The Syndicate

S~V~S wrote:More than anything you are reminding me of you in Fight Club, Keterman, when you were SO SURE LC was a civ, and Llama was bad (and the truth was the exact opposite).

Unlike some of the folks that have come for me, i think you are likely civ, as you were in that game. I also see civ BWT; he is earnest and not remotely being opportunistic.

Overconfidence is my style, and for someone who points that out a lot, I'm surprised you haven't gotten used to it yet.

Keterman wrote:

S~V~S wrote:More than anything you are reminding me of you in Fight Club, Keterman, when you were SO SURE LC was a civ, and Llama was bad (and the truth was the exact opposite).

Unlike some of the folks that have come for me, i think you are likely civ, as you were in that game. I also see civ BWT; he is earnest and not remotely being opportunistic.

Overconfidence is my style, and for someone who points that out a lot, I'm surprised you haven't gotten used to it yet.

Oh man, thank you for saying that, because it describes me as well, and I've never thought to put it in those terms.

We agree on BWT. If he's scum then he's playing a very good scum game.

linki - No problem, thank you for not letting me be the only one.

I asked you to give me points I have not addressed. I have addressed all of these. And again, throttle back the intensity a notch.

Keterman wrote:Point 1 isn't meta-based. Point 2 is meta-based regarding Made but not regarding you. Point 3 isn't meta-based. Point 4 isn't meta-based.

Keterman wrote:Canucklehead, I don't understand why I'm expected to post a case on SVS when everything I've found scummy about her I've pointed out already. If anything that post led me to the conclusion of you being her teammate more likely, although heaven forbid one of you two start claiming that the bulk of my case rested on you being on the same team if the other is revealed to be town. But to remind the rest of town:

1. Opportunistic vote for MR, covered by a claim of putting faith in one of MY overconfident, unwarranted reads, and subsequent disappointment in me after the flip, taking no responsibility for her own vote.

First, I did not want to lynch Made, and you sounded like you had info. HERE, where we play, when you have a forced vote, you do it as late as possible, you say as little as possible. You came in mid day, you made multiple posts. Why just me and not all the other people who voted MR? I clearly said I did not want to lynch Made, and said it several times. And LO AND BEHOLD, he was a civvie too. And actually this is meta based, since i would have to be a fucking moron to force your vote, then be the first to vote for it. jeez, lol.

2. Sloppy, rehearsed defenses and a derailment towards Made to distract from the case against her, leading toward a civilian lynch that could've easily been prevented. . SVS's sarcastic response to my initial statement of that post was ironic because without the orange font, it could easily interpreted as favoring my argument. Yes, an enthusiastic teenager Mafia will not be expected to change his game up, and it's funny that that would be your counterargument because it was clear before the lynch that he didn't change his game up at all. Did you think his plan was to act the same way he did in Misfits and get away with it as scum? If he was scum, then it would make more sense that he would act differently. But he acted the same, and yet didn't rely on meta as a defense, unlike you.

Again, you think peoples games don;t evolve? This is very Meta,based on "Again I will say that anyone in Misfits should have known that Made was town in this game". Plus you talk as if i were the only one to suspect him, when every freaking other person did, too. Ooo, except you. You played Misfits.

3. The classic pitying act. "Woe is me, the rest of town just can't handle my godlike reads, I have no choice but to give up. See? Only town would do this, therefore instead of actually putting up a good defense for myself I would use this gambit to attempt to show you something that only a town would do. A sad, sad, town. That's me. I'm town." Although I don't give SVS enough credit here. She disguised her I'm-town-and-I-give-up act as something else, and was that she...wanted to wait to defend herself? I don't know, but points for originality, even though I can't begin to imagine how that's managed to fool anyone.

How can you say this is not meta? This isn't even Meta for here, this is meta for where you usually play. You are probably the most condescending person i have ever met playing mafia, and that's saying alot. Sorry if you think I am throwing a pity party, put I am not. And the people i was speaking to heard me.

4. Not following through with the classic pitying act. SVS has continued to post, and has done so because she realized that her act wasn't as convincing as it seemed before she tried it. Her defenses? Meta, as I mentioned earlier. "See, you guys know that I wouldn't be playing like this if I were scum, therefore I'm not scum! Ta-daaaa! don't lynch me plz"

I said i was not going to try hard, and i am not. Most of my posts habe been in the nature of discussing with other people, and not really defending (excep to you). Now, please, vote for me, OK? Thanks

Also I'm alarmed at how little comments there were regarding my thoughts on Canuck.

