The Syndicate

I suspect that the recruiter role either was mafia aligned with restrictions, or third party without

Cookie 2 wrote:I did ALOT of reading last night, and I have not totally processed it all. I will say that I think I have a reall good handle on who Dom is, and I think he posted a blatant lie in his mega post to me. The part about how a baddie role that can't die is impossible. I have really, really good reason to believe that if he is who i think he is, that that is a false statement, that he knows better.

Some thinhs sig has said I have actualy agreed with, and think my day one theory about a set up being proved false, that my thoughts on him don't hold up. Same on Cobalt; I think i was reacting to tone rather than content.

And WTF @Lacey. Someone posting in the nature of the curse rather than playing it should not be called out for that. Personally I try not to play a curse, but I also try not to judge others for doing so. If you choose to play it, fine, but don't call out others for adhering to the nature of the curse.

I will be at work when this ends, and i got caught up in a different thread last night, so my plans to post more here tanked. But I am going to try to make detente here and trust Cobalt with a vote for Dom.

Voting DOM 2

Oh, here's the post where Cookie suspects me.

Cookie, I am certain I know who you are, and wouldn't be surprised if you had me pegged. That aside, I still don't believe mafia has an "unlynchable" player, and the main reason is because this is a closed setup. That is an incredibly powerful mafia role to have even in the simplest of closed games. On top of that, we've already lynched one mafia player who had the ability to switch a lynch. So also for the sake of parity, I doubt there is a second mafia player who cannot be lynched, or a godfather as some people call it.

Linki: Bass, according to the OP, it is a third party.

And Cookie, it appears that your entire suspicion of me is based on this one statement that you think is a lie. I understand why you think it is a lie, but I think we both know that such roles are pretty uncommon in games on this site, especially on the mafia side of the fence.

I don't think such a role would fit into this game.

I have a new suspect and his name is Epignosis 2. I'll try to keep this short and to the point.

Epignosis 2 wrote:With Long Con 2 flipping mafia I find it more likely that Synonym 2 is clean.

This is from Night 3.

Epignosis 2 wrote:Ihave to go eat, so don't have much time I will be back, but will be voting. I decided I will vote for Syn 2 this phase. Iwill explain more later


Black Rock is asking to be lynched I don't think she is mafia so I would rather wait and lynch someone who I think could be.

And this is from Day 4. Talk about a quick turn around on the Syn 2 issue. Note that Epig 2 doesn't think BR 2 is mafia.

Epignosis 2 wrote:Timmer post was strange but not one a mafia would make, if Synonym 2 flips civilian he is on the chopping block. Rereading Elohcin's post and then Llama 2 reasons for voting Synonym 2 I found that to be a better lynch then either Black Rock or Elohcin. Out of the three I'm more confident with a Synonym 2 lynch then Black Rock or elohcin especially after elohcin last post. However, I could just as easily see Elohcin and Synonym being on the same team assuming there is two mafia teams or even if there is one though that seems more unlikely.
Only a bit of time left in this phase and then night phase right?
Apparently Black Rock 2 is lynching themselves, I will be reading over her argument on cookie as well as cookies post.

"However, I could just as easily see Elohcin and Synonym being on the same team assuming there is two mafia teams or even if there is one though that seems more unlikely." That doesn't make sense to me. Syn 2 was being suspected for cashing in on his LC2 suspicion. Elohcin 2 was suspected for defending LC2. What is Epignosis 2's argument for them being teammates? Looks like faux logic to me. We now know that neither of them were mafia. More defense of BR2.

So Epignosis 2 has done nothing but defend Black Rock 2 up to this point. Okay, maybe Epig 2 simply has a strong civvie read on BR2. Or maybe Epig 2 is a baddie and knows BR2 isn't on his team. Now let's see what happens after BR2 flips tracker.

Epignosis 2 wrote:The argument that Golden didn't lynch Black Rock and accidentally voted Bass makes little sense. We didn't get a list of which mafia was on her lynch or anything like that. This argument seems to be reaching especially since Golden said he would vote for her.

I'm weighing why if mafia he would purposely do this and it doesn't make much sense. Know without being able to info/role reveal in this game, golden could be the seemer but unless the mafia have a revive ability as well it would make little sense. Unless we are saying a civ revived him by accident and he was a mafia member?

