The Syndicate

I agree. Boomslang will not be getting my vote.

Placeholder placed

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

nutella wrote:linki @ JJJ: I think the problem that you are not quite articulating to him is that he's going from "Golden strongly believes Epi is bad" to "Golden knows for certain that Epi is bad." But I also think this logic argument is kind of a useless tangent.

Do you disagree with me when I assert that Boomslang may have been manufacturing a fake reason to cast suspicion on Golden and made a mistake? That's what I'm trying to convey here.

I don't necessarily see his reasoning as invalid or manufactured just because it isn't completely logically sound. He was using certain assumptions and I think it actually makes a fair amount of sense.

DharmaHelper wrote:

nutella wrote:When did I ever defend him?

You leapt immediately after me once I decided to go after him.

Yes, I went after you because of your reasoning. That was about you and your actions. I found your No U suspicious, not because of any idea about Scotty's alignment but because it was a shitty reason to go after him and what looked to me like a baddie move. Give me a valid, substantial reason to suspect Scotty and I'll consider it fairly. I was not defending him, I was criticizing your reasoning and finding your vote in and of itself suspicious.

Taking responses into consideration as they come.

DrWilgy wrote:*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?

I didn't save him because I was in no way confident that he was framed, however my tone sounded to you.

I'm still neutral/ unrecruited and unlike some playing have no problem with baddie hunting. That's why I was asking for ideas on who might have framed golden. I got answers that I pretty much expected: anyone could have been behind it really. Just because I expected that to be the answer doesn't mean I wouldn't ask the question though.

DrWilgy wrote:

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?

Like I said before, I'm not sure that he was framed. There are a few roles with powers that could have led to epis death and those so adamant that golden killed epi didn't seem to be talking about/ taking those into consideration. Unless I missed it.

MM, why are you quiet again? What changed?

Btw, I totally forgot Tranq was playing. He hasn't posted since Night 2. Tranq where are you?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:MM, why are you quiet again? What changed?

Oh yeah, you said you'd be around Saturday.

I need to reassess bea too. Sorry for the thinking outloud filler posts, these are for me to see later as reminders.

nutella wrote: I am not on a team with Scotty. I cannot vouch for him. I have agreed with a lot of his posts in the game but I have no reason to defend him in terms of alignment.

Who are you on a team with?

I hate you all right now. So many posts

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

How did you arrive at 4 Azura? My count has them at 3.

Scotty wrote:[I mean, I'm not gonna go back into whether this is a civ vs. baddie game, because it is to an extent, but even civ factions are vying against each other for power. So as a neutral party, how would you know if someone is your future employer or not? I look at it as a business practice- you're vetting the potential employer as much as they are vetting you. If you can't pull the trigger on a kill, then how does that make you look, even if you did kill one of their own?

This didn't make sense to me since the civvie teams win together, they both need to eliminate both baddie teams.

Golden wrote:

Ricochet wrote: I don't believe that Lord of Thunder's +/-3 votes would have changed this situation, if he already manipulated something by the time the Day ended. either he added votes and then there is definitely a specific survivor, which Lordy may now choose to try to hint at; either he substracted votes and it's still a large pool of tied players and the theory above still applies, but with vague chances of pinpointing at anyone in particular

My thoughts on your theory

1) BR and LC needed to figure out the vote situation, so I don't think it likely that the lynch was simply stopped (unless there is another reason for them to need to do the count back).

2) I'm not so quick to discount the Lord of Thunder. He could theoretically given +3 votes to anyone and the person he gave them to could be Ubzargan/jilted lover. This would still require LC/BR to do a countback. That means that there is a 50% chance that literally any player could have been leading the vote.

3) But there is a 50% chance thunder said minus three.

This posts is a lot more interesting now that we know Golden was the Wielder of Lightning. He would know with 50% certainty the player who survived the lynch, assuming Thunder picked +/- 3 in time before the day ended.

