The Syndicate

Elohcin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Elohcin wrote:
You're telling me you've never voted low posters for the sake of them being low posters?

Hello, Elo! Glad to be playing with you again. I assure you that I won't rage at you this time.

That is a very good question. Thinking back through the last 5 years of mafia games, it is difficult for me to answer that question one way or the other with absolute confidence. Off the top of my head, I cannot recall any instances where I voted a player on Day 1 solely for being a low poster. It's more possible I did so as the game progressed. There may have been one or two in the last few years. I almost always find a reason for my Day 1 vote, and that alone has gotten me heat significantly in the past, since players found such reasons to be "forced" or "trying too hard". That said, I haven't come up against that accusation in the past year or so as much as I used to.

Regarding how I feel anymore about voting low or no posters on Day 1, I tend to prefer voting a no show over a low poster on Day 1, especially if that player seems unlikely to show subsequently, and has not given any reason for their absence. If instead we leave that person alive, then every day that goes by and they still do not show, they are not helping the civilians via discussion or voting, even if they are civilian, and they become an element that can never be analyzed at crucial later stages of the game (like LyLo). This is in contrast to a low poster, who has shown up in the thread, and is contributing to the game, even if very barely. I prefer to give those players at least a couple of Days until I consider lynching them for lack of content, since at least there is room to analyze their behavior. Of course, both of these depend on a case by case situation, and what the low poster says may cause me to find them suspicious in the content itself. Likewise, there may be reasons to vote someone I genuinely suspect over a no or low poster.

Does that answer your question adequately?

Nope. I don't think you elaborated enough.

Scotty wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote:WHAT HAVE YOU ALL DONE WHY ARE THERE ALREADY 7 PAGES

I'm going to bed. I'll catch up with this tomorrow

You know, I've been in bed now for 2 hours. One of the biggest mistakes I ever made was bringing my laptop with me. Good on you, ninja

I bring my laptop to bed with me just about every night. Mafia and/or tv are great activities for after I put the kids to bed.

thellama73 wrote:

G-Man wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

G-Man wrote:I've got about 10 more minutes before I unplug for the night. Any questions?

Are you a member of mafia?

I am not a member of the mafia.
I am not Moloch.
My role does not pose a threat to the civvies.

Interesting phrasing. Not "I am a civvie" but "My role does not pose a threat"

You know....I thought the same thing when I read his post. I didn't say anything b/c I wanted to watch his behavior and see what I could observe.

@G-Man - Are you a civilian?


So...overall, my reads are....
I am feeling good about:
Cookie - she seems too overwhelmed to have a team.
DDL - seems too comfortable to be bad atm
MP - very friendly and helpful which seems good to me
Golden - I have a hard time reading golden often, but I *think* I am seeing a good golden

I am feeling uneasy about:
G-Man - does not claim to be civ (may be a watchman - those with the additional win condition) but possibly Mafia
Sloonei - Just something about him reads scummy to me. Can't put my finger on it.

I still have no clue who I will vote today. There are still so many quiet players. But, time to go burn some calories I will be back later.

linki niju -
MovingPictures07 wrote:
For anyone that has ANY reads whatsoever, that hasn't voiced them yet, I am literally dying to hear them. I'm incredibly intrigued.
Niju wrote:
Oh dear. You might want to get to a doctor

Elohcin wrote:Sloonei, as I read all your posts together, I am failing to find anything that sticks out to me as scummy. I am not sure what gave me that vibe while reading the thread. I will table this gut feeling for now.

Reading through your posts did give me this though...

Sloonei wrote:The two games i've played with G-man were Economics (where he was town but posted entirely in pictures for the whole game) and Bullets over Broadway (where he was scum and replaced in after Day 2 or 3.......

I hosted G-Man in Guess Who and he tried a thing where he would begin each new post with the next letter of the alphabet.

I really don't have time atm to look at his posts in Bullets over Broadway or the other games he has played in but I am wondering what posting fun he tried to have in the other games he's played. I wonder if he even tries to do something funky with his posts if he is bad or if being on a team and having people to talk to BTS is enough for him to keep a game interesting. I don't see any themes running through his posts in this game, but I could be missing it. It's something to think about.

G-Man, do you do posting themes in each game despite your alighment? If so, can you tell us what you did in BoB when you were mafia?

Elohcin wrote:Okay, so I got a last minute cake order and am working tonight.I have one hour to read three pages and vote

Sloonei wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Golden wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:So did anyone get anything from the day zero poll?

I did not.

Me neither.

Same here

Not I.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Did anyone else notice how Elo seemingly jumped onto a vibes-based suspicion of Sloonei (which I held)

Maye I just like you. Watch out daisy!

MovingPictures07 wrote:and then dropped it, after I dropped it? What do folks think of that? I'm not sure what to make of Elo right now.

I didn't notice you dropped it.

MovingPictures07 wrote:
Elo, can you elaborate on your reads of those individuals in your most recent post? Particularly I'm interested in why you find me to be civilian this game, but in Economics, you said I seemed overly helpful.

In economics, it was like you were hyped up on caffeine. That was odd and suspicious to me. My memories of you being bad all include a bit of nuttiness. Today you seem calmly helpful, no nutty behavior.

Who else specifically would you like to hear about, I thought I elaborated already in reply to someone else.

Golden wrote:OK, at this point I will say what I think.

I think Elo's read on DDL was genuine, and it makes me feel good about her.

DDL expressed in our chat room that he found being mafia difficult, particularly on this site, and we all essentially agreed that he was getting caught and looked bad because you could sense he wasn't as comfortable in the thread. Elo is aware of this because she was in that chat room.

From my perspective, her reading DDL as good because he seems comfortable is legit, based on how things went down in Guess Who.

That doesn't mean DDL is good, of course, but I do think Elo's read was legitimate and it made me feel good about her.

MP this is exactly what I was thinking when I wrote the post about DDL. I wasn't going to elaborate this much as I feel like it was giving too much info about the Guess Who BTSC, but since Golden spelled it out for y'all there you go.

I am not done catching up, still over 2 pages to go, but I feel I ought to post for what I have read so far.

Elohcin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Elo, thanks!