And now point 5, a grain of salt: Why say "I'm not bad" rather than "I'm good/civvie/town"?

Becasue I am not bad, and it is my experience that people roll their eyes at "I am a civvie" I bet you just did. But I am.

Please Keterman, just vote for me, OK? It would please me if you started the bandwagon

That said, you don't know me, you don't know how I play. The people who do hopefully recognized what i am laying out here.

Was SVS talking to herself or were there posts that were deleted or something? I am so confused, she talks about linki when there's no other posts in between.

One of the reasons I play in this extended community is because, historically, we don't call each other scum. I'm really not liking that not being the case in this game and it's making me not want to post.

Also, since when is "meta" a dismissive term?

thellama73 wrote:

Mongoose wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I missed your thoughts on Canuck, Keterman. Now that I go back and look at them, they are astonishingly astute. I've been increasingly suspicious of Canuck this game as well. Her posting pattern alone indicates someone who spends most of their time in a chatzy and occasionally pops in to contribute when needed.

I feel like she has been very active (but that is probably because she keeps wanting to discuss me, haha).

She has been active, but there have been long pauses between her activity, as one would expect from someone who checks into a chatroom before posting.

Ok, you just crossed the line. That's ridiculous, and I done believe that anybody ne really trying to find a baddie would sink to that level. I have been seeing this for a while and kept quiet on it to lay low, but I don't believe at all that you're Civvie anymore.

Frankly, from what I know and what I've seen, you have done nothing but unapologetically hunt Civvies this game, and I don't want to see anymore.

Voting Llama now.

LoRab wrote:One of the reasons I play in this extended community is because, historically, we don't call each other scum. I'm really not liking that not being the case in this game and it's making me not want to post.

Also, since when is "meta" a dismissive term?

I see "scum" as a fun and funny term. I call my 1-year-old schmuck on a daily basis. Sometimes "Scummo".

Long Con wrote:

LoRab wrote:One of the reasons I play in this extended community is because, historically, we don't call each other scum. I'm really not liking that not being the case in this game and it's making me not want to post.

Also, since when is "meta" a dismissive term?

I see "scum" as a fun and funny term. I call my 1-year-old schmuck on a daily basis. Sometimes "Scummo".

Tone and context. It's like us not using OMGUS as a game term. And not being personal. Maybe it's just me.

And I would have no problem with using schmuck as a synonym for mafia. (and you know what schmuck actually means, I assume)

Dana wrote:Was SVS talking to herself or were there posts that were deleted or something? I am so confused, she talks about linki when there's no other posts in between.

Yeah, I talk to myself a lot.

I just looked, I should have said "Plus" or "edit" instead of linki, it's just that i kept thinking of more after I posted, maybe I was linki-ing myself. I just kept having more to say, and tacking it on, ha ha. I tend to do that

And yeah, "scum" not a word I love, either. So srs.

Long Con wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Mongoose wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I missed your thoughts on Canuck, Keterman. Now that I go back and look at them, they are astonishingly astute. I've been increasingly suspicious of Canuck this game as well. Her posting pattern alone indicates someone who spends most of their time in a chatzy and occasionally pops in to contribute when needed.

I feel like she has been very active (but that is probably because she keeps wanting to discuss me, haha).

She has been active, but there have been long pauses between her activity, as one would expect from someone who checks into a chatroom before posting.

Ok, you just crossed the line. That's ridiculous, and I done believe that anybody ne really trying to find a baddie would sink to that level. I have been seeing this for a while and kept quiet on it to lay low, but I don't believe at all that you're Civvie anymore.

Frankly, from what I know and what I've seen, you have done nothing but unapologetically hunt Civvies this game, and I don't want to see anymore.

Voting Llama now.

Hmm, that's an interestingly violent reaction from someone who was completely sure SVS was bad and almost certainly going to vote for her. What line did I cross, exactly?

DisgruntledPorcupine wrote:SUPER IMPORTANT MESSAGE THING

There will be a team challenge right after the Day 5 lynch. Teams will be announced right before.

