Lost Again Mafia (Season 3) - Day 5

**http://www.last.fm/user/nutella23** · #401

RIP Quin.

G-Man wrote:Feeling pretty confident that there is a baddie in the Llama voters. So ladies, talk me out of voting for you, starting... now!

Can you explain why you think that? If there is, it's not me. Can't speak for the S-ladies.

#402

nutella wrote:RIP Quin.

G-Man wrote:Feeling pretty confident that there is a baddie in the Llama voters. So ladies, talk me out of voting for you, starting... now!
Can you explain why you think that? If there is, it's not me. Can't speak for the S-ladies.

Just numerically speaking it's not a bad shot, I mean a third of the players were in that list of voters. That said, I don't believe you are bad and I know I'm not bad. That leaves me with Sorsha and SVS.

#403

nutella wrote:RIP Quin.

G-Man wrote:Feeling pretty confident that there is a baddie in the Llama voters. So ladies, talk me out of voting for you, starting... now!
Can you explain why you think that? If there is, it's not me. Can't speak for the S-ladies.

For reasons.

#404

Where is[/is] Sorsha?

Do you guys think she is....

Spoiler: show

#405

Spacedaisy wrote:
nutella wrote:RIP Quin.

G-Man wrote:Feeling pretty confident that there is a baddie in the Llama voters. So ladies, talk me out of voting for you, starting... now!
Can you explain why you think that? If there is, it's not me. Can't speak for the S-ladies.
Just numerically speaking it's not a bad shot, I mean a third of the players were in that list of voters. That said, I don't believe you are bad and I know I'm not bad. That leaves me with Sorsha and SVS.

Well, it is not me and I agree that it is probably not Nutella.

G Man, it would be helpful if you have more than "reasons". I went over your chart and aren't sure how it implicates individuals unless we are looking for a serial killer (or you think the entire bad team is comprised of members of your red group).

#406

Spacedaisy wrote:
nutella wrote:RIP Quin.

G-Man wrote:Feeling pretty confident that there is a baddie in the Llama voters. So ladies, talk me out of voting for you, starting... now!
Can you explain why you think that? If there is, it's not me. Can't speak for the S-ladies.
Just numerically speaking it's not a bad shot, I mean a third of the players were in that list of voters. That said, I don't believe you are bad and I know I'm not bad. That leaves me with Sorsha and SVS.

I could totally throw a vote on any of the S-ladies.

#407

For reference purposes:

ALIVE:
DFaraday- Posts
Dom- Posts
Epignosis- Posts
G-Man- Posts
nutella- Posts
S~V~S- Posts
Sorsha- Posts
Spacedaisy- Posts
Speedchuck- Posts

DEAD:
thellama73- Posts
insertnamehere- Posts
notsawyer540- Posts
Quin- Posts

Let's read back through some post histories the first half of this phase and see what stands out to us.

S~V~S, technicolor vote analysis is all about looking at who voted, when, and how that might indicate teammate behavior. Technicolors are completely useless for SK hunting. The "red groups" you refer to are only in read because those people voted for the person who got the most votes and/or got lynched on a given day. Each day has a new red group unless there is no lynch. My first takeaway is that, on Day 1, the baddies weren't interested in participating much in the EoD crazy that went down. I'll have to go back and check the timing of those votes but it makes sense for baddies to vote early- to mid- pack and let the civvies shoot themselves in the foot.

From the lynch result, we know that there was no effort to save Llama, as he was a civvie. Looking at the technicolors, the only person who might have benefited from gaining cred by helping Llama avoid the noose or by appearing to help Llama avoid the lynch is Epi. There's no save cred for DFaraday's vote for speechuck since his vote ended up being the first one in the tally after all the switching. DFaraday also gains nothing for his Day 2 vote on notsawyer since it was an early vote and for a civ. Epi gains a fraction of cred for starting the secondary train on nutella and that could grow stronger if nutella is lynched and flips mafia. Votes alone don't tell the whole story. We'll have to go back and look at posts to determine why they voted for the person they voted for and if there are any reasons they did not vote for any of the other people who got votes.

