The Syndicate

Epignosis wrote:

TheFloyd73 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Matt F wrote:The interaction between Luke/Bug is interesting Epi. I was going to say "perhaps Luke's team told him to say that to Bug", but those posts are within 10 minutes of each other. Add to that the Drac stuff...

My only problem with the theory and it's a small problem. Bug and Luke are friends. If Bug was on Luke's team, do you think he would've had more of a motivation to play?

No. I've invited many people to sign up here and play, and they hate it and never come back.

BUGLA won't be back, I didn't think he would enjoy Mafia much. Luke looks like he'll be here to stay.

Based on BULGA's input before being replaced, do you think BULGA's replacement should be lynched?

TheFloyd73 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

TheFloyd73 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Matt F wrote:The interaction between Luke/Bug is interesting Epi. I was going to say "perhaps Luke's team told him to say that to Bug", but those posts are within 10 minutes of each other. Add to that the Drac stuff...

My only problem with the theory and it's a small problem. Bug and Luke are friends. If Bug was on Luke's team, do you think he would've had more of a motivation to play?

No. I've invited many people to sign up here and play, and they hate it and never come back.

BUGLA won't be back, I didn't think he would enjoy Mafia much. Luke looks like he'll be here to stay.

Based on BULGA's input before being replaced, do you think BULGA's replacement should be lynched?

Maybe have a read of his posts and decide whether your mate was having a lend k?

Tranq was asleep in a small tent when it happened. A figure cloaked in the symbols of the Witherdeath Cabal stood outside his tent and spread its arms wide. Green light flared from its fingertips, and a toxic green mist formed, swirling and shifting like a living entity.

The mist crept into the tent, and into Tranq's lungs, causing him to shrivel and die from the inside out.

Tranq has been killed by the Witherdeath Cabal. It is now Day 5.

TheFloyd73 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

TheFloyd73 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Matt F wrote:The interaction between Luke/Bug is interesting Epi. I was going to say "perhaps Luke's team told him to say that to Bug", but those posts are within 10 minutes of each other. Add to that the Drac stuff...

My only problem with the theory and it's a small problem. Bug and Luke are friends. If Bug was on Luke's team, do you think he would've had more of a motivation to play?

No. I've invited many people to sign up here and play, and they hate it and never come back.

BUGLA won't be back, I didn't think he would enjoy Mafia much. Luke looks like he'll be here to stay.

Based on BULGA's input before being replaced, do you think BULGA's replacement should be lynched?

But day 1 you said Bug was bad and voted for him?

I am voting for whoever sig votes for today

I think juliets is a good place to start a vote today.

Me too

Rip in pepperoni.

So... I'm lookin at those who voted no because of "duh" being thier reasoning... Tomorrow. It's currently sleepy time.

I'm pretty sure someone already mentioned it, but juliets being dead-last to jump on that Luke train is a really bad look, not to mention how she (and a few others' start here and scroll down) were pressured by Epi to change from her soft Luke vote the previous lynch. Not that golden is immune since this involved a mafia bandwagon rather than a third-party bandwagon, but of the people switching to nutella he'd be the one I'd suspect least, especially since I think he'd be a little more tactical about it. The others are in a grey zone, but BUGLA/Draconus' response to the pressure seems pretty iffy as well, especially since he was replacing and might not know the full circumstances of a train building against a scumbuddy.

Wilgy I came to your bonfire party you have to come to mine now. We sacrificing some juliets to the god of maphia.

I think better of Sig after that Luke lynch. Since Nutella turned out not to be part of a baddie team, I think the best place to look would be people potentially trying to save Luke in the previous lynch.

MacDougall wrote:Wilgy I came to your bonfire party you have to come to mine now. We sacrificing some juliets to the god of maphia.

You think juliets is worse than LoRab? I'm not sure how serious you were with your LoRab suspicion

Do you want me to change my vote? I am just buddying HamburgerBoy so he stops accusing me of being bad.

MacDougall wrote:Do you want me to change my vote? I am just buddying HamburgerBoy so he stops accusing me of being bad.

