The Syndicate

Turnip Head wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I mean that she would not have bothered day fending him either unless she was sure he was civ. And she would have had no way of knowing that.

S~V~S wrote:I could be wrong, but this is something she and I have in common when civ. I honestly do not think she would have bothered to defend Vomps. I think she would have voted for him.

I remember one game where Roxy was a baddie in a two-mafia setup, 3 baddies on each team, very similar to this game: TV Show Mafia on RM. I just went back and reread all of Roxy's posts from that game, and I must disagree with your opinion that Roxy doesn't defend other players when she's a baddie. She did it multiple times in that game. She also did NOT hop on bandwagons just to blend in; if anything she did the opposite.

I don't have the time to reread entire games in order to disagree with you. This is my opinion of her formed over many years of playing with her.

Can't wait to see the outcome of the two of you spending the whole day discussing one opinion of mine

SVS all I'm trying to do is have a discussion about a player in the game. I did not ask that you "reread through entire games in order to disagree with me" nor was it implied. I don't care if you agree or disagree. My post was for the entire thread to read, not just you. You stated your opinion and now I have stated mine.

And I am not just discussing "your opinion", I am discussing "Roxy". You have discussed Roxy, so you are part of the discussion.

Turnip Head wrote:SVS all I'm trying to do is have a discussion about a player in the game. I did not ask that you "reread through entire games in order to disagree with me" nor was it implied. I don't care if you agree or disagree. My post was for the entire thread to read, not just you. You stated your opinion and now I have stated mine.

But YOU do seem to care, you have gone through great lengths to refute my argument.

And you are starting to sound kinda annoyed. But my break is over anyhow, back to work for me. Carry on

S~V~S wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I think SVS is suggesting that Roxy is Godard (vomps message partner) since she defended vomps, because how else would Roxy be certain of vomps being civ while also being civ? If Roxy is civ and she knew vomps was civ, there would be no reason to entertain a vote for him.

I might be wrong about what SVS is insinuating, but that's how I read it.

How would I know such a thing? I did consider it but those roles can't out to each other according to the first page.

Not sure why my opinion means so much to the two of you, you seem to have spent the whole day talking about it.

Welcome to my world, SVS.

S~V~S wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:SVS all I'm trying to do is have a discussion about a player in the game. I did not ask that you "reread through entire games in order to disagree with me" nor was it implied. I don't care if you agree or disagree. My post was for the entire thread to read, not just you. You stated your opinion and now I have stated mine.

But YOU do seem to care, you have gone through great lengths to refute my argument.

And you are starting to sound kinda annoyed. But my break is over anyhow, back to work for me. Carry on

I am kind of annoyed because I feel you have the wrong takeaways from my posts.

I have not gone to great lengths simply to refute your argument. I went to great lengths to get a better grasp on a player I suspect in the game. The fact that my findings refuted your argument, as opposed to confirming it, is inconsequential. I didn't go into it with the idea of "Ooooooh boy I can make SVS sound wrong!", which you seem to think was my intention.

Llama, stop it. You hold your opinion higher than anyone else's. And when we don't listen to you, you scold us. Yet when people ask for your opinion, you act as if it shouldn't matter.

I have to go back to work, too, so you two can carry on feeling like the rest of the thread is trying to crucify you

Turnip Head wrote:Llama, stop it. You hold your opinion higher than anyone else's. And when we don't listen to you, you scold us. Yet when people ask for your opinion, you act as if it shouldn't matter.

Yeah, I value my opinion because it is mine, but I don't understand why the rest of you value it, since I am always wrong.

Because everyone's opinion has value regardless of whether others agree with it or listen to it. It is important to know what people think and why they think it. Do you disagree?

Catching up but just a bit. Fed up of writing for today (MM, I explained my absence these past two-three days before going absent, every time.)

