[END] The Syndicate's 2013 Game of Champions

[S~V~S]

If you really really want me to start quoting the lists against you from a few days ago I will. There were a lot of them and they all made you look bad.

[S~V~S]

You're a liar (game wise) and I won't le this go.

[thellama73]

Or you could post original thoughts instead of quoting the arguments of others.

linki: actually, I haven't lied about anything this game.

[S~V~S]

So the thoughts of others are wrong?

My thoughts combined with theirs are formidable.

You were bad then, you still are.

[thellama73]

So the thoughts of others are wrong?

Often.

[S~V~S]

So the thoughts of others are wrong?

Often.

The point was you were implying this was all on me
And when I was came back into the game, you were the major suspect. You survived the lynch, and slid by.

[DharmaHelper]

Sometimes when I'm nervous I get all gassy and start to feel a fart come on but then it's not a fart and I'm like dang betrayed by my butt.

[Nevinera]

Nev harkening back to what you said about shoehorning words into posts to fulfill the Rumpelstiltskin thing, what do you think of SD's cold feet comment? Is it not odd to anyone else that she threw that in there? Maybe she was being a cheeky baddie and used "socks" as the word of the day? I'm sure MP would have gotten a kick out of that

Nobody used the word at the same time - if you go to the main thread and use the search box for each of the words,
you can see who posted them when (though you have to filter through quotes usually).

Fuck you how rude

I apologize - it was not intended to be insulting, but upon reread, I can see how it would sound that way.
I really am boggled by your thread behavior this evening, and I thought that significant alcohol would explain it.

As for Llama, I think if he is a lynchable baddie, it would be better to get rid of him whether he has a kill or not. I haven't seen much to convince me he's bad though.

Since we did lynch him, and it didn't take, I can safely assert that he is not a *lynchable* baddie.

Anyway, Flyin' High didn't give me much to go on. I'm not really reading her as bad. The only two things I noticed were:

1. The detailed but utterly useless "analysis" she posted on Day One. Took up a lot of time and space while contributing no useful information. Feels like a distraction/"Look at me I'm helping!" move.

I haven't been reading her as bad at all - day one is a wash anyway, and giving us something to talk about (useful or not) is important for the generation of initial information. Just an opinion, of course.

[DharmaHelper]

Nev harkening back to what you said about shoehorning words into posts to fulfill the Rumpelstiltskin thing, what do you think of SD's cold feet comment? Is it not odd to anyone else that she threw that in there? Maybe she was being a cheeky baddie and used "socks" as the word of the day? I'm sure MP would have gotten a kick out of that

Nobody used the word at the same time - if you go to the main thread and use the search box for each of the words,
you can see who posted them when (though you have to filter through quotes usually).

Fuck you how rude

I apologize - it was not intended to be insulting, but upon reread, I can see how it would sound that way.
I really am boggled by your thread behavior this evening, and I thought that significant alcohol would explain it.

As for Llama, I think if he is a lynchable baddie, it would be better to get rid of him whether he has a kill or not. I haven't seen much to convince me he's bad though.

Since we did lynch him, and it didn't take, I can safely assert that he is not a *lynchable* baddie.

Anyway, Flyin' High didn't give me much to go on. I'm not really reading her as bad. The only two things I noticed were:

1. The detailed but utterly useless "analysis" she posted on Day One. Took up a lot of time and space while contributing no useful information. Feels like a distraction/"Look at me I'm helping!" move.

I haven't been reading her as bad at all - day one is a wash anyway, and giving us something to talk about (useful or not) is important for the generation of initial information. Just an opinion, of course.

Surely you're willing to consider the possibility that only one or two members of the team used the Rumpel word instead of the whole team doing so? When we were in Grimms mafia and the role was slightly different (allowing us to control the votes of people that used the word) sometimes one or more of us used the word, sometimes nobody did. Just seems like something to consider.

Russ I think I've only played one or two games with but he's been awesome every game. He seems like a real humble guy with a lot to give in terms of insight and community.

[blindfaeth]

Wow, been a busy mafia day, I think it has been very productive. I think SVS has a point, it does seem like so many people dropped their suspicion of llama rather quickly after Nevin and DH posted their analysis. I recall thinking the points against llama were solid, but tbh I was so absorbed in Epi-land, I've forgotten the basis of the case against him. It would be helpful if anyone could summarize that, otherwise I'll try to find the time to do it myself tomorrow before the vote.

I do think Nevin has some solid evidence though, and I have trusted him ever since it was revealed that the baddies had lied about his role reveal. Of Juliets and bea, I'm more suspicious of bea.

[thellama73]

I think SVS has a point, it does seem like so many people dropped their suspicion of llama rather quickly after Nevin and DH posted their analysis.

Doesn't that say more about them than me?

[Nevinera]

Surely you're willing to consider the possibility that only one or two members of the team used the Rumpel word instead of the whole team doing so? When we were in Grimms mafia and the role was slightly different (allowing us to control the votes of people that used the word) sometimes one or more of us used the word, sometimes nobody did. Just seems like something to consider.