#408

For crying out loud.

G-Man wrote:S~V~S, technicolor vote analysis is all about looking at who voted, when, and how that might indicate teammate behavior. Technicolors are completely useless for SK hunting. The "red groups" you refer to are only in read red because those people voted for the person who got the most votes and/or got lynched on a given day. Each day has a new red group unless there is no lynch. My first takeaway is that, on Day 1, the baddies weren't interested in participating much in the EoD crazy that went down. I'll have to go back and check the timing of those votes but it makes sense for baddies to vote early- to mid- pack and let the civvies shoot themselves in the foot.

From the lynch result, we know that there was no effort to save Llama, as he was a civvie. Looking at the technicolors, the only person who might have benefited from gaining cred by helping Llama avoid the noose or by appearing to help Llama avoid the lynch is Epi. There's no save cred for DFaraday's vote for speechuck since his vote ended up being the first one in the tally after all the switching. DFaraday also gains nothing for his Day 2 vote on notsawyer since it was an early vote and for a civ. Epi gains a fraction of cred for starting the secondary train on nutella and that could grow stronger if nutella is lynched and flips mafia. Votes alone don't tell the whole story. We'll have to go back and look at posts to determine why they voted for the person they voted for and if there are any reasons they did not vote for any of the other people who got votes.

**http://www.last.fm/user/nutella23** · #409

I suppose I can see some merit in that analysis, but I'm not so sure what it tells us. I voted for llama because I thought he was suspicious.

#410

I voted for nutella because I thought she was suspicious.

Does that actually clarify any meaning?
No.

#411

Posted too quick:

So.... what's your angle? That's the general reason you vote for people. I know you stated it when you voted, but what else is there to say about it?

Sorsha, where r u and what is up!!?!

#412

Going off of G-Man's theory, I looked at the reasons for voting Llama given by each of the Day 1 Llama voters.

Spacedaisy wrote:Of the three leading, I am most comfortable with a llama lynch. I am at work and can't post much more.

Voting llama

This is the only reasoning Daisy gives for voting Llama at all. She made a lengthy post after the lynch, but did not address her reasons for having voted him then either. Given the timing of her vote, I would guess that if Speed is bad she could be a teammate trying to save him. If he's not, then she looks like a bandwagoning civ.

Sorsha wrote:Put my vote on llama for now. I'll change it later if saving myself is a possibility.

Sorsha's vote makes sense, considering that she had several votes on herself at that point (including Llama's). Since Llama already had a vote, Sorsha voting there is simple self-preservation.

S~V~S wrote:I wonder if Sorsha noticed she had three votes when she was in here.

One vote on a person for a silly reason, ha ha lulz. Dropping a second vote on someone for a silly reason, not cool. Dropping a third vote, what baddie would do that?

I hope to see votes moving there or better reasons put forth.

So dropping a temp vote on Llama for lulz. If he takes his vote more seriously, I will too.

SVS is the first of the Llama voters, and also had the most to say about him. Interestingly, her initial vote doesn't sound as if she intends to keep it there.

S~V~S wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:Llama~

"What is LOST?"

Google results: https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is ... 8&oe=utf-8

Took me 4 seconds

And I will take you seriously if you give real answers and stop goofing around. If you suspect Faraday, then vote for him! You don't feel even remotely sincere to me, and you put someone you don't actually seem to suspect in danger. That concerns me. Even goofing around, when you are sincere this comes through. I am not seeing it.
I don't google things I can ask my friends about. And if I vote for Faraday now, I put my own life in peril, which I am not in the mood to do.
I don't like to bother my friends with trivia, so I Google things. It takes all types to make the world go around.