How about: Where are you leaning for your vote today? Has it changed at all?

Linki with Ninja

If no one was finding me suspicious, I would most likely vote for G-man or sloonei (I know I said I would table my thoughts on sloonei). But, I am still back and forth on sloonei. He now finds me suspicious b/c I reread him and decided that I couldn't find any hard evidence against him? What?!? I wish G-Man would come in and talk.

But it looks like I may be trying to save myself :/

Elohcin wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Elo, thanks!

How about: Where are you leaning for your vote today? Has it changed at all?

Linki with Ninja

If no one was finding me suspicious, I would most likely vote for G-man or sloonei (I know I said I would table my thoughts on sloonei). But, I am still back and forth on sloonei. He now finds me suspicious b/c I reread him and decided that I couldn't find any hard evidence against him? What?!? I wish G-Man would come in and talk.

But it looks like I may be trying to save myself :/

Why did you read him as "scummy" the first time, then? Moreover, why did you give in to a "vibe" rather than rereading him, if it would have left to the same lack of hard evidence, in theory?

I didn't give into a vibe, I just mentioned it. He challenged me to reread him and I found nothing astoundingly scummy. That was all. But his response to my response IS scummy to me.

MP your case on scotty makes a lot of sense.

Elohcin wrote:I voted sloonei b/c of his response to me. That was odd for a civ.

Elohcin wrote:Good morning all! Four names on the poll sounds good to me. So Epi is seriously telling us, "Hey, there is a baddie among these four." Would he really do that? I guess he would if he felt it was a good thing to do for balance sake. Epi is all about the balance. I am going to do my daily workout and then come back and read through each person on the poll. I will then make my decision. I may not finish my read-throughs and vote until this evening however, as we have a birthday pool party to go to this afternoon. Swimming is much better than hiking

Elohcin wrote:I see. I missed that somehow. What do you make of them not being in alphabetical order? Do you think that is just the way the player submitted the names to Epi?

Elohcin wrote:I would say LC. They are all in alphabetical order but him.

Elohcin wrote:And honestly, without any reread, LC seems most fishy to me. Missed vote. But I am rereading now.

Elohcin wrote:We just recently go home and I am catching up.

Cookie wrote:Ok, I have not been very active in this game at all and I am truly very sorry for that, guys. Like, I've been reading the thread and somewhat keeping up with it (I usually have 4 or 5 pages to catch up on). As I go to respond to someone's posts with theories or questions, someone else has already addressed the same thing. Should I post it anyway? I usually have things typed up and ready to post, and I continue reading and someone has posted the same thing. Yesterday I posted I was catching up but I didn't even post anything because all had been addressed by the time I had finished reading.

This happens to em all the time.

Cookie wrote:I originally did not find Golden to be suspicious and I still do not find him the most suspicious out of all players (not listed in the poll), however, his vote to tie the vote for Sloonei and (I don't remember who... Niju?) makes me think that his attempt was to prevent Sloonei from getting voted out. It's very weak, I know. Someone later said that Golden is a more experienced player and would not do something so inept. So I just don't know who else to vote as there is not enough information against anyone else, in my opinion.

I understand that Golden looks bad b/c of when and who he voted for. However, I have seen this situation before where it was just coincidence and the player turned out civ. So, it's hard for the to place my vote on Golden when its only his vote that makes him look like he could be bad. I see nothing wrong with his posts.

I am on the fence about LC.

DharmaHelper wrote:I voted for LC. This game really started at an awkward time for me and the 24 hour Days isn't helping me get my footing. I am trying though and I should have some things to say in the near future.

So you really don't express a reason for voting LC. Why did you vote him?

MM's self vote makes me want to vote him too. His continuous self votes bug me.

And Russ. No suspicions there.

So, I guess my vote goes to MM today.

Elohcin wrote:So today is Simon's birthday. He is EIGHT YEARS OLD!!! (I am so old.) I will post pictures in the birthday thread later, but he is having an awesomely epic Star Wars birhtday party And...we are excited b/c our good 'ol friend blooper is supposed to be coming. Now that she has moved we don't see her often enough. So....I am only here for a minute b/c I have just finished decorating and now I need to go workout and get ready.

I will say this regarding those of you who think I could be Sloonei's teammate. I am not Sloonei's teammate. That should be lie detectable.

Elohcin wrote:SO I have yet to read anything past my last post which was in reference to niju being killed. Her death saddens me. She is too cool to be killed off so early. Anyway....that said, I just want to say how much I hate these rainbow lists. Find me suspicious if you want but I haven't liked them from the beginning. MP ranks Niju as his top read of civilian and then she dies. It's like saying...."hey baddies, this is the person you should kill next." I know I have picked on you a lot this game MP. I don't mean anything by it, really. Your list the just the one I found first.

MovingPictures07 wrote:
- nijuukyugou is my new top read, and I'm willing to take a strong stand. She seems consistently genuine, her hesitance to pile onto Golden today bodes well, and her vote from D1 still stands out as very strong. That said, I hope to see even more baddie hunting from her. And I still am going to continue to examine and question her intentions as much as everyone else, if not even more so, but right now I have to admit that she looks better than all the rest of you.

Okay, so I just wanted to mention that. I have to get back to school now and do a little housework and then I will catch up on everything that's been said so far today. I have a splitting headache from staying up until 2am with Epi and Niju. I am SO old! And I didn't even have one drop to drink. Epi drank beer all evening and is totally fine. I don't get it.

Elohcin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:
If you'll notice, Golden did not have Blooper first on his rainbow list. In fact, I'm the only one that called her my top read, if I recall correctly (and I'm pretty sure about this).

It's possible the mafia are fucking with me by killing off my top reads (they killed llama N1 and Blooper N2, both of my top reads), but to automatically think that the mafia are blindly following the opinions of just ONE individual is not worth cancelling my rainbow reads. I want everyone to know everything that I'm thinking.

I hate to even say this b/c I really feel like you are civilian. But, it could be that you are Mafia and killing off your own top reads.