BR either just wrote two contradictory statements ("Roxy is my best guess", then "I'm at a loss of who I want to vote this day") or she actually backed away from suspecting Roxy. If she did mean the latter in earnest, I can't include her anymore in Roxy's suspecters. Nevertheless, I still feel slightly wary of her. As I've said, her voting record and reasonings, up to Roxy, especially the one on Vomps, didn't put her in a good light.

MM still thinks Roxy is pretty bad, but still not many reasons offered since I asked for some.

DF, I did note MM has a bad record so far on civvie lynches, but I did not mean it as a strong thing on which to build cases, especially given that other records are worse than his right now (there's even a 4-0 one).

The most vocal right now of those who voted Roxy is TH. Contrary to BR, he said he doesn't see the Llama-Roxy dispute as bad-civ, but civ-civ. And frankly so do I, even if, on the spot, Roxy's reactions were odd. But TH still suspects Roxy for defending Vomps on his lynch day, which I frankly do not. As I've said, I've found a few players who did poor in joining in on the Vomps lynch. By contrast, Roxy's reasons for why lynching Vomps is bad idea still echo in my mind for how well-argued they were and how clear her stance, thus, was in not taking part in all that (somehow, I'm developing a distinction in my head between "not joining a lynch" and "defending the lynchee", but maybe that's all coming from my Donner traum- err experience).

Also, he wants to know why Roxy is not saying anything about her "near-lynch". She was actually asked that by MM and answered shortly, also mentioning she has an idea on what happened (but she won't state it too clearly in the thread). TH also says he has his own idea. I also have my own idea and if it's true, then Roxy wasn't saved and Blooper was unfortunately pushed to her lynch by the extra-polling abilities her visible voters might have had (or used). It's a very tricky result in which to try to scoop up the baddies, tbh.

Can you clarify, TH, why you think vote analysis is pointless until we actually baddie? I know we've had very bad results from doing that so far (at least in thinking in terms of "saves" and such), nevertheless, why give up on it altogether?

Also, Day fending should be included in our Mafia terminology. I like the sound of it, especially describing what a baddie would try to do on every Day.

All paragraphs free to snip.

DFaraday wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

DFaraday wrote:Okay, I'm really starting to apply myself in the game. I went over Rico's posts, and the results are muddled.

He maintained a Vomps suspicion (like basically everyone else) for much of the early game, and briefly mentioned suspicion of SVS and Roxy in connection to Vomps.

Later on, after Vomps was lynched, Rico had something of a row with Dom over Dom's less than enthusiastic reaction to BWT's rezz. As someone who is always a bit leery of such things anyway, I don't see anything suspicious in Dom's behavior. Rico felt like he was pressing the issue a bit much, imo.

Finally, he has begun looking more closely at MM, noting that MM has contributed to civvie lynches (although that's pretty much all we've had), and questioning MM's suspicion of Roxy.

I need to look over Dom, MM, and Roxy to see how this all comes together.

If that's going to be your reason, I could name a handful of players who've contributed to more civvie lynches than I have. Regardless, contributing to civvie lynches isn't a baddie sign. Voting patterns would be better to look at.

MM, I didn't say I was suspecting you. I was saying that's what Rico said about you.

Well in that case, I would like to hear your opinions about your observations. What do you think about Rico?

Turnip Head wrote:Because everyone's opinion has value regardless of whether others agree with it or listen to it. It is important to know what people think and why they think it. Do you disagree?

I don't disagree, but I can't help but notice a lack of such through exploration the opinions of, say, Canucklehead, as opposed to me and SVS.

Ricochet wrote:Catching up but just a bit. Fed up of writing for today (MM, I explained my absence these past two-three days before going absent, every time.)

BR either just wrote two contradictory statements ("Roxy is my best guess", then "I'm at a loss of who I want to vote this day") or she actually backed away from suspecting Roxy. If she did mean the latter in earnest, I can't include her anymore in Roxy's suspecters. Nevertheless, I still feel slightly wary of her. As I've said, her voting record and reasonings, up to Roxy, especially the one on Vomps, didn't put her in a good light.