I will consider this Golden thing but I don't believe he voted for Bass on accident. Interestingly also is Synonym 2 response to Black Rock in the post Dom quoted.

Epignosis 2 wrote:The issue I'm seeing with Golden being mafia is why would they kill him? Black Rock 2 was being considered as suspicious for awhile, she was going to get lynched at some point maybe this was a set up. The other option is that if there is a vigilante then they killed Golden 2 and it wasn't the mafia. This then brings up his revival, was the a misused civ power or a mafia ability? Assuming Golden is mafia that is.

Epignosis 2 wrote:Ah unfortunately this doesn't help us much, but at this point I would rather lynch Synonyms 2 then Golden 2.

Where has Epignosis 2's trust in BR2 gone? He seemed certain that BR2 wasn't bad, but after BR2 flipped tracker, Epig 2 is casting doubt on BR2's motives. Also back to suspecting Syn 2.

Epignosis 2 wrote:This reminds me of Sig's performance from Frisky Dingo well thought out theory but based on logic that is well completely lacking logical. So either he is a very good sock, a confused civilian, or a mafia trying to save Golden 2 a fellow mafia.

I'm interested in sig2 post it did make me suspicious and just confused me about Golden more. I had actually while confused saw logic in it until Lipsticklacey 2 pointed the above out.

This all goes back to whether or not Golden is innocent. What was Black Rocks purpose of her self lynch, As a mafia she might have lasted longer but would have eventfully died as a portion of players were ready to vote for her. Could this have also been done to save Synonyms from a lynch he and Elochin were the leading lynches until Black Rock then voted for herself and Sig 2 voted for her. Golden meant to vote for her.
Sig 2 opinion has shifted about Golden as well as of yesterday he was ready to lynch Golden and was firmly on Black Rock 2 side what changed?

I would blike to hear more people's thoughts on Sig 2 as well as the fact that this Black Rock matter has taken up the night and the first portion of the day,could this be a mafia distraction to help us forget yesterday's targets?

More doubt cast upon BR2. For someone who didn't think BR2 was bad all the way up until the flip, Epignosis 2 sure doesn't want to follow BR2's lead re: Golden 2 now.

I think these actions point to Epignosis 2 being a player who defended BR2 knowing she was civ, right up until the flip, at which point BR2's role became a problem for someone on Epig 2's team.

Some of you would make good trolls. You do a great job of making me reply when I already told myself not to.

Cookie your reason for voting me is pretty damn terrible. Not because it could result in my death, of because I'm civ, but for the sheer numbers game of it. There are 15 players are alive right? Only one person died that we know for a fact was Mafia. And there are probably third parties at play. Given the starting numbers of players, I would guess that the game started with a solid 5 Mafia players. Add in that there are usually 1-3 third parties in every game and the possibility that about 4 Mafia are left, we maybe have somewhere around 8 civs left.

Those aren't the kind of numbers that would allow for you to be playing wannabe moderator trying to get me bumped off for no reason other than that you don't like me. Killing me is of no use to town. If you want to vote me, go ahead. But at least make a viable case for me before you do.

Reywas 2 wrote:I have a new suspect and his name is

Would anyone dispute my knack for making friends? Golden 2, you're probably the only person who has an inkling of who I actually am, what say you?

Bass 2 wrote:Would anyone dispute my knack for making friends? Golden 2, you're probably the only person who has an inkling of who I actually am, what say you?

Bass 2 wrote:Would anyone dispute my knack for making friends? Golden 2, you're probably the only person who has an inkling of who I actually am, what say you?

I know who you are! You are Bass2!

I am voting for SVS. I haven't heard from her in a while and I think I know why.

Something tells me mafia are having a field day letting this boo thing permeate the thread. I do not think boo is bad or should be voted for. But I have a strange inkling that SVS is having a great time not having to be involved.

Reywas 2, we are not yet sure if elochin was civilian or mafia I thought?

Speaking for my Syn/Elo point I was very back and forth on him. Synonyms (Cobalt) had some similar town behavior, however he has been known to throw his own teammates under the bus to appear more civilian, something about his playstyle was off, and I believe he mainly pursued Long Con for revenge purposes.

