The Syndicate

Alrighty, so it seems that either the night being cut out prevented me from being rezzed or you guys just aren't fans of oldies hits. Perhaps something a little more current?



REZ ME

I want it now- won’t you please rez me?
Why don’t you go, PM the host
Resurrection- it will impress me
I’ll be the one, who loves you most

Hooooo (rez me)
Hooooo (rez me)
Hoooo-oooo-oooo (I want it now)
Hooooo (rez me)
Hooooo (rez me)
Hoooo-oooo-oooo (I want it now)


You know in this game I didn’t last long
For me to be dead is wickedly wrong
It’s got me like Miley Cyrus, brain off
Just waiting to return strong- Rez me!
Spreadsheets, funny posts- Rez me!
That’s the way we like the games- Rez me!
I'm slicker than an oil spill
You say you won’t, but I bet you will- Rez me!

No excuses, take no flak
End of the night, you bring me back
Put me on the right track
End of the night, you bring me back
No excuses, take no flak
End of the night, you bring me back
Put me on the right track
End of the night, you bring me back

I want it now- won’t you please rez me?
Why don’t you go, PM the host
Resurrection - it will impress me
I’ll be the one, who loves you most

I want it now (I want it now)
Won’t you please rez me?
Why don’t you go (Why don’t you go)
PM the host (PM the host)
Resurrection
It will impress me
I’ll be the one
Who loves you most (Who loves you most)

Oooooh (rez me)
Woooah (rez me)
Oooooh-oooh-oooh (I want it now)
Oooooh (rez me)
Woooah (rez me)
Oooooh-oooh-oooh (I want it now)

Look up in the sky, it's a bird, it's a plane
Nah, it's just me, ain't a damn thing changed
Lurk in the thread, play mind games
Blessed to say, spammin’ ain't no thing
Thread jumping like Lebron, now, voting
Rez me for another round, homie
Do us all a big favor, tonight you bring G-man back

No excuses, take no flak
End of the night, you bring me back
Put me on the right track
End of the night, you bring me back
No excuses, take no flak
End of the night, you bring me back
(Ooooh)
Put me on the right track
End of the night, you bring me back

I want it now- won’t you please rez me?
Why don’t you go, PM the host
Resurrection - it will impress me
I’ll be the one, who loves you most

I want it now (I want it now)
Won’t you please rez me?
Why don’t you go
PM the host (PM the host)
Resurrection (Resurrection)
It will impress me
I'll be the one (I'll be the one)
Who loves you most (Who loves you most)


Wooooah (rez me)
wooooah (rez me) (Hey!)
ooooh-oooh-oooh (I want it now) (G-Man)
ooooh (rez me) (Oh!)
wooooah (rez me)
ooooh-oooh-oooh (I want it now)

Wooooah (Rez me!)
wooooah (C'mon!)
ooooh-oooh-oooh (I want it now)
wooooah (Rez me!)
wooooah (PM the host!)
ooooh-oooh-oooh (rez me)

Scotty wrote:I also don't like the non-chalance in Tiny Bubble's posts. They haven't been quantitative but more importantly they haven't been qualitative.

Vote registered for Tiny Bubbles.

linki- lol DH. you funny. I'll get to you when I get some time.

Whats funny is not fact checking your "legimate" suspicions.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

unfurl wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Spoiler: show

unfurl wrote:Bye Golden, I hope you get you wish to comeback to the game

Roxy wrote:I hope people today will act more reasonable. For me yesterdays lynch was rather disturbing and I do not understand some of the way over the top antics that are being employed during this game. It is distracting and for me very unhelpful.

I want to hunt baddies - there have been recruits and there are recruiters. I am done hearing about how Neutrals can be bad. I am sorry but Neutrals are Neutrals. How can you be a bad Neutral? Makes no sense.

If you would like to discuss possible recruiters/recruitees then quote this and list your top two suspects that you feel fit the bill.

I dont trust MP or bwt, I think you know that
I think aapje has dissapear from the map, so I think thats weird, even if he was not trying to hunt baddies he was participating with questions

I dont know if the Golden vs Boomsland, can give us some clues, like where people trying to save Boomslang by votting Golden, or is Boomslang a neutral and he just happend for people to place votes too?

Also rey voted for himself, but before the thread was lock, he changed his vote to Golden making it a tie, something to consider

unfurl, why don't you trust me? I remember your D1 vote for me, but if I recall correctly, you've hardly mentioned me again until now.

Re: the bolded/underlined, so... does this mean you suspect rey for that or what? You just say it's something to consider. So what do you think of it?

I said I was gonna keep open mind about you, but it does not mean I trust you, Gaining my trust is something someone ever harldy able to do
Maybe is just a clash of style, but I think you are a very agrresive player and you like to corner people so at the end they end up looking suspicios and then if they turn out they were neutral, you can wash the blood of your hand, hey they were acting certain way, is not your fault, example bass lynch, and if you are able to lynch me then I will another players that you will go, hey she was acting weird is her fault

I do want to hear what rey has to said first, why he changed his vote toward golden right before the thread was lock?

