The Syndicate

Posted: **Wed Dec 14, 2016 12:51 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:In Triskaidekaphobia, Rico's alignment ratio was 11 civilians vs. 3 mafia.

10-3-1 tbh fam

Posted: **Wed Dec 14, 2016 2:00 pm**

triceratopzeuhl wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:Hey BWT, are you able to produce some summarized/quick reads for me (whether rainbow or not)? I'm curious where your head is at right now.

Linki: Same question to Trice.
Confident civ: Slooneiquin, MP, me

tentative/probably civ: epignosis, Timmer, MM, sig

Mafia 1: was vompatti
Serial Killer: JJJ
Mafia shortlist: Dom, Lorab, scotty, BWT, boomslang

(more info needed): ninja blooper

updated, unfortunately boomslang's death doesn't give us info. I think nijuukyugou must've been civ.

Posted: **Wed Dec 14, 2016 2:23 pm**

Mafia could have immunity. I tend to believe civs are granted such powers more often.

Posted: **Wed Dec 14, 2016 2:25 pm**

triceratopzeuhl wrote:
triceratopzeuhl wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:Hey BWT, are you able to produce some summarized/quick reads for me (whether rainbow or not)? I'm curious where your head is at right now.

Linki: Same question to Trice.
Confident civ: Slooneiquin, MP, me

tentative/probably civ: epignosis, Timmer, MM, sig

Mafia 1: was vompatti
Serial Killer: JJJ
Mafia shortlist: Dom, Lorab, scotty, BWT, boomslang

(more info needed): ninja blooper
updated, unfortunately boomslang's death doesn't give us info. I think nijuukyugou must've been civ.

Boomslang was civ. Accept it.

Posted: **Wed Dec 14, 2016 4:10 pm**

I've been called into work unexpectedly, so I'll be nonparticipatory today.

Posted: **Wed Dec 14, 2016 4:35 pm**

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Mafia could have immunity. I tend to believe civs are granted such powers more often.

Do you feel the ratios in this game are at all meaningful in that discussion?

Posted: **Wed Dec 14, 2016 4:37 pm**

Trice, could you please summarize your current concerns with each of the players you have listed as a baddie candidate?

Posted: **Wed Dec 14, 2016 5:16 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Mafia could have immunity. I tend to believe civs are granted such powers more often.
Do you feel the ratios in this game are at all meaningful in that discussion?

That's what's making me reconsider. Especially including civ btsc, potential thereof, and even a possible civ rezz.

Posted: **Wed Dec 14, 2016 5:25 pm**

Looking at MovingPictures07's ISO. There's so many cot damned posts that I am not going to assess this point-by-point like I might with most ISO reviews. I'm going to specifically look for moments in his posts that I think might be uniquely indicative of something in his alignment.

Spoiler: show

MP opening the game with this mindset and what seemed like an enthusiasm about discussing/employing it was a nice look I think. MP is usually an enthusiastic player and has been effective in pretending to be enthusiastic when necessary. This is unique though in that it represents a specific idea MP had and wanted to try out and doesn't represent a "copy" of behavior he's already exhibited as a townie in other games -- at least not under the POE title. His early rainbows reflect an effort to pinpoint townies, as evidenced by the piles of gray non-reads and green town reads.

MP's eventual support of the INH lynch can be viewed in these posts.

MP cited my own face value and past game parallel assessment directly and also name dropped Golden and timmer as inspirations for this movement. I think the important material here is found in the latter half of the second post, when MP details how it was essentially his perspective of INH's behavior that changed as the day progressed, content which meshes with his later rebuttals to criticism (primarily from Epignosis) for his part in that lynch. It's a good example of CYA if MP is bad, and at this point I don't know that he'd have been able to foresee that need so precisely. I think that's a decent look.

Late Day 1 Rainbow -- I appreciate that MP was willing to throw out the nulls here and take conclusive stances. He has taken to my own philosophy on that in recent memory I think, and I think it's good that he pushed himself to do that. I also don't think he'd have felt like he'd have to do that to cover for himself, because he has a long, established history of null portions in his rainbows in other games. In this regard one might assert his middle-area reads are "forced", and perhaps they were -- sometimes I think that's a good thing. It's a way of challenging oneself to stay out of the gray.

Spoiler: show

MP was severe in his late Day 1 assessment of Scotty. This was 9 minutes prior to the deadline. I'm just putting this here for reference because I recall it happening again later.