No need to change it. I might vote for juliets today too... I want to see how this dr wilgy/lorab thing goes today though and was wondering how you really felt about her.

Canucklehead wrote:SVS: why do my actions make you think I'm bad? I can totes understand why you think they're not good civilian play, but I struggle to see how you're reading them as baddie...

I already gave the bare bones synopsis, based on a read of your (at the time 14, now 17) posts.

S~V~S wrote:Looking back, Canuck has not mentione Luke before her casual vote for him today. Yesterday she voted for Juliets & Buglabush (who actually is blendier than she is), but no mention of those two today, one post, straight to Luke. She was only the second vote for Luke, too, which makes it even odder that she comes out of left field with a vote for someone she never mentioned or interacted with previously. This looks like the classic example of an easy bandwagon, tbh.

This was her last post before she voted for Luke; this post was made Wednesday afternoon:

Canucklehead wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:

Epignosis wrote:[snip]

This is a fantastic post, and articulates exactly what it is about Juliets posting that has been off.

Did you already think that juliets' posting had been off before Epi's post? This makes it seem like you've been playing closer attention than you've given yourself credit for

Juliets is one of two people I've actually interacted with this game, so yes I've previously thought her posts odd. No, I haven't been paying particularly close attention, to her or anyone.

This caught my eye when i was skimming her 14 post history~ since I had just read her history, I know this to not be true. She interacted with Bullz, Juliets, and Zebra, who suspected her. Three people. And of course she was questioned here by TH, who is also dead.

Probably a coincidence, but

The fact that Luke flipped bad does not change this impression, tbh. This vote felt like an easy way out, pick off the low hanging fruit kind of vote. Plus the fact that you seem to be spending an inordinate amount of time agreeing with & buddying up to thread leaders (without even looking at your posts, I can think of two occasions where you prefaced posts with "I totally agree with...", or words to that effect, about two different people) puts me in mind of bad Canuck, who tends to be a bit more agreeable to my mind.

After work I will go through your posts & post in more depth, I had planned to do so this weekend, but there was too much going on irl.

MacDougall wrote:Wilgy I came to your bonfire party you have to come to mine now. We sacrificing some juliets to the god of maphia.

Cool, I'm down

S~V~S wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:SVS: why do my actions make you think I'm bad? I can totes understand why you think they're not good civilian play, but I struggle to see how you're reading them as baddie...

I already gave the bare bones synopsis, based on a read of your (at the time 14, now 17) posts.

S~V~S wrote:Looking back, Canuck has not mentione Luke before her casual vote for him today. Yesterday she voted for Juliets & Buglabush (who actually is blendier than she is), but no mention of those two today, one post, straight to Luke. She was only the second vote for Luke, too, which makes it even odder that she comes out of left field with a vote for someone she never mentioned or interacted with previously. This looks like the classic example of an easy bandwagon, tbh.

This was her last post before she voted for Luke; this post was made Wednesday afternoon:

Canucklehead wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:

Epignosis wrote:[snip]

This is a fantastic post, and articulates exactly what it is about Juliets posting that has been off.

Did you already think that juliets' posting had been off before Epi's post? This makes it seem like you've been playing closer attention than you've given yourself credit for

Juliets is one of two people I've actually interacted with this game, so yes I've previously thought her posts odd. No, I haven't been paying particularly close attention, to her or anyone.

This caught my eye when i was skimming her 14 post history~ since I had just read her history, I know this to not be true. She interacted with Bullz, Juliets, and Zebra, who suspected her. Three people. And of course she was questioned here by TH, who is also dead.

Probably a coincidence, but

The fact that Luke flipped bad does not change this impression, tbh. This vote felt like an easy way out, pick off the low hanging fruit kind of vote. Plus the fact that you seem to be spending an inordinate amount of time agreeing with & buddying up to thread leaders (without even looking at your posts, I can think of two occasions where you prefaced posts with "I totally agree with...", or words to that effect, about two different people) puts me in mind of bad Canuck, who tends to be a bit more agreeable to my mind.

