The Syndicate

Enrique.

Daddy's back.

Okay, I'm definitely open to viewing that as a save. I wasn't happy with what happened in those final few minutes, it was so out of the blue.

Epig, have you been following the game? Still suspicious of Enrique?

zeek wrote:Okay, I'm definitely open to viewing that as a save. I wasn't happy with what happened in those final few minutes, it was so out of the blue.

Epig, have you been following the game? Still suspicious of Enrique?

Yes and yes.

You gonna comment on anything else?

zeek wrote:You gonna comment on anything else?

Yes.

I'd like to hear your thoughts...

wb Epi. bye canuck

Epig, where were you?

Long Con wrote:Epig, where were you?

In the pet cemetery.

S~V~S wrote:

zeek wrote:

S~V~S wrote:That was a horrible result, and the fact that it was so obvious made it even more horrible

What was obvious? That Snow Dog was civ? I have to disagree, it wasn't.

At the end of the lynch, that there was a save going on. Those three votes, glomming onto the suspicion of someone most people view as civvie. Especially MM with his "gotta save MP" thing , I did not but that at all
.

I know I said the Epi lynchlooked like a save, but this one was so overt. I am willing to drop my suspicions to keep the vote tight and vote for Made or one of the last Snowy voters.

Damned if I do....

Ah welcome back Epi! I'm sure you'll be just as devious this time as any. And I will keep my eye on you we now have no way of knowing if you came back good or bad. I could not stay up late enough to pay attention to what was happening last night. Guess I missed out on a lot sheesh! We still didn't catch a baddie. I'm not sure what to vote for in this next poll.... I'm thinking Chris but maybe I'll go with Chris. Does the Chris we choose affect anything at all or is this just for funzies?

MovingPictures07 wrote:

zeek wrote:If we aim for a tie between a civ and a baddie, the civ will be lynched. No tie. I think its necessary to have a clear choice of 2 votes so its free from manipulation in that sense at least.

Agreed. We all need to discuss candidates well in advance and have a game plan. We can't be lynching like this anymore.

It's possible we still leave ourselves open to manipulation and a more overwhelming civvie lynch, but we cannot let the vote spread be prevalent in the slightest.

It seems, at least I would predict right now but I really have no idea, that the major candidates for D4 would be Made, Metalmarsh, Hedge, and Elo.

Not sure if it SHOULD be those, or if it will be, but really what we need to do is come up with say, four or five people to focus on after we assess the best arguments, and then vote accordingly, making sure that the person in the lead gets at least 2 more votes than the person in second, even if that person isn't necessarily OUR number one suspect. Thoughts?

I know people have chimed in and said MP has the people wrong in this post (should include him and Daisy) but I don't want to lose his thought that we assess the best arguments and decide who the top 4-5 people are. My problem at this point in time - and I suspect some others may feel this way - is I have lost track of what the arguments are for people like Made and MM becasue there are so many people posting about so many other people. Names are mentioned a lot but for seemingly small things that I suspect roll up into something bigger. But I don't have a good way to collect all that information other than go back through the thread and capture all the allegations (god forbid that I have to do that). What I would love to see is an old fashioned case on different candidates for the lynch.

If cases that contain all the evidence have been presented and I don't even realize it if someone would just say 'hey jules, Dom presented an overall case on Made so just look at his posts' that would be fine. From this point forward I will take notes on allegations so I don't have this happen again.

Again, if I thought I was the only one in this boat I wouldn't bring the point back up but I'm afraid we've got more than a few that are as confused as I am or so behind they feel they will not catch up, so I think having cases to assess would be very helpful.

Welcome back Epi, goodbye Canuck, hope everything works out for you. RIP Snowy -

Oh and I'm going with Chris - maybe 1st Chris.

