The Syndicate

Sorsha wrote:Why are people voting and not giving reasons

I just looked over bass's posts and not liking them. When it was Juliets vs Canuck he decided to vote for Canuck then the next two lynches when Juliets was a candidate he was a no show. He's showed up to vote in the night polls but not the lynch polls plus he's been posting elsewhere on the forums during all of this.

I had originally planned on voting Floyd today but his posts from last night have me doubting his baddie-ness. Tranq- how sure are you about Floyd? Do you think you could be mistaken?

Unlikely.

Bass doesn't have alot of stuff to go on. Only 1 mention of Luke here:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Is Luke getting votes because he hasn't been posting?

And there was that time where he made odd statements about the double lynch option earlier in the game:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I think the 2 lynches is an amazing tool for the civs to use the only problem I'm having is it's still early in the game and we could loss two civs. We have to also think about the mafia knows what is going to happen with the vote tonight before they kill so they could use the kill to throw more chaos into this up coming Lynch. That's why at this point it makes more sense to use non changeable votes.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

Tranq wrote:@ Bass: Even 10 lynches in a row are better than having only only lynch. The point being that we basically skipped a Night phase in which the mafia could've killed.

I never thought about it like that.

All of which basically boils down to the following smiley:

fingersplints wrote:
I'm not sure how you can say that you don't see how I could suspect both sides of something. There are many roles in this game, and because they might not be teammates it doesn't mean they both couldn't be bad or Indy. Lorab responded pretty well after, but what caught my eye in her comment was that she was subtly pushing looking at those who could have been distancing without mentioning names. Seemed vague for Lorab.
The other thing that bothered me was how many people were jumping on sig while no one was mentioning Lorab for having a similar (although not totally the same corrected by juliets) thought.

What was your suspicion of sig at the time? If the main thing about him at the time was that he had seemingly slipped about sounding so definitive about why Timmer 1.0 was NK'd, and you said you liked the thoughts on Sig, how can Lorab be suspicious for mentioning the very some thing? I think my confusion stems from a lack of understanding your views on Sig at the time.

Tranq wrote:

Golden wrote:It feels like a new post-juliets dawn where new suspicions need to come forth.

I have two clear thoughts so far. The first is that I can see a scenario where Dr Wilgy is bad and on the Cabal and they set up his 'death' knowing the night wouldn't count for cred. My impression from TH, and it was backed up somewhat when I asked about it in the thread, is that this is exactly the kind of gambit Wilgy would enjoy. It seems up his alley.

The second is that I get the feeling that tranq may know more about his death than he can expressly say. I get the sense that he has been honest in his suspicions about who killed him. Tranq, you may have answered this already, but do you know why/how you came back to life? I don't think Tranq is on the circle of decay, and he was killed by the Cabal, so that would seem to clear him... unless the Cabal wasted a kill knowing he would rezz (for cred reasons). Which seems unlikely to me.

So, I might vote floyd to see if tranq is right.

I'm going to listen to what people have to say about others too.

Golden, your DrWilgy suspicion assumes the Cabal is responsible for the restarted Night. Why assume this? Isn't it more likely a non-Cabal restarted the Night?

What, you mean just based on the odds? You have a point.

Here is the thing... Wilgy 'asked' in the thread to be killed that day. I feel like Wilgy, at least, knew about the restarted night. The whole thing read weird to me.

Ah. I forgot about the part where he asked to be NKd

Hmm.

My main beef with Bass is his posts during the Canuck vs juliets lynch. Here are his only two posts from that Day:


3:37pm

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Sorry haven't been around . I'm catching up now.

9:12pm

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I ag ree I think juliets and canuck are both wroth lynching but I think Canuck is where my vote is going tonight.

What pings me is that he didn't justify why he chose Canuck over juliets when the lynch was 8-5 in juliets' favor when he voted. If he had said why he voted that way I would feel better, but it looks like a save. If he thoughts juliets was worth lynching, why didn't he vote for the frontrunner? There's also a 6 hour gap between when he said he was catching up and when he voted with nothing in between, which makes it feel like he was intentionally trying to stay out of the discussion that Day.