Ricochet wrote: 'Sticking with Elo' meant voting her for her back and forth on Sloonei, which I still found odd at that time. She even decided to go along with Sloonei with roughly 10 minutes to go, after returning for the deadline with 30 minutes to go, making it hard for me to inquire her properly in the time left.

It was actually an hour before days end and it was a sufficient amount of time to read the thread and vote. I had originally said that sloonei gave me a scummy vibe. He challenged me to reread him. I did and found nothing notably scummy in his posts when reading them separately from he thread. So, I told him I would table my thoughts on him for the day. After getting back from my day out with the family, I read his posts while I was gone and they were definitely scummy IMO. I voted him. That was it.

DharmaHelper wrote:Eloh Thoughts:

Early on, very jokey

Civ reads on Cookie/DDL/MP/Golden

Uneasy reads on G-Man/Sloonei

Backtracks on Sloonei suspicion

Returns to it as a "save herself" option

Likes MP's Scotty case

ends up voting for Sloonei

More jokey

Theory that there MUST be a baddie among the poll of four

LC jumps out to her as most suspect/fishy

Then she is "on the fence" RE:LC

Votes for MM for his self voting

As for "very jokey", I like to have fun in Mafia. I have said this over and over again. It is like my only adult interaction. I know that is sad. I already explained my back and forth on sloonei several times. As for the "four on the poll" I thought Epi put those names on there but I was corrected that another player picked them. That made more sense. Just b/c I think LC is the most suspicious of the four doesn't mean I cannot be "on the fence" about him at the same time. Once I found out that it was possible that none of the four were bad, I wasn't comfortable voting LC. I voted MM for voting himself b/c I think voting one's self is stupid.

Elohcin wrote:@ Rico, I thought you were talking about the vote when we were voting one of the four. That was the night I had an hour to catch up. You are right....the night when Sloonei was lynched, I didn;t have much time at all to catch up, but it was enough to see his responses to my posts and think he was bad for it.

Elohcin wrote:I am surprised to see you say you are looking at cookie. What do you see from her? I mean, I guess she COULD be bad and her team is telling her to play dumb and ask a lot of questions. But I really don't think that is the case.

I do agree with you on DH, MP. He has not seemed very civ today at all.

Elohcin wrote:My uneasiness of G-Man and LC stem from earlier on in the game and the fact that they really haven;t been present lately. I will go back and look at DH and tell you some specifics. I'm telling you though, I might as well just shut up, b/c I feel like I cannot make a post without some kind of flaw. I am misunderstanding y'all left and right, sorry.

Woah linki

Elohcin wrote:

Ricochet wrote:
I'm not deaf to Elohcin saying that being jokey relaxes her and stating time and again her reasoning for focusing on, off and then decisively on Sloonei, but I strongely feel her gameplay so far is very messy.

My gameplay is always messy. I am a horrible mafia player. Everyone knows this. But it is a heck of a lot of fun, so I play.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Elohcin wrote:My uneasiness of G-Man and LC stem from earlier on in the game and the fact that they really haven;t been present lately. I will go back and look at DH and tell you some specifics. I'm telling you though, I might as well just shut up, b/c I feel like I cannot make a post without some kind of flaw. I am misunderstanding y'all left and right, sorry.

Woah linki

Re: the bolded and underlined... You think this makes them mafia, despite their contributions?

You should never shut up. I want to hear literally every thought you're thinking about any player.

I don't think that alone makes them mafia. I think it is one reason to look at them.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:
No. What I mean is that him posting ISOs hardly means anything about his alignment.

You don't think his baddie hunting is genuine?

This sums up my feelings about DH. I couldn't think of a good way to say it, but "not genuine" works well. His baddie hunting seems a bit disconnected. Does that make sense? I am so tired.

But then MP, you make some good points about cookie. I just don't know. Is she really just so new and confused? Or is she being coached and this is all an act? I hate that I am so easily persuaded. It makes being a civ VERY difficult.

Elohcin wrote:DH went through and listed who did/said what in his posts today. It was almost like he was just throwing the info out there to see who would say what and then it would be easy for him to jump on a suspicion and not be able to be blamed for it when the lynched person turns up civ. His "ISOs" did more of stating the facts of players' gameplay than giving his own opinion. I think this could be a baddie tactic. Does that explain it any better, MP?

Elohcin wrote:Cookie - Why would you find me suspicious when I tied u the vote if it was in favor of the civs?

Elohcin wrote:Okay, DH. You defend yourself well. And MP, I see what you are saying about ISOs.

Elohcin wrote:If I had to choose from the players you listed, Mp, I would choose espers. But, I don't necessarily think she is bad. I am really not sure. But I think you are pretty close minded to ONLY want to talk about those players.

Elohcin wrote:You are too fun MP My list is G-Man and any two quiet players. Pick any. I think we have some quiet baddies today.

Elohcin wrote:Why you be asking if someone wants to vote me?

Elohcin wrote:I can't see DDL being bad again so quickly. What are the odds? And...he is far too comfortable in the thread for me to think he is bad.

linki. Alright. I guess you are a smart cookie.

Elohcin wrote:remember he was bad in Guess Who. And you KNOW Epi does nto randomize roles. And he was very uncomfortable as a mafia player in Guess Who. Golden said it best. You would have to look at his in topic to find the exact post.

Elohcin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Well "doesn't truly care who gets lynched" sounds very Molochian to me. If you think LoRab fits the description, I'm thinking Eloh does as well.

Elo is bouncing all over the place, isn't she?

I'm having a lot of trouble understanding exactly what her rainbow list of players-with-highest-propensity-to-receive-my-vote today looks like.

Like I said. I really think we have some quiet Mafia this game.

linki: out of respect of golden I will reread DDL tomorrow.

honestly, MP, I am just so tired and everything it super hilarious right now. I really don;t know who to vote for. Many of y'all come in here drunk and post. Well, I don't drink. This is my not-enough-sleep giddiness.

Elohcin wrote:A water gun? HAHA! UH...G-Man

Wow, that was a lot of linki in 2 seconds

Elohcin wrote:B/c you held a watergun to my head.

Elohcin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Elohcin wrote:B/c you held a watergun to my head.

You've said multiple times in this game that you think I'm really civilian, yet you cast your vote for me.