Of course! But I don't see anyone else using any of those words - I think we can assume at least two people would be using it. My suggested group actually does that several times with one player sitting out on the word for a day. Tellingly, never the same person again though.

It's possible I'm not seeing what you mean though - is the some word in that phrase that anyone else used? And are there any other days where that same group of people do it again? That's the test - there are actually a lot of words with 3-5 people using them each day (around a dozen each day), and a similar number of words being used in asides like this one. It's the co-occurrence of the two that is suspicious, and then the recurring pattern of names which clinches it.

I have to say I'm impressed with this version of the role - I like how it gives the team a solid ability along with enough rope to hang from.

[DharmaHelper]

Surely you're willing to consider the possibility that only one or two members of the team used the Rumpel word instead of the whole team doing so? When we were in Grimms mafia and the role was slightly different (allowing us to control the votes of people that used the word) sometimes one or more of us used the word, sometimes nobody did. Just seems like something to consider.

Of course! But I don't see anyone else using any of those words - I think we can assume at least two people would be using it. My suggested group actually does that several times with one player sitting out on the word for a day. Tellingly, never the same person again though.

It's possible I'm not seeing what you mean though - is the some word in that phrase that anyone else used? And are there any other days where that same group of people do it again? That's the test - there are actually a lot of words with 3-5 people using them each day (around a dozen each day), and a similar number of words being used in asides like this one. It's the co-occurrence of the two that is suspicious, and then the recurring pattern of names which clinches it.

I have to say I'm impressed with this version of the role - I like how it gives the team a solid ability along with enough rope to hang from.

No your version of things makes more sense and it seems like you have more than enough data to back that up, I just would have felt remiss if I didn't add to it a little :P

I saw SD's "socks" comment and my immediate thought was MP. Like, if she was on that team they went "You know what would be funny... since its MP's game lets make the word 'socks', haha". I'm just trying to come up with some other points in case your way of thinking doesn't pan out. I mean, you've done a heck of a job and all, so kudos. But part of me thinks a team with that sort of power would be very careful to avoid just the sort of trap you seem to have caught them in.
Reywas is consistently one of my favorite people to hang out with on RM or anywhere. A stand up guy with a good heart. Kate is another person I have a lot of respect for, not just as a super player but as a super person. I am glad to know the both of them even in such a small capacity.

[Hedgeowl]

Ok, I forgot the part of catching up where everyone keeps posting, so I am still several pages behind. Will try to read more before passing out tonight.

There is so much "*wink wink nudge nudge* you know my role eh eh. It's obvious right?" That I am clearly missing some obvious points, or no it's not that obvious or just people trying to sound like they are a civ and we should all know which one. I def need to spend some time with roles again after all the shenanigans.

I would also love if someone could talk more about how Rumps role worked in Grimms.

[Russtifinko]

Russ I think I've only played one or two games with but he's been awesome every game. He seems like a real humble guy with a lot to give in terms of insight and community.

mumble mumble....P.G. Wodehouse novel....mutter mutter

P.G. WODEHOUSE!! Sooooooo good!

Also, I am sad to be dead, and rezzes would be appreciated. I'll even write thank-you notes!

[Boomslang]

I think SVS has a point, it does seem like so many people dropped their suspicion of llama rather quickly after Nevin and DH posted their analysis.

Doesn't that say more about them than me?

Agreed. That's the same line of reasoning that led me to worry about the people behind the juliets confusion rather than juliets herself. Interesting to see how blocs of people move together.

[timmer]

I'd like to go over a couple of things to make sure I understand them. I've reread up to the start of the period after DH decoded everything.

So, first off, there is a lot of discussion about how two times, the role who puts up a player with a 50% correct role actually had TWO names up instead of one. The assumption seems to be that the baddies used the ability to add a fake bit to a night post to do that. What I'm currently unclear on is… does the baddie power have to follow the rules of the role they are mimicking? Like, if Epig was one of the ones they planted, did they have the ability to choose which role was next to his name, or would it have followed the 50% chance rule?

And beyond that even, can anyone tell me (this might be a bit of a challenge, this has been a huge game) but did the discussions about all of this begin before the second doubled night post happened? Like, could the baddies have realized that people were catching on that the second name was their add-on before the second time they did it? I ask because if we assume that Epig was added because he was a baddie teammate and they thought it would help build cred for him (potentially), they may have switched to a different tack the second time if they realized their gambit was being exposed. I hope that makes sense, I just want to get a full grip on these things so I can move on without wondering about it.

Also, about Zodac. Considering that Zodac apparently is informed of how many roles are left for each type of affiliation, I have a bit of a guess to make. Zodac's role, as decoded by DH, seems insanely powerful. Can't be NK-d, etc. And Zodac gets a ton of info about affiliations. etc. So my guess is that Zodacs win condition isn't just to survive until the end, but likely that Zodac has to ensure that each type of role survives until the end… like, the final four players would need to be Zodac, a civ, a baddie and an indy, or something roughly along those lines. The point is, I think MP is emphasizing balance the way Epig did when he created the role, but the affiliation thing makes me think Zodac has to achieve some kind of numbers game. The overall point, to make a long post short (too late) is that Zodac should only be trusted so far. I don't believe Zodac could say "I'm playing as a civ" etc. because balance doesn't work that way.

