The Syndicate

Ricochet wrote:Planning to revisit Russ. I think the points about his non-committal reads may stick out indeed. From MP's rebuttals, I'm only at gripes with the charge that he never mentioned most of the stuff he brought up. Isn't the point of ISO'ing a player to do a analysis of past posts and point out problems? Do you need to have foreshadowed pointing those problems by having pointed them out in real time?

LoRab wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

LoRab wrote:
What I read from your post that you mention was that I was particularly bringing up G-Man's behavior in old games, which is what I never did. Yes, I post about meta. Meta is a lot of how I think in games. And that another player came to a different conclusion than I did...well, that happens. We all see things differently.

And, again, it was the powerful part that pinged me in Golden's post--not the civ part. I have no problem with civ claims--I expect civs to say that they are civs. It was

And yes, I am getting frustrated. And there's too many posts to respond to remind everyone to eye me all you want and twirl for them. I'm a serious lynch candidate at this point, and that's really frustrating, when I know that the conclusion that people are coming to about me is not accurate.

And I didn't like the lynch day 2, either. I look forward to hearing why that power was used for the day 2 lynch in end game, because I didn't like having to choose between what at the time didn't seem like a good selection to me. But, being forced to vote one of those candidates, and having only mild pings to go on, I decided to leave it to the mafia gods. It's not the first time I've been part of making a tie.

LoRab wrote:I do care who is lynched.

LoRab wrote:I decided to leave it to the mafia gods

In general, I care who is lynched. When there are only 4 choices, none of whom I'm completely sure on, I'm comfortable with an aspect of chance between those choices.

No matter what, I had to make an active choice in that lynch and no matter how I voted it would have been a deciding vote. With no choices that had me convinced or even somewhat sure, I went with going for 1 of 2 choices.

And I'm not sure what that demonstrates, other than my unsurety about that vote.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Planning to revisit Russ. I think the points about his non-committal reads may stick out indeed. From MP's rebuttals, I'm only at gripes with the charge that he never mentioned most of the stuff he brought up. Isn't the point of ISO'ing a player to do a analysis of past posts and point out problems? Do you need to have foreshadowed pointing those problems by having pointed them out in real time?

I wasn't ISOing Russ there, only bringing up every instance where he discussed me before, specifically to show that he never mentioned any of the things before that I claim, so you all could fact check me on it.

I don't understand your last question. Can you reword?

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: More vigs (what you call ninjas here) = civs caring less about lynches and wanting to solve everything with vigs. The good old "X looks bad but let's lynch Y instead cuz someone can vig X"

More info-roles + info dumping = people building every suspicion on night info and ignoring real baddie hunting. However, balanced games provide the mafia means to counter those info roles, so the civs who do that almost always end up being trolled. Or set up by mafia.

More independents + civs generally not knowing what to do with independents = independents winning multiple games by themselves. Expect one cult victory a year, or maybe two.

Scotty wrote:

Cookie wrote: Thanks for doing that about me and I don't take anything personally at all (what would this game be like if we were all srs bsns). I actually appreciate that you've analyzed everything I've said because it puts myself into my perspective. Do you have any questions or want me to clarify anything?

I feel that I could vote for MP, as well. I find him the most outspoken and, like I said earlier, it's strange that he hasn't been NK'd yelled. If he is not an Inmate, I believe that whoever is on the middle of his rainbow list must be the remaining Inmates (or at least one or two). Those people are slowly making their way to the top because it seems that people already at the top of his list are being NK'd. It's quite smart because all of the civviest people are being killed, leaving the most suspicious. I just feel that if I were an Inmate, I would feel threatened by MP's interrogations. I haven't seen anything he's said particularly disconcerting.

My top four suspicious players are (in alphabetical order): DDL, espers, LoRab, MP

Thanks for getting back to me Cookie, and I'm glad I didn't seem too overbearing.
You did indeed answer my main question to you pertaining to suspicions. Now the follow-up to that is: why? I think you said why DDL and MP, but why espers, and LoRab?

I color'd my opinion you have about MP. I consistently see you give suspicion to someone, then back up in the same breath. Just commit to a read, woman!

You also seem rather calm in your thanking both DDL and I for ripping into you. I'm quite taken aback and need to go get a because that is not the reaction I was expecting to rise from you.

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Well, I'm not sure what I think of LoRab's defense. What do you all think?

Scotty wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Working on Elo ISO now.