Spoiler: show

I bring these posts back just to ask a question, because they were abrupt and harsh in a way that was surprising.

MP: I don't expect you to discuss any personal matters or anything external to the game, so if there were things causing these posts that you'd rather not discuss -- don't discuss them. I am concerned with the game at hand only. So: what was happening in this game, if anything, which had you as frustrated as you were at these two junctures of Day 2?

I feel the need to ask this because a precedent was set in RotTK for a baddie MP having a particularly severe moment which erupted in a scenario that I didn't feel warranted that eruption purely in the game. This scenario on GY:BE Day 2 recalls that.

Spoiler: show

MovingPictures07 wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I decided to check my data compilation to see if I could assess trends among the lowest contributory tier of players in Syndicate Mafia games, as a way of qualifying any assumptions about A Person in this game. He has made 6 posts and we're about to complete the 3rd day phase. If he doesn't post again through the night, that'd be 2 posts per cycle. This is a statistic I have tracked for nearly every game played so far in 2016.

Alignment counts for players who have finished a game at or below 2 posts per cycle this year:

Good -- 11

Bad -- 9

Independent -- 5

This is a count of 25 players in the games I have tracked (17 or 18) whose rate of contribution has been comparable to A Person's so far in this game. 44% of them were purely good and 36% of them were purely bad. The indies can be judged as a gray area since their win conditions vary so much. This ratio is a lot closer than it would be if non-contributor alignments were arranged at random in accordance with typical starting rations between good and bad. In that regard, it means people who play like A Person is playing have been baddies more often than randomness would indicate -- suggesting lynching him wouldn't entirely be a guess.

The sample size isn't large enough to make a concrete assertion and stamp it into Mafia law, but it's enough to make me reconsider my prior statement that baddies don't want to let their team mates down by giving nothing to the game. There's clearly a precedent for that.
This is compelling. It also vies with the theory that mafia members are likely to be lower posters, in general, because they have to manufacture all of their content, and may be more likely to sit back while town picks itself apart.

I may be turning around to being OK with an AP lynch. I'm not really opposed with it anyway. I just hate these 'blind' lynches, because I feel like they are essentially coin flips, and they're irritating especially when we have content by which to judge everyone else.

This raises a concern: I've noted two occasions where MP was supportive of some suspicion I stated prior to a lynch and then less supportive of it after the fact. MP supported me in my concerns about INH, and then after he flipped town MP suggested I was his tinfoil suspect for manipulating the thread in the wrong direction. MP supported me in this statistical analysis pertaining to A Person, and then after he flipped town the assessment was different:

Spoiler: show

Please talk about this, MP.

