The Syndicate

Sloonei wrote:Bullzeye is claiming that randomized votes are not uncommon, but where I come from they sre so rare that to do it once would pretty much be a death sentence. Can anyone back him up on that?

Random voting on Day 1 is not uncommon here, but there are seveal of us who heavily frown upon it. I, personally, think it is idiocy and have never done it.

thellama73 wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Bullzeye is claiming that randomized votes are not uncommon, but where I come from they sre so rare that to do it once would pretty much be a death sentence. Can anyone back him up on that?

Random voting on Day 1 is not uncommon here, but there are seveal of us who heavily frown upon it. I, personally, think it is idiocy and have never done it.

Llama! Do you prefer self voting or RVS in a non-informed situation?

Llama in regards to you being on both of my lists, you are the most easily swappable one on the situation where G-Man is bad. I could also see G-Man, Sig, Quin or Nero, following you as "most likely temmie."

So... Will you play my game?

DrWilgy wrote:Under the condition that G-Man is bad
Bad: G-Man, Sig, Llama

Under the condition that G-Man is civ
Bad: Epi, Bullzeye, and Llama

DrWilgy wrote:Llama in regards to you being on both of my lists, you are the most easily swappable one on the situation where G-Man is bad. I could also see G-Man, Sig, Quin or Nero, following you as "most likely temmie."

So... Will you play my game?

Can you explain why don't you suspect SVS, Sloonei, Sorsha, or Spacedaisy?

In a world where you are bad - Sorsha and Daisy I'm hesitant on based on your interactions with them.

In a world where you are good - a Epi, Bullzeye, Llama team just makes sense. Epi saved Bullzeye, Llama was hesitant to vote change, but considered it. Llama also put Epi high on his greenlist when like you pointed out, Epi has very little non fluff content.

I'm currently giving SVS and Sloonei a green tone read, but I need to double check them.

Doing some ISO's is taking more time than I anticipated it would. Here are my impressions of the first few players I have ISO'd:

Bullzeye posts a lot of fluff, randomizes a vote and takes off. He then gets huffy about some of us finding random votes sketchy. Lastly, he also backtracks on his "quiet game" claim when called out. He's contradictory but also feels like he's too easy of a target.

DrWilgy posts some fluff but tries to engage in some worthwhile discussion. He tries to get some people to play some baddie association games. He needs to see an eye doctor because he is seeing things. He overanalyzes my post and thinks he sees nefarious frameworks being constructed. He provides us with his gun-to-head reads and asks us to reciprocate. Otherwise, he responds well to questions and is very difficult to read.

Epignosis posted meager amounts of substance with a fluffy mountain of fluff. He's really embracing the roleplaying aspect of the game, which yields fluff. Perhaps we really just didn't have anything to go on Day 1. Or perhaps Epi is currently too tied up with his Batman game. That could explain his apparent detached manor or intended to look so.

Nero subbed in and found Llama suspicious but isn't as suspicious now. That is all I have on him, which is a little frustrating.

Quin pings others by stating his preference for Day 1 no-lynch options. He comments on RVS (unfavorable opinion) and then engages in some roleplay. He thinks DrWilgy roleclaimed as doctor but I don't think I agree. Asks Epi what convinced him to vote for me before the deadline. I like his various attempts to engage and interact outside of roleplay.

DrWilgy wrote:Epi saved Bullzeye

Did I? I'm so sorry. I won't do it again. Ever.

I just thought I was trying to lynch G-Man, like you, you know, being supportive of you and all that. Please don't break up with me. I can change.

Epignosis wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:Epi saved Bullzeye

Did I? I'm so sorry. I won't do it again. Ever.

I just thought I was trying to lynch G-Man, like you, you know, being supportive of you and all that. Please don't break up with me. I can change.

Epi, I won't leave you. That's not what a good friend would do.

Why did you hold your vote till last min? Your vote was either very aggro... For a reason unknown, or very defensive to save Bullzeye.