Thanks for the response

I'm on phone while waiting to get my Texas vehicle tags and such

Where did you get that impression about me that I skirt responsibility for my vote and blame the victim? I always am forthright in taking responsibility for my votes, so I find your accusation to be strange. If you're referring to Bass, I was obviously wrong about him being mafia, and have never claimed it was his fault that I voted for him. I did explain my suspicion clearly and why he received my vote and why I wasn't particularly heartbroken over his death, but I never once claimed to shirk responsibility for my vote.

This sounds like you are explaining thats the way he was playing, so to me is like washing the blood, cause you had your reasons

MovingPictures07 wrote:I'm not saying RIP to Bass, and, at the expense of making enemies further, I'll echo nutella's thoughts a bit and say that I'm not that sad about Bass's death either. It would have been ideal to nab a mafia-aligned recruiter or recruited, naturally, but an unrecruited Bass is still at least a somewhat favorable result. That said, I'll dearly miss him on a personal level, as always.

MovingPictures07 wrote:
I'm not alleging that I can read into Bass's brain and see what he was thinking as he played the game, so I really don't know if he was playing a bad or chaos-aligned game. That was the impression I received from his behavior, and the fact that he really didn't seem to care who received attention as long as it wasn't him.

---

MovingPictures07 wrote:

unfurl wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote: Rico, I agree that sideline Azura + voting others to vote for Golden are compatible. Which players come to mind with "wanting him gone from a distance" and playing on the sidelines? For me, I'd say unfurl, TinyBubbles, and aapje.

What do all of you players think?

Seriously MP,wow,
Golden was among the players, that was ok with how Im playing, he did thought I was just being me
why on earth I would want him gone? ask yourself that
you are clearly think Im some mastefull evil mind, or you want others to think that

Unfurl you keep espousing content as if I shouldn't be questioning anything you do and that I should just trust that you have sincere motives, sorry but that's not mafia so I think if you were civ or neutral you would understand why I'm questioning you.

From what I recall you barely committed to the Golden debacle so that's why I named you off the top of my head. I can ISO you later to confirm if you want.

Why on earth would you want golden gone? That's a ridiculous question since you could ask that of anyone. His interests might not have aligned with yours perhaps?

You can question me, when did I said people should trust me and dont ask me anything?
Im gonna keep defending myself, but you think everyone should behave certain way, like you have a book that tells you how people should play mafia
and if they dont acordanly then they are bad?

nutella wrote:DH, you seem to refuse to take ANYTHING seriously. Why won't you respond to the people bringing up your name, and why have you not contributed a single original thought or any kind of substantial discussion for the entire game?

Actually I would argue that he's ALWAYS around when someone brings up his name, and tends to post about things that have a flair for the dramatic as such. I want to look through his posts later on to see exactly what original thoughts he has brought forth, because I thought I remember him doing so, but I could be wrong.

DH I'm not saying you're bad, so you can take off your hat and have some ice tea or something brotha.

Scotty wrote:

nutella wrote:DH, you seem to refuse to take ANYTHING seriously. Why won't you respond to the people bringing up your name, and why have you not contributed a single original thought or any kind of substantial discussion for the entire game?

Actually I would argue that he's ALWAYS around when someone brings up his name, and tends to post about things that have a flair for the dramatic as such. I want to look through his posts later on to see exactly what original thoughts he has brought forth, because I thought I remember him doing so, but I could be wrong.

DH I'm not saying you're bad, so you can take off your hat and have some ice tea or something brotha.

I had some original thoughts RE: Golden, but I haven't said much of anything relevant.

Black Rock wrote:

Official Announcement

Synonym will be replacing Russtifinko effective immediately! He will not be able to be lynched today or targeted Night 4 as he catches up and joins the game.

Welcome Syn!

DharmaHelper wrote:

nutella wrote:DH, you seem to refuse to take ANYTHING seriously. Why won't you respond to the people bringing up your name, and why have you not contributed a single original thought or any kind of substantial discussion for the entire game?

Who has brought me up that I haven't responded to?

Me, llama, certainly others, your name came up a few times during the last day I believe. Nice No U on Scotty btw. Who do you really suspect and why?

I see your behavior in this game as similar to (though maybe not quite to same extreme as) MM's. Speaking of which, MM owes me a few explanations. He's refused to contribute AT ALL to any thread discussions. MM, please give us something to work with here.

nutella wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

nutella wrote:DH, you seem to refuse to take ANYTHING seriously. Why won't you respond to the people bringing up your name, and why have you not contributed a single original thought or any kind of substantial discussion for the entire game?

Who has brought me up that I haven't responded to?