I really do think you are civ. I won't let you gt lynched for real.

Elohcin wrote:*sigh* okay, I am sobering up. You guys are no fun. I am not bad y'all. Look at my voting record. I really thought I could have a little fun tonight and not be looked at b/c I have such a good voting record. . I will vote for cookie with you all on Day 4 if you guys really see her as bad.

Elohcin wrote:Listen, people drunk post all the time and no one gives a shit. I come in tired and giddy and I go from looking civ to definitely one of the last baddies. Shit. Ah well. Lynch me next then. Whatever.

Elohcin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Elohcin wrote:Listen, people drunk post all the time and no one gives a shit. I come in tired and giddy and I go from looking civ to definitely one of the last baddies. Shit. Ah well. Lynch me next then. Whatever.

What does this have to do with drunk posting?

You have no suspects, then cast a vote for me. You even panicked and indicated you might vote for Cookie after I seriously considered it, then you didn't.

It's practically Night 3. You're a lot of fun, Elo, but get your head into the game.

I'm sorry, you are right. I will do better. I just need some sleep tonight. Also, sorry DH. I feel like I might could have prevented your death had I not been so out of it. Please forgive me.

Elohcin wrote:I decided to reread Lorab to see what all the fuss is about and these particular quotes caught my eye.

LoRab wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

LoRab wrote:I'm of 2 minds with the GMan stuff.

On the one hand, back in the day (when GMan was a regular) on LP/Piano, lie detector roles and statements became a thing and how people phrase statements and asking everyone to make "An LD Statement" became something of a controversy. In addition/as a result, in many games, "I am a civie" wasn't a detectable statement, so people would often not use it and got in the habit of not just saying that.

That being said, the way he phrased it doesn't sound like a way a civie would describe themselves, even with phrasing it differently. What he posted earlier sounds like something that is a baddie trying to describe themselves with a true statement on a technicality (like, if they don't have a power that can be used to harm a civie, they technically aren't a threat). And his explanation doesn't ring so true to me.

There are also roles with secrets, and we don't know how those statements might have an impact on an LD role. He could have been waiting for clarification on how a statement of "I am a civie" would show up. on G Man. Leaning towards a vote in that direction.

Do you think a scum player would voluntarily leave such an honest statement in the thread like that? It's incredibly easy for a baddie to simply say "I'm not bad", and I have a hars time believing that G-man's conscience would have gotten to him that much, if that is what you are saying in part.

Do you have your eye on anyone other than G-man?

I think a baddie would possibly do that, yes. When there is a lie detector, baddies do all sorts of things in posts in order to try to avoid outright lying while making themselves seem like they're claiming to be civ. I've seen it happen before, especially when they've been called out for phrasing things oddly.

What doesn't make sense is that saying "I am civ" might be seen as role claiming. That just doesn't make sense to me.

LoRab wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Sloonei wrote:If you think G-man phrased his post oddly because of he was wary of the lie detector, does hos exact wording mean anything to you? He does not "pose a threat to the civvies." Does that strike you as the sort of thing scum would say to avoid being caught by a lie detector.
His rationale about not claiming civ due to role claim restrictions does seem a bit odd, i'll give you that.
And I'll also ask for more suspects again. Who besides G-man are you looking at, LoRab?

"Does not pose a threat to the civies" does seem like the sort of thing a baddie would say, yes. Especially if they don't have a power that doesn't have a direct, negative impact on others.

And, at this point, no one else is standing out to me. I'm often a 1 suspect at a time kind of gal. Also, day 1, so not much to go on.

Does this mean your mind and vote are set on G-man today?

I wouldn't say set, but if nothing else comes up and he doesn't say something to convince me, that is likely where I will vote, yes.

Also, as to another post you made (that I forgot to quote), if he was trying to attract the lie detector, then why do so with what is potentially an undetectable statement (a threat to civs can be a matter of opinion as to what that means)...unless you were trying to make sure that a teammate wasn't LD-ed?

I really think that Lorab could be one of the last two baddies.


But, then I am torn b/c she did vote G-Man Day 1 and I also think it is a possibility that G-Man is one of the last two baddies. Heck, it could be G-Man and Cookie. It would explain her sense of being lost b/c G-Man has been so busy and has to be sneaky with his Mafia mistress.

Elohcin wrote:So I got this confusing info PM. I know I cannot say what it said but I worked damn hard to get the info by doing a stupid maze and I didn't even understand the info.

Scotty wrote:

LoRab wrote:Golden's use of the "I'm a very important civ" defense may have earned him my vote. Because, in my experience, civs don't usually use that defense.

Food for thought:

LoRab wrote:You should not vote for me because I am not bad.

...

I'm civ. I don't know how to convince anyone of that, but it's true. Will do my best to try.

LoRab wrote: I may seem suspicious to some but I am not bad. I am not Indy. I am not neutral. I'm civ this game.

LoRab wrote:I'm not asking for your trust. I appreciate the suspicion. But I'm not bad.

LoRab wrote:And, since Sllnei isn't/wasn't my teammate, no, it wasn't unfortunate for me. I'm glad we lynched a baddie. I'm a civie--I'm still not sure about you.

LoRab wrote:But, eye me all you want. I have nothing to hide. I am all civ all the time this time around. If I'm not too tired later I'll twirl for you.

Keep in mind all of those are in different posts, most pulled out of larger posts.
I do get what you are saying, LoRab, and perhaps this isn't a fair post. Golden phrased his defense as "one of the most important roles we have". That's a pretty hefty statement that you did not technically make. But in your defenses over the past few days, all those little "I'm a civ" moments just stick out to me just as bad based on the overarching slightly hypocritical reasoning of your vote for Golden.

juliets wrote:
I read through Lorab and saw what G-man said that started that whole debate. When I read G-Man's response I immediately thought indy but in no way did I think baddie. The other thing I noted is unless I have not read the roles correctly the Nite Owl II could only detect once and the Night Owl I can only detect once. That just doesn't seem like enough of a threat for someone to be addressing the LD by putting a checkable statement out there this early. On her comment on the Golden comment, I am more surprised that Golden said he was an important civ in the the thread. I do somewhat see her reasoning why that might have made Golden bad - otherwise why would he risk making himself a target. Unlike Lorab though i cannot say that most of the time I hear people say this they are baddies. People say all kinds of things when they are desperate. I feel like I must mention though that in games I've played with her Lorab marches to her own drummer and like she says concentrates on detail. I have to decide if disagreeing with Lorab equates with suspecting her of being bad. Please tell me if you think I missed anything that would affect my vote about Lorab.

