Day 12 ~ 2015 Game of Champions

#5851

Quick question:

If Wilgy doesn't address my points, or he does but in a similarly deceptive way, would that be enough to convince those who are not convinced to vote for him?

#5852

By the way, the fact LC wasn't killed after allegedly having BTSC with someone is not proof of anything. If he had BTSC with you, he probably told you who else he had BTSC with or who he wants to have it with. NK him would be dangerous, not to mention he almost got jjj lynched, and was wrong. Why take him out?

linki: Well, it leaves me with nothing

#5853

MacDougall wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:I still don't get the two mafia team theory. Like, wouldn't they have tried to start killing each other by now?
There have been some questionable night kills. Perhaps they have been trying? JJJ and Dom spring to mind.

I suppose that's possible.

#5854

MacDougall wrote:
Long Con wrote:My suspects:
Draconus
FZ.
Boomslang
Dom
DharmaHelper
Metalmarsh

Ricochet wrote:Not posting suss on Wilgy =/= trusting Wilgy

MacDougall wrote:
Long Con wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
Boomslang wrote:Long Con is bad, and you have to trust me on this. I've made some bad calls this game, but this one is different.
Long Con isn't bad, and you have to trust me on this. I've made some bad calls this game, but this one is different as well.
But what's Boomslang's angle here?

Yeah, that's Wilgy trusting LC. Where does LC trusting Wilgy fit into this?

#5855

FZ. wrote:By the way, the fact LC wasn't killed after allegedly having BTSC with someone is not proof of anything. If he had BTSC with you, he probably told you who else he had BTSC with or who he wants to have it with. NK him would be dangerous, not to mention he almost got jjj lynched, and was wrong. Why take him out?

linki: Well, it leaves me with nothing

He also listed Dom as a suspect, and we saw how that turned out.

#5856

Ricochet wrote:
MacDougall wrote:
Long Con wrote:My suspects:
Draconus
FZ.
Boomslang
Dom
DharmaHelper
Metalmarsh

Ricochet wrote:Not posting suss on Wilgy =/= trusting Wilgy

MacDougall wrote:
Long Con wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
Boomslang wrote:Long Con is bad, and you have to trust me on this. I've made some bad calls this game, but this one is different.
Long Con isn't bad, and you have to trust me on this. I've made some bad calls this game, but this one is different as well.
But what's Boomslang's angle here?
Yeah, that's Wilgy trusting LC. Where does LC trusting Wilgy fit into this?

Hmm, he still didn't have to do it. Though it does make him look better in the eyes of the LC, so it's still possible.

#5857

FZ. wrote:By the way, the fact LC wasn't killed after allegedly having BTSC with someone is not proof of anything. If he had BTSC with you, he probably told you who else he had BTSC with or who he wants to have it with. NK him would be dangerous, not to mention he almost got jjj lynched, and was wrong. Why take him out?

linki: Well, it leaves me with nothing

Now that you mention it, if Boom was oblivious to LC's power (seriously, though, how did he even made his crap case, if he was just a mere question curser? yikes), wouldn't some of those who bought into Boom's idea be former BTSC buds with LC who fooled him and, knowing LC's power, wanted to push him into dying via lynch? (I know I wasn't any better trusting Boom, but I thought Boom claimed copsy.) The civs with LCBTSC visible vouched for LC, but what of the baddies he might have had BTSC with? Could they have launched into say "hiss! hiss! Boom is on to something! death to LC!"? Can we work on this angle in any way?

#5858

Ricochet wrote:
FZ. wrote:By the way, the fact LC wasn't killed after allegedly having BTSC with someone is not proof of anything. If he had BTSC with you, he probably told you who else he had BTSC with or who he wants to have it with. NK him would be dangerous, not to mention he almost got jjj lynched, and was wrong. Why take him out?

linki: Well, it leaves me with nothing
Now that you mention it, if Boom was oblivious to LC's power (seriously, though, how did he even made his crap case, if he was just a mere question curser? yikes), wouldn't some of those who bought into Boom's idea be former BTSC buds with LC who fooled him and, knowing LC's power, wanted to push him into dying via lynch? (I know I wasn't any better trusting Boom, but I thought Boom claimed copsy.) The civs with LCBTSC visible vouched for LC, but what of the baddies he might have had BTSC with? Could they have launched into say "hiss! hiss! Boom is on to something! death to LC!"? Can we work on this angle in any way?

And you have a Matt ISO coming up next too.