I thought Black Rock 2 was the detective she flipped people began to talk about a seemer and I already was leaning that Golden was a civilian her role in no way could make us certain Golden was bad. So that very much flipped my opinion on Black Rock and lead me to be less willing to lynch Golden. While this is a WIFOM argument why would I suddenly switch my thoughts on Black Rock after saying she was a civjust to defend one player. While I haven't played many games as mafia I'm not the type to just stick my neck out and 180 to save someone. In fact I think your whole argument is kinda weak.

@Dom okay thanks just wondering. What do you think about Lipsticklacey 2?

Sufficient answer.

Epi 2, I believe Reywas 2's argument is that you were back and forth without any in-between. Not wanting to vote someone one night to immediately suggesting them the next day without anything is believe is strange, wouldn't you agree?

Epignosis 2 wrote:Reywas 2, we are not yet sure if elochin was civilian or mafia I thought?

Speaking for my Syn/Elo point I was very back and forth on him. Synonyms (Cobalt) had some similar town behavior, however he has been known to throw his own teammates under the bus to appear more civilian, something about his playstyle was off, and I believe he mainly pursued Long Con for revenge purposes.

I thought Black Rock 2 was the detective she flipped people began to talk about a seemer and I already was leaning that Golden was a civilian her role in no way could make us certain Golden was bad. So that very much flipped my opinion on Black Rock and lead me to be less willing to lynch Golden. While this is a WIFOM argument why would I suddenly switch my thoughts on Black Rock after saying she was a civjust to defend one player. While I haven't played many games as mafia I'm not the type to just stick my neck out and 180 to save someone. In fact I think your whole argument is kinda weak.

@Dom okay thanks just wondering. What do you think about Lipsticklacey 2?

I imagine the real Epignosis would have a stroke if he had as many grammatical errors as you have in your posts, Epi 2. He is Mr. English, after all.

Llama 2 wrote:

Bass 2 wrote:Would anyone dispute my knack for making friends? Golden 2, you're probably the only person who has an inkling of who I actually am, what say you?

I know who you are! You are Bass2!

I am voting for SVS. I haven't heard from her in a while and I think I know why.

Something tells me mafia are having a field day letting this boo thing permeate the thread. I do not think boo is bad or should be voted for. But I have a strange inkling that SVS is having a great time not having to be involved.

Interesting point about SVS, besides the lack of posting do you have any other reasons to be suspicious of them?

linki: I did change my position on players that is true, but I have followed through with most of my reads with lynch votes.
@Llama 2 maybe that is why we have a few inactive players, one of them is in the hospital for a grammatical induced stroke?

Llama 2 wrote:

Bass 2 wrote:Would anyone dispute my knack for making friends? Golden 2, you're probably the only person who has an inkling of who I actually am, what say you?

I know who you are! You are Bass2!

I am voting for SVS. I haven't heard from her in a while and I think I know why.

Something tells me mafia are having a field day letting this boo thing permeate the thread. I do not think boo is bad or should be voted for. But I have a strange inkling that SVS is having a great time not having to be involved.

This is my first time in the thread today.

I got home from work a couple hours ago and then took a nap. I've even stated in here that my shift at work has recently altered and it has effected when I've been around, but I have still been plenty active almost every day. You seem to me like you're just capitalizing on me being away from the game at this particular moment so you can render this accusation.

Now that I'm here I'll state my opinion on the boo lynch: I don't support it because it looks like a very easy place for people to deposit pressure-free votes. His conduct might be frustrating, but that's not relevant to which team he plays for.

SVS 2 wrote:I've even stated in here that my shift at work has recently altered and it has effected when I've been around, but I have still been plenty active almost every day.

I must have caught Epi2's grammar sickness.

boo 2 wrote:Some of you would make good trolls. You do a great job of making me reply when I already told myself not to.

Cookie your reason for voting me is pretty damn terrible. Not because it could result in my death, of because I'm civ, but for the sheer numbers game of it. There are 15 players are alive right? Only one person died that we know for a fact was Mafia. And there are probably third parties at play. Given the starting numbers of players, I would guess that the game started with a solid 5 Mafia players. Add in that there are usually 1-3 third parties in every game and the possibility that about 4 Mafia are left, we maybe have somewhere around 8 civs left.

