The Syndicate

Can someone tell me what "WOT" means? Way Off Topic? post WithOut Teeth?

Golden wrote:Funny. My recollection of dom is quiet dom, dom you forget is playing. If I had to say my perception of him in this game, it's that he is less blendy and more talkative than usual. I haven't forgotten he is playing.

A Person, though...

Zombarella wrote:I don't want to vote for SVS. I want to vote for A Person.

Interesting you brought him up earlier in the day and then Zomba decides to place her vote there.

Golden wrote:Liz, you are seeing basically what I saw about epi on day one. I haven't cleared epi completely from my suspect list, although he is by no means my biggest suspect right now. I think what ends up happening with today's lynch and reveal could potentially have a significant bearing on how I perceive Epi afterwards.

So what's your perception?

juliets wrote:@Liz I'm just going to give up on getting you to answer those cases. If Epi or Golden want to push it they can. Their posts are easy to find if you just look at their posts.

If you feel I didn't answer something can you link me back to it? I still feel like you were trying to help steer a lynch my direction and it wasn't working out so you've backed off.

Vompatti wrote:

fingersplints wrote:Did Vomps give a reason for his TH vote? I'm used to Vomps being kind of out there as a player, but I'm just a little surprised he would vote a silenced player without giving a reason. (Unless I missed the vote. There has been a lot going on)

I didn't know he was silenced because I didn't read the thread. I only voted for him because I had a feeling MM had hard evidence that he's bad.

This is frustrating no matter your affiliation.

Elohcin wrote:

Golden wrote:I think there is real merit to the possibility that the baddies might be laughing at us as all the louder people cut each other down. I would certainly be willing to consider a vote against:

A person, or
Vompatti, or
possibly canuck, or
maybe even Elo, who seems a lot quieter in content here than in RR.

If the criteria is who could be hiding.

If you vote me, you will be voting a civ. It takes me longer to have much of an opinion in full games as opposed to speed games, that's all. As the game gets smaller, I have an easier time wrapping my head around things. I am reading, following along, an absorbing all that is going on though.

Wasn't Zelda a speed game? And didn't you say the same thing? I'll have to go look to be sure.

Epignosis wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:"I'd rather trust a man who doesn't shout what he's found."

"I'd rather trust a country man than a town man."

I was listening to that album, and I just now realized what you were quoting.

That's um..a disturbing image.

Golden wrote:So I voted vomps. I hope that, in the end, vomps dies and zombs is saved. Thats my goal today. I am not 100% sure zombs is good, but I do think she could be given more time to prove herself.

What if Vomps had died and had flipped civvie? I think it would have sounded more civvie to say you felt better about a Vomps vote than a Zomba and you hope you're right.

Golden wrote:
Oh well, if I fail, I fail, and hopefully Zombs flips millionaire. I just suspect she won't.

You suspect she won't be the millionaire yet you thought my vote might mean she's the millionaire?

rabbit8 wrote:

Feelings can change ..........

S~V~S wrote:Changing ones mind does not make one bad.

These two things apply very much to me.

Epignosis wrote:And I'm the one who tied it up.

Yes, interesting that.

Epignosis wrote:No...I was tying it up. I would have voted the other way around had it been 7-6 Vompatti.

Just...why?

fingersplints wrote:

Bullzeye wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Also, how is Zomba being bad mean that Vomps might not also be bad?

14 people voted for one or the other. I would be very surprised to find out that Vomp was also bad. I'm still not even sure how he got 7 votes.

Well I think that makes more sense then assuming all of Zomba's teammates voted to save her after she threw her vote away early on APerson. I doubt her teammates bothered to save her at all.

That reminds of Survivor when one team decides to throw a challenge so they can get rid of a teammate they don't like. I always think that's a dumb move.

Vompatti wrote:

You sad a mafia died?

Golden wrote:I haven't tried to twist anything.

LizKeen wrote:Transfer and traded are two different things. So I would say it could be possible for a teammate to give an item to put in the safe.

What is this if not a theory? And, why is it bad for you to have theories, anyway? Why would I need to twist your words?

Theories aren't necessarily bad, but this isn't one.

Golden wrote:There is lots that is quite odd about your game, LK...