Me, llama, certainly others, your name came up a few times during the last day I believe. Nice No U on Scotty btw. Who do you really suspect and why?

I see your behavior in this game as similar to (though maybe not quite to same extreme as) MM's. Speaking of which, MM owes me a few explanations. He's refused to contribute AT ALL to any thread discussions. MM, please give us something to work with here.

Nice and quick of you to run to Scotty's aid.

You did not give any reason to think Scotty was suspicious. You only criticized him for suspecting you. That is a no u.

nutella wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

nutella wrote:DH, you seem to refuse to take ANYTHING seriously. Why won't you respond to the people bringing up your name, and why have you not contributed a single original thought or any kind of substantial discussion for the entire game?

Who has brought me up that I haven't responded to?

Me, llama, certainly others, your name came up a few times during the last day I believe. Nice No U on Scotty btw. Who do you really suspect and why?

I see your behavior in this game as similar to (though maybe not quite to same extreme as) MM's. Speaking of which, MM owes me a few explanations. He's refused to contribute AT ALL to any thread discussions. MM, please give us something to work with here.

Did a search of your post. You mentioned me 2 times in 4 game days, once to point out correctly that I haven't contributed anything, and once to tell me not to eat granola.

Llama has the biggest hard on for me in every game, so I'm taking him about as seriously as I'm taking anything.

So, there you go.

nutella wrote:You did not give any reason to think Scotty was suspicious. You only criticized him for suspecting you. That is a no u.

Do you think it's suspicious of him to suspect me for two contradicting reasons? :P

unfurl wrote:Bye Golden, I hope you get you wish to comeback to the game

Roxy wrote:I hope people today will act more reasonable. For me yesterdays lynch was rather disturbing and I do not understand some of the way over the top antics that are being employed during this game. It is distracting and for me very unhelpful.

I want to hunt baddies - there have been recruits and there are recruiters. I am done hearing about how Neutrals can be bad. I am sorry but Neutrals are Neutrals. How can you be a bad Neutral? Makes no sense.

If you would like to discuss possible recruiters/recruitees then quote this and list your top two suspects that you feel fit the bill.

I dont trust MP or bwt, I think you know that
I think aapje has dissapear from the map, so I think thats weird, even if he was not trying to hunt baddies he was participating with questions

I dont know if the Golden vs Boomsland, can give us some clues, like where people trying to save Boomslang by votting Golden, or is Boomslang a neutral and he just happend for people to place votes too?

Also rey voted for himself, but before the thread was lock, he changed his vote to Golden making it a tie, something to consider

Good stuff unfurl!
I personally feel boomslang is yet a Neutral. I think JJJ made his points - sure - but imo he is just going for another easy lynch. I also felt JJJ and MP's back and forth when MP stated he was trying to prove a point by acting insane and providing cover for others to follow his vote. And then later say - yeah I didn't mean it - it was me proving my point.

Your point on rey is noted and I will put him on my to read list.

What do you think of JJJ and Nutella?

DH: I think he made a mistake, was corrected, and said he would look into you for other reasons. He didn't even explicitly state that he was still suspicious of you for the same reason. He said he would look into you and you overreacted.

Roxy wrote:

unfurl wrote:Bye Golden, I hope you get you wish to comeback to the game

Roxy wrote:I hope people today will act more reasonable. For me yesterdays lynch was rather disturbing and I do not understand some of the way over the top antics that are being employed during this game. It is distracting and for me very unhelpful.

I want to hunt baddies - there have been recruits and there are recruiters. I am done hearing about how Neutrals can be bad. I am sorry but Neutrals are Neutrals. How can you be a bad Neutral? Makes no sense.

If you would like to discuss possible recruiters/recruitees then quote this and list your top two suspects that you feel fit the bill.

I dont trust MP or bwt, I think you know that
I think aapje has dissapear from the map, so I think thats weird, even if he was not trying to hunt baddies he was participating with questions

I dont know if the Golden vs Boomsland, can give us some clues, like where people trying to save Boomslang by votting Golden, or is Boomslang a neutral and he just happend for people to place votes too?

Also rey voted for himself, but before the thread was lock, he changed his vote to Golden making it a tie, something to consider

Good stuff unfurl!
I personally feel boomslang is yet a Neutral. I think JJJ made his points - sure - but imo he is just going for another easy lynch. I also felt JJJ and MP's back and forth when MP stated he was trying to prove a point by acting insane and providing cover for others to follow his vote. And then later say - yeah I didn't mean it - it was me proving my point.

Your point on rey is noted and I will put him on my to read list.

What do you think of JJJ and Nutella?

I meant to add that JJJ and MP's convo felt fake.

nutella wrote:DH: I think he made a mistake, was corrected, and said he would look into you for other reasons. He didn't even explicitly state that he was still suspicious of you for the same reason. He said he would look into you and you overreacted.