Julietsintheskywithcoffee
8
MovingPictures07 (8), Epignosis (9), Bullzeye (12), Enrique (13), Elohcin (14), sabie12 (15), zeek (18), Spacedaisy (22)
36%

Epignosis
6
Long Con (7), Made (9), Dana (13), Enrique (15), Spacedaisy (18), Chris (19)
27%

Snow Dog
6
zeek (16), Enrique (22), Gotrees (24), MovingPictures07 (27), Dana (28), Metalmarsh89 (29)
21%

He voted WITH me Day 4, and then voted AGAINST me Day 2. He voted WITH MM89 on Day 3 and is planning to vote AGAINST him Day 4.

Epi thanks for the explanation of what you see in Enrique but how do you know how he is going to vote on Day 4 since this is only night 3? Also, I'm trying to work through how his voting with you then against you means he's bad? Unless he voted against you because of your vote (i'll have to check that).

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Enrique, you popped in right at 8:30 (my time) and started throwing eyeballs around immediately. It seems like you're looking for something to set up for tomorrow.

Enrique wrote:I'm definitely looking at you tomorrow, MM. I've been following the thread for a while, talking when I have something to say, and guess what? I had something to say about you.

All this talk of tie-break lynches is ridiculous. If a civ is lynched in a civ+bad tie, it doesn't reveal the other to be a baddie, because how do you know it was civ+bad and not civ+civ? You don't.

The whole discussion smacks of mafioso trying to be helpful.

I'm looking at MP, Zeek and Enrique. They may well be civs, but if they're leading last-minute charges against civs like Snow Dog, who wasn't even around to defend him/herself, they're not exactly helping the civvie cause.

And Dom, the word "exactly" is an adverb used to confirm accuracy.

I see Epi - thats what I mean about things slipping through that seem small that add up to something bigger. I'll be interested to see what Enrique has to say about your observation.

S~V~S, it may not be THAT easy. Yes, I agree with you it looks terrible upon reflection, but not every person that voted Snowy had evil intentions; I know I did not. And I'm willing to bet at least one other did not. But that leaves two or three people that I could definitely see as bad and trying to save Made.

I know people said we shouldn't plan blah blah blah and even I agreed with that, BUT really, especially with the +1 and trying to figure out what's going on here, I say we still concentrate the BULK of votes on a few suspects, let's say no more than 3 or 4. I think everyone can find one of those people that they are willing to cast their vote for. I also know it leaves it open to baddie manipulation to keep people from the teams off of it, BUT I just cannot see how letting everyone police themselves this time around will lead to something good, because I obviously helped contribute to a civvie lynch once again even when trying my hardest, and I had good intentions -- not even to mention those that do not.

I know LC volunteered to be a civvie for it, but I don't think he should be included.

Even though I feel strongly about my actions this game and how they've been misinterpreted, I am willing to be one of those few players. I think it's only logical that Made, Enrique, Metalmarsh, Daisy, and maybe Hedgeowl make up possibilities for the remainder, even if I don't agree with all of them being there, but that would make 6 players. Is there any other player that anyone thinks should be prioritized over any of these 6 or thoughts on narrowing the pool down to 3 or 4?

Thoughts? Or is this still a bad idea?

And we don't have to feel confined to vote for these players ONLY, but I still think around 75% or more of the votes should be given to just 3 or 4 players, and the players in charge of voting last MUST ensure that the person ahead is indeed ahead significantly enough to not let manipulation seek through, yes?

This is all in the name of potentially attempting to "crack open" one of the baddie teams. We will find out quickly some significant information if I were to be lynched (and flip civ, mind you) or if Made or Enrique or Metalmarsh were to be lynched and flip bad or civ, for example.

It makes the most sense to try to 'objectively' (I know that's impossible, but hear me out) determine which players at this point would provide the most information and do have enough buzz around them as being bad for it to be a benefit to put them in that grouping.

Yes, still open to manipulation, but we need results, and baddies can't control necessarily which people have the most buzz around them right now.

Oh and welcome to the land of the living, Epi 2.0. Glad to have you back (assuming you're still civ). I missed your banter.