After work I will go through your posts & post in more depth, I had planned to do so this weekend, but there was too much going on irl.

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I wasn't asking what it was in my posts which pinged you (which, as you've said, you'd already laid out super clearly), but why those pings and inconsistencies and buddying, etc. specifically made you think I was BAD as opposed to, say, neutral or even civ? I guess I just don't get what you think my gameplan is from a baddie perspective, since I think you know that as a baddie I like to be much blendier (i.e. being more consistent with votes, actually making cases/justifications for votes, etc.) and more engaged (though I'm never a big poster, really)...I don't disagree that my game has been disengaged, and random-ish, but I do disagree that a disengaged and random-ish game is a Canuck baddie game.

For the record, I agree with you that Luke was an "easy" vote (I think a vote for a low poster is always an "easy" vote, but that's just my stance on low posters.....and yes, I know that in this game I'm basiclaly the lowest poster so I'm a giant hypocrite :P , but since I know there is 0% chance that I am bad, I don't apply the same theory on low-posting to myself ).....but I still don't see why voting for a disengaged player who turned out to be bad makes ME seem bad. I get that you don't think it exonerates me and makes me CIV....but there is territory between the two extremes that one could hypothetically place me in, no?

Typhoony wrote:Also where the fuck is MetalMarsh?

Dude hasn't posted in days, still manages to be in the top half of posters yet I can't remember anything he has posted except for checking if polls has changeable votes like almost every day.

I've come back to give you a vote. Typhoony

And I don't discriminate, I confused you and that other fellow with the T-name.

Why are we sacrificing juliets?

HamburgerBoy wrote:I'm pretty sure someone already mentioned it, but juliets being dead-last to jump on that Luke train is a really bad look, not to mention how she (and a few others' start here and scroll down) were pressured by Epi to change from her soft Luke vote the previous lynch. Not that golden is immune since this involved a mafia bandwagon rather than a third-party bandwagon, but of the people switching to nutella he'd be the one I'd suspect least, especially since I think he'd be a little more tactical about it. The others are in a grey zone, but BUGLA/Draconus' response to the pressure seems pretty iffy as well, especially since he was replacing and might not know the full circumstances of a train building against a scumbuddy.

I have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.

Also, sorry for missing the night poll. I was working on unpacking at my house, doing laundry, etc. and totally forgot that there was a night poll.

Epignosis wrote:

Luke11646 wrote:

BUGLABUSH wrote:Luke is mafia

Yeah, I'm mafia and I have BTSC with you.

BUGLABUSH wrote:Haha knew it

Mmm hmm.

Draconus wrote:

juliets wrote:I am torn about Luke because he could easily be just an inactive civ like Draconus was asking about or like others have said he could be hiding behind his low posts. Tranq pointed out the few questions Luke asked but there is no digging for info like I would expect from someone who asks questions. There's just not a lot there (though SVS makes a good point that he has posted more than Canuck who voted for him for not being present). Despite some reservations (like this is feeling like a bandwagon) I'm going to go ahead and vote Luke and change my vote if something else comes up that I feel is a better vote.

Thank you for bringing this back up! I don't like this bandwagon that has quickly formed.

Draconus wrote:Thank you to both SVS and Typhoony. That was very helpful. I'm getting more and more uncomfortable with the Luke bandwagon, so I'm moving my vote again. nutella

Mmm hmm.

Oh. Well that's an inconvenient interaction for me. Despite this, I would have done the same thing on the first Day 4 lynch had I known about this interaction. As I said then, my initial vote for Luke was a placeholder, because I didn't know anything about the current or previous suspicions. I asked for information on the nutella suspicion because that was being brought up the most. 2 people were kind enough to give me that info. I read through that info carefully, and was convinced that it was the best way to go. Had this not happened, I would have kept my vote on Luke despite not being to fond of the bandwagon that so quickly formed on him. I know for a fact that I was far the only one to voice my concern about this. Regardless, I immediately moved my vote back to Luke. I didn't feel the need to move my vote for anyone else, so I left it there. We bagged a baddie. End of story.

