The Hobbit Mafia: Day 12

[Epignosis]

This happened in X-Men too. I literally sent actions in last minute multiple times because no one had taken the initiative. I'm pretty sure Epi was not pleased.

Don't feel bad. He is never pleased.

I beg to differ.

Seldom pleased?

[Turnip Head]

K4j, who do you suspect of being on MP's team?

[kneel4justice]

K4j, who do you suspect of being on MP's team?

I thought INH was a possibility because he was so against the possibility of voting for him. If he voted INH he would have had a good chance of a lynch going through other than his own. But Dom said he doesn't usually defend his own so I'm less sure.

[Epignosis]

I'm checking in, and apparently have a TON of catching up to do! Back with thoughts when I'm done

A regular ton or a Michel Fassbender ton? Which is it?

[Leamiteo]

Hey llama, I do think I see another possibility in your hypothesis about the baddies missing their actions. If no one ends up being insanified today (another role on the odd team), it could offer a little more proof.

What does insanified mean anyway?

What I was trying to posit was that Daisy didn't really say anything to merit a vote out of anyone, even for Day 1 (in my opinion). But ya gotta vote for someone, so based on a trumped up reason, he voted for her. He didn't randomly vote her, but he may as well have, which is why I put "random vote" in quotation marks.

So ar you saying you think it was distancing or you don't think it was distancing? I can't understand what point you are trying to make here.

The former. I am not sure he'd be so brazen though.

If I may add my two cents, I disagree. However, MP jumped around a bit threatening to put his vote on others. I think he was feeling guilty. I don't suspect that he was throwing a teammate under the bus. I don't get a baddie vibe from Daisy.

You think voting someone who had almost zero chance of being lynched for almost no reason at all was "brazen"?

Yes, but not because of the lynch chance, but because it tips his hand (and made some of us infer they were teamies).

I don't feel this way at all, and it makes me distrustful of you, making assumptions that seem to be based off of huge leaps. Therefore, you have my .

Welcome, fingersplints!!!

[Leamiteo]

At this point reading through, I just don't get a good vibe from FZ; I'm going to re-read some stuff, collect thoughts and hopefully post sooner rather than later. For now I desperately need sleep. Night!

[Mongoose]

Yes, but not because of the lynch chance, but because it tips his hand (and made some of us infer they were teamies).

I don't feel this way at all, and it makes me distrustful of you, making assumptions that seem to be based off of huge leaps. Therefore, you have my .

[/quote]

Oh jeez, it wasn't an assumption. Just trying to analyze how some things went down. I was positing forth a particular stance, and I am not sure I even ratified that opinion as my own yet.

I feel like this has been the most conversation-squashing, overly critical game ever. I think some of the things said to other players (not by you, Lea) are borderline rude. Why would I want to analyze or synthesis any of the data we have or posit forth any theories (ridiculous or credible), if I'm going to have a bunch of you checking off squares on a rubric for how XYZ it is? The more I think about it, I think this underhanded post review system is Neo Baddie Tactic 2.1

I'd like to get back to having some fun please.

[Epignosis]

Mongoose, I'm going to be honest- that last post made me go from Whoo to wehrn wehrn wehrn with you.

[thellama73]

I feel like this has been the most conversation-squashing, overly critical game ever. I think some of the things said to other players (not by you, Lea) are borderline rude. Why would I want to analyze or synthesis any of the data we have or posit forth any theories (ridiculous or credible), if I'm going to have a bunch of you checking off squares on a rubric for how XYZ it is? The more I think about it, I think this underhanded post review system is Neo Baddie Tactic 2.1

I'd like to get back to having some fun please.

I feel like this has been the most overly-sensitive game ever. Every person I have cast suspicion on has taken it personally and acted insulted. Talk about conversation squashing, how about trying to make me feel like a heel for baddie-hunting? I have to suspect someone, don't I?

I have nevertheless been having fun, though. Thanks, Russti!

[nijuukyugou]

Is it me, or is everyone extra on edge this game? I am just baddie hunting. Loosen up, people!

Yikes, I'm getting the same vibe. I hope much of it is for show, but dang

Okay. Quick thoughts before bed (apologies for repetition):

1) I don't believe MP was throwing a baddie teammate under the bus, simply because I think there are enough people on Day 1 not to have to do that. Why try that strategy so early, especially with so many different teams in this game?

2) I won't completely discount that one of MP's late voters might be a baddie/Indy. However, I also think it's too early to tell, so I'm not leaning in that direction at this point.

3) Llama is either pinging me with weird accusations (the MM argument with the times and the high posting/no content, for example), or I see him as a Civ genuinely baddie hunting and throwing ideas out for people to think about, which isn't a crime. At this point I'm leaning towards the latter, because at this point what other strategy do we have other than reaching in the dark and hoping that our accusations are correct? Plus, I think his accused seem rather more defensive than they need to be.

Those are my partial-gut, partial-logic thoughts, and perhaps I'll get some more insight from the accused before tomorrow's vote.

Okay, that was totally not a quick thought, but I've GOT to go to bed. Sorry if I've left a detail out that needs clarification. One more effing week of work...Can't wait to ruin my sleep cycle again for the summer

[Mongoose]

I feel like this has been the most conversation-squashing, overly critical game ever. I think some of the things said to other players (not by you, Lea) are borderline rude. Why would I want to analyze or synthesis any of the data we have or posit forth any theories (ridiculous or credible), if I'm going to have a bunch of you checking off squares on a rubric for how XYZ it is? The more I think about it, I think this underhanded post review system is Neo Baddie Tactic 2.1

I'd like to get back to having some fun please.

I feel like this has been the most overly-sensitive game ever. Every person I have cast suspicion on has taken it personally and acted insulted. Talk about conversation squashing, how about trying to make me feel like a heel for baddie-hunting? I have to suspect someone, don't I?

I have nevertheless been having fun, though. Thanks, Russti!

You've been a bit uncharacteristically caustic, so I think that's why. I dunno, maybe I am being too sensitive though.

[nijuukyugou]

I'm checking in, and apparently have a TON of catching up to do! Back with thoughts when I'm done

A regular ton or a Michel Fassbender ton? Which is it?

Michael Fassbender is the answer to everything good and holy. EVERYTHING

[insertnamehere]

I feel like this has been the most conversation-squashing, overly critical game ever. I think some of the things said to other players (not by you, Lea) are borderline rude. Why would I want to analyze or synthesis any of the data we have or posit forth any theories (ridiculous or credible), if I'm going to have a bunch of you checking off squares on a rubric for how XYZ it is? The more I think about it, I think this underhanded post review system is Neo Baddie Tactic 2.1

I'd like to get back to having some fun please.

I feel like this has been the most overly-sensitive game ever. Every person I have cast suspicion on has taken it personally and acted insulted. Talk about conversation squashing, how about trying to make me feel like a heel for baddie-hunting? I have to suspect someone, don't I?

How dare you say I take things too personally? I thought we used to be friends Logan, what the hell?