*Wilgy begins to cover his kidnapped Quin in A1 sauce*

S~V~S fluffs Day 0 away on defending hippies and simple, short responses. She disappears for the entirety of Day 1 and misses the vote. During night phase, she says she thought days were 48 hours long. She also says that an important opportunity came up at her work. I cannot fault her for the latter but the former is fishy. I remember never fully trusting S~V~S before I went on mafia hiatus. She is a crafty player and that can get her lynched early. I'm on the fence for now and look forward to more participation.

Sig had some good input on ratios and lobbied for roleplaying awards. He has terrible grammar but is willing to engage in relevant discussion. He's not afraid to ask questions and follows up for clarification's sake. He seems like a straight-shooter with a level head on his shoulders. This probably makes me susceptible to getting fleeced by him, if bad.

Sloonei claims another mafia game is a distraction for him early on. He defends Quin by explaining that his behavior is normal for him. I like his willingness to use a pressure vote to obtain reactions. He was somewhat critical of Llama's gut-read rainbow list, which is fine. He reiterated that another game is stealing most of his focus D1. He doesn't by Sorsha's read on DrWilgy as justification for her vote. I have liked Sloonei since the first game we played in together. This makes it hard for me to view him as a baddie. When he's bad, he usually slips somehow and gets called on it. So far I have not seen anything that resembles a Slooeni slip.

DrWilgy wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:Epi saved Bullzeye

Did I? I'm so sorry. I won't do it again. Ever.

I just thought I was trying to lynch G-Man, like you, you know, being supportive of you and all that. Please don't break up with me. I can change.

Epi, I won't leave you. That's not what a good friend would do.

Why did you hold your vote till last min? Your vote was either very aggro... For a reason unknown, or very defensive to save Bullzeye.

*Wilgy begins to cover his kidnapped Quin in A1 sauce*

Epignosis wrote:I'll be breaking any tie that comes up, for sure.

I have a bad experience with ties. A girl once said she was torn between me and this other guy.

She picked the other guy.

Epignosis wrote:

thellama73 wrote:Oh wow, Epi. Interesting.

G-Man's the best I've got and I almost missed the vote playing my statistical-based game called daily fantasy sports that requires me to analyze individual player stats to obtain a profit.

I try to tell the ladies that I'm pretty good at it, but they don't believe me or something.

DrWilgy wrote:I've seen RVS come into play here at least 3 times in my half year of existence.

*Wilgy gives the fish hat back to it's proper owner, but then picks up the owner and takes her in the fish hat's place*

"RVS" as I understand it is different from what Bullzeye did. RVS refere to the throwing around of arbitrary votes early in a game to get reactions and put pressure on people. What Bullzeye did was completely randomize his vote and leave it there. I don't feel like my vote (for him) was cast with a lot more conviction than his, but at least I backed it up and am willing to own up to it.

Bullzeye wrote:Nice to see some of you are up for an easy bandwagon on someone who isn't going to defend themselves Hadn't realised it suddenly became completely unacceptable to randomize on day 1 of a game with minimal discussion. I'd usually have voted a low poster but just didn't feel like it this time because the game has been generally pretty quiet.

Sloonei wrote:

sig wrote:I don't like Bull's vote for Sorsha, it seems like a good excuse to cast a vote without having to back it up. I especially don't like that this is such a small game and he randomized his vote.

Thoughts on this?

It's certainly not an ideal method for casting a vote, but I can understand the sentiment. I'd like to see him at least take a stab at giving a reason, but if he sincerely felt any reason he could offer would be contrived and false, then randomizing isn't much worse. I can't help but acknowledge that's absolving himself of any guilt in the process, though. It will be damning if he remains non-committal down the line.

What guilt is that? I didn't have a reason to vote for anyone so I just threw out a random one. It's really not a big deal people do it all the time.