Those aren't the kind of numbers that would allow for you to be playing wannabe moderator trying to get me bumped off for no reason other than that you don't like me. Killing me is of no use to town. If you want to vote me, go ahead. But at least make a viable case for me before you do.

I think that apart from the snark, boo makes a sound point here. The people voting for him should answer to it, because we're far enough into this game that policy lynching someone can really serve no benefit to the civs unless he is bad, and it can definitely hurt the civs if he isn't. If someone can make that case that he's bad then great, do that. Otherwise all four of those votes look bad to me.

Dom 2 wrote:And Cookie, it appears that your entire suspicion of me is based on this one statement that you think is a lie. I understand why you think it is a lie, but I think we both know that such roles are pretty uncommon in games on this site, especially on the mafia side of the fence.

I don't think such a role would fit into this game.

I agree with you that it's uncommon, at least in my own experience generally playing mafia all over. I would ask though what brings you to the conclusion that such a role wouldn't fit in this game?

SVS 2 wrote:

boo 2 wrote:Some of you would make good trolls. You do a great job of making me reply when I already told myself not to.

Cookie your reason for voting me is pretty damn terrible. Not because it could result in my death, of because I'm civ, but for the sheer numbers game of it. There are 15 players are alive right? Only one person died that we know for a fact was Mafia. And there are probably third parties at play. Given the starting numbers of players, I would guess that the game started with a solid 5 Mafia players. Add in that there are usually 1-3 third parties in every game and the possibility that about 4 Mafia are left, we maybe have somewhere around 8 civs left.

Those aren't the kind of numbers that would allow for you to be playing wannabe moderator trying to get me bumped off for no reason other than that you don't like me. Killing me is of no use to town. If you want to vote me, go ahead. But at least make a viable case for me before you do.

I think that apart from the snark, boo makes a sound point here. The people voting for him should answer to it, because we're far enough into this game that policy lynching someone can really serve no benefit to the civs unless he is bad, and it can definitely hurt the civs if he isn't. If someone can make that case that he's bad then great, do that. Otherwise all four of those votes look bad to me.

You're missing the point of 'policy lynching' someone then. It isn't about getting ahead in the game, it's about making this game, and future games, more enjoyable.

Boo 2 has expressed an intent not to change his behavior. If he isn't going to stop being an asshat in this game, I see no reason to expect him to not be an asshat in future games. And asshats aren't fun.

He has also outright stated that he does not intend to post, only vote. So fine, here's a case for why he is bad from an in game perspective.

You are calling 4 one time votes suspicious, because they are easy and do not help the civilians. How does keeping someone who has said they plan to do a drive-by vote in this and every remaining lynch in this game have any accountability for their votes? How can you possibly trust the intentions behind each vote? If the person is bad, how are you ever supposed to figure that out when they say nothing?

And you have to agree that makes him look bad, because it's your own logic for why we look bad. Only there's more to him looking bad, because we're actually posting and taking aaccountability for our
lynch votes, even if you do not agree with the reasons for them.

Lipsticklacey 2 wrote:You're missing the point of 'policy lynching' someone then. It isn't about getting ahead in the game, it's about making this game, and future games, more enjoyable.

Boo 2 has expressed an intent not to change his behavior. If he isn't going to stop being an asshat in this game, I see no reason to expect him to not be an asshat in future games. And asshats aren't fun.

He has also outright stated that he does not intend to post, only vote. So fine, here's a case for why he is bad from an in game perspective.

You are calling 4 one time votes suspicious, because they are easy and do not help the civilians. How does keeping someone who has said they plan to do a drive-by vote in this and every remaining lynch in this game have any accountability for their votes? How can you possibly trust the intentions behind each vote? If the person is bad, how are you ever supposed to figure that out when they say nothing?

And you have to agree that makes him look bad, because it's your own logic for why we look bad. Only there's more to him looking bad, because we're actually posting and taking aaccountability for our
lynch votes, even if you do not agree with the reasons for them.

