The Syndicate

bea wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Actually, I think I will vote for Daisy.

Why?

timmer wrote:So, again, MP... why are you 99% sure SD is a civ?

MovingPictures07 wrote:Has anyone looked through Dom's posts to see if he defended anyone? That might be an interesting read.

timmer wrote:I tend to get blinded by DH being DH. Basically, I look at the now epic-length back and forth between him and Long Con, and I feel like LC is the one who started out in the wrong, all the way back to his Day 1 vote for rey, which I believe DH called him on. And that's where the tie to SD started as well. Since then, DH has been fairly consistent in his posting about LC, and so since I feel like there is a good chance LC is bad, I feel that it makes a bigger chance DH isn't.

That said, I could definitely see an indy DH here. I'm just not seeing a baddie DH, but like I said at the start, I'm not very good at reading through his game.

DFaraday wrote:I also am wary of DH, but I've never been able to read him.

Elohcin wrote: And, Snow Dog, don't give up on Mafia!

Long Con wrote:

timmer wrote:I tend to get blinded by DH being DH. Basically, I look at the now epic-length back and forth between him and Long Con, and I feel like LC is the one who started out in the wrong, all the way back to his Day 1 vote for rey, which I believe DH called him on. And that's where the tie to SD started as well. Since then, DH has been fairly consistent in his posting about LC, and so since I feel like there is a good chance LC is bad, I feel that it makes a bigger chance DH isn't.

That said, I could definitely see an indy DH here. I'm just not seeing a baddie DH, but like I said at the start, I'm not very good at reading through his game.

I love the way you keep pushing a legitimate Day 1 vote to try and paint me up as a baddie. Spoiler Alert: It was just a Day One vote on a Day One suspicion. It was real, and it wasn't a scheme of any sort.

Lots of stuff has happened in the game, coming back to a Day One vote for your suspicions is really weak.

Timmer's quote above reminds me of DFaraday's:

DFaraday wrote:I also am wary of DH, but I've never been able to read him.

We're going to find out DH is a baddie, and I do believe it's going to be happening today, unless I've read the thread wrong. There's nowhere else at all I'd like to place my vote, so DH it is.

If somehow this lynch ends up going away from DH, I'll consider the other options and vote accordingly. *votes DharmaHelper*

DharmaHelper wrote:Your arrogance is staggering.

timmer wrote:Exactly, Alex is trying to cast himself as this big savior but he was just trying to get out in front of a situation that was already starting to unfold. He's very carefully playing the woe is me card to control the narrative. It makes me feel that I'm right about SD being bad SND her being the narrator.

bea wrote:zeek - Congratulations!!! I'm very happy for you!! As for your question about my concern for MP's sword votes, my concern wasn't because I thought he had baddie teammates voting him. I don't think a baddie team would have voted in a way that would have made it obvious that they were trying to place the prize in their hands. I think everyone that was around Rev's GTA mafia game would have pretty decent knowlege why that isn't the smart play. SVS, FH and I did something similar - FH won a prize when she was lynched as bad, SVS and I came tumbling down like a house of cards while our last teammate laughed at us for being so foolish.

The smarter move for the baddie to make is to vote someone who is gaining lots of civ credit and hope that earns them enough trust to maybe get it passed to them bts. It was why I was paranoid when I won the shield in the first champ game. I could only keep it for so long and once I passed it, I had no way of knowing if I passed it wisely till the very end of the game.

I think it's more than likely a baddie helped to put the sword in MP's hands. Just not sure which of the voters to look at. It's something to keep in mind as the game goes on though.

I have to say, lots of what timmer has said today makes sense - so it's easy to see how RL was the issue here and not nafarious things.

LC being silenced is troubling because the picture looks kinda grim for him. I can't vote for someone though untill I've at least had a chance to look at their side of things. Especially this early in the game.

There are some good points against DF as well. I've got time to wait so I'd like to hear back from him before I decide, but he's a strong vote contender for me today.

FZ - fwiw - I didn't think your logic on made was faulty at all. I'm just not very vocal. Didn't want you to think you were alone though.