He doesn't have any on-topic posts since that vote. He just votes in the night polls.

Basically I'd like to hear from Bass about why he voted the way he did.

Tranq wrote:What are your thoughts on Timmer right now?

I'm glad timmer has the opportunity to contribute, it might help me get a firmer read. I really thought that he would have objects but his denials about that sounded sincere. My timmer suspicion was really pushing him to give responses and see where I landed on him, and overall I felt he came out the other side of the fire looking ok. I don't entirely trust him, but I feel a lot better about him than I did a couple of days ago.

@splints - there is one thing that bothers me about LoRab... she has a LOT of posts and yet I really don't feel like I know where she stands on anything except Mac.

This could just as easily be me as it is her, though. I need to read back her posts specifically.

Golden wrote:

Tranq wrote:

Golden wrote:It feels like a new post-juliets dawn where new suspicions need to come forth.

I have two clear thoughts so far. The first is that I can see a scenario where Dr Wilgy is bad and on the Cabal and they set up his 'death' knowing the night wouldn't count for cred. My impression from TH, and it was backed up somewhat when I asked about it in the thread, is that this is exactly the kind of gambit Wilgy would enjoy. It seems up his alley.

The second is that I get the feeling that tranq may know more about his death than he can expressly say. I get the sense that he has been honest in his suspicions about who killed him. Tranq, you may have answered this already, but do you know why/how you came back to life? I don't think Tranq is on the circle of decay, and he was killed by the Cabal, so that would seem to clear him... unless the Cabal wasted a kill knowing he would rezz (for cred reasons). Which seems unlikely to me.

So, I might vote floyd to see if tranq is right.

I'm going to listen to what people have to say about others too.

Golden, your DrWilgy suspicion assumes the Cabal is responsible for the restarted Night. Why assume this? Isn't it more likely a non-Cabal restarted the Night?

What, you mean just based on the odds? You have a point.

Here is the thing... Wilgy 'asked' in the thread to be killed that day. I feel like Wilgy, at least, knew about the restarted night. The whole thing read weird to me.

Wilgy doesn't remind me at all of how he played in Recruitment IV, the only other game I played with him (he was civ). He was jokey and OT in that game, but he still had solid contributions. He doesn't seem to be taking this game seriously. His post history is sparse on content, OT or otherwise.

fingersplints wrote:

timmer wrote:Read through splints' posts.

So one question I have for splints, from earlier in the game, is what this post was about:

fingersplints wrote:RIP Banana and RIPIYWG Timmer. Sorry for missing the vote and general absence. Will try to be more around from here on out.

I like the points about sig, and am interested to hear his response. Lorab's post remarking about Timmer's low posting also bothers me.

LoRab wrote:Thinking about Timmer's death...and RIPIYWG Timmer of course...two things dawn on me. One is that the mafia team was going for a low poster. Two is that it would seem like good strategy for someone to separate themselves from killing a low poster by talking about how against lynching low posters they are. Just a thought.

Partially because the idea is similar to that of sig's (something discussed in btsc maybe) and this really just feels like trying to set up someone talking about lynching a low poster.

I read this as you agreeing that sig is suspicious (like the points about sig) but simultaneously suspecting lorab for suspecting sig? What was your gist, here? I don't see how you could suspect both sides of something?

As for the rest of splints' posts, she never really latched onto the cases against the known baddies, but has spent time commenting on things without getting too involved, a lot like how juliets often does. She NO U'd Epig at one point.

I'm not sure anything cries out as baddie specifically, but I don't get a strong civ vibe, either. The latest posts are a bit odd, to say the least, but maybe she's just not caught up?

I'm not sure how you can say that you don't see how I could suspect both sides of something. There are many roles in this game, and because they might not be teammates it doesn't mean they both couldn't be bad or Indy. Lorab responded pretty well after, but what caught my eye in her comment was that she was subtly pushing looking at those who could have been distancing without mentioning names. Seemed vague for Lorab.
The other thing that bothered me was how many people were jumping on sig while no one was mentioning Lorab for having a similar (although not totally the same corrected by juliets) thought.

