Cerberus Tribe - Day 9

[Marmot]

At this point I do not know what to do or how to react. We're two weeks into Day 1.

I think we're still in RVS.

[Golden]

@Hosts

The thread subject still shows Night 4.

What am I, a pigeon?

Now that thread subject shows Day 5. What gives?

It turns out I am a pigeon.

[Jackofhearts2005]

Horay! Vote INHeggplant

Why INH and not niju or Scotty? Or yourself. Sacrifice yourself. It's for the greater good.

I townread all three of those players but not INH.

Me and Blooper were killed by the mafia. Iirc, Scotty was, too. Expensive wifom. I wouldn’t buy it. INH was killed by someone else.

[Jackofhearts2005]

At this point I do not know what to do or how to react. We're two weeks into Day 1.

We lynch some people twice.

Currently, enemy nks are free (provided mafia isn’t killing themselves).

Let’s end that.

I don't understand this statement. What do you mean that nks are free?

Normally, mafia gets a nightkill and town eliminates a suspect (who is or isn’t guilty).

As long as we don’t actually lynch a player all the way dead and learn an alignment, we are not trading lynches for nightkills. We are giving away free nightkills.

That doesn’t mean there are only a few players we can lynch today. We could vote out anyone but if they have two lives now, we should then vote them out again tomorrow.

[Jackofhearts2005]

Cause it eliminates a player, revealing actual alignment.

Cause he seemingly wasn’t killed by the mafia.

Cause I still think his reason for almost getting me lynched Day 1 was dishonest. I backed off cause he was cursed but that’s not really a good reason.

So, 1/3 random bloodlust, 1/3 suspicion of me dying weirdly (?), and 1/3 resentment over me voting for him when he didn't show up on Day 1 of the Game of friggin' Champions?


Yeah, this is BS.

You’re not helping yourself.

As Marmot said, this is still basically RVS. I don’t have to have airtight reads. You don’t like it? Do something.

[Jackofhearts2005]

To be clear, I don’t suspect INH FOR dying funny. It just makes him lynchabke for real.

If you take my suspects, he’s the only one that’s dead lynchabke today.

If you take the players that are dead lynchabke today, he’s my only suspect.

[Jackofhearts2005]

Also “resentment” no. I was totally missing on day one. Blooper and Scotty voted for me. I don’t resent them either.

It’s the perceived opportunism.

[Jackofhearts2005]

I would love to know why the Pikachus got cold feet on Quin and Speedchuck. [mention]Sloonei[/mention]

[Sloonei]

I would love to know why the Pikachus got cold feet on Quin and Speedchuck. Sloonei

The Day 1 lynch appeared to be an accident. They were trying to keep the tally close to test the haiku protection thing, or something like that, and some last-minute confusion pushed votes onto Quin. I don't know what happened with speedchuck, but he seemed to be widely town-read when I was there.

I've seen no one else propose your strategy. I've been waiting for the merger to start killing people fo real.

[Scotty]

Cool cool. I’m not dead, so thanks for not killing me.

We need a lynch today. Preferably someone that looks scummy.

The thing about jack’s advice is based on an assumption that alignments are randomized among all roles no matter the design. I’m not so sure. There are a total of 46 (or 45 with DDL’s missed reveal) which does add credence to the idea that there might be a possibiliry for all roles for each faction. But I trust that Golden’s balanced the game enough that it wouldn’t be such a large variance.

But a role like speedchuck’s as a doctor aligns much more toward civilian vs mafia. It would make no sense for it to be indie. I don’t think i would lynch someone like Speedchuck again if I could help it.

I do agree with Jack however that if the people that have been killed so far on this tribe, his wasn’t via NK which keeps him in grayer territory than all fifty shades available.
I’ve said it before but his 1st role was a Nurse-lite. How does that fit into the mafia archetype?

[Scotty]

I also still think jack is town despite my frustration with him yesterday.

[Sloonei]

INH's first role seems civilian-oriented, but there's also no guarantee a player keeps their previous alinment upon death. That is a bigger hangup to me than whether a revealed role is civilian or not.