Food for thought.

Oh, and getting back to the whole "baddies adding a fake piece of info into the night poll" for a moment. On the nights that did NOT include the fake player and role match, have we figured out what they added? I an particularly curious about the night where Bea apparently got attacked by two people and survived both. Since Bea was/is taking heat, it seems like placing a fake attack against her would be a nice use of the power. Could this have happened? You guys have a better handle on this stuff than me, at this juncture.

[DharmaHelper]

Something has been eating me about Jack Torrence. His role says he can send a message every night, yet we've only seen messages on N2 and N4 as far as I can see? So I went back and looked at his messages to see if anything stood out to me. The first message on N2 was short and sweet:

"Beware! The shield is a trap."

I found the N4 message to be much more interesting.

"Mushrooming is considered a healthy hobby as one gets out into nature. Eating mushrooms adds flavor and richness to our food. But to enjoy the meal, you must remember to never eat a mushroom unless you are 100% certain of the identification."

Now, the wording of that particular message struck me as peculiar. I was thinking I would be able to comb through Jack's messages and look for language I could tie to a player, but then I had an epiphany. Something about the way that mushroom message was worded seemed familiar. It seemed like a copy/pasted message to me, not an actual players thoughts. Lo and behold, Jack's mushroom message was a word for word copy/paste from this website according to google:

http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/ne ... -mushrooms

Now, then I thought who do we know that is inactive enough to only get out messages on even number nights instead of every night like Jack is supposed, to, and who uses copy/pasted messages similarly? Then I saw this:

Quilting dates back a VERY long time, and many cultures have distinctly different ways and reasons for quilting.

Which is a word for word copy paste from this (and a few other) websites according to google:

http://hobbypacks.com/quilting/

Now then, with all that said I think That Vompatti is Jack Torrence, and I would feel good voting for Vompatti.

Dom is an amazing guy and a really fun dude to talk to. He's an incredible player with a sharp mind. DP is also equally talented, and always fun to chat with on IRC. !weather

[timmer]

DH, you amaze me.

[timmer]

But wouldn't it have made sense to sit on that thought, though, lol?

Like, unless Jack starts killing, it would mean Vomps hadn't been found, right? But now we'd almost have to lynch Vomps because if we don't, Dlebert will obv find him tonight? Assuming you are right, you've sealed the fate of a role that is currently civ.

[timmer]

By the way, any chance you can clear up my questions I recently posted?

[DharmaHelper]

Russtifinko has been killed by Jack Torrence.

As for your questions:

To your first question about if the baddies had to follow the rules of the power they were mimicking: Dunno, that's something MP would have to cryptically answer, heh. My guess is they can add whatever they want in there though.

To your second question re: Discussion of the duplicated reveals before the second duplication: the earliest I could find was Nev's postulating here:
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 320#p51942

That there was some way to duplicate powers or to double up on powers. I think for a while the general consensus was that Moriarty's team had some way to enhance their abilities (the kill and the reveal) but that changed over time obviously.

To your point about Zodac, apparently he can win with any team so I have no illusions that if he/she sees an opportunity to jump ship and shack up with the baddies he/she might do so. Scary to think about.

To your point about additional addings:

N1: Nev survived a kill and SVS was killed. Given that at that time the Manipulators had two kills in their arsenal anyway, I can't find anything that looks added

N3: The attempt on Nev was not written at the bottom of the page, but the kill on Kate was. So I think Nev's attempt was added on

N5: The attempt/kill on juliets was not mentioned at the bottom of the page with everything else. So that seems logically to be the added bit of info to me.

[timmer]

oh. lol so yeah looking at vomps may not be too bad lol.

and interesting about stuff not listed at the bottom, that seems to make it fairly simple to spot the fakes...

[Nevinera]

There is so much "*wink wink nudge nudge* you know my role eh eh. It's obvious right?" That I am clearly missing some obvious points, or no it's not that obvious or just people trying to sound like they are a civ and we should all know which one. I def need to spend some time with roles again after all the shenanigans.

Assuming you're talking to me, I don't think that everyone knows my role, but I'm *very* confident that SVS does.
And I can't explain why, because that would out me.

Also, about Zodac. Considering that Zodac apparently is informed of how many roles are left for each type of affiliation, I have a bit of a guess to make. Zodac's role, as decoded by DH, seems insanely powerful. Can't be NK-d, etc. And Zodac gets a ton of info about affiliations. etc. So my guess is that Zodacs win condition isn't just to survive until the end, but likely that Zodac has to ensure that each type of role survives until the end… like, the final four players would need to be Zodac, a civ, a baddie and an indy, or something roughly along those lines. The point is, I think MP is emphasizing balance the way Epig did when he created the role, but the affiliation thing makes me think Zodac has to achieve some kind of numbers game. The overall point, to make a long post short (too late) is that Zodac should only be trusted so far. I don't believe Zodac could say "I'm playing as a civ" etc. because balance doesn't work that way.

