[END] Fight Club Mafia

#451

timmer wrote:
@Alex: If a policeman is recruited, do the other cops know it? Does a recruited cop lose BTSC with the other cops?

No, they would not. A recruited cop maintains BTSC with the other cops, like a double agent.

#452

Something tells me there will be missing votes. Maybe I should exact revenge on non-participants at the end of this vote like I did the previous day.

#453

Soon I'll be rezzed. I just know it.

#454

timmer wrote:I have a question for peeps: we had considerable votes on bulls, nevinera and vompatti, along with fewer votes on various others. To the people who voted on those bandwagons, how do you feel about your vote now? Are you voting the same? Why yes or no?

Personally, I'm not voting Vompatti again, I feel the chance of him being Tyler is low. I'm not sure where that leaves me, tbh. I've been trying to chase down some more angles on things, but nothing ever feels any better than anything else. I may fall back on my earlier feeling on bullz, at this point, but I don't feel very secure about it.

That's how I feel about Vomps too. I haven't really seen enough that I would want to put a vote on him this time around. More somebody I'm looking at than anything else.

Heck, I'm not even sure about Bullz. I was all gung-ho to vote for him again today, but his defenses are starting to come off as more sincere to me.

Meh. I guess I'm going to go with Nev. I'm hoping he is able to come in and participate a bit more. I hate voting for somebody who is quiet when it only feels like Day 2 to me, but given we're well into Day 6 in this game, I would like to hear from him a bit more. So maybe my vote will be able to get him in here a bit more.

I'm hoping nobody else uses my weak case to throw more votes on him. Mine is more on the off-chance that somebody who is quiet could be a potential recruit, and to try and encourage him to conversate a bit more. If he continues to remain quiet, and I continue to have a hard time developing suspicions, then I might get a bit more pinged by it.

Sorry if that was a bit rambling and wordy. But I've worked almost 35 hours since Sunday, am extremely tired and about to go to bed, and tomorrow looks to be a really busy too, so I have to throw a vote on it now. We have inventory at my store starting at midnight tomorrow night, so this week has been crazy busy trying to get ready for that. On the plus side, I only have tomorrow and Friday at my current store before I have a week of vacation, and then start my training program for co-management on the 18th. So a lot to be excited about!

Linki: Yes. I think you should kill them all again.

Linki2: No u

#455

Are you f***ing kidding me?! Nev isn't on the poll at all?!

Well this downright sucks. I guess I can't go to bed yet, because I have to hope I can figure out someone else to vote for.

#456

wtf?

Alex, is Nevinera supposed to be off of the poll?

#457

oh! metalmarsh replaced nevi derp.

#458

@Dom, I just saw your earlier question. Youand Dh were both in Wilmington on Day 2, going by the polls.

#459

Sticking with my vomps vote from yesterday!

#460

Urgh... it does look like there are going to be a lot of missing votes. I'm not sure what Sock will do about it, but I'm sure it will be bad. And honestly, I still don't have enough of a read to feel confident. I don't think the Vomps case is airtight, especially this early and based on two pieces of evidence. So will likely randomize again, unless some crazy analysis comes up in the next hour or so.

#461

Leamiteo wrote:Also my view 'first unread post' is not functioning as it should...I just realized tonight that I had skipped a page and a half earlier because of it. Help? Anyone?

This happens to me a lot! I have missed major things because of it. About half the time it just takes me to the firt post of the newest page in the thread, not the oldest post I haven't read yet. Idk what the fix is, though.

Personally, after the Hobbit game I am inclined to believe the best of both Bullz and Vomps most of the time. They get wrongly killed a LOT, and fwiw they read like normal them to me. So definitely not going there. And since MM just replaced in, I'm not voting him. So it more or less looks like I'm not voting for a top contender today. Classic me! Llama is going to call me out on never voting top vote-getters in about 3 days and wrongly lynch me.

Reading things...

#462

Ok, voting Epi.