[Scotty]

INH's first role seems civilian-oriented, but there's also no guarantee a player keeps their previous alinment upon death. That is a bigger hangup to me than whether a revealed role is civilian or not.

Sure. There’s that theory that civs could flip to mafia or indie in their 2nd role, but I am most interested in finding a role on an initial reveal that makes me go “huh. That doesn’t look town.”

So would you be down to lynching INH then today, Sloonei?

[Scotty]

Meh. I GTH read INH as bad before he died, and even after, meh. I just want a lynch today. And he’s not the worst pick I guess.

vote INH aubergine

[Sloonei]

INH's first role seems civilian-oriented, but there's also no guarantee a player keeps their previous alinment upon death. That is a bigger hangup to me than whether a revealed role is civilian or not.

Sure. There’s that theory that civs could flip to mafia or indie in their 2nd role, but I am most interested in finding a role on an initial reveal that makes me go “huh. That doesn’t look town.”

So would you be down to lynching INH then today, Sloonei?

I'm not sure. I'm not inclined to think that his first role was anti-town, and I don't see why his second incarnation must be evil

[Sloonei]

This is so full of switcheroo that it almost becomes a WIFOM post.

I don't know what this means.

I meant that it's such a Switcheroo that it can't possibly be that a baddie would do that. But, then would they because everyone would think they wouldn't...

In reading LoRab's response to me from last night, I realized that these comments are about me. I had interpreted them as being about sig. I really wasn't sure what she was getting at because I am a big dope. I've gathered at long last that she's saying I reversed my opinion of sig, I think, and that that is something she viewed as suspicious. This makes much more sense than what I was trying to piece together of LoRab's Day 1 vote and subsequent posts. I've been struggling to come up with suspects, so I feel like I've been trying to read LoRab as bad because in my head it just has to be her. But as I'm looking at her posts I don't really think I can make a convincing case right now.

I don't have a suspect right now. It's Day 5 and I have no confidence in any vote that I might cast. That means I can go anywhere.

Marmot's a player I'd be interested in looking at. At certain points he's been solidly involved in driving the discussion, but that hasn't really been a consistent position of his, and sometimes he just appears to be coasting. I could see him as a baddie that's trying to stay just a little bit ahead of things, but not so much that he risks sticking his neck out. Maybe I'll vote for him. Yeah, let's vote for Marmot.
[aubergine]Marmot[/aubergine]

[Sloonei]

This is so full of switcheroo that it almost becomes a WIFOM post.

I don't know what this means.

I meant that it's such a Switcheroo that it can't possibly be that a baddie would do that. But, then would they because everyone would think they wouldn't...

In reading LoRab's response to me from last night, I realized that these comments are about me. I had interpreted them as being about sig. I really wasn't sure what she was getting at because I am a big dope. I've gathered at long last that she's saying I reversed my opinion of sig, I think, and that that is something she viewed as suspicious. This makes much more sense than what I was trying to piece together of LoRab's Day 1 vote and subsequent posts. I've been struggling to come up with suspects, so I feel like I've been trying to read LoRab as bad because in my head it just has to be her. But as I'm looking at her posts I don't really think I can make a convincing case right now.

I don't have a suspect right now. It's Day 5 and I have no confidence in any vote that I might cast. That means I can go anywhere.

Marmot's a player I'd be interested in looking at. At certain points he's been solidly involved in driving the discussion, but that hasn't really been a consistent position of his, and sometimes he just appears to be coasting. I could see him as a baddie that's trying to stay just a little bit ahead of things, but not so much that he risks sticking his neck out. Maybe I'll vote for him. Yeah, let's vote for Marmot.
[aubergine]Marmot[/aubergine]

[Kylemii]

Boomslang who is basically Sigging vs Wilgy who is basically Wilgying.

Is that the arguments I’m looking at?

what is sigging?

[LoRab]

This is so full of switcheroo that it almost becomes a WIFOM post.

I don't know what this means.

I meant that it's such a Switcheroo that it can't possibly be that a baddie would do that. But, then would they because everyone would think they wouldn't...