[Spacedaisy]

I feel like this has been the most conversation-squashing, overly critical game ever. I think some of the things said to other players (not by you, Lea) are borderline rude. Why would I want to analyze or synthesis any of the data we have or posit forth any theories (ridiculous or credible), if I'm going to have a bunch of you checking off squares on a rubric for how XYZ it is? The more I think about it, I think this underhanded post review system is Neo Baddie Tactic 2.1

I'd like to get back to having some fun please.

I feel like this has been the most overly-sensitive game ever. Every person I have cast suspicion on has taken it personally and acted insulted. Talk about conversation squashing, how about trying to make me feel like a heel for baddie-hunting? I have to suspect someone, don't I?

I have nevertheless been having fun, though. Thanks, Russti!

I apologize if I gave you that impression. I was neither taking it personally nor offended. and I did not mean to make you feel like a heel.

[Spacedaisy]

Hey INH, good to see you. Did you have anything to say to those (such as myself) who questioned your intentions on Day 1?

[Turnip Head]

Dom, at the moment I'm inclined to agree with you about k4j, he is high on my list of possible MP teammates. But I'm curious to hear your reasoning.

[kneel4justice]

Dom, at the moment I'm inclined to agree with you about k4j, he is high on my list of possible MP teammates. But I'm curious to hear your reasoning.

And I am curious to hear yours.

[insertnamehere]

Hey INH, good to see you. Did you have anything to say to those (such as myself) who questioned your intentions on Day 1?

Frankly, I'm offended that Juliet and co. took what I said so personally. I've known juliets online for maybe three years, and the fact that she still can't tell when I'm being ironically offended, wounds me. I thought that you all would have known by now that sometimes I'm not serious when I say things in a weird, sad attempt at humor. The fact that she took it so seriously, and even resorted to name-calling speaks volumes about her character.

[kneel4justice]

I have to take my dog to the vet tomorrow and I'm not sure how long that will take so I would like to defend myself while I can. I just realized this isn't like Ksite where I have a good 5 days to convince people of my innocence. So...let's go. Lol

[Turnip Head]

Dom, at the moment I'm inclined to agree with you about k4j, he is high on my list of possible MP teammates. But I'm curious to hear your reasoning.

And I am curious to hear yours.

I just find it odd, the complete change in direction you took at the end of the last lynch, and how you went from feeling sure about your vote (for Epi, you say), to changing your mind and not wanting to vote at all because you don't feel strongly, a line you know I've heard from your civ game at KSite, to showing your first suspicion of MP and quickly voting for him before the end of the lynch. It looks ike hastily planned distancing thrown together just before deadline. Then you say you're suspicious of FZ because of her behavior during the MP lynch, but you are afraid to say she is on MP's team, which rings a little false to me. I would expect (a civvie version of) you to question FZ more about her behavior during the MP lynch, but perhaps you know it's not smart to outright accuse FZ of something you know she's not. That's just the vibes I've been getting from your posts, I did not think your vote for MP and your explanation for your vote rang true..I think you were trying to blend into the bandwagon for your baddie buddy.

[kneel4justice]

Dom, at the moment I'm inclined to agree with you about k4j, he is high on my list of possible MP teammates. But I'm curious to hear your reasoning.

And I am curious to hear yours.

I just find it odd, the complete change in direction you took at the end of the last lynch, and how you went from feeling sure about your vote (for Epi, you say), to changing your mind and not wanting to vote at all because you don't feel strongly, a line you know I've heard from your civ game at KSite, to showing your first suspicion of MP and quickly voting for him before the end of the lynch. It looks ike hastily planned distancing thrown together just before deadline. Then you say you're suspicious of FZ because of her behavior during the MP lynch, but you are afraid to say she is on MP's team, which rings a little false to me. I would expect (a civvie version of) you to question FZ more about her behavior during the MP lynch, but perhaps you know it's not smart to outright accuse FZ of something you know she's not. That's just the vibes I've been getting from your posts, I did not think your vote for MP and your explanation for your vote rang true..I think you were trying to blend into the bandwagon for your baddie buddy.

It should be easy to understand why I changed my mind on Epi. I have explained it. Voting him was going to be based solely on his lack of participation and game related input. You really expect me to vote him after he started showing the side of him that I have seen him only as a civvie? Serious question! Because I am just not understanding. His game play was night and day between WWE and CAH. I'm sure he isn't always like that but I was comparing it to what I had seen before. Why are you not understanding that? I honestly do not get why you have a problem with my changing my mind from Epi. I can at least see the problem with voting MP after others have. But not this.

As for the underlined: My first suspicion of MP was not right before I voted. I am confused, is that what you're saying? I was first to question MP because I did not like how he was talking so much about voting a non participant so early on. That does not make me a civvie because I would totally cast suspicion on my teammates early on, but I at least want to get the facts straight. What you're saying didn't happen.

Who is afraid to say FZ is on MP's team? There is no fear. I am hesitant to believe that because I think FZ probably would have thrown her scumbuddy under the bus or at least not so openly looked for an alternative. But I am open to her having a different style on this site, since I have a different baddie style on this site. But why am I afraid? Simply not the case. It is because I am trying to get things correct that I am not wildly accusing something that I think might not have the most likelyhood of being true.

Don't know what to say about my explanation. If you didn't like it, you didn't like it. I thought he was bad and I voted. That's what happened.

[Dom]

Because I simply wanted to have dialogue about you and you told me I was trying to set you up for doing so.

Am I wrong to think it was a possibility?
Saying 'interesting' without any discussion on the possibility of it happening or of it not happening comes off scummy. If you're trying to see reactions, then that is fine but you can't expect me to read your mind. Of course I am going to wonder if you're trying to push something without being obvious about it, I see scum do it all the time. But do what you want.

The following posts used the word interesting:
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 787#p67787
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 823#p67823
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 827#p67827
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 851#p67851
The first two say something more definite, the last two do not.
My post more closely resembles the last two.
wehre was your outrage there?

Oh jeez, it wasn't an assumption. Just trying to analyze how some things went down. I was positing forth a particular stance, and I am not sure I even ratified that opinion as my own yet.

I feel like this has been the most conversation-squashing, overly critical game ever. I think some of the things said to other players (not by you, Lea) are borderline rude. Why would I want to analyze or synthesis any of the data we have or posit forth any theories (ridiculous or credible), if I'm going to have a bunch of you checking off squares on a rubric for how XYZ it is? The more I think about it, I think this underhanded post review system is Neo Baddie Tactic 2.1

I'd like to get back to having some fun please.

If you think this is a baddie tactic, who are the baddies using it?

I feel like this has been the most overly-sensitive game ever. Every person I have cast suspicion on has taken it personally and acted insulted. Talk about conversation squashing, how about trying to make me feel like a heel for baddie-hunting? I have to suspect someone, don't I?

I have nevertheless been having fun, though. Thanks, Russti!

I do not believe I have done such a thing!

Dom, at the moment I'm inclined to agree with you about k4j, he is high on my list of possible MP teammates. But I'm curious to hear your reasoning.

Here we go.