Regarding espers, I think the fact that espers chose to get a replacement, instead of attempting to complete what he started, pings me considerably. I know it's WIFOM, but I don't understand why a civilian would replace out amid such heavy suspicion, especially when other candidates became a possibility instead of him today (such as Cookie and LoRab). I think espers was hoping that it would buy him the necessary time to stay away from lynching.

Also, espers never really left my "scummiest" read, since he was at the bottom yesterday. I am trying to not tunnel "easy" reads that the thread seems to mostly suspect, because I don't want us to fall into autopilot mode, but I realize today that perhaps I'm trying to overcompensate too much in that regard and that I should continue to apply appropriate pressure if someone is truly acting scummy. espers kept promising baddie hunting, but never delivered, and his D1 vote still reeks of last minute bussing.

I see that angle, it makes sense. espers subbing in is exactly what TGG did in BoB, when the water got too hot, and he was cold blooded mafia.

However, if espers was at the bottom yesterday, MP, why didn't you vote him? You could have singlehandedly put the last vote needed on him yesterday. But you put it on Cookie.


Yo Russ, you gonna answer my questions or at least look at my ISO, or just carry on as if it doesn't exist?

Ricochet wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Yo, what is this. Is tonight's method of dying flying out that window?

MovingPictures07 wrote:Re: your suspicions, in that order? aka LoRab most likely?

Do you think ika's alignment is important enough that he should be lynched soon/today?

Re: Scotty, I understand. However, I think you missed the point of my question. Is it possible you suspect my behavior during EoD D1 because you don't agree with my thoughts on Scotty? If it were someone else you did agree with, do you think you would you view it differently?

Cookie wrote:Ok, I have 20 minutes to catch up and to cast my vote. I won't be on later at EoD.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Planning to revisit Russ. I think the points about his non-committal reads may stick out indeed. From MP's rebuttals, I'm only at gripes with the charge that he never mentioned most of the stuff he brought up. Isn't the point of ISO'ing a player to do a analysis of past posts and point out problems? Do you need to have foreshadowed pointing those problems by having pointed them out in real time?

I wasn't ISOing Russ there, only bringing up every instance where he discussed me before, specifically to show that he never mentioned any of the things before that I claim, so you all could fact check me on it.

I don't understand your last question. Can you reword?

Ricochet wrote:I had to google quelled, that's how 3am and tired o'clock it is.

linki: I'm just hoping it won't be one of those "when you see it, you'll shit brix" reveal. It's too late and dark in my room to be spooked.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Re: your suspicions, in that order? aka LoRab most likely?

Do you think ika's alignment is important enough that he should be lynched soon/today?

Re: Scotty, I understand. However, I think you missed the point of my question. Is it possible you suspect my behavior during EoD D1 because you don't agree with my thoughts on Scotty? If it were someone else you did agree with, do you think you would you view it differently?

No specific order.

I'm not voting ika today. Call me frivolous, but I want to have some sportsmanship. I wanna give the guy one day, and one vote, to judge him. Day 5 I'll judge him normally, though.

ika wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Re: your suspicions, in that order? aka LoRab most likely?

Do you think ika's alignment is important enough that he should be lynched soon/today?

Re: Scotty, I understand. However, I think you missed the point of my question. Is it possible you suspect my behavior during EoD D1 because you don't agree with my thoughts on Scotty? If it were someone else you did agree with, do you think you would you view it differently?

No specific order.

I'm not voting ika today. Call me frivolous, but I want to have some sportsmanship. I wanna give the guy one day, and one vote, to judge him. Day 5 I'll judge him normally, though.

No, dont do that. that shit, if you think im scummy or evil or whatever you vote it. Dont give me a pass for sportmanship. As much as i understand it, i hate it when its imposed on me.

Be a man and back them up

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Planning to revisit Russ. I think the points about his non-committal reads may stick out indeed. From MP's rebuttals, I'm only at gripes with the charge that he never mentioned most of the stuff he brought up. Isn't the point of ISO'ing a player to do a analysis of past posts and point out problems? Do you need to have foreshadowed pointing those problems by having pointed them out in real time?

I wasn't ISOing Russ there, only bringing up every instance where he discussed me before, specifically to show that he never mentioned any of the things before that I claim, so you all could fact check me on it.

I don't understand your last question. Can you reword?

What he means is that your points about "Russtifinko never said that before" are unfair because Russtifinko might as well have done an ISO or something like that on you TODAY, and then noticed those points.