Spoiler: show

Here's the second example of MP stauchly opposing Scotty in a late day scenario. On Day 1 it was so close to the lynch resolution that there wasn't time to realistically mount a CFD. There was time in this case and MP voiced his desire. At face value I appreciate MP seeing something in a heated moment, hating the way it looks, and trying to steer the wagons in that direction without verbosely blabbering out the specific grievance. The post is just "I hate this, please die" in flavor, and that's a nice look.

~~~

I think that overall MP looks okay. It's not a perfectly sterling resume, and there are points of concern here MP can discuss. Apart from the specifics of each individual post, the full body of effort should also be discussed -- MP is almost always one to play at the speed of light (ironically when he doesn't he totally lurks

), and I think his earliest pile of effort had the right look. There was enthusiasm and clear hunting effort which didn't begin to subside until his time constraints increased -- and even now in his more limited appearances he seems to be doing work.

Posted: **Wed Dec 14, 2016 7:41 pm**

I haven't yet had time for this game. Sorry all. Between spending time with Annie and packing, and then leaving out of Austin tomorrow, it'll be busy. I'll do what I can.

Frankly, I'm considering a replacement at this stage, since until December 26th or later I'll be phone posting and putting in the bare minimum, but I'd prefer to stick around I guess. Just be understanding in advance because it's the only time I've gotten to see most of my family and friends in over a year and likely the last time I'll see a lot of them for a while too.

Posted: **Wed Dec 14, 2016 8:30 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Dom, a suggestion:

2 letters = "no"

3 letters = "yes"

It doesn't really matter what the letters are. For anything more complex, you could try to use quotes. If you decide to do it this way I would recommend affirming it by quoting this post though, so I/people don't interpret you incorrectly.

IUH

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 1:07 am**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Trice, could you please summarize your current concerns with each of the players you have listed as a baddie candidate?

Those are based on a combination of patterns as I described before, not on suspicious behavior. I would have to close read for that.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 1:08 am**

I was going to say sorry for being away because I parade on wednesday nights, but seems like everybody else was away anyway

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 1:09 am**

Metalmarsh89 wrote: Boomslang was civ. Accept it.

You're probably right but as I mention above, this is based on looking at night powers and whatnot which doesn't provide a read on boomslang either direction

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 3:26 am**

I've put a vote on BWT. It's a bit of a trial balloon, to show where I'm looking at the moment. I feel very hampered by the fact that apparently there are only 2 baddies to find (and 1 SK, even harder), with no lynched baddies to help study voting records, so I'm going on post reads for now. More to come.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 3:44 am**

Random question... Epig, you and MM seem to both be pretty much in sync on the Boomslang-was-very-much-a-civ train. Does MM's view of Boomslang matter to you at all? What I mean is, you've suggested iirc that you want to reattack the same lynch targets as yesterday, but I'm wondering if the fact that you both seem to be in sync on this point changes things at all, or if you think it matters not? I'm just not used to seeing people who semi-think alike go after one another, I suppose.

MM, what do you think of Epig? Same question.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 4:03 am**

Okay, so I've got to head to bed, but my vote will stay on BWT for now. I would support/not fight against a trice lynch if people are going to go that way as I see a possible connection between them in the posts from yesterday and in the way that BWT so obviously wanted to move his vote off of trice but sort of stage managed it all.

However, I like lynching the person who looks bad first and the partner second, thus BWT gets my vote, but I'm not 100% on this.

I'm not voting for MM, or Epig, or MP for that matter. Those three are civs, I think.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 5:14 am**

I posted a thing. I know I did. So where did said thing go? I don't know.

Phone posting. I'll repost said thing when my internet comes back AGAIN

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 6:00 am**

I was just going to say that I haven't given this game the attention that it deserves and that that's going to change starting tomorrow. I'll be looking into BWT, trice and the marmot first since they've seemed to be the most dominant suspects since I subbed in.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 9:26 am**

timmer wrote: However, I like lynching the person who looks bad first and the partner second, thus BWT gets my vote, but I'm not 100% on this.

VKB

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:04 am**

triceratopzeuhl wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Trice, could you please summarize your current concerns with each of the players you have listed as a baddie candidate?
Those are based on a combination of patterns as I described before, not on suspicious behavior. I would have to close read for that.

Is that something you mean to do, or are you content operating on the basis of night kills/silences/insanifications?

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:09 am**

It's unfortunate that we've had such a dead phase, including me. I'd really like to hear from BWT today, as well as the other recent quiet people like sig. Timmer is right that it's difficult to data mine in this game with the only potential dead baddie being killed Night 1. The only remedy is live conversation.

I still have holiday things to accomplish this afternoon, but I should have plenty of time approaching the deadline.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:12 am**

LoRab, you seemed more engaged when you couldn't speak clearly than you do now. Why is that?

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:16 am**

Everyone who hasn't already commented on this: I'd like to know what impact, if any, the failed lynch of Day 4 has on your reads of trice and MM.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:18 am**

