The Syndicate

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:06 am**

Sloonei wrote:
Quin wrote:There are four ideal choices for me right now. Part of why I asked you in the first place was because I wanted to know about what kind of links you could make between your lynch choices. I didn't get exactly what I wanted, but I supposed that's what I get for not making myself clearer.

I've had four people in my mind who would be great lynches. Each of these four have had connections with each other which, to me, came across as building an association with each other that might spare them scrutiny if the others were lynched. You could argue that the links I've made could apply to anybody, and you're not wrong. But I feel confident in these specific ones.
I'll stop you right here and say that this line of thinking can often be dangerous. The likelihood that you'll ever catch 4 baddies together because of their interactions with one another in the thread when NONE of the players in question are even confirmed as bad is slim to none. But, onto the individual cases...

Scotty would be the first. I'm yet to see a side of him in this game I could get a good read from. I think other people are coming around to that realisation as well, which is good. Couple that with my original 'what if' in regards to Tranq, I think he's playing a clever, under the radar game.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say you can't "see a side of him to get a good read from". Does "good" mean "strong", or does it mean "town"? Either way, I'm not sure what the suspicion is based off of. If it's just that he's hard to read, shouldn't that make him a null read? Also, what do you make of his big chaindeath ISO that he just told me to look at? I've had doubts about Scotty too, but the investigation he put on in that one post made me feel a bit better about him.

If he flipped scum, you would be my next point of interest. I think a lot of your posts have been black and white, an interpretation that others also have commented on. You are also connected to my Tranq case, as you made up a shaky defence for Scotty by saying that the police probably knew Tranq can be a threat, but that didn't address my original point at all.
For clarification to anyone else who might be reading, the "you" in this post is Golden, I believe. Quin can correct me if I'm wrong.
Back to Quirinius, my sirens are again going off at that big "If" at the beginning of this paragraph. IF scotty flips scum. You are now putting the cart in front of the horse. If that happens, sure, this can be a legitimate line of thought, but I can't approve of any case that relies on such an unsubstantiated piece of evidence. I also still don't agree with your assessment that Tranq's N1 arrest should be connected back in any way to Scotty. Frankly it seems like an odd connection to make, and I'm not sure what drew you to it. I can't think of any reason why a player voting for the person killed on Night 1 should indicate that that player is bad.

If you then flipped scum, I'd lynch Sloonei. He and you have had a very interesting relationship in this game. I am almost convinced that you have a BTSC link together. I take this interpretation since you are quite possibly the only player Sloonei has yet to question. (I just confirmed this, and in doing so, I learned that I can filter things!) From my understanding of Sloonei's personality, there's no other conclusion I can make. I don't have the same level of tangible evidence to argue for Sloonei's lynch, but I don't think I was seeing a civilian Sloonei throughout EoD2 to EoD3.
So I am a suspect on the third layer of If? Golden's been a solid town read. I also still have trouble grasping why you thought my Day 2 and 3 behavior was so outrageously scummy. I began to formulate stronger reads because the game had been going on for a while. This is a normal thing that happens (and then unhappens when work interferes).

If I was correct yet again, at which point you should be revering me as your one true mafia god, I would lynch Nerolunar. There was a moment that really caught my attention very early, when Sloonei asked if there were any cases that would paint Nero as scum. At this point, I don't think any strong cases painting Nero as scum or civ were out there, so it just seemed a bit wild. This is admittedly the weakest link between the four of you, but no less significant in my eyes. Nero also jumped on the idea of lynching Epignosis for the sake of obtaining information. This is definitely ironic of me to scum read him for, since it was my idea, but Nero has been very 'passive' in this game. He also suggested lynching sig so people would stop talking about him. This is not GOOD town behaviour, in my eyes, so I can only hope is scum for suggesting that.
Four Ifs, and even you are now admitting that you're reaching. Nero was also a strong town read for me early on, but he's kind of lost that spot as the game has worn on.

This post has way too many Ifs in it for me to get behind, and I don't agree with points 1-3 anyway. If you have time, I wouldn't mind hearing some more complete and isolated thoughts about each of Scotty and Nero.

also to hyperlink a post you simply click the red heading that appears at the top of the post ("[DAY 5] Turf Wars...") and the link in your search bar becomes a direct link to that post.

i assume there will be a mountain of linki that i'm just gonna ignore.

or just the one post.

I don't agree that they are dangerous to the point that they shouldn't be considered. There is a lot of information to be found in taking this angle, and while you say that these lynches are based on the 'If' factor, I could just as easily put the same cases forward without the link between you and I would still feel confident that you are all bad. I don't think you should be refuting this, because information is good information regardless of its form.

With Scotty, 'good' means 'civ'. I haven't seen anything that I can label as civ-like. I feel good about that assumption because I'm not the only person to say this. I haven't read his chaindeath ISO. I'll do so and tell you, but at this point I am feeling good about chaindeath. I don't think that my thoughts on Tranq are stretched at all. Why do you think Tranq was lynched? Do you agree that it was because he might pose as a threat early on? I don't. I see Scotty arresting his EoD1 vote as an attempt to exploit the fact that being wrong in a lynch can give you civ-points.

You are correct that 'you' is Golden. I posted that and thought that things would be misunderstood, but I think most people would catch on to it anyway. I think you're taking my 'If' routine to mean that I wouldn't want any of the four of you lynched unless one of the others flip bad first. Make no mistake that I think all of you are worth lynching. The 'If' is the icing on the cake to say that, based on this persons associations, that person would come off badly.

I would like to hear more about Golden and your relationship in this game, what is it exactly that gives you so much trust in him? That other post tells you what I think already, but I'd like your input.

With Nero, I don't think you should take 'The weakest link' to mean reaching. That's like saying that the slowest runner in the 100m sprint in the olympics is a bad runner. No, I said what I said there to mean that compared to the others, the amount of conclusions I can draw are a lot larger than with any of the other three.

---

This may have been better written had I kept it within the quote and coloured it, but I'm just a bit tired.
I'll do another ISO of both Scotty and Nero at some point, but I've got an exam to study for tomorrow that I really need to focus on. Even so, what I have right now is most definitely 'complete'

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:09 am**

I can't speak for sloonei, but I can speak for me.

For me, that EoD2 experience was such that I would be unable to suspect sloonei, SVS, silverwolf, ika or indiglo (hey - s and i are great letters!) without a pretty strong case. We moved the lynch off a townie to a baddie together. This experience gave me a clarity of thought about that group of people.

I don't feel any more connected to sloonei than any of that group, but out of them only really sloonei and ika have taken much suspicion, and so I feel I've defended them more often and harder.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:10 am**

Sloonei pulled the wool over my eyes in Watchmen, and then I got lynched right behind him after. But it's not just his demeanour but his role in events that makes me feel good about him.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:12 am**

Golden wrote:Sloonei pulled the wool over my eyes in Watchmen, and then I got lynched right behind him after. But it's not just his demeanour but his role in events that makes me feel good about him.