#463

Russtifinko wrote:Ok, voting Epi.

Probably the safest bet.

#464

Keterman wrote:I'm curious as to why no one's voted vompatti yet. Is it normal over here for a strong yet failed lynch to garner no votes for quite a while the following day?

As a general answer, yes. In my Hobbit game recently, Mongoose got a lot of votes and survived a lynch. The next day it was nearly unanimous, and she died (as a civ, I might add). By the way, Hobbit players, that will be explained absolutely as soona s I have any time to write explanatory posts.

#465

Hahaha. Not! I saw him lurking, and saw that he hadn't been posting at usual Epi levels. He is the Mod, though, and thus unlynchable. However, I maintain that if he were here, he would totally be bad.

Be merciful, Your Modfulness!

Actually voting Ninja Blooper.

#466

Oh wow, NO ONE has voted yet! What is going on?

#467

Russtifinko wrote:Hahaha. Not! I saw him lurking, and saw that he hadn't been posting at usual Epi levels. He is the Mod, though, and thus unlynchable. However, I maintain that if he were here, he would totally be bad.

That's good to know.

#468

I'm gonna forget to vote if I don't do it now, and I certainly don't want to be modkilled

I've read some arguments but I feel rather confused by most of them at the moment. (I blame it on vacation brain.) The one that does stand out to me is the case on Vomps. Not terribly strong, but what is on what is really a "Day 2" kind of vote? I've ignored Vomps before, and he's been good. I've ignored Vomps before, and he's been bad. Yeah, he has his moments of lucidity, but he has been a bit more on point with this game than I've noticed in others (especially those he turned out to be good), and it seems others have noticed this, too. I'm not gung-ho about the choice, but I feel stronger about voting him than anyone else at the moment.

#469

I'm going to follow llama's Kyle vote. I am not 100 percent here, but I've been reading all the stuff going on with him and it's been the part of the discussion this cycle I have the most unsure feelings about.

I'm about to pass out now and I know I'm not going to be up at stoopid o'clock in the am to vote.

so vote kyle

#470

Alright, I've gotta vote before bed. Seems like the vote is at a 3-way tie right now, and I have no intention of breaking it. So randomizing and getting Boogs.

#471

thellama73 wrote:Maybe it's the fact that I'm operating no 3 hours sleep, but the paranoid little voice inside me is starting to wonder whether Timmer is playing the greatest baddie game of all time.

This is certainly possible, and I've been trying to read timmer carefully because I've been nervous of how much I've been trusting him.

S~V~S wrote:

Sorry I misspelled something, I will be more careful in future.

Someone had said they thought the lynch ended tonight? I did too.

That came off douchier than I intended; I apologize <3

timmer wrote:I have a question for peeps: we had considerable votes on bulls, nevinera and vompatti, along with fewer votes on various others. To the people who voted on those bandwagons, how do you feel about your vote now? Are you voting the same? Why yes or no?

I feel okay voting bulls. He is pinging me and I am voting based on who I am suspicious of. I do not feel guilty for it. I have, historically, been wrong about Bullz, but it's my biggest thing so far. However...

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Heck, I'm not even sure about Bullz. I was all gung-ho to vote for him again today, but his defenses are starting to come off as more sincere to me.

#472

nijuukyugou wrote:I'm gonna forget to vote if I don't do it now, and I certainly don't want to be modkilled I've read some arguments but I feel rather confused by most of them at the moment. (I blame it on vacation brain.) The one that does stand out to me is the case on Vomps. Not terribly strong, but what is on what is really a "Day 2" kind of vote? I've ignored Vomps before, and he's been good. I've ignored Vomps before, and he's been bad. Yeah, he has his moments of lucidity, but he has been a bit more on point with this game than I've noticed in others (especially those he turned out to be good), and it seems others have noticed this, too. I'm not gung-ho about the choice, but I feel stronger about voting him than anyone else at the moment.

