The Syndicate

Spiral wrote:

Quicksilver wrote:

The Vision wrote:

Havok wrote:Epignosis: Was the lynch a tie?

Havok, I'd like to hear from you about this post. Are you unaware of the poll thread, or did you have a different reason for asking this? Considering what such info might have helped reveal, if Epig had answered yes, it feels like the question isn't very civ friendly...

Catching up that definitely stands out to me also. The vote was clearly posted in the polls and Deathlok had the majority. So either Havok expected a different outcome because he/she knows something, or some type of manipulation Havok may have done to the votes didn't turn out as expected is my thought.
I'm looking at Havok or Polaris so far today...

Isn't part of the reason you suspect Havok for "setting up" Polaris?

I do think he wants to get Polaris eyed, which Polaris should be for the ingenuity... But I feel one here being Bad, and the other Indy IMO. Which like I said, I feel I need to vote one of them out today.

Quicksilver, just to clarify your post what do you mean by Polaris's ingenuity? I saw the post about not caring that she didn't vote but where does the ingenuity come in? Also, what are you seeing that makes one of them a possible indy?

Longshot wrote:Quicksilver, just to clarify your post what do you mean by Polaris's ingenuity? I saw the post about not caring that she didn't vote but where does the ingenuity come in? Also, what are you seeing that makes one of them a possible indy?

Polaris "not caring" about missing the vote because he/she didn't have anyone to vote for. I know Indy characters have their own agendas, but to me if someone were Civ, they would be trying to help because every vote counts. If they were bad, they would vote to help make sure one of their teammates stayed alive and get someone Civ out. But, if they were Indy, it could go either way. So I think either Polaris is bad where neither of his/her teammates were on the line to die, so they cared less. OR, Polaris may be an Indy and cared less because someone would die that wouldn't help their cause. Just how I'm feeling here. Professor X urged us to step up and work together, so I'm trying to think things out this time and be more confident in who I vote for to get us back on our A game.

Ok, I see what you're thinking now. Thanks for explaining.

I hesitate to call someone suspicious when they say something like Polaris did on Day 1. Day 4, absolutely, but Day 1 there are always going to be players who refuse to randomize and who refuse to throw away a vote. Polaris' original post about it certainly has a certain aloofness to it, but it feels too obvious. Like, wouldn't Apocalypse or the Sentinels or a baddie just try to blend in? It wouldn't have been hard at all to type a two line thing saying you "agree about Avalanche" or "yeah I see the thing about Deathlok" or whatever.

Voting someone for an aloof post, based on the theory that someone with an aloof role would signal it to us so obviously just feels like a reach, personally.

Who hasn't posted yet? We've got a silencer in the game, it would be nice to get everyone to chime in and roll call if they haven't posted yet today so we can at least figure out who is shut down.

The Vision wrote:

Havok wrote:Epignosis: Was the lynch a tie?

Havok, I'd like to hear from you about this post. Are you unaware of the poll thread, or did you have a different reason for asking this? Considering what such info might have helped reveal, if Epig had answered yes, it feels like the question isn't very civ friendly...

Yes, I am very aware of the poll thread. I asked because....

Epignosis wrote:

X-Men Mafia

Whereas Masters of the Universe took us all over a planet, X-Men will keep us...in one room.

Expect heavy manipulation.

How can you say that that question isn't civvie friendly? It sounds like you are saying that it could have only been a tie for civvie reasons? You should look over the role list. Wolverine is not the only role with vote manipulation.

The Vision wrote:

Quicksilver wrote:

The Vision wrote:

Havok wrote:Epignosis: Was the lynch a tie?

Catching up that definitely stands out to me also. The vote was clearly posted in the polls and Deathlok had the majority. So either Havok expected a different outcome because he/she knows something, or some type of manipulation Havok may have done to the votes didn't turn out as expected is my thought.
I'm looking at Havok or Polaris so far today...

Boy, you just jumped right on there, didn't ya?

lol, yes, he did.

I'm not trying to "set up" Polaris to get lynched. I'm voicing my opinions on the game. I am suspicious of Polaris. I'm not trying to hide that.

The Vision wrote:Who hasn't posted yet? We've got a silencer in the game, it would be nice to get everyone to chime in and roll call if they haven't posted yet today so we can at least figure out who is shut down.