Ricochet wrote:
This is a good explanation too of what I intended to point out. So far I'm torn between this "never brought up before" accusation being a bit forced and the fact that Russ did in fact interact with MP in the past without a shade of committal reading.

ika wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: More vigs (what you call ninjas here) = civs caring less about lynches and wanting to solve everything with vigs. The good old "X looks bad but let's lynch Y instead cuz someone can vig X"

More info-roles + info dumping = people building every suspicion on night info and ignoring real baddie hunting. However, balanced games provide the mafia means to counter those info roles, so the civs who do that almost always end up being trolled. Or set up by mafia.

More independents + civs generally not knowing what to do with independents = independents winning multiple games by themselves. Expect one cult victory a year, or maybe two.

dude that sounds like my site, except we don't use vigs as much, its very pr heavy though but we use citizen to balance it out. but the same seems to happen is that citz get board or do jack shit. its rather amusing tbh to be cit cus our site meta also had this thing about crumbing your role and some ppl overdo it

what your site i might just have to go over there now :P

Ricochet wrote:One hour to go, if you have your biological clock set to EoD Late Madness mode

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

Cookie wrote:This may be contrary to what I appear to be, but I don't feel that clueless. I mean, I've played several games on another website where we relied on power roles, just did not engage in scumhunting before. That's really the only difference. I'm really impressed with the scumhunting abilities of whoever sus'd out Sloonei. Like, how did that even happen... The only other thing I am struggling with is remembering who said what. Many others in this game can refer back to how people played before, and they know peoples' personalities and what's out of place for that person. So how people are feeling about me and my behaviour and being unable to read me that well yet is exactly how I feel about every single other person in this game.

Anyway, to explain my vote for DH further, I didn't feel super confident about any of the people I suspected. When MP posted the snippets from DH's conversation, I remembered that that was DH and I have found that suspicious. I also did not intend for it to sound like I blamed DDL for DH being townie (as DDL seemed to think this?), but merely said that I was following someone who I thought seemed suspicious and who Golden thought was suspicious. It just seemed like a scummy move to myself (I found myself scummy?).

Power roles. Well I guess that makes sense. I know first-hand what too many power roles can do to the scumhunting ability of a mafia community.

(but they are so fun, I love role madness)

Either way, welcome to Syndicate. I'm rather new here, but from what I've seen, the scumhunting skills here are pretty real, and the ban on night info reveal prevents people from focusing too much on role powers.

juliets wrote:I was thinking through a decision between ika and cookie and then I saw ika's latest post to throw sportsmanship out the window - so I'm no longer worried about giving him more of a chance. I'm voting espers/ika. (He was higher on my list but the fact that he hasnt' been in the game for very long created pause for me on voting him).

ika wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:
I'm not voting ika today. Call me frivolous, but I want to have some sportsmanship. I wanna give the guy one day, and one vote, to judge him. Day 5 I'll judge him normally, though.

No, dont do that. that shit, if you think im scummy or evil or whatever you vote it. Dont give me a pass for sportmanship. As much as i understand it, i hate it when its imposed on me.

Be a man and back them up

Russtifinko wrote:Can't say I'm shocked MP is suspecting me. Bring it on, chum!

Imma go ahead and vote espers/ika for tonight, though. I don't see anything convincing me otherwise, and someone's gotta get to the polls here.

Linki: Hmm. Well, MP, I guess to respond to the majority of your points, I haven't said most of the things I brought up because I haven't posted much at all about anything. As I said, that's changing today, so I'm saying what's on my mind.

As to being noncommittal, I feel like every time I've posted I've tried to be super clear about what I think of whom, since I haven't been posting much otherwise. Yeah, my mind has changed on some people, and yeah, since I haven't posted as much you haven't gotten to see the full progression of those changes. Saying I'm not committing too any reads is probably overplaying your hand tho.

Double Linki: Let me post! And stop it with the living rooms!

Ricochet wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

LoRab wrote:
What I read from your post that you mention was that I was particularly bringing up G-Man's behavior in old games, which is what I never did. Yes, I post about meta. Meta is a lot of how I think in games. And that another player came to a different conclusion than I did...well, that happens. We all see things differently.

And, again, it was the powerful part that pinged me in Golden's post--not the civ part. I have no problem with civ claims--I expect civs to say that they are civs. It was

And yes, I am getting frustrated. And there's too many posts to respond to remind everyone to eye me all you want and twirl for them. I'm a serious lynch candidate at this point, and that's really frustrating, when I know that the conclusion that people are coming to about me is not accurate.