Still very undecided on DH. None of my D1 feelings have really dissipated, but neither has my paranoia that I was just being overly jumpy D1.

I agree with you MP - I'd like to hear more from Russ and goosey as well. Add headgey and lorab to that list as well.

lol - I keep doing the linki dance wth timmer

bea wrote:yea- I'm here but I've been holding on to my vote hoping to hear from DF.

There's still about an hour. I guess I can vote here and change it if he is convincing later in the lynch. Not like I'm going far from the computer today...

Spacedaisy wrote:I'm sorry guys, I started a new job yesterday, I've been kind of busy, thus the lack of posting here recently. I've skimmed the past couple pages and I can't say I am happy...

timmer wrote:Exactly, Alex is trying to cast himself as this big savior but he was just trying to get out in front of a situation that was already starting to unfold. He's very carefully playing the woe is me card to control the narrative. It makes me feel that I'm right about SD being bad SND her being the narrator.

You are absolutely wrong about my alignment. I am civ. I don't know if Alex chose me as the narrator but I would be really surprised if he did. He is a smart player, he would make a careful choice here.he would want someone he thought had the best chance to make it to the end. I am not that player, and we all know it. I would not even think he would recruit me this early in the game, maybe later, I don't know.

Lynching me will only help the baddies. don't do it.

That said, this stupid narrator accusation has made me a mark, I will likely get NKed at some point, I woud rather get lynched. At least that way the civs will get some information from my death.

Now, I want to say I think either SVS or Bea are bad. I don't know which I a suspect more right now, and it's far from being certain. I could be wrong, but I tend to subscribe to the idea that the simplest explanation is the likeliest and right now that points in my mind to either Bea or SVS being bad. That is my two cents on that. I Still don't trust DH or TH either frankly. For all the reasons we've been over a million times.

Spacedaisy wrote:I'm sorry guys, I started a new job yesterday, I've been kind of busy, thus the lack of posting here recently. I've skimmed the past couple pages and I can't say I am happy...

timmer wrote:Exactly, Alex is trying to cast himself as this big savior but he was just trying to get out in front of a situation that was already starting to unfold. He's very carefully playing the woe is me card to control the narrative. It makes me feel that I'm right about SD being bad SND her being the narrator.

You are absolutely wrong about my alignment. I am civ. I don't know if Alex chose me as the narrator but I would be really surprised if he did. He is a smart player, he would make a careful choice here.he would want someone he thought had the best chance to make it to the end. I am not that player, and we all know it. I would not even think he would recruit me this early in the game, maybe later, I don't know.

Lynching me will only help the baddies. don't do it.

That said, this stupid narrator accusation has made me a mark, I will likely get NKed at some point, I woud rather get lynched. At least that way the civs will get some information from my death.

Now, I want to say I think either SVS or Bea are bad. I don't know which I a suspect more right now, and it's far from being certain. I could be wrong, but I tend to subscribe to the idea that the simplest explanation is the likeliest and right now that points in my mind to either Bea or SVS being bad. That is my two cents on that. I Still don't trust DH or TH either frankly. For all the reasons we've been over a million times.

timmer wrote:Okay so I just read all of Bea's posts from the start. I haven't read anyone's case against her, I prefer to go fresh.

There are some obvious things that stood out for me.

1. Bea has been very post-y without really saying a lot. While there ARE posts that contain seeming suspicions etc. there is also a lot of chatter. I find that always worth noting.

2. Bea has held a low-level DH suspicion for the entire game, but has never really pushed it or tried to convince anyone about him.

3. Bea voted for DF with no real explanation. Here is the first post I could find where she mentioned him (not this is a great example of point #1 as well, look at how hard it is to find the DF part buried in the rest of wordiness)

bea wrote:zeek - Congratulations!!! I'm very happy for you!! As for your question about my concern for MP's sword votes, my concern wasn't because I thought he had baddie teammates voting him. I don't think a baddie team would have voted in a way that would have made it obvious that they were trying to place the prize in their hands. I think everyone that was around Rev's GTA mafia game would have pretty decent knowlege why that isn't the smart play. SVS, FH and I did something similar - FH won a prize when she was lynched as bad, SVS and I came tumbling down like a house of cards while our last teammate laughed at us for being so foolish.