Did you ever give your thoughts on the moment he moved his vote from Fuzz to Matt 1.0? Did that look good or bad to you, at the time?

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:18 am**

Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:Sloonei pulled the wool over my eyes in Watchmen, and then I got lynched right behind him after. But it's not just his demeanour but his role in events that makes me feel good about him.
Did you ever give your thoughts on the moment he moved his vote from Fuzz to Matt 1.0? Did that look good or bad to you, at the time?

I think his words in the thread bore out, at the time, that he always intended to end on Fuzz, and I'm not sure why his brief time at Matt 1.0 would seem all that dodgy... like, what would it achieve from a baddie perspective?

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:21 am**

Golden, what do you think of sig? I'm sure you've said so at some point, so I am sorry for asking for a rehash. I am not currently in an ideal position to search around the thread. I can engage in real-time dialogue though.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:25 am**

Golden wrote:
Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:Sloonei pulled the wool over my eyes in Watchmen, and then I got lynched right behind him after. But it's not just his demeanour but his role in events that makes me feel good about him.
Did you ever give your thoughts on the moment he moved his vote from Fuzz to Matt 1.0? Did that look good or bad to you, at the time?
I think his words in the thread bore out, at the time, that he always intended to end on Fuzz, and I'm not sure why his brief time at Matt 1.0 would seem all that dodgy... like, what would it achieve from a baddie perspective?

I think it was more so the way he went around it that caught people's attention than it was him actually moving his vote. He was on the train early, maybe he wanted to get off?

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:28 am**

I need some assistance, peeps.

I'm reading the point in the game where RadicalFuzz made his ika vote and subsequently torpedoed himself. What I need to know, which is tricky due to moveable votes, is who was the other half of "breaking the tie" when he voted ika? The only other person on the poll that seems likely was Epignosis, but was that who was tied with ika at that moment?

Thanks!

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:33 am**

Baddie Sloonei has never approached anything near 460 posts to my memory. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I am saying it's unlikely. Town Sloonei, when he has time to commit to a game, is a glowing beacon of effort, facilitation, and thoroughness. One look at his post history shows me exactly that. Also, him temporarily placing his vote on someone while maintaining his advocacy of the lynch of another is not atypical of him. He likes to use his votes as a tool, especially when the thread climate is moving in one direction and he wants to ensure adequate focus is given to multiple topics.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:38 am**

Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:
Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:Sloonei pulled the wool over my eyes in Watchmen, and then I got lynched right behind him after. But it's not just his demeanour but his role in events that makes me feel good about him.
Did you ever give your thoughts on the moment he moved his vote from Fuzz to Matt 1.0? Did that look good or bad to you, at the time?
I think his words in the thread bore out, at the time, that he always intended to end on Fuzz, and I'm not sure why his brief time at Matt 1.0 would seem all that dodgy... like, what would it achieve from a baddie perspective?
I think it was more so the way he went around it that caught people's attention than it was him actually moving his vote. He was on the train early, maybe he wanted to get off?

I don't think so Tim

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:38 am**

Prisoner 920077 wrote:I need some assistance, peeps.

I'm reading the point in the game where RadicalFuzz made his ika vote and subsequently torpedoed himself. What I need to know, which is tricky due to moveable votes, is who was the other half of "breaking the tie" when he voted ika? The only other person on the poll that seems likely was Epignosis, but was that who was tied with ika at that moment?

Thanks!

It was gleam, hence the gleam vote on day 4.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:39 am**

Golden wrote:
Prisoner 920077 wrote:I need some assistance, peeps.

I'm reading the point in the game where RadicalFuzz made his ika vote and subsequently torpedoed himself. What I need to know, which is tricky due to moveable votes, is who was the other half of "breaking the tie" when he voted ika? The only other person on the poll that seems likely was Epignosis, but was that who was tied with ika at that moment?

Thanks!
It was gleam, hence the gleam vote on day 4.

'Preciate it.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:40 am**

Checking Nerolunar's interactions with Fuzz:

Spoiler: show

I doubt Fuzz was the only person Nero happened to see online, so it could be noteworthy that he felt the need to prod him like this. It was his only such prod.

This was Nero's only mention of Fuzz, and Fuzz never mentioned Nero in any non-OT text. It appears he voted early for ika on the day of their tally duel and the vote stayed there for the long haul. The total absence of interactivity, combined with an uninspiring vote and the specificity of the above prod choice make me willing to call Nerolunar a suspect. I could see him as a team mate of Fuzz.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:43 am**

Golden wrote:
Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:
Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:Sloonei pulled the wool over my eyes in Watchmen, and then I got lynched right behind him after. But it's not just his demeanour but his role in events that makes me feel good about him.
Did you ever give your thoughts on the moment he moved his vote from Fuzz to Matt 1.0? Did that look good or bad to you, at the time?
I think his words in the thread bore out, at the time, that he always intended to end on Fuzz, and I'm not sure why his brief time at Matt 1.0 would seem all that dodgy... like, what would it achieve from a baddie perspective?
I think it was more so the way he went around it that caught people's attention than it was him actually moving his vote. He was on the train early, maybe he wanted to get off?
I don't think so Tim

I can't keep up with all these names.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:49 am**

Checking Turnip Head's interactions with Fuzz:

Spoiler: show

This would be a clever bit of team mate interaction. I could easily see Fuzz saying what he said to one of his team mates, but Turnip's response is good to cast some doubt on that. I'm a bit moved by the last sentence. I don't know though, it's a small point.

Spoiler: show

If the intent is to smokescreen, it's effective. This is an unusual interaction between these two, but I don't know whether it reads suspiciously in Turnip's case. After this basically came the Fuzz lynch. Turnip Head's vote for Fuzz was the second-to-the-last, apparently at Fuzz's request. Given that Fuzz was still behind ika in the tally, maybe they thought this was a safe move and could be of positive reflection later in the game?

---------

Inconclusive for me. I'd say the interaction is compatible with a team mate relationship, but I would hesitate before placing a TH vote.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:54 am**

Thank you, Quin, for responding to my quick analysis of your chatter with Fuzz. I like your answers for the most part. I do emerge with one question though: you said that Fuzz was "by no means a town read", but that you felt much more strongly about ika as the lynch. I'm not certain this bears out in your conduct during the CFD, when your focus seemed primarily on preventing a Fuzz lynch rather than ensuring an ika lynch. Can you show me posts you made which support your assertion that lynching ika was your intended focus?

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:56 am**

I'm afraid this is all I have time for at the moment. As of right now, my preferred vote option is among DDL, Scotty, and Nerolunar. I'd also like to look into some other people, particularly Epignosis and Golden (reminder to self).