MovingPictures07 wrote:S~V~S, it may not be THAT easy. Yes, I agree with you it looks terrible upon reflection, but not every person that voted Snowy had evil intentions; I know I did not. And I'm willing to bet at least one other did not. But that leaves two or three people that I could definitely see as bad and trying to save Made.

I know people said we shouldn't plan blah blah blah and even I agreed with that, BUT really, especially with the +1 and trying to figure out what's going on here, I say we still concentrate the BULK of votes on a few suspects, let's say no more than 3 or 4. I think everyone can find one of those people that they are willing to cast their vote for. I also know it leaves it open to baddie manipulation to keep people from the teams off of it, BUT I just cannot see how letting everyone police themselves this time around will lead to something good, because I obviously helped contribute to a civvie lynch once again even when trying my hardest, and I had good intentions -- not even to mention those that do not.

I know LC volunteered to be a civvie for it, but I don't think he should be included.

Even though I feel strongly about my actions this game and how they've been misinterpreted, I am willing to be one of those few players. I think it's only logical that Made, Enrique, Metalmarsh, Daisy, and maybe Hedgeowl make up possibilities for the remainder, even if I don't agree with all of them being there, but that would make 6 players. Is there any other player that anyone thinks should be prioritized over any of these 6 or thoughts on narrowing the pool down to 3 or 4?

Thoughts? Or is this still a bad idea?

And we don't have to feel confined to vote for these players ONLY, but I still think around 75% or more of the votes should be given to just 3 or 4 players, and the players in charge of voting last MUST ensure that the person ahead is indeed ahead significantly enough to not let manipulation seek through, yes?

Or everyone could just vote for Enrique.

Forget this talk of ties, it will most likely end in the death of another civ.

keys56000000000 wrote:I'm looking at MP, Zeek and Enrique. They may well be civs, but if they're leading last-minute charges against civs like Snow Dog, who wasn't even around to defend him/herself, they're not exactly helping the civvie cause.

That is simply not true. I voted Snow Dog when he was here and gave my reasons, which he proceeded to ignore. Everybody else voted after he'd gone and couldn't defend himself. You can say I'm not helping but I'm trying my best. Not exactly easy to read a bunch of people I don't know.

I wish that every time someone said the word lynchtrain/bandwagon peoplewould immediately back track and completely switch suspicions to someone who isn't even around to have the same chance to respond as say Hedge.

Oh wait that is what happened no need for wishing.

That lynch was bs whoever voted Snow is getting re-read by me.

zeek, I'm not talking about ties. I specifically do NOT want a tie. I am only proposing we keep most of the votes solidified to only a few players. In fact, I even stated I want the person to win the vote to win it by at least a couple of votes to prevent a tie since it can't be assured.

Epig 2.0, why Enrique over Made or MM? What do you think of those two?

Also, re-reading keys's post in your response to him, zeek, it really bugs me. What are you doing, keys, to even help us? All you've done is focus on me (and to a slightly lesser extent, Dana) this entire time and you've hardly talked about anyone other than me or Dana. It's easy for YOU to sit back and point the finger at those of us who actually were trying to actively find someone. Now I'm not sure that applies to everyone who voted Snowy, but your finger pointing just rubbed me the wrong way. I don't think enough people are considering that keys and Chris who just sit back and say MP IS BAD could be just laughing it up in their chatrooms as they avoid anyone seriously voting for them, ESPECIALLY if Made was not being saved and he is also a civvie. I'm not even sure that's true, but it's a possibility that bothers me.

You know, here's the thing. Yes, the Snow Dog voters seem reallly suspicious, and I even agree it's probable that a couple of them could be bad.

But I know my intentions and Snow Dog did himself NO favors but switching his vote multiple times with no reason for doing so and not using a single thought of his own to cast any of his votes, whether temporary or permanent.

I still feel terrible about it, but I was just trying my best.