In reading LoRab's response to me from last night, I realized that these comments are about me. I had interpreted them as being about sig. I really wasn't sure what she was getting at because I am a big dope. I've gathered at long last that she's saying I reversed my opinion of sig, I think, and that that is something she viewed as suspicious. This makes much more sense than what I was trying to piece together of LoRab's Day 1 vote and subsequent posts. I've been struggling to come up with suspects, so I feel like I've been trying to read LoRab as bad because in my head it just has to be her. But as I'm looking at her posts I don't really think I can make a convincing case right now.

I don't have a suspect right now. It's Day 5 and I have no confidence in any vote that I might cast. That means I can go anywhere.

Marmot's a player I'd be interested in looking at. At certain points he's been solidly involved in driving the discussion, but that hasn't really been a consistent position of his, and sometimes he just appears to be coasting. I could see him as a baddie that's trying to stay just a little bit ahead of things, but not so much that he risks sticking his neck out. Maybe I'll vote for him. Yeah, let's vote for Marmot.
[aubergine]Marmot[/aubergine]

Sorry for the confusion. I forget that we don't all share mafia language. More specifically, and for future reference, in the mafia culture that I come from switcheroo is the genrally used term for what "traditional" mafia calls OMGUS.

[Boomslang]

Boomslang, who're you voting for today?

Why do you require a read on yourself from nijuu?

As for wanting Blooper's read on me? All in good time, my marmot.
linki: There it is! Much obliged.

I'll still take that reason for wanting a read from Blooper that you promised.

It's pretty simple — I was a prime suspect, and I wanted to see if she would take that opportunity to jump on the wagon. I like that she didn't, both for obvious reasons and for the larger reason that she's choosing to engage with the thread beyond the surface level.

[Boomslang]

At this point I do not know what to do or how to react. We're two weeks into Day 1.

We lynch some people twice.

Currently, enemy nks are free (provided mafia isn’t killing themselves).

Let’s end that.

I don't understand this statement. What do you mean that nks are free?

Normally, mafia gets a nightkill and town eliminates a suspect (who is or isn’t guilty).

As long as we don’t actually lynch a player all the way dead and learn an alignment, we are not trading lynches for nightkills. We are giving away free nightkills.

That doesn’t mean there are only a few players we can lynch today. We could vote out anyone but if they have two lives now, we should then vote them out again tomorrow.

This is faulty reasoning. The mafia have to kill a player twice to make a full elimination — they're in exactly the same boat as town. I don't see how we're "giving away" kills by not lynching someone fully.

[Jackofhearts2005]

I would love to know why the Pikachus got cold feet on Quin and Speedchuck. Sloonei

The Day 1 lynch appeared to be an accident. They were trying to keep the tally close to test the haiku protection thing, or something like that, and some last-minute confusion pushed votes onto Quin. I don't know what happened with speedchuck, but he seemed to be widely town-read when I was there.

I've seen no one else propose your strategy. I've been waiting for the merger to start killing people fo real.

Bob and Tony aren't here.

We've played a game like this. Should have been a route in the town's favor, given the numbers and how early we eliminated the serial killer (Night 1) and that we went into things with basically 3 confirmed townies but we wasted a lot of phases making townies easier to eliminate without learning anything. We lynched a player, then burned a rez on him. Mafia got closer and closer and closer to winning as we shuffled our feet and played with game mechanics (and mislynched Nightblue ). Came down to mylo 3 vs 1.

If I was bad and the town decided to lynch people with two lives only, I'd just shoot 1 life townies. That strategy is asking to merge with only dead townies and no dead scum.

[Jackofhearts2005]

*lynched a player's first life, then burned a rez on him

[Jackofhearts2005]

At this point I do not know what to do or how to react. We're two weeks into Day 1.

We lynch some people twice.

Currently, enemy nks are free (provided mafia isn’t killing themselves).

Let’s end that.

I don't understand this statement. What do you mean that nks are free?

Normally, mafia gets a nightkill and town eliminates a suspect (who is or isn’t guilty).