The "guilt" refers to the hypothetical guilt that would normally come with voting out a player. Of course by saying "guilt" I open myself up to you being able to twist my words into an assumption that Sorsha is town, but that is not what I mean. If Sorsha had been lynched yesterday and flipped town, you would be able to dance away and tell everyone that your vote meant nothing. You're absolving yourself of responsibility, how's that for a better word? It's the most eye-catching thing to happen in the thread so far.
I also have a hard time taking your criticism of the votes against you seriously when you literally voted without a reason.

thellama73 wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Bullzeye is claiming that randomized votes are not uncommon, but where I come from they sre so rare that to do it once would pretty much be a death sentence. Can anyone back him up on that?

Random voting on Day 1 is not uncommon here, but there are seveal of us who heavily frown upon it. I, personally, think it is idiocy and have never done it.

Do you think it's a strategy that would be used by a scum player in the way Bullzeye did it?

Re Epi: And you had to hold your vote till the very last minute to break a tie?

Re Sloonei: True, maybe describing a commonly seen gamestate wasn't a good comparison to an individuals vote. The better comparison would be to players like Roxy and Bea who play the RVS and leave thier votes where they land.

Bullzeye outside the realm of your vote, what are your thoughts? Why did Epi save you over G-Man? What of yours was more valuable than G-Man's?

Fun fact: I changed my vote after Epi voted for me. I could have voted for Bullzeye and forced a tie-breaker but didn't.

G-Man wrote:S~V~S fluffs Day 0 away on defending hippies and simple, short responses. She disappears for the entirety of Day 1 and misses the vote. During night phase, she says she thought days were 48 hours long. She also says that an important opportunity came up at her work. I cannot fault her for the latter but the former is fishy. I remember never fully trusting S~V~S before I went on mafia hiatus. She is a crafty player and that can get her lynched early. I'm on the fence for now and look forward to more participation.

Sig had some good input on ratios and lobbied for roleplaying awards. He has terrible grammar but is willing to engage in relevant discussion. He's not afraid to ask questions and follows up for clarification's sake. He seems like a straight-shooter with a level head on his shoulders. This probably makes me susceptible to getting fleeced by him, if bad.

Sloonei claims another mafia game is a distraction for him early on. He defends Quin by explaining that his behavior is normal for him. I like his willingness to use a pressure vote to obtain reactions. He was somewhat critical of Llama's gut-read rainbow list, which is fine. He reiterated that another game is stealing most of his focus D1. He doesn't by Sorsha's read on DrWilgy as justification for her vote. I have liked Sloonei since the first game we played in together. This makes it hard for me to view him as a baddie. When he's bad, he usually slips somehow and gets called on it. So far I have not seen anything that resembles a Slooeni slip.

The Forum Guidelines, which are in a post that I posted, say day phases in this forum are 48 hours. What is fishy about thinking days were 48 hours when the Forum Guiidelines say they are 48 hours? It did not even occur to me to check, tbh. But yeah, I am nothing but time tonight & tomorrow night. I still have to finish catching up in that Batman themed game of Epignosis' but otherwise I should be up to speed here this evening. And knowing that the phases are what they are, I won't be missing any more votes.

G-Man wrote:Fun fact: I changed my vote after Epi voted for me. I could have voted for Bullzeye and forced a tie-breaker but didn't.

G-Man wrote:Fun fact: I changed my vote after Epi voted for me. I could have voted for Bullzeye and forced a tie-breaker but didn't.

This pinged me.

Are you saying that letting yourself get lynched and surviving clears you of being mafia?

DrWilgy wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Bullzeye is claiming that randomized votes are not uncommon, but where I come from they sre so rare that to do it once would pretty much be a death sentence. Can anyone back him up on that?

Random voting on Day 1 is not uncommon here, but there are seveal of us who heavily frown upon it. I, personally, think it is idiocy and have never done it.

Llama! Do you prefer self voting or RVS in a non-informed situation?

Llama in regards to you being on both of my lists, you are the most easily swappable one on the situation where G-Man is bad. I could also see G-Man, Sig, Quin or Nero, following you as "most likely temmie."