I'm just worried what if Made was not being saved and we're setting ourselves up for a few lynches of civvies again because all the baddies are sitting back pointing fingers, not grabbing any attention. But there's only one way to know, I guess, so I may be willing to just concede at least for tomorrow and vote for Made or Enrique, even though I'm not sure either of them would make my top suspicions.

Was talking in general about the talk about ties, MP, not to you.

I'm happy to be reread, so you can all see Key has completely taken my vote out of context.

We just have to be careful about leading ourselves up for a few lynches in a row using logical fallacies. Snow Dog had 6 votes and we now know he was a civ.

But what if Made is also a civ? He had 5 voters as well.

What if the real baddies attracted hardly any votes, yet again? Doesn't that throw all of this off?

Why is everyone just falling in line with only Snow Dog voters?

Again, that said, I'm willing to reserve final judgment until we have a better idea of Enrique, Made, even MM, or whoever else's alignment, but we can't afford any more mistakes.

zeek wrote:Forget this talk of ties, it will most likely end in the death of another civ.

keys56000000000 wrote:I'm looking at MP, Zeek and Enrique. They may well be civs, but if they're leading last-minute charges against civs like Snow Dog, who wasn't even around to defend him/herself, they're not exactly helping the civvie cause.

That is simply not true. I voted Snow Dog when he was here and gave my reasons, which he proceeded to ignore. Everybody else voted after he'd gone and couldn't defend himself. You can say I'm not helping but I'm trying my best. Not exactly easy to read a bunch of people I don't know.

Zeek you did not give him the same chance as say hedge or daisy or MP ffs everyone had more time to respond and defend than he did. plus he had the 2 top posters all up in his grill.

zeek wrote:Was talking in general about the talk about ties, MP, not to you.

I'm happy to be reread, so you can all see Key has completely taken my vote out of context.

Oh, okay, I just assumed you were talking about me since you didn't make any different specific comment to my proposal, but I suppose I could assume you think the same as you did last night.

Yeah, you won't be getting my vote.

I'm just bothered; I agree Snow Dog voters could be examined more carefully, but it's so easy to fixate on them and not be open to any other considerations. I had 3 votes and I had to be careful to vote so that I didn't leave myself open to be lynched. Snow Dog's actions seemed suspicious, even if he has a rep for generally being noncommittal.

A genius baddie honestly would have stayed the fuck away from placing their vote on any of the main vote getters because now they're completely avoiding anyone examining them.

Roxy wrote:

zeek wrote:Forget this talk of ties, it will most likely end in the death of another civ.

keys56000000000 wrote:I'm looking at MP, Zeek and Enrique. They may well be civs, but if they're leading last-minute charges against civs like Snow Dog, who wasn't even around to defend him/herself, they're not exactly helping the civvie cause.

That is simply not true. I voted Snow Dog when he was here and gave my reasons, which he proceeded to ignore. Everybody else voted after he'd gone and couldn't defend himself. You can say I'm not helping but I'm trying my best. Not exactly easy to read a bunch of people I don't know.

Zeek you did not give him the same chance as say hedge or daisy or MP ffs everyone had more time to respond and defend than he did. plus he had the 2 top posters all up in his grill.

Roxy, that's just not true, he's had 3 full day/night cycles to contribute to this game. Time and time again he refused to make a vote of anything he considered to be his own thoughts and he was blatant in expressing this.

It sucks he didn't have time to properly defend against votes specifically, yes, but what else can I say? I only had control over my own vote.

All we're doing now is pointing fingers and playing the blame game and that's not going to do us any good. If you re-read Snow Dog voters and think one of them has had consistent suspicious behavior, by all means, vote for them tomorrow.

But keep your mind open here.

It would clearly have behooved a baddie to stay away from that trainwreck. Doesn't mean they did, but we haven't caught a single baddie yet and it's possible none of them have been NKed, so that leaves plenty of people who DIDN'T vote Snow Dog to also be bad.