I initially found K4J's thoughts on MP to be good. He kind of put him on the map for everyone, while others nailed his coffin. However, when we were discussing who MP's teammates were, someone (Llama?) put it out there that maybe his teammates threw him under the bus. K4J was one of those voters. I said that would be interesting given hat K4J was the one that kind of brought MP up in the first place, if I am not mistaken. However, no sooner did I say that did K4J lambaste me for it. Which is interesting given that he did not do the same for others-- only when it came to discussion about himself; it's almost as if K4J doesn't care about "scummy" practices affecting other people, only himself. However, I was only trying to garner discussion.
From here, I saw K4J as trying to paint me in a negative light for little reason. So, when I sat down right now to make this post, I did a bit of a reread. I just saw your post on him, so I don't want to just copy you, but I will highlight what I thought briefly.
-I think it's very weird that K4J won't definitively say that she think's FZ could be on MP's team. It's almost as if he knows that FZ ISN'T on MP's team and doesn't want to be proven wrong or something.
-The switch from Epig to MP doesn't ring true to me. Although, I don't know why K4J wouldn't just say "it was always MP I wanted to vote for". I am a bit fuzzy on the timeline of how that conversation happened.

So yeah...


LINKI: K4J I appreciate your response to TH's post. I really do. I'm not quite sure I believe it, but I am glad you said something substantial.

[kneel4justice]

Dom, I tend to pay more attention to posts that are about me. It is just what I do. I understand people don't like it, I've been into arguments with people about it before (when I don't even read some posts but skim) but I gather my opinions from interaction. It's just what works for me. And for me, your Interesting comment sticks out because of how it was used. I think it is much different from, for example, this post. It was that yours didn't have much of an opinion that bothered me.

As for me unwilling to say I think FZ could be on MP's team, that is just now true. I don't know where that came from. It's a possibility, I don't think I ever denied that. But I have played with FZ for years and I know she throws her buddies under the bus as soon as she knows they're going down, sometimes even before, so does that not make sense why I may be hesitant to believe it?

Still not sure how the flow from Epi to MP doesn't make sense, but okay. I can't make people understand. All I can do is explain, which I have. If someone has questions I will gladly answer.

[reywaS]

Are you asking me that question or is that for everyone? I have no idea if MP would defend his team mates. I don't think it is impossible. MP is a smart mofo, so I wouldn't be surprised at all if he were to do somethign that no one would ever expect him to do.

Cyclops is my favorite character ever, and I absolutely love him in the current Marvel Now!
Thanks for answering! Just a general question for anyone who can answer.

omg omg omg I love Cyclops! And he has gotten SO much more interesting since Avengers vs. X-Men. I love that he finally got his own solo series....even if it is the 16 year old, time displaced version of Scott Summers. Still awesome.

[reywaS]

I feel like this has been the most conversation-squashing, overly critical game ever. I think some of the things said to other players (not by you, Lea) are borderline rude. Why would I want to analyze or synthesis any of the data we have or posit forth any theories (ridiculous or credible), if I'm going to have a bunch of you checking off squares on a rubric for how XYZ it is? The more I think about it, I think this underhanded post review system is Neo Baddie Tactic 2.1

I'd like to get back to having some fun please.

I feel like this has been the most overly-sensitive game ever. Every person I have cast suspicion on has taken it personally and acted insulted. Talk about conversation squashing, how about trying to make me feel like a heel for baddie-hunting? I have to suspect someone, don't I?

I have nevertheless been having fun, though. Thanks, Russti!

I think it's funny when people act like this. I refuse to get upset and will instead just fling poo at them if they direct any of this nonsense in my direction. Fuck em.

[reywaS]

Hey INH, good to see you. Did you have anything to say to those (such as myself) who questioned your intentions on Day 1?

Frankly, I'm offended that Juliet and co. took what I said so personally. I've known juliets online for maybe three years, and the fact that she still can't tell when I'm being ironically offended, wounds me. I thought that you all would have known by now that sometimes I'm not serious when I say things in a weird, sad attempt at humor. The fact that she took it so seriously, and even resorted to name-calling speaks volumes about her character.

ummm...

So....is this an ironic character assassination?

[Marmot]

Hey llama, I do think I see another possibility in your hypothesis about the baddies missing their actions. If no one ends up being insanified today (another role on the odd team), it could offer a little more proof.

What does insanified mean anyway?

What I was trying to posit was that Daisy didn't really say anything to merit a vote out of anyone, even for Day 1 (in my opinion). But ya gotta vote for someone, so based on a trumped up reason, he voted for her. He didn't randomly vote her, but he may as well have, which is why I put "random vote" in quotation marks.

So ar you saying you think it was distancing or you don't think it was distancing? I can't understand what point you are trying to make here.

The former. I am not sure he'd be so brazen though.

If I may add my two cents, I disagree. However, MP jumped around a bit threatening to put his vote on others. I think he was feeling guilty. I don't suspect that he was throwing a teammate under the bus. I don't get a baddie vibe from Daisy.

You think voting someone who had almost zero chance of being lynched for almost no reason at all was "brazen"?

Yes, but not because of the lynch chance, but because it tips his hand (and made some of us infer they were teamies).

I don't feel this way at all, and it makes me distrustful of you, making assumptions that seem to be based off of huge leaps. Therefore, you have my .

Welcome, fingersplints!!!

When a player is insanified, it usually means they are forced to post random senseless comments for the duration of the day period. Nobody's done that yet that I know of.

[Captain Bunny Killer]

Yay, I'm caught up! It's been a distracting evening. And I tend to get bogged down in the details and never get around to sharing my thoughts.

I found it amusing that k4j and FZ kind of went after each other a couple of pages ago, because I don't trust either of them. I think they both handled the last lynch poll in shady ways (FZ: Oh, maybe I'll vote for MP, so you guys better be right. Then, who should I vote for? Then, hey do you have someone else to vote for in the last ten minutes? Then, I am going with either Vomps or Daisy. Then no voting at all. [CBK paraphrase]), and both of their posts have come across as insincere or defensive with weak arguments.

The point that you're missing, k4j, is that you never said you were suspicious of Epi when it was happening. It's just too convenient to mention a mysterious suspicion and then suddenly change course last second and then go back and fill in the story.

Am I missing something?

By the way, I'm enjoying the game, and no one has offended me. You can try if you want though.

[kneel4justice]

Yay, I'm caught up! It's been a distracting evening. And I tend to get bogged down in the details and never get around to sharing my thoughts.

I found it amusing that k4j and FZ kind of went after each other a couple of pages ago, because I don't trust either of them. I think they both handled the last lynch poll in shady ways (FZ: Oh, maybe I'll vote for MP, so you guys better be right. Then, who should I vote for? Then, hey do you have someone else to vote for in the last ten minutes? Then, I am going with either Vomps or Daisy. Then no voting at all. [CBK paraphrase]), and both of their posts have come across as insincere or defensive with weak arguments.

The point that you're missing, k4j, is that you never said you were suspicious of Epi when it was happening. It's just too convenient to mention a mysterious suspicion and then suddenly change course last second and then go back and fill in the story.

Am I missing something?

By the way, I'm enjoying the game, and no one has offended me. You can try if you want though.

I never said I was suspicious of Epi, I labeled it mysterious so that I wouldn't tip him off on what he needed to do to change my mind. I did not say afterwards because I didn't really want him knowing what I categorize as civvie behavior for him (for future games) but since I was asked, I shared. I also think that the shift is evidently clear that I am being honest because when I said I was suspicious he wasn't participating much and when I said I'm no longer suspicious he had started posting. I don't see the problem and I find people are making a big deal out of it. So I said I was confident in a vote, but changed my mind, what's suspicious? Why am I benefiting from that if I am scum?