I have a very long doctors appointment today and so will not be back on until later today. I will continue reading when I get back because as I understand it we have a vote tonight. I feel like I've got Day 1 type reactions to people (not feeling sure, tentative) but give me time to get my legs under me.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Vote Analysis on

I decided she is another player I barely have an opinion on and I'd like to.

DAY 1

LoRab wrote:I'm of 2 minds with the GMan stuff.

On the one hand, back in the day (when GMan was a regular) on LP/Piano, lie detector roles and statements became a thing and how people phrase statements and asking everyone to make "An LD Statement" became something of a controversy. In addition/as a result, in many games, "I am a civie" wasn't a detectable statement, so people would often not use it and got in the habit of not just saying that.

That being said, the way he phrased it doesn't sound like a way a civie would describe themselves, even with phrasing it differently. What he posted earlier sounds like something that is a baddie trying to describe themselves with a true statement on a technicality (like, if they don't have a power that can be used to harm a civie, they technically aren't a threat). And his explanation doesn't ring so true to me.

There are also roles with secrets, and we don't know how those statements might have an impact on an LD role. He could have been waiting for clarification on how a statement of "I am a civie" would show up. on G Man. Leaning towards a vote in that direction.

She begins the G-Man suspicion here. She has a very good point, imo. Myself, I had my fair share of watching people try to manipulate lie detectors. That said, there is only a one-shot LD in the game, which makes it pretty minor factor, so I'm not sure if this is big enough to warrant a vote. G-Man has had bigger baddie signs, as well as bigger town signs, in this game.

There are multiple other posts about G-Man which I won't bother to quote.

LoRab wrote:Until I just read MP's list, I kind of forgot LC was playing. So I checked the who's posted thingie, and he only has 1 post (only other person with 1 post, btw, is K-nuk, who isn't playing). And here's his 1 post:

Spoiler: show

Long Con wrote:

G-Man wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:If we are going to consider a policy lynch of any sort for Day 1, why not the person with the lowest posts?

You mean the player whose posts can be read with the deepest voice or the player who writes the low-down meanest posts?

I believe the word you are looking for is fewest.

G-Man is now on my list of people that I will not vote for on Day 1.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

Scotty wrote:
linki- are we doing a Golden Day 1 lynch? Is that what we're doing?

Statistics tell me leaving Golden alive is always bad for town. Never played a game where he didn't destroy the fuck out of the poor civs.

If it wasn't for Golden, the civilians wouldn't have won Biblical or Roger Rabbit, so... I can provide counterexamples for practically every example.

Is anyone here seriously considering a policy lynch option for Day 1? I just don't think it's wise.

Hey- Golden had a LOT of help behind the scenes. Never forget that. He was right and I was wrong about the final baddie but my lists helped serve up at least two baddies- one of which I handed to Golden on a silver platter from beyond the grave. I'd like to think that he would have had a much harder time winning that game without my help.

MovingPictures07 wrote:I will not stand for a closed-minded town on Day 1.

Then take a seat.

For the record... I was taking it all in stride. As in, I thought that everyone was pretty much joking, but I saw the potential for any of them to make it real just for fun as well. Although Metalmarsh and Golden are survival buddies right now, so I doubt either of them are inclined to lynch unless they're pretty convinced.

Anywho, I'll vote for Rorschach's Journal, because Rorschach is my favourite part of a story made of awesome parts. This quote I quoted is where I have read up to at this point, be back later.

Ironic that his first comment is on a comment (an awesome comment, btw) about fewest posts. Which manages to comment on the matter without commenting on the matter.

As importantly, he manages to say he will not vote for G-Man without having to defend him. Given the fact that I suspect G-Man, this strikes me as suspicious.

And the bulk of his post is about another game--nothing wrong with that in and of itself, but he barely makes comment on this game. Which isn't really like him.

I am still suspicious of G Man. But LC has just moved up on my suspiciometer (I guess I have 2 suspects now, lol). And I hope he posts more. I may throw him a vote just to get him to post more.

Later in the phase, she starts suspecting LC, for a statement about not voting G-Man which she perceived as fishy. For me, LC's statement was obviously a jokey one, considering he was just quoting a post where G-Man fixes someone's grammar. So that would point LoRab as either doing some unnecessary tunneling, or a baddie trying hard to justify a suspicion.

LoRab wrote:I'm around...voting either GMan or possibly LC

LoRab wrote:Voted G-man. Because I find him suspicious.

She mantains her position and votes G-Man, keeping LC as a close second. Consistent, but completely oblivious to what is going in the phase, since nobody else had voted G-Man.

NIGHT 1 / DAY 2

She spents Night 1 defending herself against DH's suspicions, which I'm not gonna bother quoting. There is also this interaction:

LoRab wrote:

Long Con wrote: Looks like you didn't throw me that vote. That's ok, it wouldn't have affected my posting volume at all, so that plan was doomed from inception.

Ah, but posting about you has gotten you to post. So yay!

She doesn't exactly says whether she still suspects LC or not, so I dunno what to think of this.

LoRab wrote:Golden's use of the "I'm a very important civ" defense may have earned him my vote. Because, in my experience, civs don't usually use that defense.

Spoiler: show

G-Man wrote:Hey hey, back from the campground. Still catching up but I'm on Page 12, where the vote deadline looms eminent. Very interesting to read through. Here are some thoughts and observations:

DharmaHelper wrote:In my re-reading, I am also pinged by the big deal being made out of G-Man's lie detector statements. Especially considering he said "I am not a mafia" which is an equally lie detectable statement as "I am a civvie".

Of the people making a fuss about it LoRab strikes me as most suspect, I may put my vote there.