The smarter move for the baddie to make is to vote someone who is gaining lots of civ credit and hope that earns them enough trust to maybe get it passed to them bts. It was why I was paranoid when I won the shield in the first champ game. I could only keep it for so long and once I passed it, I had no way of knowing if I passed it wisely till the very end of the game.

I think it's more than likely a baddie helped to put the sword in MP's hands. Just not sure which of the voters to look at. It's something to keep in mind as the game goes on though.

I have to say, lots of what timmer has said today makes sense - so it's easy to see how RL was the issue here and not nafarious things.

LC being silenced is troubling because the picture looks kinda grim for him. I can't vote for someone though untill I've at least had a chance to look at their side of things. Especially this early in the game.

There are some good points against DF as well. I've got time to wait so I'd like to hear back from him before I decide, but he's a strong vote contender for me today.

FZ - fwiw - I didn't think your logic on made was faulty at all. I'm just not very vocal. Didn't want you to think you were alone though.

Still very undecided on DH. None of my D1 feelings have really dissipated, but neither has my paranoia that I was just being overly jumpy D1.

I agree with you MP - I'd like to hear more from Russ and goosey as well. Add headgey and lorab to that list as well.

lol - I keep doing the linki dance wth timmer

So, in terms of DF, Bea has a ton of posts that day, talking about this and that, but there is just "There are some good points against DF as well. " and he is a strong contender?

And then later:

bea wrote:yea- I'm here but I've been holding on to my vote hoping to hear from DF.

There's still about an hour. I guess I can vote here and change it if he is convincing later in the lynch. Not like I'm going far from the computer today...

This is a lot of hedging and being careful to lead a retreat path in case your vote looks bad later.

And then we have the Bass vs Dom lynch. This is pretty clear cut to me. Bea went out of her way to a big wall post with a bunch of Bass' posts in it to build a case (but ended with hedging her suspicions again, being very careful to pint out how sucky it was) but did NOT do one for Dom, instead asking someone else to do it. Now, in a regular lynch, I wouldn't think twice about someone building a wall post against one player. that's what we do. that's what I'm doing as I type this. But when a lynch is only two people?!?!?! You don't just do one and ask someone else to do the other. If you are adamant the other guy is civ, maybe, but Bea hedged her bets and just said she wasn't doing Dom. It looks bad.

In summary: a ton of posts with lots of hedging going on. A vote for DF who is a "strong contender" without going into a single sentence of detail about it, the epitome of jumping on a lynch train. And obvious apparent support for Dom.

I can see Bea being bad, and if I don't have support for my ideas re: Daisy and Long Con, I'll pursue a vote in Bea's direction.

Dom wrote:

Boomslang wrote:

Dom wrote:

Boomslang wrote:Excellent, game on. The Day 0 poll really doesn't give us much to go on compared to previous games, but those who failed to check in are certainly the outliers here.

Does being an outlier make them bad?

My reasoning is that, if the majority of players are civvies, then the majority/average action taken is most likely to be civvie. It's not perfect, but it's playing the odds.

I think I will be voting you...

That makes zero sense. By the same logic, you can assume that most non-actions are civilian because most players are civilian. Your logic has several flaws in it. You are assuming civilians and baddies act in the same way. They do not. Civvies are far more likely to be inactive because they do not have BTSC members to prod them to participate.

Roxy wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:I think the people voting for the people who voted for no reason have less reason to their vote than the people they are voting for.

I don't think this is true. Why do you say that?

Logically speaking, you ate correct. I had zero reason for my vote, meaning that Sawyer's vote has a value of say -1, and LC is somewhere between that and negative infinity.

Every time someone uses maths to make it "seem" like what they are saying is fact it makes me want to vote for them. idk why.
But this maths seems like you are stretching a bit.

Roxy, to be fair, I read his math stuff as a joke-- did you not?

Russtifinko wrote:Wow, the game has really begun now!