I think it is the job of the hosts and mod to take care of players who are making the game less fun for everyone because of their behavior. I don't know what Rox and splints might have planned, but I think a player who refuses to post in the game thread is as deserving of a modkill as anyone who doesn't vote or send in actions I should think. Participation requires all three.

Hostesses, do you have a policy in mind for players who refuse to post in the game thread long-term?

You're right that it'd be hard to hold him accountable for his votes and to get a read on him. I think that's why a modkill would be necessary, that is a valid description of why players should be obligated to make at least some relevant posts in the thread. Civs can't fairly be expected to get a read on players who don't play.

I don't think his behavior implies that he is bad in this game as much as it implies that he is frustrated, much like Synonym earlier in the game but worse. Basically I don't think I have ever supported a policy lynch in any game. I can understand wanting to move on from a negative atmosphere, but I'm also concerned with winning the game and this lynch is an important part of seeing to that objective. Boo is a completely unknown entity in part because of his own behavior, whereas there are probably more substantial discussions to be fielded about other players.

He's already made the game less fun for other players, and hasn't been modkilled. I don't think there is a plan to deal with him, I think it's up to us.

What right does he have to be frustrated? He's an unrepentant asshat, having a fit over his inability to be an uncensored asshat.

I'd rather enjoy the rest of the game and lose, then have it be an unpleasant experience and win.

I can appreciate that you don't agree, but if you are going to spin that as me and people who share my point of view are bad for not agreeing with you, you're the one who is being opportunistic, not us.

@ Lacey

I don't think you're all bad, but someone among the four could be. I thought boo's point was a good one though and I'd like to see how it's received by the other three who voted for him. I'm always wary of votes that appear easy to me, and policy lynches are the easiest it gets. You've stated your case and while I don't agree with your logic, I don't necessarily suspect you for it.

SVS 2 wrote:@ Lacey

I don't think you're all bad, but someone among the four could be. I thought boo's point was a good one though and I'd like to see how it's received by the other three who voted for him. I'm always wary of votes that appear easy to me, and policy lynches are the easiest it gets. You've stated your case and while I don't agree with your logic, I don't necessarily suspect you for it.

Someone among any group of four in a mafia game could be bad. My problem with your logic is that suspecting anyone who votes for him because they cast an easy vote, to the point you would be willing to vote for them, would just be you casting an easy vote of your own. The difference would be they would recognize the vote was easy, while you would become a hypocrite. Then who looks worse?

Lipsticklacey 2 wrote:

SVS 2 wrote:@ Lacey

I don't think you're all bad, but someone among the four could be. I thought boo's point was a good one though and I'd like to see how it's received by the other three who voted for him. I'm always wary of votes that appear easy to me, and policy lynches are the easiest it gets. You've stated your case and while I don't agree with your logic, I don't necessarily suspect you for it.

Someone among any group of four in a mafia game could be bad. My problem with your logic is that suspecting anyone who votes for him because they cast an easy vote, to the point you would be willing to vote for them, would just be you casting an easy vote of your own. The difference would be they would recognize the vote was easy, while you would become a hypocrite. Then who looks worse?

I've stated my reason for concern with this specific group of four. If I were to vote for one of you solely on the strength of the boo vote, then yes I agree that wouldn't be the strongest case. I haven't done that though. I presented my misgivings and prompted the four of you to expand on your votes. I've not voted for anyone yet and I have no intention of doing so tonight. If I were to vote for one of the four boo voters, it'd be because that vote pinged me, I didn't like their response to my following prompt (assuming those responses eventually come), and I explored their posts further to arrive upon a more substantial justification.

SVS 2 wrote:

Lipsticklacey 2 wrote:

SVS 2 wrote:@ Lacey

I don't think you're all bad, but someone among the four could be. I thought boo's point was a good one though and I'd like to see how it's received by the other three who voted for him. I'm always wary of votes that appear easy to me, and policy lynches are the easiest it gets. You've stated your case and while I don't agree with your logic, I don't necessarily suspect you for it.

Someone among any group of four in a mafia game could be bad. My problem with your logic is that suspecting anyone who votes for him because they cast an easy vote, to the point you would be willing to vote for them, would just be you casting an easy vote of your own. The difference would be they would recognize the vote was easy, while you would become a hypocrite. Then who looks worse?