He grouped me into a list of people he intended to look into, I corrected him, he said then that he would look into me regardless. I voted for him, he backed off.

Suspect.

I'm happy with my vote where it is for now, but unfurl's "I'm just being me" defense is ludicrous and everyone should realize that. I don't trust her at all.

DharmaHelper wrote:

nutella wrote:DH: I think he made a mistake, was corrected, and said he would look into you for other reasons. He didn't even explicitly state that he was still suspicious of you for the same reason. He said he would look into you and you overreacted.

He grouped me into a list of people he intended to look into, I corrected him, he said then that he would look into me regardless. I voted for him, he backed off.

Suspect.

Jesus dude. I'd be looking into your regardless. By backing off, do you mean not calling you bad? Because I never explicitly said that. I feel like you're just looking to pick a fight for the sake of picking a fight.

Overreact much?

Roxy wrote:

Roxy wrote:

unfurl wrote:Bye Golden, I hope you get you wish to comeback to the game

Roxy wrote:I hope people today will act more reasonable. For me yesterdays lynch was rather disturbing and I do not understand some of the way over the top antics that are being employed during this game. It is distracting and for me very unhelpful.

I want to hunt baddies - there have been recruits and there are recruiters. I am done hearing about how Neutrals can be bad. I am sorry but Neutrals are Neutrals. How can you be a bad Neutral? Makes no sense.

If you would like to discuss possible recruiters/recruitees then quote this and list your top two suspects that you feel fit the bill.

I dont trust MP or bwt, I think you know that
I think aapje has dissapear from the map, so I think thats weird, even if he was not trying to hunt baddies he was participating with questions

I dont know if the Golden vs Boomsland, can give us some clues, like where people trying to save Boomslang by votting Golden, or is Boomslang a neutral and he just happend for people to place votes too?

Also rey voted for himself, but before the thread was lock, he changed his vote to Golden making it a tie, something to consider

Good stuff unfurl!
I personally feel boomslang is yet a Neutral. I think JJJ made his points - sure - but imo he is just going for another easy lynch. I also felt JJJ and MP's back and forth when MP stated he was trying to prove a point by acting insane and providing cover for others to follow his vote. And then later say - yeah I didn't mean it - it was me proving my point.

Your point on rey is noted and I will put him on my to read list.

What do you think of JJJ and Nutella?

I meant to add that JJJ and MP's convo felt fake.

I dont know JJJ, but he seems to be a talkative player, like he tends to comment about every little single thing is been said, i dont know if thats usual for him, but for example I do have in my mind he was quick to said few things about me early on and later on too, but he never went so far as to vote for me

Nutella, I have on mind, she did said early on that she thought I was being normal, like I think a baddie will probably be quiet and be more like who care let them put suspicious on her as long is not on them

linki llama, we will never get along

Canucklehead wrote:

TinyBubbles wrote:rip golden, and happy birthday black rock!
also canucklehead what concerns? if you mean my comment about being emotionally invested, it's based not only on this game but every game since the first, i felt like golden was always targeted for being talkative and often ended up in(what seemed to be) arguments, i was uncomfortable. i dont know what else to tell you, the amount of posts a person makes doesnt relate directly to how affected they are by the game, everyone has different limits and different expectations.

This is a non-answer. If you had actually read my post (and those of other people who have commented), you'd know that my thoughts about you had little to do with post count, and everything to do with a contradiction between your claim of being "emotionally invested" and the CONTENT (not the quantity) of your posts, which bear absolutely no evidence of anything I would ever classify as "emotional investment". Obviously, "everyone has different limits and different expectations".... but that has nothing to do with my suspicions of you. To put it more plainly, I am suspicious of what appears to me to be an attempt by you to *seem* involved in the game and to present yourself as such ("Guyyyyyssssss I'm SO EMOTIONALLY invested! Emotions! I feel things about this game!"), juxtaposed with the lack of substantive content in any of your posts and (most importantly) your refusal to acknowledge any of the suspicions and comments about you, which an "emotionally invested" person would not do, and (more tellingly) which a *civ* would not do. I think you were hoping to float by under the radar by ignoring things said about you and focusing on the Big Emotional Things, like Golden's Saga of Bullsuit Drama. I think your interactions with Llama on Day 1 may have made you an appealing target for a baddie recruiter. I think you've been recruited and are hiding.
I'm sorry that you "don't know what else to tell me". I feel like a good place to start might be to tell me who you're suspicious of, what you think about llama's continuing suspicion of you, why you haven't addressed anyone's comments about you before now..... you know, basic bullsuit like that.

What does her interactions to llama on day 1 have to do with her being recruited?? imoI would think the exact opposite.

Roxy wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Roxy wrote:I hope people today will act more reasonable. For me yesterdays lynch was rather disturbing and I do not understand some of the way over the top antics that are being employed during this game. It is distracting and for me very unhelpful.

