The Syndicate

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 2:19 pm**

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 2:17 pm Idk, I wanted to see what you'd say. I was but a clueless vanilla who wanted to have some fun with the setup. With all that epistemological stuff I was talking about, I thought having a dispute like that might flush out something to work with.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 2:21 pm**

btw. I considered the red on LC real and I saw the gif as him giving up. That's why I didn't mention the claim as reason of vote.
That particular gif is indeed my favorite.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 2:25 pm**

nutella wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:46 pm
NANOOKTHEGREATANDFEARSOME wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:45 pm The only way for you to know he’s lying is if you’re the doc or the 2 shot doc, in neither case should you be revealing imo
Huh?

Ok I'm confused. Maybe I am reading it wrong.

nutella wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:47 pm
NANOOKTHEGREATANDFEARSOME wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:46 pm And I’m not convinced that’s a real claim tbh
He could be fucking with us, yeah.

nutella wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:52 pm
NANOOKTHEGREATANDFEARSOME wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:51 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:50 pm
NANOOKTHEGREATANDFEARSOME wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:48 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:46 pm
NANOOKTHEGREATANDFEARSOME wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:45 pm The only way for you to know he’s lying is if you’re the doc or the 2 shot doc, in neither case should you be revealing imo
Huh?

Ok I'm confused. Maybe I am reading it wrong.
1-shot cop cannot exist with doctor or 2-shot doc. So for you to be town and know he’s lying, you’d have to be one of those two roles.

Which actually if it were a real claim is probably fine, 1 for 1 is fine at this point imo, but if it isn’t a real claim, which I don’t think it is, revealing is bad
It says it can either be a row or a column
Yes. A row or a column. The 1-shot cop doesn’t exist in the same row or column as the doc or the 2-shot doc. Thus, if one is in the game the other one cannot be.
OH never mind I'm dumb.

You seemed like you were going somewhere specific with that, beyond a "what the hell" kind of experiment, until Nanook clarified the matrix.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 2:27 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 2:17 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 2:15 pm
As of this point she still didn't know who Nanook's claimed red check was on, and so the mindset of this post confuses me. That doesn't have to mean it's bad, but I don't understand it.
Jay, i knew it can't be me because I am villager.
And i explained, me being the top wagon and pushed in that moment by every active player itt, Nanook would word that differently, idk how, but not so general.
It was simple a feminine intuition tbh if you want to give it a name.
Who do you think is mafia?

idk. I said at least one of the 'i would never NK M7' is mafia. Still i need to dig itt, glad to have such a long day

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 2:36 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 2:25 pm
You seemed like you were going somewhere specific with that, beyond a "what the hell" kind of experiment, until Nanook clarified the matrix.

Nah that was all part of the bit, I didn't want to outright fakeclaim something and Nanook was being too serious about it so I let it go.

My cluelessness about your "cop hunt" thing after that was real though. I was confused as hell.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 3:58 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 1:04 pm @Long Con please describe your mindset when you were confronted with Nanook's claim of a red check on you. Just tell me what you thought of it and how you decided your next course of action.

I knew there were no misdirects or info-corruption-type roles in the game, so I figured it was either a ploy, or a power role would step up and challenge Nanook's claim. Either way, it was best to just sit back and watch what came out of it. I gave it until a couple of hours before the lynch before engaging Nanook about it.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 3:59 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 3:40 pm People who have definitely seen me shit on Long Con without saying a damned thing about it:

@Michelle
@Epignosis
@nutella

What is this post about?

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 4:06 pm**

Long Con wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 3:59 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 3:40 pm People who have definitely seen me shit on Long Con without saying a damned thing about it:

Michelle
Epignosis
nutella
What is this post about?

Making note of what I felt were people overlooking/ignoring my grievances with you in case I ended up right.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 4:07 pm**

Why does that post interest you?

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 4:08 pm**

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 2:36 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 2:25 pm
You seemed like you were going somewhere specific with that, beyond a "what the hell" kind of experiment, until Nanook clarified the matrix.
Nah that was all part of the bit, I didn't want to outright fakeclaim something and Nanook was being too serious about it so I let it go.

My cluelessness about your "cop hunt" thing after that was real though. I was confused as hell.

Yeah all that sounds like hot bullshit

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 4:29 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 4:07 pm Why does that post interest you?

Interesting that it is a list of all the remaining living players. Personal because it speaks about shitting on me.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 4:36 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 1:15 pm
Long Con wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 10:56 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 10:37 amI submit that the mafia team for this ballgame is nutella and Long Con.

I will explore the latter when opportunity presents itself.

[VOTE: nutella] aubergine
Well, you're probably half-right. [VOTE: nutella] aubergine
Tell me why you feel Michelle is a mafioso.

Ok, some reasons. First, I don't think you would do last night as a baddie. I was already cooling off on the JJJ train, but some of the things you said felt a little too real. As for Michelle, I went back in her ISO.

Michelle wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 3:57 pm
Long Con wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:54 pm
M Plus 7 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:53 pm
Dyslexicon wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:45 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:44 pm
Long Con wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:41 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:40 pm LC turned around pretty quickly onto the Michelle train.
Am I on the Michelle train now?
You spoke as if you felt sure she was scum. Perhaps it was hypothetical but it didn't read that way in context.
Maybe it's a scummate that is actually sure she is scum, but doesn't really want to go there so he's tip toeing a bit? Just a wild guess.
Now this is a good post.
If Michelle and I were teammates... like, I'm not afraid to bus. I'm not Michelle's teammate.
Omg he is not my teammate? Then he is scum!

Idk.. LC as mafia writing this post would be a scum claim for my eyes. Because he would know I am villager and he would word it differently.

Is he a player to go for this kind of logic as scum?

This is really disingenuous. She's enjoying that I'm getting a lot of heat here, and trying to throw fuel on the fire.

Michelle wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:13 pm [VOTE: Nut] aubergine
nutella wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:08 pm Could still be okay with a Michelle lynch but I feel like her townie posts balance out her icky ones at this point.
I didn't post icky. If you are fine with my lynch then you are bad.

This looks like basic distancing. Nutella with the wishy-washy condemnation of Michelle, Michelle with a bit of pushback.

Michelle wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:13 pm Day was full of homechores, now I am back :-)
Dyslexicon wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 10:36 am
S~V~S wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 10:30 am I have a couple of mechanics questions. I have not played very many games with a matrix like this one has, and I am not 100% on the terminology.

What is a "strongman"? And a "Role Doc", that is a role checker, right?
Ok, I see the matrix setup now. No wonder nobody reacted to my "it says two scum in the OP". =p

A role cop is someone who cop town to see what role they have, vanilla or otherwise.
A role cop is a cop who's result is tne role of the target no matter AI.

So first you vote me witout any concern about my AI and you associate me at random and now you lie about what a role cop does. You posted other cop role smh

You are bad Dizzy

Another example of Michelle trying to stoke the fires under a player. I don't see how a player would form a *real* suspicion of someone based on this... even if Dizzy were just plain wrong about how a role works, it's not a worthwhile scheme for a baddie to employ: publicly lie about a role, and then... ???

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 12:38 am
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 7:10 pm Probably doesn't kill MP:
Epignosis
Long Con

Not sure, nor is she, but possibly cleared by a cop hunt anyway:
nutella

Not sure period:
S~V~S

Don't see why they wouldn't kill MP:
Michelle
Nanook
if I were scum I wouldn't like to kill him personally. But i would let the NK for my scumpartener because I have yet little knowledge about everyone here.
On the other hand, him as veteran player is fear killed by every single player including you. Every sane mafia kills M+7 if he rands villager.

Your analysis is so wifom-y that it gives me goosebumbs.

This is sketchy. First, Michelle wouldn't kill MP. Then, she'd let her partner kill MP, because everyone else in the game is insane if they don't kill MP.

More likely that Michelle was feeling the noose close in just a little, and had to say something other than "Yeah, I guess I am one of the more likely players to kill MP". She actually says she wouldn't kill him, before saying she doesn't know him. So, why wouldn't she kill him if she doesn't know him? Where did the idea that he's a superplayer that MUST be killed immediately even come from?

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 11:47 amI don't see why you felt the need to use the most violent colours on this post but I can tell you, if you are villager that we are back to square 1 and you after few games still are unable to understand me. Shame of you sir.
I was honest, but like usual sincerity doesn't pay off.

I don't accept your take, is fake reasoning again. You and your Poe and your exercises, you jump on me again like Dizzy did in day 1 and this is the way to loose the game for town only because you think I said what i didn't say.

I DON'T BELIEVE YOU WOULDN'T KILL M7 IF YOU WERE WOLF.

And the best reason is he was town reading you. The question is, are you wolf? Because if you are not the answer at the question is as useless as mine. I would kill him BUT I DIDN'T BECAUSE I AM VILLAGER.

Now she says she would kill him, contradicting her last post. I'm trying to decide if this is a "No U" accusation or not, but it never quite gets there, just calls JJJ "fake" and says he'd kill MP. I don't know how Michelle is making this judgment. If JJJ hadn't brought up the "who would kill MP?" idea, would Michelle have said anything about the subject? Now she's an expert.

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:47 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:44 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:42 pmI was convinced he is lying.
Alright cool. You said that this was suspicious to you, that Dizzy lied about the role cop role. Why do you think a mafia Dizzy would lie about that? What do they gain from that lie?
Idk. What would i gain from accusing him based on a wrong perception?

I don't really know what to say about this. The best emoji I can use to describe my face is

, but put a little more incredulous disbelief in the eyes. Really, this is just the same suspicion I had earlier when she accused Dizzy of lying.

Michelle wrote: ↑Fri Apr 03, 2020 1:48 pm LC posted my favorite gif, he deserves my vote too
[VOTE: Long Con] aubergine

This one is suspicious to me as well, she knows the check is bad, so of course she jumps on it right away, but feels the need to distance herself from the whole thing by being playful, and making it about her "favourite gif". Like, damn, I should have posted a different one!

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 4:48 pm**

I'm going to take a deeper look at these three combinations:

Long Con/Michelle
Long Con/nutella
Michelle/nutella

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 5:48 pm**

Are Long Con and Michelle compatible as mafia teammates?

Long Con's stuff

Spoiler: show

Pfbtbtbtbtbtb

Spoiler: show

These add a contextual wrinkle to the previous comment. Seemingly it wasn't just "warm-ups banter" that were driving suspicion of Michelle, so one could argue Long Con invalidly discredited the suspicion previously.

Spoiler: show

Long Con wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:39 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:34 pm
M Plus 7 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:15 pm
Dyslexicon wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:10 am
Michelle wrote: ↑Sun Mar 29, 2020 4:52 pm
S~V~S wrote: ↑Sun Mar 29, 2020 4:38 pm
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Mar 29, 2020 4:35 pm [VOTE: Michelle] aubergine
For me, she seems to be trying too hard.
this word, "seems" looks like you want to shade me but you can't because you don't have any reason to scum read me.
Second, this is scum language. It's "you don't have a reason to think I'm scum" instead of "I'm town".
I also agree that Michelle vibes kawaiii in the worst way in the very start of the game.

[VOTE: Michelle] aubergine
I like this post.
i dislike this post. Why do you like an oppinion who it's not true? The reasoning Dizzy posted to vote me it's not a townish way to put things.
I can say "i am town" but I don't trust anyone would believe it. My idea was correct because when someone scumreads based on shallow reasons I have to question the reasons of the read. Svs explained well after we interacted her thoughts, Dizzy took an opportunity to cast a bad vote.
I disagree, I understand Dizzy's logic here. You, as scum, are looking at things with the knowledge that you're scum, so saying "you don't have any reason to scum read me" belies indignation at getting caught for bullshit non-reasons.

Long Con wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:52 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:46 pmno, because he starts from the idea I am scum so he is 'sure' about the read. This is scum tactic, not my observation who just wanted to check Svs's idea there. And look how he pretends he can read me well. I sense it as a fake read made by scum.
Actually, you're right. Dizzy really took it out of context. "... looks like you want to shade me but you can't because you don't have any reason to scum read me." That's talking about S~V~S' perspective, it's not telling her that she doesn't have a reason to scum read you, it's the reason why her shade is weak.

These posts aren't adjacent in this history, but they're tied together. Long Con lent his understanding to an accusation Dizzy hurled at Michelle before re-interpreting and deciding Dizzy took things out of context. I want to make one note:

Initially in supporting Dizzy, Long Con was essentially clarifying logic -- not agreeing with it. This can bear the appearance of an accusation against Michelle, but it doesn't quite get there. He's explaining an accusation, not participating in it. This is important to me, because when Long Con reverted to the alternate interpretation (which I maintain from earlier perspectives is dubious on its own), he did implement this into concrete accusations of Dizzy. Dizzy was his worst enemy through the first cycle of my replacing him. There's some incongruency there benefiting Michelle and hurting DizzyJimmyJay.

Spoiler: show

This question and expansion are, to be fair, consistent with the notion that he hadn't actually accused Michelle of something for whatever that's worth. In this exact moment of the context, what's unclear is why Long Con wouldn't be willing to join the train "over that" -- I'm not sure something better had arrived yet to warrant his vote. Keep in mind that these precede his re-interpretation of Dyslexicon's accusation.

Spoiler: show

Long Con was supportive of Epignosis in light of the latter's being accused of being "trapped" into a Michelle vote. Okay.

Spoiler: show

Eh. The premise of this defense isn't quite valid -- one can be a perfectly willing busser and still be caught tip-toeing around suspicion of a teammate. I don't know how much I care about this post though.

Spoiler: show

It's fair to acknowledge that there's a new layer of WIFOM here that can be validly questioned -- does LC need to jam himself into every discussion of his teammate? I'm inclined to shrug.

Spoiler: show

I don't think that assertion is off-base. It's the implied message of what Michelle said even with the contextual "correction".

Spoiler: show

I missed this dialogue about "subjunctive mood" and still don't know what it is. Anyway, log this as an indirect defense of Michelle by way of accusing the accuser.

Spoiler: show

Plausible if also an easy accusation. The question of interest here though is are they teammates? The accusation carries some real weight, so that's worth something. I'll have to see what Long Con did with it though.

Spoiler: show

Okay, now it's Jack and Michelle, in response to my Michelle vote. That's not great.

Spoiler: show

LC briefly dipped his toes in the nutella/Michelle pool too. Michelle is suspicious, but a second name is tacked with her.

Spoiler: show

Long Con joined the anti-Michelle climate, but he never voted for her. When things got hottest, he stuck Jack into the pile and then found a way to vote for him when that wagon inflated.

That's bad.

Spoiler: show

This has been the prevalent message of Day 3.

~~~

Michelle's stuff not already covered

Spoiler: show

Michelle was vaguely positive on LC in this scrum of reads Day 1 post. This came about one hour after LC's reversal on his interpretation of Dizzy's accusation, for context. There's little else to discern what drove this.

Spoiler: show

I don't know why this LC post would be a "scum claim" -- it fits the tendency of Michelle in this game to voice strong suspicion of seemingly tiny things. She words it as a question of WIFOM though: would LC do such a clearly terrible thing as a mafioso?. That's perhaps more forgiving than she has been of other players when she has made accusations like this.

Spoiler: show

Seems like a frivolous post to "like".

Spoiler: show

Michelle dissociated herself from LC, kinda. I don't care about this, y'all might.

Spoiler: show

This post sees Michelle explaining her divergence from suspecting the players on the MacDougall wagon. She provides clear reasons for three of the four:

MP is dead.
Jay does not look like the mafia Jay from the GOC.
Nanook claimed a role and wasn't countered.

For Long Con, we get the highlighted thing. "Maybe I'm an idiot, but I don't see LC as bad."

Not inspiring.

Spoiler: show

Long Con continues to get support, and I continue to have no idea why.

Spoiler: show

This is the point that may bear the best chance of being assessed. This came after Nanook claimed his red check on Long Con.

The reason is of course silly. What's important though are these contextual factors:

1) The mafia should realize there is no cop in the game if they have paid any attention to the matrix.
2) If Michelle is mafia, then #1 should apply to her.
3) If LC is her teammate, then a frivolous vote of this sort may be harder to justify.

Consider, however, that -- in a theory where these two are the mafia team -- they do know the peek is bogus and LC has to react to it in some seemingly-authentic way. Michelle has to do the same thing, but from the perspective of someone who cannot boast the same "I know I am a civilian, therefore the peek is fake" mindset that could be assigned to Long Con.

Her willingness to join the wagon then, in such a theoretical world, is essentially meaningless. As soon as the ruse is revealed, she is under no obligation to lynch him. And when I consider that in conjunction with the reason she gave -- the damned gif, well those puzzle pieces can fit together decently well.

There's some presupposition necessary to make this point I grant. So I leave y'all to judge for yourselves. It doesn't have to be this way.

Spoiler: show

This is perfectly fair. Anyone is susceptible to being fooled by a "buddying" mafioso. What I don't see though is why Michelle trusted him in the first place. She just did not do a good job at any juncture of making that clear.

Spoiler: show

I should note that, given this post, Michelle was not present when Nanook revealed he had no check on Long Con. So there's room to argue that Michelle really did think the check was authentic and is not teamed with him given that she never returned for the "reveal" that'd benefit her teammate until after the lynch had resolved. She'd have had to leave with the faith that it'd work out.

Spoiler: show

This I can believe, because my initial take on LC's gif was similar. Hence my "well fought LC" comment.

~~~

Conclusion

I'll need to catch my breath after all that. There is quite a lot of shit I took issue with. If I wanted to paint a picture in which Long Con and Michelle are mafia teammates, I don't think I would struggle to do that. The case exists in here.

And yet, I emerge feeling close to no confidence at all in that. It doesn't sit right with me. There's a clash between the evidence in front of me and my intuitive response to that evidence. You'll note a lot of my grievances came in the form of "one could argue" or some such -- because from a robotic external view, there's a case.

But it makes me feel nothing. And I need to feel something.

I will have to review the other combinations to get a sense of comparison.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:35 pm**

nutella wrote: ↑Fri Apr 03, 2020 4:39 pm has Jackofhearts2005 seen all the claiming stuff? Jack we need to know if you have any counterclaims to whatever is going on here based on the matrix

Remember the conversation about role fishing?

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:46 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:35 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Fri Apr 03, 2020 4:39 pm has Jackofhearts2005 seen all the claiming stuff? Jack we need to know if you have any counterclaims to whatever is going on here based on the matrix
Remember the conversation about role fishing?

Oh come on. I was so nervous lynching him when he wasn't here and I hadn't seen any evidence that he was aware of any of the claiming that had occurred. You're imposing scum motive on something that clearly came from a town mindset. I still wish he had logged in before eod and said anything.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:48 pm**

Are Long Con and nutella compatible as mafia teammates?

Long Con's stuff

Spoiler: show

nutella's name got some meaningless incidental mentions in this post. It's a nothing post. Okay.

Spoiler: show

Generic question, could be a softball.

Spoiler: show

Generic question, could be a softball.

Spoiler: show

It turned into pretty idle chatter with LC explaining his take on Dizzy and Michelle. It means little. Continued

Spoiler: show

I'm not sure if this is exclusively a joke, or an actual prod for nutella to say more about Michelle.

Spoiler: show

The tone of this question perturbs me.

Spoiler: show

Here's a post. I don't care about it.

LC answered a prod from nutella to say why I am worthy of his vote. This fits with the softball theme.

Spoiler: show

LC is referring to nutella and I jumping in with the fake red check on him. It's not a scathing accusation when I am stuck there with her. I'll see if/how it develops.

Spoiler: show

LC seemed to misinterpret me here. I was speaking in nutella's favor, and he extracted that I thought she was bad with Michelle. Regarding their compatibility, this is still nothingness.

Spoiler: show

Thank you nutella for giving me an easy post to make.

Spoiler: show

Day 3. Consider that LC has restricted his reads by eliminating Epi and I, so even if nutella is his teammate he is mechanically obligated to provide this perspective.

Spoiler: show

Epignosis provided a thorough case against nutella and Long Con elected to join the vote. I will interpret this when I see how nutella handled it.

Note: I don't actually know why Long Con views nutella as suspicious. He expanded on Michelle at my request earlier, and so now I request the other side. [mention]Long Con[/mention], why is nutella a mafioso?

~~~

nutella's stuff not already covered

Spoiler: show

It's a waffle that leans positive. Okay.

Spoiler: show

Dramatic ellipsis and potential softball.

Spoiler: show

Epi referenced this earlier. It's a deviation from the "positive waffle" earlier. If nutella really viewed Long Con as the second-preferred lynch after Epignosis despite what she'd just said about him, then she'd have to have had a civilian read on every single player except Epignosis. That's hard to believe, particularly given her handling of Michelle. That's more a pure assessment of her honesty though; as it pertains to their compatibility -- without action, this adds no real pressure to Long Con.

Spoiler: show

Very easy post to suspish-emoji. Perhaps Nanook's assertion was accurate.

Spoiler: show

2x TMI if Long Con is a mafioso. Not only was Mac obviously a civilian, but his lynch was driven to save a mafioso among LC and Epi. Were it not for the clearance following the MP kill, I wonder if she'd have kept her foot on the gas in that Epi tunnel here.

Spoiler: show

In light of this rainbow, nutella expanded: Michelle and LC were the lead suspects with Jack~V~S as an alternative. In isolation this means little to me. POE was restrictive.

Spoiler: show

This string of posts dissolves the theory that there was a save of LC (which absolves him) and then only maintains some of that suspicion by way of association with Michelle. Michelle was the one facing all of the pressure here.

Spoiler: show

This is, once again, a point of high interest. If nutella is a mafioso, she knows the peek is fake. In that regard, the arguments one can construct here mirror closely the ones that also applied to Michelle in the previous analysis.

The highlighted portion does portend a direction for nutella's movement when the peek is revealed to be false. And here it is.

Spoiler: show

This is ugly at face value. The yellow thing literally looks like someone pretending to discover something new that they were already well aware of lol.

The orange thing just looks like bullshit. Why is that a theory that should emerge from those shenanigans?

Spoiler: show

I don't know why she crammed that last sentence in there. Looks forced.

Spoiler: show

It feels like nutella is mentioning LC as a possible suspect out of obligation instead of any perspective she has actually developed.

Spoiler: show

This was in response to my call for protests in the event that I was wrong to have a final POE of Jack/nutella/Michelle. nutella had voted Jack. Of the remaining names she extracted LC on the basis of "gut", which seems rather in conflict with the previous post in this review. "genuinely solvey" suggests some gut/intuitive trust.

Spoiler: show

Maybe so.

nutella has remained consistent in this regard. When she has spoken of the Michelle/LC pairing though, Michelle has taken the brunt of her criticism and suspicion. LC is mentioned as a sort of default secondary thing.

Spoiler: show

nutella then spent at least one post talking about LC and I on a team. Considering the way he and I treated each other and the way he and Dizzy treated each other, that vague "not particularly inspiring" take she pulled out looks bogus. More importantly though, a trend continues: she nearly never mentions LC as a suspect in isolation. There's always a name stuck alongside him.

Because of that, it's never clear exactly why nutella feels Long Con is suspicious. I could recite considerably clearer suspicions she has had of Michelle and of me -- and yet Long Con is the common denominator in these theories. I really don't like that.

~~~

Conclusion

Like with Michelle and Long Con, I think there's a case that can be made here. nutella and Long Con fit together appropriately. What's different this time though is that I do feel something from this assessment. I don't have to merely "acknowledge" the validity of certain possibilities or theories because one could state them. Instead I just state them, because it adds up. My instincts are more aligned with the evidence in this one.

Long Con and nutella can be mafia teammates.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:49 pm**

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:46 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:35 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Fri Apr 03, 2020 4:39 pm has Jackofhearts2005 seen all the claiming stuff? Jack we need to know if you have any counterclaims to whatever is going on here based on the matrix
Remember the conversation about role fishing?
Oh come on. I was so nervous lynching him when he wasn't here and I hadn't seen any evidence that he was aware of any of the claiming that had occurred. You're imposing scum motive on something that clearly came from a town mindset. I still wish he had logged in before eod and said anything.

That's a bad sentence.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:53 pm**

Your instincts are wrong

Like, yeah, I can see why my LC interactions don't look great, because I'm never super confident about my read of him. Like I said I've always had a hard time reading him. He's just been sort of generally in my POE for most of the game.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:53 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:49 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:46 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:35 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Fri Apr 03, 2020 4:39 pm has Jackofhearts2005 seen all the claiming stuff? Jack we need to know if you have any counterclaims to whatever is going on here based on the matrix
Remember the conversation about role fishing?
Oh come on. I was so nervous lynching him when he wasn't here and I hadn't seen any evidence that he was aware of any of the claiming that had occurred. You're imposing scum motive on something that clearly came from a town mindset. I still wish he had logged in before eod and said anything.
That's a bad sentence.

why?

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:54 pm**

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:53 pm Your instincts are wrong Like, yeah, I can see why my LC interactions don't look great, because I'm never super confident about my read of him. Like I said I've always had a hard time reading him. He's just been sort of generally in my POE for most of the game.

You're no longer in a game state where you have to wiggle about on instincts. There is a wealth of analytic evidence, whatever you may think of it. What do you think is the best case that Long Con is a mafioso?

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:55 pm**

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:53 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:49 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:46 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:35 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Fri Apr 03, 2020 4:39 pm has Jackofhearts2005 seen all the claiming stuff? Jack we need to know if you have any counterclaims to whatever is going on here based on the matrix
Remember the conversation about role fishing?
Oh come on. I was so nervous lynching him when he wasn't here and I hadn't seen any evidence that he was aware of any of the claiming that had occurred. You're imposing scum motive on something that clearly came from a town mindset. I still wish he had logged in before eod and said anything.
That's a bad sentence.
why?

You didn't have to be role fishing. It's one possible interpretation among others.

When you tell me that it was clearly coming from a town mindset though, I actually snort. Give me a break.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:59 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:54 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:53 pm Your instincts are wrong Like, yeah, I can see why my LC interactions don't look great, because I'm never super confident about my read of him. Like I said I've always had a hard time reading him. He's just been sort of generally in my POE for most of the game.
You're no longer in a game state where you have to wiggle about on instincts. There is a wealth of analytic evidence, whatever you may think of it. What do you think is the best case that Long Con is a mafioso?

His reaction to Nanook's fake peek didn't feel natural.
He is compatible with Michelle, who is my other top suspect. (Yeah that's POE not a reason but whatever, you made the analysis so I'm not going to restate all the points there.)
His relation to the Mac wagon (both as a participant and a beneficiary) looked sketchy.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:01 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:55 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:53 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:49 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:46 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:35 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Fri Apr 03, 2020 4:39 pm has Jackofhearts2005 seen all the claiming stuff? Jack we need to know if you have any counterclaims to whatever is going on here based on the matrix
Remember the conversation about role fishing?
Oh come on. I was so nervous lynching him when he wasn't here and I hadn't seen any evidence that he was aware of any of the claiming that had occurred. You're imposing scum motive on something that clearly came from a town mindset. I still wish he had logged in before eod and said anything.
That's a bad sentence.
why?
You didn't have to be role fishing. It's one possible interpretation among others.

When you tell me that it was clearly coming from a town mindset though, I actually snort. Give me a break.

Well it's clear to me.

Surely you were also frustrated at Jack's absence? Or is your mindset not town?

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:03 pm**

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:01 pm Well it's clear to me. Surely you were also frustrated at Jack's absence? Or is your mindset not town?

Sure. If I had my way, nobody would ever miss any EOD ever.

"clearly" is a shitty word in that sentence

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:04 pm**

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:59 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:54 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:53 pm Your instincts are wrong Like, yeah, I can see why my LC interactions don't look great, because I'm never super confident about my read of him. Like I said I've always had a hard time reading him. He's just been sort of generally in my POE for most of the game.
You're no longer in a game state where you have to wiggle about on instincts. There is a wealth of analytic evidence, whatever you may think of it. What do you think is the best case that Long Con is a mafioso?
His reaction to Nanook's fake peek didn't feel natural.
He is compatible with Michelle, who is my other top suspect. (Yeah that's POE not a reason but whatever, you made the analysis so I'm not going to restate all the points there.)
His relation to the Mac wagon (both as a participant and a beneficiary) looked sketchy.

Who should be lynched first?

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:04 pm**

[mention]JaggedJimmyJay[/mention]
What's the number one reason you can't be mafia teammates with Long Con?
What's the number one reason you can't be mafia teammates with Michelle?

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:05 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:04 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:59 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:54 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:53 pm Your instincts are wrong Like, yeah, I can see why my LC interactions don't look great, because I'm never super confident about my read of him. Like I said I've always had a hard time reading him. He's just been sort of generally in my POE for most of the game.
You're no longer in a game state where you have to wiggle about on instincts. There is a wealth of analytic evidence, whatever you may think of it. What do you think is the best case that Long Con is a mafioso?
His reaction to Nanook's fake peek didn't feel natural.
He is compatible with Michelle, who is my other top suspect. (Yeah that's POE not a reason but whatever, you made the analysis so I'm not going to restate all the points there.)
His relation to the Mac wagon (both as a participant and a beneficiary) looked sketchy.
Who should be lynched first?

Depends on your answers to my above questions. Whichever of LC or Michelle is more compatible with you has a higher chance of being scum (even if I think the team is probably exactly those two, I have to weigh that in somehow).

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:09 pm**

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:04 pm JaggedJimmyJay
What's the number one reason you can't be mafia teammates with Long Con?
What's the number one reason you can't be mafia teammates with Michelle?

It should be pretty apparent that I am not Long Con's teammate given not only the violence between the two of us, but the violence that preceded between he and Dizzy. It's not just mutual distrust -- it's righteous indignation, it's pissing me off with sarcasm, and it's my initial belief that Nanook's red check on him was real.

When I've accused Michelle, her responses have often stopped short of full-on No-U. If she is a mafioso, she has shown trepidation in returning fire -- perhaps fearing the volume of my voice at EODs.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:12 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:09 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:04 pm JaggedJimmyJay
What's the number one reason you can't be mafia teammates with Long Con?
What's the number one reason you can't be mafia teammates with Michelle?
It should be pretty apparent that I am not Long Con's teammate given not only the violence between the two of us, but the violence that preceded between he and Dizzy. It's not just mutual distrust -- it's righteous indignation, it's pissing me off with sarcasm, and it's my initial belief that Nanook's red check on him was real.

When I've accused Michelle, her responses have often stopped short of full-on No-U. If she is a mafioso, she has shown trepidation in returning fire -- perhaps fearing the volume of my voice at EODs.

I don't recall much violence between him and Dizzy. It was mostly softball as far as I could tell, until Dizzy ended up voting for him right before you replaced in, and you made sure that vote didn't stick when it mattered. That being said, I do recall your fiery spat later on, and yeah, that probably wasn't scum theatre since you seemed legitimately frustrated.

Your argument about Michelle doesn't do much for me. That sounds like a reasonable for her to treat you if you were teammates.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:12 pm**

[VOTE: michelle] aubergine

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:14 pm**

We absolutely need consensus among the three townies at EOD, so I will obviously switch to LC if need be.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:15 pm**

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:12 pm [VOTE: michelle] aubergine

The basis for your vote is my report on my own compatibility -- something I have no reason to think about at all until you ask me.

It's not based upon your review of that compatibility on your own terms.

What?

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:15 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:15 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:12 pm [VOTE: michelle] aubergine
The basis for your vote is my report on my own compatibility -- something I have no reason to think about at all until you ask me.

It's not based upon your review of that compatibility on your own terms.

What?

I'm lazy. I'll do more looking into it.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:50 pm**

Are Michelle and nutella compatible as mafia teammates?

Michelle's stuff

Spoiler: show

I'm not sure what this is about, but okay.

Spoiler: show

Softball response to a half-accusation.

Spoiler: show

nutella is incidentally relevant. I don't care; readers might.

Spoiler: show

Michelle responded with suspicion to the unnamed group of people suspecting her for Day 0 stuff. nutella was one of them; that's only clear given the name in the quote.

Spoiler: show

This exchange doesn't look like an association to me. nutella pulled the "I posted this kind of thing too, why am I not evil?" prod, and I don't think that's a standard approach to distancing. Small point.

Spoiler: show

Michelle invoked nutella to back up a self-meta (which was to disparage self-meta), suggesting Michelle trusts nutella at least as an authority on how she plays. This again doesn't look like typical teammate interaction.

Spoiler: show

As is too often the case with Michelle, here's a read and I don't know what inspired it. Okay.

Spoiler: show

If I recall correctly, this was a strong support of nutella -- given that Michelle also felt good about S~V~S (at least early in the game). Both S~V~S and nutella had voiced some suspicion of Michelle, so it's a dually-magnanimous reception. S~V~S was a civilian; that could suggest dissociation.

Spoiler: show

Michelle accused Dizzy of TMI when they called nutella town. If Michelle is a mafioso, this accusation only works if she has TMI. So that's something.

Spoiler: show

Prods 'n' things

Spoiler: show

Michelle wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:13 pm [VOTE: Nut] aubergine
nutella wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:08 pm Could still be okay with a Michelle lynch but I feel like her townie posts balance out her icky ones at this point.
I didn't post icky. If you are fine with my lynch then you are bad.

Michelle wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:18 pm
NANOOKTHEGREATANDFEARSOME wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:14 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:13 pm [VOTE: Nut] aubergine
nutella wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:08 pm Could still be okay with a Michelle lynch but I feel like her townie posts balance out her icky ones at this point.
I didn't post icky. If you are fine with my lynch then you are bad.
Nutes/me/SVS can’t all be bad
I town read all of you until Nut ignored my question earlier and said she is ok with my lynch.
So what's your point?

Michelle wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:18 pm
M Plus 7 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:17 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:13 pm [VOTE: Nut] aubergine
nutella wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:08 pm Could still be okay with a Michelle lynch but I feel like her townie posts balance out her icky ones at this point.
I didn't post icky. If you are fine with my lynch then you are bad.
These are the posts that initially made me suspicious of you, by the way. Would you say you're very reactive like this normally?
yes

Michelle wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:22 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:16 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:13 pm [VOTE: Nut] aubergine
nutella wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:08 pm Could still be okay with a Michelle lynch but I feel like her townie posts balance out her icky ones at this point.
I didn't post icky. If you are fine with my lynch then you are bad.
Eh? Is a civilian nutella invulnerable to errors?
Yes when is about the player whe knows better my meta in this game.

Michelle wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:26 pm
S~V~S wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:22 pm I tried to stay caught up today, but the thread started moving too fast.

anyone have a tl;dr on why LC is getting votes? Is it just to save Jay?

@Dyslexicon Hope everything is OK with you, I will miss you, you made the thread a fun place.

I always find it disconcertingwhen one or two people take over a thread. I felt good about Dizzy though, so BOTD for now. i am gonna try to catch up totally, but for now am OK with my vote where it is.

linki,

Michelle wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:18 pm
NANOOKTHEGREATANDFEARSOME wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:14 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:13 pm [VOTE: Nut] aubergine
nutella wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:08 pm Could still be okay with a Michelle lynch but I feel like her townie posts balance out her icky ones at this point.
I didn't post icky. If you are fine with my lynch then you are bad.
Nutes/me/SVS can’t all be bad
I town read all of you until Nut ignored my question earlier and said she is ok with my lynch.
So what's your point?
You said earlier that me and Nanook were two of your stronger town reads, yet we have both voted for you. You seem to be able to separate suspicion of you from a person being bad in those case, why not nutellas? Did I miss something? I admit I am not fully caught up.
Nutella is the player who knows me better than anyone in this game. I have small expectations from anyone else.to read me based on meta.

Things take a severe turn here. nutella had voiced a little suspicion of nutella previously, but as soon as the word "lynch" appeared, Michelle lost her shit and turned hard against nutella. This continues the trend: I think this looks compatible with a civilian Michelle responding to wrongness, or a mafioso Michelle trying to fend off a civilian suspicion -- it looks less like the distancing of teammates. Michelle holds nutella to a very high standard here, fairly or not.

Spoiler: show

After Day 1 ended, Michelle relented. The read is a bit topsy-turvy.

Spoiler: show

Prodded me about nutella. Don't care.

Spoiler: show

Prod a la mode

Spoiler: show

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 12:18 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 12:15 pm Yeah I'm getting unusually sketchy vibes from a lot of Michelle's posts. This far into the game and I haven't felt the screen scream "Michelle is town" at me yet -- means she's probably not.

[VOTE: michelle] aubergine
you ignored me until now. As expected.

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 12:20 pm I mean, Nut, how did you know Mac is villager when everyone wanted him lynched?

Why didn't you answer at my questions?

Why you expected a wagon to be formed to vote me?

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 12:20 pm Why are you underwhelming? nutella

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:04 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 12:42 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 12:18 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 12:15 pm Yeah I'm getting unusually sketchy vibes from a lot of Michelle's posts. This far into the game and I haven't felt the screen scream "Michelle is town" at me yet -- means she's probably not.

[VOTE: michelle] aubergine
you ignored me until now. As expected.
No? I believe I've stated a few times that you were in my poe and that you haven't caused me to townread you
You ignored my questions. So yes, you ignored me. Doesn't matter how many times you read me wrong, I know I told you at least once about this and I don't remember to see an answer at my post.

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:06 pm What if Nut is scum with Jack?

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:07 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:05 pm I did not purposefully ignore you. I do not know what questions you are referring to. Come on.
There is no possibility, for no one on this forum, to not see a quoted post. Come on.

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:08 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 12:50 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 11:58 am
Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:36 am Town
Jack
Nutella
Dys/Jay
.....
Nanook
Epi
.....
Michelle
LC
.....
.....
Scum

Unless both power roles are in Nutella and Jay, we can pretty well guarantee a wolf lynch today since there's very likely 2 wolves in a 4 player POE and two innocent children.
How do you know there may be 2 PRs?
Like this, this is fake shade. Yeah, there are possibilities in the matrix for only one town PR and an extra vanilla, but are you suggesting that Jack assuming there are two is a slip or something? I don't get it. Lame attempt at a gotcha.
Why are you so concerned about Jack?

Back to suspicion. It's a roller coaster. Again this looks more like a) civilian indignation or b) fighting off a civilian who is right. Neither works for a mafia team with both of them. She even gave nutella shit for missing a post that had been quoted. When things get that petty, I tend to be moved toward dissociation.

Spoiler: show

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:10 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:08 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:07 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:05 pm I did not purposefully ignore you. I do not know what questions you are referring to. Come on.
There is no possibility, for no one on this forum, to not see a quoted post. Come on.
I still don't know what you're talking about. When was it? Help me out?
I can't search on phone so fast. Look at your notifications

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:13 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:10 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:05 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 12:44 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 12:17 pm Looking better at Jack's reads without scum reads it's like a scum claim

[VOTE: Jack/Svs] aubergine
You were suspicious of the people who voted for Mac. What changed?
I think. I don't accept a stale read non deserved.
Can you rephrase this please
I had a TR on Svs day 1. At Eod I said she is not present, and I realised her 'case' on me is fake. Today Jack came but I don't think town Jack would make that reads list. So I am reevaluating an old read because is not deserved.

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:14 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:12 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 12:30 am
nutella wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 8:08 pmWat
You still didn't share your reads iirc.
This? Is it just you asking me to share my reads? I did so. You must have missed it
not just that, I am sure there are more.

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:17 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:09 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:08 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 12:50 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 11:58 am
Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:36 am Town
Jack
Nutella
Dys/Jay
.....
Nanook
Epi
.....
Michelle
LC
.....
.....
Scum

Unless both power roles are in Nutella and Jay, we can pretty well guarantee a wolf lynch today since there's very likely 2 wolves in a 4 player POE and two innocent children.
How do you know there may be 2 PRs?
Like this, this is fake shade. Yeah, there are possibilities in the matrix for only one town PR and an extra vanilla, but are you suggesting that Jack assuming there are two is a slip or something? I don't get it. Lame attempt at a gotcha.
Why are you so concerned about Jack?
What?
What make you say it's fake shade? I didn't adress at you more than the discontent of you ignoring my posts. and when I attack Jack you have something to tell me so fast.
So you are concerned about Jack.

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:22 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:16 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:40 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:37 pm I feel like everyone should have a pretty developed POE pool right now. There are seven not-yous and two of them are no good. Even two solid civilian reads nets a workable reduction, and I think we can do better than that.

Let's go.
SVS
Jay
MP
Michelle
LC
Epi
Nanook
@Michelle this was sometime after you asked me that. I guess I never responded to you directly, I apologize for that, but if you have read my posts you should have some idea of my reads. To update this a bit, Nanook is tentatively moved up for the claim, Epi is tentatively moved up for probably not killing MP, and the SVS/Jack slot moved down a bit for poe reasons and something that vaguely pinged me when he came into the thread last night. That leaves you and LC as the most likely scum in my eyes.
Cool so Jack went down for a certain not exposed reason, but I am the baddie. With LC. I know LC defended me but that, even if he is scum, doesn't make me scum. You don't look at all interested in solving, but in throwing someone on the chopping block

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:25 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:20 pm I'm not concerned that you're attacking Jack. He could be bad. I'm concerned that your method of doing so is baseless garbage.
I am not deflecting, I see you defending Jack. I see Jack having most probably TMI and presenting infos he shouldn't know.
Idk how to talk better. Is that a good reason to hung me?

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:36 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:18 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:13 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:10 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:05 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 12:44 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 12:17 pm Looking better at Jack's reads without scum reads it's like a scum claim

[VOTE: Jack/Svs] aubergine
You were suspicious of the people who voted for Mac. What changed?
I think. I don't accept a stale read non deserved.
Can you rephrase this please
I had a TR on Svs day 1. At Eod I said she is not present, and I realised her 'case' on me is fake. Today Jack came but I don't think town Jack would make that reads list. So I am reevaluating an old read because is not deserved.
OK but from my perspective you're only half addressing Jay's question here. You're explaining why Jack became a priority suspect, but you're not explaining why you've completely stopped caring about the Mac train and in fact turned around and shaded me for defending Mac when I thought you agreed with me that the train was bad. Can you talk more about that?
Yes. When the game has players that can each one talk good enough to keep themselves out of suspicion the only clues that can be found in the thread are the TMI moments. I wish to know if your read on Mac is not TMI. I see that wagon on Mac formed by LC, Jay and Nanook. And M7 but that is less important.
Maybe I am idiot but I don't see LC as bad. Jay as much as I took this game from his slot looks not like Jay from the previous game, so idk if he is scum, Nanook is un-cc-ed PR. So.. maybe I am wrong about that wagon.

I try to find answers. But this is bad and everyone put me at the wall like this is a bad thing.

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:37 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:28 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:25 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:20 pm I'm not concerned that you're attacking Jack. He could be bad. I'm concerned that your method of doing so is baseless garbage.
I am not deflecting, I see you defending Jack. I see Jack having most probably TMI and presenting infos he shouldn't know.
Idk how to talk better. Is that a good reason to hung me?
I don't view what he said as TMI. I feel like you're purposefully ignoring what my actual point is.
Explain your point, mayne i didn't get it.

Remarkably, all of these posts are consecutive within Michelle's post history. This is a real-time exchange that elapsed 28 minutes from 1:09 PM to 1:37 PM my time. If they're teammates, then that means this would have to be pretty elaborate theater. I have my doubts.

Spoiler: show

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:44 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:40 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:37 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:28 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:25 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:20 pm I'm not concerned that you're attacking Jack. He could be bad. I'm concerned that your method of doing so is baseless garbage.
I am not deflecting, I see you defending Jack. I see Jack having most probably TMI and presenting infos he shouldn't know.
Idk how to talk better. Is that a good reason to hung me?
I don't view what he said as TMI. I feel like you're purposefully ignoring what my actual point is.
Explain your point, mayne i didn't get it.
To me it looked like you were calling out Jack saying "both PRs" as potential TMI/slip. I think that's an unfair judgment to make on his wording. There's no reason not to assume there are two PRs.
Was the meaning of his post that he 'assumed'?. I think it looked like an affirmative sentence without doubt.

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:57 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:54 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:47 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:44 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:42 pmI was convinced he is lying.
Alright cool. You said that this was suspicious to you, that Dizzy lied about the role cop role. Why do you think a mafia Dizzy would lie about that? What do they gain from that lie?
Idk. What would i gain from accusing him based on a wrong perception?
Yikes this is bad
Why?

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 2:06 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:59 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:57 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:54 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:47 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:44 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:42 pmI was convinced he is lying.
Alright cool. You said that this was suspicious to you, that Dizzy lied about the role cop role. Why do you think a mafia Dizzy would lie about that? What do they gain from that lie?
Idk. What would i gain from accusing him based on a wrong perception?
Yikes this is bad
Why?
You punted on the question and instead threw it back to jay with "why would I do this if I were bad" when imo the answer to that is fairly obvious.
No it's not. Obvious is the need to obtain a mislynch. Why are we fighting here? Do you push now for my lynch, imagine my green flip, will you be happy for it?
Why were yesterday the equality until 3 mins before Eod and Epi, LC, Mac and you were at 2 votes ?
Maybe a wolf wasn't in immediate danger.

Did you think at it?

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 2:40 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 2:11 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 2:06 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:59 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:57 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:54 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:47 pm
Idk. What would i gain from accusing him based on a wrong perception?
Yikes this is bad
Why?
You punted on the question and instead threw it back to jay with "why would I do this if I were bad" when imo the answer to that is fairly obvious.
No it's not. Obvious is the need to obtain a mislynch. Why are we fighting here? Do you push now for my lynch, imagine my green flip, will you be happy for it?
Why were yesterday the equality until 3 mins before Eod and Epi, LC, Mac and you were at 2 votes ?
Maybe a wolf wasn't in immediate danger.

Did you think at it?
Sorry I don't understand the question
Are you sure about that?

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:10 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 2:40 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 2:11 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 2:06 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:59 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:57 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 1:54 pm

Yikes this is bad
Why?
You punted on the question and instead threw it back to jay with "why would I do this if I were bad" when imo the answer to that is fairly obvious.
No it's not. Obvious is the need to obtain a mislynch. Why are we fighting here? Do you push now for my lynch, imagine my green flip, will you be happy for it?
Why were yesterday the equality until 3 mins before Eod and Epi, LC, Mac and you were at 2 votes ?
Maybe a wolf wasn't in immediate danger.

Did you think at it?
Sorry I don't understand the question
Are you sure about that?
I have to admit i didn't structured it well.
What is yellow is your question and my answer. I don't think is obvious.
From the green part is my oppinion.I think you beat around the bush about scum reading me and you should focus on more evident scum actions than my words, which can be (is not the first time) easy to misinterpret because of the way I am wording my posts.

I say I flip town and I wonder if you will be happy to see my green flip.

I show you that with 3 mins before Eod the wagons were tied at 2 votes. One idea is that no mafia was in danger. What do you think about this?

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:20 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:13 pm No, I would not be happy if you flipped green. But I increasingly believe that is unlikely and you aren't giving me any better ideas about who to lynch.

I think there is some chance the d1 wagons were all town, but a fairly small one. I think it is more likely that LC or Epi was saved.
Who and how saved them?
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 2:46 pm Are you saying you think everyone who had votes on d1 is town?
I am not sure. But may be. What if they are all town? The tied wagons I mean.
I know I am villager. I see on you sparkles of towniness who are defeating my paranoia.
I town read LC and Epi.

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:23 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:18 pm So Michelle, maybe they were all town, and maybe you knew that all along.
You really want to see me dead? Nothing tells you why I don't give up?
I don't know they are all town, it's an hypothesis. I saw in many games that if no wolf is in danger they don't interfere with the mislynch.

How could I save anyone when I didn't even self press or switch my vote on Mac?

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:30 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:19 pm Or you're hard defending your teammate LC
Look, I am villager. Maybe I am an idiot and I was too honestly answering at Jay's 'test' and I jumped to conclusions not enough thinked in the game, but you tunneling me and reffusing to think at anything else is not a good thing if you are villager.

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:34 pm Nut is 10:30 pm. I will answer in the morning.

It's mostly from how they worded some posts but to give examples I have to search.

Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:44 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:32 pm
Michelle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:30 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:19 pm Or you're hard defending your teammate LC
Look, I am villager. Maybe I am an idiot and I was too honestly answering at Jay's 'test' and I jumped to conclusions not enough thinked in the game, but you tunneling me and reffusing to think at anything else is not a good thing if you are villager.
I'm not refusing to think. I am trying to find your townie spark and your posts just keep pinging me as bad. But I could be wrong and I'm trying to see different possibilities. I think there are varying chances for any of LC/Epi/Jack/Jay to be scum, and that's a dangerously large poe pool at this point so for now I am voting for the person I can point to the most reasons to suspect, and that's you.
My postcount speaks for me.Just saying.
And when I am scum I reread all posts to not receive this kind of heat.
And i am less jumpy at anyone for any scum move.

Remember how town mislynched GMan in the last game. Remember the hydra game in december when you were sure I am scum. I don't feel I have to give more self meta for you.

More of the same, albeit non-consecutive. Michelle dedicated a huge portion of page 3 of her post history to arguing with and dealing with nutella.

Spoiler: show

If Michelle is a mafioso, then this is a classic discredit of a civilian. Michelle could be innocent here too; what matters is that it's not the stuff of mafia teammates.

Spoiler: show

The antagonism persists in Day 3.

~~~

nutella's stuff not already covered

Spoiler: show

nutella's suspicion of Epignosis was driven in part by his reception of Michelle. If nutella is a mafioso and Michelle is a civilian, this is an easy way to set up a scapegoat.

Spoiler: show

nutella stood in defense of Michelle re: ~subjunctive mood~. Means little to me.

Spoiler: show

Purely balanced/neutral waffle. Okay.

Spoiler: show

Michelle was nutella's backup lynch when the Long Con red peek was revealed false. Not sure I'd expect such a thing from teammates, particularly when the peek was known to be false by the mafia in the first place.

~~~

Conclusion

I don't think nutella and Michelle are mafia teammates. I can see arguments for either/or, but not for both.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:51 pm**

If I am right that nutella and Michelle don't fit together and that Epignosis is a civilian, then Long Con must necessarily be a mafioso.

[mention]Epignosis[/mention] I'd be interested to know how you feel about nutella and Michelle as a mafia team.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 8:06 pm**

Sometimes when I get all BIG POST, threads die. I'd appreciate it if we could keep this thing moving. It's LyLo. Feedback is fantastic, and anything else is fantastic.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 8:07 pm**

I'm playing D&D for the next few hours so I'll be quiet for a while but I will make every effort to use the rest of the phase

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 8:50 pm**

I'll get to you JJJ. Just had my ass handed to me in Worms by my daughter who relies on rare homing weapons.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 8:52 pm**

Let me get a drink and settle in and see what it is JJJ has written.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 9:32 pm**

I think Michelle is a civilian. She looks lost, alone, helpless, angry, trying to figure things out, etc.

Does anybody disagree with that assessment?

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 9:35 pm**

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 9:32 pm I think Michelle is a civilian. She looks lost, alone, helpless, angry, trying to figure things out, etc.

Does anybody disagree with that assessment?

I can see that being the case. I am not confident. The term "alone" may be most compelling in that her last real ally in the game was Nanook, at least until you at present. It's the "trying to figure things out" that has given me problems. I see raw effort; I am not sure I see sincere effort.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 9:41 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 9:35 pm
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 9:32 pm I think Michelle is a civilian. She looks lost, alone, helpless, angry, trying to figure things out, etc.

Does anybody disagree with that assessment?
I can see that being the case. I am not confident. The term "alone" may be most compelling in that her last real ally in the game was Nanook, at least until you at present. It's the "trying to figure things out" that has given me problems. I see raw effort; I am not sure I see sincere effort.

What's the difference?

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 9:44 pm**

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 9:41 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 9:35 pm
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 9:32 pm I think Michelle is a civilian. She looks lost, alone, helpless, angry, trying to figure things out, etc.

Does anybody disagree with that assessment?
I can see that being the case. I am not confident. The term "alone" may be most compelling in that her last real ally in the game was Nanook, at least until you at present. It's the "trying to figure things out" that has given me problems. I see raw effort; I am not sure I see sincere effort.
What's the difference?

I mean that she has put a lot of "effort" into the game, both in defending herself and in putting forth some manner of "hunt". There have been numerous instances wherein she has cast suspicion upon players for what I view as spurious or questionable reasons; it has made me question the authenticity of her hunt.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 9:55 pm**

nutella wrote: ↑Fri Apr 03, 2020 4:33 pm have I been fooled? was Nanook lying all along?

I'm not good enough with this kind of setup/counterclaim stuff to understand what could be happening here. Are Nanook and LC scum together and pulling some kind of... well, long con?

Jay help me out lol

In the same breath, nutella asks if she's been fooled and was Nanook lying AND THEN also says she's not good enough with this "kind of setup/counterclaim stuff to understand what could be happening here."

AND THEN she goes on to offer an accusation based on it.

Look. If you don't understand something, either ask questions to learn or shut the hmm hmm.

This is a nutella that is covering bases. She doesn't claim anything at all, but instead asks a bunch of questions that try to make her look innocent.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 10:01 pm**

I'm at the point that if nutella and LC are civilians, I am prepared to take my first loss of the year. They add up in my head.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 10:03 pm**

Michelle needs to vote though. We can't have a lack of voters at this stage. Michelle, who is bad in your opinion? And stop saying everybody who suspects you or changes his mind or plays at 5%.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 10:04 pm**

Why do I get the feeling there's a spectator chat?

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 10:07 pm**

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 10:01 pm I'm at the point that if nutella and LC are civilians, I am prepared to take my first loss of the year. They add up in my head.

I lean toward the same pairing. The first lynch is still a very important choice though. No margin for error.

Everything collides at Long Con for me.

If you agree that nutella and Michelle don’t work as teammates (and believe that I’m a civilian), it’s where we end up.

If you can sell me on Michelle with your degree of confidence that’d go a long way.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2020 10:11 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 10:07 pm
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2020 10:01 pm I'm at the point that if nutella and LC are civilians, I am prepared to take my first loss of the year. They add up in my head.
I lean toward the same pairing. The first lynch is still a very important choice though. No margin for error.

Everything collides at Long Con for me.

If you agree that nutella and Michelle don’t work as teammates (and believe that I’m a civilian), it’s where we end up.

If you can sell me on Michelle with your degree of confidence that’d go a long way.

For me nutella needs to go first.

The Syndicate

Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [NIGHT 1]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [NIGHT 1]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [NIGHT 1]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 1]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 1]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [NIGHT 1]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 2]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 2]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 2]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 2]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 2]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 2]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 2]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 2]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]

Re: Take Me Out at the Ballgame! [DAY 3]