We've actually got two silencers in the game - Iceman and Toad, one bad one good. I totally agree with your idea that people chime in today so we will know who is silenced - should be 2 if both Ice and Toad got their pm's in.

Havok wrote:
How can you say that that question isn't civvie friendly? It sounds like you are saying that it could have only been a tie for civvie reasons? You should look over the role list. Wolverine is not the only role with vote manipulation.

The way I look at it is that it was Day 1. No night actions had yet occurred. The only two roles, barring secrets, that have naturally occurring vote weirdness are Wolverine and Cyclops. So with no Magneto or Sentinel or Omega Red manipulations in play since it was Day 1, your question seemed engineered to potentially reveal a shortlist of who could be one of our most important roles. That is absolutely not a civ-friendly question to have asked.

Any other Day, yeah go for it, there will be a ton of vote weirdness. But not yesterday…

Quicksilver wrote:

Longshot wrote:Quicksilver, just to clarify your post what do you mean by Polaris's ingenuity? I saw the post about not caring that she didn't vote but where does the ingenuity come in? Also, what are you seeing that makes one of them a possible indy?

Polaris "not caring" about missing the vote because he/she didn't have anyone to vote for. I know Indy characters have their own agendas, but to me if someone were Civ, they would be trying to help because every vote counts. If they were bad, they would vote to help make sure one of their teammates stayed alive and get someone Civ out. But, if they were Indy, it could go either way. So I think either Polaris is bad where neither of his/her teammates were on the line to die, so they cared less. OR, Polaris may be an Indy and cared less because someone would die that wouldn't help their cause. Just how I'm feeling here. Professor X urged us to step up and work together, so I'm trying to think things out this time and be more confident in who I vote for to get us back on our A game.

Like I said, I did not intend to miss the vote deadline, but I didn't feel particularly bad about it either. I dunno why you think casting a worthless vote is more ideal. I know it is important to vote for the sake of later vote records, but I still don't think that justifies it. And please use the correct quotes. I said I did not feel bad about missing the vote, not that I didn't care.

Also, are y'all going to actually read and respond to my posts, or just continue to speculate and post the same things over again?

It's seriously non-stop work for me right now. After tomorrow afternoon I should be a bit more free though.

Exodus wrote:

Mojo wrote:Yeah because he was saying "guys please don't lynch me," well.... If you ignore questions and have a focus on something (morlocks) that a) doesn't appear to be something we even have to worry about in this game and b) don't appear to be bad to the x-men anyway, then yeah... I think you're bad-or at least less likely to be civvie.

I'm not going to act like I know what goes on in avalanches head or why he acts as he does.

Okay, I didn't realize it was in response to that. As for your points, I am not sure a baddie would risk that behavior (I feel it's suicidal), but I have seen it done before. Time will tell.

The bolded is exactly why I think a baddie probably would risk that behaviour. Nobody would expect it. However I still think Avalanche was just having a bit of fun on day 0, and there's not necessarily anything wrong with that is there?

The Vision wrote:Who hasn't posted yet? We've got a silencer in the game, it would be nice to get everyone to chime in and roll call if they haven't posted yet today so we can at least figure out who is shut down.

I'm chiming in!

Havok wrote:

The Vision wrote:

Havok wrote:Epignosis: Was the lynch a tie?

Havok, I'd like to hear from you about this post. Are you unaware of the poll thread, or did you have a different reason for asking this? Considering what such info might have helped reveal, if Epig had answered yes, it feels like the question isn't very civ friendly...

Yes, I am very aware of the poll thread. I asked because....

Epignosis wrote:

X-Men Mafia

Whereas Masters of the Universe took us all over a planet, X-Men will keep us...in one room.

Expect heavy manipulation.

How can you say that that question isn't civvie friendly? It sounds like you are saying that it could have only been a tie for civvie reasons? You should look over the role list. Wolverine is not the only role with vote manipulation.

I have to be honest, I also thought it was an odd question to ask. For a start, why would Epig even answer? It reads as if you might have been expecting a different result in my view and I'm not sure why you would've been.

Longshot wrote:

The Vision wrote:Who hasn't posted yet? We've got a silencer in the game, it would be nice to get everyone to chime in and roll call if they haven't posted yet today so we can at least figure out who is shut down.

We've actually got two silencers in the game - Iceman and Toad, one bad one good. I totally agree with your idea that people chime in today so we will know who is silenced - should be 2 if both Ice and Toad got their pm's in.