I've stated my reason for concern with this specific group of four. If I were to vote for one of you solely on the strength of the boo vote, then yes I agree that wouldn't be the strongest case. I haven't done that though. I presented my misgivings and prompted the four of you to expand on your votes. I've not voted for anyone yet and I have no intention of doing so tonight. If I were to vote for one of the four boo voters, it'd be because that vote pinged me, I didn't like their response to my following prompt (assuming those responses eventually come), and I explored their posts further to arrive upon a more substantial justification.

That's good. There are other people who share your opinion, but aren't dealing with it the same way you are. You're an easy way for me to deliver a message to them that I am worried about them for their actions today, coupled with some post Elohcin 2 stuff, without having to call them out, since while worried by them, I am also still undecided.

Lipsticklacey 2 wrote:He's already made the game less fun for other players, and hasn't been modkilled.

You appear to be oblivious. So I'll let you in on a secret.

So have you.

And I dont mean you've had an effect on me. Others. They may say something after the game, they may not. But believe me, I am not an isolated incident in this game.

Going back to the page before this one to get caught up. As annoyed as I am with this little pitchfork mob I have acquired, something isn't letting me drop the game.

Also lol at "sanctimonious". I actually had to google that one believe it or not. I didn't see it the first time.

Nice to meet you pot. I'm kettle.

Also I am going to vote for one of the people that votes for me btw. While some of you, if not all of you, may be genuinely upset with me, all it would take for mafia to force a mislynch in this situation is to turn their reactions to the incident up to 11, and place a vote on me. It's an extremely easy set up. My nephew could think of that one.

And maybe not literally, but killing me will rewind time. Back to Day 3 to be specific. No that isn't an "info dump". Simply a figure of speech.

Stop it with the personal attacks.

Boo, you don't get to come in and claim bts knowledge about lacey. If people are talking to you about game stuff out of game, then it is probably only because it was necessary to resolve issues. You don't then get to bring that into the thread.
Whoever contacted Dom 2 - Dom, I hope you told the hosts, that person should be modkilled. There is no excuse for trying to interfere with the game behind the scenes.

Can we please play the game, instead of playing that incident.

I really regret my vote for boo - I stepped away from the thread and got a bit of context, although reading through everything I've begun to lose it again.

THESE HOSTS DESERVE BETTER THAN CONTINUED RULE INFRINGEMENTS BOTH IN THE THREAD AND BEHIND THE SCENES.

The mods dealt with the things they felt they needed to deal with. That is THEIR JOB. It is not OUR job as players to play mod. Again, if people are doing things they shouldn't, tell the hosts, tell the mod on duty. Please, lets keep it out of the game thread.

I wish I could take it back and vote for cookie, the person who I think is most likely to be bad. I think she knew she would be on the block today and used boo as a convenient opportunity to steer the thread away from suspecting her.

She wants us to debate the merits of keeping boo for very non-mafia reasons but in the style of playing mafia. Not agreeing with things boo said has nothing to do with playing mafia. It's a completely different thing.

lol, I knew the whole "this is my last post" was an empty threat. I will be back after the lynch post.

I am over ugliness, and this is so incredibly fuckng unfair to our hostesses who want nothing more than to provide us with a fun pastime.

I am tired of rehashing it as well. I've been trying to continue past it but it's constantly "guys look a this guy he's such an asshole. Right guys? Isnt he an asshole?". I'm not letting that go on completely ignored.

Maybe stop calling me an asshat, or an asshole, or any other various insults of your choosing, and we can all ignore it for the duration of the game. I mean you know I havent been personally attacking any of you. Express name calling or otherwise. I may have been a bit condescending at times yes. But I'm not running around specifically calling any of you names.

Golden 2 wrote:

You're pretty good.

Cookie 2 wrote:lol, I knew the whole "this is my last post" was an empty threat.

Call it as you will. That was what I originally intended.

Are you mad that you no longer have a reason to vote for me know that I am participating again? That's unfortunate for you.

Puppies now!

Lots and lots of puppies.

Please everyone I respect each and everyone of you but for the sake of my sanity and this game can we all just stop with the name calling and the snarky side comments. Ricochet 2 has tthe right of this!