I guess you have to put me on a team but I will not be available right after the Day 5 lynch - and not because I was so bad last time. We're going out to eat and I won't be at home. Have a good day everyone.

Keterman wrote:Canucklehead, I don't understand why I'm expected to post a case on SVS when everything I've found scummy about her I've pointed out already. If anything that post led me to the conclusion of you being her teammate more likely, although heaven forbid one of you two start claiming that the bulk of my case rested on you being on the same team if the other is revealed to be town. But to remind the rest of town:
*snippy snip snip*

Also I'm alarmed at how little comments there were regarding my thoughts on Canuck.

Did I ask you to post a case on SVS??? (This is not a rhetorical/snarky question...I honestly don't remember asking for that.....)

Like I said before, I understand why you think I'm bad. I know you don't agree with my rationale for voting Made, and I'm not sure I could ever convince you that it wasn't motivated by malice/baddie intentions, but it really truly wasn't. Like several other people, I recognized that a Made lynch was inevitable sooner or later since his suspicious-to-others behaviour was not being altered in any way and almost all in-thread conversation was focused solely on Made and Made-related things. When it seemed clear to me that his chances of survival were nil due to the force of popular opinion being expressed in the thread, I decided to vote for him so that I wouldn't be accused of avoiding responsibility and put suspicion on myself and have people focus on me rather than on an actual baddie. Is that self-serving? Yes. Is it baddie-motivated? No, actually.
Again, I could have been stubborn and voted for Mongoose again, but that would have helped nothing, solved nothing, and only made me seem like I was avoiding responsibility. I didn't want to voe for SVS because I'm not convinced that SVS is bad. Everyone believed to at least some degree that Made was bad, I think it is incumbent on civvies to be willing to put their own opinions aside from time to time and listen to the thoughts of players they trust. I did that. You do not agree with this. That's fine. But it doesn't mean I'm bad.
SVS and I are not baddie teammates. (Are you sure you're not having a Misfits hangover, where you nailed me as a baddie and her teammate within about 4 seconds? )
I will continue trying to explain myself and my actions as much as you want, but I think you first have to be willing to accept the basic premise that something that you personally would never consider doing as a townie, or something that you think is illogical or silly or sloppy or whatever, does not make it a universally bad behaviour. Otherwise, we're not really conversing in good faith.

thellama73 wrote:I missed your thoughts on Canuck, Keterman. Now that I go back and look at them, they are astonishingly astute. I've been increasingly suspicious of Canuck this game as well. Her posting pattern alone indicates someone who spends most of their time in a chatzy and occasionally pops in to contribute when needed.

This is not the case. My posting pattern indicates someone who spends most of their time at work/in real life/playing with their dog and occasionally pops in to contribute when the whim strikes them or when they encounter a particularly obscure passage of Merleau-Ponty that they want to procrastinate on trying to wrap their feeble brain around.

Long Con wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Mongoose wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I missed your thoughts on Canuck, Keterman. Now that I go back and look at them, they are astonishingly astute. I've been increasingly suspicious of Canuck this game as well. Her posting pattern alone indicates someone who spends most of their time in a chatzy and occasionally pops in to contribute when needed.

I feel like she has been very active (but that is probably because she keeps wanting to discuss me, haha).

She has been active, but there have been long pauses between her activity, as one would expect from someone who checks into a chatroom before posting.

Ok, you just crossed the line. That's ridiculous, and I done believe that anybody ne really trying to find a baddie would sink to that level. I have been seeing this for a while and kept quiet on it to lay low, but I don't believe at all that you're Civvie anymore.

Frankly, from what I know and what I've seen, you have done nothing but unapologetically hunt Civvies this game, and I don't want to see anymore.

Voting Llama now.

I'm also not sure what line has been crossed here. Obviously, I agree that llama's reason for suspecting me are more than a little spurious....but I'm not sure how they cross any lines of ridiculosity that aren't frequently crossed in any mafia game.

Canucklehead wrote:I'm around very sporadically today, but I'll try to address any suspicions that llama/others have of me as they come up.