I want to hunt baddies - there have been recruits and there are recruiters. I am done hearing about how Neutrals can be bad. I am sorry but Neutrals are Neutrals. How can you be a bad Neutral? Makes no sense.

If you would like to discuss possible recruiters/recruitees then quote this and list your top two suspects that you feel fit the bill.

If the first paragraph was mainly about MP, then my personal impression of it is that his vote was forced (you'll notice his vote stayed on Golden) and then he decided to go batshit about it in sign of protest instead of having to adopt a more conventional tactic. It wasn't elegant, but he would have been in a much tighter spot making a serious case against Golden after treating him as genuine the past phases. Azura (or the punisher?) must have clearly taken advantage of this.

I'll think of the angle you're suggesting as well, in addition to scanning Golden's voters, but right now I don't feel I have strong leads as to who would be a recruiter/recruitee/recruit material.

Why does it have to be someone that voted golden?

I am suprised you don't have any opinions on who has been recruited - you have opinions on everything else.

True, it doesn't have to be strictly related to voting Golden. I just meant MP's behaviour fits the profile, for me.

Also, I don't think players can ever just come in and shout they've been forced to vote or do something; they can try to signal it, at least. So MP heavily denying to have been forced doesn't fully detract me from finding the other version to be a plausible signal or tactic in dealing with a forced vote. In fact, a pee fountain sort of signaling.

What do you make of MP's D3, if you trust his version that it was all genuine?

And true, you don't have to tell me I'm not doing a great job so far.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

unfurl wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Spoiler: show

unfurl wrote:Bye Golden, I hope you get you wish to comeback to the game

Roxy wrote:I hope people today will act more reasonable. For me yesterdays lynch was rather disturbing and I do not understand some of the way over the top antics that are being employed during this game. It is distracting and for me very unhelpful.

I want to hunt baddies - there have been recruits and there are recruiters. I am done hearing about how Neutrals can be bad. I am sorry but Neutrals are Neutrals. How can you be a bad Neutral? Makes no sense.

If you would like to discuss possible recruiters/recruitees then quote this and list your top two suspects that you feel fit the bill.

I dont trust MP or bwt, I think you know that
I think aapje has dissapear from the map, so I think thats weird, even if he was not trying to hunt baddies he was participating with questions

I dont know if the Golden vs Boomsland, can give us some clues, like where people trying to save Boomslang by votting Golden, or is Boomslang a neutral and he just happend for people to place votes too?

Also rey voted for himself, but before the thread was lock, he changed his vote to Golden making it a tie, something to consider

unfurl, why don't you trust me? I remember your D1 vote for me, but if I recall correctly, you've hardly mentioned me again until now.

Re: the bolded/underlined, so... does this mean you suspect rey for that or what? You just say it's something to consider. So what do you think of it?

I said I was gonna keep open mind about you, but it does not mean I trust you, Gaining my trust is something someone ever harldy able to do
Maybe is just a clash of style, but I think you are a very agrresive player and you like to corner people so at the end they end up looking suspicios and then if they turn out they were neutral, you can wash the blood of your hand, hey they were acting certain way, is not your fault, example bass lynch, and if you are able to lynch me then I will another players that you will go, hey she was acting weird is her fault

I do want to hear what rey has to said first, why he changed his vote toward golden right before the thread was lock?

Thanks for the response

I'm on phone while waiting to get my Texas vehicle tags and such

Where did you get that impression about me that I skirt responsibility for my vote and blame the victim? I always am forthright in taking responsibility for my votes, so I find your accusation to be strange. If you're referring to Bass, I was obviously wrong about him being mafia, and have never claimed it was his fault that I voted for him. I did explain my suspicion clearly and why he received my vote and why I wasn't particularly heartbroken over his death, but I never once claimed to shirk responsibility for my vote.

It seemed you blamed his responses to you and everyone else. Yesterday you said something about golden's self vote. So yes there does seem to be a pattern of you blaming the victim imho.

*Wilgy walks into the room of chattering. His cloths are dirty and he smells of alcohol, but there is confidence in his step. He approaches everyone and points a finger to Sorsha.*

Sorsha wrote:First of all I'm of the mind that golden is not on the team that killed epi night one. I know golden still claims responsibility like that team is going to do his bidding for him but I'd think their motive was more to frame him. Anyone in particular come to mind as one who would do that?

My thoughts on the matter is whoever is really hounding golden in the thread did it. But is it a silly question to ask who would set golden up?

Sorsha, the reason why I asked you a question so soon after you posted was due to your tone. You state, confidently, that Golden is being framed. Here's the kicker though, you didn't save him. You could've taken your vote off of tiny to save a person being framed, but you didnt. Why?

Also, what gave you the confidence in your tone? I don't believe you answered that question when I asked earlier?