And I didn't like the lynch day 2, either. I look forward to hearing why that power was used for the day 2 lynch in end game, because I didn't like having to choose between what at the time didn't seem like a good selection to me. But, being forced to vote one of those candidates, and having only mild pings to go on, I decided to leave it to the mafia gods. It's not the first time I've been part of making a tie.

LoRab wrote:I do care who is lynched.

LoRab wrote:I decided to leave it to the mafia gods

In general, I care who is lynched. When there are only 4 choices, none of whom I'm completely sure on, I'm comfortable with an aspect of chance between those choices.

No matter what, I had to make an active choice in that lynch and no matter how I voted it would have been a deciding vote. With no choices that had me convinced or even somewhat sure, I went with going for 1 of 2 choices.

And I'm not sure what that demonstrates, other than my unsurety about that vote.

But you didn't make a deciding vote. You made a tie vote and you waited (and wavered between the candidates) till the tie would have been decisive. Why not vote for MM the first time you saw a tie opportunity (4-4 each) I think and feel good about the same rationale that "the gods will decide" or someone else left to vote will take the lynch in a different direction?

Instead, you designed the tie at 5-5, forced Golden to have to save himself and counting the three votes left as improbable to ever happen. Would this sound like a fair tie making to you, if someone else would have done it?

Ricochet wrote:My gut read of ika is that she landed on a bad role and is bombing the thread kamikaze style. No way am I getting into more reading than that, at this stage of the Day - I don't even know her style from previous games; I think she was in Omerta...and didn't do shit...?

Right now, I'm considering voting the following

LoRab (shall I make a tie for her? )
ika

and thinking about how I feel on Russ.

Cookie also in mind. I see she stuck to her espers read since ever and nothing more. Does that tell anyone anything new?

juliets wrote:I was thinking through a decision between ika and cookie and then I saw ika's latest post to throw sportsmanship out the window - so I'm no longer worried about giving him more of a chance. I'm voting espers/ika. (He was higher on my list but the fact that he hasnt' been in the game for very long created pause for me on voting him).

Elohcin wrote:

ika wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:
I'm not voting ika today. Call me frivolous, but I want to have some sportsmanship. I wanna give the guy one day, and one vote, to judge him. Day 5 I'll judge him normally, though.

No, dont do that. that shit, if you think im scummy or evil or whatever you vote it. Dont give me a pass for sportmanship. As much as i understand it, i hate it when its imposed on me.

Be a man and back them up

Sportsmanship:ethical, appropriate, polite and fair behavior while participating in a game or athletic event.

Why show ika sportsmanship when he isn't showing any to us. I am voting ika.

Cookie wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Cookie wrote: Thanks for doing that about me and I don't take anything personally at all (what would this game be like if we were all srs bsns). I actually appreciate that you've analyzed everything I've said because it puts myself into my perspective. Do you have any questions or want me to clarify anything?

I feel that I could vote for MP, as well. I find him the most outspoken and, like I said earlier, it's strange that he hasn't been NK'd yelled. If he is not an Inmate, I believe that whoever is on the middle of his rainbow list must be the remaining Inmates (or at least one or two). Those people are slowly making their way to the top because it seems that people already at the top of his list are being NK'd. It's quite smart because all of the civviest people are being killed, leaving the most suspicious. I just feel that if I were an Inmate, I would feel threatened by MP's interrogations. I haven't seen anything he's said particularly disconcerting.

My top four suspicious players are (in alphabetical order): DDL, espers, LoRab, MP

Thanks for getting back to me Cookie, and I'm glad I didn't seem too overbearing.
You did indeed answer my main question to you pertaining to suspicions. Now the follow-up to that is: why? I think you said why DDL and MP, but why espers, and LoRab?

I color'd my opinion you have about MP. I consistently see you give suspicion to someone, then back up in the same breath. Just commit to a read, woman!

You also seem rather calm in your thanking both DDL and I for ripping into you. I'm quite taken aback and need to go get a because that is not the reaction I was expecting to rise from you.

Espers (now Ika) because of the last minute D1 vote. LoRab because of the post by DDL.