I personally don't find Long Con suspicious for finding reywaS suspicious, because I also didn't interpret DH's original post as being at him. From what I've seen of reywaS before, though, defensiveness isn't unusual. (No offense.)

Then, what do you make of the clarification that it was, indeed, about rey?



I also found LC's rush to vote a bit out of character, but nothing that made my stomach lurch.

Dom wrote:

Boomslang wrote:
*facepalm* Yes, INH, that's exactly what I'm saying. Justifying sexism from mathematical reasons... I'm disappointed you took my argument off the slippery slope right off the bat.

You very clearly missed the point of what INH said. He used your exact logic to reach that conclusion. He was showing how flawed your logic is.

You also have yet to respond to my points about your logic, but only seemed to have doubled down on your thoughts.

Boomslang wrote:Metalmarsh, I'm not arguing about conformism. I'm arguing that, because there are more civs than mafia in the game, any given group of players is more likely to be composed of more civs than mafia. The largest, i.e., majority, group is thus most likely to contain the most civs.

Do civs and baddies behave randomly or uniformly?

Boomslang wrote: Well, if you look at what everyone else is doing, they're picking at outliers: too early of a vote, too talkative, too aggressive, not posting enough. So... just saying.

Here's the thing-- I asked if your group of players was likely to contain baddies and you didn't really answer it. You seem more concerned with showing why your logic isn't bad than justifying that there might be baddies in the group you seemed to have picked: people who did not vote Day Zero.

zeek wrote:Don't know who to vote for, don't have time to re-read. Drugs are making me have an early night... so, I'll go for Dharmahelper. I don't like this back and forth going on and DH feels less passionate about the argument. Dunno, it's all I've got.

"Cue criticisms for poor vote reasoning*

I'll be back in the morning

I read this as you pick Dharmahelper to vote for and then looked for a reason to vote for him.

Dom wrote:

juliets wrote:I apologize but I just got home for the day and want to give Dom another chance to post but haven't read and formed thoughts about whats been said today. I can't do that until a little later so I'm posting in case Dom has something he would like to say now.

Thank you ^_^
I also meant to respond to your post to me earlier, but accidentally posted without including it in my multi quote. <3

Made wrote: No, it happened. It's funny, because I kinda trusted him because he was acting different from his misfits game, but he's now playing traditional DH baddie and it's ticking me off.

I think it's fair to say that DH and I know each others play styles relatively well. At least more than most know each others. So admittedly he outplayed me yesterday by switching up his play style, but today he's playing his traditional baddie game to me lynched, and it's bull. This is EXACTLY the same situation that happened in misfit. I voted early and DH capitalized. Paging MP, the only person that I think could at least kinda back me up on this.

There's a key bit of information i'm intentionally leaving out about the way that he's done this that I think MP will pick up, hopefully adding validity to my claim.

What makes you think you and DH know each other so well? Why do you know each other better than most players know each others' games? You're a relatively new player and DH is a veteran. I am wondering where you get this knowledge and apparent insight into DH's game-- something that someone who has played with him for several years (me) does not have.
I did not play Misfits, but I don't think you got a full understanding of DH's game in one game. I'm not sure what DH is doing this game and I'm unclear on his alignment, but your statement aren't sitting well with me at all.

reywaS wrote:hmm.

Yes??
Anything??




RE BOOMSLANG:
So, you'd like to see INH lynched simply because he isn't posting?
That's strange to me.
Very strange. I'll be intrigued to see if he does post.

Dom wrote:

Mongoose wrote:

Dom wrote:

Mongoose wrote:

zeek wrote:

Mongoose wrote:Guys, we can't just all vote for ourselves.

Vote for me then

I might! We need to start nominating people and have a discussion on the merits of voting that player, what do y'all think?

Mongoose, is there someone you trust, then?

Hmm. You kinda. zeek seems an okay option. There are people that have been helpful, so I want to trust them, but that's naive. I don't think we've been in this long enough to trust anyone yet, but I think we have some contenders that hopefully we can come to a group consensus on.