I'm neither bad nor indie. And yes, I was being intentionally vague. Partly because I didn't want to make a Mac case at that point (I'm pretty sure it was mainly mac I was thinking of at that moment), and partly because I honestly didn't have time to look at who else had made that point.

I don't quite see what you see Sig and I having similar thoughts on? And I suspect Sig, so quite curious about that.

Golden wrote:@splints - there is one thing that bothers me about LoRab... she has a LOT of posts and yet I really don't feel like I know where she stands on anything except Mac.

This could just as easily be me as it is her, though. I need to read back her posts specifically.

In sum: I still suspect Mac. And Sig.

I agree with you on Dr W. Because of points made (and posts I've made) as well as similar reasons for suspicions you had earlier in the game.

I also think that points against Timmer have been apt.

I haven't looked deeply into other cases that are currently being discussed.

Also: eye me all you want. I shave my head again (to raise money for childhood cancer research, not just for fun) and I totally rock the buzz cut. I'll even twirl.

Tell me more about your suspicion of sig, Lorab. Does the fact that he's dead make you suspect him more?

Turnip Head wrote:Tell me more about your suspicion of sig, Lorab. Does the fact that he's dead make you suspect him more?

It actually doesn't change my suspicion of him at all.

LoRab what's up homie? You got something to say to me?

Not really.

And since voting early seems the hip thing the kids are doing these days, I voted Dr W, at least for the time being. I think he's bad.

You have a scum read of me but you don't want to talk to me in the thread to help formulate a case? Seems legit.

MacDougall wrote:You have a scum read of me but you don't want to talk to me in the thread to help formulate a case? Seems legit.

I've hashed and rehashed my case several times. It hasn't changed. No reason to bring it up again. You haven't done anything that has made me change my mind.

Nothing at all. Not even enough to give you pause. Very discerning of you.

I'm open to Floyd, Mac, or Wildgy maybe.

Turnip Head wrote:My main beef with Bass is his posts during the Canuck vs juliets lynch. Here are his only two posts from that Day:


3:37pm

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Sorry haven't been around . I'm catching up now.

9:12pm

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I ag ree I think juliets and canuck are both wroth lynching but I think Canuck is where my vote is going tonight.

What pings me is that he didn't justify why he chose Canuck over juliets when the lynch was 8-5 in juliets' favor when he voted. If he had said why he voted that way I would feel better, but it looks like a save. If he thoughts juliets was worth lynching, why didn't he vote for the frontrunner? There's also a 6 hour gap between when he said he was catching up and when he voted with nothing in between, which makes it feel like he was intentionally trying to stay out of the discussion that Day.

He doesn't have any on-topic posts since that vote. He just votes in the night polls.

Basically I'd like to hear from Bass about why he voted the way he did.

I voted that way because more people I trusted voted that way and I wasn't keeping up as much as I should have been.

MacDougall wrote:Nothing at all. Not even enough to give you pause. Very discerning of you.

You've been pretty clear about dismissing my thoughts and not refuting any of my accusations. You've acknowledged that I suspect you, repeatedly, but that's it. I've thought things through. I have come to the same conclusion. Just like you suspect people, I suspect people. You happen to be one of the people I suspect. I am discerning, even if my discernment doesn't end with the conclusion you'd prefer.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:My main beef with Bass is his posts during the Canuck vs juliets lynch. Here are his only two posts from that Day:


3:37pm

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Sorry haven't been around . I'm catching up now.

9:12pm

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I ag ree I think juliets and canuck are both wroth lynching but I think Canuck is where my vote is going tonight.

What pings me is that he didn't justify why he chose Canuck over juliets when the lynch was 8-5 in juliets' favor when he voted. If he had said why he voted that way I would feel better, but it looks like a save. If he thoughts juliets was worth lynching, why didn't he vote for the frontrunner? There's also a 6 hour gap between when he said he was catching up and when he voted with nothing in between, which makes it feel like he was intentionally trying to stay out of the discussion that Day.