To explain the coloured part about MP: I can vote for him simply because he's not been NK'd yet. Not because of something he's said. In fact, he is the civviest civvy I c. Apart from him still being alive. I won't vote for MP at this point, but I will keep him on my radar because there are other people with more incriminating evidence. I'm going to review the posts about LoRab and Elo and see which one I find most suspicious (I think it's Elo that juliet posted about). Then I will weigh the option of voting between those two or Espers (Ika).

Have a drink for me! Good idea! I'll get some win *Cheers*

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Russtifinko wrote:Can't say I'm shocked MP is suspecting me. Bring it on, chum!

Imma go ahead and vote espers/ika for tonight, though. I don't see anything convincing me otherwise, and someone's gotta get to the polls here.

Linki: Hmm. Well, MP, I guess to respond to the majority of your points, I haven't said most of the things I brought up because I haven't posted much at all about anything. As I said, that's changing today, so I'm saying what's on my mind.

As to being noncommittal, I feel like every time I've posted I've tried to be super clear about what I think of whom, since I haven't been posting much otherwise. Yeah, my mind has changed on some people, and yeah, since I haven't posted as much you haven't gotten to see the full progression of those changes. Saying I'm not committing too any reads is probably overplaying your hand tho.

Double Linki: Let me post! And stop it with the living rooms!

I understand, Russ. I just hope to see more thought process from you, because otherwise it's difficult to discern whether you are latching onto suspicions for convenience or whether you just haven't been fully articulating why you suspect whom you suspect. Does that make sense?

juliets wrote: I read espers today and find myself in agreement with what has been said here. He did keep promising to do more baddie hunting but in my view came up short. And his Day 1 vote certainly looked like jumping onto a teammate when all hope is lost to gain civ cred. On top of all this he left the game and we had not heard anything from him that I read that mentioned not being able to keep up because of RL or anything that would be the usual reason people drop out. Now that someone has subbed in I feel a little guilty thinking about putting a vote there but nevertheless it's between he and cookie for me. I though Lorab's defense post was good so I am going to drop her off my list for today. I'm not going to have time to study these latest cases like on Russ and MP for this round of voting but I will before the next vote.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Re: your suspicions, in that order? aka LoRab most likely?

Do you think ika's alignment is important enough that he should be lynched soon/today?

Re: Scotty, I understand. However, I think you missed the point of my question. Is it possible you suspect my behavior during EoD D1 because you don't agree with my thoughts on Scotty? If it were someone else you did agree with, do you think you would you view it differently?

No specific order.

I'm not voting ika today. Call me frivolous, but I want to have some sportsmanship. I wanna give the guy one day, and one vote, to judge him. Day 5 I'll judge him normally, though.

Ricochet wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Russtifinko wrote:Can't say I'm shocked MP is suspecting me. Bring it on, chum!

Imma go ahead and vote espers/ika for tonight, though. I don't see anything convincing me otherwise, and someone's gotta get to the polls here.

Linki: Hmm. Well, MP, I guess to respond to the majority of your points, I haven't said most of the things I brought up because I haven't posted much at all about anything. As I said, that's changing today, so I'm saying what's on my mind.

As to being noncommittal, I feel like every time I've posted I've tried to be super clear about what I think of whom, since I haven't been posting much otherwise. Yeah, my mind has changed on some people, and yeah, since I haven't posted as much you haven't gotten to see the full progression of those changes. Saying I'm not committing too any reads is probably overplaying your hand tho.

Double Linki: Let me post! And stop it with the living rooms!

I understand, Russ. I just hope to see more thought process from you, because otherwise it's difficult to discern whether you are latching onto suspicions for convenience or whether you just haven't been fully articulating why you suspect whom you suspect. Does that make sense?

So do you still think he's Mafia and want to vote him? These "I understand" posts after heaving hunting on someone are also a bit of a leitmotif in your repertoire.

link: get what gender right? LoRab is f

Ricochet wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Planning to revisit Russ. I think the points about his non-committal reads may stick out indeed. From MP's rebuttals, I'm only at gripes with the charge that he never mentioned most of the stuff he brought up. Isn't the point of ISO'ing a player to do a analysis of past posts and point out problems? Do you need to have foreshadowed pointing those problems by having pointed them out in real time?

I wasn't ISOing Russ there, only bringing up every instance where he discussed me before, specifically to show that he never mentioned any of the things before that I claim, so you all could fact check me on it.

I don't understand your last question. Can you reword?

What he means is that your points about "Russtifinko never said that before" are unfair because Russtifinko might as well have done an ISO or something like that on you TODAY, and then noticed those points.