And I don't think my arguments are weak. Please point me to a weak argument, I think my points are strong and I want to prove it so people will listen instead of continuing on and joining a bandwagon.
Don't think I can defend the insincere thing but it doesn't make sense to me lol

[Captain Bunny Killer]

Yay, I'm caught up! It's been a distracting evening. And I tend to get bogged down in the details and never get around to sharing my thoughts.

I found it amusing that k4j and FZ kind of went after each other a couple of pages ago, because I don't trust either of them. I think they both handled the last lynch poll in shady ways (FZ: Oh, maybe I'll vote for MP, so you guys better be right. Then, who should I vote for? Then, hey do you have someone else to vote for in the last ten minutes? Then, I am going with either Vomps or Daisy. Then no voting at all. [CBK paraphrase]), and both of their posts have come across as insincere or defensive with weak arguments.

The point that you're missing, k4j, is that you never said you were suspicious of Epi when it was happening. It's just too convenient to mention a mysterious suspicion and then suddenly change course last second and then go back and fill in the story.

Am I missing something?

By the way, I'm enjoying the game, and no one has offended me. You can try if you want though.

I never said I was suspicious of Epi, I labeled it mysterious so that I wouldn't tip him off on what he needed to do to change my mind. I did not say afterwards because I didn't really want him knowing what I categorize as civvie behavior for him (for future games) but since I was asked, I shared. I also think that the shift is evidently clear that I am being honest because when I said I was suspicious he wasn't participating much and when I said I'm no longer suspicious he had started posting. I don't see the problem and I find people are making a big deal out of it. So I said I was confident in a vote, but changed my mind, what's suspicious? Why am I benefiting from that if I am scum?

And I don't think my arguments are weak. Please point me to a weak argument, I think my points are strong and I want to prove it so people will listen instead of continuing on and joining a bandwagon.
Don't think I can defend the insincere thing but it doesn't make sense to me lol

This argument right here. You can't see why it's suspicious that you would hide your suspicions until the last second, when you expect the chance to discuss accusations against yourself? You don't see why it seems phony to go back and pick up something someone else actually said at the time and fill it into a cryptic comment you made before the lynch went down? You don't see why people are suggesting that you could have purposely waited to give yourself civ points by voting for a doomed teammate?

I'm not guarenteeing that you are his teammate. I don't know. I try to look for a collection of evidence, not just one post. And that doesn't mean that everything you say is off. If you want me to go back and look for other things, I will. Unfortunately, I can't do it right away.

[kneel4justice]

This argument right here. You can't see why it's suspicious that you would hide your suspicions until the last second, when you expect the chance to discuss accusations against yourself? You don't see why it seems phony to go back and pick up something someone else actually said at the time and fill it into a cryptic comment you made before the lynch went down? You don't see why people are suggesting that you could have purposely waited to give yourself civ points by voting for a doomed teammate?

I'm not guarenteeing that you are his teammate. I don't know. I try to look for a collection of evidence, not just one post. And that doesn't mean that everything you say is off. If you want me to go back and look for other things, I will. Unfortunately, I can't do it right away.

I don't think I was hiding my suspicions. I was waiting to see before I jumped on a townie too soon or tipped off a scum, do you not see what is townie about that? I didn't even see anyone say what I said, except I did see MP's comment which caused Epi to start talking. And I wouldn't pick up on a scums comment either. I think you're referring to FZ. Didn't even know she suspected Epi until today, but whatever. Believe what you want.
I see the voting for a doomed teammate but why that is being paired with my suspicion of Epi makes no sense. I could have voted for Epi that night so I didn't have to end up voting for a teammate if I was really scum with MP. I do think at least some people are reaching with that one.

[FZ.]

MP was a goner when I posted my support of him, he was ahead by like three votes with eight minutes to go. Why would I do that if he were my teammate and was clearly going to flip bad when I could just as easily say I suspect him? This argument makes no sense. I get why you say it if you take MPs posts and vote alone, but if you consider the whole picture and how it unfolded, it does not hold water.

Also,what I think everyone should keep in mind is that I am dating MP, and when he learned he was likely going to be lynched, I witnessed first hand his reaction. To say he was upset is an understatement. We both had a very stressful time recently and had stepped away from mafia to deal with our own stuff. I don't think any of you realize how close the site came to losing him completely. So he was finally getting excited to come back and play again, getting into it again. I wasn't sure that was going to happen. So when he saw he was getting lynched on Day 1 he was livid. I don't say any of this to condemn anyone for voting for him or whatever. He was a Baddie and had to go at some point. I just want to give you perspective on why I said what I said. I would never have said anything about his reaction in person in this thread, except now to explain that my defense of him was like i said, born mostly out of empathy to what he was feeling at that moment. At that point I had no reason to suspect him,it struck me as normal MP because I know him, he kind of swings between two courses of action. Careful consideration and reckless impetuousness. Mafia can bring out that second side that he exercises with less frequency in his day to day life. So no, tossing a vote on me was not too horribly surprising to me. In fact, I wondered if I would come back to find myself lynched,not him. I'm glad he flipped bad. I still feel bad he got lynched Day 1 on his first game back after his hiatus and in a game hosted by one of his closest friends. But I am glad a Baddie role was eliminated.

Does that answer the suspicion against me adequately?

This makes me sad. I hope MP still comes to play next game even if he's busy. I already feel his absence.

[FZ.]

Okay, I'm out. I'll be back tomorrow to place my vote and then I'll be back on Saturday.


linki:@ I'm thinking that my assumption that K4J couldn't be on MP's team was wrong. And if we're looking at the list of players who voted for MP and reasonably thinking that one of the late voters could be on his team, he's my best option. Because like TH pointed out, the way he said he didn't have time to catch up, yet voted for MP even though he planned on voting for Epig, but now is saying he saw he posted good posts, doesn't make sense and seems like a lie


And now, good night

I'm slowly going to lose it. Lol
Seriously, what doesn't make sense? Everything I have said has made sense. Tell me how me saying I planned for voting for Epi because he was so quiet, but changed my mind when he started posting heavily and building cases doesn't make sense. Wait, you can't because YOU'RE not making sense. How does that seem like a lie? I'm lost.
As for me not having time to catch up, I was in the car, with 13% battery, I didn't know if I was going to have time. I made it home and had about 20 minutes to skim the thread (amongst doing other things non-game related and so I made my decision).

Okay, I missed the 20 minutes part, though for me, it takes longer, maybe because English is not my native language...but when I read the other post it seemed weird that you didn't have time to read yet you managed to decide Epig did good enough to sway you away from voting for him, and MP became your first choice.
As for the wow about thinking the same, it's been a while since we had such an identical thought about someone and while this is something that usually makes me feel good about you, I'm hesitant. The way you found really weird reasons to suspect me, and even started out agreeing with MP, only to then take it back. Then, my "panic attack" near the end of the lynch got you worried, like it's something that's never happened to me, and like there were no good reasons for it...
Not sure what I think now. I think there's probably a scum buddy on MP's vote list, because at some point it was certain he was going down, and the timing of your vote with all things surrounding that seems quite compelling.