The imp in me wants to say "Screw it, let's give it to Vompatti."

Made wrote:Holy fuck that was a lot to digest. Caught up, and don't have much coming up till next weekend, so i'm around for a while.

Going to start RE:SVS I love her curse, but someone said she outed herself. Was that a joke? Also, SVS, do you know who cursed you?

And as a General read on SVS, she seems more involved in this game than she is in games where she's good. In Misfits and Monty Python, I found myself able to bounce of her easily, later learning that in Misfits she was bad and Monty, she was attempting to get actions drawn to her.

Lilly is interesting... Having not read the harry potter series, I'm pretty sure that re:voldies' bio that if Lilly is a Horcrux, she will disappear by tomorrow. If she's still here, it would more likely be Snapes.
Lilly claim to be killed by Voldie would make her INH which I very much doubt considering 727 isn't currently a thing....unless It's a player that voldie voted for, which i'd call less likely.

I think the claims against TH is pretty weak, as if he were bad and had knowledge of Bass's role, he wouldn't of had any knowledge of Doms. While this could be called a weak theory/attempt to set Dom up for a lynch on today at its most vindictive , I wouldn't call it a slip.

I read over everything carefully, but I feel like i need to read it over again. I think vote analysis of Bass and DF would be the best use of our time for now, as anything Dom is Wifom city.

linki- Can someone explain Potter v SVS? I am so lost.

Boomslang wrote:

Dom wrote:Note: next time I'm getting heat-- I'll just say I can't play for a week-- no one will vote for me.


(Not saying Bass is lying, I'm just pointing out how dumb that is)

Boomslang wrote:Caught up, frankly still unsure what's going on. Just let it be noted that Dom has been gunning for me this whole game; I think that burnishes my civvie cred a bit.

Agreed. In the interest of making Bass a more valid option for discussion and to forestall a Dom bandwagon picking up steam, I'll vote now.

I'm pretty sure I effed up the quotes here. I'm sorry - point out my inconsistancies - and also address the content.
Maybe? You're not a sorcerer - that much I'm pretty sure about. Dom doesn't strike me as a hard distancing player. Lots of stuff going on now. What do you think about any of it?

Made wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

zeek wrote:It's Sauron that is the threat I'd say. Gollum's win condition is probably linked to this as well. Maybe he'll need whoever gets it dead.

Interesting theory. That's certainly possible.

kinda attached to what LC said, has lilly been around since last night? If she's still around by Day 6, i'd say she's probably worth trusting as Voldies role states that his Horcruxes die the next day.

I get Elo's ring logic, not sure if it's something I'd want to pursue myself...

Anyone else seeing DH as uncharacteristically antagonistic? While I've only played one game of mafia with him and it was helpful reDom, it seems like he's just throwing suspicion around w/o and agenda or clear goal, which seems weird to me.

As a person who typically trust Indys even people I suspect as LMS indies when it's early enough in the game, or civvies are really doing shit, I don't see a problem with keeping Mp around for a bit. It's important to be mindful that he is still fallible, and that while he can be trusted not to be corrupt(unless he just feels like screw civvies over....), if he's chasing bare leads, Mafia would be incentivized to keep him alive.
linki

MovingPictures07 wrote:

zeek wrote:It's Sauron that is the threat I'd say. Gollum's win condition is probably linked to this as well. Maybe he'll need whoever gets it dead.

Interesting theory. That's certainly possible.

Personally, I was thinking Death match, but considering That's what Epi did in LoZ, I doubt he'd do it again. I'm not sure how that would work considering that from the host post it seems that you are allow to give the ring up. Maybe by killing the person with the ring, or getting them lynched before they're are able to give it up, Gollum wins?
I've never actually seen the LotR movies, What does the person get in the movies for having the rings, and what did they get last game?


linki x2

zeek wrote:New theory:

The Wand is related the Voldemort's secrets.
The Cerebro Helmet is related to Omega Red's secrets.
The Ring is related to Gollum's secrets.

I guess the next one could be a hat or a bar of soap, eh?