This is a good explanation too of what I intended to point out. So far I'm torn between this "never brought up before" accusation being a bit forced and the fact that Russ did in fact interact with MP in the past without a shade of committal reading.

LoRab wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

LoRab wrote:
What I read from your post that you mention was that I was particularly bringing up G-Man's behavior in old games, which is what I never did. Yes, I post about meta. Meta is a lot of how I think in games. And that another player came to a different conclusion than I did...well, that happens. We all see things differently.

And, again, it was the powerful part that pinged me in Golden's post--not the civ part. I have no problem with civ claims--I expect civs to say that they are civs. It was

And yes, I am getting frustrated. And there's too many posts to respond to remind everyone to eye me all you want and twirl for them. I'm a serious lynch candidate at this point, and that's really frustrating, when I know that the conclusion that people are coming to about me is not accurate.

And I didn't like the lynch day 2, either. I look forward to hearing why that power was used for the day 2 lynch in end game, because I didn't like having to choose between what at the time didn't seem like a good selection to me. But, being forced to vote one of those candidates, and having only mild pings to go on, I decided to leave it to the mafia gods. It's not the first time I've been part of making a tie.

LoRab wrote:I do care who is lynched.

LoRab wrote:I decided to leave it to the mafia gods

In general, I care who is lynched. When there are only 4 choices, none of whom I'm completely sure on, I'm comfortable with an aspect of chance between those choices.

No matter what, I had to make an active choice in that lynch and no matter how I voted it would have been a deciding vote. With no choices that had me convinced or even somewhat sure, I went with going for 1 of 2 choices.

And I'm not sure what that demonstrates, other than my unsurety about that vote.

But you didn't make a deciding vote. You made a tie vote and you waited (and wavered between the candidates) till the tie would have been decisive. Why not vote for MM the first time you saw a tie opportunity (4-4 each) I think and feel good about the same rationale that "the gods will decide" or someone else left to vote will take the lynch in a different direction?

Instead, you designed the tie at 5-5, forced Golden to have to save himself and counting the three votes left as improbable to ever happen. Would this sound like a fair tie making to you, if someone else would have done it?

I generally vote as late as I can--it gives me the opportunity to take everything into account.

And yes, I would have understood it if someone else had done it.

linkitis: @Dragon: Yes, I agree I've been tunnel visioning. It's a bad habit. And nothing else that he's posted has really stuck out to me one way or the other, so I haven't mentioned it.

And, over the course of 4 phases, I've also been defending myself. And many of the posts against me have had to do with the LD thing, so I've had to continue talking about it. And when needing to defend, the ability to consider and post about other suspicions is limited.

And you are wrong in your vote for me.

And...okay.

Ricochet wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Russtifinko wrote:Can't say I'm shocked MP is suspecting me. Bring it on, chum!

Imma go ahead and vote espers/ika for tonight, though. I don't see anything convincing me otherwise, and someone's gotta get to the polls here.

Linki: Hmm. Well, MP, I guess to respond to the majority of your points, I haven't said most of the things I brought up because I haven't posted much at all about anything. As I said, that's changing today, so I'm saying what's on my mind.

As to being noncommittal, I feel like every time I've posted I've tried to be super clear about what I think of whom, since I haven't been posting much otherwise. Yeah, my mind has changed on some people, and yeah, since I haven't posted as much you haven't gotten to see the full progression of those changes. Saying I'm not committing too any reads is probably overplaying your hand tho.

Double Linki: Let me post! And stop it with the living rooms!

I understand, Russ. I just hope to see more thought process from you, because otherwise it's difficult to discern whether you are latching onto suspicions for convenience or whether you just haven't been fully articulating why you suspect whom you suspect. Does that make sense?

So do you still think he's Mafia and want to vote him? These "I understand" posts after heaving hunting on someone are also a bit of a leitmotif in your repertoire.

link: get what gender right? LoRab is f

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Re: your suspicions, in that order? aka LoRab most likely?

Do you think ika's alignment is important enough that he should be lynched soon/today?

Re: Scotty, I understand. However, I think you missed the point of my question. Is it possible you suspect my behavior during EoD D1 because you don't agree with my thoughts on Scotty? If it were someone else you did agree with, do you think you would you view it differently?

No specific order.

I'm not voting ika today. Call me frivolous, but I want to have some sportsmanship. I wanna give the guy one day, and one vote, to judge him. Day 5 I'll judge him normally, though.

Order them, now. (Applying the pressure).