As long as we don’t actually lynch a player all the way dead and learn an alignment, we are not trading lynches for nightkills. We are giving away free nightkills.

That doesn’t mean there are only a few players we can lynch today. We could vote out anyone but if they have two lives now, we should then vote them out again tomorrow.

This is faulty reasoning. The mafia have to kill a player twice to make a full elimination — they're in exactly the same boat as town. I don't see how we're "giving away" kills by not lynching someone fully.

How are you going to catch scum if you never fully lynch anyone?

You can't. This is basic. I don't know why I'm even getting pushback on this idea.

[Jackofhearts2005]

Cool cool. I’m not dead, so thanks for not killing me.

We need a lynch today. Preferably someone that looks scummy.

The thing about jack’s advice is based on an assumption that alignments are randomized among all roles no matter the design. I’m not so sure. There are a total of 46 (or 45 with DDL’s missed reveal) which does add credence to the idea that there might be a possibiliry for all roles for each faction. But I trust that Golden’s balanced the game enough that it wouldn’t be such a large variance.

But a role like speedchuck’s as a doctor aligns much more toward civilian vs mafia. It would make no sense for it to be indie. I don’t think i would lynch someone like Speedchuck again if I could help it.

I do agree with Jack however that if the people that have been killed so far on this tribe, his wasn’t via NK which keeps him in grayer territory than all fifty shades available.
I’ve said it before but his 1st role was a Nurse-lite. How does that fit into the mafia archetype?

Your first role was pretty anti town. Should we lynch you eh?

Nah.

Maybe it's not 100% randomized but if we lynch people whose first lives are misdirectors, insanifiers, silencers, vote stealers, etc and we refuse to lynch people whose first lives are cops, docs, watchers, etc, I'm certain we will lose. That is WAY too easy.

[Jackofhearts2005]

Boomslang who is basically Sigging vs Wilgy who is basically Wilgying.

Is that the arguments I’m looking at?

what is sigging?

Making little inaccurate comments. Being the only one to hold certain opinions. Being a bit blendy, a bit vaguely scummy feeling.

Basically all the reasons Sig gets mislynched a lot.

[Jackofhearts2005]

I actually don't know why people were voting for Sig.

I know people were voting for Wilgy cause he was being Wilgy.

[insertnamehere]

I’m quickly approaching “Chicka Chicka 1, 2, 3” levels of frustration and pissed off-ness with this game.

So, apparently JoH and Scotty want to lynch me so I can become, I guess, a death patsy, and “gain information.” Unfortunately, the only information they’ll gain is that they lynched a civilian for dumbass reasons.

According to JoH, my Day 1 vote for him was some calculated burst of opportunism, when, as I’ve stated multiple times, I didn’t feel strongly about anyone during that day, and my vote for JoH was to get him to show the fuck up.

It seems like there’s no way to defend myself against people attacking me, not because their logic is ironclad, but because there is no logic. It’s just emotional reads, all of which seem to be hostile towards me. I don’t know if I need to get my chakras fixed or what, in order to get rid of this negative aura people apparently feel when reading my posts.

The natural response would be to baddiehunt, and find a an actual scummeister. But, of course, all of my reads are seemingly diametrically opposed to the (Sloonei, Scotty) braintrust taking the thread by storm, so all I can do there is just put my vote on someone and watch as no one even acknowledges my suspicions or my townreads.

The best case scenario for me is to wait until their flighty methodology of suspicion randomly shifts onto another poor sap.

Basically, screw all y’all, and I hope all you sons of bitches get the plague that I could have inoculated you from had I not been killed.

I’m gonna go stand facing a wall like a schizophrenic homeless person, loudly yelling about my Spacedaisy and Sig suspicions while passerbys all attempt to ignore me the best they can.

[DrWilgy]

I actually don't know why people were voting for Sig.

I know people were voting for Wilgy cause he was being Wilgy.

This brings me to a question. Who was voting me for being me? I'm somewhat unsettled by this.

[Jackofhearts2005]

I’m quickly approaching “Chicka Chicka 1, 2, 3” levels of frustration and pissed off-ness with this game.

