The Syndicate

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:30 pm**

DharmaHelper wrote:Shame about BwT

Ditto. :/

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:37 pm**

Elohcin wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Shame about BwT
Ditto. :/

Yeah, but no night kill is good news indeed. Don't worry BWT, my friend, we will avenge you!

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:41 pm**

I am convinced that what we saw yesterday was a baddie rescue squad on SVS. She took two early votes, and then everyone piled on Dom with very little explanation. If I am right (and I think I am) this was a huge blunder on their part. It would have been better to throw SVS under the bus than make such a transparent attempt at saving her. I am holding onto my vote for now, but it will almost certainly go to SVS again.

I urge the rest of you to do the same.

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:59 pm**

FZ. wrote:
Dom wrote:
And I'm really really sorry

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 8:19 pm**

thellama73 wrote:
Elohcin wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Shame about BwT
Ditto. :/
Yeah, but no night kill is good news indeed. Don't worry BWT, my friend, we will avenge you!

Well, I should hope there wasn't. Not if I'm reading the roles correctly anyway.

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 8:23 pm**

thellama73 wrote:I am convinced that what we saw yesterday was a baddie rescue squad on SVS. She took two early votes, and then everyone piled on Dom with very little explanation. If I am right (and I think I am) this was a huge blunder on their part. It would have been better to throw SVS under the bus than make such a transparent attempt at saving her. I am holding onto my vote for now, but it will almost certainly go to SVS again.

I urge the rest of you to do the same.

What say you about Kate and FZ then? If it was a baddie save as you think, SVS most certainly couldn't have done it alone.

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 8:25 pm**

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Elohcin wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Shame about BwT
Ditto. :/
Yeah, but no night kill is good news indeed. Don't worry BWT, my friend, we will avenge you!
Well, I should hope there wasn't. Not if I'm reading the roles correctly anyway.

lol, that is a good point. I just assumed there would be a kill every night.

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 8:30 pm**

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
thellama73 wrote:I am convinced that what we saw yesterday was a baddie rescue squad on SVS. She took two early votes, and then everyone piled on Dom with very little explanation. If I am right (and I think I am) this was a huge blunder on their part. It would have been better to throw SVS under the bus than make such a transparent attempt at saving her. I am holding onto my vote for now, but it will almost certainly go to SVS again.

I urge the rest of you to do the same.
What say you about Kate and FZ then? If it was a baddie save as you think, SVS most certainly couldn't have done it alone.

I don't really have an opinion on Kate yet. I am keeping an eye on FZ because I think her attack on Turnip Head was weird and without much merit.

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 10:11 pm**

thellama73 wrote:
Elohcin wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Shame about BwT
Ditto. :/
Yeah, but no night kill is good news indeed. Don't worry BWT, my friend, we will avenge you!

The baddies kill on Even nights, so that is expected news, actually.

More people than there are baddies (including me~ had to save myself, i had no opinion on him) piled onto Dom.

And other than disagreeing with you philosophically, which is what all of your arguments come down to, why exactly do you urge everyone to vote for me?

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 10:16 pm**

S~V~S wrote: The baddies kill on Even nights, so that is expected news, actually.
Yep.
More people than there are baddies (including me~ had to save myself, i had no opinion on him) piled onto Dom.
I don't dispute that.
And other than disagreeing with you philosophically, which is what all of your arguments come down to, why exactly do you urge everyone to vote for me?
Because the way the votes fell looked exactly like teammates trying to save you, and because you kept contradicting yourself yesterday, so I think you are bad.

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 10:21 pm**

I never contradicted myself.

When did that happen? I did not know about the "randomized only" thing becasue it was not in this thread. I was pretty much under attack from the second i said i thought Andrew was probably a civ. I don't recall saying anything contradictory; i had at that time, and still do have, no reason whatsoever to lie about my motivations yesterday. I wanted Andrew to win a prize cause its fun to win prizes, but also I believed (for reason now shown to have been wrong) that he was very likely to have been a civ.

