Scotty wrote:I'm back and catching up
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote:HOLDEN! Don't mafia and drive! The game is not worth your life or that of anyone else on the road...
I realize it's a flimsy excuse, but I only do it on the highway when there aren't cars around.
THIS. See guys? It's not so bad if there's no one around. Or parked at a red light. Right guys?

#549

sig wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:
sig wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:North, one of the greatest movies of all time.
Zebs!!!
Fun fact Glorf always civ reads Zebra, I don't know why he doesn't do the same to me. I think it has something to do with cowboys? :P

I will look over really quick the Soneji and Zebra thing, Soneji makes a good point, but I want to ISO Zebra for a moment.

linki: That is a good point, stop making me think so late on my break.
Fun Fact correction, my friend: I always Town read Zebs when she is Town. I never explicitly said when I made that post above that I thought she was (it was simply a heartfelt greeting for someone for whom I have a lot of affection and respect). Having said that, I have pretty much subsequently come to the conclusion that she is in fact Town.

As for you, you are completely accurate in your assumption: Fool me once, shame on you...
Like I said always. :P

And you persist in misrepresenting my statements, Sig. Why is that? I don't think I ever thought for a second that Zebs was Town in Star Wars and indeed she was not. I'd thank you to have a care speaking MY mind...

#550

LoRab wrote: I agree about Philadelphia, as that is the closest actual city to me. (Althought I love other cities, too...but Philly is a great place).

Really! I thought you lived on the West Coast for some reason.

The main thing I've seen today is alot of mechanic talk. However, one thing I noticed is how defensive DDL seemed to be about leaving ishmael alive, then he said I looked bad for fearmongering! I'm in no way fear mongering, since it is a threat that should be dealt with. That is making me consider a DDL lynch more then his wish to policy lynch someone.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:
Jackofhearts2005 wrote:
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Two pages after his first post and I already think Sig looks fishy.

Must... not... lynch... Sig... again.
Fishy how.
Has done nothing all game than discuss the role. That's usually a pretty good baddie tell in my book.

I didn't like his post about wanting to be recruited either. And while I don't know if that actually works, some say fearmongering about neutral players is another classical baddie tell, which makes me wary (I did that in my first game as a baddie lol).

Also the post about me being recruited was a joke. Which is why i put the little

face at the end of it get it haha a joke? Why so serious?

This is the post I'm taking about though with fearmongering, I don't think I'd call what I was doing fearmongering I think I was trying to gauge people and if possible have us direct some focus on trying to find a dangerous 3P/Indy player before he and his team becomes to powerful.

Glorf I don't think i'd want to speak your mind. You Aussies minds are like dens of horror.

Also you didn't answer my question, who do you plan to vote for today and why?

Full Games	Civilian: Mafia: Independent:
Speed Games	Civilian: Fiddler on the Roof Mafia:
Heists	Civilian: MVP: RED vs BLUE
Burglaries	Independent: The Theme Is Literally a Burglary
Special Games	Civilian: Independent:

Full Games	Civilian: Mafia: Independent:
Speed Games	Civilian: Fiddler on the Roof Mafia:
Heists	Civilian: MVP: RED vs BLUE
Burglaries	Independent: The Theme Is Literally a Burglary
Special Games	Civilian: Independent:

Full Games	Civilian: Mafia: Independent:
Speed Games	Civilian: Fiddler on the Roof Mafia:
Heists	Civilian: MVP: RED vs BLUE
Burglaries	Independent: The Theme Is Literally a Burglary
Special Games	Civilian: Independent:

Full Games	Civilian: Mafia: Independent:
Speed Games	Civilian: Fiddler on the Roof Mafia:
Heists	Civilian: MVP: RED vs BLUE
Burglaries	Independent: The Theme Is Literally a Burglary
Special Games	Civilian: Independent:

Full Games	Civilian: Mafia: Independent:
Speed Games	Civilian: Fiddler on the Roof Mafia:
Heists	Civilian: MVP: RED vs BLUE
Burglaries	Independent: The Theme Is Literally a Burglary
Special Games	Civilian: Independent:

2014 Sockys
2015 Sockys
Miscellaneous

2014 Sockys
2015 Sockys
Miscellaneous

2014 Sockys
2015 Sockys
Miscellaneous

2014 Sockys
2015 Sockys
Miscellaneous

Who needs to practice their stabbing?