#5859

LC wasn't after Wilgy, yet he had 6 scumreads. That's enough for me to say that at worst he had Wilgy as yellow skittle?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
FZ. wrote:By the way, the fact LC wasn't killed after allegedly having BTSC with someone is not proof of anything. If he had BTSC with you, he probably told you who else he had BTSC with or who he wants to have it with. NK him would be dangerous, not to mention he almost got jjj lynched, and was wrong. Why take him out?

linki: Well, it leaves me with nothing
He also listed Dom as a suspect, and we saw how that turned out.

Discrediting the dead! You are vile Metalmarsh.

#5860

Ricochet wrote:
FZ. wrote:By the way, the fact LC wasn't killed after allegedly having BTSC with someone is not proof of anything. If he had BTSC with you, he probably told you who else he had BTSC with or who he wants to have it with. NK him would be dangerous, not to mention he almost got jjj lynched, and was wrong. Why take him out?

linki: Well, it leaves me with nothing
Now that you mention it, if Boom was oblivious to LC's power (seriously, though, how did he even made his crap case, if he was just a mere question curser? yikes), wouldn't some of those who bought into Boom's idea be former BTSC buds with LC who fooled him and, knowing LC's power, wanted to push him into dying via lynch? (I know I wasn't any better trusting Boom, but I thought Boom claimed copsy.) The civs with LCBTSC visible vouched for LC, but what of the baddies he might have had BTSC with? Could they have launched into say "hiss! hiss! Boom is on to something! death to LC!"? Can we work on this angle in any way?

I don't think so. I am only unsure of who had BTSC with LC on the last day so you'd be talking about the person he was in BTSC with at the time jumping on him and him not effectively posting in the thread "fuck this guy".

Which incidentally he did do to Boomslang after he died.

#5861

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
FZ. wrote:By the way, the fact LC wasn't killed after allegedly having BTSC with someone is not proof of anything. If he had BTSC with you, he probably told you who else he had BTSC with or who he wants to have it with. NK him would be dangerous, not to mention he almost got jjj lynched, and was wrong. Why take him out?

linki: Well, it leaves me with nothing
Now that you mention it, if Boom was oblivious to LC's power (seriously, though, how did he even made his crap case, if he was just a mere question curser? yikes), wouldn't some of those who bought into Boom's idea be former BTSC buds with LC who fooled him and, knowing LC's power, wanted to push him into dying via lynch? (I know I wasn't any better trusting Boom, but I thought Boom claimed copsy.) The civs with LCBTSC visible vouched for LC, but what of the baddies he might have had BTSC with? Could they have launched into say "hiss! hiss! Boom is on to something! death to LC!"? Can we work on this angle in any way?
And you have a Matt ISO coming up next too.

The connection being?

#5862

MacDougall wrote:LC wasn't after Wilgy, yet he had 6 scumreads. That's enough for me to say that at worst he had Wilgy as yellow skittle?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
FZ. wrote:By the way, the fact LC wasn't killed after allegedly having BTSC with someone is not proof of anything. If he had BTSC with you, he probably told you who else he had BTSC with or who he wants to have it with. NK him would be dangerous, not to mention he almost got jjj lynched, and was wrong. Why take him out?

linki: Well, it leaves me with nothing
He also listed Dom as a suspect, and we saw how that turned out.
Discrediting the dead! You are vile Metalmarsh.

He certainly was wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.

So was I though...

#5863

Ricochet wrote:
FZ. wrote:By the way, the fact LC wasn't killed after allegedly having BTSC with someone is not proof of anything. If he had BTSC with you, he probably told you who else he had BTSC with or who he wants to have it with. NK him would be dangerous, not to mention he almost got jjj lynched, and was wrong. Why take him out?

linki: Well, it leaves me with nothing
Now that you mention it, if Boom was oblivious to LC's power (seriously, though, how did he even made his crap case, if he was just a mere question curser? yikes), wouldn't some of those who bought into Boom's idea be former BTSC buds with LC who fooled him and, knowing LC's power, wanted to push him into dying via lynch? (I know I wasn't any better trusting Boom, but I thought Boom claimed copsy.) The civs with LCBTSC visible vouched for LC, but what of the baddies he might have had BTSC with? Could they have launched into say "hiss! hiss! Boom is on to something! death to LC!"? Can we work on this angle in any way?

Not sure I follow. You think those who did have BTSC with him but were bad, jumped on his wagon? That would make them look just as bad, wouldn't it? If I had BTSC with LC and was bad, I would probably openly protect him to maintain the impression I'm good, in case he didn't get lynched

#5864

Ricochet wrote:
FZ. wrote:By the way, the fact LC wasn't killed after allegedly having BTSC with someone is not proof of anything. If he had BTSC with you, he probably told you who else he had BTSC with or who he wants to have it with. NK him would be dangerous, not to mention he almost got jjj lynched, and was wrong. Why take him out?

linki: Well, it leaves me with nothing
Now that you mention it, if Boom was oblivious to LC's power (seriously, though, how did he even made his crap case, if he was just a mere question curser? yikes), wouldn't some of those who bought into Boom's idea be former BTSC buds with LC who fooled him and, knowing LC's power, wanted to push him into dying via lynch? (I know I wasn't any better trusting Boom, but I thought Boom claimed copsy.) The civs with LCBTSC visible vouched for LC, but what of the baddies he might have had BTSC with? Could they have launched into say "hiss! hiss! Boom is on to something! death to LC!"? Can we work on this angle in any way?