I too am curious about why my statements became such a big deal. LoRab had to reach back a long time in history to pull out the LD point from back in my early LP days. I mean way back. Same goes for MP (i think) for going way way back to the stone age of STV too. I choose my words carefully every time. Curious how they chose to think back past an awful lot of my playing history to find a possible reason that they could use to implicate me as a baddie.

Eye me all you want. But I haven't played a game with an LD (that I remember at least) since back in that time. I wasn't thinking about your playing history in general, but how I have noticed people respond to LD's in games. Those games just happen to be old ones. I notice patterns in posting and patterns of behavior. It's how I always play and always have played. If that makes me suspicious, so be it. I'm just trying to find the bad guys and point out behavior and posting that I happen to find suspicious. I'm not trying to implicate you. I suspect you. There is a difference.

This post features her first suspicion on Golden, for a sort of weird reason, though one I could agree with. It also shows more of bickering with G-Man, showing she still suspects him.

LoRab wrote:

Golden wrote:I mean that as a legitimate question to - like, is it colouring your vision.

It's a fair question and a good one (and I took it that way). And not really. I don't mind suspicion--I actually kind of like being suspected. Especially as a civ. Keeps the game more interesting and sometimes keeps me alive a little bit longer. I also expect it. For this vote, it's more that I have to vote one of you and I don't really highly suspect any of you right now and then you posted that.

I also meant to say earlier that there hasn't been a lot of discussion about LC's point earlier about it being somewhat strange that Night Owl chose this power to use so early, before knowing any information. With bringing up ideas like that he's either working for the town or he's the biggest of the bads--I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt for now.

This post shows some self-defense arguments, and finally something about her giving LC the benefit of doubt. Seems kind of random to me imo.

LoRab wrote:I actually think of Golden as being more careful a player as a civ than as a baddie--I love having civie golden on my side. I'm not sure I'm seeing that.

MM went along with sloonei, so that doesn't look great. Russtifinko I have no idea. LC I already said before I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt for the moment because he's asking good questions and bringing things up others aren't--but I have an eye on him.

I could vote MM to create a tie, just for fun. Maybe I'll see where the vote is when we get close.

I don't like this whole choice of 4 thing. Especially not this early. Meh.

She changes her mind here, calling Golden a more likely civ, calling MM suspicious, Russ neutral, and keeping her stance of giving LC a pass. At this point I'd bet she'd vote MM.

LoRab wrote:MP--want to decide how to play this out?

Obviously Golden votes MM. One of us then can vote MM, and it's back to a tie. Which leaves the other of us to decide where the vote goes. Or we both vote for one person. Or you just descide to screw it and not vote. What's your thinking on this, mr sock?

Very fishy dialogue with MP, sho is obviously silenced. She seems highly aware of how the vote count may end.

LoRab wrote:Oh, wait, except he's sileneced and has no vote. (realized that as you were typing it. yay linkitis!)

Golden, I'm voting for you. I expect you to vote for MM. We'll let the powers that be decide what happens next. Seems like the fairest thing to do. Although scariest.

And then this. After all the suspicions about the 4 players, she ties the poll on purpose (well technically she gave Golden the chance to tie the poll, but Golden's vote was a given). She seems to think that's the most "fair" way to end the lynch. Imo, that's an epic cop-out. A good civ player should decide who she thinks is the best target for a lynch, not leave it to the RNG gods.

NIGHT 2 / DAY 3

She is not really active on D3, though I remember seeing her lurking the thread pretty much all the time.

Some more bickering with LC, where she keeps the position of giving him a pass. And a few posts defending herself. Actually, she barely does much in the phase other than defending herself. And then this:

LoRab wrote:On quickly and skimmed up. I do care who is lynched. I'm posting based on my suspicions. Day 2 I didn't really like any of the choices at that moment. I may seem suspicious to some but I am not bad. I am not Indy. I am not neutral. I'm civ this game. I'm voting gman because I still suspect him. And for those saying I was bringing up his old games that is not true. Read my posts. It's how people post with an ld in game in general. Although I still don't see how gman' statement of thinking that saying he was civie would be role outing still doesn't make sense to me and his explanations for it don't ring true. If that makes me seem suspish, so be it. I find him suspicious. That hasn't changed. Voting him. I hope to live to actually defend myself from specific posts.

More self defense, and finally votes G-Man, based on the d1 reasoning. Again, it's not necessarily a bad reason, but G-Man did more things in the game and I'd at least like her to have an opinion on them. At this point, the d1 thing seems forced.

I have a pretty strong baddie read on LoRab now, though I'm not sure if it's my biggest one. She seems overly focused on G-Man without actually doing much work on it, and her flip-flopping on day 2, as well as her intentional tie is fishy as fuck.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

juliets wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I think we should lynch LoRab tomorrow.

Metalmarsh, I read what Rico said about Lorab but I'd like to know what you've seen that makes you want to lynch her next. If you did an iso already on her just tell me.

I meant to say something yesterday, but was thwarted by unforeseen circumstances. Her votes are opportunistic.

Day 1, she voted G-Man even though she also found Long Con suspicious. That itself is not suspicious, but her case on G-man looks insincere. I think she is trying to paint him as a baddie for something that doesn't look bad. Her reason for voting G-man was that he said "his role is not harmful to civilians".

Day 2, she backed off LC for some reason. Then she said both myself and Golden look bad. In the end, she votes for Golden for saying "I am an important civ". Sound familar? Also, she played musical votes at the end of the day phase, directing and orchestrating the end of the day votes to create a situation where she could force a tie.

Day 3, she votes G-Man again, defaulting to her Day 1 suspicion. Again, I don't like the case, and there's the fact that she quickly backed off of the Long Con suspicion. Why the tunneling of G-Man?

G-Man, these are the points I made about LoRab. What are your thoughts, considering you were the one she's been voting for?

Linki: Hi Ricochet, I have good vibes about you this game.

Russtifinko wrote:Sooooo the game started, and I worked all day.....

You guys do realize you averaged over a post per minute between 9:30am and 10am, right? And I haven't read the last 3 pages yet, but it's gotta be close to that for most of the evening.

MP has already demanded no less than 7 answers to questions from EVERY SINGLE PLAYER....and that was 3 pages ago.