[Kylemii]

i checked this thread this morning and now i'm already 200 posts behind o_o

this thread moves quick

[FZ.]

Yay, I'm caught up! It's been a distracting evening. And I tend to get bogged down in the details and never get around to sharing my thoughts.

I found it amusing that k4j and FZ kind of went after each other a couple of pages ago, because I don't trust either of them. I think they both handled the last lynch poll in shady ways (FZ: Oh, maybe I'll vote for MP, so you guys better be right. Then, who should I vote for? Then, hey do you have someone else to vote for in the last ten minutes? Then, I am going with either Vomps or Daisy. Then no voting at all. [CBK paraphrase]), and both of their posts have come across as insincere or defensive with weak arguments.

The point that you're missing, k4j, is that you never said you were suspicious of Epi when it was happening. It's just too convenient to mention a mysterious suspicion and then suddenly change course last second and then go back and fill in the story.

Am I missing something?

By the way, I'm enjoying the game, and no one has offended me. You can try if you want though.

I never said I was suspicious of Epi, I labeled it mysterious so that I wouldn't tip him off on what he needed to do to change my mind. I did not say afterwards because I didn't really want him knowing what I categorize as civvie behavior for him (for future games) but since I was asked, I shared. I also think that the shift is evidently clear that I am being honest because when I said I was suspicious he wasn't participating much and when I said I'm no longer suspicious he had started posting. I don't see the problem and I find people are making a big deal out of it. So I said I was confident in a vote, but changed my mind, what's suspicious? Why am I benefiting from that if I am scum?

And I don't think my arguments are weak. Please point me to a weak argument, I think my points are strong and I want to prove it so people will listen instead of continuing on and joining a bandwagon.
Don't think I can defend the insincere thing but it doesn't make sense to me lol

This argument right here. You can't see why it's suspicious that you would hide your suspicions until the last second, when you expect the chance to discuss accusations against yourself? You don't see why it seems phony to go back and pick up something someone else actually said at the time and fill it into a cryptic comment you made before the lynch went down? You don't see why people are suggesting that you could have purposely waited to give yourself civ points by voting for a doomed teammate?

I'm not guarenteeing that you are his teammate. I don't know. I try to look for a collection of evidence, not just one post. And that doesn't mean that everything you say is off. If you want me to go back and look for other things, I will. Unfortunately, I can't do it right away.

Well, I can't defend my hesitation for voting MP more than I have. If you find that insincere, I can't do anything about it. I said I trusted MP more than others when the game started moving, because he felt like genuinely trying to progress the game, so later on, even when I felt he was starting to get all over the place, I thought there was a good chance he was a civvie being scapegoated for his behavior, and I was trying to save him, but not feeling sure about it. I was wrong, but it doesn't make me bad.

As for K4J, the fact he didn't share his thoughts on Epig is the last thing that worries me. We do that plenty, because you have a hunch and you want to see how that person is going to act. If he'd come out with his reasons for suspecting him so early, he wouldn't have known if it was a reaction to what he said. At least that was what I thought when not saying who I was keeping an eye on. Is this your way of jumping on a bandwagon of suspicion by trying to give your "original" thoughts about it and not appearing like you're bandwagoning?

[FZ.]

Reywas, I'm sorry if I offended you, but up until now, I don't think you've said anything substantial about the game, and who you're suspicious of. All I see from you is defending yourself and making jokes. To me, defending yourself without giving anything else, screams of badness. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but you're very high on my suspect list. Your recent posts just make me feel stronger about it

I don't know what your problem is. I explained why I was hesitant in voting MP. It felt like the votes were piling up on him, which is something I'm not used to here, and while I started feeling less sure he was a civvie in the last day or so, I started out feeling he was the most civvie of them all, the way he progressed the game, so I was still hesitant to call him a baddie, not to mention my stupid tendency to view people who are suspicious of me as more civ 'than baddie. Anyway, that was what was going on through my mind, and you of all people should be able to get me in situations like this. This is the second time you've said something that I really don't expect you to say, and it's starting to worry me. If you'd said I could be on MP's team, I'd know you're bad , but saying I might be on the other team is clever enough to make me hesitate on this.

I do not like how you replied to me, 'I don't know what your problem is' as if what I am saying has no value. I am saying I did not get the same vibe as you did. I was not all that concerned with the votes for MP being 'too many' as you were. I was not scrambling at deadline trying to come up with an alternative as you were. What I am saying is, if we were of the same alignment based on our track record I should have at least felt similar to the way you did. It's a vibes thing. We often think the same or similar and you know this. So me having a completely opposite reaction to the lynch as you did, pings me. I think even you should have seen that while MP was suspecting you, he was doing it with an agenda. He called you insincere when you had barely any posts and thoughts to be insincere about. Yes you feel better about those who suspect you, but you also see through fake suspicions and you weren't doing that here. Which is why I'm having trouble seeing you as a civvie right now. Now you're starting to get worried about me, well ok but I don't see why and it feels kind of empty. I really don't see your points, probably because you're counteracting mine which I feel are more credible than you're giving them. Or rather, not credit but you should at least be able to understand what I'm saying.

First of all, after last game where we went head to head as civvies on the first day, and then you got recruited and I started trusting you, it changed things for me. Sorry, can't help it.
So you're allowed to think my suspicions are "empty", yet I can't feel yours are absurd? I didn't mean to sound rude in the "what is your problem" comment. I meant to say that I really don't get what you didn't see. Yes, I feel different from you regarding how the lynch went down. I'm still pretty sure there were baddies voting for him from the other team as well, so the fact that people got lucky with the lynch doesn't mean there weren't some bad people around that lynch. And I can't bother with the are we seeing things the same way or not line of thought anymore. It's proven false. At least some time. So either you're bad, or we're just not seeing things the same way. I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt for this day, though you're on my suspect list, but we'll see

[Lizzy]

Also, another form of distancing is throwing your teammate under the bus. I wonder if we there's at least one of MP's teammates in those 6 that voted for him.

An interesting thought.

Turnip Head (18), Hedgeowl (19), juliets (20), Captain Bunny Killer (21), kneel4justice (23), Epignosis (24) 25%

I don't believe Rob and MP were on a team (if they were, they would have won by now) and TH and Hedgeowl's votes would have been too risky for teammates, but you may be onto something with juliets, CBK or K4J.

I just find it interesting how the votes came pouring in. Only the 22nd vote is missing from that bandwagon, and that's Snowy's. I wonder if there isn't at least one baddie from the other team who decided to join in though.

Linki - thanks, Rob.

I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at here. Could you clarify for me?

Well, we were discussing the possibility of at least one of MP's teammates throwing him under the bus for credibility, which means at least one baddie in that group of 6. However, looking at how the votes for Alex came pouring in: 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24 - that's what I would call a bandwagon, if I ever saw one. It's quite convenient for at least one baddie from the other team to add another nail in the coffin, just to be sure none of their teammates is in actual danger. I would say though that more than one from the other team would be too risky if the Sock happened to flip civ. So, using this logic, there is a possibility that there is at least one baddie from each side in that group of 6.