I am anti-lynching Vomps right now. I probably would've thought the same way before the Hobbit. I know you all don't know it yet, because I have been awful about posting it, but Vomps was one of the most engaged players in that game. He got more riddles right than anyone while he was alive, and was civ, but when he was lynched people accused him of not trying/participating.

My point here is that he can be very engaged and still be civ, maybe even more so than as a baddie. However, I don't blame you for thinking this way, since I had access to related info that you didn't.

I also don't love the idea of killing Vomps because he's on point, as you said. As long as I've been on the site, people have been bemoaning Vomps' perceived disinterest. I think punishing him for trying will only force him to post very little and act wacky all the time, which is ultimately counterproductive.

I urge others not to vote Vomps.

#473

Dom wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Heck, I'm not even sure about Bullz. I was all gung-ho to vote for him again today, but his defenses are starting to come off as more sincere to me.

Quoted for truth.

#474

Haha he's even get Tyler in his profile picture.

#475

#476

Russtifinko wrote:
I also don't love the idea of killing Vomps because he's on point, as you said. As long as I've been on the site, people have been bemoaning Vomps' perceived disinterest. I think punishing him for trying will only force him to post very little and act wacky all the time, which is ultimately counterproductive.

I urge others not to vote Vomps.

I'm personally anti-lynching Vomps as well. Vote for him if you think he is a recruit, or if you think he is Tyler and don't buy the theory that Tyler must be in the fight club to recruit someone. But if neither of those is true, Vomps didn't encounter DH until Day 4 which by mafia logic should be too late to have recruited him. I just can't see him being Tyler.

#477

Okay, hold the damn phone.

So yesterday, near the end of the lynch, you come in and say this:

nijuukyugou wrote:Thank goodness I still had this page open; I nearly forgot the vote! I read this thread earlier, but didn't get terribly strong feelings. However, in the past couple of games I've played, inactive people have often turned out to be bad. Both Nevinera and johns2jj have been so, and I'm not really feeling Bullz as being bad. The flyby vote on Nevinera by johns2jj pinged me when I first read the thread, so I'm gonna go with him. Not a strong feeling, but I must vote so I don't suffer Sock's consequences.

The poll, when you write this, has four people with 4-5 votes. Bullz, johns, nevinera and vompatti. You clearly have read the thread, you say as much in your post. Yours is the VERY LAST VOTE to come in. You vote for johns, the vote that ultimately killed him. You say NOTHING about Vompatti, despite him being in the LEAD with 5 votes at the time of your vote, meaning it was kind of a big deal.

And then here we are today.

You say this:

nijuukyugou wrote:I'm gonna forget to vote if I don't do it now, and I certainly don't want to be modkilled I've read some arguments but I feel rather confused by most of them at the moment. (I blame it on vacation brain.) The one that does stand out to me is the case on Vomps. Not terribly strong, but what is on what is really a "Day 2" kind of vote? I've ignored Vomps before, and he's been good. I've ignored Vomps before, and he's been bad. Yeah, he has his moments of lucidity, but he has been a bit more on point with this game than I've noticed in others (especially those he turned out to be good), and it seems others have noticed this, too. I'm not gung-ho about the choice, but I feel stronger about voting him than anyone else at the moment.

So suddenly, you are confused about most of the cases, even though the case against bullz and nevinera HAVEN'T CHANGED AT ALL. But suddenly, the case against Vomps stands out to you? The case against Vomps, which was largely brought up by me? Because here's the deal, man. I brought up the case against Vompatti YESTERDAY (in game terms), but TODAY I actually said I thought I was wrong. in fact, I don't believe has actually laid out a case against Vomps today, its just been a few people who referenced yesterday, basically.

So how do you go from commenting on everyone but Vompatti yesterday and casting the final, damaging vote in the lynchto suddenly being confused by all of the cases, but hey the one against Vompatti seems best?