Wait a minute, you know who's really flying under the radar? Russtifinko. Only 9 posts the entire game, and none after Day 1?! There are a few good points he makes that early, mostly about the need for neutrals to basically play civ unless otherwise recruited, but also some filler. The only vote he's justified so far has been for Timmer, and that because Timmer was an adjunct to the points MP had been making. What do you have to say for yourself, Mr. Russ?

Boomslang wrote:Wait a minute, you know who's really flying under the radar? Russtifinko. Only 9 posts the entire game, and none after Day 1?! There are a few good points he makes that early, mostly about the need for neutrals to basically play civ unless otherwise recruited, but also some filler. The only vote he's justified so far has been for Timmer, and that because Timmer was an adjunct to the points MP had been making. What do you have to say for yourself, Mr. Russ?

I imagine him saying "lol".

As do I.

:P

Boomslang wrote:Wait a minute, you know who's really flying under the radar? Russtifinko. Only 9 posts the entire game, and none after Day 1?! There are a few good points he makes that early, mostly about the need for neutrals to basically play civ unless otherwise recruited, but also some filler. The only vote he's justified so far has been for Timmer, and that because Timmer was an adjunct to the points MP had been making. What do you have to say for yourself, Mr. Russ?

Russ has been replaced with synonym earlier today

aapje wrote:I hate you all right now. So many posts

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

How did you arrive at 4 Azura? My count has them at 3.

[/quote]

You're right. Post D0 + D3. Don't know why I thought I read a third action.

aapje wrote:

Golden wrote:

Ricochet wrote: I don't believe that Lord of Thunder's +/-3 votes would have changed this situation, if he already manipulated something by the time the Day ended. either he added votes and then there is definitely a specific survivor, which Lordy may now choose to try to hint at; either he substracted votes and it's still a large pool of tied players and the theory above still applies, but with vague chances of pinpointing at anyone in particular

My thoughts on your theory

1) BR and LC needed to figure out the vote situation, so I don't think it likely that the lynch was simply stopped (unless there is another reason for them to need to do the count back).

2) I'm not so quick to discount the Lord of Thunder. He could theoretically given +3 votes to anyone and the person he gave them to could be Ubzargan/jilted lover. This would still require LC/BR to do a countback. That means that there is a 50% chance that literally any player could have been leading the vote.

3) But there is a 50% chance thunder said minus three.

This posts is a lot more interesting now that we know Golden was the Wielder of Lightning. He would know with 50% certainty the player who survived the lynch, assuming Thunder picked +/- 3 in time before the day ended.

Err...?? You're talking about Lord of Thunder's vote manipulation, but Golden was the Wielder of Lightning. How would he be aware of Thunder's actions?

Ricochet wrote:

aapje wrote:

Golden wrote:

Ricochet wrote: I don't believe that Lord of Thunder's +/-3 votes would have changed this situation, if he already manipulated something by the time the Day ended. either he added votes and then there is definitely a specific survivor, which Lordy may now choose to try to hint at; either he substracted votes and it's still a large pool of tied players and the theory above still applies, but with vague chances of pinpointing at anyone in particular

My thoughts on your theory

1) BR and LC needed to figure out the vote situation, so I don't think it likely that the lynch was simply stopped (unless there is another reason for them to need to do the count back).

2) I'm not so quick to discount the Lord of Thunder. He could theoretically given +3 votes to anyone and the person he gave them to could be Ubzargan/jilted lover. This would still require LC/BR to do a countback. That means that there is a 50% chance that literally any player could have been leading the vote.

3) But there is a 50% chance thunder said minus three.

This posts is a lot more interesting now that we know Golden was the Wielder of Lightning. He would know with 50% certainty the player who survived the lynch, assuming Thunder picked +/- 3 in time before the day ended.

Err...?? You're talking about Lord of Thunder's vote manipulation, but Golden was the Wielder of Lightning. How would he be aware of Thunder's actions?