The points brought up about K4J are pretty solid, corroborated with the fact that MP's fate was pretty much sealed when he decided to vote for him.

And then there's this when he only had ONE vote and there were still 20 something people left to vote and he wasn't really under scrutiny:

Let me find out y'all trying to 'randomize' me out of this game!

Then the already famous sudden change of heart:

I voted for MP. Not as sure as I would like but in the time I had to catch up he did some weird things. I did think it was strange people actually agreed with my points on INH and Dom did to MP. I'm not sure if they used it to pilot a vote or not. But yeah, voted for MP. Sorry MP, I wish I felt better about you because I've missed playing with you a lot but some things you've done just do not feel genuine or from a townie mind set.

... and right after there was this:

I do no see what is bad about Daisy's vote. Seems like it makes sense to me. If I had chose to vote for INH, that would be my reason.

So which is it? Is it strange people agreed with you on INH or is it okay they did and ended up voting for him? Your game and explanations at the moment remind me quite a bit of Exodus, to be honest.

I also agree with CBK about the interaction between K4J and FZ, going after each other this early in the game, which seems like a way of distancing themselves from each other. However, while I'm not feeling great about FZ, I'm not seeing a baddie atm.

Vomps' remark about Dom gives me break though. I need a few more days to form a proper opinion, but he's more careful than usual, which again, suggests he has a role that requires a certain degree of responsibility, and we know the baddies aren't the only ones with BTSC.

On Goosey, I noticed this:

Random: Matt is being chatty. And I like that. Sometimes he is like that when he is being managed on a team (Lizzy has handled him quite well in the past, for instance), but I think it's more than he was called out (and Vomperdoodle) for not being as helpful as he could. Matt's a realllllly smart guy, so I'm hoping it's just him feeling comfortable enough to participate more. Mattmatt, I hope you don't take offense of any of that. I know it doesn't sound very polite to insinuate someone is being coached, but that's not precisely what I mean (V&A wouldn't mind being coached by L, if you know what they mean).

Matt has not been chatty and he only made a slightly on topic post which is his last, and this to me looks like a tacit manner of bringing VAL up again. Baddies tend to use VAL as a scapegoat, doncha no.

On Marshy, I know you've also been away, but I have to agree with Llama, there isn't a lot of helpful content in your posts, and I know what you can do as both a helpful civilian and a more reserved baddie. I miss Jennet tbh. (although I can't complain about the zombie date with Polaris either )

Snowy seems to be having keyboard issues.

Also, why are so many people offended and taking things personally? Loosen up k. You only have the right to be offended if you outed Apocalypse, single-handedly lynched a baddie and pointed out another one, be civ friendly in general, be absent for a couple of days and ask people not to kill you, yet they do it anyway without giving you the chance to defend yourself because omg cereal killer.

Feck, that's a long post.

[FZ.]

I think I read everything.

At the moment, I'm willing to vote for one of the following:
1. Reywas, who hasn't voiced a single suspicion and the only serious posts I see from him is when he's trying to defend himself. I don't think we've played together, so I don't know if this is his usual MO, but to me, someone who focuses only on defending himself, is more likely a baddie.

2. Mongoose- I agree with llama that her posts carry the scent of scum hunting, but when you look into them, they are kind of tasteless And I'm mean that in the nicest way possible (and not rude).

3. K4J- I admit, I hate voting for K4J with a passion, because when he is a civ, he's very valuable to the civvies. I'm not concerned by his "hiding" his suspicions for Epig, because I totally get that, and I actually did that myself. And actually, the fact he doesn't think I'm on MP's team doesn't surprise me. He knows my baddie game better than anyone here, and I think I tried defending a team mate once and it ended up so bad, that I just went back to throwing them under the bus and doing it much faster. I'd probably vote second for MP, lol. That said, he knows I know he knows, so if he implied that, I would just be more sure he's a baddie. So I don't know if it's because he's bad or not, but I think his very minor suspicion for MP coupled with the fact that I think it's highly likely there's someone from MP in the voters and his timing seems the most appropriate for a baddie from the team makes him look more baddie than a civvie at this point. Add to that the way his reasons for suspecting me just seem forced to me (there's the one in the beginning where he went back on), and I just might vote for him after all.

I could also see myself persuaded to vote for MM or INH because they too have been posting but not saying much. And INH's just answered our questions about what he thought of the votes on him and suspicions with an "emotional" reply and not with an analyzing one, so it didn't make me feel good about him.

There's also Vompatti, but I seem to be the only one thinking he's a baddie, and while I really don't get that kind of play style, I'm tired of trying to get it or do something about it if I'm the only one.


If anyone stops by anytime soon, let me know who you think of voting for. I don't want my vote to go to waste, so while I'll probably be the first voter since I need to leave for my vacation, I want to hear what people are planning to do

linki: @ Hey Lizzie, so are you going to vote for K4J?

[Leamiteo]

Yes, but not because of the lynch chance, but because it tips his hand (and made some of us infer they were teamies).

I don't feel this way at all, and it makes me distrustful of you, making assumptions that seem to be based off of huge leaps. Therefore, you have my .

Oh jeez, it wasn't an assumption. Just trying to analyze how some things went down. I was positing forth a particular stance, and I am not sure I even ratified that opinion as my own yet.

I feel like this has been the most conversation-squashing, overly critical game ever. I think some of the things said to other players (not by you, Lea) are borderline rude. Why would I want to analyze or synthesis any of the data we have or posit forth any theories (ridiculous or credible), if I'm going to have a bunch of you checking off squares on a rubric for how XYZ it is? The more I think about it, I think this underhanded post review system is Neo Baddie Tactic 2.1

I'd like to get back to having some fun please.[/quote]

This is my first game in a year, so I am having fun! I would agree with others that this has tended to be a touchy game...I don't mean to be a fun crusher Mongoose, I was just writing out snippets of thoughts because I was crunched on time. Sorry if it felt abrupt and abrasive to you, that was not my attempt, I meant only to say I doubt MP and Daisy are teamies based on that alone and that it was kind of a big jump to make. I'm a people pleaser, so please love me! It's below the last thing on my list to make people feel badly.

OK, so I have to get to work, but hope to catch up and post later! I just saw your response and wanted to reply asap.

[Russtifinko]

Quick note: rules have been updated to indicate that double-targeting is not allowed. This isn't a change to game rules, just a correction of a previous oversight. And since we've only had one Night, it doesn't affect anything that has occurred so far.

[S~V~S]

Good Morning lovely players

Always remember, lets respect each other. And, if someone feels the need to say you have an attitude more than once, perhaps you do.

By the same token, if more than one person says you are being oversensitive, perhaps they are right.

Most of all, if you feel that someone is taking it beyond the realm of game related comments, and is making YOU related comments, don't take it to the thread, take it to me.

If anyone feels that this was directed at them, maybe they should throttle the 'tude back a bit. Although tbh, had it been directed at any individual, they would have gotten a PM already.

Just a friendly reminder~ and I have a whip, and am not afraid to use it Edit~ actually that is a stick, but you get the point I am sure

[insertnamehere]

Hey INH, good to see you. Did you have anything to say to those (such as myself) who questioned your intentions on Day 1?