I think there is a solid chance that you tried to save one of bullz or nevinera yesterday. I think you're either a recruit or Tyler. I do NOT think you were trying to save a cop, for the record, because INH voted near the end and placed his vote on a third party, which tells me none of his cop buddies were in trouble at all yesterday. So if you were coming to someone's help, they were bad, and so are you.

voting nijuu

#478

hello

i want to apologize for my low amount of participation lately, my sister's in town and that means going from my usual schedule of not having a schedule i'm instead doing tons of things nonstop with very little free time. :0 my participation is going to be especially low during the next five days but after that i'll be massively available and really mega thoughtful and all that.

thellama73 wrote:Super busy today and not much time, but I want to make sure I don't miss the vote.

I'm actually going wildcard and voting for Kyle. He is on unfurl's list and I found his eagerness to participate in the last fight a little unsettling. Just a gut ping.

i only wanna fight because i'm weak and i'm worried that fight skill may somehow end up being important in the endgame. i was worried about dying in a fight early on but now i've realized that the risk of dying early may be a fair trade-off for possibly not getting screwed in the endgame if i somehow end up living that long. Does that make sense?

bea wrote:I'm going to follow llama's Kyle vote. I am not 100 percent here, but I've been reading all the stuff going on with him and it's been the part of the discussion this cycle I have the most unsure feelings about.

I'm about to pass out now and I know I'm not going to be up at stoopid o'clock in the am to vote.

so vote kyle

maybe you will someday feel less unsure about me? there's nothing really going on with me, I voted somewhat lazily for bullz, based on vibes which were enhanced by other people's thoughts, which basically describes like 60% of my thought process in almost every game i play recently until things get narrowed down. He felt that I was being disingenuous about it because i voted for him without having earlier said words about a vague feeling i had about him back before lynch polls existed and there was no purpose in bringing up suspicions.

in the meantime i appear to be currently a part of a three-way tie and I would prefer not to die yet so.... I'm gonna save my vote to prevent that from happening. :0 I should be awake before it closes since i have a dentist appointment tomorrow morning. goodnight friends

#479

It's late and I'm tired and I randomized Russti. I'll probably focus more later

#480

I find it ridiculous that I'm still being voted. There isn't even really a proper case against me and I've shown that already.

Dom wrote: I feel okay voting bulls. He is pinging me and I am voting based on who I am suspicious of. I do not feel guilty for it. I have, historically, been wrong about Bullz, but it's my biggest thing so far. However...

One day you will learn. Rather than saying 'historically I've been wrong' perhaps you should say 'of all the times I suspected Bullz and hounded him relentlessly over the smallest things I was right exactly once and even that was only technically because I thought he was on the other baddie team'. You've literally never been right about me but each time we play together you do the exact same thing expecting to finally be right. Have you ever played Far Cry 3? Have I ever told you the definition of insanity?

To be fair, you aren't actually hounding me here but I just wanted to nip it in the bud because it gets tiring.

Dom wrote:
birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Heck, I'm not even sure about Bullz. I was all gung-ho to vote for him again today, but his defenses are starting to come off as more sincere to me.

So because someone doesn't suspect me (shocking when you consider the bulletproof case against me, I know) they're automatically suspicious?

Kylemii wrote: maybe you will someday feel less unsure about me? there's nothing really going on with me, I voted somewhat lazily for bullz, based on vibes which were enhanced by other people's thoughts, which basically describes like 60% of my thought process in almost every game i play recently until things get narrowed down. He felt that I was being disingenuous about it because i voted for him without having earlier said words about a vague feeling i had about him back before lynch polls existed and there was no purpose in bringing up suspicions.

This isn't why I thought your vote was off. First, I thought you were being disingenuous because you made a completely unverifiable claim and expected it to be believed. Second, you tried to excuse your vote just in case I was a civ by saying I could just replace back in. Again, that's no excuse for lynching a civ. If you'd said it after the fact it'd still be a bad excuse for your vote.