Quick and dirty thoughts:
- I was prepared to listen to te anti-SVS arguments from Keter/llama/LC et al today, and still am...but so far in this last page or so since the lynch SVS has sounded civ-like to me. Maybe she's hoodwinking me, I dunno. I'm interested to see how this plays out, but......
:

OK. I think this is the post, Keterman, where you thought I was asking you to post a case on SVS? Yep, I can see how you read it that way (and I do appreciate you re-posting your thoughts on her), but just for clarification I think my meaning in this particular line could better be paraphrased as "The arguments against SVS already posted by Keterman/llama/LC were interesting and I was feeling open to hearing them today and still am.....but so far etc. etc." I meant it more as a statement of how my thoughts on SVS were in flux and not settled (and therefore open to hearing further arguments that would come up) rather than as a demand or expectation for posts to be made on SVS.
Sorry, my bad. That was really poor phrasing on my part.

Canuck, how many games have you played on the syndicate? just wondering

thellama73 wrote:I missed your thoughts on Canuck, Keterman. Now that I go back and look at them, they are astonishingly astute. I've been increasingly suspicious of Canuck this game as well. Her posting pattern alone indicates someone who spends most of their time in a chatzy and occasionally pops in to contribute when needed.

This is a really weird thing to say. People's lives don't revolve around this site, we all have other things to be doing.

LoRab wrote:One of the reasons I play in this extended community is because, historically, we don't call each other scum. I'm really not liking that not being the case in this game and it's making me not want to post.

Also, since when is "meta" a dismissive term?

I think scum can sound quite mean sometimes regardless of context but ultimately I try to remember that some players come from communities where it's just standard practice and isn't meant to be taken that way. At least I'd hope it isn't.

fingersplints wrote:Canuck, how many games have you played on the syndicate? just wondering

This is my third, but in a very short space of time. In addition to this current game, I subbed in to Fight Club, and played Misfits.

Dana had it right with her post against him, and he just deflected it with a "no u" post to put her on the defensive. His reasons for suspecting people have mostly been trifling and contrived, and this last one against you takes the cake.

I don't find scum offensive.

Also I don't find llamas comment crossing a line or weird. There is a difference between someone who is just popping in when RL permits it and someone who seems to conveniently pop in when their name is mentioned or something. I'm not saying I agree that is Canuck, but I have been suspicious of someone in a similar situation before. Maybe it's coincidence, or maybe she is being warned to check the thread. idk I get it though

linki thanks Canuck. Your posting doesn't seem all that different to me, but I was wondering if it seemed a little off due to not being used to forum/players

So no one else thinks the presence of a chat room in which to spend large amounts of time discussing things can affect the frequency or clustering of a player's posts? Okay then.

S~V~S wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote:RIP reywaS

Pardon my ignorance once again SVS, but what is a "ninja" in mafia terms?

Dana, the cat in your icon is ADORABLE. Is he/she yours?

Once again? Have I been condescending? I apologize if this is the case.

A ninja is a civvie killer.

Not necessarily. Or maybe not, I don't know.

In my experience, a ninja is a killer that cannot be blocked, nor can be tracked, followed, or watched. It can have any alignment though.

The "llama suspects people for trivial reasons" thing is ridiculous. Where are the detailed, well thought out cases behind LoRab's votes? Or Ninjablooper's? Or Dana's? or Bea's? Or Boogs'? or Hedgeowl's? or Mongoose's?

thellama73 wrote:

Mongoose wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I missed your thoughts on Canuck, Keterman. Now that I go back and look at them, they are astonishingly astute. I've been increasingly suspicious of Canuck this game as well. Her posting pattern alone indicates someone who spends most of their time in a chatzy and occasionally pops in to contribute when needed.

I feel like she has been very active (but that is probably because she keeps wanting to discuss me, haha).

She has been active, but there have been long pauses between her activity, as one would expect from someone who checks into a chatroom before posting.

I think you assume all baddies check into the chatroom for instructions before they post. As if every time they come online, they are given a list of keywords, phrases, and ideas they must talk about that day.

Is this how you run your mafia chatroom llama?

Oh, and we also don't even know if baddies have BTSC.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Mongoose wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I missed your thoughts on Canuck, Keterman. Now that I go back and look at them, they are astonishingly astute. I've been increasingly suspicious of Canuck this game as well. Her posting pattern alone indicates someone who spends most of their time in a chatzy and occasionally pops in to contribute when needed.

I feel like she has been very active (but that is probably because she keeps wanting to discuss me, haha).

She has been active, but there have been long pauses between her activity, as one would expect from someone who checks into a chatroom before posting.