He doesn't have any on-topic posts since that vote. He just votes in the night polls.

Basically I'd like to hear from Bass about why he voted the way he did.

I voted that way because more people I trusted voted that way and I wasn't keeping up as much as I should have been.

That is... a very clever answer.

Bass IS Clever

Bass why weren't you here for either of the Juliets lynches the past two days?

LoRab wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Tell me more about your suspicion of sig, Lorab. Does the fact that he's dead make you suspect him more?

It actually doesn't change my suspicion of him at all.

Did you have a particular team you think he was on?

I still think typh was bad, what do you think about him?

Tranq wrote:

Sorsha wrote:Why are people voting and not giving reasons

I just looked over bass's posts and not liking them. When it was Juliets vs Canuck he decided to vote for Canuck then the next two lynches when Juliets was a candidate he was a no show. He's showed up to vote in the night polls but not the lynch polls plus he's been posting elsewhere on the forums during all of this.

I had originally planned on voting Floyd today but his posts from last night have me doubting his baddie-ness. Tranq- how sure are you about Floyd? Do you think you could be mistaken?

Unlikely.

Bass doesn't have alot of stuff to go on. Only 1 mention of Luke here:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Is Luke getting votes because he hasn't been posting?

And there was that time where he made odd statements about the double lynch option earlier in the game:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I think the 2 lynches is an amazing tool for the civs to use the only problem I'm having is it's still early in the game and we could loss two civs. We have to also think about the mafia knows what is going to happen with the vote tonight before they kill so they could use the kill to throw more chaos into this up coming Lynch. That's why at this point it makes more sense to use non changeable votes.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

Tranq wrote:@ Bass: Even 10 lynches in a row are better than having only only lynch. The point being that we basically skipped a Night phase in which the mafia could've killed.

I never thought about it like that.

All of which basically boils down to the following smiley:

You don't think it's suspicious that he voted for Canuck in a lynch that ended up tied between Juliets and Canuck, that he was absent for the Juliets vs Mac lynch and absent for the lynch that actually got Juliets lynched despite being active in other threads on the forum?

Do you have any suspicions other than Floyd?

fingersplints wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

fingersplints wrote:Don't blame you. I haven't been around. I am a civvie though, and hope I am around long enough now to prove it to you.

The beacon sounds interesting

Ripiywg dfaraday and bye juliets. I'm taking a break after this game too so see you around soon

splints what was the purpose of the underlined? It feels like you're talking just to talk

Not talking just to talk. Just recapping a bit on everything I had just read. Idk what to make of it, and I wish I had a better term to describe it then that, but I like to use interesting I think that someone should check it out. Not sure how much there is to speculate on it until we can figure out more though.

splintsy, the first embedded quote is the first post from you in roughly five days. Because your only observation was that the beacon sounds interesting, I accuse you of talking just to talk, and you respond with the underlined.

Your recap "on everything [you] had just read" only includes saying rip to the two recent deaths, and saying that you think the beacon sounds interesting. Those are things that had only just happened, and you hadn't posted in five days.

I believe one of two things is true. Either you really did get caught up on all that you've missed and came out of it with no new suspicions, or you were already caught up and just not contributing.

I do believe you thought the beacon sounded interesting though.

Sorsha wrote:Bass why weren't you here for either of the Juliets lynches the past two days?

I've been super busy.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

Sorsha wrote:Bass why weren't you here for either of the Juliets lynches the past two days?

I've been super busy.

I believe you. It says "Location: DMV" underneath your avatar.

Bass what do you think about the game?

Feeling that Bass is a badder here despite my turnip vote.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:My main beef with Bass is his posts during the Canuck vs juliets lynch. Here are his only two posts from that Day:


3:37pm

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Sorry haven't been around . I'm catching up now.

9:12pm

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I ag ree I think juliets and canuck are both wroth lynching but I think Canuck is where my vote is going tonight.