No contradiction because there was no lying becasue there was no reason to lie.

Like I said, the thing you are crucifying me for is a thing i would have done bad or civ. And thats the fact.

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 10:26 pm**

S~V~S wrote:I never contradicted myself.

You gave three different reasons for your vote for Andrew on three different occasions. I consider that to be contradictory. It smacks of a baddie playing defense.

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 10:30 pm**

What was the third?

Like i said, they are all the same thing. I wanted the kid to win a prize, i also thought it likely he was a civvie. What else was there.

And do you do things with only one motivation?

Your case smacks of someone who is looking for reasons to bolster a hypothesis rather than someone who has evidence to build a hypothesis from. Like TH yesterday misconstruing what i said becasue it fit his ideas about me.

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 10:35 pm**

I also think the baddie save possibility is a bit far-fetched and unfounded. Dom expressed some suspicion of SVS, but just because he's good doesn't make SVS bad. I think the suspicion of dom was more justifiable, even if he did flip good.

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 10:36 pm**

S~V~S wrote:What was the third?
1. Andrew is smart. 2. Andrew is civvie. 3. I wanted the kid to win a prize.
Like i said, they are all the same thing. I wanted the kid to win a prize, i also thought it likely he was a civvie. What else was there.

And do you do things with only one motivation?
Yes, always.
Your case smacks of someone who is looking for reasons to bolster a hypothesis rather than someone who has evidence to build a hypothesis from. Like TH yesterday misconstruing what i said becasue it fit his ideas about me.
I guess we will just have to wait and see. I think I am right though.

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 10:48 pm**

Yeah, Andrew is smart. What does that have to do with me being bad? What does that even contradict?

Like I said, I think you and TH are trying to fit the facts to your theory. And I know I often have more than one motivation. I prefer to eat fresh, local food. Fresh food is healthier; it's local so it supports the local economy, does NOT support factory farms, and the place where I buy it does not use pesticides or inorganic fertilizer. Plus it's tasty.

Lots of motivations.

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 10:55 pm**

Rest in piggiedom, BWT.

Of the Dom voters, SVS is still the one I'm looking at for today. I think the pigging of BWT might have been an attempt by the baddies to try and "prove" that the push to vote Dom wasn't the baddies' doing. 5 Dom voters, only 3 baddie roles. Obviously at least a couple of the Dom voters were civs. But BWT was an odd choice to turn into a pig unless the baddies were hoping to make some sort of point by choosing him. I'm surprised they didn't choose someone more random.

SVS, where do you think the baddies might have placed their votes yesterday? You said yesterday that you would read back to see what you had missed. Are you suspicious of anyone based on what you read?

I'm not sure what to make of the rest of the Dom voters yet, I feel the situation with them will become clearer based on what happens today. I appreciated FZ changing her mind about me; she had some questions about my gameplay, we talked it out and she changed her opinion. That seemed genuine to me. Flip flopping is not an inherently baddie trait. I'll be keeping an eye on her, but I came out of that conversation feeling better about her.

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 11:17 pm**

You are looking at me becasue you think i am bad for undefined reasons, not becasue i voted for Dom. I had the best reason for voting for Dom, self preservation.

I am not in love with INHs vote for Sorsha. INHs whole schtick has been off IMO; some of the things he has said, in light of his Day Zero vote for Andrew seem off to me. I thought both bea & MMs self votes unneccessary as they both were participatory before the lynch, especially MM, so I am not sure what the point was of either vote. MM has said things I feel pretty Ok about otherwise, but I don't love the self vote.

Of the Dom voters, I thought Elo made some good points for Day One, and some of the votes seemed more in the "I trust SVS" mode when they voted for him, and I cannot fault them on that~ sorry, but I can't

Of them i was the most opportunistic, becasue I wanted to live. So i plowed a vote onto someone whose posts I had not even read solely to save myself. It was Day one, lots of people vote for lame reasons on Day one, and most of them are NOT baddies. I can think of two people that probably are not baddies that voted for lame reasons

Had i been caught up, and not felt a need to give myself an insurance vote (it was 3-2 when i voted, on the phone at my folks house), I would have voted for INH.