I think you assume all baddies check into the chatroom for instructions before they post. As if every time they come online, they are given a list of keywords, phrases, and ideas they must talk about that day.

Is this how you run your mafia chatroom llama?

Oh, and we also don't even know if baddies have BTSC.

I don't ever "run" chatrooms, but I have frequently been in ones in which people come in and run their post ideas by the group before posting.

Metalmarsh89 wrote: Oh, and we also don't even know if baddies have BTSC.

Really? Why wouldn't they?

thellama73 wrote:The "llama suspects people for trivial reasons" thing is ridiculous. Where are the detailed, well thought out cases behind LoRab's votes? Or Ninjablooper's? Or Dana's? or Bea's? Or Boogs'? or Hedgeowl's? or Mongoose's?

I think that reason is contrived. Just because Made was civ doesn't mean the case against him was not a good one. I don't know why people don't understand that.

Bullzeye wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote: Oh, and we also don't even know if baddies have BTSC.

Really? Why wouldn't they?

There's no indication in "The Knight Who Says Ni"'s role description, so we can't just assume such a thing. That's the only 'baddie' that's flipped so far.

I know baddies usually do, but that doesn't mean we can assume as such.

thellama73 wrote:So no one else thinks the presence of a chat room in which to spend large amounts of time discussing things can affect the frequency or clustering of a player's posts? Okay then.

No, I think that definitely could affect the posting frequency of a certain kind of player with a certain kind of mafia team....but I am not that kind of player, and I do not have a mafia team. Anyone who has ever been a baddie with me knows that I am a terrible mafia teammate because I rarely contribute to chatrooms, and I ALWAYS get called out in the thread (whether civ or baddie) for posting too little or too little substance. Since you have not been a baddie with me before, you would not know that, which is why I didn't consider your comment to be "crossing a line". I'm sure baddie teams do exist that do a lot of working together and planning and strategizing, but I can assure you that even if I were bad (insert necessary denial of that fact here), the reasons that my posting frequnecy might be "clustered" would not be because I was spending time in a baddie chat strategizing. "Canucklehead" and "strategy discussion" are not words that blend together easily. I think SVS and I had about 8 PMs total through the entirety of the Misfits game, and i considered myself to be super duper unusually involved in our team that game. I am not great at disguising my baddieness and keeping a consistent playstyle from game to game, but one thing that IS absolutely consistent for me is my sometimes erratic and uneven contribution level. I play for fun, I don't take it at all seriously, so I post when I feel like it and when I'm having a mental break from working, regardless of my alignment in any given game.

So I'm not saying that your theory qua theory is flawed...just that it is flawed when applied to me.

And for the record, I actually don't agree with LC's characterizations of your cases/points as trivial. I think you're wrong about me on this particular point (your other reasons for suspecting me are weightier, I think...still wrong, but weightier), but I think you're civ and have demonstrated that by being straightforward and unflinching in sharing your thoughts and opinions.

linki dinki

ETA: the one exception I can think of to my truancy from baddie chatrooms was the first Recruitment game at TP. I had a shittonne of fun that game and hung out in our baddie chat a LOT. I have no idea how we did as a team in the actual game (I think we lost? Probably pretty hard?), but I will admit that I did in that instance spend a lot of time chatting and planning who we were going to recruit and kill. FoD Forever!

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

thellama73 wrote:The "llama suspects people for trivial reasons" thing is ridiculous. Where are the detailed, well thought out cases behind LoRab's votes? Or Ninjablooper's? Or Dana's? or Bea's? Or Boogs'? or Hedgeowl's? or Mongoose's?

I think that reason is contrived. Just because Made was civ doesn't mean the case against him was not a good one. I don't know why people don't understand that.

i don't think anyone is making this argument about the case against Made?

Canucklehead wrote:

thellama73 wrote:So no one else thinks the presence of a chat room in which to spend large amounts of time discussing things can affect the frequency or clustering of a player's posts? Okay then.