As far as I can tell, every single secret has been posted accurately.
I agree that Zodac looks way overpowered this game, but I think that was just a motivational oversight on MP's part.
I have no illusions that Zodac wouldn't switch sides if the baddies somehow pulled ahead,
but from where I'm sitting that is starting to look astoundingly unlikely.

Now then, with all that said I think That Vompatti is Jack Torrence, and I would feel good voting for Vompatti.

Wonderful investigation!
I can't consider it 'proof', but it is strongly suggestive.
And it fits perfectly with delbert stopping his lynch (which is why I thought he was delbert) -
of course he'd need to save his teammate (who owns the kill).
On the down-side, he'd stop the lynch again, so I still think we should get bea/juliets first.

[S~V~S]

I think SVS has a point, it does seem like so many people dropped their suspicion of llama rather quickly after Nevin and DH posted their analysis.

Doesn't that say more about them than me?

No it says you worked hard to keep out of the public eye, being as blendy as possible.

You lying about that curse and attempting to flout it brought you back to the forefront of my mind, so I reread you and am convinced the people who made the case against you were correct to do so.

I will pull up quotes tonight.

and sorry Nevin~ I guess I am a bit over sensitive after the way this game started for me but no matter what fancy analyses you produce, I know in my heart that Llama is bad.

[Nevinera]

and sorry Nevin~ I guess I am a bit over sensitive after the way this game started for me but no matter what fancy analyses you produce, I know in my heart that Llama is bad.

No worries - I didn't agree with any of that for what it's worth.
You've always seemed a rational player, and distrusting indies with secret win conditions is completely appropriate.

As I've said though, I don't know that llama is good (in fact I kind of doubt it), but I do know that lynching him won't work.
Which makes it seem kind of a waste, aye?

[Lizzy]

Lynching Llama or trying to lynch him would be a waste of time. The only baddie he could be is Dr. Fetus. Trying to lynch the Doc would be wasting a day because he'll survive again. Of the indies, Zodac is cool, Cohen is pretty harmless, and the Grady is no longer a priority now that he found Jack. Soooooooo... I would not encourage a Llama lynch k.

[thellama73]

DH is right. That message sounds very much like Vompatti, which is a pretty damning piece of evidence. I would by willing to consider a Vompatti vote today.

[Hedgeowl]

Lynching Llama or trying to lynch him would be a waste of time. The only baddie he could be is Dr. Fetus. Trying to lynch the Doc would be wasting a day because he'll survive again. Of the indies, Zodac is cool, Cohen is pretty harmless, and the Grady is no longer a priority now that he found Jack. Soooooooo... I would not encourage a Llama lynch k.

How do you feel about Vomps?

[Nevinera]

I wouldn't hate a vomps lynch based on DH's investigation, but he *will* survive at least one more lynch.

I still think the Bea/Juliets lead is the strongest we have, and would much prefer to lynch either of them (who should not be able to avoid the lynch).

I am curious though - does grady still get to keep sending kill offers now that he's found jack?
It sounds like he shouldn't, but it's slightly ambiguous.

[juliets]

SVS, I know that this has been talked to death but I still need to clarify. Are you saying llama lied about getting a post saying he had to talk insanified? We know he got the post about the poetry because devin got it too. In the poetry post it said he had to talk in orange, are you saying he lied about overlooking the fact he had to post in orange? And again, why would he lie about posting in orange? Finally, do you think if we lynch him he will really be lynched? What do you think about the analysis that says if he's bad he won't be lynched? You are adamant about him being bad which makes me believe you are onto something so I will go back and read over all the points that led us to vote him last time but due to the analysis about who he could be i'm not sure voting him would do much good - unless there is something I'm not seeing.

I'm probably more likely to vote bea or vomps today. Interesting find DH on Vomps. I will read over all three of bea, vomps, and llama and unless something else big comes up with regards to someone else I will vote one of those three today. I will also most likely wait until the end in case I have to save myself.

[Flyin' High]

Whew, finally caught up! Amazing discussion and fact finding!

PS Libel is written and slander is verbal, but they are both archaic terms for defamation.

I am assuming people read their posts out loud as they type them. Do other people not do that? I know I do.

Anyway, Flyin' High didn't give me much to go on. I'm not really reading her as bad. The only two things I noticed were:

1. The detailed but utterly useless "analysis" she posted on Day One. Took up a lot of time and space while contributing no useful information. Feels like a distraction/"Look at me I'm helping!" move.