MP, what have you done to help the civvie cause?

You spam the game thread with multiple posts, drowning the rest of us. You throw suspicion at practically everyone in the game. How many of the civs lynched so far did you vote for and/or make cases on? 2? or all 3? Your record this game is awful. You've essentially hijacked the game with your volume of posting. I'm tired of reading post after post of wild speculation. You throw shit and see what sticks. You've done us no favours whatsoever.

I guess we just don't know though, so whatever, I'm just really afraid of the possibility that Made is also not bad and we're headed up the wrong tree AGAIN.

But if any of the Snow Dog voters is bad, I'm willing to bet there's a baddie in Enrique, Made, or Metalmarsh. So... I guess we can't know for sure until we lynch one of them.

MP - if keys was a baddie, he would be much more invested. I've said it before I am fairly confident he is a civvie. Chris, despite reassurances from others this is his civvie game, I am unsure of, but am feeling a little better about his posting lately.
How come it's bad for them to focus on certain individuals they think are bad? Roxy has been on hedgie for days, Epi is again pushing Enrique hard. I just don't see how being confident someone is bad automatically makes them bad. And it really feels like you feel that way because it's you they feel confident on.

I honestly only glanced over some of the Made/Dom stuff because it was getting a bit nasty, but I was reading Dom as a civvie and not feeling great about Made, but I'd like to do a better reread of that.

I don't think all the Snow Dog voters were bad, but for the most part that suspicion did seem to pop up out of nowhere suddenly which is why it seems like a save. I'd like to know about Made first before I decide who is his teammate and saving him. Same with daisy

keys56000000000 wrote:MP, what have you done to help the civvie cause?

You spam the game thread with multiple posts, drowning the rest of us. You throw suspicion at practically everyone in the game. How many of the civs lynched so far did you vote for and/or make cases on? 2? or all 3? Your record this game is awful. You've essentially hijacked the game with your volume of posting. I'm tired of reading post after post of wild speculation. You throw shit and see what sticks. You've done us no favours whatsoever.

That's your opinion that I "spam" it, thank you. I've played games on other sites, RYM being an example, where it was considered a norm for players to have around 200-300 posts on AVERAGE during D3. It's all relative.

If you think my posts are spam and that I've "hijacked" the game, feel free, but I have not. I have not thrown shit to see what sticks; my thought process has been WAY more transparent than yours or anyone else's. I've only been trying to help at every possible outlet. At least I've been contributing and trying to consider all possibilities and actively participate in every discussion and attempt to discern who is actually bad.

You just sit back and say oh MP IS BAD MP IS BAD DANA IS BAD I CAN GUARANTEE IT while pointing fingers at everyone else for not catching baddies. I'm willing to bet you're a baddie yourself, frankly.

My record may be awful, but at least I'm fucking trying.

Roxy wrote:

zeek wrote:Forget this talk of ties, it will most likely end in the death of another civ.

keys56000000000 wrote:I'm looking at MP, Zeek and Enrique. They may well be civs, but if they're leading last-minute charges against civs like Snow Dog, who wasn't even around to defend him/herself, they're not exactly helping the civvie cause.

That is simply not true. I voted Snow Dog when he was here and gave my reasons, which he proceeded to ignore. Everybody else voted after he'd gone and couldn't defend himself. You can say I'm not helping but I'm trying my best. Not exactly easy to read a bunch of people I don't know.

Zeek you did not give him the same chance as say hedge or daisy or MP ffs everyone had more time to respond and defend than he did. plus he had the 2 top posters all up in his grill.

This is also not true. I was the first voter for Snow Dog and nobody else had even questioned him. Is it my fault I logged out ten minutes after my vote and in that time didn't reply to my points? Is it my fault he still didn't respond to my points when he came back to the thread to change his vote? He chose not to take the time to respond to me. The others voted for him without giving him any chance to defend himself, not me.