MM still thinks Roxy is pretty bad, but still not many reasons offered since I asked for some.

DF, I did note MM has a bad record so far on civvie lynches, but I did not mean it as a strong thing on which to build cases, especially given that other records are worse than his right now (there's even a 4-0 one).

The most vocal right now of those who voted Roxy is TH. Contrary to BR, he said he doesn't see the Llama-Roxy dispute as bad-civ, but civ-civ. And frankly so do I, even if, on the spot, Roxy's reactions were odd. But TH still suspects Roxy for defending Vomps on his lynch day, which I frankly do not. As I've said, I've found a few players who did poor in joining in on the Vomps lynch. By contrast, Roxy's reasons for why lynching Vomps is bad idea still echo in my mind for how well-argued they were and how clear her stance, thus, was in not taking part in all that (somehow, I'm developing a distinction in my head between "not joining a lynch" and "defending the lynchee", but maybe that's all coming from my Donner traum- err experience).

Also, he wants to know why Roxy is not saying anything about her "near-lynch". She was actually asked that by MM and answered shortly, also mentioning she has an idea on what happened (but she won't state it too clearly in the thread). TH also says he has his own idea. I also have my own idea and if it's true, then Roxy wasn't saved and Blooper was unfortunately pushed to her lynch by the extra-polling abilities her visible voters might have had (or used). It's a very tricky result in which to try to scoop up the baddies, tbh.

Can you clarify, TH, why you think vote analysis is pointless until we actually baddie? I know we've had very bad results from doing that so far (at least in thinking in terms of "saves" and such), nevertheless, why give up on it altogether?

Also, Day fending should be included in our Mafia terminology. I like the sound of it, especially describing what a baddie would try to do on every Day.

All paragraphs free to snip.

I'm only 0-1 dammit. Everyone who voted on the vomps wagon (including you) has an equal or worse record if you're going to look at it that way.

But TH is kinda right about vote analysis. Until we lynch a baddie, we can't have any certainty about people's intentions with their lynchvotes. If say vomps was bad, llama may have been right about him being saved on two different occasions, and we can look at the Day 1.2 and Day 2 lynches to see who was a common voter on the lynchee those days. But because vomps was civ, we can only speculate and WIFOM, but answers are not available.

The exception is dead players. FZ and timmer's votes may (key word) tell us something as to why they were targeted. Also, since we know BWT, MP, vomps, etc. are civs, we know they voted with a civvie mindset, something we can't guarantee with living players.


Sorry I haven't answered your question, but I have not dropped the suspish of Roxy. I am baffled that players are still passing on her after she was not lynched yesterday, nor did she even bat an eye after the fact. She's gone quiet too, but the circumstances speak for her.

Linki: I've forgotten about Canucklegoose tbh.

I don't suspect Roxy for defending Vomp, Rico. Hell I defended Vomps myself. SVS said that Roxy doesn't bother defending players when she's bad, and I disagree with that notion.

I remember Roxy's response to MM, but I still feel like we're missing a more complete reaction from her. Frankly I expected her to get on my case a bit for putting the final vote on her, or even ask me WHY I voted for her, but we didn't get much. Not even a "rip blooper but DAMN I'm lucky to be alive". It just made me think that her reaction was reserved for BTSC conversations.

As for why I don't think voting records matter yet... We haven't caught a baddie yet, so we can't argue that any votes were cast to save teammates. People tried to apply this logic on Day 2 and 3 and it resulted in the lynching of two civs. Analyzing voting records at this point will lead to all sorts of wrong conclusions and already has. We need to lynch a baddie before voting records will mean anything. If there's a certain vote that piques your interest or feels out of place, I'm all ears, but voting records in general just don't mean much yet.

Ricochet wrote:Catching up but just a bit. Fed up of writing for today (MM, I explained my absence these past two-three days before going absent, every time.)