#481

Not sure who I am voting for, but i have 20 mins to figure it out.

#482

Boomslang wrote:
Sorsha wrote:
Long Con wrote: What was the case on Vompatti again? Keterman seems to think that he would be automatically receiving votes because he came so close to lynch last time, but was there a solid case against him, or did votes just kind of fall his way in a lazy semi-bandwagon?
This was the original post against vomps:
timmer wrote:Okay, continuing my read of Penns Grove.

So Vompatti, who has been his normal obscure self, continues to be an interesting person here.

Day 3, DH shows up, throws his shit around and makes sure everyone knows he wants to fight. But then he says:

"Vomps wants to fight, so I will let him do that."

Only there is no post AT ALL where Vompatti said he wanted to fight. None. Please read Penns Grove and tell me where I'm wrong.

Also, Alex mentioned that the puzzle in his siggie hadn't yet been solved and said people could suggest a letter.

Vompatti said: "I request the letter 'D'."

That's VERY unlike Vompatti to be so suddenly on-topic and direct.

I think I just talked myself into thinking Vompatti is bad.
I'm not going to go find all the other people who voted for him too but if you go back to this post you can scan through and find them.

I think I am going to be voting for vomps today, as I did yesterday. I think the theories going around are nice and everything but this point about vomps is a good one and I'd rather vote for someone based on actual thread behavior than on a theory that may or may not be correct.
Interesting points both, especially the first. Regarding the second point I get the feeling that Vomps being random encompasses random moments of lucidity... On the other hand, I can see DH trying to throw Vomps, with all of his known behavior, under the bus if he thought suspicion was coming his way.

tl;dr

I've voted for myself in every fight poll. Does that not imply I want to fight?

#483

Voted timmer for trying to set me up.

#484

I see we have 3 people who were with DH on Day one (Bulls, Kyle) and two (Blooper) tied.

Blooper was in Wilmington Day One as well as Day Two. Not sure how often Tyler could recruit, but tbh, if she were Tyler I would expect her to recruit llama more so than DH over those 2 days. I am just not "feeling" her as Tyler. I think Bullz sounds sincere, and I think Kyle does not, which is how I always feel about kyle...when he's a civ

I will vote via phone closer to the deadline. I reread wilmington & New Castle fairly exhaustively, I really think that DH was in one of those places when recruiited (I still think maybe/probably Day One in New Castle, but I am not married to that). My AM at work will consist of mostly mindless repetitive tasks, so i will have time to think on it.

#485

Ooo, I missed the two votes for Vomps. I did not totally get why he took votes the other day either.

#486

Bullzeye wrote:I find it ridiculous that I'm still being voted. There isn't even really a proper case against me and I've shown that already.

Dom wrote: I feel okay voting bulls. He is pinging me and I am voting based on who I am suspicious of. I do not feel guilty for it. I have, historically, been wrong about Bullz, but it's my biggest thing so far. However...
One day you will learn. Rather than saying 'historically I've been wrong' perhaps you should say 'of all the times I suspected Bullz and hounded him relentlessly over the smallest things I was right exactly once and even that was only technically because I thought he was on the other baddie team'. You've literally never been right about me but each time we play together you do the exact same thing expecting to finally be right. Have you ever played Far Cry 3? Have I ever told you the definition of insanity?

To be fair, you aren't actually hounding me here but I just wanted to nip it in the bud because it gets tiring.

Dom wrote:
birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Heck, I'm not even sure about Bullz. I was all gung-ho to vote for him again today, but his defenses are starting to come off as more sincere to me.

So because someone doesn't suspect me (shocking when you consider the bulletproof case against me, I know) they're automatically suspicious?

Bullz, I'm not hounding you because I'm not completely convinced you are bad-- but you are my biggest suspicion. I'm sorry you seem to be frustrated with this, but I'm not going to abstain from voting simply because I've been wrong before.
My suspicion of BWT has nothing really to do with YOU. It's his post. It's the fact that all of a sudden you're sounding sincere to him-- but you sound no different than before.