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 4:04 am**

Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:
Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:
Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:Sloonei pulled the wool over my eyes in Watchmen, and then I got lynched right behind him after. But it's not just his demeanour but his role in events that makes me feel good about him.
Did you ever give your thoughts on the moment he moved his vote from Fuzz to Matt 1.0? Did that look good or bad to you, at the time?
I think his words in the thread bore out, at the time, that he always intended to end on Fuzz, and I'm not sure why his brief time at Matt 1.0 would seem all that dodgy... like, what would it achieve from a baddie perspective?
I think it was more so the way he went around it that caught people's attention than it was him actually moving his vote. He was on the train early, maybe he wanted to get off?
I don't think so Tim
I can't keep up with all these names.

You're Tim!

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 4:05 am**

Golden wrote:
Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:
Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:
Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:Sloonei pulled the wool over my eyes in Watchmen, and then I got lynched right behind him after. But it's not just his demeanour but his role in events that makes me feel good about him.
Did you ever give your thoughts on the moment he moved his vote from Fuzz to Matt 1.0? Did that look good or bad to you, at the time?
I think his words in the thread bore out, at the time, that he always intended to end on Fuzz, and I'm not sure why his brief time at Matt 1.0 would seem all that dodgy... like, what would it achieve from a baddie perspective?
I think it was more so the way he went around it that caught people's attention than it was him actually moving his vote. He was on the train early, maybe he wanted to get off?
I don't think so Tim
I can't keep up with all these names.
You're Tim!

No, I'm Mark!

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 4:05 am**

Okay, so I'm going to have to provide individual, very particular bits of gem that I find interesting, due to the massive task of reading a 43-page game.

Before Golden said the tie was with gleam, I assumed, looking at the poll, that it was with Epignosis, so I started working from there. Working from the point where we know a baddie was in trouble is always easier.

So, I think there is a decent chance Epignosis is a cop.

His game, up until Fuzz started taking votes, was mainstream and fine, nothing to pinpoint in any way.

Then Fuzz made his vote, people noticed, he started taking on votes quickly.

Spoiler: show

So Epig asks what's up? No great answers. Then he posts that he will make sure to break the tie, sounding srsbsns:

Spoiler: show

He then asks again for information:

Spoiler: show

That was at 4:38 my time. At 4:39 my time, just one minute later, Enrique answers him:

Spoiler: show

At 4:41, just two more minutes later, now only 3 minutes from Epig's post asking for reasons, Sloonei also provides an answer:

Spoiler: show

Now follow me even more closely, we're going into SECONDS now.

4:41 again, still 3 minutes after asking about Fuzz, he actually says nothing about Fuzz or the responses to his question, which have just occurred, but votes... a2thzebra?

Spoiler: show

Here's the seconds... Sloonei's post answering Epig's question was at 4:41:02. Epig's vote post for a2thezebra was at 4:41:13, eleven seconds apart. The point? No one types a post in 11 seconds. Especially not a post where a word is underlined, which requires a bit more typing, or clicking of buttons. Sloonei's post had to show up in linkitis before Epig got his post sent. The point is that Epig absolutely HAD to have seen Sloonei's post explaining the votes on Fuzz, and in all likelihood saw Enrique's as well, but ignored them completely and dodged the fucking very tie he said he would break, with no explanation.

Incidentally, he posted again at 4:44. Basically, all evidence points to Epig getting the information he wanted to break the tie he said he would break, but then he... didn't, and tossed his vote away. Sorry, but Epignosis doesn't do that. Also, if he says he will break a tie, and asks for info, and he's civ, he won't then fabricate a nothing vote at the last second and not even comment on the thing he got people to tell him about

Epig's bad. you're welcome.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 4:07 am**

I also note that Epig's posts starting the next day get VERY feisty against people who called him for his vote, etc. As if he knew he had stumbled a bit.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 4:09 am**

And on that note, I'm off to bed. Since in all likelihood, y'all will be pursuing your own cases and not mine tomorrow, I'll focus on the main cases as deadline approaches.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 4:17 am**

Think you got it all figured do you? Well well, I am happy to tell you that Silverwolf and ika aren't agents of Justice and that one of Nerolunar, Sloonei, Sig, Scotty, Quin, or thellama73 came by my office the other day asking about getting transferred into the field of corrections.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 4:30 am**

Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:
Quin wrote:
Golden wrote: I don't think so Tim
I can't keep up with all these names.
You're Tim!
No, I'm Mark!

You can be both, it's ok.

(It was a Home Improvement reference)

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 4:44 am**

Prisoner 509378 wrote:Thank you, Quin, for responding to my quick analysis of your chatter with Fuzz. I like your answers for the most part. I do emerge with one question though: you said that Fuzz was "by no means a town read", but that you felt much more strongly about ika as the lynch. I'm not certain this bears out in your conduct during the CFD, when your focus seemed primarily on preventing a Fuzz lynch rather than ensuring an ika lynch. Can you show me posts you made which support your assertion that lynching ika was your intended focus?

I'll have a search through my posts for something you can work with. I feel as though you're mistaking what my priority was, though. I'd said everything I had to say on the ika lynch prior to when the CFD happened, and from experience if I'd gone off and sounded like a broken record I think that may have been seen just as badly as defending Fuzz turned out to be. My defence of Fuzz boils down to really just the two posts you addressed, compared to a whole lot of ika posts over the two day period.

Assuming you only want Day 2 posts that support that ika was my focus, here you go:

Spoiler: show

Quin wrote:
indiglo wrote:
Sloonei wrote:Depending on how SVS responds to my earilier questions, my vote today seems like it will be coming down to her, Epignosis, or ika.
I actually disagree with you on all 3 of these vote prospects. I haven't seen anything from SVS yet that reads scummy, Epi's response to my questions has satisfied me for now, and I won't be voting ika because I think it's mean.

I was actually leaning towards perhaps a Matt vote, but then he posted this:

Matt wrote:'Sides Golden, Quin is reading funny to me. Can't put my finger on it. Perhaps an ISO is in order!
And actually Quin read funny to me too. I just ISO'd (oh man, it feels weird to type that and not say I did a Quin re-read) and something felt funny. He kind of jumped around from suspicion to suspicion, not really holding on to any of them, and deciding to change his vote when his previous suspicion didn't gain any traction. Quin, I'm not sure have a concrete question to ask you, but I'd like to hear anything you can provide as to your thinking or developing of suspicions.

Then as I think about it, I wonder if my weirdness meter is actually tweaked because you changed your vote so many times. And that all goes back to my old school ways - one vote and you're done for the day. And I gather that with changeable votes, it seems to be encouraged to move them as many times as you can, making your first few changes null and void. In that case, my not voting yet may look strange to someone used to changeable votes.

I did notice Quin mentioned Enrique, so I'm happy to check there to see if I see what Quin saw. Ah, there I do have my first concrete question for you - How are you feeling about Enrique now? And what changed/affected your mind?