So, apparently JoH and Scotty want to lynch me so I can become, I guess, a death patsy, and “gain information.” Unfortunately, the only information they’ll gain is that they lynched a civilian for dumbass reasons.

According to JoH, my Day 1 vote for him was some calculated burst of opportunism, when, as I’ve stated multiple times, I didn’t feel strongly about anyone during that day, and my vote for JoH was to get him to show the fuck up.

It seems like there’s no way to defend myself against people attacking me, not because their logic is ironclad, but because there is no logic. It’s just emotional reads, all of which seem to be hostile towards me. I don’t know if I need to get my chakras fixed or what, in order to get rid of this negative aura people apparently feel when reading my posts.

The natural response would be to baddiehunt, and find a an actual scummeister. But, of course, all of my reads are seemingly diametrically opposed to the (Sloonei, Scotty) braintrust taking the thread by storm, so all I can do there is just put my vote on someone and watch as no one even acknowledges my suspicions or my townreads.

The best case scenario for me is to wait until their flighty methodology of suspicion randomly shifts onto another poor sap.

Basically, screw all y’all, and I hope all you sons of bitches get the plague that I could have inoculated you from had I not been killed.

I’m gonna go stand facing a wall like a schizophrenic homeless person, loudly yelling about my Spacedaisy and Sig suspicions while passerbys all attempt to ignore me the best they can.

Is your frustration because it's Day 5 and we have nothing? Like if you got lynched Day 1, would it be this frustrating? Cause this is essentially still Day 1 as far as town information goes.

Did your vote get me to show up? Looks like what it did was lynch me except Quin had more votes.

[insertnamehere]

Is your frustration because it's Day 5 and we have nothing? Like if you got lynched Day 1, would it be this frustrating? Cause this is essentially still Day 1 as far as town information goes.

Did your vote get me to show up? Looks like what it did was lynch me except Quin had more votes.

Re: The first paragraph. No, I’m frustrated at people deciding that random, emotion-based reads are more valid and more lynch-worthy than other reads.

Deciding that “this is essentially Day 1” is a toxic cop-out. We’ve been posting and interacting for 13 or so days. Disregarding all that content is downright ignorant. Pushing and pushing towards a “kill” for “information” and telling people to fall in line behind you if they know what’s best for the thread, is downright idiotic at best and anti-civ at worst.

I don’t understand the merits of making sure that a civilian is really “dead.” I’d rather take time, gather as much info from interactions as possible, and lynch someone that I’m reasonably sure is bad, instead of pursuing a half-assed case out of empty, pointless bloodlust.

Re: The second paragraph. As you yourself are aware, we have two lives in this game, so I wasn’t killing you “for real.” Plus, me and a lot of members view the game of champions as a big mafia “event,” and not showing up for Day 1 was an annoying enough action for me to not mind having you lose one of your lives as penalty, especially when there was no one else I was reading as bad. It was a shot in the dark directed at someone behaving, IMO, against the spirit of “championship” by not showing up.

Do you have other reasons for suspecting me, or are you just gonna keep harping on this?

[Sloonei]

INH, on the one hand you blast other people's cases as "random and emotion bases", but then on the other you champion your own sig and spacedaisy reads as somehow superior to other cases that exist. What makes those more valid than others?

Also stop blasting emotion-based reads. They work.

[Jackofhearts2005]

Re: The first paragraph. No, I’m frustrated at people deciding that random, emotion-based reads are more valid and more lynch-worthy than other reads.

Point me towards the valid and lynchworthy reads that are being ignored.

Deciding that “this is essentially Day 1” is a toxic cop-out. We’ve been posting and interacting for 13 or so days. Disregarding all that content is downright ignorant.

We don't have a flip.

Pushing and pushing towards a “kill” for “information” and telling people to fall in line behind you if they know what’s best for the thread, is downright idiotic at best and anti-civ at worst.

I don’t understand the merits of making sure that a civilian is really “dead.”

You only get flips if you make sure a player is really dead.