BR either just wrote two contradictory statements ("Roxy is my best guess", then "I'm at a loss of who I want to vote this day") or she actually backed away from suspecting Roxy. If she did mean the latter in earnest, I can't include her anymore in Roxy's suspecters. Nevertheless, I still feel slightly wary of her. As I've said, her voting record and reasonings, up to Roxy, especially the one on Vomps, didn't put her in a good light.

MM still thinks Roxy is pretty bad, but still not many reasons offered since I asked for some.

DF, I did note MM has a bad record so far on civvie lynches, but I did not mean it as a strong thing on which to build cases, especially given that other records are worse than his right now (there's even a 4-0 one).

The most vocal right now of those who voted Roxy is TH. Contrary to BR, he said he doesn't see the Llama-Roxy dispute as bad-civ, but civ-civ. And frankly so do I, even if, on the spot, Roxy's reactions were odd. But TH still suspects Roxy for defending Vomps on his lynch day, which I frankly do not. As I've said, I've found a few players who did poor in joining in on the Vomps lynch. By contrast, Roxy's reasons for why lynching Vomps is bad idea still echo in my mind for how well-argued they were and how clear her stance, thus, was in not taking part in all that (somehow, I'm developing a distinction in my head between "not joining a lynch" and "defending the lynchee", but maybe that's all coming from my Donner traum- err experience).

Also, he wants to know why Roxy is not saying anything about her "near-lynch". She was actually asked that by MM and answered shortly, also mentioning she has an idea on what happened (but she won't state it too clearly in the thread). TH also says he has his own idea. I also have my own idea and if it's true, then Roxy wasn't saved and Blooper was unfortunately pushed to her lynch by the extra-polling abilities her visible voters might have had (or used). It's a very tricky result in which to try to scoop up the baddies, tbh.

Can you clarify, TH, why you think vote analysis is pointless until we actually baddie? I know we've had very bad results from doing that so far (at least in thinking in terms of "saves" and such), nevertheless, why give up on it altogether?

Also, Day fending should be included in our Mafia terminology. I like the sound of it, especially describing what a baddie would try to do on every Day.

All paragraphs free to snip.

That's cause things change.

What changed for you, BR?

Turnip Head wrote:Llama, stop it. You hold your opinion higher than anyone else's. And when we don't listen to you, you scold us. Yet when people ask for your opinion, you act as if it shouldn't matter.

lol

TH are you seeing baddie svs?

Dom who are your top three suspects?

No Dom I don't think that I am. You?

Turnip Head wrote:I don't suspect Roxy for defending Vomp, Rico. Hell I defended Vomps myself. SVS said that Roxy doesn't bother defending players when she's bad, and I disagree with that notion.

I remember Roxy's response to MM, but I still feel like we're missing a more complete reaction from her. Frankly I expected her to get on my case a bit for putting the final vote on her, or even ask me WHY I voted for her, but we didn't get much. Not even a "rip blooper but DAMN I'm lucky to be alive". It just made me think that her reaction was reserved for BTSC conversations.

As for why I don't think voting records matter yet... We haven't caught a baddie yet, so we can't argue that any votes were cast to save teammates. People tried to apply this logic on Day 2 and 3 and it resulted in the lynching of two civs. Analyzing voting records at this point will lead to all sorts of wrong conclusions and already has. We need to lynch a baddie before voting records will mean anything. If there's a certain vote that piques your interest or feels out of place, I'm all ears, but voting records in general just don't mean much yet.

OK, I read the first part wrong.

Turnip Head wrote:As for why I don't think voting records matter yet... We haven't caught a baddie yet, so we can't argue that any votes were cast to save teammates. People tried to apply this logic on Day 2 and 3 and it resulted in the lynching of two civs. Analyzing voting records at this point will lead to all sorts of wrong conclusions and already has. We need to lynch a baddie before voting records will mean anything. If there's a certain vote that piques your interest or feels out of place, I'm all ears, but voting records in general just don't mean much yet.