2. Voting for me, but then a lot of people made that mistake.

First, I made a point to say those tables I posted weren't an analysis (because they weren't). Blindfaeth asked me to do an analysis of the Day 0 poll and as I mentioned previously, by the time I got time to do it, Day 0 had ended and we knew what the poll was for. But BF mentioned had me doing an analysis a second time and I figured, why not. No harm in seeing if there is anything useful to comment on. I think it's weird that some people got hung up on me posting that. If I had done it without anyone asking me, then yeah, I might agree that it was an attention grabbing scheme (even though it's something that I'm known for doing). Except I was explicitly asked to do it by another player.

As to your second point, you're right, I did vote for you. And I still think you're probably bad. But I also think you're probably unlynchable at the current time and therefore not where I want to place my vote today.

@DH: Vompatti as Jack makes a ton of sense and would explain how he survived the lynch yesterday. However, we know that Delbert successfully executed two "offer" kills meaning he earned two lynch stops. If he used the first on Vompatti then he still has one left and will likely use it on Vompatti again. It might be worth lynching Vompatti again today to force Delbert to use up the second lynch stop, especially since Jack has a nightly kill and the sooner we take care of him the better. Best case scenario is llama is Delbert and already used the first lynch stop on himself and Vompatti is actually lynchable today.

I also would be up for lynching bea because I think there is a lot of evidence in the thread that supports the theory that she's Catherine Martell. She hasn't posted since Friday so I'm a little worried about her, but hopefully she's just busy.

Lastly, I think the possibility that juliets is on Team Magic Words is very plausible. (And if Nev is right it really looks like Epi might have been!) I also feel like her being on that team could explain why the Exaggerator chose her out of every player still alive to write a fake scene about. I know Epi said that role couldn't really be used to distance from a teammate, but why not? I mean, now that we know how the role works I don't think the possibility can be completely discounted.

So yeah, lots of options for this lynch. I am leaning towards voting bea, but Vomps might be a really good way to go since if he is Jack and is lynchable (or only one lynch stop away from being lynchable) then we could get rid of a nightly kill.

[Nevinera]

As to your second point, you're right, I did vote for you. And I still think you're probably bad. But I also think you're probably unlynchable at the current time and therefore not where I want to place my vote today.

@DH: Vompatti as Jack makes a ton of sense and would explain how he survived the lynch yesterday. However, we know that Delbert successfully executed two "offer" kills meaning he earned two lynch stops. If he used the first on Vompatti then he still has one left and will likely use it on Vompatti again. It might be worth lynching Vompatti again today to force Delbert to use up the second lynch stop, especially since Jack has a nightly kill and the sooner we take care of him the better. Best case scenario is llama is Delbert and already used the first lynch stop on himself and Vompatti is actually lynchable today.

I also would be up for lynching bea because I think there is a lot of evidence in the thread that supports the theory that she's Catherine Martell. She hasn't posted since Friday so I'm a little worried about her, but hopefully she's just busy.

Lastly, I think the possibility that juliets is on Team Magic Words is very plausible. (And if Nev is right it really looks like Epi might have been!) I also feel like her being on that team could explain why the Exaggerator chose her out of every player still alive to write a fake scene about. I know Epi said that role couldn't really be used to distance from a teammate, but why not? I mean, now that we know how the role works I don't think the possibility can be completely discounted.

So yeah, lots of options for this lynch. I am leaning towards voting bea, but Vomps might be a really good way to go since if he is Jack and is lynchable (or only one lynch stop away from being lynchable) then we could get rid of a nightly kill.

I agree with all of this, but I have more confidence about bea/juliets than I do about vomps.
I'll accept it if other people don't share my statistical confidence though,
and vompatti is definitely the next best lynch, so I'll wait and see how people are leaning.

[timmer]

I've just read back through the case against Bea and it seems damn solid. And since it seems Vomps would survive a lynch, to me this is a promising day.

[juliets]

In re-reading I decided to sum up what I found in relation to bea's possibly being bad as i reviewed the thread. Counterpoints have been made to many of these points but my intent was just to pull together in one place all the things that people have brought up as evidence that bea is bad. Let me know if I got something wrong or left something out. I do this for myself and only post it because in the past others have asked for it. I'm going to do llama or vomps next. If it is not helpful just let me know and I won't post.

1. Said that maybe Bob is not the person to go after because he might be helpful to the civs.
2. After winning the shield bea seemed awfully interested in the workings of bob implying bea might be the minion.
3. Said "Oh socky - if we lynch Bob's minion, will we be told that he was the recruit or will only his original civ role be revealed? " Original civv role believed to be a slip up.
4. Bob picked bea as a minion to get the shield.
5. Responses to accusations were "fleety"
6. BB attempted to kill bea - that is a civv role, does it imply anything about bea
7. bea voted to give the shield to kate
8. bea voted for kate to be rezzed
9. narrowed down possible minions to bea, bwt, epi
10. her self-voting behavior seems fishy - voting self because opportunity to frame her which seems like a weak excuse - avoiding detection
11. she started begging to be lynched seemingly out of nowhere
12. Guess that she is Martell and knows the lynch won't show her as a baddie
13. Begging to be lynched despite the fact she's not on the lynch poll
14. Tried to get a civv lynched (DF, this was yours but i couldnt figure out which civ you were talking about)
15. Video game baddies tried to kill her on a night she had the sheild and they would have known that
16. Says several words via nevin's analysis that could mean she's using rumple words, use of the word specific stood out
17. Posts prior to meltdown were fluffy posts
18. Perhaps tried to pad her post count by talking about the edit button
19. Went after nev a couple of times on weak evidence when he is obviously civ
20. Look at beas insanified posts day 5 (llama this was your point and I'm not sure what you are getting at)