Draconus wrote:Alright! A successful double lynch!!
Now to finish my nap.

Oh and I'm breaking the current tie with a no. Cus I think I'm still a low poster. Lol.

I'm a nub. I was so tired at the time, I don't remember making the second have of this post lol. Looks like I didn't miss the vote after all

Sorry for the triple post.

I'm gonna try and see if I can understand the case against juliets, cause I don't right now. (With some linki's now, for your pleasure. )
As always ,let me know if I missed something or if you disagree with how I said something.

It started with Epi's post where he said that comparing sigs sincerity to LCs was disingenuous. When Juliets asks why, Epi responds that " judging sig based on facts you didn't name because you got burned by Long Con stinks."
Juliets responds by saying she doesn't know anything about Sig and that sincerity does not equal civvieness. To which Epi responds that sig cannot sound sincere.
To conlude this saga:
Later Epi lists juliets as his suspect, when Juliets asks why, Epig responds.
He thinks that juliets' vote for sig is disingenuous. He expects a civ juliets to engage sig directly with questions instead of talk about him.

My opinion:
- I do not see a problem here. Juliets does not know sig => How would she know if he is able to sound genuine?
- Her posts read a bit like she is in panic mode to me. Last game I remember juliets being bad was Recruitment ... 2? When she was Erlatz. I don't remember her posting like she was in panic mode then, but truth be told, I don't remember how she was posting then at all. Does anyone have a link to a game where Juliets was bad? Thank you

-------------------------------------------------------

TH has a post where he points out that juliets got lynched (or almost) for similar reasons as sig did here.
She responds by saying that she acknowledges the case is not that good, but that it is the best one out there for peeps in group 1.

My opinion:
She voted for a shitcase... As you have probably many times TH. We already talked about this a bit but I don't see what would make her bad here? What would be her baddie reason to vote for a shitcase?

-------------------------------------------------------

Canuck made a post where she says juliets makes a concerted effort to misunderstand/ignore othe people's posts. Juliets says she has no idea what Canuck is talking about basically.

My opinion:
I have no idea what Canuck means either. I think Juliets has responded to everything people have thrown at her (hell, too eager and flimsy at times, ie panic mode). Combine that with the fact that Canuck ignores juliets post where juliets ask which posts she ignored, a point made by Canuck, is lolworthy and makes Canuck look worse than juliets imo.

----------------------------------------------------
Back to Epignosis:
His post this time is about juliets D1 vote for Banana. He does not believe a civ juliets would leave a pressure vote on low hanging fruit like Banana.
Juliets responds by saying she made more posts about Banana and that she left her vote there because Banana did not respond and she continued to be suspicious

My opinion:
Seems meta based, and I don't think this is uncivvie like for juliets. A link to a baddie game for juliets would help though

----------------------------------------------------

And last but not least, HamburgerBoys post about juliets. He says that:
- Juliets was the last one on the Luke train and this is a really bad look.
- She was pressured by Epi to change her vote from Luke to nutella.

My opinion:
Ok?
- How does this make her look bad Hboy? Juliets was indeed the last one on the Luke train, she had also said multiple times that she was away and wouldn't know for sure when she would be back.
- She already said her vote for Luke was provisional.

------------------------------

Overall:
What exactly in this is baddie behavior for juliets?
Her behavior overal has been iffy, asking lots of questions, changing opinions a lot, but is that baddie behavior? More specifically, is it baddie behavior for juliets?

Linki:

Here you go, MarshMellow. Enjoy.
Provisional vote on your spiky ass as well.

Given Luke's alignment, I don't think it's implausible for Juliets to be his teammate.

*spins around quickly and yells* Nothing's impossible!! *grabs the marmott and quickly jumps into a car, and drives off immediately. The scene is very reminiscent of a cheap action flick*

Typhoony wrote: Does anyone have a link to a game where Juliets was bad? Thank you

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... f=42&t=280

Epignosis wrote:

Typhoony wrote: Does anyone have a link to a game where Juliets was bad? Thank you

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... f=42&t=280

Thanks Epi.