Legend.

#5865

FZ. wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
FZ. wrote:By the way, the fact LC wasn't killed after allegedly having BTSC with someone is not proof of anything. If he had BTSC with you, he probably told you who else he had BTSC with or who he wants to have it with. NK him would be dangerous, not to mention he almost got jjj lynched, and was wrong. Why take him out?

linki: Well, it leaves me with nothing
Now that you mention it, if Boom was oblivious to LC's power (seriously, though, how did he even made his crap case, if he was just a mere question curser? yikes), wouldn't some of those who bought into Boom's idea be former BTSC buds with LC who fooled him and, knowing LC's power, wanted to push him into dying via lynch? (I know I wasn't any better trusting Boom, but I thought Boom claimed copsy.) The civs with LCBTSC visible vouched for LC, but what of the baddies he might have had BTSC with? Could they have launched into say "hiss! hiss! Boom is on to something! death to LC!"? Can we work on this angle in any way?
Not sure I follow. You think those who did have BTSC with him but were bad, jumped on his wagon? That would make them look just as bad, wouldn't it? If I had BTSC with LC and was bad, I would probably openly protect him to maintain the impression I'm good, in case he didn't get lynched

Well, you talked about any baddie who had BTSC with LC not removing him swiftly via NK afterwards, so I took the angle what if they (or some) worked on digging LC's grave the other possible way and wash their hands with it.

#5866

Ricochet wrote:
The connection being?

I misread you. I thought you were talking about the Boomslang naysayers, not LC naysayers.

#5867

DharmaHelper wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
FZ. wrote:By the way, the fact LC wasn't killed after allegedly having BTSC with someone is not proof of anything. If he had BTSC with you, he probably told you who else he had BTSC with or who he wants to have it with. NK him would be dangerous, not to mention he almost got jjj lynched, and was wrong. Why take him out?

linki: Well, it leaves me with nothing
Now that you mention it, if Boom was oblivious to LC's power (seriously, though, how did he even made his crap case, if he was just a mere question curser? yikes), wouldn't some of those who bought into Boom's idea be former BTSC buds with LC who fooled him and, knowing LC's power, wanted to push him into dying via lynch? (I know I wasn't any better trusting Boom, but I thought Boom claimed copsy.) The civs with LCBTSC visible vouched for LC, but what of the baddies he might have had BTSC with? Could they have launched into say "hiss! hiss! Boom is on to something! death to LC!"? Can we work on this angle in any way?
Legend.

Says the LC mislyncher.

#5868

Ricochet wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
FZ. wrote:By the way, the fact LC wasn't killed after allegedly having BTSC with someone is not proof of anything. If he had BTSC with you, he probably told you who else he had BTSC with or who he wants to have it with. NK him would be dangerous, not to mention he almost got jjj lynched, and was wrong. Why take him out?

linki: Well, it leaves me with nothing
Now that you mention it, if Boom was oblivious to LC's power (seriously, though, how did he even made his crap case, if he was just a mere question curser? yikes), wouldn't some of those who bought into Boom's idea be former BTSC buds with LC who fooled him and, knowing LC's power, wanted to push him into dying via lynch? (I know I wasn't any better trusting Boom, but I thought Boom claimed copsy.) The civs with LCBTSC visible vouched for LC, but what of the baddies he might have had BTSC with? Could they have launched into say "hiss! hiss! Boom is on to something! death to LC!"? Can we work on this angle in any way?
Legend.
Says the LC mislyncher.

...who LC left breadcrumbs of doubt on, furthermore.