We could look at voting records for the people who did NOT vote to lynch a Civvie... coming from the idea that baddies have a better idea of who is Civvie and who is not, they might avoid what they perceive to be a Civvie "lynch train" in the hopes that NOT lynching a Civvie could make them seem more Civvie... and then go after the Civvies who did the lynching.

thellama73 wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Because everyone's opinion has value regardless of whether others agree with it or listen to it. It is important to know what people think and why they think it. Do you disagree?

I don't disagree, but I can't help but notice a lack of such through exploration the opinions of, say, Canucklehead, as opposed to me and SVS.

This is very true. No one ever weighs my thoughts very seriously (myself included).....I think it's a compliment to you, llama...or at the very least an indication of the effects of confidence on others' perceptions of you. I can understand how/why you and SVS are annoyed by this phenomenon, but I i were you peeps is wee it as a badge of honour.
Lord knows I wear my perpetual lack of influence and scrutiny as a badge of shame.

Don't worry, Canuck, I get ignored a lot too, even when I'm crying and tearing out my beard to lynch someone. I think they're anti-Canadian.

I suppose we could do that LC but again I fear it would just lead to some wrong conclusions. I guess I shouldn't say that voting records are downright worthless atm, but those records will become exponentially more useful with a baddie lynch under our belts.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:LC, who are your top three suspects?

Glad you asked. I'm still of the mindset that Llama is a baddie, and if I recall correctly, I think that MM and Made are on his team as well.

And that's my top three!!!

There are many typos in the above post, including the memorable and incomprehensible "but I i were you peeps is wee", which I beleive is meant to say "but if I were you peeps I'd wear....etc".

Apologies.

Linki: thanks, LC, my dear neglected compatriot

Long Con wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:LC, who are your top three suspects?

Glad you asked. I'm still of the mindset that Llama is a baddie, and if I recall correctly, I think that MM and Made are on his team as well.

And that's my top three!!!

I am not as sure of Llama as you are, but I can agree on MM for sure, possibly made as well. Ricochet rounds out my top three

Today my vote is pretty mch up for grabs because I am pretty damn lost, and my previous thoughs have proved not good. Someone buy my vote with reason, logic, intuition, and/or charm!

I am very intrigued by the swarming MM suspicions. He's been neutral/unreadable for me so far, but I owe him a re-read since a few people on my think-they're-civ list have serious doubts about MM.


BR, any thoughts on TH? You were the only person who seemed even marginally on board with my suspicions of him, and I'm just wondering if your thoughts on him have changed in either direction. I'm still pretty torn.

Anyone else have thoughts on TH? Or thoughts on Dom?

I don't get the Roxy suspicions, so if anyone wants my vote to go there, I'll need some convincing.

Canucklehead wrote: Anyone else have thoughts on TH? Or thoughts on Dom?

Dom jumped on Llama after D4, but then said he's just messing about his gameplay. (As opposed to LC who actively thinks Llama may be bad; Made is somewhere in the middle between the two). He was consistent in a conflict with MP and in wanting (and ultimately contributing to) MP's lynch, but afterwards fell off everyone's radar. He's as low as BR on my Vomp lynchers accountability chart. Not sure how good I feel about this. Since everyone's speaking in terms of top three's, I think he'd be somewhere up there right now.

Canucklehead wrote:Today my vote is pretty mch up for grabs because I am pretty damn lost, and my previous thoughs have proved not good. Someone buy my vote with reason, logic, intuition, and/or charm!

I am very intrigued by the swarming MM suspicions. He's been neutral/unreadable for me so far, but I owe him a re-read since a few people on my think-they're-civ list have serious doubts about MM.


BR, any thoughts on TH? You were the only person who seemed even marginally on board with my suspicions of him, and I'm just wondering if your thoughts on him have changed in either direction. I'm still pretty torn.

Anyone else have thoughts on TH? Or thoughts on Dom?