So you would rather leave your vote on the person who you don't actually suspect, instead of the person you DO suspect, and who you already named as your suspect? Becasue voting for the person you actually do suspect will get you killed, whereas just naming him won't?

I know you like to be quirky and quixotic and cultivate this image, but you make no sense right now. I am Okey Dokey with my vote.

Iam taking another hit of Nyquil and going to bed.

Llama was making sense here, he was trying to vote in such a way as to maximize his chances of survival. I find it suspect that SVS would paint that as "quixotic" without acknowledging Llama's obvious reasoning for doing so?

nutella wrote:
thellama73 wrote:Quin is the only one in this game talking any sense, so I am following his vote on Sorsha.
Huh? Why? He literally said there was no reasoning behind that vote. Why follow it? I think Quin is civ, but that doesn't mean I'll blindly follow his vote. Do you have reasons to suspect Sorsha? I don't. But I have reason to suspect you.

*vote llama*

Also, have you hinted at your role at all? Even if you haven't watched the show you should be able to find a quote or something from your character (just the superficial information Quin found about his character was enough for us fans to deduce who it is). I may have missed something though.

On another note, I don't think I've ever seen DFaraday this active on a day 1, lol. Maybe it's because he's especially interested in the theme and the roleplaying/references, but it still feels unusual coming from him. But I do agree with his assessment of speedchuck's vote. I could probably just as well vote for speed since he has the same problems as llama. And his only attempt at hinting has been multiple references to the smoke monster. Not sure what's going on there.

Nutella's reason for voting Llama is due to him following Quin's meaningless Sorsha vote. As someone who voted Speed for the same reason, I can't fault Nutella for doing that. She also brings up Speed's smoke monster references, but votes for Llama. Why she picked one over the other, I'm not sure.

Of the four, and just going off of their votes and posts on Day 1, I'd say SVS and Daisy look the worst, and Sorsha looks the best.

#413

Finished with two ISO's. Not going to post my thoughts until I have read you all, everybody!

#414

nutella wrote:I suppose I can see some merit in that analysis, but I'm not so sure what it tells us. I voted for llama because I thought he was suspicious.

Yeah, me too. I really disliked his piling a second frivolous vote on Sorsha for a very silly reason. It actually looked more suspect to me than Speen putting a THIRD vote on her for the same frivolous reason. Everyone was voting for frivolous reasons that day, put putting a second vote on someone is serious.

#415

Speed not Speen (when I first looked at the typo I thought it said "spleen" lol)

#416

S~V~S wrote:
nutella wrote:I suppose I can see some merit in that analysis, but I'm not so sure what it tells us. I voted for llama because I thought he was suspicious.
Yeah, me too. I really disliked his piling a second frivolous vote on Sorsha for a very silly reason. It actually looked more suspect to me than Speen putting a THIRD vote on her for the same frivolous reason. Everyone was voting for frivolous reasons that day, put putting a second vote on someone is serious.

To the highlighted bit: Why?

#417

#418

I'm pretty far behind. I'll catch up tonight

#419

speedchuck wrote:
S~V~S wrote:
nutella wrote:I suppose I can see some merit in that analysis, but I'm not so sure what it tells us. I voted for llama because I thought he was suspicious.
Yeah, me too. I really disliked his piling a second frivolous vote on Sorsha for a very silly reason. It actually looked more suspect to me than Speen putting a THIRD vote on her for the same frivolous reason. Everyone was voting for frivolous reasons that day, put putting a second vote on someone is serious.
To the highlighted bit: Why?

I think i explained this when I made the vote; it would be incredible to me that a baddie would do something like putting a third vote on someone for a silly reason. Baddies worry too much about how they look, and that looked awful. I don't see a baddie doing it. I was a bit conflicted about it when Llama flipped civ; that's why I asked you why you were paralleling him.

#420

@Speed, this post from Friday afternoon.

S~V~S wrote:I wonder if Sorsha noticed she had three votes when she was in here.