Like, for instance, the fact that you, yourself, kept saying you were suspicious of Vomps, yet you are now quick to jump on someone who actually went after him.

I haven't cleared Vomps, but IF he's civvie then you could be bad.

Golden wrote:I was bothered by your zomb vote on day 1 after you spent the whole day saying you were looking at three other people (low posters), followed by another early zomb vote last night. Last nights one made the least sense of all... with virtually no-one voted yet, you decide to do this:

LizKeen wrote:I'm in a royal quandary as to what to do because I know there's very few people who are going to get votes and I feel like it's going to be me or you Zomb, but I don't feel good enough to put a vote on you either. And I'm most definitely not self-voting. I have no problem going after a low poster but I don't think that's going to get any traction today either.

Golden wrote:@LK - I think we can get traction for someone other than you or zombs. I think it can be done.

LizKeen wrote:I do have to attempt to get some sleep though and I'm going to have to vote now or miss the vote again. I wish I could feel confident I'm not going to get lynched but I just don't and I won't be here before the vote to defend myself anymore. So I feel I don't have much choice but to vote Zomberella. If you're civvie I hope you understand, but I hope you're not so this isn't a total mistake.

I found this whole thing last night pretty odd. It nearly turned me back to thinking zombs was the millionaire, actually, and you thought you could get a sneaky vote in while I led the lynch in another direction. Obviously zombs wasn't the millionaire, but it's a great strategy eh?

If you thought this possible why not just vote Zombs? I never asked you to lead the vote a new direction, I was glad not to get lynched obviously, but that was your decision. I didn't think it would actually happen.

Golden wrote:
Well, if your possibility is correct, maybe Dom didn't get a stock certificate, right? Maybe he got nothing. Because, maybe the baddies knew zombs would be lynched and transferred everything away from her so she wouldn't have anything on her.

I don't know why you are so defensive about this? And, I don't know the difference you see between a possiblity and a theory. To me they are the same.

Llama said items couldn't be transferred. And to me a possibility is something that might or might not happen. A theory is something someone thinks did happen.

This was from the Zelda game where she was a big baddie. Or since it was a reverse game she was a goodie but that was bad.

Elohcin wrote: I know I have a bad voting record. I was just thinking (at the end of the last day) that I need to stop listening to the "crowd" but it is difficult when I still feel like everyone is playing so civ-like. I have not been in a game where its Day 6 and still I have no great suspicions. It is odd. My biggest suspicion is Russ, but still not crazy convinced.

Elohcin wrote: 2. I am discouraged. I have been wrong about everyone this game, and I am losing confidence in my ability to read people. I thought I would back off a little and see what other people have to say.

(There was a long post in the middle I've cut because it was a lot of what she thought of several players that was basically a whole lot of nothing)

Nothing else to say, unfortunately. Rereading each player didn't really bring about any new pings, but there you go. Maybe you will be encouraged to do your own read through and post on everyone. I know many of us are getting discouraged by lynch results.

Epi, do you hate me? I hope not, I'm really not a terrible person but this is a game and players gotta play. But I'm seeing a lot of "well Epi might be bad but I'm not sure yet". Feels like deflection from voting him.

Long Con wrote:I believe Zomba said she burned her Stock Certificate when I suggested it. As a baddie, she could be lying about it, but if she had nothing, then it could have actually happened.

Or, LKs theory could be true, and baddies may be able to swap items amongst themselves.

LK, it's hard to quote to quotes... but hopefully this will do!

1) Zombs brought up A Person first. YOU brought up Vomps. The first two names on the list (the one you cut out the other names of, leaving only A Person) were aimed at Zombs and you, people you had suspicions of who I was suggesting I was willing to look at, because I was busy trying to save both your bacons. For one who is accusing me of twisting words.... sure is a very neatly cut quote, that one. (You did then quote the whole thing later in the same post anyway...)

2) Also, even if you take your version of events and say I brought up A Person first, it wasn't 'earlier in the day', that was all happening literally in a single conversation happening in the thread over a period of about an hour or so - one that you were there for, and fully aware of.

3) The lynch didn't give me the clarity on epi that I had hoped. But the lynch went down nothing like what I expected it to.