Typhoony wrote: Does anyone have a link to a game where Juliets was bad? Thank you

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... f=60&t=744

No "thanks" for you Canuck.

Typhoony brought up the same questions I have about this suspicion around me. I cannot think of a game where I was bad - it's been awhile - to link everyone to. The closest I can come is an LMS role I had but that's not the same. I will go back through some games a little later to see if I can find one where I was bad.

Meanwhile I've got a question for Dom:

Dom wrote:Given Luke's alignment, I don't think it's implausible for Juliets to be his teammate.

Dom, what is it about Luke's alignment that makes you think it's possible for me to be his teammate? If it was my vote keep in mind I was traveling that day and wasn't able to get on-line until late in the voting process. Otherwise please clue me in so I have an opportunity to respond.

linki: looks like Canuck already found a game so i wont have to do that later

nub juliets

Well, I should have clicked on Canucks link. I didnt realize it was this game when I said she found a game where i was a baddie. That's not what we're looking for, but thanks Epi for finding one. I am not a nub.

Canucklehead wrote:

Typhoony wrote: Does anyone have a link to a game where Juliets was bad? Thank you

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... f=60&t=744

DrWilgy wrote:*spins around quickly and yells* Nothing's impossible!! *grabs the marmott and quickly jumps into a car, and drives off immediately. The scene is very reminiscent of a cheap action flick*

Bye guys, we're eloping.

I don't think I've ever seen juliets lynched.

Typhoony wrote:And last but not least, HamburgerBoys post about juliets. He says that:
- Juliets was the last one on the Luke train and this is a really bad look.
- She was pressured by Epi to change her vote from Luke to nutella.

My opinion:
Ok?
- How does this make her look bad Hboy? Juliets was indeed the last one on the Luke train, she had also said multiple times that she was away and wouldn't know for sure when she would be back.
- She already said her vote for Luke was provisional.

Saying it was a provisional vote isn't really a good thing. Luke's level of activity and his (often lack of) response to others' questioning means he was on the way out regardless, and therefore an easy person to bus. A provisional vote can just as easily mean "Hey I want people to know that I had been looking at Luke early, but he's still my scumbuddy so I'll wait until it looks like a lynch is guaranteed". Additionally, she didn't appear to be away to me; her vote change was made 3:16PM my time, her "torn about Luke" at 2:41PM, she had asked MetalMarsh about you at 12:15PM, and had even posted a RIP for Turnip four hours before that. All of that indicates she had been viewing the thread on and off over a good portion of that day. In fact, all of the other vote changes prior to hers (from Draconus, Floyd, and golden in that order) happened in between her 2:41PM post and her 3:16PM post.

juliets was an SK in the Hobbit. She replaced into that game I think.

Sorsha wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Wilgy I came to your bonfire party you have to come to mine now. We sacrificing some juliets to the god of maphia.

You think juliets is worse than LoRab? I'm not sure how serious you were with your LoRab suspicion

If he was serious about me, it would be nice if he actually said why he was suspicious.

I think he was just another random name he decided out of nowhere to suspect in the final hours of the lynch (as he seems wont to do).

Juliets, it's more that you voted for nutella and then Luke and I don't see really why you picked Luke. I don't see why Nutella was your choice on 4.1 versus Luke on 4.2

HamburgerBoy wrote:

Typhoony wrote:And last but not least, HamburgerBoys post about juliets. He says that:
- Juliets was the last one on the Luke train and this is a really bad look.
- She was pressured by Epi to change her vote from Luke to nutella.

My opinion:
Ok?
- How does this make her look bad Hboy? Juliets was indeed the last one on the Luke train, she had also said multiple times that she was away and wouldn't know for sure when she would be back.
- She already said her vote for Luke was provisional.