I still might today. I will see what he has to say about this before i pull quotes.

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 11:24 pm**

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I also think the baddie save possibility is a bit far-fetched and unfounded. Dom expressed some suspicion of SVS, but just because he's good doesn't make SVS bad. I think the suspicion of dom was more justifiable, even if he did flip good.

To be fair, Dom often says stuff off the top of his head, :whistle: , kinda stream of consciousness, that does not always sound as he means it i think. I doubt i would have voted for him on Day One if i did not feel i had to.

Posted: **Mon Mar 17, 2014 11:41 pm**

S~V~S wrote:You are looking at me becasue you think i am bad for undefined reasons, not becasue i voted for Dom. I had the best reason for voting for Dom, self preservation.

I am not in love with INHs vote for Sorsha. INHs whole schtick has been off IMO; some of the things he has said, in light of his Day Zero vote for Andrew seem off to me. I thought both bea & MMs self votes unneccessary as they both were participatory before the lynch, especially MM, so I am not sure what the point was of either vote. MM has said things I feel pretty Ok about otherwise, but I don't love the self vote.

Of the Dom voters, I thought Elo made some good points for Day One, and some of the votes seemed more in the "I trust SVS" mode when they voted for him, and I cannot fault them on that~ sorry, but I can't Of them i was the most opportunistic, becasue I wanted to live. So i plowed a vote onto someone whose posts I had not even read solely to save myself. It was Day one, lots of people vote for lame reasons on Day one, and most of them are NOT baddies. I can think of two people that probably are not baddies that voted for lame reasons

Had i been caught up, and not felt a need to give myself an insurance vote (it was 3-2 when i voted, on the phone at my folks house), I would have voted for INH.

I still might today. I will see what he has to say about this before i pull quotes.

I'm on a vacation and have limited internet access. I'm around at night and in the morning. I have to vote early. I may not be on the top of my game. I randomized because it was early in Day 1, and I didn't have any other leads. I'm not sure what part of that you aren't in love with. Apparently, you need some poor sap to shift blame onto, and you think that because I'm on vacation, I'm an easy target.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:00 am**

I'm enjoying not being the one engaged in battle with either Llama or SVS for once.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:41 am**

You are looking at me becasue you think i am bad for undefined reasons, not becasue i voted for Dom. I had the best reason for voting for Dom, self preservation.

Yes, my suspicion of you is hard to define, but not undefinable altogether. I never said I was looking at you because of your Dom vote. I know that that vote is easily justifiable. I think you want to be able to justify everything you do this game; I think you are playing very carefully.

insertnamehere wrote:I'm on a vacation and have limited internet access. I'm around at night and in the morning. I have to vote early. I may not be on the top of my game. I randomized because it was early in Day 1, and I didn't have any other leads. I'm not sure what part of that you aren't in love with. Apparently, you need some poor sap to shift blame onto, and you think that because I'm on vacation, I'm an easy target.

Indeed, INH set up that he was likely going to have to vote early and randomly in this post, and then he voted early as promised, well before the majority of the Day 1 discussion happened. I don't think you can fault INH too much for that vote. I find it odd that you think it is suspicious. I am interested to see which quotes you planned on pulling from INH, and what you might have to say about them.

DharmaHelper wrote:I'm enjoying not being the one engaged in battle with either Llama or SVS for once.

I hope you're at least taking notes from the sidelines. :P

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:49 am**

That second paragraph was still addressed to SVS even though the quote is from/about INH.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:52 am**

thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:
bea wrote:(I'm guessing it was the naughty word you edited out. )
I edited it out, to be clear. I said i would do so.
You've set a dangerous precedent. Now we will all be curious to see which substitutions you will make in your edits. I fear you may have unleashed a monster.

Fortunately for you, I am always fastidiously clean-tongued.