I also think it's a little strange to see the Tranq NA (Night Arrest) and then immediately assume Scotty did it and is a cop, and try to push that idea. Maybe it seems a little opportunistic? Do you still believe that to be the case Quin? (That Scotty NA'd Tranq, that is.)

Planning to look over Golden's posts now to see if anything feels funny. Also cannot wait to see how much linki there will be...

Yep, tons. Will post then read.
I feel as though all of my votes thus far have been pretty well reasoned. With ika on Day 1, I made it clear that I found the initial vote for Silverwolf was suspicious, given the context of the whole traitor/don situation, but I did take Silverwolfs word for it that it was not atypical behaviour for him. My current vote is all about his tight-lippedness. Withholding information like this isn't a town-move.

I am not entirely sure how I think about Enrique, now. His actions in the thread were very fishy to me, from his vote to his justifications, but the way he responded to me when I questioned him felt good to me. I think if I ran out of options I'd return to him, but there are currently better candidates out there at the moment.

I do still have that suspicion for Scotty. People keep saying they disagree, but nobody is presenting any viable alternatives. I can't agree with things like 'too opportunistic' or 'too convenient'. There is a reason why Tranq was the target over somebody else, y'no? I've changed my vote from him on account of this, but I am still adamant on the fact that I believe him to be a good lynch. If you wonder why I'm voting ika instead of Scotty, I'd answer that it's because I don't support a gleam lynch, and I am sufficiently suspicious of ika to warrant hopping on a bandwagon. Well, since Sloonei jumped off I guess that means I'm leading it?

My internet connection died the moment I went to post this, thank god it was saved.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 5:17 am**

i am now home i am probally going ot eb up for the next 30 misn

anything i should be noting of intrested i kinda read but my eyes kinda glossed near the end

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 5:27 am**

in that case im voting draconous for now

im saddened that silver thinks my budding is scum. shes should knwo thats the nullest of null tells

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 7:15 am**

Prisoner 509378 wrote:Thank you, Quin, for responding to my quick analysis of your chatter with Fuzz. I like your answers for the most part. I do emerge with one question though: you said that Fuzz was "by no means a town read", but that you felt much more strongly about ika as the lynch. I'm not certain this bears out in your conduct during the CFD, when your focus seemed primarily on preventing a Fuzz lynch rather than ensuring an ika lynch. Can you show me posts you made which support your assertion that lynching ika was your intended focus?

Did you read the last hour of the Day Two lynch in its entirety? It is an illuminating read, and you seem a thorough guy.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 8:27 am**

indiglo wrote:
Prisoner 813142 wrote:
thellama73 wrote:I for one welcome our jailbird colleagues and invite them to join me in a drink.
Will we be toasting to good or evil?
Yes?

I'm afraid you have given the wrong answer. I may be Evil by name but I am no longer evil by reputation. I'm a reformed man, thanks to the efforts of my father and brother. Your attempt to thread a needle that wasn't there now has me suspicious of you.

Prisoner 640326 wrote:I think all Prisoners should unite and determine the outcome of the lynch poll

I like the way you think.

Prisoner 920077 wrote: ...blah, blah, blah...

Epig's bad. you're welcome.

Excellent work both behind bars and here in the game thread. If I'd have had you as a henchman back in the day I could have been ruling the frickin' world years ago.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 8:31 am**

indiglo wrote:@ Hosts - Do the prisoner's votes count as normal votes in the lynch poll?

They're humans just like you yeah?

You bet their votes count.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 8:33 am**

Ah, I see that's already been answered! Next time I'm catching up completely first.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 8:42 am**

Golden wrote:I wonder what would happen if we lynched the warden...

There's only one way to find out:

Warden

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 8:49 am**

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:
Golden wrote:I wonder what would happen if we lynched the warden...
There's only one way to find out:

Warden

Golden

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 8:52 am**

Sloonei wrote:I want to rewind and go back to Day 1 for a moment. The following exchange was the first time sig caught my attention in this game:
sig wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
sig wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
sig wrote:
Sloonei wrote:sig and enrique's names have been hanging out at the bottom of the page for a while but neither of them are saying anything. No one likes a tattle tale, but I'm gonna do it anyway.
This is scummy, and very pingy. Since I've had the tab up and haven't talked it must mean something? You bringing this up is very very troubling.

Could someone brief me on the Golden and Gleam case? It seems Wilgy is voting for him mainly based on tone? Yet I've got no idea why people are voting for Gleam.

I'll be moving my vote from Chain seeing how he has posted, but not sure who to yet.
Why is it troubling? I never said it's scummy of you, I just wanted you to say something. Hello.
Hi, how you doing?
Not too good, sig. I don't know who to vote for.
What do you make of Enrique/Diiny

I've got a good gut vibe of LC so far, Zebra seems really quite which is weird.

linki: @Nero

sig wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
sig wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
sig wrote:
Nerolunar wrote:
@ Sig I find it suspicious that you reacted so violently and defensive towards Sloonei pointing out you were lurking.
I didn't react violently, I did react defensively yes since usually accusing someone of being present and lurking is followed by someone saying it is pingy, then BAM Sig gets lynched and there is no more Sig.
but why did you say i was scummy for pointing it out?
Since it doesn't seem like something a civ would do this early, espacilly since both of us have posted. Also as I already said, this seemed like a starter attempt to get sig lynched and sig doesn't like to get lynched.
Nope. I just wanted to generate as much content as I could before I leave for work. Which I'm doing now. Adios, amigos. Lynch a bad guy.
Why do you want to lynch a mafia member?
[/spoiler]
Sig initially came out VERY aggressive against me prodding him for activity, but then back off substantially. He offered up a few light reads and made a suggestion about the pair of Diiny and Enrique (now Boomslang), but what caught my eye most of all was the extreme reactions on both ends of the spectrum here. Sig went from 0 to 100 and back down to 0 in a matter of minutes. I don't know if I just disarmed him or what, but the reaction was alarming, and after that initial post I got a vibe that he was trying to play it safe so as to not provoke me to scum read him in any way.

Sig, what can you recall from this exchange? What thoughts were going through your head?

You were potential scum trying to set up my lynch, I responded in hopes you'd back off. Nero made his post which was both suspicious yet also made me realized that I might have been over reacting so I cooled it back a bit.

Golden wrote:
Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:Sloonei pulled the wool over my eyes in Watchmen, and then I got lynched right behind him after. But it's not just his demeanour but his role in events that makes me feel good about him.
Did you ever give your thoughts on the moment he moved his vote from Fuzz to Matt 1.0? Did that look good or bad to you, at the time?
I think his words in the thread bore out, at the time, that he always intended to end on Fuzz, and I'm not sure why his brief time at Matt 1.0 would seem all that dodgy... like, what would it achieve from a baddie perspective?