It's probably a fair assumption that they got their PM's in, but with the activity in this game, I'm not even sure we'll be able to narrow it down. I dunno if they're allowed to share, but we may find out tomorrow.

Furthur to Havok, let me expand a bit more on why I was eyeing you a bit for your question.

Here is the key part of the Day 1 lynch:

Avalanche
4
Marrow (6), Mojo (7), White Queen (18), Bastion (19)

Deathlok
7
Sunfire (8), Spiral (11), The Vision (15), Quicksilver (17), Avalanche (20), Havok (22), Banshee (23)


So, I see two civs with inherent vote weirdness. Cyclops, whose vote is worth 3, and Wolverine, whose starts each lynch at -4.

And if I'm reading the role description correctly, I believe the Sentinels role starts out with a vote worth 0.

In your reply to me, you only mentioned Wolverine, not Cyclops.

I see a small chance here that you are being very careful, for a specific reason. Let's say, for instance, you are The Sentinels. Look at the above lynch results. If your vote were worth 0, the lynch would have been an apparent 6 vs 4. Now what happens if one of the Avalanche voters is Cyclops? His vote is worth 3, not 1, so all of a sudden the lynch would be tied 6 vs 6. You see?

So, while this is all just what is swirling around in my mind, and because it's just a convenient hypothetical fit, I'm not saying I'm going to vote you because of it just yet, but I just wanted you to better understand why that question of yours feels so ping-y to me.

And here's a list of players based on that.

Players who have posted today.

Banshee
Bastion
Dazzler
Exodus
Havok
Longshot
Mojo
Polaris
Quicksilver
Scarlet Witch
Shadowcat
Spiral
Sunfire
The Vision

Players who have not

Avalanche
Cable
Deadpool
Domino
Hawkeye
Marrow
Mikhail Rasputin
Phoenix
Sebastian Shaw
Thunderbird
White Queen - currently browsing the thread

The Vision wrote:Furthur to Havok, let me expand a bit more on why I was eyeing you a bit for your question.

Here is the key part of the Day 1 lynch:

Avalanche
4
Marrow (6), Mojo (7), White Queen (18), Bastion (19)

Deathlok
7
Sunfire (8), Spiral (11), The Vision (15), Quicksilver (17), Avalanche (20), Havok (22), Banshee (23)


So, I see two civs with inherent vote weirdness. Cyclops, whose vote is worth 3, and Wolverine, whose starts each lynch at -4.

And if I'm reading the role description correctly, I believe the Sentinels role starts out with a vote worth 0.

In your reply to me, you only mentioned Wolverine, not Cyclops.

I see a small chance here that you are being very careful, for a specific reason. Let's say, for instance, you are The Sentinels. Look at the above lynch results. If your vote were worth 0, the lynch would have been an apparent 6 vs 4. Now what happens if one of the Avalanche voters is Cyclops? His vote is worth 3, not 1, so all of a sudden the lynch would be tied 6 vs 6. You see?

So, while this is all just what is swirling around in my mind, and because it's just a convenient hypothetical fit, I'm not saying I'm going to vote you because of it just yet, but I just wanted you to better understand why that question of yours feels so ping-y to me.

Tbh though, I think it's more likely that whoever is playing as the Sentinels would be rather quiet. Considering that they only gain vote power from not getting votes themselves. Garnering attention wouldn't really work out for them. Although now that I think about it, I probably should have voted someone yesterday if I could have. Even if it was a vote on someone else who didn't have one, it could have been the Sentinels and could influence their vote power.

It also seems to me that you are entertaining the possibility that Havok is the Sentinels. Did I read that right?

Don't forget Havok could have also asked if a tie possibly for Omega Red, it allows votes to be drained. Not saying he is, just a possibility for him asking along with the suggestions already given. I feel some quiet people should be examined also though, like Bastion and Banshee not giving much insight or posts thus far in the game. Maybe the baddies are lurking in the shadows amongst the quiet people.

Btw also, did anyone have any insight from those who chose How to Spot and Imposter that may help this lynch? Didn't know if any info may be brought to light

Checking in as well.

On Polaris: to me her comment seemed like way to detach herself from Day 1's result. That type of brutally honest comment is bound to attract reactions, and I'm sure Polaris knew that when she posted it. I can see the logic behind Quicksilver's interpretation, even if Polaris specifically said she did not feel bad about and not that she didn't care, however in the context those two appear fairly similar. I can also understand Polaris' explanation to a certain extent, but a person's voting record is important when making a case for or against someone. Can you at least see why that comment makes you look like trying to avoid accountability?