Saying it was a provisional vote isn't really a good thing. Luke's level of activity and his (often lack of) response to others' questioning means he was on the way out regardless, and therefore an easy person to bus. A provisional vote can just as easily mean "Hey I want people to know that I had been looking at Luke early, but he's still my scumbuddy so I'll wait until it looks like a lynch is guaranteed". Additionally, she didn't appear to be away to me; her vote change was made 3:16PM my time, her "torn about Luke" at 2:41PM, she had asked MetalMarsh about you at 12:15PM, and had even posted a RIP for Turnip four hours before that. All of that indicates she had been viewing the thread on and off over a good portion of that day. In fact, all of the other vote changes prior to hers (from Draconus, Floyd, and golden in that order) happened in between her 2:41PM post and her 3:16PM post.

Saying it was a provisional vote means I could change it if something else compelling comes along. I don't agree that it really isn't a good thing. The way I look at it if I'm not voting last then there's always something that could come up that causes me to change my mind. Also, I am confused about what day you are talking about that I was in the thread. If it was Sat. Nov. 7th I was not in the thread all day because I was traveling. I got to my stop that night just in time to skim for Luke answering questions and then vote. Other days I have been in the thread off and on. Which vote are you talking about?

Dom wrote:Juliets, it's more that you voted for nutella and then Luke and I don't see really why you picked Luke. I don't see why Nutella was your choice on 4.1 versus Luke on 4.2

I voted for nutella because even after she responded to her accusations the fact still remained that she still didn't give any hint to Sorsha that she was going to vote her, thus giving her no chance to respond. She also avoided breaking the three way tie. Then I voted for Luke because when I checked to see if he had answered the questions that people had addressed to him that day (this was late on Saturday after not having been in the thread all day) I found only a weak attempt to answer those questions. That was the last straw to me and I voted Luke.

I'm not understanding why the order in which I voted people is an issue.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:juliets was an SK in the Hobbit. She replaced into that game I think.

Yes I was smaug. I don't think a game where I was a LMS indie is comparable to a game where I was a baddie but please bring forward anything you think is relevant.

LoRab wrote:

Sorsha wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Wilgy I came to your bonfire party you have to come to mine now. We sacrificing some juliets to the god of maphia.

You think juliets is worse than LoRab? I'm not sure how serious you were with your LoRab suspicion

If he was serious about me, it would be nice if he actually said why he was suspicious.

I think he was just another random name he decided out of nowhere to suspect in the final hours of the lynch (as he seems wont to do).

I am always serious. You are a baddie

I was invited to a bonfire though, why should I turn down this bonding moment between friends? You aren't on the pyre anymore would you like to join us?

I have decided to abandon the Sig thing for now. I feel like it's not doing me any favours in this game to just be tunneling after one person and on reflection, I think the baddies are definitely trying to get something going against him by killing Zebra and failing at getting me.

DrWilgy wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Sorsha wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Wilgy I came to your bonfire party you have to come to mine now. We sacrificing some juliets to the god of maphia.

You think juliets is worse than LoRab? I'm not sure how serious you were with your LoRab suspicion

If he was serious about me, it would be nice if he actually said why he was suspicious.

I think he was just another random name he decided out of nowhere to suspect in the final hours of the lynch (as he seems wont to do).

I am always serious. You are a baddie

I was invited to a bonfire though, why should I turn down this bonding moment between friends? You aren't on the pyre anymore would you like to join us?

I'm not a baddie.

And I'd consider joining a bonfire--but how do I know you aren't going to throw me onto it?

linkitis: The way you phrase that is a bit suspect, Bullz. Being suspicious of another player isn't doing YOU any favors? So, you're backing away because it's bad for you? Also, maybe the baddies are actually killing his accusors, because it will seem like a setup (you know, wifom).

juliets wrote:

Dom wrote:Juliets, it's more that you voted for nutella and then Luke and I don't see really why you picked Luke. I don't see why Nutella was your choice on 4.1 versus Luke on 4.2

I voted for nutella because even after she responded to her accusations the fact still remained that she still didn't give any hint to Sorsha that she was going to vote her, thus giving her no chance to respond. She also avoided breaking the three way tie. Then I voted for Luke because when I checked to see if he had answered the questions that people had addressed to him that day (this was late on Saturday after not having been in the thread all day) I found only a weak attempt to answer those questions. That was the last straw to me and I voted Luke.