What pings me is that he didn't justify why he chose Canuck over juliets when the lynch was 8-5 in juliets' favor when he voted. If he had said why he voted that way I would feel better, but it looks like a save. If he thoughts juliets was worth lynching, why didn't he vote for the frontrunner? There's also a 6 hour gap between when he said he was catching up and when he voted with nothing in between, which makes it feel like he was intentionally trying to stay out of the discussion that Day.

He doesn't have any on-topic posts since that vote. He just votes in the night polls.

Basically I'd like to hear from Bass about why he voted the way he did.

I voted that way because more people I trusted voted that way and I wasn't keeping up as much as I should have been.

OK so you have people you trust?
So.. ergo.. you have people you don't trust... people you think are bad?
Who are they?

MacDougall wrote:Feeling that Bass is a badder here despite my turnip vote.

What do you think about Floyd? Those are the two i'm contemplating between right now. Id like to finally put the Floyd suspicion to rest (plus it might get Tranq to give us more help) but I think they're both bad.

We (all of us) need to get more on the same page with votes because this is ridiculous right now.

Dom's got a decent point. If you are paying attention enough to have people you trust, you must have people you don't trust, Bass. If you aren't paying enough attention to have any suspicions, how do you have people you trust?

How has Wilgy been in the past regarding deliberate WIFOM in thread? I can see how his "kill me" [Wilgy gets killed/night gets reset] sequence looks bad. But all of his posts, allg ame, have been wifom'y glib goofiness. Has he done this before? I can't remember anything quite this lightweight. If he has, was it indicative of alignment at all?

I did a sort of ISO of TH, because I thought its time I started to do some today of people I don't really have any read on. TH was first, because I've just been beginning to get good civ vibes.

My findings:

There is nothing to suggest his perspective shifted in the slightest from before and after the Dr Dre experiment, that I can see. TH's claim that he does not know the point of the experiment is believable.
TH has been pretty consistently baddie-hunting. It's a good look. Overall I get a pretty strong town vibe from him. Having said that, (in light of us not having had a member of the circle of decay flip yet) there is nothing that looks particularly definitive that would rule him out of being on the circle team, so I guess that is possible - Cabal seems strongly unlikely (unless he doesn't know who his teammates are ). But he still seems to be baddie hunting.

TH - some questions I got out of reading your iso.

Do you have any idea who is on the circle of decay team? Who do you suspect of being bad who you think is most likely to be on that team rather than Luke/Juliets team?
I haven't really seen you pursue the 'who is Dr Dre' angle much. Do you feel you have any more you could share on what ideas you have about who this could be? Do you think the role is more likely bad or indy (or even civ?)
If bass was off the table, who would be your most likely vote today?

Sorsha wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Feeling that Bass is a badder here despite my turnip vote.

What do you think about Floyd? Those are the two i'm contemplating between right now. Id like to finally put the Floyd suspicion to rest (plus it might get Tranq to give us more help) but I think they're both bad.

We (all of us) need to get more on the same page with votes because this is ridiculous right now.

Floyd is a scum read too. I will vote for whoever you do.

Golden wrote:Do you have any idea who is on the circle of decay team? Who do you suspect of being bad who you think is most likely to be on that team rather than Luke/Juliets team?

I don't have splints tied to a particular team but I think she might be bad. There's more evidence for Bass being on the juliets team but I think he could be on either one, because either way I think his contributions smell baddie.

Golden wrote:I haven't really seen you pursue the 'who is Dr Dre' angle much. Do you feel you have any more you could share on what ideas you have about who this could be? Do you think the role is more likely bad or indy (or even civ?)

I haven't been sure what to think about him, but I thought I remembered him being a civvie in the original World Apart, so I went to LP to check, and here's his role description:

World Apart wrote:Dr. Von Dreszen – The Doctor has BTSC with Silver Golem and Jimmy. Dr. Von Dreszen sends in the Silver Golem kill PM. Keeper of the life-gem that animates the Silver Golem.