Because he picked the target for the vote manipulation

Black Rock wrote:Wielder of Lightning - Brotherhood of the Inner Eye

Position 1: Picks Player
Position 2: Picks Protect or Block
Position 3: Picks Player
Position 4: Picks Positive or Negative Boon
Position 5: Picks an element, if Thunder picks the same element they both use that element’s power

Lord of Thunder -Brotherhood of the Inner Eye

Position 1: Picks 3 minus or plus votes
Position 2: Picks Player
Position 3: Picks Alignment or Role Check (they both receive info)
Position 4: Picks Player
Position 5: Picks an element, if Lightning picks the same element they both use that element’s power

Hey @TinyBubbles

Why are you voting Boom today? Any reason? Because your posts from the past few days say nothing to validate that.

Is it just a survival vote?

Would love to hear more from you, or else my vote is staying where it is.

aapje wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

aapje wrote:

Golden wrote:

Ricochet wrote: I don't believe that Lord of Thunder's +/-3 votes would have changed this situation, if he already manipulated something by the time the Day ended. either he added votes and then there is definitely a specific survivor, which Lordy may now choose to try to hint at; either he substracted votes and it's still a large pool of tied players and the theory above still applies, but with vague chances of pinpointing at anyone in particular

My thoughts on your theory

1) BR and LC needed to figure out the vote situation, so I don't think it likely that the lynch was simply stopped (unless there is another reason for them to need to do the count back).

2) I'm not so quick to discount the Lord of Thunder. He could theoretically given +3 votes to anyone and the person he gave them to could be Ubzargan/jilted lover. This would still require LC/BR to do a countback. That means that there is a 50% chance that literally any player could have been leading the vote.

3) But there is a 50% chance thunder said minus three.

This posts is a lot more interesting now that we know Golden was the Wielder of Lightning. He would know with 50% certainty the player who survived the lynch, assuming Thunder picked +/- 3 in time before the day ended.

Err...?? You're talking about Lord of Thunder's vote manipulation, but Golden was the Wielder of Lightning. How would he be aware of Thunder's actions?

Because he picked the target for the vote manipulation

Black Rock wrote:Wielder of Lightning - Brotherhood of the Inner Eye

Position 1: Picks Player
Position 2: Picks Protect or Block
Position 3: Picks Player
Position 4: Picks Positive or Negative Boon
Position 5: Picks an element, if Thunder picks the same element they both use that element’s power

Lord of Thunder -Brotherhood of the Inner Eye

Position 1: Picks 3 minus or plus votes
Position 2: Picks Player
Position 3: Picks Alignment or Role Check (they both receive info)
Position 4: Picks Player
Position 5: Picks an element, if Lightning picks the same element they both use that element’s power

Roxy, how do you feel about the votes for TinyBubbles?

I have a reason for asking Roxy specifically.

The Wielder of Lightning and Lord of Thunder work together with their power. One of them picks who is targeted and the other picks the target. So the Wielder (Golden) picked player x while the Lord of Thunder decided to add or subtract 3 votes.

I assume the Lord of Thunder will now wield those powers alone, but the hosts wouldn't confirm that:

Long Con wrote:

aapje wrote:What happens to Thunder and Lightening if one of them dies? The other one cries. And the powers will change.

aapje wrote:The Wielder of Lightning and Lord of Thunder work together with their power. One of them picks who is targeted and the other picks the target. So the Wielder (Golden) picked player x while the Lord of Thunder decided to add or subtract 3 votes.

I assume the Lord of Thunder will now wield those powers alone, but the hosts wouldn't confirm that:

Long Con wrote:

aapje wrote:What happens to Thunder and Lightening if one of them dies? The other one cries. And the powers will change.

Definitely an interesting deduction - the "picks players" mix between the two would make sense, indeed - but was it confirmed anywhere? I checked your posts for asking about this and couldn't find anything, but I could be wrong.