What puzzle piece am I missing in Golden's case? And should I place my bets on you? Or against you?

Canucklehead wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:@Boomslang voters: Does JJJ's ISO case adequately cover all the reasons why you chose to vote for Boom? Or are there other points you want to add?

JJJ seems to be stepping up admirably to take the scrutiny about the rush of Boomslang votes..... and I REALLY am very itchy about how other Boomslang bandwagoners are just letting him do so....

Yeah. nutella has done a nice job expressing her suspicion, but I need more from the other people who voted Boomslang yesterday and today.

MovingPictures07 wrote:If I had to pick one of the two candidates at gunpoint, I'd actually pick number 2, and assess that Boomslang is a neutral being utilized by the mafia.

Thanks for providing your thoughts and I think you make sound points. I find myself trusting my own case less as time progresses, because he is drawing votes far too easily while people just heap the responsibility for it on my shoulders (and nutella to a degree).

Wording corrections:

Scotty wrote:He says that Golden has been acting emotionally manipulative all game, and no one spurred that on. You say "no one spurred that on." I said no one "forced him." Huge difference. Obviously it was in response to someone. But he could have taken a better approach. Plus Golden had votes on him before self-voting, which looked like a more suspicious situation. Yup

Devin hasn't offered much to the party so far, and his explanation for the vote is a very simple one. Also very lazy.

"Lazy?" Psh. Try busy.

Scotty wrote:Hope to finish this up tomorrow with Boom, who I think just voted out of survival' sake (which in and of itself is funny because he voted himself as a joke and look where it got him)

I would have done the same in his shoes.

DharmaHelper wrote:

nutella wrote:DH, you seem to refuse to take ANYTHING seriously. Why won't you respond to the people bringing up your name, and why have you not contributed a single original thought or any kind of substantial discussion for the entire game?

Who has brought me up that I haven't responded to?

You've done an admirable job of answering "What is five times seven?" with "Thursday".

Ricochet - I think just the opposite actually. I think you are playing an "A" grade game <3

nutella - I promise after work when I have Larry I will present you with something to respond to with my reasoning - its just too hard to do from my old school phone.
But jjj. asked so I answered.

Scotty wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

nutella wrote:DH: I think he made a mistake, was corrected, and said he would look into you for other reasons. He didn't even explicitly state that he was still suspicious of you for the same reason. He said he would look into you and you overreacted.

He grouped me into a list of people he intended to look into, I corrected him, he said then that he would look into me regardless. I voted for him, he backed off.

Suspect.

Jesus dude. I'd be looking into your regardless. By backing off, do you mean not calling you bad? Because I never explicitly said that. I feel like you're just looking to pick a fight for the sake of picking a fight.

Overreact much?

So, in general when you look into people is that because you *dont* find them suspicious (i.e bad)?

Roxy wrote:I personally feel boomslang is yet a Neutral. I think JJJ made his points - sure - but imo he is just going for another easy lynch.

This would imply that you found at least one of my points to be inadequate. Please show me. I've tried my best to assess players and come up with reads. If I wanted an "easy" lynch I would have just joined the anti-Golden crusade.

Rest in peace Golden. See you in another life brotha.

I'm registering a vote for LoRab for wanting to lynch neutrals.

Roxy wrote:I meant to add that JJJ and MP's convo felt fake.

I can understand you thinking the MP side of the conversation was fake. He was bonkers and his eventual explanation can only be believed or disbelieved at face value. What was fake about my part in it though? I was trying to figure out WTF he was on about.

quick question: is there a pic of the last poll?

and GUYS im not being nonchalant or whatever you think, canucklehead you're wrong im not trying to fly under the radar of the whole golden thing, on the contrary im trying to post more cause i dont want my participation score to drop more. i am admittedly behind on the suspicious posts so thats why i havent been answering them as youd expect, really its just the tone of the posts that is putting me off i hate getting into arguments, it just fucking feels horrible and i get enough of that in real life. i'm not trying to create drama , want to keep it to the point, but its already 4am and im lagging behind, hopefully tomorrow i'll have something more constructive to say. please bare with me i am trying to be a part of it.

voted for tinybubbles.

I agree with the basic thrust of the case against tiny bubbles, her posts have been the epitome of both wishy and washy. But moreso, I'm liking the gameplay of the people voting her, so I'm willing to follow their lead on this.

Ricochet wrote:Also, I don't think players can ever just come in and shout they've been forced to vote or do something; they can try to signal it, at least. So MP heavily denying to have been forced doesn't fully detract me from finding the other version to be a plausible signal or tactic in dealing with a forced vote. In fact, a pee fountain sort of signaling.

Is there really any precedent for players abjectly denying that they were forced to so something they didn't want to do when that is in fact the truth? Couldn't they just ignore those comments to allow the theories to survive instead of putting a concerted effort into eliminating them?