I'm not understanding why the order in which I voted people is an issue.

Why was Luke less of a priority when it was more popular to lynch nutella?

LoRab wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Sorsha wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Wilgy I came to your bonfire party you have to come to mine now. We sacrificing some juliets to the god of maphia.

You think juliets is worse than LoRab? I'm not sure how serious you were with your LoRab suspicion

If he was serious about me, it would be nice if he actually said why he was suspicious.

I think he was just another random name he decided out of nowhere to suspect in the final hours of the lynch (as he seems wont to do).

I am always serious. You are a baddie

I was invited to a bonfire though, why should I turn down this bonding moment between friends? You aren't on the pyre anymore would you like to join us?

I'm not a baddie.

And I'd consider joining a bonfire--but how do I know you aren't going to throw me onto it?

linkitis: The way you phrase that is a bit suspect, Bullz. Being suspicious of another player isn't doing YOU any favors? So, you're backing away because it's bad for you? Also, maybe the baddies are actually killing his accusors, because it will seem like a setup (you know, wifom).

Shouldn't I think of myself? What I mean is voting him every day and not really focusing on much else doesn't help me to find other baddies or have opinions on other topics. I don't think it's beneficial to my ability to play when all I'm doing is going after the same person and repeating the same things over and over again with no real effect on anything.

SVS and I agree about something!

I like the case on canuck. That's where I'm putting a vote for now. I think there have been other good options floated too. Juliets definitely seems different to me, but because she is so consistent I'm not sure if 'different' = 'bad' or not. The biggest reason I'm not voting for her right now and canuck instead, though, is I think we could use having some viable competition to see where people land.

The Draconus connections to luke thing also has merit. I think there are several viable options today.

linki - I thought bullz's post makes sense. I understand that when I tunnel it can sometimes damage my ability to hurt the town. Sometimes it helps to take a step back and look at all the options again.

juliets wrote:Saying it was a provisional vote means I could change it if something else compelling comes along. I don't agree that it really isn't a good thing. The way I look at it if I'm not voting last then there's always something that could come up that causes me to change my mind. Also, I am confused about what day you are talking about that I was in the thread. If it was Sat. Nov. 7th I was not in the thread all day because I was traveling. I got to my stop that night just in time to skim for Luke answering questions and then vote. Other days I have been in the thread off and on. Which vote are you talking about?

Sorry, I'm referring to both lynches so I'm probably muddying it a bit. For more clarity...

Day 4, Lynch 1 (this was on the 6th my timezone): There was a big anti-Luke bandwagon forming, and when Epi called out how odd it was that nutella wasn't receiving nearly the pressure Luke did, a bunch of people jumped ship. That's the thing I'm referring to about you making a provisional vote on Luke, Epi making his post, Draconus, floyd, and golden switching to nutella, and then finally you. In that particular case, I don't think being away can be used as a defense because you were posting a bit that day.

Day 4, Lynch 2 (on the 7th my timezone): This is the day where you weren't as present as you said you would be. While I'm not going to hold it against you simply for being the last voter on the Luke train this day, I think it's still compatible with everything else in context. For example, prior to the "torn about Luke" vote on the 6th, you only mention him once in your history, where you apparently tried to help him answer questioning by Luke (in all honesty I'm a bit confused about which posts of yours and of Tranq's you were referring to; explanation here would help). Even though there are understandable time constraints due to your trip, that you came back and only mentioned intention to check Luke's history is also suspect just because it would fit my interpretation that you were setting him up for a bus on the 6th.

"help him answer questioning by TRANQ" I meant, sorry.

juliets wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:juliets was an SK in the Hobbit. She replaced into that game I think.

Yes I was smaug. I don't think a game where I was a LMS indie is comparable to a game where I was a baddie but please bring forward anything you think is relevant.

I'm just trying to think of a game where you were a baddie, and that's the closest I could remember off the top of my head.