No, I think that definitely could affect the posting frequency of a certain kind of player with a certain kind of mafia team....but I am not that kind of player, and I do not have a mafia team. Anyone who has ever been a baddie with me knows that I am a terrible mafia teammate because I rarely contribute to chatrooms, and I ALWAYS get called out in the thread (whether civ or baddie) for posting too little or too little substance. Since you have not been a baddie with me before, you would not know that, which is why I didn't consider your comment to be "crossing a line". I'm sure baddie teams do exist that do a lot of working together and planning and strategizing, but I can assure you that even if I were bad (insert necessary denial of that fact here), the reasons that my posting frequnecy might be "clustered" would not be because I was spending time in a baddie chat strategizing. "Canucklehead" and "strategy discussion" are not words that blend together easily. I think SVS and I had about 8 PMs total through the entirety of the Misfits game, and i considered myself to be super duper unusually involved in our team that game. I am not great at disguising my baddieness and keeping a consistent playstyle from game to game, but one thing that IS absolutely consistent for me is my sometimes erratic and uneven contribution level. I play for fun, I don't take it at all seriously, so I post when I feel like it and when I'm having a mental break from working, regardless of my alignment in any given game.

So I'm not saying that your theory qua theory is flawed...just that it is flawed when applied to me.

And for the record, I actually don't agree with LC's characterizations of your cases/points as trivial. I think you're wrong about me on this particular point (your other reasons for suspecting me are weightier, I think...still wrong, but weightier), but I think you're civ and have demonstrated that by being straightforward and unflinching in sharing your thoughts and opinions.

linki dinki

This is a very fair and measured response. Thank you. I was only making an observation and I was frankly shocked with the strong pushback I received. Nowhere did I say I was planning to vote for you today, just that I thought Keterman made some good points and adding an observation of my own. Now I have to wonder if the violence of the response from others itself means something.

Canucklehead wrote:ETA: the one exception I can think of to my truancy from baddie chatrooms was the first Recruitment game at TP. I had a shittonne of fun that game and hung out in our baddie chat a LOT. I have no idea how we did as a team in the actual game (I think we lost? Probably pretty hard?), but I will admit that I did in that instance spend a lot of time chatting and planning who we were going to recruit and kill. FoD Forever!

Best team ever.

We lost, but I got to the final four! I blame LoRab because of that stupid amulet. UGH! Still haunting me to this day.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote:RIP reywaS

Pardon my ignorance once again SVS, but what is a "ninja" in mafia terms?

Dana, the cat in your icon is ADORABLE. Is he/she yours?

Once again? Have I been condescending? I apologize if this is the case.

A ninja is a civvie killer.

Not necessarily. Or maybe not, I don't know.

In my experience, a ninja is a killer that cannot be blocked, nor can be tracked, followed, or watched. It can have any alignment though.

In this community we generally understand it to be a civ aligned killer.

thellama73 wrote:

Mongoose wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I missed your thoughts on Canuck, Keterman. Now that I go back and look at them, they are astonishingly astute. I've been increasingly suspicious of Canuck this game as well. Her posting pattern alone indicates someone who spends most of their time in a chatzy and occasionally pops in to contribute when needed.

I feel like she has been very active (but that is probably because she keeps wanting to discuss me, haha).

She has been active, but there have been long pauses between her activity, as one would expect from someone who checks into a chatroom before posting.

Or maybe Canuck's posts are generally long ones, big blocks of text, multiquoting masterpieces , and that takes more time to get into the thread than , say, someone who just throws short accusations out there to see what sticks, to see if he can get some people to go along with it. Like you.

I think Canuck is being surprisingly cool about you doing it to her, actually.

I have a question for SVS. Who is your top suspect?

I believe Llama's are SVS and LC, and now apparently LC's are Llama and SVS.

I am a little surprised at the turn around LC has done from SVS to Llama, after not suspecting him.

I have already started to forget some of my thread impressions from 8 pages of reading last night, but I believe juliets list was something that jived with me. I was surprised to see Reywas flip civ as well. People of interest to me would also be MM, Mongoose, Dana, and possibly SVS.

Long Con wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Mongoose wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I missed your thoughts on Canuck, Keterman. Now that I go back and look at them, they are astonishingly astute. I've been increasingly suspicious of Canuck this game as well. Her posting pattern alone indicates someone who spends most of their time in a chatzy and occasionally pops in to contribute when needed.

I feel like she has been very active (but that is probably because she keeps wanting to discuss me, haha).

She has been active, but there have been long pauses between her activity, as one would expect from someone who checks into a chatroom before posting.