It would achieve something if he had successfully flipped the CFD onto Matt. When it didn't work he switched back so he wouldn't look suspicious. Sloonie pushed for a Matt lynch over Fuzz. If it had been a mislynch we would have dropped Fuzz and not have done another CFD or CFD people. So yeah he could have achieved something saving his teammate with little risk.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 8:52 am**

Matt wrote:
Prisoner 740359 wrote:
Quin wrote:Should I be under the impression that Matt 1.0 is a prisoner? hyuckhyuckhyuck
Is this a joke?
Lol. Like, MP and Daisy let me post in this thread and your prisoner thread too? That would be the shiz, I'd have so much knowledge. Muhahahaha. And then probably ignore it all and tunnel ika.

Maybe they don't need to let you post in the prisoner thread, just give you a sockpuppet account after the break and let you play here.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 8:56 am**

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:
Matt wrote:
Prisoner 740359 wrote:
Quin wrote:Should I be under the impression that Matt 1.0 is a prisoner? hyuckhyuckhyuck
Is this a joke?
Lol. Like, MP and Daisy let me post in this thread and your prisoner thread too? That would be the shiz, I'd have so much knowledge. Muhahahaha. And then probably ignore it all and tunnel ika.
Maybe they don't need to let you post in the prisoner thread, just give you a sockpuppet account after the break and let you play here.

Our first challenge was to each post only once in five complete sequences. So what you're suggesting is 100% impossible.

This line of thought is completely nonsensical. I invite only scum players to keep fluffing on this, so we can catch them and solve this game.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 8:58 am**

Prisoner 509378 wrote:Checking Nerolunar's interactions with Fuzz:

Spoiler: show
Nerolunar wrote:I see RadicalFuzz is online. What are your suspects and general thoughts on what happened at EoD and from there on?
I doubt Fuzz was the only person Nero happened to see online, so it could be noteworthy that he felt the need to prod him like this. It was his only such prod.

This was Nero's only mention of Fuzz, and Fuzz never mentioned Nero in any non-OT text. It appears he voted early for ika on the day of their tally duel and the vote stayed there for the long haul. The total absence of interactivity, combined with an uninspiring vote and the specificity of the above prod choice make me willing to call Nerolunar a suspect. I could see him as a team mate of Fuzz.

What do you make of his interaction with LC especially considering that LC flipped as a BTSC role. I thought Nero was mafia until I saw his hard early defense of LC, it wouldn't make much sense unless he knew LC was civ. Mainly his interaction with Chaindeath over LC.

Someone pointed out I should come out of my shell. I've been making cases, but have also for the last two phases defending myself. This leaves little room for case building.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 9:05 am**

Prisoner 509378 wrote:DDL softened his abrupt grip on Fuzz just as abruptly, and I'm not quite sure why. I could be missing something in this exchange where quotes weren't included, since Fuzz is not one to quote very often. Talk about this DDL -- why exactly did you change your tune here?

Since the start of the game, I've been trying to distinguish malice from what is just weird posting behavior. I didn't manage to convince myself that Fuzz was clearly the former instead of the later. besides, no one listened to my Fuzz wagon so I might as well abort, go back to the wagon that actually had a chance to lynch someone, and wait for Fuzz to give me more evidence.

Also this:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I mentioned Fuzz at least once before that, marmot.
I did a search on your posts with Fuzz as a parameter.

I forgot that it doesn't check for quote names.
If you want an explanation on how I read him:

- I read Fuzz as bad for his unwillingness to scumhunt.
- I pointed that out and voted for him.
- He asked me to ask him questions.
- I asked him to post his reads.
- He posted a wall of reads. It didn't convince me, but didn't make me suspect him more.
- We got close to EoD and nobody had followed me on my Fuzz wagon. I switched back to gleam not to waste my vote.
- The CFD started. I opposed it because I didn't like the concept.
- Almost all the gleam voters siwtched to Fuzz. I siwtched along because Fuzz had always been one of my suspects.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 9:06 am**

Also, I think someone may have asked for the POLLS thread. I can't really remember.

Nonetheless, here it is.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 9:19 am**

Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:
Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:Sloonei pulled the wool over my eyes in Watchmen, and then I got lynched right behind him after. But it's not just his demeanour but his role in events that makes me feel good about him.
Did you ever give your thoughts on the moment he moved his vote from Fuzz to Matt 1.0? Did that look good or bad to you, at the time?
I think his words in the thread bore out, at the time, that he always intended to end on Fuzz, and I'm not sure why his brief time at Matt 1.0 would seem all that dodgy... like, what would it achieve from a baddie perspective?
I think it was more so the way he went around it that caught people's attention than it was him actually moving his vote. He was on the train early, maybe he wanted to get off?

nope. I kept on interrogating Fuzz the whole time.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 9:26 am**

Quin wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Quin wrote:There are four ideal choices for me right now. Part of why I asked you in the first place was because I wanted to know about what kind of links you could make between your lynch choices. I didn't get exactly what I wanted, but I supposed that's what I get for not making myself clearer.

I've had four people in my mind who would be great lynches. Each of these four have had connections with each other which, to me, came across as building an association with each other that might spare them scrutiny if the others were lynched. You could argue that the links I've made could apply to anybody, and you're not wrong. But I feel confident in these specific ones.
I'll stop you right here and say that this line of thinking can often be dangerous. The likelihood that you'll ever catch 4 baddies together because of their interactions with one another in the thread when NONE of the players in question are even confirmed as bad is slim to none. But, onto the individual cases...

Scotty would be the first. I'm yet to see a side of him in this game I could get a good read from. I think other people are coming around to that realisation as well, which is good. Couple that with my original 'what if' in regards to Tranq, I think he's playing a clever, under the radar game.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say you can't "see a side of him to get a good read from". Does "good" mean "strong", or does it mean "town"? Either way, I'm not sure what the suspicion is based off of. If it's just that he's hard to read, shouldn't that make him a null read? Also, what do you make of his big chaindeath ISO that he just told me to look at? I've had doubts about Scotty too, but the investigation he put on in that one post made me feel a bit better about him.

If he flipped scum, you would be my next point of interest. I think a lot of your posts have been black and white, an interpretation that others also have commented on. You are also connected to my Tranq case, as you made up a shaky defence for Scotty by saying that the police probably knew Tranq can be a threat, but that didn't address my original point at all.
For clarification to anyone else who might be reading, the "you" in this post is Golden, I believe. Quin can correct me if I'm wrong.
Back to Quirinius, my sirens are again going off at that big "If" at the beginning of this paragraph. IF scotty flips scum. You are now putting the cart in front of the horse. If that happens, sure, this can be a legitimate line of thought, but I can't approve of any case that relies on such an unsubstantiated piece of evidence. I also still don't agree with your assessment that Tranq's N1 arrest should be connected back in any way to Scotty. Frankly it seems like an odd connection to make, and I'm not sure what drew you to it. I can't think of any reason why a player voting for the person killed on Night 1 should indicate that that player is bad.