Scotty wrote:I think JJJ killing Vomps N1 fits because he would be most prone to wanting to eliminate wild cards. For what it's worth.

Scotty, before I said Vomps may have been bad, what made you feel the way you did about this? Why would I be "the most prone to wanting to eliminate wild cards"?

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:23 am**

Dom, could you provide GTH reads with your code?

birdwithteeth11
Epignosis
JaggedJimmyJay
LoRab
Metalmarsh89
MovingPictures07
Sloonei/Quin
Scotty
sig
timmer
triceratopzeuhl

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 am**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:At this point, I'm willing to accept that trice is civilian and Jay is bad.

I doubt the mafia would have the ability to survive a lynch. Also, Jay is a clever person who I think would target me on Night 3.
Why do you doubt the mafia would have that ability, and why do you suggest I'd have more reason to target you than [whoever] would have to target you?

Marmot, I'd still like an answer to the highlighted question.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:46 am**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:LoRab, you seemed more engaged when you couldn't speak clearly than you do now. Why is that?

Because, irony.

Seriously, though: Because I had a really busy day at work yesterday. Also, because I tend to have more to say when other people are talking more, and no one is really talking much, so there isn't much to respond to.

Also, is Dom the only apparent curse this round? Is there someone or someones else out there who seems to have been cursed that I'm missing or forgetting?

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:48 am**

Dom's is the only curse I see. A number of people haven't posted though.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:57 am**

How do you feel about BWT, LoRab?

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 12:05 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Dom, could you provide GTH reads with your code?

birdwithteeth11 - VKB

Epignosis - IK

JaggedJimmyJay - IK

LoRab - VKB

Metalmarsh89 - IK

MovingPictures07 - IK

Sloonei/Quin - IK

Scotty - IK

sig - VKB

timmer - IK

triceratopzeuhl - VKB

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 12:08 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: as well as the other recent quiet people like sig

VKB
VKB

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 12:10 pm**

Thanks Dom. Am I right to assume IK is "good" and WKB is "bad"?

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 12:12 pm**

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 12:31 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:How do you feel about BWT, LoRab?

I'm horrible at reading him in general. I get where the suspicion of him is coming from. I need to read back on his posts. I should have time this afternoon to do that. I'm heading out (into the cold....brrrr....) in a bit to station myself at a cafe to do work for a while--while I'm doing work I can also do "work" and look back at his posts.

I'm still feeling pretty strongly about my trice vote, though.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 12:46 pm**

Right now I'd rather lynch trice than BWT because I think the case is more conclusive. His hyper-focus on night kills/actions leaves a lot of room for manipulation, he has misrepresented me and others to an egregious degree, and I believe the failed lynch is a point against both he and Marmot. If either of them had a civilian-driven lynch protection then this game seems quite imbalanced. I am also skeptical an anti-town-borne lynch save would have been used in a way that isn't immediately beneficial to their own faction (for example a mafia save being used to prevent a lynch between two non-mafia).

I can see the connection being drawn between the two based on EOD4 and it's frustrating to have no comment from BWT himself on the matter yet.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 12:49 pm**

BWT was very active yesterday in the game and now, with votes piling on, is suddenly absent, which I don't like. He can't be silenced since sleep is killing now, so this is either very unfortunate timing with him being busy or he was hoping by not posting we would swerve away from him. Not liking the situation, either way.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 2:33 pm**

timmer wrote:I've put a vote on BWT. It's a bit of a trial balloon, to show where I'm looking at the moment. I feel very hampered by the fact that apparently there are only 2 baddies to find (and 1 SK, even harder), with no lynched baddies to help study voting records, so I'm going on post reads for now. More to come.

We are in the same thinking boat.

I lurked for a second yesterday and saw that Bwt was online reading the thread, and found it curious that he wasn't posting to defend himself. Is it possible that there is a silencer in the civ faction that may balance out Sleep's action?

And if BWT has in fact been silenced, how many of you on his train would hesistate to vote him on the basis of honor?

I was looking to vote there too, but always feel a little shitty voting for someone possibly silenced.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 2:42 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Scotty wrote:I think JJJ killing Vomps N1 fits because he would be most prone to wanting to eliminate wild cards. For what it's worth.
Scotty, before I said Vomps may have been bad, what made you feel the way you did about this? Why would I be "the most prone to wanting to eliminate wild cards"?

I think of you as someone that tends to prefer a skim vanilla latte when you are bad, if you know what I mean. Less chaos = more control

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 2:45 pm**

Has there been any evidence of a second silencer? And if there was a weird civ silencer, why would they silence someone being talked about for lynch?

Unless the ??? role is a power borrower, which is why we've occasionally had too many curses etc? But even that role is listed under the civs, so.... hmm.

The only other choice for lynch, as far as I'm concerned, is trice, but I'm not sold on trice being bad.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 2:46 pm**