I don't get the Roxy suspicions, so if anyone wants my vote to go there, I'll need some convincing.

I have thoughts on Dom! Let me pull them for you.

*scurry scurry*

Ah yes, here they are. Right where I left them.

thellama73 wrote:I am bored of not making cases, and since it seems like there is contingent of people eager to lynch me tomorrow, I guess I better start preparing my defense. MongooseLawyer would approve.

Has anyone read Dom lately? I just did, and a couple of things really stand out.

1. Have you noticed that almost every one of his on topic posts (at least for the first few days) was a question? This is always a red flag for me. It's a great way to participate without committing to much.
2. His campaign against MP, who we now know was as civvie as the day is long.
3. The thing that inspired me to do the reread was the way he jumped onto me after the Blooper lynch (for which he missed the vote.) It feels like the height of opportunism, because no player has stuck his neck out as much as I have. I would be an extremely easy lynch, and when I flip civ, anyone could reasonably say "well, what was I supposed to do? He kept leading campaigns against civvies!"

Anything that allows a player to dodge accountability sticks out as baddie-esque to me, and Dom's Socratic method combined with his opportunistic pouncing on me are both great examples of accountability dodging.

I still want to reread TH and MM before the lynch (been crazy busy at work) but I would not be surprised if I voted for him tomorrow.

Also, I am with you and SVS on Roxy, Canuck. I don't want to lynch her.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Dom who are your top three suspects?

In no particular order:
-Llama
-Made
-You
-MM

Ah-- Llama bringing up THAT tired post where he crucifies me for being wrong about MP (like he was wrong about everyone), asking questions (because that's bad!), and lies (because he is not an easy lynch)

Turnip Head wrote:No Dom I don't think that I am. You?

I'm on the fence. I can't identify anything in particular, but her tone seems off. :/

Long Con wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:LC, who are your top three suspects?

Glad you asked. I'm still of the mindset that Llama is a baddie, and if I recall correctly, I think that MM and Made are on his team as well.

And that's my top three!!!

I'm more sure of Made than MM, you?





Sorry for the triple post- I forgot to copy and paste.

Dom wrote:Ah-- Llama bringing up THAT tired post where he crucifies me for being wrong about MP (like he was wrong about everyone), asking questions (because that's bad!), and lies (because he is not an easy lynch)

I still like it. I think it is a nice little post. I'm thinking about printing it out and framing it.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I think SVS is suggesting that Roxy is Godard (vomps message partner) since she defended vomps, because how else would Roxy be certain of vomps being civ while also being civ? If Roxy is civ and she knew vomps was civ, there would be no reason to entertain a vote for him.

I might be wrong about what SVS is insinuating, but that's how I read it.

Why do you insist on doing this, not just in this game, but in every game? What if Roxy really is this role? Don't you think, in light of all the info dropping discussion, that discussing what civvie role someone may or may not be, or that someone may think they are, is a really bad idea?

Some of us work really hard to get our point across while being somewhat vague and not endangering people, and to have you do this is, frankly, infuriating. You are supposed to read between the lines, not publish them.

I responded to this before, but I have been stewing on it ever since.

{/high horse]

Linki~ I am more sure of MM, but would rather come to a consensus.

thellama73 wrote:I still want to reread TH and MM before the lynch (been crazy busy at work) but I would not be surprised if I voted for him tomorrow.

Why? The last thing you said about me re: alignment is that I'm probably a civ, and you haven't reread me yet apparently, so I'm super curious.

Turnip Head wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I still want to reread TH and MM before the lynch (been crazy busy at work) but I would not be surprised if I voted for him tomorrow.

Why? The last thing you said about me re: alignment is that I'm probably a civ, and you haven't reread me yet apparently, so I'm super curious.

I generally think it's worth rereading people when others are talking about lynching them. Don't you?

I now see that you could have meant you'll vote MM and not me, but it wasn't clear.

Linki. What? Sure. That doesn't answer my question though, I was talking about the vote part.