So... Will you play my game?

I hate both, but I guess random is better than self, since there is at least a chance you could catch a bad guy. A self vote never will, unless a baddie is stupid enough to vote himself lynched.

And no, I will not play your game. Now it's just pure stubbornness.

Nerolunar wrote:

G-Man wrote:Fun fact: I changed my vote after Epi voted for me. I could have voted for Bullzeye and forced a tie-breaker but didn't.

This pinged me.

Are you saying that letting yourself get lynched and surviving clears you of being mafia?

No but I am surprised that this little fact has been overlooked.

DrWilgy wrote:Re Epi: And you had to hold your vote till the very last minute to break a tie?

Did I have to? No...but that's how it worked out. It was 9:39pm EST when I came back to my computer. I voted, and then I spent the rest of the night at my computer looking at fourteen empty inboxes on various meetup sites.

G-Man wrote: Bullzeye posts a lot of fluff, randomizes a vote and takes off. He then gets huffy about some of us finding random votes sketchy. Lastly, he also backtracks on his "quiet game" claim when called out. He's contradictory but also feels like he's too easy of a target.

I didn't backtrack, I just accepted your point of view. I would still call this game quiet and argue that not much (if anything) worthwhile had happened before I had to vote.

Sloonei wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Bullzeye is claiming that randomized votes are not uncommon, but where I come from they sre so rare that to do it once would pretty much be a death sentence. Can anyone back him up on that?

Random voting on Day 1 is not uncommon here, but there are seveal of us who heavily frown upon it. I, personally, think it is idiocy and have never done it.

Do you think it's a strategy that would be used by a scum player in the way Bullzeye did it?

What possible reason would I have for choosing to do that as a baddie? Like is it a tactic a baddie would use? To draw so much attention to myself? What have I gained from random voting?

G-Man wrote:Fun fact: I changed my vote after Epi voted for me. I could have voted for Bullzeye and forced a tie-breaker but didn't.

This is meaningless and frankly suspicious to mention given you obviously knew you'd survive. It proves nothing.

Nerolunar wrote:

G-Man wrote:Fun fact: I changed my vote after Epi voted for me. I could have voted for Bullzeye and forced a tie-breaker but didn't.

This pinged me.

Are you saying that letting yourself get lynched and surviving clears you of being mafia?

Hold on, who stated that this clears him of being mafia?

For me, the random vote is not really suspicious. It's Epi's last minute vote to break the tie that has me worried.

Where was Epi's vote before he changed it?

I thunked he held it until the end, but could be wrong.

I just thought it worth mentioning since people are giving Epi heat. His vote helped to save Bullzeye but it wasn't the last word. No one has yet asked me why I didn't try saving myself. You would all be wondering that one had I actually been lynched.

thellama73 wrote:For me, the random vote is not really suspicious. It's Epi's last minute vote to break the tie that has me worried.

I said I was going to break any tie that came up. It didn't matter who it was between. I don't like leaving things to luck.

I don't have good luck, especially with the ladies.

G-Man wrote:I just thought it worth mentioning since people are giving Epi heat. His vote helped to save Bullzeye but it wasn't the last word. No one has yet asked me why I didn't try saving myself. You would all be wondering that one had I actually been lynched.

hey, why this?

Sloonei wrote:

G-Man wrote:I just thought it worth mentioning since people are giving Epi heat. His vote helped to save Bullzeye but it wasn't the last word. No one has yet asked me why I didn't try saving myself. You would all be wondering that one had I actually been lynched.

hey, why this?

If I had died, you guys would have wondered about my vote. I am highlighting the fact that it's treated as a non-issue today. Did nobody notice my vote or is it because I didn't die?

All other points of discussion are valid and I apologize for derailing.