I’d rather take time, gather as much info from interactions as possible, and lynch someone that I’m reasonably sure is bad, instead of pursuing a half-assed case out of empty, pointless bloodlust.

So do it. What's stopping you?

Re: The second paragraph. As you yourself are aware, we have two lives in this game, so I wasn’t killing you “for real.” Plus, me and a lot of members view the game of champions as a big mafia “event,” and not showing up for Day 1 was an annoying enough action for me to not mind having you lose one of your lives as penalty, especially when there was no one else I was reading as bad. It was a shot in the dark directed at someone behaving, IMO, against the spirit of “championship” by not showing up.

Disregarding one of two lives any given townie has is silly. When I played this style before and the town won at 3 vs 1, 2 of the 3 townies had lost a life. If we had lynched one of their lives earlier as a penalty (and given the mafia an extra kill by doing so), that would have caused a town loss. This practice is antitown. If you're going to lynch me, lynch me. Get a flip. Learn something. Don't give me a slap on the wrist that serves to do nothing but give the mafia a free kill and make me easier to eliminate later, when you might have figured out I'm town and have room to regret it. Why are you assigning penalties instead of scumhunting?

Do you have other reasons for suspecting me, or are you just gonna keep harping on this?

Your constant weasel wording and misrepresentations, as follows:

people deciding that random, emotion-based reads are more valid

I don’t understand the merits of making sure that a civilian is really “dead.”

pursuing a half-assed case out of empty, pointless bloodlust.

I don't think you really think I'm saying or doing any of those things, particularly the second quote.

[Jackofhearts2005]

It's not even an emotion based read. I'm very chill. I don't remember the last time I took something in a mafia game personal. I get annoyed from time to time (usually at people on my own team) but not mad.

[Sloonei]

Anyone wanna talk about marmot?

[Jackofhearts2005]

Anyone wanna talk about marmot?

Bad feelings about him. Gut read. I'd maybe lynch him over INH. Maybe Sig, too, if the argument against him wasn't purely Sig being Sig related.

[Sloonei]

Anyone wanna talk about marmot?

Bad feelings about him. Gut read. I'd maybe lynch him over INH. Maybe Sig, too, if the argument against him wasn't purely Sig being Sig related.

Where do these bad feelings come from? And I don't understand your position on sig. You'd be willing to lynch him if there was an entirely different case on him? So you don't suspect him, but you could?

[Jackofhearts2005]

Anyone wanna talk about marmot?

Bad feelings about him. Gut read. I'd maybe lynch him over INH. Maybe Sig, too, if the argument against him wasn't purely Sig being Sig related.

Where do these bad feelings come from? And I don't understand your position on sig. You'd be willing to lynch him if there was an entirely different case on him? So you don't suspect him, but you could?

Idk. I should probably ISO him. I remember reading some stuff yesterday and thinking Marmot could be bad.

I don't have any reason to suspect Sig is town. (Same goes for Wilgy.) If there is a real case on Sig, I'll listen. If we're just lynching Sig for being himself yet again, I'll pass. So what's the case on Sig?

[Spacedaisy]

I just did an ISO on Marmot and for once I think I agree with Sloonei. Marmot is talking but not taking any real solid consistent stance. He casts votes with little or no explanation, asks questions of people and never seems to really go anywhere with moves that he tries to cast as being for some purpose or gambit or something. I am unimpressed with Marmot. And since INH's first death I'm a lot less inclined to think he is bad so I don't like the train on him currently.

[Spacedaisy]

I'll cast an aubergine MARMOT VOTE

[Jackofhearts2005]

I just did an ISO on Marmot and for once I think I agree with Sloonei. Marmot is talking but not taking any real solid consistent stance. He casts votes with little or no explanation, asks questions of people and never seems to really go anywhere with moves that he tries to cast as being for some purpose or gambit or something. I am unimpressed with Marmot. And since INH's first death I'm a lot less inclined to think he is bad so I don't like the train on him currently.