One vote on a person for a silly reason, ha ha lulz. Dropping a second vote on someone for a silly reason, not cool. Dropping a third vote, what baddie would do that?

I hope to see votes moving there or better reasons put forth.

So dropping a temp vote on Llama for lulz. If he takes his vote more seriously, I will too.

#421

Does anyone need me to do anything? I've been testing some vaginal canals lately.

#422

nutella-- I would love to see a response in the style of SVS.

**http://www.last.fm/user/nutella23** · #423

Dom wrote:nutella-- I would love to see a response in the style of SVS.

what does this mean

#424

I think he means I explained why I found Llama suspicious.

It seems everyone is having the same issue here that I am. Day one was jyst so silly I am having a hard time wrapping my head around it.

#425

Four ISO's down and I'm seeing a pattern- lots of phoning it in this game.

#426

S~V~S wrote:@Speed, this post from Friday afternoon.

S~V~S wrote:I wonder if Sorsha noticed she had three votes when she was in here.

One vote on a person for a silly reason, ha ha lulz. Dropping a second vote on someone for a silly reason, not cool. Dropping a third vote, what baddie would do that?

I hope to see votes moving there or better reasons put forth.

So dropping a temp vote on Llama for lulz. If he takes his vote more seriously, I will too.

Is it just accepted here that dropping a second vote on a random vote for no reason is scummy?

Because that's weird.

#427

A second vote endangers a person. It might be a leftover from when we were less likely to have changeable votes.

For me, yeah, it is something that almost always gets my eye. It turned Sorsha from one of many people with silly Day One votes into someone who was a lynch leader.

Since the entirety of Day One was pretty silly, it was the thing that stuck out the most to me, so my temp vote became a permanent vote.

**http://www.last.fm/user/nutella23** · #428

Well I explained my reasoning for voting llama when I voted, here. Pretty similar to SVS's reasons. His only justification for voting Sorsha was as blindly following Quin because he trusted him. I don't think that's ever a good reason for a vote. If the person you trust makes a decent case and you decide you agree with it, fine. But llama gave no such reasoning.

#429

Flying through these ISO's now. Just two to go.

I hope you all everybody realize that, barring a failed or abstained kill, we need to lynch our first baddie today or tomorrow or it's all over.

#430

SVS, I brought this post up earlier, and I wanted to hear your thought process on it. Why is it suspicious that Llama would vote out of self-preservation, even if that person wasn't his top suspect? At that point in the day Sorsha was Llama's best chance at staying alive.

S~V~S wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:Llama~

"What is LOST?"

Google results: https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is ... 8&oe=utf-8

Took me 4 seconds

And I will take you seriously if you give real answers and stop goofing around. If you suspect Faraday, then vote for him! You don't feel even remotely sincere to me, and you put someone you don't actually seem to suspect in danger. That concerns me. Even goofing around, when you are sincere this comes through. I am not seeing it.
I don't google things I can ask my friends about. And if I vote for Faraday now, I put my own life in peril, which I am not in the mood to do.
I don't like to bother my friends with trivia, so I Google things. It takes all types to make the world go around.

So you would rather leave your vote on the person who you don't actually suspect, instead of the person you DO suspect, and who you already named as your suspect? Becasue voting for the person you actually do suspect will get you killed, whereas just naming him won't?

I know you like to be quirky and quixotic and cultivate this image, but you make no sense right now. I am Okey Dokey with my vote.

Iam taking another hit of Nyquil and going to bed.

#431

Sorry I missed it, this thread is slow moving enough that I thought I had seen anything addressed to me.

Faraday, when Llama initially voted for Sorsha, several people had one vote. He said he voted for her becasue he agreed with Quin.

Quins reasoning was:

Quin wrote:I'm voting for Sorsha. Reason? None whatsoever.

The conversation you quoted had nothing to do with any of that. He had already voted for Sorsha in his first post after Quins vote (7:50 AM):

thellama73 wrote:Quin is the only one in this game talking any sense, so I am following his vote on Sorsha.