#5869

FZ. wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
FZ. wrote:By the way, the fact LC wasn't killed after allegedly having BTSC with someone is not proof of anything. If he had BTSC with you, he probably told you who else he had BTSC with or who he wants to have it with. NK him would be dangerous, not to mention he almost got jjj lynched, and was wrong. Why take him out?

linki: Well, it leaves me with nothing
Now that you mention it, if Boom was oblivious to LC's power (seriously, though, how did he even made his crap case, if he was just a mere question curser? yikes), wouldn't some of those who bought into Boom's idea be former BTSC buds with LC who fooled him and, knowing LC's power, wanted to push him into dying via lynch? (I know I wasn't any better trusting Boom, but I thought Boom claimed copsy.) The civs with LCBTSC visible vouched for LC, but what of the baddies he might have had BTSC with? Could they have launched into say "hiss! hiss! Boom is on to something! death to LC!"? Can we work on this angle in any way?
Not sure I follow. You think those who did have BTSC with him but were bad, jumped on his wagon? That would make them look just as bad, wouldn't it? If I had BTSC with LC and was bad, I would probably openly protect him to maintain the impression I'm good, in case he didn't get lynched

If LC was nightkilled, the civs he had BTSC with would know who else LC had had BTSC with (probably). So LC was a dangerous player to nightkill. But Boomslang offered the chance for the players in this game to lynch him. That's what Ricochet is getting at. Since the baddies would have had trouble nightkilling him, taking the chance to lynch him would be their best option.

#5870

By the way, can anyone tell me what was with the story about Motel room? Did someone attempt to kill him or did I get it wrong?

#5871

I think someone tried to kill him.

#5872

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
FZ. wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
FZ. wrote:By the way, the fact LC wasn't killed after allegedly having BTSC with someone is not proof of anything. If he had BTSC with you, he probably told you who else he had BTSC with or who he wants to have it with. NK him would be dangerous, not to mention he almost got jjj lynched, and was wrong. Why take him out?

linki: Well, it leaves me with nothing
Now that you mention it, if Boom was oblivious to LC's power (seriously, though, how did he even made his crap case, if he was just a mere question curser? yikes), wouldn't some of those who bought into Boom's idea be former BTSC buds with LC who fooled him and, knowing LC's power, wanted to push him into dying via lynch? (I know I wasn't any better trusting Boom, but I thought Boom claimed copsy.) The civs with LCBTSC visible vouched for LC, but what of the baddies he might have had BTSC with? Could they have launched into say "hiss! hiss! Boom is on to something! death to LC!"? Can we work on this angle in any way?
Not sure I follow. You think those who did have BTSC with him but were bad, jumped on his wagon? That would make them look just as bad, wouldn't it? If I had BTSC with LC and was bad, I would probably openly protect him to maintain the impression I'm good, in case he didn't get lynched
If LC was nightkilled, the civs he had BTSC with would know who else LC had had BTSC with (probably). So LC was a dangerous player to nightkill. But Boomslang offered the chance for the players in this game to lynch him. That's what Ricochet is getting at. Since the baddies would have had trouble nightkilling him, taking the chance to lynch him would be their best option.

Yeah, but if the other civs he had BTSC with knew who else he had BTSC with, they would suspect anyone who voted for him after having BTSC with him. That would openly put them in a bad position, even more so than NK him, because that would still remain vague, wouldn't it?

#5873

So, Bea, Wilgy and Mac, who else do you "think" LC had BTSC with?

#5874

Ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

*No info dumping~ which means no night results, no info gleaned via BTS, etc.

LMAO

#5875

FZ. wrote:So, Bea, Wilgy and Mac, who else do you "think" LC had BTSC with?

Is there a reason you have think in quotes?

#5876

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I think someone tried to kill him.

Whoa. I thought it was a near or faux modkill post, but not that I've re-read it.

The hell, suddenly two kills? After five cycles?!

DharmaHelper wrote:Ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

*No info dumping~ which means no night results, no info gleaned via BTS, etc.
LMAO

Com'ooon, just this once.

#5877

If I ever get around to hosting, RIP to everyone who breaks the rules lol.

#5878

Ricochet wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:I think someone tried to kill him.
Whoa. I thought it was a near or faux modkill post, but not that I've re-read it.

The hell, suddenly two kills? After five cycles?!

DharmaHelper wrote:Ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

*No info dumping~ which means no night results, no info gleaned via BTS, etc.
LMAO
Com'ooon, just this once.

Could there be a role who only gets a kill at a certain position? We stayed on position 4 for quite a while.

#5879

DharmaHelper wrote:If I ever get around to hosting, RIP to everyone who breaks the rules lol.

Didn't you host a game like yestermonth?

@Rico, I've never seen someone survive a modkill.

#5880

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:If I ever get around to hosting, RIP to everyone who breaks the rules lol.
Didn't you host a game like yestermonth?

@Rico, I've never seen someone survive a modkill.

DharmaHelper wrote:If I ever get around to hosting, RIP to everyone who breaks the rules lol.

That's why I said "faux". Motel evaded the modkill threshold at least once when he was nearing it. That's why I had it in mind this morning, skimming over that Host post.

#5881

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:If I ever get around to hosting, RIP to everyone who breaks the rules lol.
Didn't you host a game like yestermonth?