On Havok: Again, I can see both points of view: it is interesting to have such information and it's surprising that our host provided it, but in this case it could expose some powerful civilians.

On Shadowcat: I see she has been busy IRL, but I would still like her to reply to my last post if she has time.

Quicksilver wrote:Btw also, did anyone have any insight from those who chose How to Spot and Imposter that may help this lynch? Didn't know if any info may be brought to light

That is an oddly specific question. :0

Hawkeye wrote:Checking in as well.

On Polaris: to me her comment seemed like way to detach herself from Day 1's result. That type of brutally honest comment is bound to attract reactions, and I'm sure Polaris knew that when she posted it. I can see the logic behind Quicksilver's interpretation, even if Polaris specifically said she did not feel bad about and not that she didn't care, however in the context those two appear fairly similar. I can also understand Polaris' explanation to a certain extent, but a person's voting record is important when making a case for or against someone. Can you at least see why that comment makes you look like trying to avoid accountability?

On Havok: Again, I can see both points of view: it is interesting to have such information and it's surprising that our host provided it, but in this case it could expose some powerful civilians.

On Shadowcat: I see she has been busy IRL, but I would still like her to reply to my last post if she has time.

Hey Hawkeye, your link takes me to the top of a page. Did you click the little white box in your post by the word "by" to get the post link?

Longshot wrote:

Hawkeye wrote:Checking in as well.

On Polaris: to me her comment seemed like way to detach herself from Day 1's result. That type of brutally honest comment is bound to attract reactions, and I'm sure Polaris knew that when she posted it. I can see the logic behind Quicksilver's interpretation, even if Polaris specifically said she did not feel bad about and not that she didn't care, however in the context those two appear fairly similar. I can also understand Polaris' explanation to a certain extent, but a person's voting record is important when making a case for or against someone. Can you at least see why that comment makes you look like trying to avoid accountability?

On Havok: Again, I can see both points of view: it is interesting to have such information and it's surprising that our host provided it, but in this case it could expose some powerful civilians.

On Shadowcat: I see she has been busy IRL, but I would still like her to reply to my last post if she has time.

Hey Hawkeye, your link takes me to the top of a page. Did you click the little white box in your post by the word "by" to get the post link?

Odd. It works fine for me. I usually click the title above each post. Let's try it again with the with white box. Looks like the same thing though.

There was some stuff but not too helpful really, at least not immediately

I'm interested in the cases on Polaris and Havok, there was another player who caught my eye in sunfire but I don't remember what it was for. But I plan to look back on her when I get home.

Havok wrote:

The Vision wrote:

Quicksilver wrote:

The Vision wrote:

Havok wrote:Epignosis: Was the lynch a tie?

Catching up that definitely stands out to me also. The vote was clearly posted in the polls and Deathlok had the majority. So either Havok expected a different outcome because he/she knows something, or some type of manipulation Havok may have done to the votes didn't turn out as expected is my thought.
I'm looking at Havok or Polaris so far today...

Boy, you just jumped right on there, didn't ya?

lol, yes, he did.

I'm not trying to "set up" Polaris to get lynched. I'm voicing my opinions on the game. I am suspicious of Polaris. I'm not trying to hide that.

No not hiding your suspicion just using an already made suspicion yourself to distract some of the focus off of you imo since you were already being questioned. See below:

The Vision wrote:

Havok wrote:
How can you say that that question isn't civvie friendly? It sounds like you are saying that it could have only been a tie for civvie reasons? You should look over the role list. Wolverine is not the only role with vote manipulation.

The way I look at it is that it was Day 1. No night actions had yet occurred. The only two roles, barring secrets, that have naturally occurring vote weirdness are Wolverine and Cyclops. So with no Magneto or Sentinel or Omega Red manipulations in play since it was Day 1, your question seemed engineered to potentially reveal a shortlist of who could be one of our most important roles. That is absolutely not a civ-friendly question to have asked.

Any other Day, yeah go for it, there will be a ton of vote weirdness. But not yesterday…

For which I totally agree with Vision. Any other day.

Not to say Polaris with his non vote isn't suspicious bc tbh with them being so forthright about it throws me off a bit.