If you then flipped scum, I'd lynch Sloonei. He and you have had a very interesting relationship in this game. I am almost convinced that you have a BTSC link together. I take this interpretation since you are quite possibly the only player Sloonei has yet to question. (I just confirmed this, and in doing so, I learned that I can filter things!) From my understanding of Sloonei's personality, there's no other conclusion I can make. I don't have the same level of tangible evidence to argue for Sloonei's lynch, but I don't think I was seeing a civilian Sloonei throughout EoD2 to EoD3.
So I am a suspect on the third layer of If? Golden's been a solid town read. I also still have trouble grasping why you thought my Day 2 and 3 behavior was so outrageously scummy. I began to formulate stronger reads because the game had been going on for a while. This is a normal thing that happens (and then unhappens when work interferes).

If I was correct yet again, at which point you should be revering me as your one true mafia god, I would lynch Nerolunar. There was a moment that really caught my attention very early, when Sloonei asked if there were any cases that would paint Nero as scum. At this point, I don't think any strong cases painting Nero as scum or civ were out there, so it just seemed a bit wild. This is admittedly the weakest link between the four of you, but no less significant in my eyes. Nero also jumped on the idea of lynching Epignosis for the sake of obtaining information. This is definitely ironic of me to scum read him for, since it was my idea, but Nero has been very 'passive' in this game. He also suggested lynching sig so people would stop talking about him. This is not GOOD town behaviour, in my eyes, so I can only hope is scum for suggesting that.
Four Ifs, and even you are now admitting that you're reaching. Nero was also a strong town read for me early on, but he's kind of lost that spot as the game has worn on.

This post has way too many Ifs in it for me to get behind, and I don't agree with points 1-3 anyway. If you have time, I wouldn't mind hearing some more complete and isolated thoughts about each of Scotty and Nero.

also to hyperlink a post you simply click the red heading that appears at the top of the post ("[DAY 5] Turf Wars...") and the link in your search bar becomes a direct link to that post.

i assume there will be a mountain of linki that i'm just gonna ignore.

or just the one post.
I don't agree that they are dangerous to the point that they shouldn't be considered. There is a lot of information to be found in taking this angle, and while you say that these lynches are based on the 'If' factor, I could just as easily put the same cases forward without the link between you and I would still feel confident that you are all bad. I don't think you should be refuting this, because information is good information regardless of its form.

With Scotty, 'good' means 'civ'. I haven't seen anything that I can label as civ-like. I feel good about that assumption because I'm not the only person to say this. I haven't read his chaindeath ISO. I'll do so and tell you, but at this point I am feeling good about chaindeath. I don't think that my thoughts on Tranq are stretched at all. Why do you think Tranq was lynched? Do you agree that it was because he might pose as a threat early on? I don't. I see Scotty arresting his EoD1 vote as an attempt to exploit the fact that being wrong in a lynch can give you civ-points.

You are correct that 'you' is Golden. I posted that and thought that things would be misunderstood, but I think most people would catch on to it anyway. I think you're taking my 'If' routine to mean that I wouldn't want any of the four of you lynched unless one of the others flip bad first. Make no mistake that I think all of you are worth lynching. The 'If' is the icing on the cake to say that, based on this persons associations, that person would come off badly.

I would like to hear more about Golden and your relationship in this game, what is it exactly that gives you so much trust in him? That other post tells you what I think already, but I'd like your input.

With Nero, I don't think you should take 'The weakest link' to mean reaching. That's like saying that the slowest runner in the 100m sprint in the olympics is a bad runner. No, I said what I said there to mean that compared to the others, the amount of conclusions I can draw are a lot larger than with any of the other three.

---

This may have been better written had I kept it within the quote and coloured it, but I'm just a bit tired.
I'll do another ISO of both Scotty and Nero at some point, but I've got an exam to study for tomorrow that I really need to focus on. Even so, what I have right now is most definitely 'complete'

All the ifs are definitely dangerous thoughts. It is hard enough to catch one baddie in this game, and adding layers of unnecessary hypotheticals to the mix does not make it any easier.
What posts in Scotty's history do you particularly read as not good? Same with Nerolunar, I'm still not seeing why you suspect him.

As for Golden, I suppose I didn't like the early case against him and then Day 2 arrived, and all that stuff that happened there. I've felt no reason to suspect him or SVS since then, and only minor WIFOMy pings for both ika and Silverwolf. I find myself agreeing with Golden more than any other player in this game lately (ealrier I said this was the case for Turnip Heas, but that no longer applies), so that is always helpful.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 9:28 am**

Prisoner 509378 wrote:Baddie Sloonei has never approached anything near 460 posts to my memory. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I am saying it's unlikely. Town Sloonei, when he has time to commit to a game, is a glowing beacon of effort, facilitation, and thoroughness. One look at his post history shows me exactly that. Also, him temporarily placing his vote on someone while maintaining his advocacy of the lynch of another is not atypical of him. He likes to use his votes as a tool, especially when the thread climate is moving in one direction and he wants to ensure adequate focus is given to multiple topics.

Thanks, stranger.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 9:39 am**

Prisoner 920077 wrote:Okay, so I'm going to have to provide individual, very particular bits of gem that I find interesting, due to the massive task of reading a 43-page game.

Before Golden said the tie was with gleam, I assumed, looking at the poll, that it was with Epignosis, so I started working from there. Working from the point where we know a baddie was in trouble is always easier.

So, I think there is a decent chance Epignosis is a cop.

His game, up until Fuzz started taking votes, was mainstream and fine, nothing to pinpoint in any way.

Then Fuzz made his vote, people noticed, he started taking on votes quickly.

Spoiler: show
Epignosis wrote:I just got home after picking up a drunken Eloh. First time ever that I get to return the favor.

I pulled up the thread a few moments ago to see the votes roughly the way they were when I left work. I began reading. I went to the next page and all the votes had gone to RadicalFuzz.

Damn that was fast. Fuzz slip?

Heh, his name is Fuzz.
So Epig asks what's up? No great answers. Then he posts that he will make sure to break the tie, sounding srsbsns:

Spoiler: show
Epignosis wrote:I ain't having a tie, so I'll be breaking this bad boy as soon as I finish reading this shit and make up my mind. I have twelve minutes.

Which doesn't look like it's going to happen because I cannot friggin post.

Addendum: Fuck!

Addendum: Fucking hell!

Addendum: Please stop posting.

Addendum: No, seriously. Just for a second.