@Rico, I've never seen someone survive a modkill.

I was more a secondary host for SW. I meant moreso if I ever get around to putting my games out.

#5882

bea wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:I think someone tried to kill him.
Whoa. I thought it was a near or faux modkill post, but not that I've re-read it.

The hell, suddenly two kills? After five cycles?!

DharmaHelper wrote:Ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

*No info dumping~ which means no night results, no info gleaned via BTS, etc.
LMAO
Com'ooon, just this once.
Could there be a role who only gets a kill at a certain position? We stayed on position 4 for quite a while.

Position 2 won the N6 poll and I think it was a first.

Good point.

#5883

DharmaHelper wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:If I ever get around to hosting, RIP to everyone who breaks the rules lol.
Didn't you host a game like yestermonth?

@Rico, I've never seen someone survive a modkill.
I was more a secondary host for SW. I meant moreso if I ever get around to putting my games out.

I always thought Epig was second fiddle in hosting that.

Anyway, I will break all your rules in your next game.

#5884

Speaking of potential baddies who would dig LC's grave post-BTSC whilst reading him civ... Matt missing the D6 vote.

Any hints on Matt having had BTSC with LC?

Again, D6 had at least three missed votes, on a tight EoD in which saving or not LC was at stake.

Incidentally, another one who missed the vote - Wilgy. The one LC "trusted".

#5885

Anyone who hasn't already commented, what are your thoughts on my post(s) regarding Wilgy's crap-posting?

#5886

FZ. wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Why are people not getting that there are two teams lmao.

There have always been two GOC Mafia teams

A2 was mafia and died N1. Two teams.
DH your scumdoodlyness is leaking. I just looked at your ISO comparing Drac and Sorsha.

You mention Sorsha as bad early game with clapping and nothing else quoting a JJJ read.

You mention Drac, always jokingly or not serious. Even when I ask you your thoughts on him, you go "meh yellow" and move on. When he votes for you, your reaction isn't that of a civ afraid of a lynch, it's neutral.

DH you aren't saving your temmie here. I'll look over Drac now and see if these connections hold true on his end.
Thissun right here FZ.

I'd have to give Mac a re-read to nail down one way or the other but intuitively I think he's civ.
And you claim it's BS?

Why would you rather lynch Sorsha over him?

Did you ever answer?

#5887

DharmaHelper wrote:Anyone who hasn't already commented, what are your thoughts on my post(s) regarding Wilgy's crap-posting?

I think you make good points and even if there was nothing else about Wilgy I'd be suspicious of him. As it is, I see enough between that, the ISO, and my own gut feel to put Wilgy at the top of my list. As always though I'd like to hear from him. I may go ahead and vote him with the understanding I'll pull my vote if I believe what he says.

#5888

What a surprise. juliets picks up a foreign case and wants to pressure vote.

#5889

Finished scanning Matt, but I need to take a shower.

...Uhm, not implying any connection between the two actions.

#5890

Ricochet wrote:What a surprise. juliets picks up a foreign case and wants to pressure vote.

I don't understand what "foreign case" means.

#5891

FZ, I notice a very interesting absence of Draconus related content in your ISO.

Elohcin ISO had zero Draconus interaction...

Your first mention of Drac is a soft defense against a point raised by Matt - Day 2

Then you don't mention him at all until Day 3.5 when you make a statement that you would feel comfortable voting for him but unfortunately he has no votes.

Spoiler: show

FZ. wrote:I still have a few more pages to read , but from what I have read so far, out of those who have votes, I think I'm most comfortable voting for MM. I think I would also feel comfortable voting for Drac, but he has no votes, for Sorsha or Dom. Either have votes at the moment.

FZ. wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
FZ. wrote:
I realize it's possible, and again, if I knew he was bad, I wouldn't hesitate lynching him, or if he was up against a person I felt was a civ. But, when there are other players who are acting scummy and can post a threat to the town more heavily, I'd rather save him and keep him the last baddie standing. After that, the baddies can shove their win. If they don't understand their win is worthless, I pitty them.
Why do you feel you have a better control over telling which other suspects are truly bad, over Tranq doing nothing remotely civilian-like, so far?

Also, you'd rather let Tranq as last baddie standing... although, in your own words, you cannot tell for sure if he's bad...? How does that make sense.

Finally, similar to what Boom asked, how do you know Tranq, if bad, isn't a threat outside the written game (night powers)?
I don't, but just because someone doesn't contribute shit, doesn't make him bad. He could be, but in my opinion, more often than not, he's a civ. I think people who appear to be around and doing stuff, yet aren't are more likely to be bad. Hence my willingness to vote MM, or Drac. I think they are trying to seem like they are baddie hunting, when in fact they aren't really.