I voted Snow Dog hours before everybody else.

linki fuck guys

Thats right MP you gave him NO time to respond to the votes coming in.
No chance to defend.
You and zeek all over the place.
Snows first game back.
You know him better than me which is why I was dismayed when you did not give him the same chance as Daisy.

You all set up w/e I am going after baddies. Hedge is my target. Idt anything will change my mind about her.

fingersplints wrote:MP - if keys was a baddie, he would be much more invested. I've said it before I am fairly confident he is a civvie. Chris, despite reassurances from others this is his civvie game, I am unsure of, but am feeling a little better about his posting lately.
How come it's bad for them to focus on certain individuals they think are bad? Roxy has been on hedgie for days, Epi is again pushing Enrique hard. I just don't see how being confident someone is bad automatically makes them bad. And it really feels like you feel that way because it's you they feel confident on.

I honestly only glanced over some of the Made/Dom stuff because it was getting a bit nasty, but I was reading Dom as a civvie and not feeling great about Made, but I'd like to do a better reread of that.

I don't think all the Snow Dog voters were bad, but for the most part that suspicion did seem to pop up out of nowhere suddenly which is why it seems like a save. I'd like to know about Made first before I decide who is his teammate and saving him. Same with daisy

I appreciate your thoughts, but I'm just trying to consider everything, and I find it odd no one is talking about keys. It's so easy to sit back and play the blame game when you've been sticking on only one suspect and hardly discussing absolutely anything else.

I'm not saying sticking on only one suspect makes you bad, but your comparisons are off. Epig voiced TONS of other opinions before he died; he said I was not bad, for example. Keys has done NO such thing. He only continues to harp over and over again about me. He finally threw zeek and Enrique in the mix just recently.

And sure, I know I'm a civ, so

Nonetheless, I'll take your read on him into consideration, since you know him way better than I do.

Fair enough. I just want to avoid groupthink, everyone saying SNOW DOG VOTERS WERE SO SUSPICIOUS OMG and then we go and lynch one, they flip civ, and we're right back where we were when we started. That's all.

I'm not throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks, I'm just trying to make sure we consider everyone and discuss many possibilities, because for all I know practically anyone in this game could be a baddie. And I have a hard time believing someone to be genuine when he or she may be trying to color my intentions when they have been transparent.

Roxy wrote:Thats right MP you gave him NO time to respond to the votes coming in.
No chance to defend.
You and zeek all over the place.
Snows first game back.
You know him better than me which is why I was dismayed when you did not give him the same chance as Daisy.

You all set up w/e I am going after baddies. Hedge is my target. Idt anything will change my mind about her.

Daisy is not bad though.

But sure, my vote sucked ass, I'm willing to admit. I feel terrible about it. But it doesn't make me bad.

I'm more than willing to consider a vote for MM, Enri, or Made, I just haven't made up my mind yet. I just don't want us to get collective tunnel vision, Rox, I'm not trying to attack you or anyone else. I understand why the votes look bad. Surely I do. I'm just saying that doesn't mean all of us or maybe even ANY of us are bad.

But what do I know?

Keys, sorry if you feel I'm attacking you, I'm not. I'm just afraid that baddies could be sitting back and avoiding accountability for all of this, and you were the first person that I feel would fit that bill. I'm willing to consider you're a civvie and just firmly believe in your evaluations. I just don't know.

Anyway, I'm out of here for now, I have a lot of homework to do.

I'll be back later cause I'm slightly annoyed that I'm getting grouped in with this dodgy-as-fuck (and I agree it is) lynch.

I gave Snow Dog a chance to respond and he didn't. Of all his voters I am the only one who did that.

Zeek kk I will give you that much but still am disappointed that you did not give 48 hours like most other lynch candidtes had.