Tell me about that. #slooneiing

[Spacedaisy]

I think the role didn't make sense as anything but a civ role. My suspicion of him was mostly based on a loose idea he might be teammates with Wilgy, who I still strongly suspect and would rather we lynch today so if anyone is on board with that I am down to move to Wilgy. But INH's role reveal looked civ. So why would I now want to lynch him? Any real suspicion of him I had before is negated by the role reveal. His new role could have changed his alignment, but I don't see any reason to believe that over any of the other people who are in their second role. And I feel like his emotional response is real. I don't know if it is alignment indicative or not, but I see no good reason to vote him.

I still solidly believe Wilgy is bad. And I resent that you keep saying people are voting for Wilgy being WIlgy when I am voting him for the exact opposite reason. I think we are seeing a more serious gameplay Wilgy and it makes me believe he is bad as per meta I have observed from him as previous Baddie Wilgy.

[Jackofhearts2005]

I think the role didn't make sense as anything but a civ role. My suspicion of him was mostly based on a loose idea he might be teammates with Wilgy, who I still strongly suspect and would rather we lynch today so if anyone is on board with that I am down to move to Wilgy. But INH's role reveal looked civ. So why would I now want to lynch him? Any real suspicion of him I had before is negated by the role reveal. His new role could have changed his alignment, but I don't see any reason to believe that over any of the other people who are in their second role. And I feel like his emotional response is real. I don't know if it is alignment indicative or not, but I see no good reason to vote him.

I still solidly believe Wilgy is bad. And I resent that you keep saying people are voting for Wilgy being WIlgy when I am voting him for the exact opposite reason. I think we are seeing a more serious gameplay Wilgy and it makes me believe he is bad as per meta I have observed from him as previous Baddie Wilgy.

Do you think Juliets and Golden are making alignments clear based on the first role only? If so, why aren't you voting for Scotty?

Do you think Wilgy is acting significantly different than in Mortal Kombat or Fire Emblem? I do not.

[Spacedaisy]

Look, you can go through my posts I posted a whole thing linking to his ISOs from games where he was bad, good and even one 3P game. So I have already given my thoughts on this, I don't have time to repeat myself. Clearly I do think he is playing to his Baddie meta.

As to the first point, you don't get what I'm saying. My point is my previous suspicion is negated by the fact I feel he pretty much flipped a civ role. And I have nothing since then that leads me to suspect him for being bad. So why would I vote for him? Just because he is in a second role? Is that what you are suggesting? If so I disagree. To borrow a sentiment from 3J, I am not playing against the hosts, I am playing against the mafia. I will cast my vote against those I suspect, not against those that I think the theories on setup could possibly make bad. That is not a solid reason to do anything IMO. I am not voting for Scotty because I don't suspect Scotty's play like I do Marmot's. In fact, I have for the most part felt like Scotty was giving me civ vibes.

[LoRab]

Daisy: What are your current thoughts on this?

(quote clipped for the relevant part)

Given that fact, two baddies who are in separate tribes make perfect sense. Again, it helps them to make up for their disadvantage. Additionally, Blooper's response to Scotty pointing out that her first role had BTSC with someone from the other tribe seemed very odd to me. If you were given BTSC with someone else, what is the first thing you would want to know?

Who are you?

Or, what thread are you in/what information do you have that I might not have?

The fact she said she didn't even know she was talking to someone from the other thread is really odd to me. How?

Did Blooper ever respond?

[Jackofhearts2005]

Look, you can go through my posts I posted a whole thing linking to his ISOs from games where he was bad, good and even one 3P game. So I have already given my thoughts on this, I don't have time to repeat myself. Clearly I do think he is playing to his Baddie meta.

As to the first point, you don't get what I'm saying. My point is my previous suspicion is negated by the fact I feel he pretty much flipped a civ role. And I have nothing since then that leads me to suspect him for being bad. So why would I vote for him? Just because he is in a second role? Is that what you are suggesting? If so I disagree. To borrow a sentiment from 3J, I am not playing against the hosts, I am playing against the mafia. I will cast my vote against those I suspect, not against those that I think the theories on setup could possibly make bad. That is not a solid reason to do anything IMO. I am not voting for Scotty because I don't suspect Scotty's play like I do Marmot's. In fact, I have for the most part felt like Scotty was giving me civ vibes.