Each night, Dr Von Dreszen will choose one person to abduct into his laboratory, to experiment on in the name of Science. (Yup, he's still on the Good Guys team, he just has questionable priorities when it comes to 'the greater good' - he believes his experiments will help to eliminate evil and suffering from the land.)

The Golem is also in this game though and looks like an indy, so there's nothing to say the doctor is a civvie in this game as well. I just don't really know who it is and haven't devoted much of my time to figuring it out. I know of three players that were in the area but there could have been more. I think if he's a baddie then we'll get him eventually, but he hasn't experimented on anyone lately, so it could have been Typh.

Golden wrote:If bass was off the table, who would be your most likely vote today?

splints, and I might vote that way anyway. Take a look at her post history and also the things I pointed out about her word use. I think splintsy gets accused of being blendy a lot when she's a civ, but that usually includes her sharing her thoughts. But here I think she's intentionally trying to fly under the radar and avoid attention. All she wanted us to know was that she thought the beacon was interesting.

Dear Living Statue,
I fear you are dead or have been turned. Perhaps even stuck forever if the Gem is lost. Nonetheless, I have received word that my destiny lies elsewhere. If you are alive and still an ally, good luck to you brave sir. Perhaps one day we will meet again.

Sincerely,
Matt F

I'm pretty sure it wasn't Typh, I have him in another role.

I'd be pretty happy voting splints with you. She reminds me a lot of how she played in Bullets over Broadway, when she was bad. I also think she has been implying she was responsible for that beacon, which even though it doesn't seem to have killed anyone seems like it could have.

I understand sorsha's point about us crystallising around one person, but there are a few candidates on the table today that I could genuinely see being bad, and I don't necessarily think it is unhelpful to our reads of people that there is uncertainty about the way the lynch is going to go right now.

In what ways does splintsy remind you of BoB?

Turnip Head wrote:In what ways does splintsy remind you of BoB?

In that game I could pin nothing on her... I felt like there was nothing to point to her alignment. She stayed so far under the radar, she didn't really engage a lot. Her posting frequency was about the same as in this game. In the end, we only really got to lynch her through process of elimination, because it was virtually impossible to build a case any other way.

Golden wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:In what ways does splintsy remind you of BoB?

In that game I could pin nothing on her... I felt like there was nothing to point to her alignment. She stayed so far under the radar, she didn't really engage a lot.

This is how I feel about her. Having been bad with her a few times, I think she struggles to be engaged more as a baddie than a civvie.

So I finally got the time to read through MetalMarsh's history thoroughly. His votes are all over the place and often unexplained, but I do think it's consistent with a Witherdeath alignment. He cited Typhoony's long defensive post on juliets as wish-washy and reasoning for voting for him, but he also voted for him two lynches (4-1 and 4-2) prior to that post. Since other votes had been left with minimal explanation that could be a sign of nothing, but then I also find this post a bit suspect. He had been voting for Typhoony consistently but never explained it, and when asked to give an opinion on juliets, he says "No idea" but immediately rushes to justify his post on Typhoony when only tangentially related. The reason this rubs me wrong is that it reminds me of my first ever scum game on RYM #86; to summarize, I was bussing Turnip alongside a case to get MetalMarsh (town that game) lynched. I had a long case on MetalMarsh written, but found myself struggling to find the right time to slander Turnip, and jumped on the first opportunity to give my opinion on Turnip even when barely related. I sucked that game and obviously MetalMarsh has more experience than me, and it wouldn't actually be a bus since Typhoony was killed by Witherdeath, but I think an inconsistency in conviction is always suspect. His long ISO on Canuck where he has no other posts as pointed is another case of this. Worth noting that "No idea" regarding juliets is suspicious on its own merits as well, and that keeping his votes on Typhoony at that stage of the game meant avoiding the Luke and juliets trains.