I'm way behind and I'm sure missing LOTS OF THINGS - but in my starting of my catsup.

This raises my eye. Why would you be worried about the dangerous precedent set from making a curse word not a curse word?

I get the basic idea of not wanting to give anyone access to edit any of my posts. But if I slip up and drop the eff bomb - I have NO PROBLEM with svs or YOU or epi coming in and fixing my post because it's a fix I would want to have happen. family friendly thread is family friendly . It looks at it EXACTLY like all the times the mods on this site helped me out when I effed up the sock game.

Intention means everything.

Why would you think SVS would make those edits without the purest of reasons

Tell me what I'm missing.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:58 am**

thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:i will only edit cuss words and will note it in the posts (unless the host says not to, in which case i will not). But he wants a clean thread and was not here to remove the cuss.
I made the right choice voting for you today.

why? In my reading - late as it is - I'm not yet seeing it - I may redadct is as I go along. But at this point in the thread? Really you're that sure she's bad? Cuz I'm not at this point in my read though. I'm only seeing that she made your opinons a little more questionable.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 1:05 am**

thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote: I think any little kid would be uncomfortable with this decision. And i don't understand why you are making such a huge deal out of this.
Because I like logic, and "Andrew would be uncomfortable killing Kate, therefore Andrew is civvie" does not follow.

I actually agree with this.

I honestly think Andrew is civ because I think he'd be more than comfy with pulling the trigger on his mom if she earned it. And I think he'd have the best idea of all of us to know if she earned it.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 1:08 am**

FZ. wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote: I think any little kid would be uncomfortable with this decision. And i don't understand why you are making such a huge deal out of this.
Because I like logic, and "Andrew would be uncomfortable killing Kate, therefore Andrew is civvie" does not follow.
I have an 8 year old. I'd never let him play (not being judgmental), but having to deal with all the lies and deceiving is something I wouldn't want him to do, even without his mother playing the game. It's too much pressure in my opinion. So if I were hosting, I can definitely see myself making him a civ.

kate is am amazing mom. Andrew is so amazingly mature for his age - he hosted all of us before he played with us.

And also - I do believe when epi said it was random, it was random.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 1:13 am**

Dom wrote:
bea wrote:(I'm guessing it was the naughty word you edited out. )
I'm bad at words.

me too really - I hope the karma police fix all my mistakes

\
I'd hate to have it go not family friendly on my account.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 1:27 am**

thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote: I could pay tribute to many people in this game, but i will pay it to Andrew. He is the smartest young man I have ever met, maybe the smartest person, and he is a pretty cool guy, too.

I vote Andrew.
Smarter than me? SVS comes right out of the gate with a lie.

[

why is that a lie?

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 1:31 am**

i'm really really Irish right now. I hope to catsup soon, but admitedly - I've been the fail this game

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 1:33 am**

DharmaHelper wrote:I'm enjoying not being the one engaged in battle with either Llama or SVS for once.

I can see your happiness and match it with a flower.

What do you see - outside of the fray DH? You opinion has weight...

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 1:48 am**

i'm sorry - I feel like I'm irish fail in this thread. I'm trying and it may take a day or so till I make up for it. Or I'm asking the right questions at the right time. IDK. I"m sorry. I'm the worst Irish person ever.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:46 am**

Sorsha wrote:
birdwithteeth11 wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
birdwithteeth11 wrote:
I almost typed the whole word too. [/ot]
you meant to say fudge, right?
Yes ma'am.

TH, the main thing I focused on with Dom was him saying that S~V~S had been spending more time on people she thought were bad than people who were civs (paraphrasing here). I referred to it as "outright lying" because it was, well, outright lying. S~V~S had spent so much time on Andrew, that most of the rest of her posts were her trying to defend herself. I know it's not much, but it was a Day 1 vote, and it was what felt strongest to me at the time. I was clearly wrong, but there's not a whole lot I can do to change it now. And I stand by my justification for it at the time.