Polaris wrote:

Quicksilver wrote:

Longshot wrote:Quicksilver, just to clarify your post what do you mean by Polaris's ingenuity? I saw the post about not caring that she didn't vote but where does the ingenuity come in? Also, what are you seeing that makes one of them a possible indy?

Polaris "not caring" about missing the vote because he/she didn't have anyone to vote for. I know Indy characters have their own agendas, but to me if someone were Civ, they would be trying to help because every vote counts. If they were bad, they would vote to help make sure one of their teammates stayed alive and get someone Civ out. But, if they were Indy, it could go either way. So I think either Polaris is bad where neither of his/her teammates were on the line to die, so they cared less. OR, Polaris may be an Indy and cared less because someone would die that wouldn't help their cause. Just how I'm feeling here. Professor X urged us to step up and work together, so I'm trying to think things out this time and be more confident in who I vote for to get us back on our A game.

Like I said, I did not intend to miss the vote deadline, but I didn't feel particularly bad about it either. I dunno why you think casting a worthless vote is more ideal. I know it is important to vote for the sake of later vote records, but I still don't think that justifies it. And please use the correct quotes. I said I did not feel bad about missing the vote, not that I didn't care.

Also, are y'all going to actually read and respond to my posts, or just continue to speculate and post the same things over again?

I don't think I have ever seen anyone do this openly. It's weird for me to try and process. I get why Polaris is clarifying to them because of the wording but to me they do kinda mean the same thing. I am not sure a baddie would unnecessarily be so bold as to say outright I didn't feel bad about missing the vote when they could as easily say Sorry I missed the vote and leave it there. Something to watch for sure and remember, I mean vote records can be quite important normally but in a game made specifically for vote manipulation I don't know how much use they will be, only time will tell.

Quicksilver's seems to be very fixated on Indy's. There is a 7 member baddie team that I am much more worried about. They have secrets. I mean 7 members!! There are only 3 Indy's. 3!! Only 2 of which need be dead for civ's to win. So really only 2 Indy's to worry over. So why Quicksilver are you focused on 2 Indy's vs 7 mafia? About my poll pick (How to Spot Impostor's) unfairly it is not anything I can share outright I can only use it as a guide. It is also something that needs a couple of days to make more sense of it imo. Are you worried about what it could tell me?


Avalanche - where are you? It will worry me if you go quiet after being under so much scrutiny yesterday. What are your thoughts going into the lynch?

I wish White Queen would post. I have a feeling she is silenced every time I looked down when reading back she was there.

The Vision wrote:Furthur to Havok, let me expand a bit more on why I was eyeing you a bit for your question.

Here is the key part of the Day 1 lynch:

Avalanche
4
Marrow (6), Mojo (7), White Queen (18), Bastion (19)

Deathlok
7
Sunfire (8), Spiral (11), The Vision (15), Quicksilver (17), Avalanche (20), Havok (22), Banshee (23)


So, I see two civs with inherent vote weirdness. Cyclops, whose vote is worth 3, and Wolverine, whose starts each lynch at -4.

And if I'm reading the role description correctly, I believe the Sentinels role starts out with a vote worth 0.

In your reply to me, you only mentioned Wolverine, not Cyclops.

I see a small chance here that you are being very careful, for a specific reason. Let's say, for instance, you are The Sentinels. Look at the above lynch results. If your vote were worth 0, the lynch would have been an apparent 6 vs 4. Now what happens if one of the Avalanche voters is Cyclops? His vote is worth 3, not 1, so all of a sudden the lynch would be tied 6 vs 6. You see?

So, while this is all just what is swirling around in my mind, and because it's just a convenient hypothetical fit, I'm not saying I'm going to vote you because of it just yet, but I just wanted you to better understand why that question of yours feels so ping-y to me.

I know that heavy vote manipulation is a big part of this game. Think on this. Epig has talked about it leading up to the game and it even says so quite clearly in the host post. I think it would be wise to figure out as much as possible as the game goes on. I asked if the vote was a tie because it's a way to start to try to figure out what's going on. People ask all the time if the lynch was a tie in games, so I figured there was a chance that Epig would actually answer such a question. Answering if a 7-4 vote was a tie would not expose any powerful civ roles. As you pointed out, Wolverine is a -4 and cyclops is a +3 situation. Neither could apply in this scenario. If Epig asnwered that yes it was a tie, it would point out to us that there are other things at play. You don't think that would be useful knowledge?