Sheesh.


I'd have not voted Rorschach's journal. If he's all he made out to be, he'd write a shorthand or code known only to him in case it fell into the wrong hands.

Also, I have a policy of supporting policy lynches. Let it be known that I will bandwagon onto all policy lynches forthwith, henceforth.

Welcome new players! And new players who used to be old players before I was around. And regular players.

Russtifinko wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Elo, thanks!

How about: Where are you leaning for your vote today? Has it changed at all?

Linki with Ninja

If no one was finding me suspicious, I would most likely vote for G-man or sloonei (I know I said I would table my thoughts on sloonei). But, I am still back and forth on sloonei. He now finds me suspicious b/c I reread him and decided that I couldn't find any hard evidence against him? What?!? I wish G-Man would come in and talk.

But it looks like I may be trying to save myself :/

Why did you read him as "scummy" the first time, then? Moreover, why did you give in to a "vibe" rather than rereading him, if it would have left to the same lack of hard evidence, in theory?

I didn't give into a vibe, I just mentioned it. He challenged me to reread him and I found nothing astoundingly scummy. That was all. But his response to my response IS scummy to me.

MP your case on scotty makes a lot of sense.

There's a case on Scotty? I think I missed it. Anyone with a reminder or link to the case?

MP, your policy of underlining names to direct things to people is super helpful, btw.

Russtifinko wrote:Holy shit, good job team! Beast mode, there.

I hereby drop my suspicion of llama until further notice. :P

So at the risk of adding fuel to the engine of what may be a forming bandwagon, something Scotty said right before the lynch pinged me, but it wasn't any of the stuff MP was talking about. Here it is:

Scotty wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:
I still don't understand the "buddying". If my offhand comment about agreeing with MP's opinion on first-day lynching is to be considered "buddying" then sure, we're buddies, we're getting married next week and having 5 beautiful illegitimate children.

For the record, I'm getting strong civ read from you Bass, though you are suspicious of me

The hyperbole combined with the magnanimity just strikes me as off, somehow. Pretty defensive but also super restrained and friendly.

Russtifinko wrote:

Elohcin wrote:SO I have yet to read anything past my last post which was in reference to niju being killed. Her death saddens me. She is too cool to be killed off so early. Anyway....that said, I just want to say how much I hate these rainbow lists. Find me suspicious if you want but I haven't liked them from the beginning. MP ranks Niju as his top read of civilian and then she dies. It's like saying...."hey baddies, this is the person you should kill next." I know I have picked on you a lot this game MP. I don't mean anything by it, really. Your list the just the one I found first.

MovingPictures07 wrote:
- nijuukyugou is my new top read, and I'm willing to take a strong stand. She seems consistently genuine, her hesitance to pile onto Golden today bodes well, and her vote from D1 still stands out as very strong. That said, I hope to see even more baddie hunting from her. And I still am going to continue to examine and question her intentions as much as everyone else, if not even more so, but right now I have to admit that she looks better than all the rest of you.

Okay, so I just wanted to mention that. I have to get back to school now and do a little housework and then I will catch up on everything that's been said so far today. I have a splitting headache from staying up until 2am with Epi and Niju. I am SO old! And I didn't even have one drop to drink. Epi drank beer all evening and is totally fine. I don't get it.

The beer preserves him, Elo!

MP, sorry man, but I have to agree with Elo on this one. I get that you need to express your thoughts, but I think posting an absolute top civ read is detrimental to our cause. You're one of the most vocal players, which gives you a lot of clout, and (assuming for the moment you're civ) you joining forces with any other strong player would terrify most baddies. It seems an easy call for them to eliminate that person because it makes them a bigger threat. I think you could do just as much good and less harm by posting a general list of civ reads without singling out one person as the most civ ever.

Russtifinko wrote:

G-Man wrote:Please note that these analyses are based off looking for the Inmates only. In my short time back in action, I don't think I've played enough games with serial killers (I'm assuming that's what we're classifying Moloch as) to get back in the groove of sniffing them out. This setup is very difficult because the typical mafia team (the Inmates) only has three members. Considering we caught one of those three members on Day 1, it is going to be very difficult to track the other two. We have to look for small patterns and vote sequences that might suggest a collaborative effort between two players.

Day 1 vote data is in the spoiler tag. Please look refer to it as you read over my assessments.

What I infer from the Day 1 votes:

-I'm still not sure what to make of Timmer's self-vote. I like the warning about possibly pulling a Deborah but would he try that shtick again so soon?

-There is potential for espers to be Sloonei's teammate and he wanted to or was encouraged to throw that final vote on Sloonei for the cred. I like what espers said about feeling something was off about Sloonei. They have played elsewhere before, right? Knowing meta is a powerful item on the tool belt, so I feel compelled to respect that. This leaves me feeling only neutral on espers, unlike the other Sloonei voters.

-LoRab's vote on me came before Sloonei picked up any votes. This is important because we should look for desperate votes after the Sloonei train picks up steam. LoRab focused on the LD issue in regards to my post. I already looked suspicious before any of that because I was more aggressive, assertive, and less playful than usual. Rather than trying to use the "he's different and that's sus" angle that had been mentioned, she comes at it from an angle with a unique twist by suggesting I was trying to evade the LD power. To let my tin-foil hatted hamster out of his cage for a moment, consider this: Both Sloonei vote and LoRab's vote came before Sloonei had any votes. Sure there was discussion but could it be that the two of them are teammates and they tried to divide and conquer by voting for two potential victims that could attract more votes. Unfortunately for them, any momentum for Niju and myself died down as the momentum on Sloonei ramped up.

-Russ's vote for me was crap but not crap enough for me to shift him off of a neutral read.

-After this we have MP07 joining in on Bass's vote for Scotty. MP07 went from being cordial with Scotty, to asking a question or two, to doubting the sincerity of his contributions and the soundness of his vote for Elo. He openly agrees with Bass and then adds a few more points for other people to consider. This after his suspicion of Sloonei eroded bit by bit over the course of the day. In short, MP07 seems to have built a case on why Scotty is suspicious while also posting several points on why Sloonei probably shouldn't be suspicious. All this occurs as MP07 votes for Scotty, making it a 3-2-2 race between Sloonei, Niju, and Scotty. With Niju being NK'd by the Inmates, we know that MP07 adding Scotty to the mix wasn't an attempt to save Niju. Could it have been an attempt to save Sloonei?