Please.

Puppies nao!

Roxy wrote:Puppies now!

Lots and lots of puppies.

Please everyone I respect each and everyone of you but for the sake of my sanity and this game can we all just stop with the name calling and the snarky side comments. Ricochet 2 has tthe right of this!

Please.

Puppies nao!

Hi Roxy

One cute, relaxing dog coming up, Roxy!

After mulling it over I'm mostly satisfied with Epig 2's response to my case. But I'll keep thinking on it.

I'm looking at a Cookie 2 vote today. Her comment about win cons can't be ignored. Why aren't more people talking about that? And she was a suspect before this boo 2 stuff happened. Maybe she truly feels like boo 2 needs to die for his attitude but that doesn't mean she isn't a baddie taking advantage of the situation.

I'm gonna need something from Scotty 2 other than a big ass picture of puppies.

Scotty 2 has 8 posts.

Yeah Scotty 2, anything at all would be helpful at this point. Your voting record looks sketchy.

I see where you're coming from with Scotty 2's very lackluster contribution, but consider something else. Within 20 minutes of Roxy posting that he had made his post. So he had been caught up, or caught up, roughly 20 minutes after the post but rather than saying anything of value whatsoever, comes in with the puppies. This is unnerving.

And I feel so left out, nobody's called me names or sent me illicit messages that may or may not contain genitals.
(Also, general thread question: Can we refer to rule-breaking BTSC PMs as STDs? For example, "Player A gave an STD to Player 2! That's against the rules!" it would be quite amusing)

here is the little stinky furball that has been driving me crazy this week.

I feel so bad for him. This is actually an old picture because he has to wear the cone again. He has some kinda sensitive skin issue and when it flares up he continuously licks his paws and makes it worse. He has also had the flu too this week, his arthritis is acting up, and he now has fleas.

It's been a bad week in splints dog world.

here he is crying about the cone

It looked big so I put it in spoiler tags

Reywas 2 wrote:After mulling it over I'm mostly satisfied with Epig 2's response to my case. But I'll keep thinking on it.

I'm looking at a Cookie 2 vote today. Her comment about win cons can't be ignored. Why aren't more people talking about that? And she was a suspect before this boo 2 stuff happened. Maybe she truly feels like boo 2 needs to die for his attitude but that doesn't mean she isn't a baddie taking advantage of the situation.

Win con comments? I think I missed those.

Reywas 2 wrote:I'm gonna need something from Scotty 2 other than a big ass picture of puppies.

I'm sorry about that. I was unable to really participate for a week. When I came back and started to catch up the thread went into chaos. I chose not to get involved with that so I haven't posted much since then. If we are finally moving on I will be getting more involved.

Well Reywas 2 being satisfied with my response really took the wind out of my sails of martyrdom, but what can you do?

Looking over everything again I agree with Reywas the Cookie comment, also if we believe Black Rock 2 was innocent she made a case against Cookie. Today I would rather lynch Cookie 2 then Boo 2, for that reason I will be voting for Cookie.

Scotty 2 you could have just posted your thoughts and ignored the drama this seems like a rather weak reason for not posting.

I think I shall vote now. I'm going to vote for Cookie 2. I agree that Cookie 2 is likely bad taking advantage of the boo 2 situation. I'm hoping from this point boo 2 will settle down and play the game moving forward. I don't really think boo is a baddie.

Epignosis 2 wrote:Well Reywas 2 being satisfied with my response really took the wind out of my sails of martyrdom, but what can you do?

Looking over everything again I agree with Reywas the Cookie comment, also if we believe Black Rock 2 was innocent she made a case against Cookie. Today I would rather lynch Cookie 2 then Boo 2, for that reason I will be voting for Cookie.

Scotty 2 you could have just posted your thoughts and ignored the drama this seems like a rather weak reason for not posting.

That's true... if I myself felt comfortable in the thread at that time. I felt removed from the game and when I was reading the thread there was so much negativity I asked the hosts to replace me. I'm not good with negativity. Since I can't be replaced and I feel like dropping out for something that had nothing to do with me is lame I decided to sit back and wait. You may think this is weak but I'm not about to change my personality.