G-Man wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

G-Man wrote:I just thought it worth mentioning since people are giving Epi heat. His vote helped to save Bullzeye but it wasn't the last word. No one has yet asked me why I didn't try saving myself. You would all be wondering that one had I actually been lynched.

hey, why this?

If I had died, you guys would have wondered about my vote. I am highlighting the fact that it's treated as a non-issue today. Did nobody notice my vote or is it because I didn't die?

All other points of discussion are valid and I apologize for derailing.

It pretty much is a non-issue. You knew you weren't going to die - that explains why you didn't save yourself. You probably deliberately allowed yourself to be lynched in hopes of gaining civ cred upon surviving.

DrWilgy wrote:I thunked he held it until the end, but could be wrong.

You are not wrong.

Bullzeye wrote:

G-Man wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

G-Man wrote:I just thought it worth mentioning since people are giving Epi heat. His vote helped to save Bullzeye but it wasn't the last word. No one has yet asked me why I didn't try saving myself. You would all be wondering that one had I actually been lynched.

hey, why this?

If I had died, you guys would have wondered about my vote. I am highlighting the fact that it's treated as a non-issue today. Did nobody notice my vote or is it because I didn't die?

All other points of discussion are valid and I apologize for derailing.

It pretty much is a non-issue. You knew you weren't going to die - that explains why you didn't save yourself. You probably deliberately allowed yourself to be lynched in hopes of gaining civ cred upon surviving.

No, I did it because I was not sure you were bad. I'd rather advance game discussion than force a tie-breaker I'm unsure about. The more we discuss, the deeper the baddies lie and dig their graves.

Bullzeye wrote:

G-Man wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

G-Man wrote:I just thought it worth mentioning since people are giving Epi heat. His vote helped to save Bullzeye but it wasn't the last word. No one has yet asked me why I didn't try saving myself. You would all be wondering that one had I actually been lynched.

hey, why this?

If I had died, you guys would have wondered about my vote. I am highlighting the fact that it's treated as a non-issue today. Did nobody notice my vote or is it because I didn't die?

All other points of discussion are valid and I apologize for derailing.

It pretty much is a non-issue. You knew you weren't going to die - that explains why you didn't save yourself. You probably deliberately allowed yourself to be lynched in hopes of gaining civ cred upon surviving.

This is what I was questioning earlier. We still don´t know G-man´s alignment.

No, but he makes a good point. If someone knows they are not going to die, they can make town-ier votes & posts *IF* they are bad. But lynch survival could be a town or a baddie ability, so

I will be reading what I missed yesterday to see why you all lynched G-Man, as of now I am very not caught up.

Uh, point to consider, G-Man survived a lynch and llama is claiming to have the same ability as g-Man. It seems unlikely to me that they would have the same role ability and the same alignment.

Spacedaisy wrote:Uh, point to consider, G-Man survived a lynch and llama is claiming to have the same ability as g-Man. It seems unlikely to me that they would have the same role ability and the same alignment.

I agree with Daisy here, though Llama could be lying about his lynch proof ability?

sig wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:Uh, point to consider, G-Man survived a lynch and llama is claiming to have the same ability as g-Man. It seems unlikely to me that they would have the same role ability and the same alignment.

I agree with Daisy here, though Llama could be lying about his lynch proof ability?

i don't find it unbelievable that two people could have the same role condition.

Two people of the same alignment? That seems highly unusual to me. When designing games I usually try to balance powers, if there are going to be duplicates of a power they are usually on opposing sides.

Llama may be lying about his lynch proof ability, but why would a civ lie about that? It would most likely invite being NKed since they can't get him lynched. If he is lying about it, it would only serve to get G-Man lynched. Why would a civ do that? Unless he knows G-Man is bad, I can't see a good reason for it. Now a baddie, yes. I could see a baddie lying about it. I think most likely one of these two is bad.

I think both of our near-lynches were wrong.

G-Man wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

G-Man wrote:

Quin wrote:interesting. a lynch-proof?

Sadly, my immunity to lynches is limited to only the first one.