Polaris wrote:
It also seems to me that you are entertaining the possibility that Havok is the Sentinels. Did I read that right?

It is the only reason I can see as to why his question about the tie might have popped in his head, based on how I'm reading the roles. But it's a good point that the Sentinels would want to lay low at first, to build up their vote a little. His question about the tie just seemed engineered to potentially fish out one of the most important civs, that's the part I don't like. It's certainly not enough to go labelling him as The Sentinels, but it puts him on my ping list, at a minimum.

Quicksilver wrote:Don't forget Havok could have also asked if a tie possibly for Omega Red, it allows votes to be drained. Not saying he is, just a possibility for him asking along with the suggestions already given. I feel some quiet people should be examined also though, like Bastion and Banshee not giving much insight or posts thus far in the game. Maybe the baddies are lurking in the shadows amongst the quiet people.

I read Omega Red's power as being done at night, though, so I don't see how it could come into play on Day 1.

Also, ask yourself this question: If I were a baddie with the potential to create a tie out of a vote 7-4 vote, why in the world would I ask a question like that and potentially expose a secret like that?

Quicksilver wrote:Btw also, did anyone have any insight from those who chose How to Spot and Imposter that may help this lynch? Didn't know if any info may be brought to light

If anyone did have any insight about them, wouldn't revealing said insight probably count as info dumping?

The Vision wrote:

Polaris wrote:
It also seems to me that you are entertaining the possibility that Havok is the Sentinels. Did I read that right?

It is the only reason I can see as to why his question about the tie might have popped in his head, based on how I'm reading the roles. But it's a good point that the Sentinels would want to lay low at first, to build up their vote a little. His question about the tie just seemed engineered to potentially fish out one of the most important civs, that's the part I don't like. It's certainly not enough to go labelling him as The Sentinels, but it puts him on my ping list, at a minimum.

How could that be trying to fish out one of the powerful civvies? The vote was 7-4. The vote being a tie would actually mean that Wolverine or Cyclops could NOT have been a factor would it not?

Havok wrote:
Answering if a 7-4 vote was a tie would not expose any powerful civ roles. As you pointed out, Wolverine is a -4 and cyclops is a +3 situation. Neither could apply in this scenario.

Unless one of the Deathlok voters was The Sentinels. Then it exposes Cyclops, potentially. That you can't see that is weird.

The fact that you, a Deathlok voter, asked the question is part of the problem. It indicates a chance that you are The Sentinels. It's not enough to lynch you, but it's enough that I plan on spending tonight looking for a better lynch option, with the caveat that I will ensure that you have at least one vote against you in the poll.

Off to work.

If the sentinels voted for Deathlok it was 6-4, not 7-4. That exposes Cyclops if it was a tie. You really can't see this?

Hawkeye wrote:

Longshot wrote:

Hawkeye wrote:Checking in as well.

On Polaris: to me her comment seemed like way to detach herself from Day 1's result. That type of brutally honest comment is bound to attract reactions, and I'm sure Polaris knew that when she posted it. I can see the logic behind Quicksilver's interpretation, even if Polaris specifically said she did not feel bad about and not that she didn't care, however in the context those two appear fairly similar. I can also understand Polaris' explanation to a certain extent, but a person's voting record is important when making a case for or against someone. Can you at least see why that comment makes you look like trying to avoid accountability?

On Havok: Again, I can see both points of view: it is interesting to have such information and it's surprising that our host provided it, but in this case it could expose some powerful civilians.

On Shadowcat: I see she has been busy IRL, but I would still like her to reply to my last post if she has time.

Hey Hawkeye, your link takes me to the top of a page. Did you click the little white box in your post by the word "by" to get the post link?

Odd. It works fine for me. I usually click the title above each post. Let's try it again with the with white box. Looks like the same thing though.

Hawkeye, this worked fine for me. Thank you.

The Vision wrote:If the sentinels voted for Deathlok it was 6-4, not 7-4. That exposes Cyclops if it was a tie. You really can't see this?

Yeah, I see that now. It wasn't something I thought about before asking the question.

For this theory of yours to hold water, you have to think that it was likely that the person playing the Sentinels would draw attention to himself in such a way. That seems very foolish to me.

Quicksilver wrote:

Spiral wrote:

Quicksilver wrote:

The Vision wrote:

Havok wrote:Epignosis: Was the lynch a tie?