So sorry, but not everyone who voted for Dom did so for the reason you claimed. I just proved otherwise. I will say that I felt FZ, Kate, and Sorsha gave the weakest reasons for voting for him. So I can safely rule out giving them a vote tonight.
I didn't even vote for Dom

Why did you vote for TH (was it him you voted for)? He didn't have any other votes and you had to know that vote would just go to waste. If you didn't mind Dom getting the votes, why not just vote him instead? Could it be that you knew he wasn't a baddie and wanted to look better later on?

bea wrote:
FZ. wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote: I think any little kid would be uncomfortable with this decision. And i don't understand why you are making such a huge deal out of this.
Because I like logic, and "Andrew would be uncomfortable killing Kate, therefore Andrew is civvie" does not follow.
I have an 8 year old. I'd never let him play (not being judgmental), but having to deal with all the lies and deceiving is something I wouldn't want him to do, even without his mother playing the game. It's too much pressure in my opinion. So if I were hosting, I can definitely see myself making him a civ.

kate is am amazing mom. Andrew is so amazingly mature for his age - he hosted all of us before he played with us.

And also - I do believe when epi said it was random, it was random.

I never meant to imply she wasn't an amazing mom, and if I left that impression I'm truly sorry. I guess it's my son that isn't mature enough, lol...or I'm not that good of a mother

I'm kidding. There's no right answer here. I think that as his mother, I just don't want my son to be a good liar at this stage in his life

But Bea, I get that you're busy and behind, but you just chose weird stuff to quote and reply to in my opinion since we moved way beyond that, and other things have been discussed. I've seen baddies use the catchup trick to always appear like they are behind, thus never really having to say something when it counts. I hope this is not the case with you, but I'm keeping an eye.

Finally, DH, you seem to be skating through. You've barely said anything worth while so far (no offense). I'm getting the feeling you're trying to lay low.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 7:07 am**

insertnamehere wrote:
S~V~S wrote:You are looking at me becasue you think i am bad for undefined reasons, not becasue i voted for Dom. I had the best reason for voting for Dom, self preservation.

I am not in love with INHs vote for Sorsha. INHs whole schtick has been off IMO; some of the things he has said, in light of his Day Zero vote for Andrew seem off to me. I thought both bea & MMs self votes unneccessary as they both were participatory before the lynch, especially MM, so I am not sure what the point was of either vote. MM has said things I feel pretty Ok about otherwise, but I don't love the self vote.

Of the Dom voters, I thought Elo made some good points for Day One, and some of the votes seemed more in the "I trust SVS" mode when they voted for him, and I cannot fault them on that~ sorry, but I can't Of them i was the most opportunistic, becasue I wanted to live. So i plowed a vote onto someone whose posts I had not even read solely to save myself. It was Day one, lots of people vote for lame reasons on Day one, and most of them are NOT baddies. I can think of two people that probably are not baddies that voted for lame reasons

Had i been caught up, and not felt a need to give myself an insurance vote (it was 3-2 when i voted, on the phone at my folks house), I would have voted for INH.

I still might today. I will see what he has to say about this before i pull quotes.
I'm on a vacation and have limited internet access. I'm around at night and in the morning. I have to vote early. I may not be on the top of my game. I randomized because it was early in Day 1, and I didn't have any other leads. I'm not sure what part of that you aren't in love with. Apparently, you need some poor sap to shift blame onto, and you think that because I'm on vacation, I'm an easy target.

No, sorry about the vaca thing, but I was talking about the threatening thing with Kate actually. That was a weird thing to say, and i am not sure of your meaning in saying it.