#487

Dom wrote: Bullz, I'm not hounding you because I'm not completely convinced you are bad-- but you are my biggest suspicion. I'm sorry you seem to be frustrated with this, but I'm not going to abstain from voting simply because I've been wrong before.
My suspicion of BWT has nothing really to do with YOU. It's his post. It's the fact that all of a sudden you're sounding sincere to him-- but you sound no different than before.

I'm not frustrated with you, I'm just annoyed that people are ignoring the fact there's no real reason to suspect me. People brought up this connection to DH that I proved didn't actually exist yet to some that doesn't seem to matter. I do think though that you need to consider your stance on me. Every time you suspect me it always seems to be brought on by some small throwaway remark that you don't like, maybe the reason you always suspect me is just that you don't understand the way I play.

#488

Sorry everyone. I've been in airports all day yesterday and after a delayed flight and missed flight, I was put in a hotel in Seattle until I catch another flight this morning. Also why doesn't Detroit airport have free wifi?

Anyway, I self-voted because I won't have time to catch up today, and I don't want to miss another one.

#489

I have three thoughts this morning about my vote. First, I do not understand the Vomps votes so I might vote for someone who voted for him. Second, I may vote someone who was with DH on day 1. And third, I"m becoming increasingly concerned about LC. He has been extra quiet this whole game and I'm not used to seeing him quiet. It's not just that he's quiet, it's that he's quiet in comparison to his usual self.

I'm worried about people not voting because at this point most people are at work or school and may not get an opportunity.

#490

Keterman wrote:Haha he's even get Tyler in his profile picture.

That would be such a ballsy move if he actually was Tyler.

#491

timmer wrote:Okay, hold the damn phone.

So yesterday, near the end of the lynch, you come in and say this:

nijuukyugou wrote:Thank goodness I still had this page open; I nearly forgot the vote! I read this thread earlier, but didn't get terribly strong feelings. However, in the past couple of games I've played, inactive people have often turned out to be bad. Both Nevinera and johns2jj have been so, and I'm not really feeling Bullz as being bad. The flyby vote on Nevinera by johns2jj pinged me when I first read the thread, so I'm gonna go with him. Not a strong feeling, but I must vote so I don't suffer Sock's consequences.
The poll, when you write this, has four people with 4-5 votes. Bullz, johns, nevinera and vompatti. You clearly have read the thread, you say as much in your post. Yours is the VERY LAST VOTE to come in. You vote for johns, the vote that ultimately killed him. You say NOTHING about Vompatti, despite him being in the LEAD with 5 votes at the time of your vote, meaning it was kind of a big deal.

And then here we are today.

You say this:

nijuukyugou wrote:I'm gonna forget to vote if I don't do it now, and I certainly don't want to be modkilled I've read some arguments but I feel rather confused by most of them at the moment. (I blame it on vacation brain.) The one that does stand out to me is the case on Vomps. Not terribly strong, but what is on what is really a "Day 2" kind of vote? I've ignored Vomps before, and he's been good. I've ignored Vomps before, and he's been bad. Yeah, he has his moments of lucidity, but he has been a bit more on point with this game than I've noticed in others (especially those he turned out to be good), and it seems others have noticed this, too. I'm not gung-ho about the choice, but I feel stronger about voting him than anyone else at the moment.
So suddenly, you are confused about most of the cases, even though the case against bullz and nevinera HAVEN'T CHANGED AT ALL. But suddenly, the case against Vomps stands out to you? The case against Vomps, which was largely brought up by me? Because here's the deal, man. I brought up the case against Vompatti YESTERDAY (in game terms), but TODAY I actually said I thought I was wrong. in fact, I don't believe has actually laid out a case against Vomps today, its just been a few people who referenced yesterday, basically.