Or maybe Canuck's posts are generally long ones, big blocks of text, multiquoting masterpieces , and that takes more time to get into the thread than , say, someone who just throws short accusations out there to see what sticks, to see if he can get some people to go along with it. Like you.

I think Canuck is being surprisingly cool about you doing it to her, actually.

I am surprisingly cool, in general.

Hedgeowl wrote: I am a little surprised at the turn around LC has done from SVS to Llama, after not suspecting him.

You and me both, sister. I seem to have touched a nerve.

thellama73 wrote:

Hedgeowl wrote: I am a little surprised at the turn around LC has done from SVS to Llama, after not suspecting him.

You and me both, sister. I seem to have touched a nerve.

You did indeed, it was my baddie-sensing nerve. I've been watching you all game and you seem to have the majority convinced you're Civvie, but Civvies don't need to twist things to put a negative light on people in a mudslingy kind of way like that.

How you say things is important. You didn't bring up Canucks posting style and really analyze why it was the way it was, you looked for something you could stick to her to get people suspicious of her. That's baddie behaviour.

Long Con wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Hedgeowl wrote: I am a little surprised at the turn around LC has done from SVS to Llama, after not suspecting him.

You and me both, sister. I seem to have touched a nerve.

You did indeed, it was my baddie-sensing nerve. I've been watching you all game and you seem to have the majority convinced you're Civvie, but Civvies don't need to twist things to put a negative light on people in a mudslingy kind of way like that.

If that is indeed what I did (which I deny) then civvies DO do that, since I am a civvie.

thellama73 wrote:

Long Con wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Hedgeowl wrote: I am a little surprised at the turn around LC has done from SVS to Llama, after not suspecting him.

You and me both, sister. I seem to have touched a nerve.

You did indeed, it was my baddie-sensing nerve. I've been watching you all game and you seem to have the majority convinced you're Civvie, but Civvies don't need to twist things to put a negative light on people in a mudslingy kind of way like that.

If that is indeed what I did (which I deny) then civvies DO do that, since I am a civvie.

Baddies and Civvies alike say "I am a Civvie", so sorry if that defense doesn't blow my skirt up.

Long Con wrote:Dana had it right with her post against him, and he just deflected it with a "no u" post to put her on the defensive. His reasons for suspecting people have mostly been trifling and contrived, and this last one against you takes the cake.

I agree, he didn't really address what I said other than saying he wanted Made dead the whole time and then changing the subject.

Voting Llama because I just have to know his role!

Hmmmm....re-evaluating my reads at the moment. I'm biased against a scum read on Llama because to me he acts scummy all of the time, almost literally every post he makes. SVS's defenses have sounded genuine to me so far. Canucklehead I'm unsure about. I'll see where the day goes before I make any conclusions.

Dana wrote:

Long Con wrote:Dana had it right with her post against him, and he just deflected it with a "no u" post to put her on the defensive. His reasons for suspecting people have mostly been trifling and contrived, and this last one against you takes the cake.

I agree, he didn't really address what I said other than saying he wanted Made dead the whole time and then changing the subject.

Voting Llama because I just have to know his role!

I didn't change the subject. You said I made cases based on minor things. I pointed out that everyone else votes based on even more minor things, especially you. I think that is relevant.

S~V~S wrote:Seriously, have I been condescending? I worry about stuff like that, I worry about hurting peoples feelings, etc. If i have done so, if I have made you feel ignorant, I am so sorry. You say "once again" like there is a pattern of this kind of thing, and if that is so, I apologize.

Catching up with the thread, but I wanted to address this first - you are absolutely not being condescending! That's just the way I talk, and I was afraid it might come across that way, so apologies for making you feel bad Sorry for just responding to this now (I tend to mafia in spurts when I have time and when I don't literally fall asleep sitting straight up on the couch, like I just did about two minutes ago). I figured I'd ask you since a) you used the term and b) you're usually the quickest and most efficient answerer of such questions

Now, going back to read!

Hedgeowl wrote:I have a question for SVS. Who is your top suspect?

I believe Llama's are SVS and LC, and now apparently LC's are Llama and SVS.

I am a little surprised at the turn around LC has done from SVS to Llama, after not suspecting him.

I have already started to forget some of my thread impressions from 8 pages of reading last night, but I believe juliets list was something that jived with me. I was surprised to see Reywas flip civ as well. People of interest to me would also be MM, Mongoose, Dana, and possibly SVS.