Havok, I'd like to hear from you about this post. Are you unaware of the poll thread, or did you have a different reason for asking this? Considering what such info might have helped reveal, if Epig had answered yes, it feels like the question isn't very civ friendly...

Catching up that definitely stands out to me also. The vote was clearly posted in the polls and Deathlok had the majority. So either Havok expected a different outcome because he/she knows something, or some type of manipulation Havok may have done to the votes didn't turn out as expected is my thought.
I'm looking at Havok or Polaris so far today...

Isn't part of the reason you suspect Havok for "setting up" Polaris?

I do think he wants to get Polaris eyed, which Polaris should be for the ingenuity... But I feel one here being Bad, and the other Indy IMO. Which like I said, I feel I need to vote one of them out today.

So you suspect Havok for suspecting Polaris... yet you suspect Polaris yourself?

deadpool checkin in for the remix. gj everyone for stain alive last night i didn't think Polaris saying that thing about missing the vote was suspish missing the day 1 vote is nbd. i wanted to look at white queen today i think she was the one who was making a big deal about avalanches day 0 choice nd i thought it was silly that she kept doggin him when it seemed to clearly be a joke? and im thinkin avalanche got silenced cuz he should have opened his big mouth by now lol.

i agree with scarlet that quicksilver seems too focused on the indys... could be a baddie tryin to look helpful

and i agree with vision that havoks question about ties was sketchy and could only rlly help the bad guys but maybe havok wasnt thinking bout that at the time. it was a weird question to ask tho after a 7-4 vote...

deadpool out 4 now but ill check back in tonite with more thoughts

Polaris wrote:And here's a list of players based on that.

Players who have posted today.

Banshee
Bastion
Dazzler
Exodus
Havok
Longshot
Mojo
Polaris
Quicksilver
Scarlet Witch
Shadowcat
Spiral
Sunfire
The Vision

Players who have not

Avalanche
Cable
Deadpool
Domino
Hawkeye
Marrow
Mikhail Rasputin
Phoenix
Sebastian Shaw
Thunderbird
White Queen - currently browsing the thread

Oh! I was getting worried about White Queen, because I kept seeing her view the thread but not post. I didn't realize that if people were silenced, it wasn't announced who they were.

Scarlet, I'm concerned about both Indy players and Baddies. I'm scared of all 10 of them, but quite frankly more scared of the Indies getting more powerful as the days go by and some being hard for us to get later on. If I were Bad, I would be focussing on Civs, not Indy. We need to really think about this vote because we keep not having much good insight when we vote and we accidentally got a Civ last time.

Quicksilver wrote:Scarlet, I'm concerned about both Indy players and Baddies. I'm scared of all 10 of them, but quite frankly more scared of the Indies getting more powerful as the days go by and some being hard for us to get later on. If I were Bad, I would be focussing on Civs, not Indy. We need to really think about this vote because we keep not having much good insight when we vote and we accidentally got a Civ last time.

So you don't get my point?

You are focusing on 2 when you should be focused on 10 of them. My point 7>2 or 3

My thoughts are that White Queen and Avalanche are the two silenced.

On Havok: I don't really have much to add except that if he was scum, I would think he would PM the host the question about the tie instead of openly asking in the thread. And, since he did openly ask, maybe it was a slip. Don't really know or have a strong opinion on the matter.

@ Quicksilver: I agree that there are most likely scum among the quiet players, there usually are. Then again, there are usually scum who are quite talkative as well. I think if we look only to the quiet players we are just as likely to lynch a townie just as we are scum.

@ whoever asked if those who voted for How to Spot Imposters had any info on who to vote for today. We are not allowed to share such info, remember?

Scarlet Witch wrote:

Quicksilver wrote:Scarlet, I'm concerned about both Indy players and Baddies. I'm scared of all 10 of them, but quite frankly more scared of the Indies getting more powerful as the days go by and some being hard for us to get later on. If I were Bad, I would be focussing on Civs, not Indy. We need to really think about this vote because we keep not having much good insight when we vote and we accidentally got a Civ last time.

So you don't get my point?

You are focusing on 2 when you should be focused on 10 of them. My point 7>2 or 3

Forgot to add about the bolded As a baddie how do you focus on civs? Just curious.
That staement just pops out at me as well as your need to know about my poll choice.
So full of wifom

I think Banshee and Scarlet Witch are bad, even though they don't look like monsters.