I'd rather let him be the last baddie standing, because then, in my eyes, even if they win because of that, we are the ones who really won, and I don't care what the official end game is. The challenge for me, when playing mafia, is to figure out who is lying to me and fooling me after doing his best at that. If you followed my Pikmin game, you'd know that this is how I act when bad. There's no challenge in trying to win a player who is not really playing.

LC, I'm willing to vote for Drac. Will you move your vote to him instead of JJJ?

Same day you were discussing with LC saving JJJ by moving vote to Draco (again no case was built by you.)

Spoiler: show

Ricochet picking up on it and questioning you. Here you state that he is preparing to chain you to a possible JJJ civ flip? The suspicion she raises on the Draco vote is incredibly valid. Why would he vote for FZ at this point for attempting to save someone he thought was bad (JJJ) when JJJ had more votes. Unless they were distancing?

FZ. wrote:
HamburgerBoy wrote:
FZ. wrote:
Ricochet wrote:FZ, you've mentioned no suspicion of Draconus up until a few posts ago saying "you'd vote for him or MM". Am I missing something? Day 2, in fact, you've eyeballed Matt for claiming Draco faked his curse.
FIrst off, I'm allowed to change my mind. Second, I don't buy his vote. If he thinks I'm bad and was defending JJJ, why is he voting me and not JJJ who had more votes? I feel like he's preparing for after JJJ is lynched and flips civ.

linki: I'm saying that if I know he's bad, than that would be a reason to lynch him. When all I have is him not contributing anything, that's not enough to make me lynch him.
Where did Draconus say that?
He didn't, but:

Draconus wrote:
FZ. wrote:I will barely be here this day, so I really hope this doesn't go JJJ's way. I do agree that if he is bad, and knew he won't be lynched, that there are scum in his voters.
Covering all of your bases in case shit hits the fan? "I think JJJ is good, but if he's bad, look that way." Also, calling your sussers idiots before they even go after you? Not cool Adding "no offense" at the end of that doesn't make it more appropriate. So, yeah.

And then this:

Draconus wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:
FZ. wrote:I will barely be here this day, so I really hope this doesn't go JJJ's way. I do agree that if he is bad, and knew he won't be lynched, that there are scum in his voters.
<snipped>

Oh good, someone else sees how ridiculous this post is.
These are his only posts, and then he votes me

If he doesn't think JJJ is bad, than why would I be covering all bases?

HamburgerBoy raises doubts about the validity of her point so she quotes a few Draco posts to justify it. Pretty haphazardly thrown together post. I don't think FZ had any intention of actually getting Draco lynched here. HamburgerBoy was killed that night.

Spoiler: show

FZ. wrote:RIP Golden, HB and Epi. I am really really saddened by this result. I'll miss you Golden!
Both HB and Golden were pretty obvious civvies. As for Epi, I had a feeling he was an indie role, because he was reserved, but I didn't think it was a killing role. I don't share your enthusiasm some of you do, about him being killed, because Epi always thinks these kind of roles could help the town. I imagine that if it wouldn't hurt him, he would help the town. Maybe not to the end, but at least in major parts of the game. I could be wrong, but that's how I feel. He did help us get Lorab, so I think baddies saw him as a real threat.

As for HB and whether his death happened because he was hiding behind a baddie, I doubt he hid behind Drac, because at the end of the last day, he didn't trust him enough. He didn't trust BR enough, though he was coming around regarding her. I still think he didn't hide behind her. He had to have hid behind a person he trusted. I don't think he'd take the chance and "explore" those he wasn't sure about.

If he was leaving crumbs for us to find in case he dies. These are the two people he talked about having a gut feel that they may be civvies:

HamburgerBoy wrote:What makes you put MetalMarsh immediately below Dom/Llama? I could agree with it in the "compatible but not indicative" sense of things but compared to people like Wilgy that have the supportive post history and the questionable voting records, I'd put MM towards the bottom of the lynch. Otherwise, I think I mostly agree with your analysis. I'm also leaning civvie on Long Con only because he's had some interactions with Dom that look like too obvious of buddying from the latter to be scummates, but of course Dom isn't a 100% done deal yet.
He also mentions MM here, but I'm not sure if it means he feels he's a civ.

The second person:
HamburgerBoy wrote:Oh, and one more thing, do you guys feel DharmaHelper would be the kind of guy to stick his neck out, defending a scummate and attacking the alternative so aggressively as he's done? In spite of the LoRab flip I'm still getting a civvie gutfeel from him, because at least I feel the mindset he's used to express his cases so far is what I would expect from a Syndicater (regarding his general dislike of counter-wagons building so rapidly and all that).
He says DH is acting like how he expects a syndicater to act, and he's getting a civvie gutfeel.