Something where someone was talking about me seems like the easiest place to sink my teeth in. Here goes. (I edited the quote above for length, so only the parts I'm responding to are there):

G-Man, this vote analysis format is cool, but I'm not totally understanding your color scheme here. Maybe you could provide a key for those of us new to this?

You're slightly mischaracterizing my vote here in saying I ONLY voted for you in order to not vote Elo, with no other reasoning. I thought (and still think) it was strange that you were so circumspect with your wording.

That said, your numerous explanations have made me feel a little better about it. More to the point, this is my first game seeing you post words, and your style over the last few days definitely cements you in my mind as a very careful thinker and something of a microanalyzer. So I think now that the careful wording is probably just in character for you.

Re: your timmer explanation, what is a Deborah?

I'd have to read espers to develop an opinion there, since I don't have one as of my first thread read-through.

I'm not really buying the LoRab angle on the D1 vote. You're saying you think two baddie teammates tried to start lynch trains on two separate people to save Sloonei before she got any votes? With only 3 of them total, it seems crazy to me that they'd split up their voting power so early if they thought Sloonei might need defending.

To me, honestly Golden's vote looks the worst here, and we know Golden was civ. So I guess at this point I'm a bit skeptical about MP's "treasure trove of D1 evidence" claim. I think MP's vote looks bad at first glance, because it came in late-ish for a non-Sloonei but early enough to be a very, very long-shot save attempt. However, throwing teammates under the bus is something MP has added to his game more recently, and it would have made more sense to try that here than to go for the save IMO. Also, MP's content has felt super classic good-guy MP to me so far.

So if anything, to me the currently most suspicious D1 vote is espers. Keep in mind, a baddie voting late in a lynch for a teammate actually has a LOWER risk than a civ doing the same thing, because they know they won't end up on Rorschach's hit list.

Linki: I dunno. I suppose Elo could be bad, but when she voted Sloonei it was tied up with Blooper. I dunno if I see a mafia Elo giving up on a teammate so early.

Russtifinko wrote:
Ugh! I almost forgot the Day was ending soon, so I'm catching up now. Sorry, people!

MP, the llama thing makes more sense now. And yes, I think your suggestion on your rainbow lists is a good one.

Regarding espers, like I said, it definitely seems one of the safer votes on the day. However, my suspicion of espers basically rests solely on that at the moment, and without seeing anything suspicious in his posts I doubt I'd go that way yet. I'd say 30% chance I vote him, but that's mainly because I don't have another stronger case atm. If I did it'd be lower.

Russtifinko wrote:Going to work now. However, I definitely will be active today. Some players I'm considering (in no particular order):

espers, Cookie, LoRab G-Man, MP <---Some of these are VERY mild suspicions,I'm just trying to keep an open mind.

Players I probably would not vote toy (barring drastic changes):

Elo, MM, Bass

Russtifinko wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Scotty, I need to start conducting ISO's now. I've been meaning to for some time. I'll look at Russ first, since his posts earlier today had me wondering about him. I thought he said my conduct seemed "super civ" or something, so to see my name on his suspect list today puzzled me. I'll go look at him now.

Yeah, you did seem super civ to me at first. Lately I'm just wondering if it's too civ, if that makes any sense. Basically, my paranoid, "MP-might-be-baddie" self thinks thusly:

1) You FREAKED when llama started poking you on Day 1. Which to be fair is a pretty standard MP thing to do because you care so much about the game regardless of role. However, from my vantage point, it was pretty clear llama was joking around, and it's a classic baddie move to go hyper defensive. Epi pretty much runs his civ game entirely on the theory that baddies overreact when poked.

2) You pretty much allayed my fears D1 by posting a ton of content, though, and being your normal crazy-involved self.

3) I agree with others that some of the wishy-washiness around lynches is a little weird. I'm used to you being hyper confident in your reads. I get that some past experiences have changed that a bit, but it still just doesn't read like the MP I know. For me the weirdness here is less about the votes themselves and more about your willingness to believe in yourself.

4a) Again, paranoid me here: You've done a great job trying to get people involved, mainly by asking them literally dozens of questions at a time. I'm starting to wonder if the questions are a way to avoid talking too much about yourself. (I think someone said this earlier today, but I thought it first. So hmph! )
4b) You've had a super well-reasoned explanation for every. single. thing. you. have. done. in. the. game. (Not ture anymore, after yesterday's lynch.) It just was starting to seem a little too airtight.

5) I think it's really fishy that the day after I mention I'm thinking of you for a vote, I'm suddenly one of 2 remaining baddies along with Elo.

6) And maybe this one is unfair. But I know in the past, Epi has been known to choose players for certain roles. Since Sloonei is relatively new to the site, I can see him maybe putting a more experienced player on the team as well. Now for sure, you aren't the only one who would fit that bill, and it's pretty much an indefensible thought. It just is a very small factor in Paranoid Dan's mind.

All that said, I'm not sold on you being or not being bad yet. I just brought up your name because at the time I hadn't seen it mentioned much, and I thought it needed to be discussed to some degree because of my thoughts above.

I will say, though, that I think the kills being associated with your rainbow list in particular doesn't hold much water. I feel like maybe I've been misinterpreted on that point to be saying that you're somehow directing the baddies. I think I said this in an earlier post, but I don't really think that's the case. My rainbow list stance is basically, why take a chance of giving them any help at all?

I also think Rico's idea that you may be being framed (verb tenses?? help!) has some merit, and that alone makes me want to wait a good long while and evaluate carefully how I feel on you. If you're civ I'd hate to lose you.

Linki: Scotty, I think I answered your stuff. So we're good, right?

Double Linki: Yeah looking back, I can see how anyone lost it Day 3. Those were the latest votes I've ever seen.

Also, I'm pretty heavily leaning an espers vote for today. As bad as I'd feel for ika, it just looks worse and worse to me all the time.