MP, I'm tired of you leading the conversation. Yes, you're "helping", or you're pretending to help. That's the game. Whatever it is you're doing, it's not helping us, because we keep dying, and mostly, ironically, at your hands. You cannot say that I haven't been participating just because my main suspect is yourself. It is obviously inaccurate to characterise my suspicion of you as "MP IS BAD MP IS BAD". You sound like a fucking child. Quieten down some and let the rest of us play the game. Might be we'll catch a baddie without your incessant "helping".

linki: Jesus MP, can you please stop with the multiple consecutive posts so I can get a word in.

MovingPictures07 wrote:I don't think enough people are considering that keys and Chris who just sit back and say MP IS BAD could be just laughing it up in their chatrooms as they avoid anyone seriously voting for them, ESPECIALLY if Made was not being saved and he is also a civvie. I'm not even sure that's true, but it's a possibility that bothers me.

Another "no u" MP?

So what you're saying is, since I think you could be bad, I must be a baddie, sitting in my chatroom laughing it up?

Have I got that right?

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Roxy wrote:Thats right MP you gave him NO time to respond to the votes coming in.
No chance to defend.
You and zeek all over the place.
Snows first game back.
You know him better than me which is why I was dismayed when you did not give him the same chance as Daisy.

You all set up w/e I am going after baddies. Hedge is my target. Idt anything will change my mind about her.

Daisy is not bad though.

Could you have come to this conclusion by giving that suspicion a chance to be vetted?
If you are honest with yourself the answer has to be yes.

All I am asking is that you don't go off half cocked near a lynch end and vote like this again. Ofc unless someones says I am bad vote for me.

keys56000000000 wrote:MP, I'm tired of you leading the conversation. Yes, you're "helping", or you're pretending to help. That's the game. Whatever it is you're doing, it's not helping us, because we keep dying, and mostly, ironically, at your hands. You cannot say that I haven't been participating just because my main suspect is yourself. It is obviously inaccurate to characterise my suspicion of you as "MP IS BAD MP IS BAD". You sound like a fucking child. Quieten down some and let the rest of us play the game. Might be we'll catch a baddie without your incessant "helping".

linki: Jesus MP, can you please stop with the multiple consecutive posts so I can get a word in.

This post is just incredibly insulting to me, and here I was just coming back into the thread SPECIFICALLY to apologize to you if I came across personally at all that I did not intend so.

And it's not inaccurate, you've hardly said anything about anyone else.

But I'm willing to let it go for now.

Chris wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:I don't think enough people are considering that keys and Chris who just sit back and say MP IS BAD could be just laughing it up in their chatrooms as they avoid anyone seriously voting for them, ESPECIALLY if Made was not being saved and he is also a civvie. I'm not even sure that's true, but it's a possibility that bothers me.

Another "no u" MP?

So what you're saying is, since I think you could be bad, I must be a baddie, sitting in my chatroom laughing it up?

Have I got that right?

I did NOT say that. I said it's a possibility I'm considering. I do not necessarily believe it to be true.

Roxy wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Roxy wrote:Thats right MP you gave him NO time to respond to the votes coming in.
No chance to defend.
You and zeek all over the place.
Snows first game back.
You know him better than me which is why I was dismayed when you did not give him the same chance as Daisy.

You all set up w/e I am going after baddies. Hedge is my target. Idt anything will change my mind about her.

Daisy is not bad though.

Could you have come to this conclusion by giving that suspicion a chance to be vetted?
If you are honest with yourself the answer has to be yes.

All I am asking is that you don't go off half cocked near a lynch end and vote like this again. Ofc unless someones says I am bad vote for me.

I'm confused by your question, sorry, can you reword it?

Anyway, I'm gone now, I have shit to do anyway.

Chris wrote:HOSTS: Does anyone have any info on the current poll?

I do. Does that help?

bea wrote:

Chris wrote:HOSTS: Does anyone have any info on the current poll?

I do. Does that help?

HOSTS: Do any players of this game have any information about the current poll?


Christ, I feel like I'm wording a genie wish in D&D...