So I would assume it's either one of these two, or one of Lorab's voters. If Epi is not it, then it leaves Sorsha, BR and Ninju. I think his rainbow list should not be the one guiding us, because it was before the lynch and he's changed his mind on a few people. I think that he would try to leave clues in case it didn't work, and telling us who he feels is a civ, during the night, is a good way of doing so. His last post is about DH.

The only problem is, we don't know if he died because of that or not.

Her next mention of Draco is dismissing the idea that HB stood behind him without nary a thought about it. For someone such as FZ who is a little bit tinfoily to not even entertain the idea that HB was kamikaze mode and stood behind a player who she had just read as manipulatively trying to chain her to a mislynch... There is a disconnect there. It makes her previous suspicions look fabricated.

Spoiler: show

FZ. wrote:
Dom wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Dom wrote:
Draconus wrote:I missed a 4 way tie?? I love ties. But great result folks

I saw a couple of mentions of me and Lorab so allow me to address what I read. I thought I explained this clearly on Day 0 but there still seems to be some confusion. I didn't want to vote Lorab on Day 1 because she was doing exactly what I went after her for doing in our previous game together. I had convinced Golden to switch to her and we lynched a civ. (I should say "convinced" as Golden was bad at the time. Anyways, I've had no further mention of Lorab due a lack of time to read up on her.
For the record and for those who don't remember I gave Jay a chance to save himself with a tie on 3.0 with a vote for llama. I didn't have time to come back before the end of the Day, but if I had a chance to I woud've voted for Lorab at that time. Before anyone says "it wouldn't have mattered. Jay was up by 2 votes" 1. We still don't know for sure what caused the lynch to be cancelled. Sure we know what Jay claimed, but we can't take those at face value. 2. Matt was also still on llama. Had he come back in time, he, too could have switched to Lorab and caused a tie. Would he do that? Idk.
My point with all of this is that I felt better about Jay than I did about both Lorab and llama.

As for who I think should be lynched next: I think DH looks the worst after this result. Typing this on my phone so I'll go look for quotes after posting this to back up my argument. But I recall DH defending Lorab pretty hard core early on and a bit recently. Be back in a few.
This doesn't sit right with me.
Why?
The tone doesn't real well.

FZ. wrote:
Dom wrote:
FZ. wrote:I suggest we start looking at the people who voted JJJ on day 3.0 who tipped it toward him instead of Lorab. That's the occam's razor logic you all like to use so much.

JaggedJimmyJay
10
Metalmarsh89 (5), Dom (7), Long Con (8), DrWilgy (10), HamburgerBoy (17), nijuukyugou (22), DharmaHelper (23), MacDougall (24), bea (25), juliets (27) 37%

LoRab
8
Epignosis (6), Sorsha (15), Golden (16), thellama73 (18), JaggedJimmyJay (19), Tranq (20), FZ. (21), motel room (26) 30

Also important to note is the fact that the only two who voted for someone else (for llama), were Drac and Matt, who voted relatively early on, when Lorab only had 1 vote. They too, should be viewed in my opinion. Not saying there can't be a baddie on the Lorab train, but less likely in my eyes.
Why not just look at JJ?
I just said why in the post above. Are you ignoring it deliberately?
No, I just think it's a WIFOM point to make.
How on earth is that WIFOM? Are you kidding me? The claim is that Lorab forced the position to prevent JJJ from being lynched. So they are both on the same team. JJJ had plenty of opportunities that day to go for someone who is not on his team, when several options were gaining momentum. Even after the Boomslang options was shot down, and he suggested Lorab, I gave him and out by suggesting Sorsha. He convinced me to go for Lorab. If he was my team mate, I wouldn't speak with him after pulling something like that. There's bussing and there's being a complete ass hole.
You'd rather say my observation is WIFOM and take a very circumstantial evidence as something that is proof enough? That is so bad.

linki: no Drac, I didn't. I should though. I was just bringing up the list for now.

Points out that Draco and Matt voted elsewhere, which is really rather arbitrary and then when Dom calls her out on it being wifom she doubles down and eyeballs him. This post against Draco (and Matt) is rather softly softly considering she was so pinged by him earlier she tried to raise a counterwagon against him (without ever actually placing a vote). Bonus points Dom calling out Draconus's post as reading tone bad is a very nice little pearl. Look at the actual post. It's Draconus suspecting DH as "looking worst after this result". Have a look at him now. Echoing every fucking thing DH says.

She then doesn't mention Draconus until DAY 6!

So much for her case on him. After he survived the LC showdown.