The post you quoted was 7:46 *PM* and had nothing to do with why I voted for him. I asked him that question becasue he posted this:

thellama73 wrote:If three other people will vote for Faraday, I will join them, since he is an obvious baddie, but I'm not willing to go down with the ship just yet.

...yet he left his vote on Sorsha. And I totally did not get why, if he suspected you, he was voting for Sorsha rather than trying to get you lynched. It made no sense to me.

Also, @ Speedchuck~

speedchuck wrote:
S~V~S wrote:
speedchuck wrote:Those who have their vote placed on me:

Is it because you don't like what my actions have been? Or because you think they come from a scummy place. Do explain.
Personally, I think Llama looks scummier than you. He was the first to put a second vote on someone for a silly reason. I can't imagine someone being bad and piling a third silly vote on someone. That is why I voted for him, not you. But I have seen very bold baddies do very bold things to fall back on the wifom.

Are you a bold baddie?

Do you honestly think Sorsha is bad? If not do you plan to move your vote?
Am I a bold baddie? I could give you my metaread here, but it'd sound bad coming from me.

I suspect Sorsha more than Llama, and thus am unable to move my vote ATM.

Hm.

Vote Dfaraday

I knew I had explained this to you before. Also did you ever explain why you suspected Sorsha?

#432

I mean, at the time you voted for her, she had only posted off topic.

speedchuck wrote:If there's anyone I can trust, it's Quin. And Llama. Yes.

SORSHA

(Fri 10:44 AM)

Here's her post history: http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/search ... 7&sr=posts

And on a tangent, here is another post of you and I discussing the same thing:

speedchuck wrote:
S~V~S wrote:I just really dislike it when people put others in a lynchable position for lulz. Probably an artifact of when we did not have changeable votes.
Nah, it bugs the people where I come from too, and we never experienced unchangeable votes.

You seemed surprised this AM that this was a thing, yet here you say it is a thing where you are from as well. This morning:

speedchuck wrote:
S~V~S wrote:@Speed, this post from Friday afternoon.

S~V~S wrote:I wonder if Sorsha noticed she had three votes when she was in here.

One vote on a person for a silly reason, ha ha lulz. Dropping a second vote on someone for a silly reason, not cool. Dropping a third vote, what baddie would do that?

I hope to see votes moving there or better reasons put forth.

So dropping a temp vote on Llama for lulz. If he takes his vote more seriously, I will too.
Is it just accepted here that dropping a second vote on a random vote for no reason is scummy?

Because that's weird.

#433

S~V~S wrote:I mean, at the time you voted for her, she had only posted off topic.

speedchuck wrote:If there's anyone I can trust, it's Quin. And Llama. Yes.

SORSHA
(Fri 10:44 AM)

Here's her post history: http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/search ... 7&sr=posts

And on a tangent, here is another post of you and I discussing the same thing:

speedchuck wrote:
S~V~S wrote:I just really dislike it when people put others in a lynchable position for lulz. Probably an artifact of when we did not have changeable votes.
Nah, it bugs the people where I come from too, and we never experienced unchangeable votes.
You seemed surprised this AM that this was a thing, yet here you say it is a thing where you are from as well. This morning:

speedchuck wrote:
S~V~S wrote:@Speed, this post from Friday afternoon.

S~V~S wrote:I wonder if Sorsha noticed she had three votes when she was in here.

One vote on a person for a silly reason, ha ha lulz. Dropping a second vote on someone for a silly reason, not cool. Dropping a third vote, what baddie would do that?

I hope to see votes moving there or better reasons put forth.

So dropping a temp vote on Llama for lulz. If he takes his vote more seriously, I will too.
Is it just accepted here that dropping a second vote on a random vote for no reason is scummy?

Because that's weird.

Sorsha's posts, though off topic, gave me an uncomfortable feel. Good as it got at that time of day.