Ricochet wrote:

aapje wrote:The Wielder of Lightning and Lord of Thunder work together with their power. One of them picks who is targeted and the other picks the target. So the Wielder (Golden) picked player x while the Lord of Thunder decided to add or subtract 3 votes.

I assume the Lord of Thunder will now wield those powers alone, but the hosts wouldn't confirm that:

Long Con wrote:

aapje wrote:What happens to Thunder and Lightening if one of them dies? The other one cries. And the powers will change.

Definitely an interesting deduction - the "picks players" mix between the two would make sense, indeed - but was it confirmed anywhere? I checked your posts for asking about this and couldn't find anything, but I could be wrong.

I thought it was obvious so I didn't explicitly ask. But there is this which seems to confirm my reading of those roles:

Black Rock wrote:

aapje wrote:

Wielder of Lightning - Brotherhood Clan
Lord of Thunder - Brotherhood Clan

Interesting buddy system! You like it?

Ok, I'll treat it as very plausible, thanks for the clarification.

In that case, yes, there's a 50% chance Golden knows who survived the lynch if Thunder added votes and if Thunder did that in time for the early Day end. This would also be valuable info, given that the lynch survivor was probably Uzbargan or Jilted Lover (so 50% chance Golden may have known Uzbargan?).

The 50%, however, has to be lower, actually since a) the requirement to even begin projecting such odds was for both Golden and Thunder to have made their move in time, and b) if Golden picked in time, but Thunder took off votes, there's still no valuable info to result from that D1 lynch.

Ricochet wrote:Ok, I'll treat it as very plausible, thanks for the clarification.

In that case, yes, there's a 50% chance Golden knows who survived the lynch if Thunder added votes and if Thunder did that in time for the early Day end. This would also be valuable info, given that the lynch survivor was probably Uzbargan or Jilted Lover (so 50% chance Golden may have known Uzbargan?).

The 50%, however, has to be lower, actually since a) the requirement to even begin projecting such odds was for both Golden and Thunder to have made their move in time, and b) if Golden picked in time, but Thunder took off votes, there's still no valuable info to result from that D1 lynch.

Based on

Golden wrote:I'm not so quick to discount the Lord of Thunder

I think we can safely assume Golden got his action in on time, why else mention it?

I'm off to bed, I really hope I won't wake up to another 10 pages or so

aapje wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Ok, I'll treat it as very plausible, thanks for the clarification.

In that case, yes, there's a 50% chance Golden knows who survived the lynch if Thunder added votes and if Thunder did that in time for the early Day end. This would also be valuable info, given that the lynch survivor was probably Uzbargan or Jilted Lover (so 50% chance Golden may have known Uzbargan?).

The 50%, however, has to be lower, actually since a) the requirement to even begin projecting such odds was for both Golden and Thunder to have made their move in time, and b) if Golden picked in time, but Thunder took off votes, there's still no valuable info to result from that D1 lynch.

Based on

Golden wrote:I'm not so quick to discount the Lord of Thunder

I think we can safely assume Golden got his action in on time, why else mention it?

I'm off to bed, I really hope I won't wake up to another 10 pages or so

True, keyword was "both".

Good morning Syndicate,

I have no idea who I've replaced but I'm probably going to be more active so that's a positive.

Trying to figure out the nuances of this site so bear with me for a phase or so. I'm guessing the giant pole at the top is how we vote? Are we allowed to change votes or is it a lock once you choose one?

Synonym wrote:Good morning Syndicate,

I have no idea who I've replaced but I'm probably going to be more active so that's a positive.

Trying to figure out the nuances of this site so bear with me for a phase or so. I'm guessing the giant pole at the top is how we vote? Are we allowed to change votes or is it a lock once you choose one?

Cinnamon! Good to see you.

Synonym wrote:Good morning Syndicate,

I have no idea who I've replaced but I'm probably going to be more active so that's a positive.