[Nevinera]

In re-reading I decided to sum up what I found in relation to bea's possibly being bad as i reviewed the thread. Counterpoints have been made to many of these points but my intent was just to pull together in one place all the things that people have brought up as evidence that bea is bad. Let me know if I got something wrong or left something out. I do this for myself and only post it because in the past others have asked for it. I'm going to do llama or vomps next. If it is not helpful just let me know and I won't post.

1. Said that maybe Bob is not the person to go after because he might be helpful to the civs.
2. After winning the shield bea seemed awfully interested in the workings of bob implying bea might be the minion.
3. Said "Oh socky - if we lynch Bob's minion, will we be told that he was the recruit or will only his original civ role be revealed? " Original civv role believed to be a slip up.
4. Bob picked bea as a minion to get the shield.
5. Responses to accusations were "fleety"
6. BB attempted to kill bea - that is a civv role, does it imply anything about bea
7. bea voted to give the shield to kate
8. bea voted for kate to be rezzed
9. narrowed down possible minions to bea, bwt, epi
10. her self-voting behavior seems fishy - voting self because opportunity to frame her which seems like a weak excuse - avoiding detection
11. she started begging to be lynched seemingly out of nowhere
12. Guess that she is Martell and knows the lynch won't show her as a baddie
13. Begging to be lynched despite the fact she's not on the lynch poll
14. Tried to get a civv lynched (DF, this was yours but i couldnt figure out which civ you were talking about)
15. Video game baddies tried to kill her on a night she had the sheild and they would have known that
16. Says several words via nevin's analysis that could mean she's using rumple words, use of the word specific stood out
17. Posts prior to meltdown were fluffy posts
18. Perhaps tried to pad her post count by talking about the edit button
19. Went after nev a couple of times on weak evidence when he is obviously civ
20. Look at beas insanified posts day 5 (llama this was your point and I'm not sure what you are getting at)

I don't know if it matters, but I no longer think bea is a bob minion.
I haven't figured out how he was getting away with not killing anyone, but my gut says that it's not her.
A Martell that got recruited would not be trying to die to benefit her team, because she's no longer win with that team.

And llama was trying to point out example insanification posts in his own defense, and wasn't attempting to say anything about bea.

[BigDamnHero]

There aren't many people right now I can declare as a civ, but IMO the following people are civs:

Bea
Devin
DFaraday
DHelper
Lizzy (duh)

My list of baddies is even shorter:
BWT
Llama
Vompatti

Everyone else I'm not sure of one way or another. The concerted effort to lynch Bea seems more like a strategy of opportunity more than anything. She has been ruthlessly targeted with insanifications, night kills and most everything else from early on in the game which has served as a basis to undermine her credibility. Asking to be lynched a few days ago just seems like a desprate plea from a frustrated civ, which I TOTALLLY get. If I'm reading her correctly (and I'm very confident that I am), she's not a civ we want eliminated from the game, especially today.

[Nevinera]

There aren't many people right now I can declare as a civ, but IMO the following people are civs:

Bea
Devin
DFaraday
DHelper
Lizzy (duh)

My list of baddies is even shorter:
BWT
Llama
Vompatti

Would you like to give an explanation, or is 'declaring' as far as you're interested in going?

[timmer]

BDH, I'd love to hear your thoughts on some of the specifics of the case against Bea. What about the word usage that was pointed out? Her vote to give Kate the shield? The fact that asking to be lynched makes sense if she were Martell?

[timmer]

And to anyone, where are we with vote strategy? Am I good to vote now? I saw in my readback that there were some times where people wanred votes done a certain way, but I didn't always follow the logic. I'd like to vote Bea soon as I'll be hsading out for the day in about an hour. Unkess BDH can shed some light there. ?.

[Nevinera]

And to anyone, where are we with vote strategy? Am I good to vote now? I saw in my readback that there were some times where people wanred votes done a certain way, but I didn't always follow the logic. I'd like to vote Bea soon as I'll be hsading out for the day in about an hour. Unkess BDH can shed some light there. ?.

That was all about Bob's minions and preventing them from having a kill (if we vote for the minion he doesn't get a kill).
Nobody's been doing that very much, and we still have gotten no bob kills.
I don't have any proof, but my gut says the minion must either be dead or non-present.

[Draconus]

Anyone have any thoughts about this possibility?:

DH is Jack Torrence, and he ingeniously planted this little seed to frame Vompatti later on (as in now).
Just a thought that popped into my mind.