Addendum:
He then asks again for information:

Spoiler: show
Epignosis wrote:I'm behind seven pages. Catching up before the deadline isn't going to happen. Can someone give me a summary of Fuzz? What'd he do?
That was at 4:38 my time. At 4:39 my time, just one minute later, Enrique answers him:

Spoiler: show
Enrique wrote:
Epignosis wrote:I'm behind seven pages. Catching up before the deadline isn't going to happen. Can someone give me a summary of Fuzz? What'd he do?
Said he wouldn't touch ika/Silverwolf, then broke the tie against ika. Fast forward a bit and all the gleam voters immediately hop on him instead.
At 4:41, just two more minutes later, now only 3 minutes from Epig's post asking for reasons, Sloonei also provides an answer:

Spoiler: show
Sloonei wrote:
Epignosis wrote:I'm behind seven pages. Catching up before the deadline isn't going to happen. Can someone give me a summary of Fuzz? What'd he do?
In general, he's been providing some pretty scant analysis of things in the thread, enough content to avoid being a lurker, but not so much that he's really needed to commit to anything.
Plus in the last hour or so he's cast a fairly shady vote against ika just because not too long after implying he wouldn't be doing such a thing. None of his responses since this wagon started up have been all that inspiring either.
Now follow me even more closely, we're going into SECONDS now.

4:41 again, still 3 minutes after asking about Fuzz, he actually says nothing about Fuzz or the responses to his question, which have just occurred, but votes... a2thzebra?

Spoiler: show
Epignosis wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:If there's anyone like me that isn't feeling good about either an ika or a Fuzz lynch, please switch your vote to Epi.
a2thezebra

There. You finally got a reaction.
Here's the seconds... Sloonei's post answering Epig's question was at 4:41:02. Epig's vote post for a2thezebra was at 4:41:13, eleven seconds apart. The point? No one types a post in 11 seconds. Especially not a post where a word is underlined, which requires a bit more typing, or clicking of buttons. Sloonei's post had to show up in linkitis before Epig got his post sent. The point is that Epig absolutely HAD to have seen Sloonei's post explaining the votes on Fuzz, and in all likelihood saw Enrique's as well, but ignored them completely and dodged the fucking very tie he said he would break, with no explanation.

Incidentally, he posted again at 4:44. Basically, all evidence points to Epig getting the information he wanted to break the tie he said he would break, but then he... didn't, and tossed his vote away. Sorry, but Epignosis doesn't do that. Also, if he says he will break a tie, and asks for info, and he's civ, he won't then fabricate a nothing vote at the last second and not even comment on the thing he got people to tell him about

Epig's bad. you're welcome.

3 points:
-As you seem to have noticed, the poll before Fuzz was lynched was nearer a 3-way tie between Epi, ika, and gleam.
-Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but Epignosis is not the type of player who would he afraid to bus a partner. That said, he also probably wouldn't be afraid to smother himself in WIFOM by essentially abstaining from the vote like he did Day 2.
-The point that Epi must have seen my post in the linki is not one I agree with. Having been in the thread at the time, there was no point to try to keep up with the linki, and no point to look at it. Doing so would have just made posting a headache. The thread was moving so fast there were at least 5 or 6 posts of linkitis any time anyone went to say something new, and often more than that. I don't think anyone was checking their linki at that point.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 9:40 am**

I'm probably starting to feel better about lynching Quin than sig again.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 9:53 am**

Sloonei wrote:I'm probably starting to feel better about lynching Quin than sig again.

'Ayyyyyyy

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 9:58 am**

Scotty wrote:
Sloonei wrote:I'm probably starting to feel better about lynching Quin than sig again.
'Ayyyyyyy

This is a problem, Scotty. I have serious commitment issues. What do you think of Mr Luffy?

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 10:03 am**

Quin wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Quin wrote:There are four ideal choices for me right now. Part of why I asked you in the first place was because I wanted to know about what kind of links you could make between your lynch choices. I didn't get exactly what I wanted, but I supposed that's what I get for not making myself clearer.

I've had four people in my mind who would be great lynches. Each of these four have had connections with each other which, to me, came across as building an association with each other that might spare them scrutiny if the others were lynched. You could argue that the links I've made could apply to anybody, and you're not wrong. But I feel confident in these specific ones.
I'll stop you right here and say that this line of thinking can often be dangerous. The likelihood that you'll ever catch 4 baddies together because of their interactions with one another in the thread when NONE of the players in question are even confirmed as bad is slim to none. But, onto the individual cases...

Scotty would be the first. I'm yet to see a side of him in this game I could get a good read from. I think other people are coming around to that realisation as well, which is good. Couple that with my original 'what if' in regards to Tranq, I think he's playing a clever, under the radar game.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say you can't "see a side of him to get a good read from". Does "good" mean "strong", or does it mean "town"? Either way, I'm not sure what the suspicion is based off of. If it's just that he's hard to read, shouldn't that make him a null read? Also, what do you make of his big chaindeath ISO that he just told me to look at? I've had doubts about Scotty too, but the investigation he put on in that one post made me feel a bit better about him.

If he flipped scum, you would be my next point of interest. I think a lot of your posts have been black and white, an interpretation that others also have commented on. You are also connected to my Tranq case, as you made up a shaky defence for Scotty by saying that the police probably knew Tranq can be a threat, but that didn't address my original point at all.
For clarification to anyone else who might be reading, the "you" in this post is Golden, I believe. Quin can correct me if I'm wrong.
Back to Quirinius, my sirens are again going off at that big "If" at the beginning of this paragraph. IF scotty flips scum. You are now putting the cart in front of the horse. If that happens, sure, this can be a legitimate line of thought, but I can't approve of any case that relies on such an unsubstantiated piece of evidence. I also still don't agree with your assessment that Tranq's N1 arrest should be connected back in any way to Scotty. Frankly it seems like an odd connection to make, and I'm not sure what drew you to it. I can't think of any reason why a player voting for the person killed on Night 1 should indicate that that player is bad.

If you then flipped scum, I'd lynch Sloonei. He and you have had a very interesting relationship in this game. I am almost convinced that you have a BTSC link together. I take this interpretation since you are quite possibly the only player Sloonei has yet to question. (I just confirmed this, and in doing so, I learned that I can filter things!) From my understanding of Sloonei's personality, there's no other conclusion I can make. I don't have the same level of tangible evidence to argue for Sloonei's lynch, but I don't think I was seeing a civilian Sloonei throughout EoD2 to EoD3.
So I am a suspect on the third layer of If? Golden's been a solid town read. I also still have trouble grasping why you thought my Day 2 and 3 behavior was so outrageously scummy. I began to formulate stronger reads because the game had been going on for a while. This is a normal thing that happens (and then unhappens when work interferes).

If I was correct yet again, at which point you should be revering me as your one true mafia god, I would lynch Nerolunar. There was a moment that really caught my attention very early, when Sloonei asked if there were any cases that would paint Nero as scum. At this point, I don't think any strong cases painting Nero as scum or civ were out there, so it just seemed a bit wild. This is admittedly the weakest link between the four of you, but no less significant in my eyes. Nero also jumped on the idea of lynching Epignosis for the sake of obtaining information. This is definitely ironic of me to scum read him for, since it was my idea, but Nero has been very 'passive' in this game. He also suggested lynching sig so people would stop talking about him. This is not GOOD town behaviour, in my eyes, so I can only hope is scum for suggesting that.
Four Ifs, and even you are now admitting that you're reaching. Nero was also a strong town read for me early on, but he's kind of lost that spot as the game has worn on.