4) If Vomps had died and flipped civvie I would not have been the slightest bit bothered, because I would have felt like I might have saved a more important and engaged civ for a lesser one. I would have been wrong, but thats what I would have felt, and in fact what I was feeling when I chose vomps as the direction I wanted to push the lynch. I think there is a lot of merit in the idea that the civvies often lose on this site because the baddies can just stay out of it and let each other pick them off. If you aren't adding value, I don't mind lynching you. If Zombs was good, she was adding lots of value. She wasn't, but I can only go on what I can see. I'd have preferred a vote for A Person too, but it was clear that had no traction. Now I doubt I'd vote for A Person, since Zombs did.

5) I can and frequently do have multiple conflicting theories in my mind at the same time. I thought zombs could be millionaire and you could be feeding her votes. I also thought zombs could be oliver oliver, which is the reason I was trying to save her, because that role could help connect the town. I very nearly turned on zombs and voted for her after you did, because your vote made me feel worse about zombs. But I chose not to because I thought she might take the option of having btsc with me on the next day if I fought for her. That whole thing makes no coherent sense, and it's because the entire period I was weighing up the possibility of millionaire vs the possibility of oliver. I didn't think she could be anyone other than those two (because of the 'ruined my role' statement).

6) And, for me, a theory is not something I think must have happened. It's just conjecture, an idea. So, I'm very happy to say that MY theory is that the baddies can transfer items between themselves, and this might be why Zombs doesn't appear to have had anything on her. Which doesn't surprise me at all, if the baddies could move things around amongst themselves. But honestly, at this point, what is meant by a theory doesn't even bother me. What bothers me is why you seemed so upset that I suggested you had a theory? What exactly is wrong with having one, so much so that it made you say I was twisting your words? You haven't answered this yet...

7) You can change your mind... but if I do, its a no u? Think that through, especially in light of the fact that of the two of us, the first to build a case on the other was me.

8) "What if Vomps had died and had flipped civvie? I think it would have sounded more civvie to say you felt better about a Vomps vote than a Zomba and you hope you're right." - First thing about me is this. I put my money where my mouth is. If I feel better about vote a than vote b, that's what I'll say. If I feel someone is civ and I am deliberately setting out to convince the town to vote with me and put in the save, then that's what I'll say. I wasn't explaining my vote. I was setting out to get vomps lynched to save zomba. Not to lynch vomps. To save zomba. I just picked someone I thought had enough people saying they would be happy to vote that way. Canuck, JC, SVS, splints... a few different people were saying maybe vomps. So I went to vomps, and tried to convince the others already saying they were thinking of that to go with it. I'm not gonna pretend I wasn't trying to put in the save when I was.

But I've explained why I was trying to put in the save, and people have to choose whether to believe it or not.

Golden, the post I quoted above was you mentioning A Person early on Day 3, not during our conversation 24 or more hours later. If you go back and look at your posts from the beginning of Day 3 you'll see it.

I'm bothered when any civvie dies because it gives us one less number.

Someone should a mafia with roles like "conjecture", theory, trade, transfer, possibility, as roles and their, they're, there as mafia. Could be mind boggling.


I believe what is bothering me is you keep saying it was my theory items could be transferred when Llama clearly stated they couldn't .

Last I had spoken with you before the vote you weren't suspicious of me, then after the day post when I felt some things didn't add up to you about me, that's when I Felt you started the no U.

I think the simple solution is we're going to have to come up for new words for theory and Possibility, for clarification purposes.

Speaking of which, has anyone theorized the possibility the millionaire could gain more power to recruit?

Turnip Head wrote:I voted to go to Wabash. It is only two blocks away, so we won't have to walk very far to get there.

Exercise is good for you

Golden wrote:But I didn't know what epi meant by the 'full participant' thing either. The only things I can think of are: 1) picking items, 2) sending in a picture, 3) voting for streets - I've done all of those things. What other participation is there? Unless he is talking about participating in something that you get selected for eg being enthralled.

I'm wondering if Epi got some kind of PM from the host that used the words "full participant" and he was trying to communicate to anyone else that may have gotten the same PM.

Long Con wrote:Is that how Epig posts? From his phone? Ever?

Also, I consider the Celestials to be the greatest asset the Civs have right now. I'd like to seriously encourage them to steal from me tonight. Ichabod, I'm wide open. Send in your PM to steal from me.

Our (yes our) flip phone doesn't even have internet access.