And re the editing Which has come up again, i see), I edited out a word, and the Host said it was OK, and i replaced it with a euphemism for that word. I said it, and so long as no one cusses and the host does not catch it first, I don't know how this makes me bad either.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 7:17 am**

Turnip Head wrote:
You are looking at me becasue you think i am bad for undefined reasons, not becasue i voted for Dom. I had the best reason for voting for Dom, self preservation.
Yes, my suspicion of you is hard to define, but not undefinable altogether. I never said I was looking at you because of your Dom vote. I know that that vote is easily justifiable. I think you want to be able to justify everything you do this game; I think you are playing very carefully.

insertnamehere wrote:I'm on a vacation and have limited internet access. I'm around at night and in the morning. I have to vote early. I may not be on the top of my game. I randomized because it was early in Day 1, and I didn't have any other leads. I'm not sure what part of that you aren't in love with. Apparently, you need some poor sap to shift blame onto, and you think that because I'm on vacation, I'm an easy target.
Indeed, INH set up that he was likely going to have to vote early and randomly in this post, and then he voted early as promised, well before the majority of the Day 1 discussion happened. I don't think you can fault INH too much for that vote. I find it odd that you think it is suspicious. I am interested to see which quotes you planned on pulling from INH, and what you might have to say about them.

DharmaHelper wrote:I'm enjoying not being the one engaged in battle with either Llama or SVS for once.
I hope you're at least taking notes from the sidelines. :P

Once again you are misconstruing and misinterpreting. I said NOTHING about his random vote, I read his post. That is why I was just confused. I said in light of his DAY ZERO vote for Andrew, nothing about him randomizing. Which is why I was just confused about him saying he was on vaca and going random, I was like *?*, I never mentioned his random vote? I was saying he seemed to shift his focus, I was surprised to see that he had voted for Andrew on Day Zero in light of some things he has said since then.

And using inflammatory language, like saying I needed a sap makes you look worse than me, tbh.

You ask me to produce detailed suspicions on Day Two about day one, which is pretty much impossible unless you overinflate small issues into large ones, then mock me for them, lol.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 7:55 am**

bea wrote: I'm way behind and I'm sure missing LOTS OF THINGS - but in my starting of my catsup.

This raises my eye. Why would you be worried about the dangerous precedent set from making a curse word not a curse word?

I get the basic idea of not wanting to give anyone access to edit any of my posts. But if I slip up and drop the eff bomb - I have NO PROBLEM with svs or YOU or epi coming in and fixing my post because it's a fix I would want to have happen. family friendly thread is family friendly . It looks at it EXACTLY like all the times the mods on this site helped me out when I effed up the sock game.

Intention means everything.

Why would you think SVS would make those edits without the purest of reasons

Tell me what I'm missing.

Hi Bea!

I'm afriad you've misunderstood what was purely a joke on my part. I was just saying that since people know that SVS will edit their curses, they might be tempted to curse more just to give her a hard time or see how she would edit them. It had nothing to do with the game itself, and probably should have been on OT green. Sorry for the confusion.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 7:57 am**

bea wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:i will only edit cuss words and will note it in the posts (unless the host says not to, in which case i will not). But he wants a clean thread and was not here to remove the cuss.
I made the right choice voting for you today.

why? In my reading - late as it is - I'm not yet seeing it - I may redadct is as I go along. But at this point in the thread? Really you're that sure she's bad? Cuz I'm not at this point in my read though. I'm only seeing that she made your opinons a little more questionable.[/quote

This was a vote to give her the power to control the universe, not to lynch her. I said that, again, partly in jest because she was editing the thread (which I have no problem with at all), and I saw that as analogous to controlling the universe.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 8:00 am**

bea wrote: Smarter than me? SVS comes right out of the gate with a lie.
[

why is that a lie?[/quote]

Again, forcing me to clarify my joke makes it less funny and makes me sound more arrogant than I intended. I was calling it a lie because SVS said Andrew was maybe the smartest person she knows, but she knows me, so obviously that is not true.

Is this thread allergic to humor?

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 9:14 am**

S~V~S wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
S~V~S wrote:You are looking at me becasue you think i am bad for undefined reasons, not becasue i voted for Dom. I had the best reason for voting for Dom, self preservation.