I doubt this only because It would mean that for a period, Gollum, Omega, and Hattie would not be doing anything, which sounds off to me. I feel like it's more just traditional night polls with effects similar to Doctor who, but providing items to players.

reywaS wrote:

Made wrote:ReywaS, I'm assuming that the shaking head means you aren't allowed to edit post or quote only part of a message?

reywaS wrote:Sorry I haven't been involved the last few days. I'll do better now.

S~V~S wrote:You know, now that you point it out, I recall at the time thinking that Mades post up there about what Rey was and was not allowed to quote seemed kinda specific. But I did not really think much of it at the time as i also made a guess about Reys meaning in another post.

We have not seen anything else like that curse, have we?

thellama73 wrote:

Elohcin wrote: And, Snow Dog, don't give up on Mafia!

If Snow Dog quits mafia, I will keep up appearances for a while, going to work and making a token effort to show up at happy hours, but gradually I'll retreat into the life of a lonely and bitter recluse. My fingernails will grow long and I'll shun human contact. Even my computer will grow dusty as I neglect that internet (for it reminds me too much of him). I'll drink a bit more, and then a lot more, but eventually I'll lack the motivation even to make it to the liquor store. One day, someone will wonder what ever happened to me, or someone will notice that I haven't been paying my bills. They'll find my body curled up on top of my bed, above the sheets and fully clothed in the filthy rags I hadn't bothered to change in weeks or months, surrounded by empty bottles and miscellaneous detritus. No one will come to my funeral. If Snow Dog quits mafia...

bea wrote:snowy - I'd miss you too. Really - I love when you play. Even if we don't see eye to eye and if I struggle to see you eye to eye - I appiciate you. And I LOVE when you play with us. That said, if you are done, I respect that. PLEASE come visit us often in the speakeasy. I do adore you and adore hearing about you. d

That said, since you are here - what do you think about what's been happening?

S~V~S wrote:Not sure what you could have missed, Snowy. I am not Voldemort, and I am not bad at all. I think Bea has the right of it about me.

Why exactly do you think I am most likely bad?

Snow Dog wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Not sure what you could have missed, Snowy. I am not Voldemort, and I am not bad at all. I think Bea has the right of it about me.

Why exactly do you think I am most likely bad?

I hope to do a re read. Maybe it was nothing.

Long Con wrote:Where your logic is backwards: You said "A Civ LC would be worried about Made getting framed", and that's exactly what happened. I was worried that could be, and so I posted a clarification post before I left for work, so that anyone who was inclined could get more information. The baddie move would have been to not post anything, and let the original supposition stand. If I didn't post that out of concern that Made was being framed... then why else would I post it?

zeek wrote:bea, my wand vote doesn't look good, you're right, but that was only in reaction to the unwarranted and unexplained trust MP was receiving for it. I believe I initially voted LC maybe, don't quote me on it, but Dom had a vote more so I switched hoping somebody would turn up or swap over. I was just worried about MP getting it.

Snow Dog, I really hope you reconsider. Maybe take a break and see how you feel?

I'm a bit annoyed today thinking about all the players who've simply not shown up this game. Likelihood is they're all disinterested civs who are missing a great game and making it seriously hard for the rest of us.

DharmaHelper wrote:First thing that pops out at me is Long Con's stance during the Made suspicion. He felt strongly enough about it to quit the contest, and aside from that drop his bullheaded suspicion of me for a day.

He even brought up the idea that people steering the convo away from Made might be Made's teammates. And as I'm typing this, I'm remembering that Bass was in fact one of the Made defenders, and turned out to be a suit. So in addition to pointing out what I originally wanted to point out, which was that Long Con's shift from "Made is looking more bad than DH and its possible he might have teammates here defending him." to "Nothing I plan on pursuing unless Made flips bad" again illustrates his double standard suspicion of me.

Since there were A LOT of people on my junk about the llama voters and how they couldn't see Made being bad unless he/someone who defended him flipped bad, what are our thoughts now that Bass has indeed flipped bad? Does this, combined with Mades absence, thrust him back into discussion? I think it's certainly a point against him.