On the flip to side voting for someone who possibly can't respond is- if my mind was already headed in that direction, I'm sorta kinda wanting to vote there anyway, and it's not even something he can respond to. It's the way he has operated in my read throughs. It's like stuff would happen and as I was reading like 10 pages behind his posts would seem insincere and stick out like a sore thumb.

Ima put a bandaid on that thumb.

bwt

Linki: I still don't see trice as bad

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 2:57 pm**

Scotty wrote:On the flip to side voting for someone who possibly can't respond is- if my mind was already headed in that direction, I'm sorta kinda wanting to vote there anyway, and it's not even something he can respond to. It's the way he has operated in my read throughs. It's like stuff would happen and as I was reading like 10 pages behind his posts would seem insincere and stick out like a sore thumb.

Ima put a bandaid on that thumb.

bwt

Linki: I still don't see trice as bad

Yeah I'm not sold on trice either way, I keep changing my thoughts. I feel good about MM, though. And Epig, I think.

I'll leave my vote on BWT, because I don't see how he can truly be silenced and I think it's a good shot at finally hitting a baddie.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 3:29 pm**

timmer wrote:Random question... Epig, you and MM seem to both be pretty much in sync on the Boomslang-was-very-much-a-civ train. Does MM's view of Boomslang matter to you at all? What I mean is, you've suggested iirc that you want to reattack the same lynch targets as yesterday, but I'm wondering if the fact that you both seem to be in sync on this point changes things at all, or if you think it matters not? I'm just not used to seeing people who semi-think alike go after one another, I suppose.

MM, what do you think of Epig? Same question.

MM's opinion of Boomslang doesn't really mean anything to me (most of MM's opinions in general sound loose and superficial to me anyway). As I mentioned, the suspicion I have of him is circumstantial based on the outcome of Day 4, and he couldn't defend against it.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 3:57 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Right now I'd rather lynch trice than BWT because I think the case is more conclusive. His hyper-focus on night kills/actions leaves a lot of room for manipulation, he has misrepresented me and others to an egregious degree, and I believe the failed lynch is a point against both he and Marmot. If either of them had a civilian-driven lynch protection then this game seems quite imbalanced. I am also skeptical an anti-town-borne lynch save would have been used in a way that isn't immediately beneficial to their own faction (for example a mafia save being used to prevent a lynch between two non-mafia).

I can see the connection being drawn between the two based on EOD4 and it's frustrating to have no comment from BWT himself on the matter yet.

I agree that there is more on Trice than on BWT (just looked back at posts, not uber-carefully, but read through them). He's on a list of players that I could see being a teammate of Trice, if Trice is indeed Mafia.

Also, I think it's possible he's been silenced (that there have been extra insanifications on some days is evidence of the possibility of a mimic role), and I don't want to vote for someone who is silenced unless I'm pretty sure about them. Even the possibility is enough reason to hesitate, for me. And, if it seems at a later time that he was faking it, then that's another story. But, in the short run, at least I think he should be able to defend.

Also, I suspect Trice more.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 4:35 pm**

Still Day 5: I Am Only Human

Spoiler: show

Transcript

Spoiler: show

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 4:54 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Thanks Dom. Am I right to assume IK is "good" and WKB is "bad"?

IK

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 4:56 pm**

Scotty wrote:On the flip to side voting for someone who possibly can't respond is- if my mind was already headed in that direction, I'm sorta kinda wanting to vote there anyway, and it's not even something he can respond to. It's the way he has operated in my read throughs. It's like stuff would happen and as I was reading like 10 pages behind his posts would seem insincere and stick out like a sore thumb.

Ima put a bandaid on that thumb.

bwt

Linki: I still don't see trice as bad

VKB

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 4:56 pm**

timmer wrote:BWT was very active yesterday in the game and now, with votes piling on, is suddenly absent, which I don't like. He can't be silenced since sleep is killing now, so this is either very unfortunate timing with him being busy or he was hoping by not posting we would swerve away from him. Not liking the situation, either way.

Dom wrote:
sig - VKB

VKB

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 5:07 pm**

I think it's unlikely BWT is pretending to be silenced. The nature of the Sleep role, and the fact that we all know it has the killing power, makes that a strategy which only invites scrutiny. I'd say it's more likely that he is either actually silenced because of whatever other role or mechanic might be in play, or he simply hasn't been around to get involved. That circumstance can apply to any alignment. I think the cases available in the thread already are more pertinent.

Posted: **Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:02 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
triceratopzeuhl wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Trice, could you please summarize your current concerns with each of the players you have listed as a baddie candidate?
Those are based on a combination of patterns as I described before, not on suspicious behavior. I would have to close read for that.
Is that something you mean to do, or are you content operating on the basis of night kills/silences/insanifications?

It's something I kinda tried to do but didn't have enough time and didn't reach any conclusions that weren't mentioned here already

The Syndicate

GY!BE Mafia [E.N.D.]

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 4] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 4] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 4] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 4] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 4] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 4] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 5] GY!BE Mafia