I am not in love with INHs vote for Sorsha. INHs whole schtick has been off IMO; some of the things he has said, in light of his Day Zero vote for Andrew seem off to me. I thought both bea & MMs self votes unneccessary as they both were participatory before the lynch, especially MM, so I am not sure what the point was of either vote. MM has said things I feel pretty Ok about otherwise, but I don't love the self vote.

Of the Dom voters, I thought Elo made some good points for Day One, and some of the votes seemed more in the "I trust SVS" mode when they voted for him, and I cannot fault them on that~ sorry, but I can't Of them i was the most opportunistic, becasue I wanted to live. So i plowed a vote onto someone whose posts I had not even read solely to save myself. It was Day one, lots of people vote for lame reasons on Day one, and most of them are NOT baddies. I can think of two people that probably are not baddies that voted for lame reasons

Had i been caught up, and not felt a need to give myself an insurance vote (it was 3-2 when i voted, on the phone at my folks house), I would have voted for INH.

I still might today. I will see what he has to say about this before i pull quotes.
I'm on a vacation and have limited internet access. I'm around at night and in the morning. I have to vote early. I may not be on the top of my game. I randomized because it was early in Day 1, and I didn't have any other leads. I'm not sure what part of that you aren't in love with. Apparently, you need some poor sap to shift blame onto, and you think that because I'm on vacation, I'm an easy target.
No, sorry about the vaca thing, but I was talking about the threatening thing with Kate actually. That was a weird thing to say, and i am not sure of your meaning in saying it.

These are your two sentences on me.

I am not in love with INHs vote for Sorsha. INHs whole schtick has been off IMO; some of the things he has said, in light of his Day Zero vote for Andrew seem off to me.

Nowhere in that do you mention Kate. I voted for Andrew Day 1 because I thought that giving the prize to a relatively new player would be interesting. I wanted to see how he would use it. Not because I had any real opinion on his allegiance, because it was very early in the game. I voted for him before the big debate on his allegiance began. If you have any other things that you suspect me for, I'd really like to hear them. Anyway, I'm voting for SVS.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 9:21 am**

S~V~S wrote:
Once again you are misconstruing and misinterpreting. I said NOTHING about his random vote, I read his post. That is why I was just confused. I said in light of his DAY ZERO vote for Andrew, nothing about him randomizing. Which is why I was just confused about him saying he was on vaca and going random, I was like *?*, I never mentioned his random vote? I was saying he seemed to shift his focus, I was surprised to see that he had voted for Andrew on Day Zero in light of some things he has said since then.
you said that you weren't in love with my Sorsha vote. That's not nothing. You only posted two sentences on me, and one whole sentence was all about my Sorsha vote.
And using inflammatory language, like saying I needed a sap makes you look worse than me, tbh.

You ask me to produce detailed suspicions on Day Two about day one, which is pretty much impossible unless you overinflate small issues into large ones, then mock me for them, lol.
why are you holding me accountable for my idiotic cases?

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 9:38 am**

S~V~S wrote:I am not in love with INHs vote for Sorsha. INHs whole schtick has been off IMO; some of the things he has said, in light of his Day Zero vote for Andrew seem off to me.

S~V~S wrote:Once again you are misconstruing and misinterpreting. I said NOTHING about his random vote, I read his post. That is why I was just confused. I said in light of his DAY ZERO vote for Andrew, nothing about him randomizing. Which is why I was just confused about him saying he was on vaca and going random, I was like *?*, I never mentioned his random vote? I was saying he seemed to shift his focus, I was surprised to see that he had voted for Andrew on Day Zero in light of some things he has said since then.

SVS, I'm not trying to misconstrue or misinterpret you. You DID mention his random vote for Sorsha, in the first quote above. I didn't pull it out of my butt.

You say you are surprised that INH voted for Andrew on Day 0 given what he has done since then. Can you explain what you mean by that? How does his Andrew vote on Day 0, before the game had really started, not match up with his play afterwards? And how does that connection lead you to suspect him?