As for your second thing: Disliking something and thinking it's scummy are not always the same thing. I would actually dislike the 3rd no-reson vote on a wagon more. Still wouldn't attribute scum to the second. But that's me.

----------------------------------------------------------

Been looking over Quin, doing some death analysis. People that might have killed Quin:
SpaceDaisy (barely, but there was interaction, and not all was positive. What was positive was buddy-buddy)
DFaraday (Obviously. Quin would be pushing us to lynch DF today)

#434

I'm just getting home from work to go to other work. I am voting for nutella again. will catch up tonight or tomorrow morning

#435

FATE- I just lost my notes on six of my eight ISO's because my computer BSoD'd me in favor of a physical memory dump. This is why we should hit Ctrl + S more often.

**http://www.last.fm/user/nutella23** · #436

Voting for DF again. I don't feel any better about him, in fact worse, after how the last lynch went down.

#437

nutella wrote:Voting for DF again. I don't feel any better about him, in fact worse, after how the last lynch went down.

Can you elaborate?

#438

SVS' response still hasn't adequately explained her treatment of Llama, imp. I will likely vote SVS or Daisy, whose votes have felt safe and, if Nutella is bad, potentially a last minute save.

#439

DFaraday wrote:SVS' response still hasn't adequately explained her treatment of Llama, imp. I will likely vote SVS or Daisy, whose votes have felt safe and, if Nutella is bad, potentially a last minute save.

In my opinion, either DF is scum or one of these targets is scum.

It's an opinion that I've had for most of the day, but this further sets up that paradigm.

#440

At the time when I had four votes on day one I was saying to myself there is no way they can all be civs. Two have been civs so far and that leaves speedchuck and Epi.

Df and svs come to mind as players who defended me pretty early while that vote was going on and now after, are going after those who voted me. As much as I appreciate them sticking up for me it makes me wonder if one, or both are bad trying to buddy me or going after some easy targets. I have to look over the last lynch to see what part they played in it.

I've still only skimmed, I just wanted to get a few thoughts out there.

#441

From what I can remember from the notes that went *bloop*, none of you look good. Here's a quick breakdown of what's still rolling around in my head:

DFaraday's D1 vote for speedchuck was almost a soft defense of Sorsha. He got a little punchy with notsawyer. He handed a WIFOM sandwich to Spacedaisy night 2. A little soft on brushing Sorsha's D1 vote as purely self-defense even though she never came back to move her vote like she said she might once votes shifted away from her. Also some soft defending of nutella.

Dom was utterly useless until most of the way through Day 2. He was a late adopter of the Nutella Seems Fishy movement. He kept pressure on nutella through Night 2 and asked one pointed question to speedchuck. Come Day 3, he's all about "Where's Sorsha?" with a little jab at nutella as well.

Epignosis is being snarky with the occasional forceful streak. Par for the course for him but it leaves me neutral.

nutella got more and more defensive as the focus grew on her. She threw out a few "I told you already"'s and "go back and read what I said"'s. More recently, when pressed she did something similar but also provided a link. I don't buy her explanations.

S~V~S may have been trying to set me up before she realized that I am off the chopping block. I expect her to push me, given my silliness early on but it's rare for her to overlook something like that. I'm reconciling my historical distrust of her with the notion that teammates would let her go down that road of pursuing me like that. Then again, quiet game is quiet, so maybe baddie chat is quiet too.

Sorsha started out with nothing buy roleplay and offered little through two days of play. Now I'm picking up Lazy Rotten Deborah vibes with one or two of her most recent posts. I've caught/suspected her doing this before as a baddie.

Spacedaisy might be using her business as a shield. I'm not questioning RL. I'm just saying it's convenient for baddies to be busy in a small game where they can sit back and let the civvies kill each other. She did that in Season 2, after all.

speedchuck is new to me. He's had some positives and some ponderings. Now and again he seems to be either distracted or taking things too easy. In a game with participation as crappy as this, it's hard to tell the difference.