Long Con wrote:Where your logic is backwards: You said "A Civ LC would be worried about Made getting framed", and that's exactly what happened. I was worried that could be, and so I posted a clarification post before I left for work, so that anyone who was inclined could get more information. The baddie move would have been to not post anything, and let the original supposition stand. If I didn't post that out of concern that Made was being framed... then why else would I post it?

DharmaHelper wrote:

zeek wrote:bea, my wand vote doesn't look good, you're right, but that was only in reaction to the unwarranted and unexplained trust MP was receiving for it. I believe I initially voted LC maybe, don't quote me on it, but Dom had a vote more so I switched hoping somebody would turn up or swap over. I was just worried about MP getting it.

Snow Dog, I really hope you reconsider. Maybe take a break and see how you feel?

I'm a bit annoyed today thinking about all the players who've simply not shown up this game. Likelihood is they're all disinterested civs who are missing a great game and making it seriously hard for the rest of us.

I can take being lynched. I can take being set up to be lynched. What I can't take (every time it happens) is being lynched before people who are barely here. Its a large reason why I have become disinterested in mafia :P

I dropped the suspicion of you? I just looked - I have three posts during that time. In the first, I voted for you. In the second, I reiterate my suspicion of you "I still suspect DH quite a bit and if you wanna lynch him, I'll be there. I just feel like the Made thing has more solidity."

Long Con wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:First thing that pops out at me is Long Con's stance during the Made suspicion. He felt strongly enough about it to quit the contest, and aside from that drop his bullheaded suspicion of me for a day.

I dropped the suspicion of you? I just looked - I have three posts during that time. In the first, I voted for you. In the second, I reiterate my suspicion of you "I still suspect DH quite a bit and if you wanna lynch him, I'll be there. I just feel like the Made thing has more solidity."

He even brought up the idea that people steering the convo away from Made might be Made's teammates. And as I'm typing this, I'm remembering that Bass was in fact one of the Made defenders, and turned out to be a suit. So in addition to pointing out what I originally wanted to point out, which was that Long Con's shift from "Made is looking more bad than DH and its possible he might have teammates here defending him." to "Nothing I plan on pursuing unless Made flips bad" again illustrates his double standard suspicion of me.

If we find out Made is bad, then it would still be a good idea to look at those people. I thought it then and I think it now, thanks for reminding me of that. You're really going all out here, you're a very eloquent word-twister. Now you make me have to disprove what you said.

What I'm saying is, according to your logic finding out Made is bad would warrant looking into llama voters. But we KNOW Bass was bad, so why does that not warrant looking into Made?

There's no double-standard because there was no "shift" in what you described. I said it's possible Made's defenders were teammates, and that I wouldn't be going after them unless Made flipped bad. That's one complete thought.

You know what else is one complete thought? "I find it odd that this phrase which I hadn't heard before was used twice in one game in such a short time but its nothing I would put a vote behind." That is the double standard I have described.

Since there were A LOT of people on my junk about the llama voters and how they couldn't see Made being bad unless he/someone who defended him flipped bad, what are our thoughts now that Bass has indeed flipped bad? Does this, combined with Mades absence, thrust him back into discussion? I think it's certainly a point against him.

That's actually a pretty good point. Worth looking into. Thanks.

Long Con wrote:Where your logic is backwards: You said "A Civ LC would be worried about Made getting framed", and that's exactly what happened. I was worried that could be, and so I posted a clarification post before I left for work, so that anyone who was inclined could get more information. The baddie move would have been to not post anything, and let the original supposition stand. If I didn't post that out of concern that Made was being framed... then why else would I post it?

Why indeed. WIFOM? Yet another ironic thing for you to say given your umbrage with my posts/concerns of being misrepresented.

Ha ha ha, WIFOM. Ok. Also, I don't see any irony from the idea that I was upset about you misrepresenting me... how does the idea that I did a WIFOM create irony there?


You were all up in my joint about my posts RE: Dom and my posts insisting that I wasn't making a case based on my Misfits comment or my comments to Rey/SVS. And then you go and make the same type of comments. You don't see the irony there?