Llama. I have gone back & forth on LC; he sounds insincere to me, but tbh, he ALWAYS sounds insincere to me, same with Llama, actually. But in llamas case I think he has been somewhat opportunistic, whereas LC really has seemed less so to me. Llama mostly suspected me for going soft, as he viewed it, on Made. He made that big post about how we were bad together with lynch saves in our pocket, etc. When that was shown not to be the case (and I believe Made to have really been Lance) rather than saying, OK, I was wrong, Llama continued to suspect me.

The other people that suspected me suspected me for the opposite reason, that I was pushing too hard on a civvie and coming up with theories that would make him look bad even if he was not. THOSE people i can see still suspecting me when Made came up Lancelot. BWT suspecting me makes more sense to me than llama suspecting me in light of Mades lynch.

nijuukyugou wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Seriously, have I been condescending? I worry about stuff like that, I worry about hurting peoples feelings, etc. If i have done so, if I have made you feel ignorant, I am so sorry. You say "once again" like there is a pattern of this kind of thing, and if that is so, I apologize.

Catching up with the thread, but I wanted to address this first - you are absolutely not being condescending! That's just the way I talk, and I was afraid it might come across that way, so apologies for making you feel bad Sorry for just responding to this now (I tend to mafia in spurts when I have time and when I don't literally fall asleep sitting straight up on the couch, like I just did about two minutes ago). I figured I'd ask you since a) you used the term and b) you're usually the quickest and most efficient answerer of such questions

Now, going back to read!

Oh Good

And now for some thoughts, while I'm actually able to post AND read what others say:

1) Canuck, I feel like I've picked on you in the last few games (and I hope you don't take it personally! ), but your response about voting Made to make yourself "take responsibility" (and not voting for who you really thought was bad, Mongoose) is...extremely weird and unsound logic. To me, it seems you are doing the opposite of what you say by voting for someone that already has the ridiculous majority of votes. You get to say in the end that "oh, well he looked bad and everyone else voted for him" when he turns up Civ. That's not taking responsibility - that's jumping on a bandwagon. Your responses to Ket seem floundering a la Misfits (which you've pointed out several times :P). For the record, however, others voted for Made in a similar manner, even though they claimed to have a conviction that he was a Civ (Lancelot, as they stated) but voted for him anyway because "his lynch was inevitable/necessary" (MM and LC, and possibly others although I'm having a hell of a time going back through the thread and I'd like to get this posted).

2) I think LC's sudden turn on llama for a comment I thought was rather innocuous to be...odd. I've seen other people accuse players of only being on when it's convenient and possibly being in a chat, so...not really understanding why THAT happened to be the comment that set him off. Is there more to the case than "That's what a baddie would say!" LC? I'm curious.

3) I'm still looking at SVS. You are a hard cookie to read, madam, but also a master at turning the thread in the direction you want that I've noticed particularly in this game. My gut and my previous reads from this game tell me your defense is naught but crocodile tears (I don't know why I'm talking like that, but it sounds both cool and stupid in my head and I'm sticking with it).

4) Boogs has made the same number of posts in this game than I have, and that's...REALLY weird, as he's not usually this quiet in my experience. I am most curious about his most recent post, which tries to steer us away from SVS. He said her posts are "genuine" but doesn't offer an explanation as to how they're more genuine in comparison to Ket's (and others') reads that they are, well, not genuine (I know you mentioned this, Ket, but I figured it was worth looking at a second time). Any further thoughts, Mr. Kitty?

5) I never knew the term "scum" actually offended people! I saw people using it in Xmen behind their socks but never really thought how it wasn't used anywhere else. Ya learn something new every day

nijuukyugou wrote: 5) I never knew the term "scum" actually offended people! I saw people using it in Xmen behind their socks but never really thought how it wasn't used anywhere else. Ya learn something new every day

It rubs me the wrong way, but I try not to worry about it since I know it is just a cultural thing.

Wow, what an amazingly waffly post, Ninjajujube.

And I also noticed how Boogs backed right off of me; prior to that post he was right up there with Llama, all gung ho to rid the thread of me. So did Keterman, but you don't mention that. That did not get your attention?

And tell me why you say this re Crocodile tears; it's a provacative statement. Can you be more precise, or is it just vibes?