But I'd be willing to look at Vompers for this if no one else goes for BWT (Who I would LOOOOOVE to vote for again today).

Also, OMG LIZZY I think I love this avatar more for you!!!!!

[Flyin' High]

In re-reading I decided to sum up what I found in relation to bea's possibly being bad as i reviewed the thread. Counterpoints have been made to many of these points but my intent was just to pull together in one place all the things that people have brought up as evidence that bea is bad. Let me know if I got something wrong or left something out. I do this for myself and only post it because in the past others have asked for it. I'm going to do llama or vomps next. If it is not helpful just let me know and I won't post.

1. Said that maybe Bob is not the person to go after because he might be helpful to the civs.
2. After winning the shield bea seemed awfully interested in the workings of bob implying bea might be the minion.
3. Said "Oh socky - if we lynch Bob's minion, will we be told that he was the recruit or will only his original civ role be revealed? " Original civv role believed to be a slip up.
4. Bob picked bea as a minion to get the shield.
5. Responses to accusations were "fleety"
6. BB attempted to kill bea - that is a civv role, does it imply anything about bea
7. bea voted to give the shield to kate
8. bea voted for kate to be rezzed
9. narrowed down possible minions to bea, bwt, epi
10. her self-voting behavior seems fishy - voting self because opportunity to frame her which seems like a weak excuse - avoiding detection
11. she started begging to be lynched seemingly out of nowhere
12. Guess that she is Martell and knows the lynch won't show her as a baddie
13. Begging to be lynched despite the fact she's not on the lynch poll
14. Tried to get a civv lynched (DF, this was yours but i couldnt figure out which civ you were talking about)
15. Video game baddies tried to kill her on a night she had the sheild and they would have known that
16. Says several words via nevin's analysis that could mean she's using rumple words, use of the word specific stood out
17. Posts prior to meltdown were fluffy posts
18. Perhaps tried to pad her post count by talking about the edit button
19. Went after nev a couple of times on weak evidence when he is obviously civ
20. Look at beas insanified posts day 5 (llama this was your point and I'm not sure what you are getting at)

I think this list is a good summary of the different reasons she's been suspected, and what I find a bit funny and maybe a bit sad is that she's been suspected of being on both mafia teams and being the minion as well as a number of us thinking she was civvie early on--talk about being all over the place! However, now that we are further into the game and have more to work with, I personally think the most solid theory is that she is a Manipulator and Catherine Martell.

One little error I see in your list is #6. I think at this point it's pretty clear that was one of Delbert's kills and whoever has the Beggar's Banquet role accepted the offer (since that kill attempt came before all of the role secrets were revealed).

As for strategy voting, BWT and Epi both received votes yesterday (and have every day since the minion was recruited). So it's still possible that one of them is/was the minion. Hopefully it was Epi and we just never have to worry about the minion for the rest of the game.

[DharmaHelper]

Anyone have any thoughts about this possibility?:

DH is Jack Torrence, and he ingeniously planted this little seed to frame Vompatti later on (as in now).
Just a thought that popped into my mind.

But I'd be willing to look at Vompers for this if no one else goes for BWT (Who I would LOOOOOVE to vote for again today).

Also, OMG LIZZY I think I love this avatar more for you!!!!!

I have a few thoughts on that possibility: It's incorrect. It would be far from genius to expose myself to a lynch if I was wrong about Vompatti. It would also be silly to wait until just now instead of adding onto my case last lynch, when I had much more support. I recognize the possibility, but it's too much of a logical gap. It would be just as possible if I were to say you were Jack or Delbert and knew Vompatti wasn't so you saw an opportunity to knock me down a peg by claiming I framed Vomps. Or if Vomps WAS Jack and you were Delbert and you were nervous about losing your partner so soon, so you cast suspicion on me.

The difference between those conjectures (mine and yours) and the evidence that Vompatti is Jack is that there is actual evidence pointing to Vompatti being Jack. His rescue from the lynch, and the message. In my mind, Jack would want to send messages that made it clear to Delbert who he was so that he could be recruited, not send messages that sent Delbert on a wild goose chase.

A.P was awesome to partner up with in Sherlock, and is a sweet and funny guy. INH is a twisted bastard but one I can respect nonetheless.

[timmer]

Ok, well then I'm voting for Bea. Nevs case has sold me and I'm only going to be around sporadically today.

votes Bea

[Lizzy]

Vomps being Jack sounds plausible. I missed (fock it again!) the post about the mushrooms, but it does seem like something he would do, and if Delbert paid enough attention, it's possible that he recognised Vomps' style and thus recruited him. Having two lynch stops might explain why he survived last time. There's also the possibility that someone made copied Vomps' style on purpose, or it's a mere coincidence that Jack's messages sound Vompattesque. However, if he is indeed Jack, Delbert might have another lynch stop, so again - wasted day.

One thing about Juliets' summary - why is it so obvious that Nev is a civ? The only obvious civ around these parts is moi.

@Devin - cheers! it is also a tribute to Russti who let us host first.