Banshee wrote:i really didn't allow enough time for this, but at this moment i feel okay with avalanche, i think he's probably just a silly nerd. i feel more comfortable with a deathlok lynch, though not by a lot. reading his posts i do see some possible weirdness coming from that direction, especially with the accusations of sebastian not being a sock, so... *crosses fingers*

But I'm not a sock! I'm a human!

Does "silly" and "weird" mean the same thing?

Banshee wrote:damnit, sorry deathlok

I think you're trying to trick people into thinking you feel sorry about Deathlok so I want to vote for you.

I think the White Queen is good.

Scarlet Witch, dear sisters lol. I've been dying to say that. Anyway, in the past when I've played and been Bad, I've had the goal of eliminating Civs to win. Indy usually can go either way to win etc. I understand you point that there are more Baddie than Indy in this game, but our goal as a whole is to eliminate all 10 to win. I'm focussing on trying to get them all out, so it would be a bonus to get the Indy first when their powers grow each day/zing hot making it almost impossible to get some of them unless the ones with certain powers are still in this game on our X-Men side. I'm thinking of the long run, but want all 10 out no doubt.

Day/night EBWOP

I'm alive and not silenced (and totally not scum; just worked super late today)!

Looking at the posts, I'm inclined to agree that Avalanche is one of the silenced, since he was so keen to speak the last Day and Night. (I kinda miss the commentary, actually

The Imposter book was somewhat helpful, but as was mentioned, it's not terribly helpful at this time in my decision-making process. Hopefully more insight will come out of it later on.

I need to complete more investigating/logistics with who's left and who's talking to make my decision. Just figured I'd chime in before too much time passed. Onward to investigation!

Sunfire wrote:@ whoever asked if those who voted for How to Spot Imposters had any info on who to vote for today. We are not allowed to share such info, remember?

it was Quicksilver.

i'm curious to ask him though, what gave him the impression that voting that particular option might have provided such a thing, that is a very specific question to ask.

Banshee wrote:

Sunfire wrote:@ whoever asked if those who voted for How to Spot Imposters had any info on who to vote for today. We are not allowed to share such info, remember?

it was Quicksilver.

i'm curious to ask him though, what gave him the impression that voting that particular option might have provided such a thing, that is a very specific question to ask.

Because if you look at my posts, I wanted to vote both for that and Wealthy that I ended up voting for and wanted some insight into if that option helped. I know you can't specifically tell me what info anyone got, but I thought maybe the people who got that option had guidance who the attention for this poll should be on was all.
After all, I can't share if I had anything with my option either. (Hides the giant stacks of money behind my legs)

Quicksilver wrote:

Banshee wrote:

Sunfire wrote:@ whoever asked if those who voted for How to Spot Imposters had any info on who to vote for today. We are not allowed to share such info, remember?

it was Quicksilver.

i'm curious to ask him though, what gave him the impression that voting that particular option might have provided such a thing, that is a very specific question to ask.

Because if you look at my posts, I wanted to vote both for that and Wealthy that I ended up voting for and wanted some insight into if that option helped. I know you can't specifically tell me what info anyone got, but I thought maybe the people who got that option had guidance who the attention for this poll should be on was all.
After all, I can't share if I had anything with my option either. (Hides the giant stacks of money behind my legs)

Now that you've mentioned it (I missed it originally), I'm not quite sure why you chose wealth over something that you thought would provide such helpful information.

Exodus wrote:

Quicksilver wrote:

Banshee wrote:

Sunfire wrote:@ whoever asked if those who voted for How to Spot Imposters had any info on who to vote for today. We are not allowed to share such info, remember?

it was Quicksilver.

i'm curious to ask him though, what gave him the impression that voting that particular option might have provided such a thing, that is a very specific question to ask.

Because if you look at my posts, I wanted to vote both for that and Wealthy that I ended up voting for and wanted some insight into if that option helped. I know you can't specifically tell me what info anyone got, but I thought maybe the people who got that option had guidance who the attention for this poll should be on was all.
After all, I can't share if I had anything with my option either. (Hides the giant stacks of money behind my legs)

Now that you've mentioned it (I missed it originally), I'm not quite sure why you chose wealth over something that you thought would provide such helpful information.

You coukd ask the same question to anyone who voted any option besides Imposters. I chose it because it seemed too obvious and i saw the word defense and hoped it would pay off. If i am causing suspicion, I woukdnt be talking so much and trying to help.