House showing and my grandmothers lack of wifi prevented me from keeping up, but that's what i plan to do right now.
On a skim last night , I saw people were interested in who I wanted to pursue. Before I catch up and case up, I'd like to say going into Day 5, I am most suspect of Roxy and SVS. stand by plox.

Turnip Head wrote:I now see that you could have meant you'll vote MM and not me, but it wasn't clear.

Linki. What? Sure. That doesn't answer my question though, I was talking about the vote part.

Oh, I see the confusion. "him" in that sentence referred to Dom. Apologies.

Made wrote:House showing and my grandmothers lack of wifi prevented me from keeping up, but that's what i plan to do right now.
On a skim last night , I saw people were interested in who I wanted to pursue. Before I catch up and case up, I'd like to say going into Day 5, I am most suspect of Roxy and SVS. stand by plox.

I thought you were most suspicious of Llama for not voting for me or Roxy. Cause you know, we did not think Vomps was bad. Oh wait, he wasn't

Replying from where I last left off...

S~V~S wrote:I think if Roxy was bad she would have voted for Vomps in order to avoid standing out.

I disagree. Imo, it'd make sense for someone to want to avoid a lynch train is typically it's the first place people look for baddies.

Response to suspicion on MM: I'm not seeing any real case against him as it stands. Honestly, he's reading civve, or at least passive baddie atm. Will revisit.

Response to suspicion on Rico: again, not seen much thus far. I do think it's worth noting the tone i've been getting from his post as of recent as change since the beginning of the game. Might revisit.

Turnip Head wrote:Rest in peace Timmer hope your hand feels better.

MM, we cannot look at voting patterns, we cannot look at who voted for civvies, because we haven't lynched a baddie yet. So none of those data points have enough context. That is why it's so important we get a baddie, like RIGHT NOW. Otherwise we will be flailing around aimlessly all game until one by one we're all put out of our misery.

I agree....slightly.... I think the way to look at vote patterns now would be to see if we can properly justify each vote, and maybe weigh if someone's vote seems a bit opportunistic/or defensive as part of a large argument.

S~V~S wrote:I mean that she would not have bothered day fending him either unless she was sure he was civ. And she would have had no way of knowing that.

This post was in reference to Roxys opinion on Vomp, but i'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. Rephrase?

thellama73 wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Llama, stop it. You hold your opinion higher than anyone else's. And when we don't listen to you, you scold us. Yet when people ask for your opinion, you act as if it shouldn't matter.

Yeah, I value my opinion because it is mine, but I don't understand why the rest of you value it, since I am always wrong.

well you're right here!

Reevaluation of Rico: Probably won't revisit

thellama73 wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Because everyone's opinion has value regardless of whether others agree with it or listen to it. It is important to know what people think and why they think it. Do you disagree?

I don't disagree, but I can't help but notice a lack of such through exploration the opinions of, say, Canucklehead, as opposed to me and SVS.

Do you have a read on her as it stands?

Turnip Head wrote: I remember Roxy's response to MM, but I still feel like we're missing a more complete reaction from her. Frankly I expected her to get on my case a bit for putting the final vote on her, or even ask me WHY I voted for her, but we didn't get much. Not even a "rip blooper but DAMN I'm lucky to be alive". It just made me think that her reaction was reserved for BTSC conversations.

ehhh, I'm not much of one to respond to lynch post/night post personally, just feels a little awkward/forced unless it's a baddie lynch.

Something just clicked MADE AFTER CATCHING UP DOUBLE CHECK ROLES

Dom wrote: TH are you seeing baddie svs?

Personally I think I am. I elaborated on this previous, so check my post history or ask for repost. Opinions since then have not since changed.

Response to suspicions on llama: nothing he's said thus far today as really pinged me. Might Reread.

Dom wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Dom who are your top three suspects?