Why would you want Ichabod to take from you? Do you not have anything?

LizKeen wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:"I'd rather trust a man who doesn't shout what he's found."

"I'd rather trust a country man than a town man."

I was listening to that album, and I just now realized what you were quoting.

That's um..a disturbing image.

It's just this guy.

A flower?

thellama73 wrote:A flower?

LizKeen wrote:

Epignosis wrote:And I'm the one who tied it up.

Yes, interesting that.

Epignosis wrote:No...I was tying it up. I would have voted the other way around had it been 7-6 Vompatti.

Just...why?

LizKeen wrote:Epi, do you hate me? I hope not, I'm really not a terrible person but this is a game and players gotta play. But I'm seeing a lot of "well Epi might be bad but I'm not sure yet". Feels like deflection from voting him.

Who is "him?" You were talking to me right?

There are lots of things I hate. Government. Being out of beer. The media obsession with asses (literal and otherwise). Beets.

You, my dear, would have a hard time making that list.

when i google literal asses, i get

LizKeen wrote:I think the simple solution is we're going to have to come up for new words for theory and Possibility, for clarification purposes.

Speaking of which, has anyone theorized the possibility the millionaire could gain more power to recruit?

I have a theory that Vomp may be the Millionaire.

S~V~S wrote:It doesn't mean that. I never said that. But her being bad does mnotb make him good.

And I am not bad, Dom. It is what it is.

See, here's the thing-- you immediately ruled on possibility out, but not the other. You took it upon yourself to comment on the possibility of a save with "No"
Not maybe.
No.


Why?

S~V~S wrote:It means he could be bad or good. This isn't rocket science.

That's not what you implied earlier.

S~V~S wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:It means he could be bad or good. This isn't rocket science.

So then you can't decide which he is?

Wow that is quite the misinterpretation of what I said. What I said was that just because Zomba was bad does not make Vomps good. You and Dom are taking a simple remark and twisting it into something it is not.

And Rabbit, I am not bad, and furthermore, I think you know it.

I said one thing.
A solitary thing.
Nice try at character assassination, SVS. It didn't work for anyone else this game either.

LizKeen wrote:

Golden wrote:Who voted zombs first? Whoever it was, I'm interested to hear if they got an item. Since SVS apparently didn't either. LK's theory of baddies being able to transfer items between them could be put to the test.

Did I say this was a theory? I think I just pointed out that transfer and trade were two different things. And I said "seem" astute, not OMG you're so brilliant! And you say maybe we should go ahead and lynch you because it might give us info? Civvie comment? Not much. Even if you are going on vacation that's not helpful. You 're really trying to twist my words or words said about me.

And I want to hear LC's response to Epi.

Why are you being so defensive?

I meant to posers this last night. 'I'll read now

LizKeen wrote:Can someone tell me what "WOT" means? Way Off Topic? post WithOut Teeth?

I usually say it as a funny way to spell "what".

LizKeen wrote: Epi, do you hate me? I hope not, I'm really not a terrible person but this is a game and players gotta play. But I'm seeing a lot of "well Epi might be bad but I'm not sure yet". Feels like deflection from voting him.

Defection onto what?

WOT= wall of text

LizKeen wrote:

juliets wrote:@Liz I'm just going to give up on getting you to answer those cases. If Epi or Golden want to push it they can. Their posts are easy to find if you just look at their posts.

LizKeen wrote:If you feel I didn't answer something can you link me back to it? I still feel like you were trying to help steer a lynch my direction and it wasn't working out so you've backed off.

I was not trying to steer the lynch in any direction. If I were trying to steer the lynch there would be no doubt in anyone's mind that that's what I was doing. That's because I would never do it unless I was sure. It is the norm on this board that when your name is brought up as suspicious and there are reasons provided you should address those reasons. All I was trying to get you to do was address those reasons. I've backed away from trying to get you to respond because 1) the questions have become dated 2)no one else saw it as a priority and 3)from recent discussion you are seeming civ to me. There are the original cases. Golden had another quote that had a question in it I just didn't reproduce it here.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 70#p130270
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 13#p130213

Long Con wrote:And I say "supposedly" because that curse gave Golden one vote for every vowel he used. You used AT LEAST 5 vowels that I was aware of, and I didn't even have to look that hard. 5 would have tied you up with Vomps and Zombs, and one more would have put you over the edge. And yet you didn't get lynched. Interesting. Why did you fake being cursed?