My primary reason for voting Boomslang early this phase was to generate significant pressure that might get him in here fighting for himself. Hopefully he does that while there are still votes in play. LoRab is still a suspect, and I'm moved my vote to her for now.

One thing I would recommend to everyone is this: don't trust your own suspicions too much. Don't carry your suspects from Day 0/1 all the way through Day 4 merely because they exist on the roster still. Reassess. That doesn't mean you're wrong about them, it just means you should put the legwork in to build confidence. Engage those players frequently.

unfurl wrote: linki llama, we will never get along

But not for lack of trying.

Ricochet wrote:Catching up on the stats, for now

Team Azura recruited and Teams Caelia & Ahriman launched a contest D3, so, except a few of the night victims were recruits, I assume this is the standing right now, or?

Team Caelia - 4 players
Team Ahriman - 4 players
Team Ubzargan - 3 players...?
Team Azura - 4 players

16 players unrecruited

Assuming these counts are accurate, the circumstances have officially become dangerous for everyone -- civilian and neutral alike. There'd be enough baddies in the game that they would be approaching a numbers advantage (in terms of typical Mafia ratios).

For that reason I urge everyone who is unrecruited to stow selfish playstyles and play it like they would as civilians. Get hunting.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Roxy wrote:I personally feel boomslang is yet a Neutral. I think JJJ made his points - sure - but imo he is just going for another easy lynch.

This would imply that you found at least one of my points to be inadequate. Please show me. I've tried my best to assess players and come up with reads. If I wanted an "easy" lynch I would have just joined the anti-Golden crusade.

Where did I imply that?
Oh thats right I didn't. You are trying to put something into my post that simply is not there and making my post have a different inflection.

I just think Boomslang would make a horrible recruit. (No offense Boomslang I said the same thing about my own son).
He has not really been in the thread.
You can tell he is not keeping up by looking at his posts.
If he is not around to read or post properly what makes you so sure he has had time to try for a recruitment?

I think you, however, would make an excellent recruit.
you are paying attention to the thread.
You are playing the game and fully reading and posting.
You are under no suspicion but from me.
You have been around to eneter contests for recruitmen
You a good player so you know how to play the same once recruited.
You are pushing neutral easy lynch after lynch.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Also, I don't think players can ever just come in and shout they've been forced to vote or do something; they can try to signal it, at least. So MP heavily denying to have been forced doesn't fully detract me from finding the other version to be a plausible signal or tactic in dealing with a forced vote. In fact, a pee fountain sort of signaling.

Is there really any precedent for players abjectly denying that they were forced to so something they didn't want to do when that is in fact the truth? Couldn't they just ignore those comments to allow the theories to survive instead of putting a concerted effort into eliminating them?

I've flatly denied being forced to do things I was forced to do in many a game.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Catching up on the stats, for now

Team Azura recruited and Teams Caelia & Ahriman launched a contest D3, so, except a few of the night victims were recruits, I assume this is the standing right now, or?

Team Caelia - 4 players
Team Ahriman - 4 players
Team Ubzargan - 3 players...?
Team Azura - 4 players

16 players unrecruited

Assuming these counts are accurate, the circumstances have officially become dangerous for everyone -- civilian and neutral alike. There'd be enough baddies in the game that they would be approaching a numbers advantage (in terms of typical Mafia ratios).

For that reason I urge everyone who is unrecruited to stow selfish playstyles and play it like they would as civilians. Get hunting.

Something I said way before this.

Ok, I've finally got time to sit down and write a substantial post. So let's do it.

My self-vote was an experiment to see how quickly I could get bandwagoned based on practically no other "baddie" tells. And with that single action, I nearly got lynched. To me, that showed how many people were willing to protect Golden at the drop of a hat. My voters wanted to encourage a game environment in which someone can claim responsibility for a death (CAUSED BY A BADDIE, as Rey pointed out) and not get lynched for it. Although Golden did not flip bad, I maintain that if he had not been lynched for his statements on the death of Epi, it would have opened up the space in which baddies could operate.

I also want to point out that JJJ's "case" on me is built almost entirely on an absence of evidence. Of things that I did not do, of brilliant points that I could have made Day 0 or 1 but didn't, of a vote for Bass that was entirely justifiable but not justified by more than one post. Of "confusing" post about G-man's support of Golden that JJJ interprets correctly at the same time he's denouncing it for being confusing. He doesn't have a leg to stand on, and he knows it.

The one point I'll concede was that my post on the Golden-Epi interaction could have been confusing to someone not inside my head. But here's what my thought was at the time: Golden claimed he wanted to kill Epi because he suspected him of being bad. He claims that he baited one of the baddie teams into killing Epi. Golden could not have known that this strategy would work for sure unless he knew for certain which baddie team Epi was on. Golden would only have this knowledge if he were on the other baddie team. Therefore, I interpreted this as a slip of Golden trying to distance himself from being on a baddie team. Obviously that interpretation was incorrect.

timmer wrote:voted for tinybubbles.