Trying to figure out the nuances of this site so bear with me for a phase or so. I'm guessing the giant pole at the top is how we vote? Are we allowed to change votes or is it a lock once you choose one?

>Giant Pole


But seriously, welcome. Changing votes depends on the game, but this particular game is in fact changeable votes.

I've got a giant pole if you know what I'm sayin'

Welcome Synonym! This game follows a very different format from most other games and has quite a few new mechanics so don't feel bad if it's overwhelming. And yes, votes are changeable in this game's polls (though traditionally they aren't in most games).

So first off DrWilgy is my favourite now because he has his own unique avatar rather than confusing me with somebody else's.

unfurl wrote: 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?

I was planning to "save" (by breaking the tie, but it'd probably have only been temporary) Golden yesterday by voting Boom but then someone went and locked the thread. On the other hand, I doubt anyone was planning to save Boom by voting for Golden, since Golden's name has been right out there pretty much every lynch.

JaggedJimmyJay 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?

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

Is that not the right answer? I've never been good with maths.

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?

People can die from admitting to being forced sometimes. MP in particular is a fan of that move, in one of my fav games by him quite a lot of deaths were caused by even the slightest implicit acknowledgement of having been forced. So I could see him denying having been forced.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: 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.

I intend to do this tomorrow if I get the time.

Turnip Head wrote:

Roxy wrote:Nutella I promise to respond to your posts as soon as I am off work and properly buzzed.

Truly the best way to play mafia

Does it count if you're buzzed off energy drinks because you'll be staying up all night doing work?

Boomslang wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Boomslang wrote:Ok, fine, add Premise 4, which was assumed by Golden: Epi is bad! Mafia is a game of fuzzy and unproven assumptions, my dear JJJ, and we shouldn't be trying to solve a game of hunches like it's Fermat's last theorem.

That's the problem. You can't combine Golden's assumption with your own and then suppose a sensible point can be drawn from it. Under all circumstances it would be impossible for Golden to know Epignosis was on a different baddie team.

This isn't some minor point I'm harping on. You based your accusation of Golden partly on this concept, and it doesn't make sense. My supposition is that you might have made it up and made a logical mistake in so doing.

I disagree. Now what you need to ask yourself is this: am I bad, or just stupid?

This is a question I often ask when I'm bad and have no other defense. Usually, for me, it's an admission of having made a mistake.

Canucklehead wrote:In a game with two baddie teams, why would anyone need to "manufacture" suspicions on anyone? Why not just baddie hunt? And why would a baddie team want to orchestrate the lynch of the Ayer almost singlehandedly responsible for monopolizing the is issuing in the thread? Doesn't make sense to me, so I'm more willing to buy that potential baddies are in the camp of Golden apologists, rather than the Gokden witch-hunters.....but wifom is a thing, so

Agree 100%. You've got two sets of baddies, each will be actively hunting for the other to gain civ cred (or that's how a traditional setup would work) but at the same time it's possible there are baddies who actually thought Golden was bad and that they'd look so great when he flipped. Who knows?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:In a game with two baddie teams, why would anyone need to "manufacture" suspicions on anyone? Why not just baddie hunt? And why would a baddie team want to orchestrate the lynch of the Ayer almost singlehandedly responsible for monopolizing the is issuing in the thread? Doesn't make sense to me, so I'm more willing to buy that potential baddies are in the camp of Golden apologists, rather than the Gokden witch-hunters.....but wifom is a thing, so

Baddies are more likely to participate in lynches they don't actually support than non-baddies -- even when there are multiple teams. They have to justify their participation somehow.

But in this particular game when you say non-baddies you're talking mostly neutrals, who are probably just as likely - or possibly more - to just throw out votes for the hell of it. Nothing to lose, they're on nobody's side yet. There have been people espousing such attitudes all game.

DharmaHelper wrote:I've got a giant pole if you know what I'm sayin'

This?