Ah, ah, ah. Fortunately someone here knows I wasn't faking.

Long Con wrote:And look at you, trying to beg sympathy from everyone because you "haven't been able to speak normally since Day 1". So you couldn't manage to express anything you needed to express during Day Two, when it was known to everyone that you had the jokey influence of having to answer questions with a "yes"? Are you joking? Why do you NEED to make plays like this, it's just not honest. You supposedly couldn't post vowels between Night 2 and Night 3. Has there been ANY other curses this game? Are we going to see more like that? I'll be very interested to see.

Damn right. It sucks, especially when you have a Long Con who wants your neck in a noose. You want to talk dishonest? See your assumption that a curse in one game operates exactly as it did in another. See your loaded question about faking a curse that follows that assumption. See the fact that you voted for me on Day 2 without even giving me a second to respond. So let us not pretend like you would have given one shart what my response would have been.

Long Con wrote:"Pressuring others to talk about me"?? Do I even have to address that? Sorry, I'll just keep all my thoughts to myself from now on, I wouldn't want to pressure anyone.

"Hey George! What do you think of Epig?" "Hey Sam! What do you think of Epig?" "Hey Eunice! What do you think of Epig?"

Those aren't your thoughts. Are they?

Long Con wrote:I don't know what this "full participant" talk is, so if anyone beside Epig wants to fill me in on what he means, I'm all ears.

And I'm all eyes.

Canucklehead wrote:WOT= wall of text

I'm starting to wonder about you.

rabbit8 wrote:

LizKeen wrote:I think the simple solution is we're going to have to come up for new words for theory and Possibility, for clarification purposes.

Speaking of which, has anyone theorized the possibility the millionaire could gain more power to recruit?

I have a theory that Vomp may be the Millionaire.

Is this serious that you think Vomps is the Millionaire?

fingersplints wrote:

rabbit8 wrote:

LizKeen wrote:I think the simple solution is we're going to have to come up for new words for theory and Possibility, for clarification purposes.

Speaking of which, has anyone theorized the possibility the millionaire could gain more power to recruit?

I have a theory that Vomp may be the Millionaire.

Is this serious that you think Vomps is the Millionaire?

Thinking about it. I think maybe the baddies saw the train coming on Zomba and wanted to save her if possible. If they could get Vomps lynched since he has not really been involved Zomba would look really good in a lot of players eyes when Vomps flipped as the Millionaire and then the badies could really create some chaos. Now if Vomps is not lynched and he is the Millionaire, he just got pretty powerful. It's something I would have done if I was in the baddies position. A win win situation.

Just a working theory. He could also be a civvie they decided to go after because it was easy as well.

Pending on the ness of our baddie teams I could see either one of these being true.

S~V~S wrote:If you flip civ, MM, I will change my rank to marmot in solidarity with you

I just realized what you were saying here. For some reason I read this as my rank being changed to "Marmot in Solidarity", which made no sense to me.

Being a marmot ain't so bad.

I used to live on Van Buren Dr. so I think I'll vote for that one.

Epignosis wrote:

Long Con wrote:And I say "supposedly" because that curse gave Golden one vote for every vowel he used. You used AT LEAST 5 vowels that I was aware of, and I didn't even have to look that hard. 5 would have tied you up with Vomps and Zombs, and one more would have put you over the edge. And yet you didn't get lynched. Interesting. Why did you fake being cursed?

Ah, ah, ah. Fortunately someone here knows I wasn't faking.

Maybe there is, but it ain't me.

Long Con wrote:And look at you, trying to beg sympathy from everyone because you "haven't been able to speak normally since Day 1". So you couldn't manage to express anything you needed to express during Day Two, when it was known to everyone that you had the jokey influence of having to answer questions with a "yes"? Are you joking? Why do you NEED to make plays like this, it's just not honest. You supposedly couldn't post vowels between Night 2 and Night 3. Has there been ANY other curses this game? Are we going to see more like that? I'll be very interested to see.