#442

Sorsha wrote:At the time when I had four votes on day one I was saying to myself there is no way they can all be civs. Two have been civs so far and that leaves speedchuck and Epi.

Df and svs come to mind as players who defended me pretty early while that vote was going on and now after, are going after those who voted me. As much as I appreciate them sticking up for me it makes me wonder if one, or both are bad trying to buddy me or going after some easy targets. I have to look over the last lynch to see what part they played in it.

I've still only skimmed, I just wanted to get a few thoughts out there.

The fourth vote on a wagon, especially in early game, is a happenstance place for scum to be. It's an opportunistic place on the wagon, but still a meaningful place that leads further toward a lynch.

Epi being scum wouldn't surprise me.

Assuming you've narrowed it down to the four, which one would you be most suspicious of?

linki: Honestly, I had a wedding and a birthday, and was sick through both. I'm usually around much more, like in Phenon, but I was down and out this past week. That's the distracting bit you're seeing.
I'm here now, though.

#443

Thanks for the post link assist, G-Man - I'll stick in them in the front post as soon as I can.

My humble apologies for relative absence. I had no idea how crazy life was about to get. I should be around at deadline, at least, I hope.

#444

Furthermore, did Dom ever claim or hint at his role? I still have him as my only ???

I suspect my vote will be bouncing around wildly tonight.

#445

Fill us in, Golden the Coward

! Why is Quin still on the poll?

#446

G-Man wrote:Fill us in, Golden the Coward ! Why is Quin still on the poll?

Why didn't quin use dead red when he posted?

#447

speedchuck wrote:
Sorsha wrote:At the time when I had four votes on day one I was saying to myself there is no way they can all be civs. Two have been civs so far and that leaves speedchuck and Epi.

Df and svs come to mind as players who defended me pretty early while that vote was going on and now after, are going after those who voted me. As much as I appreciate them sticking up for me it makes me wonder if one, or both are bad trying to buddy me or going after some easy targets. I have to look over the last lynch to see what part they played in it.

I've still only skimmed, I just wanted to get a few thoughts out there.
The fourth vote on a wagon, especially in early game, is a happenstance place for scum to be. It's an opportunistic place on the wagon, but still a meaningful place that leads further toward a lynch.

Epi being scum wouldn't surprise me.

Assuming you've narrowed it down to the four, which one would you be most suspicious of?

linki: Honestly, I had a wedding and a birthday, and was sick through both. I'm usually around much more, like in Phenon, but I was down and out this past week. That's the distracting bit you're seeing.
I'm here now, though.

If I had to throw a vote right now it would be DF.

#448

Golden wrote:
G-Man wrote:Fill us in, Golden the Coward ! Why is Quin still on the poll?
Why didn't quin use dead red when he posted?

Answer:

KILL HIM

#449

Sorsha wrote:At the time when I had four votes on day one I was saying to myself there is no way they can all be civs. Two have been civs so far and that leaves speedchuck and Epi.

Df and svs come to mind as players who defended me pretty early while that vote was going on and now after, are going after those who voted me. As much as I appreciate them sticking up for me it makes me wonder if one, or both are bad trying to buddy me or going after some easy targets. I have to look over the last lynch to see what part they played in it.

I've still only skimmed, I just wanted to get a few thoughts out there.

I think you are misreading my intention. It was the pattern of votes I did not like. I would have reacted the same regardless of who the votes had been for.

@G Man, yeah I kind of did suspect you a bit. That whole forced tie screamed baddie to me, I hate that kind of thing. I was still in my "asking questions" phase when I realized you were not on the poll. Why do you think that is something I would notice? I can think of two games, one I remember which, the other I don't, where I misread my own role. One was MR's game a while back, the other was around the same time.

#450

speedchuck wrote:Epi being scum wouldn't surprise me.

Why should it ever surprise you?

Who killed poor Charlie?