I agree with the basic thrust of the case against tiny bubbles, her posts have been the epitome of both wishy and washy. But moreso, I'm liking the gameplay of the people voting her, so I'm willing to follow their lead on this.

You have been recruited. I would bet my sweet ass on it.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Roxy wrote:I meant to add that JJJ and MP's convo felt fake.

I can understand you thinking the MP side of the conversation was fake. He was bonkers and his eventual explanation can only be believed or disbelieved at face value. What was fake about my part in it though? I was trying to figure out WTF he was on about.

Bc you were all like "yeah I was playing like Epi bc I knew you were faking it"

Gosh and golly! lol

Woah, Gosh *AND* Golly?

Roxy wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Roxy wrote:I personally feel boomslang is yet a Neutral. I think JJJ made his points - sure - but imo he is just going for another easy lynch.

This would imply that you found at least one of my points to be inadequate. Please show me. I've tried my best to assess players and come up with reads. If I wanted an "easy" lynch I would have just joined the anti-Golden crusade.

Where did I imply that?
Oh thats right I didn't. You are trying to put something into my post that simply is not there and making my post have a different inflection.

I made the assumption that you must not like my case if you still suspected me despite it specifically because of the player I was voting for.

Roxy wrote:I just think Boomslang would make a horrible recruit. (No offense Boomslang I said the same thing about my own son).
He has not really been in the thread.
You can tell he is not keeping up by looking at his posts.
If he is not around to read or post properly what makes you so sure he has had time to try for a recruitment?

I can understand your perspective, but I also think it's very dangerous to exonerate people just because they haven't seemed to be around as often. If this reasoning is accepted then we should simply lynch everyone who has been the most active one-by-one until the game is over.

Roxy wrote:I think you, however, would make an excellent recruit.
you are paying attention to the thread.
You are playing the game and fully reading and posting.
You are under no suspicion but from me.
You have been around to eneter contests for recruitmen
You a good player so you know how to play the same once recruited.
You are pushing neutral easy lynch after lynch.

I don't know how to respond to this within the boundaries of Syndicate rules -- it's still very foreign to me compared to RYM. I'm going to have to ask the hosts first.

I thought that BWT not accounting for Azura forcing votes in Pos. 5, in the context of assessing MP's vote for Golden, felt like a potential slipup if he knew Azura had targeted players other than MP.

As in "Well hmmm, I know I didn't force MP's vote, and I don't see any other vote forcers, so that can't be it."

Sorsha wrote:Thats a good question Wilgy.. was it a frame or was it the result of a redirect (Ahriman), target switch (Master of Ancient Arts), switching three roles powers (Chaos Dancer) or a repel of kill to the Magnetarch?

Do you think Golden was framed Wigly? And why did you vote for me? Also, what are your thoughts on the day ending early and no night?

Also, good dance around my question here, I feel like you slipped though. If Epig's death was simply a frame, I think you would be pursuing those who were going after him. I also think you wouldn't have voted Tiny when the votes were so stacked on Golden. You rose the question of if it could be a redirect. The only peole that can answer that question are the people that cast the kill and the person who caused the redirect. Which one are you Sorsha?

Roxy wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Roxy wrote:I meant to add that JJJ and MP's convo felt fake.

I can understand you thinking the MP side of the conversation was fake. He was bonkers and his eventual explanation can only be believed or disbelieved at face value. What was fake about my part in it though? I was trying to figure out WTF he was on about.

Bc you were all like "yeah I was playing like Epi bc I knew you were faking it"

Gosh and golly! lol

What? I didn't say I knew he was faking it. I pressed him hard "like Epi" because I didn't know that. I was trying to get him to show me what he was doing.

Turnip Head wrote:I thought that BWT not accounting for Azura forcing votes in Pos. 5, in the context of assessing MP's vote for Golden, felt like a potential slipup if he knew Azura had targeted players other than MP.

As in "Well hmmm, I know I didn't force MP's vote, and I don't see any other vote forcers, so that can't be it."

Could be. Could also be that he didn't read the roles, which is quite possible in a game with this many complex roles.

thellama73 wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:I thought that BWT not accounting for Azura forcing votes in Pos. 5, in the context of assessing MP's vote for Golden, felt like a potential slipup if he knew Azura had targeted players other than MP.

As in "Well hmmm, I know I didn't force MP's vote, and I don't see any other vote forcers, so that can't be it."

Could be. Could also be that he didn't read the roles, which is quite possible in a game with this many complex roles.

Could be. This is the full quote if you're interested.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:I don't see anything in the roles for this position about some kind of insanification, forced vote, or any type of posting-altering-related power. So not sure what is going on with MP. I'm starting to wonder if he's trying to prove a point about something.