Do you think Juliets and Golden are making alignments clear based on the first role only?

Isn't Scotty's first role bad?

If you're going to say that INH is good because of his first role, then you have to say Scott is bad because of his first role.

You're the one playing against the mods. You're basically saying "I don't think Golden and Juliets would give this power to a baddie."

I'm playing against INH and Scotty. I'm ignoring their powers and voting based on what they're saying.

[nijuukyugou]

Daisy: What are your current thoughts on this?

(quote clipped for the relevant part)

Given that fact, two baddies who are in separate tribes make perfect sense. Again, it helps them to make up for their disadvantage. Additionally, Blooper's response to Scotty pointing out that her first role had BTSC with someone from the other tribe seemed very odd to me. If you were given BTSC with someone else, what is the first thing you would want to know?

Who are you?

Or, what thread are you in/what information do you have that I might not have?

The fact she said she didn't even know she was talking to someone from the other thread is really odd to me. How?

Did Blooper ever respond?

No, because I just saw this (I think I skipped a chunk or two of a page). To answer as best I can, I had one day of being able to talk to the person (who I now know was nutella), and I was SUPER busy that Day period (as my parents were in town) before I lost the role. Like, I think I had time to check in with her twice, and that was combined with reading the thread and actually, y'know, responding to stuff. I didn't expect to get friggin' NK'ed Night 1. Like, I was really shocked when I saw the post. And sad, because I really didn't have time to even use the BTSC. That's my best explanation for why I didn't ask the questions that you would've liked I'd have asked.

[nijuukyugou]

Oh wow, that sounded really salty! I don’t mean it that way - just been running around at work like a crazy person, and I was slightly annoyed with your perfectly valid question (no sarcasm - it really is a valid observation and question). My apologies!

[Spacedaisy]

Daisy: What are your current thoughts on this?

(quote clipped for the relevant part)

Given that fact, two baddies who are in separate tribes make perfect sense. Again, it helps them to make up for their disadvantage. Additionally, Blooper's response to Scotty pointing out that her first role had BTSC with someone from the other tribe seemed very odd to me. If you were given BTSC with someone else, what is the first thing you would want to know?

Who are you?

Or, what thread are you in/what information do you have that I might not have?

The fact she said she didn't even know she was talking to someone from the other thread is really odd to me. How?

Did Blooper ever respond?

Not that im aware of and I still feel suspicious of Blooper because of this. But I'm kind of hoping she will comment on it still.

[Spacedaisy]

Look, you can go through my posts I posted a whole thing linking to his ISOs from games where he was bad, good and even one 3P game. So I have already given my thoughts on this, I don't have time to repeat myself. Clearly I do think he is playing to his Baddie meta.

As to the first point, you don't get what I'm saying. My point is my previous suspicion is negated by the fact I feel he pretty much flipped a civ role. And I have nothing since then that leads me to suspect him for being bad. So why would I vote for him? Just because he is in a second role? Is that what you are suggesting? If so I disagree. To borrow a sentiment from 3J, I am not playing against the hosts, I am playing against the mafia. I will cast my vote against those I suspect, not against those that I think the theories on setup could possibly make bad. That is not a solid reason to do anything IMO. I am not voting for Scotty because I don't suspect Scotty's play like I do Marmot's. In fact, I have for the most part felt like Scotty was giving me civ vibes.

Do you think Juliets and Golden are making alignments clear based on the first role only?

Isn't Scotty's first role bad?

If you're going to say that INH is good because of his first role, then you have to say Scott is bad because of his first role.

You're the one playing against the mods. You're basically saying "I don't think Golden and Juliets would give this power to a baddie."

I'm playing against INH and Scotty. I'm ignoring their powers and voting based on what they're saying.

I didn't say INH was good based on his first role! I said I hadn't seen anything in his behavior since his new role thstmakes me suspect him. And my previous suspicions of him in his first role were incorrect judging by the role he had so I don't old them in any bearing on INH in his new role. Stop putting words in my mouth, it makes me seriously istrust you.