So how do you go from commenting on everyone but Vompatti yesterday and casting the final, damaging vote in the lynchto suddenly being confused by all of the cases, but hey the one against Vompatti seems best?

I think there is a solid chance that you tried to save one of bullz or nevinera yesterday. I think you're either a recruit or Tyler. I do NOT think you were trying to save a cop, for the record, because INH voted near the end and placed his vote on a third party, which tells me none of his cop buddies were in trouble at all yesterday. So if you were coming to someone's help, they were bad, and so are you.

voting nijuu

It's is an interesting case on Blooper, but my one thought is why be the tie vote on JJ in the previous lynch? If Blooper is a recruit or a civ then it didnt matter who she voted for between Vomps and JJ if she is now willing to vote Vomps. She came in as the last voter, but that is actually irrelevant in point of fact. Her back and forth comments about being caught up et another a separate point. Since I am feeling a bit better about Vomps based his recent posts I do wonder. blooper could be a recruit but why wait till the last minute like that unless someone else was threatened. Wasn't it a 4 way tie previously? Makes me wonder if its possible that one of the 4 was a recruit that needed protecting. That only works if Blooper is a recruit like you suspect. I will have to look back.

#492

Ok, I may have talked myself into possibly voting Blooper. Of the 4 people who were tied, Nevinera, JJ, Bullz, and Vomps, both Vomps and JJ voted for Nevinera as well as llama and Elo. We know JJ was civ, I am starting to suspect Vomps is too, I am feeling good about Llama, and have no feelings on Elo as bad or civ.

I broke the tie voting for Vomps then Blooper voted for JJ Tieing the lynch again which if Vomps were a teamie seems suspicious. However, it may have been to ensure there were several front runners last minute.

#493

Bullzeye wrote:I find it ridiculous that I'm still being voted. There isn't even really a proper case against me and I've shown that already.

Dom wrote: I feel okay voting bulls. He is pinging me and I am voting based on who I am suspicious of. I do not feel guilty for it. I have, historically, been wrong about Bullz, but it's my biggest thing so far. However...
One day you will learn. Rather than saying 'historically I've been wrong' perhaps you should say 'of all the times I suspected Bullz and hounded him relentlessly over the smallest things I was right exactly once and even that was only technically because I thought he was on the other baddie team'. You've literally never been right about me but each time we play together you do the exact same thing expecting to finally be right. Have you ever played Far Cry 3? Have I ever told you the definition of insanity?

To be fair, you aren't actually hounding me here but I just wanted to nip it in the bud because it gets tiring.

Dom wrote:
birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Heck, I'm not even sure about Bullz. I was all gung-ho to vote for him again today, but his defenses are starting to come off as more sincere to me.

So because someone doesn't suspect me (shocking when you consider the bulletproof case against me, I know) they're automatically suspicious?

Kylemii wrote: maybe you will someday feel less unsure about me? there's nothing really going on with me, I voted somewhat lazily for bullz, based on vibes which were enhanced by other people's thoughts, which basically describes like 60% of my thought process in almost every game i play recently until things get narrowed down. He felt that I was being disingenuous about it because i voted for him without having earlier said words about a vague feeling i had about him back before lynch polls existed and there was no purpose in bringing up suspicions.
This isn't why I thought your vote was off. First, I thought you were being disingenuous because you made a completely unverifiable claim and expected it to be believed. Second, you tried to excuse your vote just in case I was a civ by saying I could just replace back in. Again, that's no excuse for lynching a civ. If you'd said it after the fact it'd still be a bad excuse for your vote.

Potato potato :0 you've just repeated the same events that I listed with your own spin on it. I don't expect to be believed. I don't care if I'm believed why would that be important? If I wanted to just get through that vote without attracting attention or whatever I would have just random voted. I voted on a whim out of necessity given time restraints and played with what my only real twitch at the time was. Yes that claim is unverifiable but that doesn't translate to bad. I think baddies put a lot more effort into making sense than civvies do.