DrWilgy wrote:A no lynch in a Heist?

Does this help explain how bold and cavalier my posting was today?

Depends G-Mizzle muh nizzle,
What did you learn from your bold and cavalier posting? Is there anything you would like to expand upon from your notes?

Linki - Do you think Epignosis saved Bullzeye?

They are just two of my three most suspicious players right now. I will analyze the votes and posts tomorrow before the night post. Unfortunately, my gun-to-head reads are more guesswork than they are wily intuition. Right now, however, it is time for me to head to bed.

I think this post from G-man backs up everything I was reading about him on Day 1. It makes perfect sense and I believe it.

I would also take back my vote for Bullzeye now that I've read the thread more closely.

Sloonei wrote:

sig wrote:I don't like Bull's vote for Sorsha, it seems like a good excuse to cast a vote without having to back it up. I especially don't like that this is such a small game and he randomized his vote.

Thoughts on this?

It's certainly not an ideal method for casting a vote, but I can understand the sentiment. I'd like to see him at least take a stab at giving a reason, but if he sincerely felt any reason he could offer would be contrived and false, then randomizing isn't much worse. I can't help but acknowledge that's absolving himself of any guilt in the process, though. It will be damning if he remains non-committal down the line.

My initial thought on his vote is better than the one that prompted me to vote for him later on.

Bullzeye wrote:Nice to see some of you are up for an easy bandwagon on someone who isn't going to defend themselves Hadn't realised it suddenly became completely unacceptable to randomize on day 1 of a game with minimal discussion. I'd usually have voted a low poster but just didn't feel like it this time because the game has been generally pretty quiet.

I understand the thought behind his vote randomization, I just wasn't sure about it because that's basically unheard of on RYM. But I can't honestly say that much more thought went into my own vote than his. I announced that I would be putting my vote on someone who had a gripe with ~*~the llama's rainbow~*~ because that was such an easy softball thing for scum to latch onto in a fake case, but then I went with the wrong person. I should have gone with Nerolunar.

Nerolunar wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Why make a rainbow if it's so heavily reliant on pure gut reads?

Seconding this question. Im under the impression that rainbows are used when someone has a good and fairly solid idea about the various alignments of the players. Llamas rainbow just looked so random to me. Fx what´s the difference between the yellow and green colors at this point anyway? How can someone look slightly bad compared to clearly civ and clearly bad when the first 3 pages barely contained discussion?

I'm going by my gut on this and voting for Llama.

This post reads much more like an opportunistic bandwagon-seizer than anything else. My initial prodding of the llama was not concerned with calling him scum, and his response was satisfying. But this simple thing turns into a vote from Nero. Note his next post also, backs off the suspicion a little bit but still leaves the door open in case it needs to be brought back later on.

Nerolunar wrote:Im still pinged a little by Llama but not so much as before. I don´t think Im going to vote for him/her next day phase, as there will likely be better lynch candidates.

Spacedaisy wrote:Two people of the same alignment? That seems highly unusual to me. When designing games I usually try to balance powers, if there are going to be duplicates of a power they are usually on opposing sides.

Llama may be lying about his lynch proof ability, but why would a civ lie about that? It would most likely invite being NKed since they can't get him lynched. If he is lying about it, it would only serve to get G-Man lynched. Why would a civ do that? Unless he knows G-Man is bad, I can't see a good reason for it. Now a baddie, yes. I could see a baddie lying about it. I think most likely one of these two is bad.

I would not be willing to dismiss the possibility that duplicate roles exist.

Nerolunar wrote:

Bullzeye wrote:

G-Man wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

G-Man wrote:I just thought it worth mentioning since people are giving Epi heat. His vote helped to save Bullzeye but it wasn't the last word. No one has yet asked me why I didn't try saving myself. You would all be wondering that one had I actually been lynched.

hey, why this?

If I had died, you guys would have wondered about my vote. I am highlighting the fact that it's treated as a non-issue today. Did nobody notice my vote or is it because I didn't die?