I have played a few games with him before so the biggest thing going for him in his favor is that I've noted him as a little wackier anyways in terms of meta, but to this extent I'm not seeing a townie in him. There's also the possibility of Circle of Death or anti-town indy, but from what I know of the game regarding the latter scenario, that doesn't leave him too many options, and one of them involves a scum-alignment anyways. If Floyd ends up taking the lynch and flips Witherdeath it will make me lean much more strongly towards another anti-town motive.

MetalMarsh

Had another tooth-brushing thought before bed. If we do assume Typhoony was on the Circle of Decay (which seemed implied based on Mac's and golden's replies after the flip), it could mean that MetalMarsh was just straight bussing a scummate where it didn't matter and that the Luke/juliets stuff was just happenstance, and Typh's connection with juliets forced buddying (he seemed insistent she was playing her town meta; maybe he believed that and thought he'd look better). Typhoony's only posts on MM were to ask for coherent thoughts and to ask where he was. I'm skimming Typh's history really quickly and it's 1:43AM my time so I might be missing it, but he doesn't appear to call out any other players for similar reasons, even though there certainly could be (e.g. fingersplints or Floyd).

Oh, yeah, Typh would have to be Circle of Decay if bad. Good point. For some reason I hadn't thought that through... I think because of the confusion about who killed him I still had him as being able to be either.

I don't really see the cases on MM - they are both completely different (your case and Matts case), but I just see pretty normal MM.

Sorsha wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Tell me more about your suspicion of sig, Lorab. Does the fact that he's dead make you suspect him more?

It actually doesn't change my suspicion of him at all.

Did you have a particular team you think he was on?

I still think typh was bad, what do you think about him?

I originally thought circle but they killed him. Unless that was a redirect or something. Or a mastermind plan so he wasnt revealed. Or he was either death and the slip was coincidence or based on the other teams thinking or Indy and the slip was coincidence. I don't think he was civ. I could have been wrong but that's my thought.

I think typh was a bad Indy. I wasn't getting a team feel for him, but I wasn't really getting a civ feel either.

Yep, I'm out. Someone can replace me.

Golden wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:In what ways does splintsy remind you of BoB?

In that game I could pin nothing on her... I felt like there was nothing to point to her alignment. She stayed so far under the radar, she didn't really engage a lot. Her posting frequency was about the same as in this game. In the end, we only really got to lynch her through process of elimination, because it was virtually impossible to build a case any other way.

Sometimes I think that the game can be In a place where you kind of have to start over. I think we are kind of in that place now, having spent so long on one person.

So maybe shotgun voting as we did at the start of the day helps by getting conversation going.

I strongly disagree with you about MM, Hammy, not so sure about Typhoony. I have known Typh for years, and been bad with him many times; I am not even sure HOW many. I think I read him well. I have never seen him aggressively defend a bad teammate EVER. To me his tone and feel were very civ. He buddies more when he is bad, and did not do it here. They hang together in IRC a lot, so he would have known her to be away. So I am not sure any of that speaks to his affiliation.

While I understand the desire to compare another persons gameplay to ones own, it is not generally a valid comparison. You are different people. We have a pair of twin brothers that are part of our community and who both play occasionally, and their games are amazingly different.

On short acquaintance with you, i think comparing your game and MMs game are like comparing a Lamborghini and a bottle nose dolphin. While both excellent, they are nothing alike. We are all rather individualists here as compared to the Mafia community at large, and MM is perhaps even more an individualist than most.

Link I @floyd can you please pm the host with that rather than discussing it with the thread? Thanks

Golden wrote:I'm pretty sure it wasn't Typh, I have him in another role.

I'd be pretty happy voting splints with you. She reminds me a lot of how she played in Bullets over Broadway, when she was bad. I also think she has been implying she was responsible for that beacon, which even though it doesn't seem to have killed anyone seems like it could have.

I understand sorsha's point about us crystallising around one person, but there are a few candidates on the table today that I could genuinely see being bad, and I don't necessarily think it is unhelpful to our reads of people that there is uncertainty about the way the lynch is going to go right now.

Wow I quoted the wrong post, I meant to quote this one ∆∆

That's what happens when I mafia pre coffee.