Damn right. It sucks, especially when you have a Long Con who wants your neck in a noose. You want to talk dishonest? See your assumption that a curse in one game operates exactly as it did in another. See your loaded question about faking a curse that follows that assumption. See the fact that you voted for me on Day 2 without even giving me a second to respond. So let us not pretend like you would have given one shart what my response would have been.

I'm not the only person here, so I would have thought some response for their benefit would have been a good thing for you to do. Obviously I was wrong - all Epignosis has to do is a couple of Smileys and some cryptic remarks, and you have everyone eating out of your hands. I suppose I should have known this before coming after you, but hey, I'll probably learn more this way.

Long Con wrote:"Pressuring others to talk about me"?? Do I even have to address that? Sorry, I'll just keep all my thoughts to myself from now on, I wouldn't want to pressure anyone.

"Hey George! What do you think of Epig?" "Hey Sam! What do you think of Epig?" "Hey Eunice! What do you think of Epig?"

Those aren't your thoughts. Are they?

Let's talk about "my thoughts". Are my thoughts worthy of being acknowledged or discussed in a Mafia game? Should I just sigh and shuffle off when someone says "no cases on Epig really stuck out in my mind"?

Long Con wrote:I don't know what this "full participant" talk is, so if anyone beside Epig wants to fill me in on what he means, I'm all ears.

And I'm all eyes.

The problem is, you're actually all talk. It's really fascinating to me that you are accusing me of having info on you (but of course it's wrong info, one of three possible cases of wrong info in this game), when the truth is I don't. Or rather, I didn't until you gave it to me with that accusation. We can ask Llama after the game, I received no info on you, I just figured you out through your own actions. I understand that is something that maybe you thought was impossible, but it's true. If you want to keep believing that I have info on you, that's fine. Just know that this misconception will not be a permanent one.

I voted for Van Buren again because that's where I started, and I don't want to leave. The fact that so many other people are suddenly voting it makes me uneasy though.

Re: the last lynch, it's certainly possible that there was a save, so I'm not sure why some players want to rule it out so quickly. You can say it would be too obvious, but that dives straight into WIFOM territory.

Rabbit's theory is intriguing as well, but at the moment I'm more inclined to think Vomp was a civ scapegoat.

Back to Archer Ave for me.

LC, I just noticed that one of your issues with Epi is he looks as if he had a curse on him to answer questions with a "yes" which you think is possible he made up. I think I can prove he didn't make it up. I chose a rare book as an item and the book had the power to make people say "yes" to questions asked of them. I really didn't see how that was useful because I thought people would see through it but anyway it got stolen from me. I believe it was used on Epi.

voted randomly

juliets wrote:LC, I just noticed that one of your issues with Epi is he looks as if he had a curse on him to answer questions with a "yes" which you think is possible he made up. I think I can prove he didn't make it up. I chose a rare book as an item and the book had the power to make people say "yes" to questions asked of them. I really didn't see how that was useful because I thought people would see through it but anyway it got stolen from me. I believe it was used on Epi.

That is very interesting juliets. Your book was stolen from you before Day 2?

Turnip Head wrote:

juliets wrote:LC, I just noticed that one of your issues with Epi is he looks as if he had a curse on him to answer questions with a "yes" which you think is possible he made up. I think I can prove he didn't make it up. I chose a rare book as an item and the book had the power to make people say "yes" to questions asked of them. I really didn't see how that was useful because I thought people would see through it but anyway it got stolen from me. I believe it was used on Epi.

That is very interesting juliets. Your book was stolen from you before Day 2?

Yes it was stolen night 1.

juliets wrote:LC, I just noticed that one of your issues with Epi is he looks as if he had a curse on him to answer questions with a "yes" which you think is possible he made up. I think I can prove he didn't make it up. I chose a rare book as an item and the book had the power to make people say "yes" to questions asked of them. I really didn't see how that was useful because I thought people would see through it but anyway it got stolen from me. I believe it was used on Epi.

Metalmarsh already claimed that his Bottle item is what was used on Epig.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Oh, and my item. I received a bottle that contains a liquid. If I use it on a player at night, that player is forced to respond to questions directed at them in the affirmative the following day. I used it on Epignosis.

Interesting that two Items would have the same effect on a player. I can see the appeal of it, to confuse people.