This post has way too many Ifs in it for me to get behind, and I don't agree with points 1-3 anyway. If you have time, I wouldn't mind hearing some more complete and isolated thoughts about each of Scotty and Nero.

also to hyperlink a post you simply click the red heading that appears at the top of the post ("[DAY 5] Turf Wars...") and the link in your search bar becomes a direct link to that post.

i assume there will be a mountain of linki that i'm just gonna ignore.

or just the one post.
I don't agree that they are dangerous to the point that they shouldn't be considered. There is a lot of information to be found in taking this angle, and while you say that these lynches are based on the 'If' factor, I could just as easily put the same cases forward without the link between you and I would still feel confident that you are all bad. I don't think you should be refuting this, because information is good information regardless of its form. on that same line of thought, then, lynching you should give us plenty of information

With Scotty, 'good' means 'civ'. I haven't seen anything that I can label as civ-like. I feel good about that assumption because I'm not the only person to say this. I haven't read his chaindeath ISO. I'll do so and tell you, but at this point I am feeling good about chaindeath. I don't think that my thoughts on Tranq are stretched at all. Why do you think Tranq was lynched? Do you agree that it was because he might pose as a threat early on? I don't. I see Scotty arresting his EoD1 vote as an attempt to exploit the fact that being wrong in a lynch can give you civ-points. a couple things here. One- Tranq wasn't lynched, bub. I still don't see how getting a lynch wrong makes me look good as civ. I'm always disappointed in myself when I vote a civ in a lynch. Two- You're pushing for my lynch but you aren't reading my posts? Like, one case on chaindeath does not a civ make, but I'm actually pushing for cases as opposed to some people and you've been rubbing me the wrong way with your irregard of civ behavior. The more Golden and Sloonei post, the more civ they look. Like, suspect me all you want I guess, but at least show me better reasoning how our 2 biggest posters are scummy. Because I don't see it, and actually I feel like you're trying to push an unnecessary lynch on two of our strongest assets. Lynch me, I turn up good. 'Whoopsidaisy! Well, time to lynch Sloonei! Gosh darn it! Well, good thing we got information, right guys?'

You are correct that 'you' is Golden. I posted that and thought that things would be misunderstood, but I think most people would catch on to it anyway. I think you're taking my 'If' routine to mean that I wouldn't want any of the four of you lynched unless one of the others flip bad first. Make no mistake that I think all of you are worth lynching. The 'If' is the icing on the cake to say that, based on this persons associations, that person would come off badly.

I would like to hear more about Golden and your relationship in this game, what is it exactly that gives you so much trust in him? That other post tells you what I think already, but I'd like your input.

With Nero, I don't think you should take 'The weakest link' to mean reaching. That's like saying that the slowest runner in the 100m sprint in the olympics is a bad runner. No, I said what I said there to mean that compared to the others, the amount of conclusions I can draw are a lot larger than with any of the other three.

---

This may have been better written had I kept it within the quote and coloured it, but I'm just a bit tired.
I'll do another ISO of both Scotty and Nero at some point, but I've got an exam to study for tomorrow that I really need to focus on. Even so, what I have right now is most definitely 'complete'
id say I'd look forward to your next iso, but I'm not. Because I'm nervous you're going to miss more of my posts. And on the scope of this game, there's really not that much

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 10:05 am**

sig wrote:
Sloonei wrote:I want to rewind and go back to Day 1 for a moment. The following exchange was the first time sig caught my attention in this game:
Spoiler: show
sig wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
sig wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
sig wrote:
This is scummy, and very pingy. Since I've had the tab up and haven't talked it must mean something? You bringing this up is very very troubling.

Could someone brief me on the Golden and Gleam case? It seems Wilgy is voting for him mainly based on tone? Yet I've got no idea why people are voting for Gleam.

I'll be moving my vote from Chain seeing how he has posted, but not sure who to yet.
Why is it troubling? I never said it's scummy of you, I just wanted you to say something. Hello.
Hi, how you doing?
Not too good, sig. I don't know who to vote for.
What do you make of Enrique/Diiny

I've got a good gut vibe of LC so far, Zebra seems really quite which is weird.

linki: @Nero
Sig initially came out VERY aggressive against me prodding him for activity, but then back off substantially. He offered up a few light reads and made a suggestion about the pair of Diiny and Enrique (now Boomslang), but what caught my eye most of all was the extreme reactions on both ends of the spectrum here. Sig went from 0 to 100 and back down to 0 in a matter of minutes. I don't know if I just disarmed him or what, but the reaction was alarming, and after that initial post I got a vibe that he was trying to play it safe so as to not provoke me to scum read him in any way.

Sig, what can you recall from this exchange? What thoughts were going through your head?
You were potential scum trying to set up my lynch, I responded in hopes you'd back off. Nero made his post which was both suspicious yet also made me realized that I might have been over reacting so I cooled it back a bit.

I'd say you cooled off before Nero's post. Your first response to me was what I was noting as your cooling off. What happened?
The Nero interaction is irrelevant to this, and I only included it to show that the final post in the whole exchange was you jokingly accusing me of wanting to lynch the wrong faction.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 10:07 am**

In Rocky & Bullwinkle the thing which really cemented Scotty as a sure scum read for me was that he came out guns blazing against me on Day 2, but shortly after he revealed that he had not read a few of my most substantial posts. Seeing Quin now accuse him of being bad and making the same slip up is a little too poetic and delicious for me to ignore.

Posted: **Thu Mar 17, 2016 10:09 am**

Sloonei wrote:
Scotty wrote:
Sloonei wrote:I'm probably starting to feel better about lynching Quin than sig again.
'Ayyyyyyy
This is a problem, Scotty. I have serious commitment issues. What do you think of Mr Luffy?

Committing was my New Years resolution.

Last year and this year. Still working on it. I'll get there eventually.

I think DDL had some heat early on for steering the thread a bit, and I started getting suspicious of him when he started switching gears around night 2 I think and suspecting sig when sig was getting more heat than the space between my butt cheeks. I read this (and still could i guess, if I didn't have a problem making up my mind on sig) as a way to bus a teammate. His vote on gleam yesterday was exactly what I did, and so it would be duplicitous of me to suspect him for that, but I guess it's his slickness in switching minds in general that keeps me coming back to suspect him.

I think I should iso him, not in relation to sig, since I already did that. It could be a good idea.

The Syndicate

[END] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [NIGHT 4] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [NIGHT 4] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [NIGHT 4] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

Re: [DAY 5] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts