The Syndicate

RIP TH, very likely you were civ.

RIP TH.

RIP TH - I was sure you were civ and sorry to see you go. See you next game.

Wait - Mr. Boddy doesn't kill does he? I just re-read his description and don't see anything about a kill. And I thought he had forced TH to vote just this last cycle. I don't understand.

juliets wrote:Wait - Mr. Boddy doesn't kill does he? I just re-read his description and don't see anything about a kill. And I thought he had forced TH to vote just this last cycle. I don't understand.

juliets, the baddie team kills are shared among the team. It says they "kill on odd nights".

Also, I bet he was blackmailed. His role information wasn't revealed because he obeyed the force vote.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

juliets wrote:Wait - Mr. Boddy doesn't kill does he? I just re-read his description and don't see anything about a kill. And I thought he had forced TH to vote just this last cycle. I don't understand.

juliets, the baddie team kills are shared among the team. It says they "kill on odd nights".

Also, I bet he was blackmailed. His role information wasn't revealed because he obeyed the force vote.

Yeah, I knew that if he was forced his role info wouldn't be revealed and I forgot about the traveling vote. Pay no attention to what I post after 9:00 pm.

juliets wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

juliets wrote:Wait - Mr. Boddy doesn't kill does he? I just re-read his description and don't see anything about a kill. And I thought he had forced TH to vote just this last cycle. I don't understand.

juliets, the baddie team kills are shared among the team. It says they "kill on odd nights".

Also, I bet he was blackmailed. His role information wasn't revealed because he obeyed the force vote.

Yeah, I knew that if he was forced his role info wouldn't be revealed and I forgot about the traveling vote. Pay no attention to what I post after 9:00 pm.

No worries.

Whom are you examining for today's lynch?

I have to finish looking at Lon Con and then DH is next. DH has not pinged me though he does seem a little antagonistic. I think that's his way though and doesn't speak to alignment (I think someone else brought this up too). Then I will probably take a quick look at blooper. Something pinged me but it could be nothing. Who will you be looking at MP?

That was a weird choice for a kill IMO. RIP TH. From this kill, I believe you must have been good.

Truly sorry to see you go, TH.

juliets wrote:I have to finish looking at Lon Con and then DH is next. DH has not pinged me though he does seem a little antagonistic. I think that's his way though and doesn't speak to alignment (I think someone else brought this up too). Then I will probably take a quick look at blooper. Something pinged me but it could be nothing. Who will you be looking at MP?

Sounds good.

Very curious re: Blooper.

You know, good question. I thought I would get in some rereads tonight but man I am tired. I'll try tomorrow instead at some point. I'll probably at least read as many players as I can, but I'm looking most at DH, then S~V~S, then some others I have no read on (but don't really feel they're necessarily civ either) like Russ, zeek, Snowy, etc.

I also still have my on bea and I want to hear from her.

I've still got my eye on Long Con and Spacedaisy. I'll have more to say tomorrow, I've got the morning off.

MP, at one point you say I looked "bad, bad, bad" then you said, welp, maybe not. Now you say I am in your top two.

You still can't read me to save your life.

I stopped thinking TH was bad a while ago, unless he was on Voldemorts team. Personally, I have a similar suspect list to Timmer. Both Daisy & LC seemed to be trying to push Dom early; that whole "if you were a civvie, you would make a case on another civvie to survive" thing was ludicrous. Dom was not bad, but not for the reasons Daisy & LC were pushing. TBH I thought they both were civ, and I have to Thank both Dom & Bass, because they both could have played me harder, and I appreciate it that they did not

I also don't love the way Snowy is blaming me for his voting issues. Especially in the Dom/Bass lynch; when I voted for Dom it tied it (on paper, but with two players with a 3 vote manip not known to be dead, who knows?) but I also said I tied it since I was conflicted. I said I was conflicted more than once, to the point where I am taking suspicion for it. So why would *I* sway Snow Dog? He thought my waffling was convincing?

For now I am going to vote Daisy. I can always change if I need to defend. I am going to pretty much ignore MP. We have no idea what his agenda is, or even what his win cons really entail. Just becasue we don't have to defeat him to win doesn't mean much. I had a similar recruiting role in AG, and it was a sudden death win. As soon as he outnumbered the civvies, the game was over. If that changes, and we learn more via the Host, my feelings on that may change (or already did and I missed it~ yesterday the game seemed to be heading into wall o'text territory, which tends to glaze my eyes over, lol, and I often skip much of those posts on phone and may or may not read them later on).

I don't particularly need MP dead, but I am also not particularly interested in saving his recruits if I think they are bad, either. I am not a fan of an outed Indy (who outed himself) trying to steer the thread. He is going to steer it away from his recruits regardless of their affiliation. So his opinion is inherently biased. He won't vote for one of his recruits, and indeed would actively lobby against anyone pushing a lynch of one of his recruits. So what value does his opinion have now that he is known to be Tyler?

I was looking at both DH & Bea myself early in the game, mainly via paranoia, but saw things to make me look away. Haven't seen anything to make me look back. So MP adding these two to his list isn't making me trust his motivations more. Although I would like to hear more from Bea too.

I stopped thinking TH was bad a while ago, unless he was on Voldemorts team. Personally, I have a similar suspect list to Timmer. Both Daisy & LC seemed to be trying to push Dom early; that whole "if you were a civvie, you would make a case on another civvie to survive" thing was ludicrous. Dom was not bad, but not for the reasons Daisy & LC were pushing. TBH I thought they both were civ, and I have to Thank both Dom & Bass, because they both could have played me harder, and I appreciate it that they did not

There was an extraneous "not" in that section up there; Dom WAS bad. Proofread fail.

hey not fully caught up still reading the zeek/MP show. Hope to have some thoughts to share later

I'm 99% sure Daisy is NOT bad. And she isn't one of my recruits. If you want to ignore me, S~V~S, then whatever. I don't understand what more I could have done this game to gain the civilians' trust. But fair enough, you're entitled to your opinion. If I thought everyone was going to respond the way you did (and I'm not sure they will, just saying), certainly I wouldn't have bothered knocking out Dom. And yes, you are in my top 2 suspects. The only reasons I backed off were because you made a good point with the LD statements and because TH saw something apparently significant that made him back off. And because I disagree with you on who's bad, you distrust me more? If that was the case, wouldn't you distrust me every game, even if I was civilian?

I'm curious to hear what timmer has to say regarding his suspects, nonetheless, even if I don't particularly think either of them are bad.

I am also NOT trying to steer the thread; I am merely offering my opinions on players which I believe should be taken into consideration just like any other player. If you want to ignore them completely, be my guest.

S~V~S wrote:...that whole "if you were a civvie, you would make a case on another civvie to survive" thing was ludicrous. Dom was bad, but not for the reasons Daisy & LC were pushing.

Ludicrous? That is an awfully strange way to look at the situation. I can't recall another time that I called out a player as being bad for the way they were acting, being right, and then had someone say that he was bad, but not for the reasons I was saying.

What were the reasons Dom was bad, S~V~S?

Am verr slheepy sory for lame pos but I will lbeeo looking at LC tofay to vote. Byt I habe r dash ry so I'll vote ;ater

DharmaHelper wrote:Am verr slheepy sory for lame pos but I will lbeeo looking at LC tofay to vote. Byt I habe r dash ry so I'll vote ;ater

Well, I can't argue an eloquent case like that!

Alright alright alright! Lets get cracking. Ladies and Gentlemen, Boys and Girls of all ages, sit back, relax, and prepare for a post that will rival the novelist MP! I promise, by the end of it you will be mesmerized, hypnotized, and most likely ostracized! Ours is a tale of hyperbole, hypocrisy, and obsession. Shall we begin?

**EDITORS NOTE** I've color coded several phrases, just to keep my own head on right when making this post. Hopefully, the color coding helps you understand as you read it too.

Long Con wrote:

reywaS wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Humorous antics are an often effective way to deflect suspicion in the early days of mafia games.

Can I assume since you responded with this 7 minutes after I voted for metalmarsh that this is directed at me? If it was directed at me, I must ask what makes it a humorous tactic? Why is it a humorous tactic as opposed to any legitimate attempt at playing the game?

I didn't read DH as specifically targeting you with that statement. You seem to me to be jumping to the defensive pretty quickly... especially since I didn't find your vote for MM particularly humourous or... antical?

Anyways, that made you my best choice for a Day One vote. *votes reywaS*

LC's very early vote for Rey, giving a (wrong and IMO poorly thought out) reason for doing so. In and of itself, not too damning. But this vote is part of a much larger whole, one that will become clear very shortly.

Long Con wrote:

reywaS wrote:I don't understand that metaphor, DH.

Linki: Seriously? I got "up in arms"? So, in addition to fabricating a reason to vote for me, you are now going to use hyperbole to try to further justify your vote?

I just read your post again. Maybe something is lost/gained in translation because it's pure text, but I think the situation called for, at most, a "Was that at me, DH?"

You put a string of three increasingly defensive questions in one paragraph.

reywaS wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Humorous antics are an often effective way to deflect suspicion in the early days of mafia games.

Can I assume since you responded with this 7 minutes after I voted for metalmarsh that this is directed at me? If it was directed at me, I must ask what makes it a humorous tactic? Why is it a humorous tactic as opposed to any legitimate attempt at playing the game?

Don't you think it reads pretty defensively?

Linkitis: That's fine, rey. I am not planning on getting up in arms about this, it's a Day One vote, not a lynch train. Also, watch those shrugs. I got accused last game of too many shrugs, and that was a non-committal baddie tactic.

After a back and forth with Rey, LC posts the above. I will highlight a phrase that seems...familiar. Let's move further down this rabbit hole and see where it takes us.

Long Con wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

juliets wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Again I should say nothing I find overly suspicious at this moment in time, but I just thought the coincidence was funny. The same sort of scenario coming up in the game that I won to get to this game, now coming up in this game. Cosmically improbable, yet here we are.

As it stands I'm mulling over a vote for LC.

DH can you expand a little on why you are mulling over a vote for LC? What are you seeing?

I don't like his exchange with Rey. I'll let you go back and read it for yourself, but it just did not ring true to me. LC is a good enough player not to want to rush into things with such slapdash and paper-thin logic

Which logic exactly was paper-thin? I don't think it makes me not a good player to have cast that vote.

And re: reywaS' point about your S~V~S post... I didn't actually read the whole comparison word-for-word, because it was to block-of-texty, but I thought the gist of it was that you were drawing a deliberate connection to suggest that S~V~S was a baddie. I think you're playing a cavalier kind of game, this isn't the first time this game you've had to do several posts of explanation how you're not really accusing anyone with your "observations".

Highlighted two key phrases here. LC admits to not having actually read the post he is basing his suspicions of me off of. Ain't that some shit? I've also highlighted the first of several hypocritical statements regarding "mudslinging" as LC would put it. Recall if you will above, his exchange with Reywas.

Long Con wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

Long Con wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

juliets wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Again I should say nothing I find overly suspicious at this moment in time, but I just thought the coincidence was funny. The same sort of scenario coming up in the game that I won to get to this game, now coming up in this game. Cosmically improbable, yet here we are.

As it stands I'm mulling over a vote for LC.

DH can you expand a little on why you are mulling over a vote for LC? What are you seeing?

I don't like his exchange with Rey. I'll let you go back and read it for yourself, but it just did not ring true to me. LC is a good enough player not to want to rush into things with such slapdash and paper-thin logic

Which logic exactly was paper-thin? I don't think it makes me not a good player to have cast that vote.

And re: reywaS' point about your S~V~S post... I didn't actually read the whole comparison word-for-word, because it was to block-of-texty, but I thought the gist of it was that you were drawing a deliberate connection to suggest that S~V~S was a baddie. I think you're playing a cavalier kind of game, this isn't the first time this game you've had to do several posts of explanation how you're not really accusing anyone with your "observations".

"You got a little defensive here in this one post" Is a wobbly, weak reason for such an early vote. I don't necessarily care if it is Day 1 or Day 8, a vote is a vote. And you can't honestly tell me it is a civvie thing to do or in the civvies best interest to vote that early for that reason.

Why not? Are you against generating discussion, and gauging reactions? You'd prefer if everyone voted low posters or random or for no reason?

I've highlighted this post for later. I've already addressed how overblown and defensive this post was, and I maintain that. This is not only a clear and blatantly intentional misread of my post, but also a highly defensive reaction. Remember when Long Con jumped on Rey for being "overly defensive"? This case LC has built, has been built inside a Glass House.

Speaking of defensive:
Taken from this post which won't allow me to quote it due to the quote limit. The post itself is rather large and filled with a very charged defensiveness on LC's part, but this snippet I have posted here should be pretty telling.

Long Con wrote:You're the one using "tactics" here, DH, not me, and it should be obvious to anyone reading your posts. You're just full of adverbs, aren't you? "Ravenously", that's a good one. That's my favourite. You should know by now to tone down the excessive colour commentary in your posts. What you are trying to do is put lipstick on a pig. I'm not a baddie, my vote for Rey was because of a Day One ping, nothing more. You, however, have been doing your damnedest to be subtly mudslinging, only to back off entirely if someone acknowledges it. More than once, and that's saying a lot for Day One.

Alright Mr. Mudslinger, Captain Adverb, Doctor Lipstick Von Pig, I'll tone down the commentary in *my* posts.

Long Con wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:I won't be voting for MM or Rey, I found their early votes harmless and I believe MM when he says he did it to get a reaction. LC's vote by contrast I thought felt opportunistic and trying to make something out of nothing on Day 1. My vote might be headed there.

Much like Bea I have to be at work today. Normally I get chances to sneak some mafia'ing in at work but I likely won't be able to today so I'll probably be voting soon

I wasn't "making something out of nothing". I thought Rey's post was a lot more defensive than the situation called for, and that was suspicious to me. If you want to vote for someone who is making something out of nothing, then Dharmahelper is the one you should be going for. Not to mention he's mudslinging to see if he can get something to stick, then backing off when questioned about it.

It's funny that some people think they can read so much into one vote, and yet they completely close their eyes to a player that has several undeniable instances of suspicious activity already under their belt.

Linki: Well, that gives me some hope that your vote won't go my way.

This post is another interesting one. Note his mention of rey's defensiveness? His immediate campaign to actually get other players to vote for me by deflecting attention off of himself and on to me? He finishes it with another "mudslinging" accusation, which as I've established with his Rey suspicion is more than a tad ironic.

Long Con wrote:I don't think you're bad because you're after me. I think you're bad because you're mudslinging and backing off.

Finally, a small post to quote. His criteria for me being bad is essentially exactly what he himself did with Rey. Enough said.

Long Con wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:If I had been trying to build a case, I would have done so and done so in a way that took absolutely zero account for what anyone thought about it. I'm not the type of player to care at all if anyone agrees or disagrees with my suspicions. If I suspect someone, I'll make sure they know it.

That's all cool, I believe you. That's how you build your cases, I think that's most likely an accurate description. I can't say for sure, because, like I said, I don't really have a good memory for what people did and how they did it in past games.

The way someone builds a case and the way someone mudslings are different things, though. I was accusing you of mudslinging.

I hear your defenses about it, and I'm not trying to argue them. Smart players, when mudslinging, will have a way out of it if it comes back on them.

I'll just break it down slightly so we can avoid any unnecessary back-and-forth. It all comes down to whether or not people believe that you were hoping to start some suspicion or not, when you brought up the Federal Case, or the Misfits reference.

You went from "Twice in one game seems funky to me" to "Nothing I was gonna put a vote behind anyway" on the Federal Case. The first statement is a suggestion of suspicion. The second is wiping your hands clean of it. That one's pretty direct, and as a smart player, you have the way out with "I didn't know that expression but now I do, so never mind".

The Misfits thing you introduced with "deja vu is a bitch", which doesn't give any clear indication of how you feel about connecting this game situation to the Misfits one. I was unclear when I read it what your intentions were, but I assumed you were drawing a connection between games to argue S~V~S' possible baddieness in this game. You came in right away and said it's not something you find "overly suspicious", which isn't quite the same as "I don't find this suspicious".

And it's not really something I would usually say, but since I'm sampling DH-style here and there: Mudslinging is not what's generally conceived of as Civvie behaviour.

I realize this post is getting rather long. and I have MUCH more to say, so I'm gonna try and wrap this up and do a Part Two:

Once again, Long Con's double-standard and hypocritical suspicions shine through. Let me break THIS down for you, so YOU understand, bub

Remember that Reywas vote? Remember how he went from that to "Calm down Rey, its just a day one vote, nothing to I'm gonna get up in arms about"?

Ehem:
The first is a (very clear) statement of suspicion. The second is wiping his hands clean of it.

I think that's as good a place as any to end this Part I of my LC case before it gets too long. I'll have another post up soonish continuing what we've established here.

I stand by everything I said. Your comparisons to denote hypocrisy are weak... are you trying to wipe your record clean of the accusations I put out there, so you can move forward in this lynch bereft of suspicion? Or are you trying to make me look like I'm a baddie because you can twist my words to look like they have something in common with your words... so I'm a baddie like you?

Long Con wrote:

I stand by everything I said. Your comparisons to denote hypocrisy are weak... are you trying to wipe your record clean of the accusations I put out there, so you can move forward in this lynch bereft of suspicion? Or are you trying to make me look like I'm a baddie because you can twist my words to look like they have something in common with your words... so I'm a baddie like you?

I think I laid out quite clearly the similarities between what I said and what you said.

My point being, you can't build a suspicion on hypocrisy. As I've been saying this whole time, your suspicion of me is a giant, illogical, poorly slapped together farce.

I don't see how proving "hypocrisy" equates with the suspicions against you being wrong.

Long Con wrote:I don't see how proving "hypocrisy" equates with the suspicions against you being wrong.

Yeah you do.

You're case on me is wrong for a number of reasons. The fact that you have to dig deep enough by resorting to double-standards and hypocrisy being one of them. If it were genuine, if you yourself were genuine, you would not have to resort to such weak, easily disputed points. You're building a case to look civvie, not to hunt baddies. So you're doing exactly what you claim I was doing. Throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks. Nothing in your case follows the logic, merit, or validity of a civvie case.

Pot. Kettle.

To put it another way:

If you suspect I am bad for doing the things that you are doing, how do you explain doing the things that you suspect I am bad for doing?

SVS. Whether you like it or not what you said swayed my vote. I am not blaming you, I should stick to my guns. It's my failing. If you are bad, well done, very subtly done. If you are civ, it's just one of those things. You gave your point of view and i took it on board.

About my voting. Yeah. It doesn't look great. I will be sure to try and get a suit or a sorcerer soon.

Regarding MP. I am happy not to lynch him.

DH, the things I said aren't the same as the things you said. You drew parallels between a couple of statements, but the situations were not the same. This is a weak attempt to discredit my suspicions against you, dressed up as usual in DharmaHelper pomp and glamour.

Snow Dog wrote:I will be sure to try and get a suit or a sorcerer soon.

Regarding MP. I am happy not to lynch him.

That is definitely a great start.

Okay, so this game is starting to make my head spin, but here goes.

I think LC is bad for many of the reasons DH has set out. the Day 1 vote against rey was very weird, but more weird (and more important) were his responses regarding it all afterwards which DH has just covered. That said, DH is fucking on FIRE right now, and when he's on fire he can pretty much convince me to buy a bridge to nowhere, so I may be getting a bit swayed here, BUT, I've been eyeing Long Con for much of the game so DH's posts are essentially bolstering what I already believed.

As to SpaceDaisy. MP, I would like you to go into DETAIL about why you are thinking civ here. Obviously you have an agenda, and the fact that you are outed and playing an ostensibly pro-civ game doesn't change that. You DO have an agenda to see your recruits survive. So when I see you defend someone as civ at this point in the game, if you want me to listen to you, you will need to DEMONSTRATE your reasons. I don't think anyone, outside of your recruits, will just simply trust you. At least, they shouldn't. So I'm willing to listen, how is SD civ?

As to SVS, she's a brilliant player and I could see her being bad always. Essentially, I've seen her flip bad and had my jaw drop enough that I'm not taking anything for granted. But I would like someone to summarize their case there.

And MP, I'll read back on your Bea case later today, I'll admit I don't think i've read it yet!

So MP says he thinks Long Con is civ, and Long Con says it's good not to lynch MP. Hmm. And MP also thinks SD is civ, who I think is tied to LC. Hmm. This doesn't help.

How is SpaceDaisy tied to me? I definitely missed that post.

She was weirdly supportive of your rey vote on Day 1, for starters.

timmer wrote:She was weirdly supportive of your rey vote on Day 1, for starters.

Interesting... and she also was the main other Dom accuser during the Bass lynch.

It definitely feels like something is missing without those 5. Maybe at least one of them will pop in soon for a cameo.

linki - Ooh, that's true, Timmer.

linki 2 - oh touche.

My thoughts on LC are all over the place, can't get a decent read on him. He seems genuine and civ one post, then tetchy and insincere in the next. Did he ever say which team he was silenced by?

S~V~S I tend to believe is Snape. Obviously it's possible she's also Voldemort but he can't summon a patronus (like that in Lily's avatar). Unless I've read the situation incorrectly and she isn't likely responsible for Lily. Someone correct me if that is the case.

timmer wrote:As to SpaceDaisy. MP, I would like you to go into DETAIL about why you are thinking civ here. Obviously you have an agenda, and the fact that you are outed and playing an ostensibly pro-civ game doesn't change that. You DO have an agenda to see your recruits survive. So when I see you defend someone as civ at this point in the game, if you want me to listen to you, you will need to DEMONSTRATE your reasons. I don't think anyone, outside of your recruits, will just simply trust you. At least, they shouldn't. So I'm willing to listen, how is SD civ?

MP's 99% claim makes me think he chose her as the Narrator and, thus, knows her role.

timmer wrote:She was weirdly supportive of your rey vote on Day 1, for starters.

But if you're tying us to MP (as in, the Fight Club recruits perhaps join him more than the role indicates?) then the Day One connection doesn't really support that aspect.

zeek wrote:My thoughts on LC are all over the place, can't get a decent read on him. He seems genuine and civ one post, then tetchy and insincere in the next. Did he ever say which team he was silenced by?

S~V~S I tend to believe is Snape. Obviously it's possible she's also Voldemort but he can't summon a patronus (like that in Lily's avatar). Unless I've read the situation incorrectly and she isn't likely responsible for Lily. Someone correct me if that is the case.

timmer wrote:As to SpaceDaisy. MP, I would like you to go into DETAIL about why you are thinking civ here. Obviously you have an agenda, and the fact that you are outed and playing an ostensibly pro-civ game doesn't change that. You DO have an agenda to see your recruits survive. So when I see you defend someone as civ at this point in the game, if you want me to listen to you, you will need to DEMONSTRATE your reasons. I don't think anyone, outside of your recruits, will just simply trust you. At least, they shouldn't. So I'm willing to listen, how is SD civ?

MP's 99% claim makes me think he chose her as the Narrator and, thus, knows her role.

Oh, that makes sense for the MP-SpaceDaisy connection. If we believe in that, then we can be reasonably sure that she's not on the Sorcerers' team, or it would have been against MP's interests to go after him.

You also bring up a good point I hadn't thought of - if MP chose a baddie as The Narrator, then he would have more than his own whims to consider when deciding which side to support.

Sorry, submitted too soon, I forgot to confirm that I did share who silenced me: The Warden from the Suits team put me in the hole.

RIP TH - I had pretty decent feels about you.

MovingPictures07 wrote: bea:
bea’s opinions were similar to S~V~S, saying she had no read on either player. I understand Bass posted very little, and that others said this as well, but her posts struck me as odd/contradictory just like S~V~S’s, and unlike everyone else’s. What’s very suspicious is she then votes Bass and cites a reason for believing he could be bad... so how does that make them “equal”? Note that she didn’t say anything about Dom:

bea wrote:
Nope. I've got nothing to hid. From Boe or anyone else. That said, my post was influenced by 6 glasess of chardonay -so take that for what you will.

As for today's vote I'm all popping a brain cell or three over it. Dom and Bass are about at equal levels of IDK what to think about them. Feels like the all things being equal. I hate to vote bass when he can't defend and I hate to punish dom by voting him because bass can't defend.

I guess I'm going to go with Bass. I feel bad that he can't defend, but the likely hood that one of them is bad, compiled by rox expressing distrust in him and rox's subsiquent silence push him a hair ahead of dom for me.

My suspicion of bea is relatively mild, especially compared to the aforementioned three, but I haven’t seen anything from her this game to convince me she is civilian, and her behavior the past cycle really made me wonder in a way that S~V~S’s did, but to a much lesser degree. In addition, I remember absolutely nothing about what she has said this game. But she has the same number of posts as I do at the time of writing this (we both have 73). Maybe that’s at least partially my problem, but it’s pretty concerning to me that someone would have 73 posts going into D5 but I can’t remember a single suspect they have.

So the crux of your argument is that I had a lot of posts you can't remember and I appeared weird when posting while drinking? I just want to make sure I'm addressing the proper things.

I'm sorry you don't remember anything I've said. That kinda makes me sad really, I've been trying to play as much as I can and as well as I can this game. I've been far more vocal than I have in the past games I've played. I have to ask if you actually went back and read any of he 72 other posts in this game that you didn't quote? Because I think if you had, you'd see that from Day 1 I've been expressing what I'm thinking when I'm posting. I've been trying to contribute as best as I can.

I've not listed suspects? I was the first to point to the possibility on Day 1 that DH could have been dropping the suspicious "federal case" bomb before the second bit even happened. I've been asking questions of people the whole way through trying to figure out where I stand.

I was the ONLY player to go back and read Bass and attempt to actually try to figure out who could be bad. Sure, I picked the player on the poll with the least votes. I had that block of time to do it. I'd truly hoped someone would follow my lead and give Dom a good read as well, but that didn't really happen did it? I didn't have time to go back and pull through those posts. I didn't have a clue about either of them but I went with the best decision I could based on what work I was able to put into it. I don't understand why that makes me bad.

I'm sorry you couldn't remember a single suspect I had. Again, I have to ask if you actually went back and read any of the other posts. Because I do feel like everything you ask for is in them. I encourage everyone to go back and read them. I've said it before, I'll say it again, I've got nothing to hid this game. I'm never going to be as aggressive of a player as others. I'm never going to be as loud and vocal as others. So if they are not memory sticking for you, then I'm very sorry.

By the way, how many times did you have to ask the thread about me last cycle before you figured out I was silenced? Did missing the vote clue you in? Did my attempts to post during that cycle in other threads clue you in? You managed to ratchet up your suspish on me to an pretty much as a new cycle started when I couldn't say a single thing. Did you think I'd forgotten you mentioned me?

I'm cutting this here - I do have more to say, but this post is getting rather long. More to come.


so much linki!

bea wrote:I was the ONLY player to go back and read Bass and attempt to actually try to figure out who could be bad. Sure, I picked the player on the poll with the least votes.

I think you meant the player with the least posts, right?

I appreciated that you did that, bea. I guess the greater number of posts that Dom had was more intimidating to comb through? What lazy players!

zeek wrote:My thoughts on LC are all over the place, can't get a decent read on him. He seems genuine and civ one post, then tetchy and insincere in the next. Did he ever say which team he was silenced by?

S~V~S I tend to believe is Snape. Obviously it's possible she's also Voldemort but he can't summon a patronus (like that in Lily's avatar). Unless I've read the situation incorrectly and she isn't likely responsible for Lily. Someone correct me if that is the case.

timmer wrote:As to SpaceDaisy. MP, I would like you to go into DETAIL about why you are thinking civ here. Obviously you have an agenda, and the fact that you are outed and playing an ostensibly pro-civ game doesn't change that. You DO have an agenda to see your recruits survive. So when I see you defend someone as civ at this point in the game, if you want me to listen to you, you will need to DEMONSTRATE your reasons. I don't think anyone, outside of your recruits, will just simply trust you. At least, they shouldn't. So I'm willing to listen, how is SD civ?

MP's 99% claim makes me think he chose her as the Narrator and, thus, knows her role.

I agree with this post like 100%.

Also I would add that in the books Snape's patronus was a doe. Which was supposed to represent Lily. Speaking of that whole thing, yes SVS - I did get a giggle there.

Long Con wrote:

bea wrote:I was the ONLY player to go back and read Bass and attempt to actually try to figure out who could be bad. Sure, I picked the player on the poll with the least votes.

I think you meant the player with the least posts, right?

I appreciated that you did that, bea. I guess the greater number of posts that Dom had was more intimidating to comb through? What lazy players!

lol - yes - I ment posts. OMG. Even half a pot of coffee in and I still do dumb things. The greater number of posts Dom had did intimidate me. I started that quest at like 1 am my time after a long night of work. My point being though that I did try. Which is more than I've normally done in past games. Face it we all know didn't win the monopoly game because I played awesomely.

Okay, so here is a post summarizing why I think SD is shady. Before I get into it, I'll address the above comment. If MP chose SD as his narrator, which makes sense as a good choice, and he knows her role, it doesn't mean she is CIV. It means he knows her role and needs her alive otherwise he DIES. And the only way he could make that happen, in a situation where she is getting looked at, is to promote her as a civ. It's entirely self-serving on his part (and understandable of course). So if she is his narrator, it is NOT an indicator of alignment.

Anyway, here we go:

Day 1, after LC had voted for rey VERY early.

Spacedaisy wrote:
I don't see what the big deal about LC's vote is either. Rey does seem a bit defensive, nothing I would cast a vote for though, but I don't find it odd that LC did especially in a game where if something big happened he could change his vote. Additionally because LC has been known to do things that seem odd just to shake the tree and see what falls out. I don't think that is what he was doing here either, but given all this I don't find anything out of place with his vote or reason, especially on Day 1.

At this time, LC had not made any mention of the fact that he could change his vote. He never used it as a reason for his vote. SD seems to be supporting his vote with things that were not in the thread, and it gives me a "they were discussing it in BTSC" vibe.

Next up, the Day 2 lynch:

Spacedaisy wrote:I find myself looking at three options for this lynch. I still do not like the feel of DH after Day 1. Made seems to be making blatantly false statements, if there were any truth in what he was saying, I am sure he would be punished for what he has said. However, there are secret roles and I really can't see why anyone would lie about this, bad or otherwise, so it still leaves me wondering if there is a role that can force you to claim things or act certain ways. It would not be the first time. Then there is the case against llama...

I just don't know which one I feel like is the best place for a vote today.

Then there is the case against Llama. She never mentioned it before this moment. She never provided any thoughts on it. Or explained why she agreed with it, or anything at all. Just... "then there is the case against llama."

Spacedaisy wrote:Ok, looking at the votes has helped me decide. Casting a vote for DH would be throwing my vote away right now, so I won't be voting him today despite not trusting him. That leaves Made or Llama. The people who have currently voted for Made include both DH and Llama. The people who have voted for Llama include people that I do not as of yet find suspicious. My vote is going to Llama.

So SD's entire logical basis for her vote on Day 2 has to vote with llama and DH's vote for Made, but to this point, she still hasn't explained her thoughts on llama even one time. She just kind of tagged along with the lynch train.

Spacedaisy wrote: I think it is likely that we had civ v civ action on Day 2 and the baddies let us run with it. It's an easy out for two lynches if they did, because it would not be until made flipped before we realized it.

And suddenly, after Made's claims of being forced were corroborated, "oh, it was civ vs civ". But SD is still totally detached from the entire llama lynch. Like, she never made a case to begin with to explain her vote, and now she's not really acknowledging that she was part of the lynch at all. This does NOT feel like a civ to me, but rather an indy or baddie.

Now, later on:

Spacedaisy wrote:My other suspect, though less so, is LC. His original vote for Rey pinged me more on the second read than the first time through, but his subsequent back and forth with DH made me feel less suspicious of him, so I'm kind of on the fence. I will be voting DH today.

Classic baddie partner move. Your baddie partner is starting to get eyed a bit. Make sure to mention them, make sure to distance yourself a bit, but don't work it TOO hard.

Next up is working a vibe for me, but this post pinged me at the time:

Spacedaisy wrote:I didn't get targeted by anyone with anything so I am no help at all unfortunately

That just screams baddie to me. Like, she knew her team's actions, and was accidentally using language that was too definite here. On its own, it wouldn't be enough for a case, but it lends support to the above, imo.

In the Dom v Bass lynch, SD was heavy against Dom, while making sure to say she's happy with either being lynched, suggesting she would be a suit, of which two remain. In fact, this is the only point in the game where SD has really been on fire, attacking Dom in multiple posts, it is a STARK difference to the llama lynch and her sparse, nonchalant comment about Made early on, rey, heck this is even more fired up then her occasional post about DH, which is the only other time in the game she has seemed locked in.

SD's vote for Dom the next day doesn't warrant exploration since MP outed him essentially and the lynch was a done deal the instant that happened.

What does warrant a look is SD's defense of her vote for Dom, instead of Bass.

She defends it this way:

Spacedaisy wrote:I am not bad. I realize you and your team are going after me because I said I suspected both of them and you thought I KNEW because I was on the other team. But I didn't KNOW. I just highly suspected. And I gave my reasons why for both candidates. I became more vocal when I did because that lynch provided more insight than any cycle so far. I have done nothing this game but play for the civs because that is alignment.

She says she gave reasons against both Bass and Dom, but there is only one lone post where she says ANYTHING about Bass, and it is this:

Spacedaisy wrote:I must be a weirdo, because unlike everyone else I am ok with either of these two being lynched. In the case of Bass, I think the big thing for me is the fact Roxy suspects him. That speaks volumes to me. As far as Dom, I didn't suspect him all that much until his comment about them both being civ. That pinged big time. There are a good number of baddie roles that target people, if I was up against someone in a Tyler showdown then it would make me pretty darn suspicious of the other person. The fact he isn't seems to me that he is trying to look civ.

That's it. One line mentioning Roxy's feelings, and then SD moved right into Dom full bore. To me, attacking Dom repeatedly, while throwing on a "but I'm good with either one" line is not balanced. And saying "I gave my thoughts on both" isn't really cutting it when it was LOTS of attack posts against Dom versus one sentence regarding Bass.

After all that died down, we are back to mentioning people other's have built cases on to seem participatory:

Spacedaisy wrote:My top three suspects are SVS, DH and TH. But I feel really unsure right now about all of it to be frank. I feel most confident about SVS. TH really looks like he slipped up, but I don't see how this would be reconciled with him going after DF as MP pointed out already. DH I have not trusted since early in the game but I just feel very uncertain about it right now.

That's a total "I'm waiting to see which way the thread goes" post, to me.

And then finally...

Spacedaisy wrote:I'd like to hear from Bea

Why? You've never said anything about Bea that I can see, but again, others are discussing her and pointing out why she may be bad. But you don't comment on that, you just post this.

All of this reads like detached baddie or indy to me, except the Dom vs Bass lynch where you went BIG against Dom. I think you are a Suit.

Long Con wrote: You also bring up a good point I hadn't thought of - if MP chose a baddie as The Narrator, then he would have more than his own whims to consider when deciding which side to support.

For this reason, no one should be listening to MP's thoughts on anything, imo. He'll paint his narrator to be a civ, no matter what. And if his narrator is a baddie then MP is essentially a baddie, too.

Agreed on MP. And this also illustrates something I missed before... I said that an outed Tyler would essentially have already won the game, but I forgot about the fact that he will die if the Narrator dies. I wonder if his secret is that he can ONLY die if The Narrator dies? I think MP is very vulnerable right now, especially with SpaceDaisy being quasi-outed as The Narrator, double-especially after a pretty reasonable case was just made for her being a Suit. And if she's not a Suit, then she's most likely a Civ (she and MP both went after Dom pretty hard), and thus she's someone the baddies would need dead to win.

timmer wrote:

Long Con wrote: You also bring up a good point I hadn't thought of - if MP chose a baddie as The Narrator, then he would have more than his own whims to consider when deciding which side to support.

For this reason, no one should be listening to MP's thoughts on anything, imo. He'll paint his narrator to be a civ, no matter what. And if his narrator is a baddie then MP is essentially a baddie, too.

I think that goes a bit far - even if MP is siding with the Suits, it's still in his best interests to try and lynch a Sorcerer. Instead of not listening to him, we should consider that his posts may be tainted with Suit-friendly intentions... but still analyze for ourselves if things he says make sense. I'd hate to throw out a good case against a baddie just because MP said it.

About Daisy:

timmer wrote:All of this reads like detached baddie or indy to me, except the Dom vs Bass lynch where you went BIG against Dom. I think you are a Suit.

I believe the last two Suits are either her, DH or Snowy. Your point about her suspecting LC (in theory a teammate) a little but not too hard, works if DH is her teammate as well, as he was in her Top 3 Suspects but saying she's just unsure about him.

timmer wrote:If MP chose SD as his narrator, which makes sense as a good choice, and he knows her role, it doesn't mean she is CIV. It means he knows her role and needs her alive otherwise he DIES. And the only way he could make that happen, in a situation where she is getting looked at, is to promote her as a civ. It's entirely self-serving on his part (and understandable of course). So if she is his narrator, it is NOT an indicator of alignment.

You could be right about MP and Daisy, I'd forgotten about the death factor. I feel better about him than I did but you raise a huge point that shouldn't be ignored.


Also, thanks for the backup yesterday when I was sparring with MP, guys :P

zeek wrote:I believe the last two Suits are either her, DH or Snowy. Your point about her suspecting LC (in theory a teammate) a little but not too hard, works if DH is her teammate as well, as he was in her Top 3 Suspects but saying she's just unsure about him.

If Daisy is a Suit, then DH is her teammate. Note that in all DH's grand interesting colourful post, he didn't touch on what I consider to be the most damning baddie indicator, the DFaraday connection.