Frankly, I'm offended that Juliet and co. took what I said so personally. I've known juliets online for maybe three years, and the fact that she still can't tell when I'm being ironically offended, wounds me. I thought that you all would have known by now that sometimes I'm not serious when I say things in a weird, sad attempt at humor. The fact that she took it so seriously, and even resorted to name-calling speaks volumes about her character.

ummm...

So....is this an ironic character assassination?

As always, I am 100% serious.

[reywaS]

Reywas, I'm sorry if I offended you, but up until now, I don't think you've said anything substantial about the game, and who you're suspicious of. All I see from you is defending yourself and making jokes. To me, defending yourself without giving anything else, screams of badness. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but you're very high on my suspect list. Your recent posts just make me feel stronger about it

I don't know what your problem is. I explained why I was hesitant in voting MP. It felt like the votes were piling up on him, which is something I'm not used to here, and while I started feeling less sure he was a civvie in the last day or so, I started out feeling he was the most civvie of them all, the way he progressed the game, so I was still hesitant to call him a baddie, not to mention my stupid tendency to view people who are suspicious of me as more civ 'than baddie. Anyway, that was what was going on through my mind, and you of all people should be able to get me in situations like this. This is the second time you've said something that I really don't expect you to say, and it's starting to worry me. If you'd said I could be on MP's team, I'd know you're bad , but saying I might be on the other team is clever enough to make me hesitate on this.

I do not like how you replied to me, 'I don't know what your problem is' as if what I am saying has no value. I am saying I did not get the same vibe as you did. I was not all that concerned with the votes for MP being 'too many' as you were. I was not scrambling at deadline trying to come up with an alternative as you were. What I am saying is, if we were of the same alignment based on our track record I should have at least felt similar to the way you did. It's a vibes thing. We often think the same or similar and you know this. So me having a completely opposite reaction to the lynch as you did, pings me. I think even you should have seen that while MP was suspecting you, he was doing it with an agenda. He called you insincere when you had barely any posts and thoughts to be insincere about. Yes you feel better about those who suspect you, but you also see through fake suspicions and you weren't doing that here. Which is why I'm having trouble seeing you as a civvie right now. Now you're starting to get worried about me, well ok but I don't see why and it feels kind of empty. I really don't see your points, probably because you're counteracting mine which I feel are more credible than you're giving them. Or rather, not credit but you should at least be able to understand what I'm saying.

First of all, after last game where we went head to head as civvies on the first day, and then you got recruited and I started trusting you, it changed things for me. Sorry, can't help it.
So you're allowed to think my suspicions are "empty", yet I can't feel yours are absurd? I didn't mean to sound rude in the "what is your problem" comment. I meant to say that I really don't get what you didn't see. Yes, I feel different from you regarding how the lynch went down. I'm still pretty sure there were baddies voting for him from the other team as well, so the fact that people got lucky with the lynch doesn't mean there weren't some bad people around that lynch. And I can't bother with the are we seeing things the same way or not line of thought anymore. It's proven false. At least some time. So either you're bad, or we're just not seeing things the same way. I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt for this day, though you're on my suspect list, but we'll see

I wasn't really offended. I take great pride in being high on people's suspect lists when I'm not a baddie. So list away.

[reywaS]

Also, another form of distancing is throwing your teammate under the bus. I wonder if we there's at least one of MP's teammates in those 6 that voted for him.

An interesting thought.

Turnip Head (18), Hedgeowl (19), juliets (20), Captain Bunny Killer (21), kneel4justice (23), Epignosis (24) 25%

I don't believe Rob and MP were on a team (if they were, they would have won by now) and TH and Hedgeowl's votes would have been too risky for teammates, but you may be onto something with juliets, CBK or K4J.

I just find it interesting how the votes came pouring in. Only the 22nd vote is missing from that bandwagon, and that's Snowy's. I wonder if there isn't at least one baddie from the other team who decided to join in though.

Linki - thanks, Rob.

I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at here. Could you clarify for me?

Well, we were discussing the possibility of at least one of MP's teammates throwing him under the bus for credibility, which means at least one baddie in that group of 6. However, looking at how the votes for Alex came pouring in: 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24 - that's what I would call a bandwagon, if I ever saw one. It's quite convenient for at least one baddie from the other team to add another nail in the coffin, just to be sure none of their teammates is in actual danger. I would say though that more than one from the other team would be too risky if the Sock happened to flip civ. So, using this logic, there is a possibility that there is at least one baddie from each side in that group of 6.

The points brought up about K4J are pretty solid, corroborated with the fact that MP's fate was pretty much sealed when he decided to vote for him.

And then there's this when he only had ONE vote and there were still 20 something people left to vote and he wasn't really under scrutiny:

Let me find out y'all trying to 'randomize' me out of this game!

Then the already famous sudden change of heart:

I voted for MP. Not as sure as I would like but in the time I had to catch up he did some weird things. I did think it was strange people actually agreed with my points on INH and Dom did to MP. I'm not sure if they used it to pilot a vote or not. But yeah, voted for MP. Sorry MP, I wish I felt better about you because I've missed playing with you a lot but some things you've done just do not feel genuine or from a townie mind set.

... and right after there was this:

I do no see what is bad about Daisy's vote. Seems like it makes sense to me. If I had chose to vote for INH, that would be my reason.

So which is it? Is it strange people agreed with you on INH or is it okay they did and ended up voting for him? Your game and explanations at the moment remind me quite a bit of Exodus, to be honest.

I also agree with CBK about the interaction between K4J and FZ, going after each other this early in the game, which seems like a way of distancing themselves from each other. However, while I'm not feeling great about FZ, I'm not seeing a baddie atm.

Vomps' remark about Dom gives me break though. I need a few more days to form a proper opinion, but he's more careful than usual, which again, suggests he has a role that requires a certain degree of responsibility, and we know the baddies aren't the only ones with BTSC.

On Goosey, I noticed this:

Random: Matt is being chatty. And I like that. Sometimes he is like that when he is being managed on a team (Lizzy has handled him quite well in the past, for instance), but I think it's more than he was called out (and Vomperdoodle) for not being as helpful as he could. Matt's a realllllly smart guy, so I'm hoping it's just him feeling comfortable enough to participate more. Mattmatt, I hope you don't take offense of any of that. I know it doesn't sound very polite to insinuate someone is being coached, but that's not precisely what I mean (V&A wouldn't mind being coached by L, if you know what they mean).

Matt has not been chatty and he only made a slightly on topic post which is his last, and this to me looks like a tacit manner of bringing VAL up again. Baddies tend to use VAL as a scapegoat, doncha no.

On Marshy, I know you've also been away, but I have to agree with Llama, there isn't a lot of helpful content in your posts, and I know what you can do as both a helpful civilian and a more reserved baddie. I miss Jennet tbh. (although I can't complain about the zombie date with Polaris either )

Snowy seems to be having keyboard issues.

Also, why are so many people offended and taking things personally? Loosen up k. You only have the right to be offended if you outed Apocalypse, single-handedly lynched a baddie and pointed out another one, be civ friendly in general, be absent for a couple of days and ask people not to kill you, yet they do it anyway without giving you the chance to defend yourself because omg cereal killer.