[juliets]

Here are the things i find looking back at llama. Again, if I left anything out or misrepresented what anyone said please speak up.

1. Accuses DH of squashing discussion because he (DH) wants to discuss other options other than inh.
2. When Bullz says the same thing about inh llama agrees with it
3. Rarely backs his suspicions with anything at all
4. Tries to buddy up to SD, Bullz, SVS, BWT which is indicative of a baddie
5. Case against DH was "weak slapdash of propped up nonsense" http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 780#p53780
6. llama was a kate voter
7. Suspects DH for: arrogance, insincerity, squashing discussion, opportunism, suspiciously fast code-breaking http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 545#p53545
8. accuses dh of lying about how long dnd lasted (see post directly below post link in #7.
9. A lot of back and forth with DH over different things, e.g., low posters
10. Adds in "if I survive the night" which is classic overplay
11. points about llama are fact driven
12. had a valid and verifiable reason to be absent which would be a good thing to use until midgame to avoid lynches

I paid particular attention to the day 5 voting and most all of it was based on the fact that people were not comfortable with llama's case against DH.

[juliets]

Vomps being Jack sounds plausible. I missed (fock it again!) the post about the mushrooms, but it does seem like something he would do, and if Delbert paid enough attention, it's possible that he recognised Vomps' style and thus recruited him. Having two lynch stops might explain why he survived last time. There's also the possibility that someone made copied Vomps' style on purpose, or it's a mere coincidence that Jack's messages sound Vompattesque. However, if he is indeed Jack, Delbert might have another lynch stop, so again - wasted day.

One thing about Juliets' summary - why is it so obvious that Nev is a civ? The only obvious civ around these parts is moi.

@Devin - cheers! it is also a tribute to Russti who let us host first.

Just to be clear, my summary is a summary of what people said so that was not my opinion injected into the summary.

[juliets]

In re-reading I decided to sum up what I found in relation to bea's possibly being bad as i reviewed the thread. Counterpoints have been made to many of these points but my intent was just to pull together in one place all the things that people have brought up as evidence that bea is bad. Let me know if I got something wrong or left something out. I do this for myself and only post it because in the past others have asked for it. I'm going to do llama or vomps next. If it is not helpful just let me know and I won't post.

1. Said that maybe Bob is not the person to go after because he might be helpful to the civs.
2. After winning the shield bea seemed awfully interested in the workings of bob implying bea might be the minion.
3. Said "Oh socky - if we lynch Bob's minion, will we be told that he was the recruit or will only his original civ role be revealed? " Original civv role believed to be a slip up.
4. Bob picked bea as a minion to get the shield.
5. Responses to accusations were "fleety"
6. BB attempted to kill bea - that is a civv role, does it imply anything about bea
7. bea voted to give the shield to kate
8. bea voted for kate to be rezzed
9. narrowed down possible minions to bea, bwt, epi
10. her self-voting behavior seems fishy - voting self because opportunity to frame her which seems like a weak excuse - avoiding detection
11. she started begging to be lynched seemingly out of nowhere
12. Guess that she is Martell and knows the lynch won't show her as a baddie
13. Begging to be lynched despite the fact she's not on the lynch poll
14. Tried to get a civv lynched (DF, this was yours but i couldnt figure out which civ you were talking about)
15. Video game baddies tried to kill her on a night she had the sheild and they would have known that
16. Says several words via nevin's analysis that could mean she's using rumple words, use of the word specific stood out
17. Posts prior to meltdown were fluffy posts
18. Perhaps tried to pad her post count by talking about the edit button
19. Went after nev a couple of times on weak evidence when he is obviously civ
20. Look at beas insanified posts day 5 (llama this was your point and I'm not sure what you are getting at)

I think this list is a good summary of the different reasons she's been suspected, and what I find a bit funny and maybe a bit sad is that she's been suspected of being on both mafia teams and being the minion as well as a number of us thinking she was civvie early on--talk about being all over the place! However, now that we are further into the game and have more to work with, I personally think the most solid theory is that she is a Manipulator and Catherine Martell.

One little error I see in your list is #6. I think at this point it's pretty clear that was one of Delbert's kills and whoever has the Beggar's Banquet role accepted the offer (since that kill attempt came before all of the role secrets were revealed).

As for strategy voting, BWT and Epi both received votes yesterday (and have every day since the minion was recruited). So it's still possible that one of them is/was the minion. Hopefully it was Epi and we just never have to worry about the minion for the rest of the game.

FH thanks for pointing out that #6 has since been dis-proven. I just listed the accusations as they were in the thread.

[Lizzy]

Juliets - got it!

Not to defend Llama, but I agree with almost everything he said about DH, maybe not so much about the code breaking, but even there I can't be sure. The 'I hope I survive the night' bit is not necessarily pointing to baddie behaviour. I use that quite often and I mostly had the misfortune of being a civ. He can easily be a target for the other baddie team. Actually, if Llama is bad (Dr Fetus) I wouldn't be surprised if DH was his team mate. Trying to lynch him however, would be futile.