And again, that line about at least if we're wrong then he can be rezzed into that other person's body was like.... barely even about you.

it was more an argument against lynching someone just so the host wouldn't need to replace them when that person was most likely not recruited at any point.

#494

Kylemii wrote: Potato potato :0 you've just repeated the same events that I listed with your own spin on it. I don't expect to be believed. I don't care if I'm believed why would that be important? If I wanted to just get through that vote without attracting attention or whatever I would have just random voted. I voted on a whim out of necessity given time restraints and played with what my only real twitch at the time was. Yes that claim is unverifiable but that doesn't translate to bad. I think baddies put a lot more effort into making sense than civvies do.

What I mean is it basically looks like you were jumping on saying "oh yeah I've always thought he was bad I just never mentioned it before but I totally agree so I'm gonna vote there as well". It looks to me like you were trying to be blendy.

Kylemii wrote:And again, that line about at least if we're wrong then he can be rezzed into that other person's body was like.... barely even about you. it was more an argument against lynching someone just so the host wouldn't need to replace them when that person was most likely not recruited at any point.

Really?

Kylemii wrote:i'm going to a party that won't be over until the poll end time, so i need to vote now. i'm going with bullz.

worst case scenario, if he's an unrecruited civ then he can just replace back in for nevi.

Doesn't seem that way. It looks to me like an argument that it's okay to lynch civs because they can just replace back in. Every lynched civ is one less person Tyler needs dead. So in my opinion it does matter if we lynch civs.

I'm gonna vote Kyle. Partly just in hope of saving myself and partly because his day one vote and excuses are quite shady in my opinion. It's not a lot to go on and if we weren't tied I might've voted someone else instead but there you go.

#495

I randomized! Among those who already had votes! Voted ninjuuuuu! Hooray!

#496

imo, the case against Blooper is more persuasive than the other cases I've seen and she fits one of my criteria - she voted for Vomps and though she wasnt with DH day 1 she was on Day 2 and i dont rule out the possibility thats when he was recruited (night 2).

I hope my mentioning LC and my being unnerved will bring him out of the background and into some of the discussions or at least get him to voice opinions about others.

vote blooper

#497

I get why you are voting Kyle Bullz, but why did Bea and llama as well? It seems like not a lot of suspicion there. Did they also vote based on his vote for you Bullz? I need to check their posts.

As for the suspicions on Bullz I always have a hard time reading him. His frustration is absolutely genuine I think as either a civvie or a baddie, especially as we have all experienced when the suspicion doesn't seem warranted. I think he has definitely addressed the issue of the DH possible connection, but what I am more curious about is how Tyler might decide to recruit. We don't know if he has restrictions but if not would he recruit a totally unconnected group? Would he recruit those traveling together? Too many questions to decide now, but since it seems project mayhem is more like the llamas super team in American Gods or other recruitment based games I think it's worth talking about recruitment styles as well.

#498

Canucklehead wrote:I randomized! Among those who already had votes! Voted ninjuuuuu! Hooray!

Randomizing this far in the game? Interesting that it was one of the people to create a tie as well. I will definitely be interested in how the results of this lynch turn out.

Juliets - I am finding myself nodding in agreement with your postings this game. Glad to have you here.

#499

Well that isn't the case.

Yes really, bullz. Maybe your judgement is being clouded by the fact that you were involved in the vote. Are you going to argue that it would have made sense to lynch whatever that other player was because you already said you agreed with me on that point. I'm fairly certain that I mentioned that your lynch opponent wasn't likely to be bad before that post.

#500

You were the first to vote for me. I didn't have a lynch opponent. It wouldn't have made sense to lynch Nev, no, but I don't think it makes sense to lynch anyone on the logic that they can just replace back in. You're still going to be responsible for the death of a civ even if they can come back in someone else's role that's still one civ down.

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

2014 Sockys
2015 Sockys
Miscellaneous