In no particular order:
-Llama
-Made
-You
-MM

Ahh, Dom's short list. *hands Dom my punchcard*

S~V~S wrote:
Why do you insist on doing this, not just in this game, but in every game? What if Roxy really is this role? Don't you think, in light of all the info dropping discussion, that discussing what civvie role someone may or may not be, or that someone may think they are, is a really bad idea?

Some of us work really hard to get our point across while being somewhat vague and not endangering people, and to have you do this is, frankly, infuriating. You are supposed to read between the lines, not publish them.

I agree sorta kinda... Don't try to force someone to break silence on a particular issue, but also don't be afraid to speculate. Personally, If someone is talking about me in a game and the role I might be, I just ignore them.

Annnddd caught up!
Gonna check priority from this post, and make a case, stand by!

or nah, linki: I was suspicious of Llama in the same way Llama was Suspicious of you. The theory lined up with my ping for you and Roxy being bad.

Hmmmmm....I don't know if I'm suspicious of Dom exactly, but his posts have seemed very curt/terse this game which is not what I normally associate Dom with. Since he hasn't been under a huge deal of suspicion (apart from his bout with MP), I'm having difficulty ascribing it to civvie frustration....perhaps a baddie frustrated by kill fails? Or by teammates who aren't pulling their weight?
I'm not willing to vote for Dom based merely on my (very subjective) Interperetation I the tone of his posts, but it has been drawing my attention throughout the game, so I'd like to hear others' opinions on whether this is regular Dom (and I'm just remembering him wrong and/or misinterpreting his short responses) or whether this is odd

Canucklehead wrote:Hmmmmm....I don't know if I'm suspicious of Dom exactly, but his posts have seemed very curt/terse this game which is not what I normally associate Dom with. Since he hasn't been under a huge deal of suspicion (apart from his bout with MP), I'm having difficulty ascribing it to civvie frustration....perhaps a baddie frustrated by kill fails? Or by teammates who aren't pulling their weight?
I'm not willing to vote for Dom based merely on my (very subjective) Interperetation I the tone of his posts, but it has been drawing my attention throughout the game, so I'd like to hear others' opinions on whether this is regular Dom (and I'm just remembering him wrong and/or misinterpreting his short responses) or whether this is odd

He's reading more normal Dom to me atm. I typically think of baddie dom as far more passive, that said his tone is kinda weird.

Canucklehead wrote:Hmmmmm....I don't know if I'm suspicious of Dom exactly, but his posts have seemed very curt/terse this game which is not what I normally associate Dom with. Since he hasn't been under a huge deal of suspicion (apart from his bout with MP), I'm having difficulty ascribing it to civvie frustration....perhaps a baddie frustrated by kill fails? Or by teammates who aren't pulling their weight?
I'm not willing to vote for Dom based merely on my (very subjective) Interperetation I the tone of his posts, but it has been drawing my attention throughout the game, so I'd like to hear others' opinions on whether this is regular Dom (and I'm just remembering him wrong and/or misinterpreting his short responses) or whether this is odd

No one ever takes my opinions seriously.

Oh, and Made. I saw your question. No read on Canuck at the moment, but I will add her to my list of rereads for tomorrow.

S~V~S wrote:I mean that she would not have bothered day fending him either unless she was sure he was civ. And she would have had no way of knowing that.

First "day fending" is android speak for "defending" and this was actually a clarification on another post. I don't believe Roxy would have gone out of her way to defend someone whose affiliation was very questionable (alot of what was said on Vomps made sense re a gamestyle POV; but it did not take into account that it was one of his best Forum friends hosting, on a topic he was super into. And he had to keep defending from second one, so that elevated his on topic post count). Vomp could very well have come up bad. I was on pins & needles myself waiting on his lynch result.

I don't think a bad Rox would have even gotten involved in this, but if she did, she certainly would not have defended Vomps who had a 50/50 chance at coming up bad.

And I don't know how you did not understand my meaning here as you quote my follow up to this lashing at MM and say you grasp & kinda agree. So missing why you need a rephrase.