Feck, that's a long post.

Ok, I see what you were getting at. I didn't understand what you meant about the other team joining a bandwagon. I thought you were saying that they likely knew that MP was a baddie somehow. Thanks for clarifying!

[reywaS]

I think I read everything.

At the moment, I'm willing to vote for one of the following:
1. Reywas, who hasn't voiced a single suspicion and the only serious posts I see from him is when he's trying to defend himself. I don't think we've played together, so I don't know if this is his usual MO, but to me, someone who focuses only on defending himself, is more likely a baddie.

2. Mongoose- I agree with llama that her posts carry the scent of scum hunting, but when you look into them, they are kind of tasteless And I'm mean that in the nicest way possible (and not rude).

3. K4J- I admit, I hate voting for K4J with a passion, because when he is a civ, he's very valuable to the civvies. I'm not concerned by his "hiding" his suspicions for Epig, because I totally get that, and I actually did that myself. And actually, the fact he doesn't think I'm on MP's team doesn't surprise me. He knows my baddie game better than anyone here, and I think I tried defending a team mate once and it ended up so bad, that I just went back to throwing them under the bus and doing it much faster. I'd probably vote second for MP, lol. That said, he knows I know he knows, so if he implied that, I would just be more sure he's a baddie. So I don't know if it's because he's bad or not, but I think his very minor suspicion for MP coupled with the fact that I think it's highly likely there's someone from MP in the voters and his timing seems the most appropriate for a baddie from the team makes him look more baddie than a civvie at this point. Add to that the way his reasons for suspecting me just seem forced to me (there's the one in the beginning where he went back on), and I just might vote for him after all.

I could also see myself persuaded to vote for MM or INH because they too have been posting but not saying much. And INH's just answered our questions about what he thought of the votes on him and suspicions with an "emotional" reply and not with an analyzing one, so it didn't make me feel good about him.

There's also Vompatti, but I seem to be the only one thinking he's a baddie, and while I really don't get that kind of play style, I'm tired of trying to get it or do something about it if I'm the only one.


If anyone stops by anytime soon, let me know who you think of voting for. I don't want my vote to go to waste, so while I'll probably be the first voter since I need to leave for my vacation, I want to hear what people are planning to do

linki: @ Hey Lizzie, so are you going to vote for K4J?

2 notes for you.

1. I think you are exaggerating a bit that I am defending myself so much.

2. I disagree with your accusation that my only serious posts are the ones where I'm defending myself.

bonus note: I think you are looking for an easy vote today.

[FZ.]

I think I read everything.

At the moment, I'm willing to vote for one of the following:
1. Reywas, who hasn't voiced a single suspicion and the only serious posts I see from him is when he's trying to defend himself. I don't think we've played together, so I don't know if this is his usual MO, but to me, someone who focuses only on defending himself, is more likely a baddie.

2. Mongoose- I agree with llama that her posts carry the scent of scum hunting, but when you look into them, they are kind of tasteless And I'm mean that in the nicest way possible (and not rude).

3. K4J- I admit, I hate voting for K4J with a passion, because when he is a civ, he's very valuable to the civvies. I'm not concerned by his "hiding" his suspicions for Epig, because I totally get that, and I actually did that myself. And actually, the fact he doesn't think I'm on MP's team doesn't surprise me. He knows my baddie game better than anyone here, and I think I tried defending a team mate once and it ended up so bad, that I just went back to throwing them under the bus and doing it much faster. I'd probably vote second for MP, lol. That said, he knows I know he knows, so if he implied that, I would just be more sure he's a baddie. So I don't know if it's because he's bad or not, but I think his very minor suspicion for MP coupled with the fact that I think it's highly likely there's someone from MP in the voters and his timing seems the most appropriate for a baddie from the team makes him look more baddie than a civvie at this point. Add to that the way his reasons for suspecting me just seem forced to me (there's the one in the beginning where he went back on), and I just might vote for him after all.

I could also see myself persuaded to vote for MM or INH because they too have been posting but not saying much. And INH's just answered our questions about what he thought of the votes on him and suspicions with an "emotional" reply and not with an analyzing one, so it didn't make me feel good about him.

There's also Vompatti, but I seem to be the only one thinking he's a baddie, and while I really don't get that kind of play style, I'm tired of trying to get it or do something about it if I'm the only one.


If anyone stops by anytime soon, let me know who you think of voting for. I don't want my vote to go to waste, so while I'll probably be the first voter since I need to leave for my vacation, I want to hear what people are planning to do

linki: @ Hey Lizzie, so are you going to vote for K4J?

2 notes for you.

1. I think you are exaggerating a bit that I am defending myself so much.

2. I disagree with your accusation that my only serious posts are the ones where I'm defending myself.

bonus note: I think you are looking for an easy vote today.

And here you are, defending yourself again
And good job, you actually managed to find someone suspicious- me for going after you. That's got to be your most serious post. A little too late, and too much of a NO U. Excuse me if I'm not impressed.

I don't think I'm looking for an easy vote. I actually gave a list of people and reasons. What have you done? I said I was willing to vote for any of those people, but you haven't addressed any of them, but only talked about yourself. How is that supposed to make me feel better about you?

[Russtifinko]

Just wanted to remind everyone about Rule 10 quickly!

"10) You have to be sarcastic all the time or else. Seriously though, sarcastic orange is encouraged for sarcasm."

Tone can be tough in text-based communication, and so I heartily approve the use of sarcastic orange in any message that is not heartfelt. This helps prevent things being taken too personally. For example:

Not sarcastic: In extreme cases where sarcastic orange is not used and a post is particularly sarcastic, and it is either caustic or is taken personally, fines may be meted out to the offending party at my discretion. Also S~V~S may get cross, and you wouldn't want that.
Sarcastic: Sarcastic posts that aren't orange will result in me rubbing a porcupine on the offending party's face. They would make S~V~S mad though, and that would be a GREAT idea.

Thanks! Carry on. Glad to see everyone is so into the game, by the way!

[thellama73]

What happened to positive reinforcement, Russ?

[thellama73]

Okay, seven hours till the poll closes and here are my thoughts this morning:

Dom has been exceptionally conciliatory to me since I said I might vote for him, asking my opinion, sympathizing with me, and so forth. This is understandable and wise on his part, and it does not necessarily make him bad. Civvies want to avoid taking votes as much as baddies. Still, it stuck out to me enough to keep him on my watch list. That being said, it has been very pleasant playing with you, Dom!

I am less interested in voting for MetalMarsh today for reasons I can't quite articulate. Something about his responses has made me less inclined to give him my vote today.

Mongoose has seemed uncharacteristically defensive, which, along with my earlier points, makes her the most suspicious in my eyes. If nothing else emerges, she will probably get my vote today.

I look forward to the opinions of others as the day progresses.

[juliets]

llama if you have already answered this my apologies, but what do you think about k4j?

Also, is there anything else about Mongoose besides your opinion that she's been more defensive than normal? I will go back through her posts since I haven't seen this point brought up before but I just wonder if there's not something else, even small, that you are seeing.