I was thinking he made up the No Vowels curse on himself to try and deflect suspicion away. I wonder, since he used AT LEAST five vowels, what kind of punishment he supposedly has for disobeying the curse?

What if Epi was cursed with something like "You can only use five vowels for the next 48 hours"? That would somehow be even worse.

juliets wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

juliets wrote:LC, I just noticed that one of your issues with Epi is he looks as if he had a curse on him to answer questions with a "yes" which you think is possible he made up. I think I can prove he didn't make it up. I chose a rare book as an item and the book had the power to make people say "yes" to questions asked of them. I really didn't see how that was useful because I thought people would see through it but anyway it got stolen from me. I believe it was used on Epi.

That is very interesting juliets. Your book was stolen from you before Day 2?

Yes it was stolen night 1.

But Epig was affected by the Affirmative Curse on Day 2, so that would mean that YOU would have had to use it on him Night 1, no? Unless Items can be used anytime, in my experience it's a Night Action to "use" an active item.

Turnip Head wrote:What if Epi was cursed with something like "You can only use five vowels for the next 48 hours"? That would somehow be even worse.

Yup, that was probably it.

You're right LC, I didn't think of it that way. I double checked my spreadsheet and it was stolen night one. I double checked the pm on the item and it was definitely that the receiver has to say yes to every action. But maybe this is relevant - when I asked about it I was told it didn't do anything right now (back then). I don't understand really what that meant, not that I wanted to use it then. Maybe it had to be stolen to activate? Anyway, the fact that it left me night one appears to be a stumbling block to it having been used on Epi. Which I guess means its still out there to be used by someone else.

EBWOP: "action" should have been "question"

Voting Archer just because

juliets wrote:You're right LC, I didn't think of it that way. I double checked my spreadsheet and it was stolen night one. I double checked the pm on the item and it was definitely that the receiver has to say yes to every action. But maybe this is relevant - when I asked about it I was told it didn't do anything right now (back then). I don't understand really what that meant, not that I wanted to use it then. Maybe it had to be stolen to activate? Anyway, the fact that it left me night one appears to be a stumbling block to it having been used on Epi. Which I guess means its still out there to be used by someone else.

Juliets, I don't think you're reading the thread closely enough. I just told you that MEtalmarsh claimed responsibility for Epig's Affirmative Curse on Day Two. Your rare book is not directly relevant to Epig's curse, as far as I can see.

Long Con wrote:

juliets wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

juliets wrote:LC, I just noticed that one of your issues with Epi is he looks as if he had a curse on him to answer questions with a "yes" which you think is possible he made up. I think I can prove he didn't make it up. I chose a rare book as an item and the book had the power to make people say "yes" to questions asked of them. I really didn't see how that was useful because I thought people would see through it but anyway it got stolen from me. I believe it was used on Epi.

That is very interesting juliets. Your book was stolen from you before Day 2?

Yes it was stolen night 1.

But Epig was affected by the Affirmative Curse on Day 2, so that would mean that YOU would have had to use it on him Night 1, no? Unless Items can be used anytime, in my experience it's a Night Action to "use" an active item.

My point of saying this was that it's weird that you would think it was your book that affected Epig on Day Two, when it was in your possession until the end of Night One. We know that it wasn't you or your book, I'm just confused by how YOU would think that.

Long Con wrote:

juliets wrote:You're right LC, I didn't think of it that way. I double checked my spreadsheet and it was stolen night one. I double checked the pm on the item and it was definitely that the receiver has to say yes to every action. But maybe this is relevant - when I asked about it I was told it didn't do anything right now (back then). I don't understand really what that meant, not that I wanted to use it then. Maybe it had to be stolen to activate? Anyway, the fact that it left me night one appears to be a stumbling block to it having been used on Epi. Which I guess means its still out there to be used by someone else.

Juliets, I don't think you're reading the thread closely enough. I just told you that MEtalmarsh claimed responsibility for Epig's Affirmative Curse on Day Two. Your rare book is not directly relevant to Epig's curse, as far as I can see.