Picture is bigger than I expected, feel free to crop from quotes :P

thellama73 wrote:

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.

In some hosts games, the host punishes you if you let on that you have been forced, and if directly asked, you had best deny it. So denial does not mean much. I do not recall if these hosts are punishers or not, I try not to run afoul of their directives.

Just home, will read back to this AM.

At least that is the correct Robin.

DharmaHelper wrote:At least that is the correct Robin.

Of course it is. Were you perhaps expecting me to post a picture of Jason or Damian? Or, umm, the first one?

I wasn't 100% sure your avatar was Tim since I'm so used to the Arkham games atm where he's bald and stacked but the joke was an easy one to make.

>The First One

I hope you don't need me to explain how that's part of the joke...

Roxy and unfurl, I think much of the reason we're consistently having different opinions is largely in part due to approaching the game with very different mindsets, so I'll keep that in mind going forward, and try not to judge either of you too harshly merely for disagreeing.

As to Boomslang, Jay... Can you see his exchange from you coming from a neutral perspective?

I also think it's dangerous to think that certain types of players are more or less apt to be recruited. We should be cautious of everyone. I, too, have been too closed-minded with regards to this.

It's Day 4, the baddies have recruited at least 3 to their teams (if I understand aapje and Rico's thoughts correctly), and I have my rainbow sock avatar back, so I think it's time for a Rainbow List.

MovingPictures07 wrote:It's Day 4, the baddies have recruited at least 3 to their teams (if I understand aapje and Rico's thoughts correctly), and I have my rainbow sock avatar back, so I think it's time for a Rainbow List.

I'm gonna look around for anything i can use to off myself.

Now that Russ has a replacement, my attention turns to Dom. More posts than me, but not by crazily much, and the majority of them involved in the Golden debate. A definite quietness after the lynch result, saying only "I need to think a little more." Also seemed supportive of DFaraday's comparative quiet when JJJ prodded him with a vote. Still thinking over there?

MovingPictures07

S~V~S
nutella
Dom

Bullzeye
JaggedJimmyJay
Spacedaisy
birdwithteeth11
Scotty
bea

Roxy
Canucklehead
timmer

Ricochet
Turnip Head
Russtifinko / Synonym
DharmaHelper

thellama73
Metalmarsh89
reywaS
Boomslang
DrWilgy
Tranq
DisgruntledPorcupine
DFaraday

LoRab
aapje
Devin the Omniscient

unfurl
Sorsha
TinyBubbles

It was still quite difficult to commit to traditional civilian/mafia reads of everyone given we still have about half of neutrals (right?), but I forced myself to. All players' positions are very subject to change, especially provided the nature of this game, and I'm going to try to keep an open mind to, but also a skeptical eye on, everyone.

I realize I haven't really talked about Sorsha yet, but I was willing to give her time to catch up provided her RL situation, and when I forced myself to think about her under this exercise, I realized she seems to fit the bill very well for recruiter/recruitee. I also find the WIFOM that she projected in the Golden situation to be very tenuous; I believe someone else mentioned this as well (can't remember who, sorry, whoever you are). Add Sorsha to the definite "sidelines" theory I spoke of earlier. What are players' thoughts on Sorsha? Or literally anyone who you feel hasn't been talked about enough yet?

If anyone wants me to elaborate upon any of these reads, I would be more than happy to do so. Most are a combination of the players' content and how genuine I believe that player is in their behavior.

Even better, I hope we can open up discussion on as many players as possible today.

I would like you to elaborate on your read of me. And please read my responses to dr wilgy from earlier today so that I don't have to repeat myself.

MovingPictures07 wrote: thellama73
Metalmarsh89
reywaS
Boomslang
DrWilgy
Tranq
DisgruntledPorcupine
DFaraday

Bruh? C'mon bruh.

Just kidding. I don't really care. I just got home so I'm going to catch up now.