You say INH's shtick has been off; you say you would have voted for him on Day 1 if you hadn't needed to vote elsewhere to save yourself; you said you would pull quotes if necessary. Please pull quotes and build your case on INH so that I understand it and I don't "misconstrue and misinterpret" it again.

S~V~S wrote:You ask me to produce detailed suspicions on Day Two about day one, which is pretty much impossible unless you overinflate small issues into large ones, then mock me for them, lol.

I'm not trying to mock you, I'm trying to understand your suspicion. You see, I'm interested in trying to catch baddies. If you're a civvie, then I value your opinion about other players, and want to know what you think about them and why.

It might not be easy to produce suspicions on Day 2, but as civvies, that's the job we have to do. We have to lynch someone, and if you're a civvie I expect you to have some strong ideas even if they're wrong, even if they're built off of something small. I expect you to be actively finding the baddies among us. How else are we civilians going to win?

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 11:35 am**

SVS, I have to agree with TH, that you're not really trying hard to find baddies. I'm starting to wonder if he and llama are right after all. I didn't agree on the whole Andrew accusations, but we've moved on and yet you're still stuck in the same place

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 2:18 pm**

FZ. wrote:
But Bea, I get that you're busy and behind, but you just chose weird stuff to quote and reply to in my opinion since we moved way beyond that, and other things have been discussed. I've seen baddies use the catchup trick to always appear like they are behind, thus never really having to say something when it counts. I hope this is not the case with you, but I'm keeping an eye.

Finally, DH, you seem to be skating through. You've barely said anything worth while so far (no offense). I'm getting the feeling you're trying to lay low.

I have to agree with everything said here. As I was reading today I was thinking, "Are we really still talking about this?"

And, DH....I get the same feeling. If you aren't "trying to lay low" then who are you suspecting today?

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 2:54 pm**

I'll be at work the rest of the afternoon. I might be able to peep in occasionally before the poll ends, but likely won't be able to make any more posts, so I'm going to place my vote now.

*votes SVS*

My gut tells me she's bad, and my interaction with her today hasn't made me feel any better about her.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:10 pm**

Elohcin wrote:
FZ. wrote:
But Bea, I get that you're busy and behind, but you just chose weird stuff to quote and reply to in my opinion since we moved way beyond that, and other things have been discussed. I've seen baddies use the catchup trick to always appear like they are behind, thus never really having to say something when it counts. I hope this is not the case with you, but I'm keeping an eye.

Finally, DH, you seem to be skating through. You've barely said anything worth while so far (no offense). I'm getting the feeling you're trying to lay low.

I have to agree with everything said here. As I was reading today I was thinking, "Are we really still talking about this?"

And, DH....I get the same feeling. If you aren't "trying to lay low" then who are you suspecting today?

It's only D2. If I have something interesting to say I'll say it.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:18 pm**

Actually, just re-read SVS and I'm not seeing the suspicion of her. I'm moreso seeing TH/INH/Llama trying to jump on her. So. Voting for TH or INH.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:20 pm**

Just kidding, voted Llama ;P

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:28 pm**

DharmaHelper wrote:Just kidding, voted Llama ;P

Explanation requested.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:34 pm**

thellama73 wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Just kidding, voted Llama ;P
Explanation requested.

We can change our votes and I wanted to give the appearance of participation.

Posted: **Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:44 pm**

DharmaHelper wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Just kidding, voted Llama ;P
Explanation requested.
We can change our votes and I wanted to give the appearance of participation.

That's the best answer anyone has given to anything this game. Thank you. (I do hope you decide to change it though. You and I are on the same side this time.)

The Syndicate

Willow [Endgame]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Night 1]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Prologue]

Re: Willow [Prologue]

Re: Willow [Prologue]

Re: Willow [Prologue]

Re: Willow [Prologue]

Re: Willow [Prologue]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Prologue]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Prologue]

Re: Willow [Prologue]

Re: Willow [Prologue]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Prologue]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Prologue]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]

Re: Willow [Day 2]