I read that he said that and I read that you repeated it. I didn't think he was telling the truth when he said it but since he was good I guess he was. I'm not sure why you are saying I didn't. This post was to close out our discussion on the rare book.

juliets wrote:

Long Con wrote:

juliets wrote:You're right LC, I didn't think of it that way. I double checked my spreadsheet and it was stolen night one. I double checked the pm on the item and it was definitely that the receiver has to say yes to every action. But maybe this is relevant - when I asked about it I was told it didn't do anything right now (back then). I don't understand really what that meant, not that I wanted to use it then. Maybe it had to be stolen to activate? Anyway, the fact that it left me night one appears to be a stumbling block to it having been used on Epi. Which I guess means its still out there to be used by someone else.

Juliets, I don't think you're reading the thread closely enough. I just told you that MEtalmarsh claimed responsibility for Epig's Affirmative Curse on Day Two. Your rare book is not directly relevant to Epig's curse, as far as I can see.

I read that he said that and I read that you repeated it. I didn't think he was telling the truth when he said it but since he was good I guess he was. I'm not sure why you are saying I didn't. This post was to close out our discussion on the rare book.

Ok, as long as we're on the same page here. When you said "the fact that it left me night one appears to be a stumbling block to it having been used on Epi" I thought it displayed a lack of understanding of the Metalmarsh-bottle thing.

Long Con wrote:

juliets wrote:

Long Con wrote:

juliets wrote:You're right LC, I didn't think of it that way. I double checked my spreadsheet and it was stolen night one. I double checked the pm on the item and it was definitely that the receiver has to say yes to every action. But maybe this is relevant - when I asked about it I was told it didn't do anything right now (back then). I don't understand really what that meant, not that I wanted to use it then. Maybe it had to be stolen to activate? Anyway, the fact that it left me night one appears to be a stumbling block to it having been used on Epi. Which I guess means its still out there to be used by someone else.

Juliets, I don't think you're reading the thread closely enough. I just told you that MEtalmarsh claimed responsibility for Epig's Affirmative Curse on Day Two. Your rare book is not directly relevant to Epig's curse, as far as I can see.

I read that he said that and I read that you repeated it. I didn't think he was telling the truth when he said it but since he was good I guess he was. I'm not sure why you are saying I didn't. This post was to close out our discussion on the rare book.

Ok, as long as we're on the same page here. When you said "the fact that it left me night one appears to be a stumbling block to it having been used on Epi" I thought it displayed a lack of understanding of the Metalmarsh-bottle thing.

Oh I see what you mean. No we're on the same page. Since MM was good, him saying that was likely the truth.

I don't like seeing both sides of this LC/Epig debate. :/

juliets wrote:I didn't think [Metalmarsh] was telling the truth when he said [he used the Bottle on Epig and caused the Affirmative Curse] but since he was good I guess he was. I'm not sure why you are saying I didn't. This post was to close out our discussion on the rare book.

Why didn't you think Metalmarsh was telling the truth? He explained Epig's weird responses and claimed responsibility for it with his Item, the Bottle. I thought it was pretty cut-and-dry.

Dom wrote:I don't like seeing both sides of this LC/Epig debate. :/

Open-mindedness can be a bitch.

*Waits for Dom to accuse LC of Character Assassination*

Long Con, maybe this is a stupid question but if you knew the bottle caused Epi's Yes responses why did you think in that recent post that Epi had just made that up? Or did I misread your post. Let me see if I can find the part I'm talking about -

Long Con wrote: And look at you, trying to beg sympathy from everyone because you "haven't been able to speak normally since Day 1". So you couldn't manage to express anything you needed to express during Day Two, when it was known to everyone that you had the jokey influence of having to answer questions with a "yes"? Are you joking? Why do you NEED to make plays like this, it's just not honest. You supposedly couldn't post vowels between Night 2 and Night 3. Has there been ANY other curses this game? Are we going to see more like that? I'll be very interested to see.

S~V~S wrote:*Waits for Dom to accuse LC of Character Assassination*

Dom, the one thing I keep coming back to about SVS, it will be interesting to get your thoughts on this...

If she was bad, why come out and be the first one to have the theory that she was supposed to die, she still had the will, lol the baddies failed to kill her and therefore the story in the newspaper must be a fake? After all, that is how most of the heat on zombs started?

Why not just come out and go... yeah, the will was stolen...

Seems like a very odd baddie plot to put a story in the newspaper that appears to clear Zombs, then immediately start going after her in the thread. Not to mention, no-one else has claimed any reason for why there might not have been a NK.