All other points of discussion are valid and I apologize for derailing.

It pretty much is a non-issue. You knew you weren't going to die - that explains why you didn't save yourself. You probably deliberately allowed yourself to be lynched in hopes of gaining civ cred upon surviving.

This is what I was questioning earlier. We still don´t know G-man´s alignment.

What is your point? We still don't know anyone's alignment.

Of course I could be lying about my role power, but I'm having a hard time imagining a scenario in which such a lie would benefit me. I don't think my power and civ alignment automatically mean C-Man is of the opposite alignment though. And he still reads civ to me, so I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for now.

I have mixed feelings on llama right now. I'm inclined to believe he is town, owing to the way he presented his 'rainbow list', and I don't doubt the validity of his role claim, but I don't understand why he would claim it in the first place. I can't think of a single way it benefits him.

I quoted it before but I lost it, but I honestly think SVS missing the vote was an honest mistake, since I thought the day phase was 48 hours as well. But I still acknowledge whoever it was that said he hasn't been saying much with any relevance.

Final call for the great WHO IS MY TEMMIE game!!
DrWilgy: Sig
Sig: Sloonei
Sloonei: DrWilgy

...

And no one played...

Epignosis wrote:

thellama73 wrote:For me, the random vote is not really suspicious. It's Epi's last minute vote to break the tie that has me worried.

I said I was going to break any tie that came up. It didn't matter who it was between. I don't like leaving things to luck.

I don't have good luck, especially with the ladies.

Epi, if everyone was tied at one vote who would've you broken the tie towards?

I can think of a very strategic reason for Llama to lie.

G-Man wrote:I can think of a very strategic reason for Llama to lie.

Would you like to share it with the class?

Well, I'm starting to come up with something myself, but it doesn't necessarily speak mafia to me.

Quin wrote:I have mixed feelings on llama right now. I'm inclined to believe he is town, owing to the way he presented his 'rainbow list', and I don't doubt the validity of his role claim, but I don't understand why he would claim it in the first place. I can't think of a single way it benefits him.

I quoted it before but I lost it, but I honestly think SVS missing the vote was an honest mistake, since I thought the day phase was 48 hours as well. But I still acknowledge whoever it was that said he hasn't been saying much with any relevance.

It benefits me by providing more data for the thread to analyze. Mafia benefit from secrecy. Civilians benefit from information. If people accept my claim as true, it means that either C-Man is lying, or there are two roles with the same power. If there are, we can decide how likely it is that they are the same alignment. I think this is fodder for productive discussion.

Agreed about SVS.

thellama73 wrote:

Quin wrote:I have mixed feelings on llama right now. I'm inclined to believe he is town, owing to the way he presented his 'rainbow list', and I don't doubt the validity of his role claim, but I don't understand why he would claim it in the first place. I can't think of a single way it benefits him.

I quoted it before but I lost it, but I honestly think SVS missing the vote was an honest mistake, since I thought the day phase was 48 hours as well. But I still acknowledge whoever it was that said he hasn't been saying much with any relevance.

It benefits me by providing more data for the thread to analyze. Mafia benefit from secrecy. Civilians benefit from information. If people accept my claim as true, it means that either C-Man is lying, or there are two roles with the same power. If there are, we can decide how likely it is that they are the same alignment. I think this is fodder for productive discussion.

Agreed about SVS.

I can agree with that.

Quin wrote:

G-Man wrote:I can think of a very strategic reason for Llama to lie.

Would you like to share it with the class?

Well, I'm starting to come up with something myself, but it doesn't necessarily speak mafia to me.

I'd rather wait until after the night post to share my idea.

DrWilgy wrote:Final call for the great WHO IS MY TEMMIE game!!
DrWilgy: Sig
Sig: Sloonei
Sloonei: DrWilgy

...

And no one played...

Fine, you want an answer, right now I would say I'm a baddie and my teammate is llama