Spoiler: show

Now she mentions that what MM does makes sense if Drac is bad, but in a way that makes it seem unlikely that Drac is bad. We've gone from her establishing a scum read earlier in the game from no case, to now having a civ read on him with no interaction at all?

She also quoted LC's list that had Draco at the top of it (and Metalmarsh in it too) and ignored them both, asking him about Boomslang's schtick.

Spoiler: show

I don't know if you're baddie or not? She said this to Boomslang. What kind of thing is that to say? She also is now making analysis from the position of Draco being civ. Like why!?

Spoiler: show

She says "I have no reason to believe Drac is a civvie... but then gives a reason. Like wtf!? How has this stuff been ignored?

After this she soft prods Draco for content and then doesn't follow through, and doesn't mention him again until an hour ago.

All of her interaction around Draco is suspicious. They are scum together.

#5892

Juliets, what exactly is the good case? Why are you pressure voting him? What do you think about what Mac and Bea say?

linki: Mac, I don't think Drac is bad at the moment. I don't know what I said about him before

#5893

You just replied to a case that took me 30 minutes to put together with a one sentence linki.

#5894

You caught me. Good job. I just wanted to post my post and gave you my GTH. Deal

#5895

#5896

DharmaHelper wrote:
FZ. wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Why are people not getting that there are two teams lmao.

There have always been two GOC Mafia teams

A2 was mafia and died N1. Two teams.
DH your scumdoodlyness is leaking. I just looked at your ISO comparing Drac and Sorsha.

You mention Sorsha as bad early game with clapping and nothing else quoting a JJJ read.

You mention Drac, always jokingly or not serious. Even when I ask you your thoughts on him, you go "meh yellow" and move on. When he votes for you, your reaction isn't that of a civ afraid of a lynch, it's neutral.

DH you aren't saving your temmie here. I'll look over Drac now and see if these connections hold true on his end.
Thissun right here FZ.

I'd have to give Mac a re-read to nail down one way or the other but intuitively I think he's civ.
And you claim it's BS?

Why would you rather lynch Sorsha over him?
Did you ever answer?

#5897

DH, please review my case. I'll play with you mate.

#5898

I don't have time to try and persuade you I'm not bad. If I need to, and I get votes, I will. For the time being, you can believe whatever you want. I change my mind on people based on gut reading, and Drac's recent post saying "if Bea is bad, I quit" made me feel it was genuine. His actions during the end of that LC lynch felt good to me too. I don't think MM is bad so I don't think he was trying to save Drac either.

linki: Sorry DH, I wasn't sure it was for me. I don't know what to make of the Wilgy case. At the moment, it's the best one out there, but Mac and Bea keep saying LC trusted him, so I'm still hesitant

#5899

FZ. wrote:I don't have time to try and persuade you I'm not bad. If I need to, and I get votes, I will. For the time being, you can believe whatever you want. I change my mind on people based on gut reading, and Drac's recent post saying "if Bea is bad, I quit" made me feel it was genuine. His actions during the end of that LC lynch felt good to me too. I don't think MM is bad so I don't think he was trying to save Drac either.

linki: Sorry DH, I wasn't sure it was for me. I don't know what to make of the Wilgy case. At the moment, it's the best one out there, but Mac and Bea keep saying LC trusted him, so I'm still hesitant

So that's a soft yes that you agree he was full of shit?

#5900

EBWOP: Give me a few minutes and I'll reply to that post of yours Macaroni

Full Games	Civilian: Mafia: Independent:
Speed Games	Civilian: Fiddler on the Roof Mafia:
Heists	Civilian: MVP: RED vs BLUE
Burglaries	Independent: The Theme Is Literally a Burglary
Special Games	Civilian: Independent:

Full Games	Civilian: Mafia: Independent:
Speed Games	Civilian: Fiddler on the Roof Mafia:
Heists	Civilian: MVP: RED vs BLUE
Burglaries	Independent: The Theme Is Literally a Burglary
Special Games	Civilian: Independent:

Full Games	Civilian: Mafia: Independent:
Speed Games	Civilian: Fiddler on the Roof Mafia:
Heists	Civilian: MVP: RED vs BLUE
Burglaries	Independent: The Theme Is Literally a Burglary
Special Games	Civilian: Independent:

Full Games	Civilian: Mafia: Independent:
Speed Games	Civilian: Fiddler on the Roof Mafia:
Heists	Civilian: MVP: RED vs BLUE
Burglaries	Independent: The Theme Is Literally a Burglary
Special Games	Civilian: Independent:

Full Games	Civilian: Mafia: Independent:
Speed Games	Civilian: Fiddler on the Roof Mafia:
Heists	Civilian: MVP: RED vs BLUE
Burglaries	Independent: The Theme Is Literally a Burglary
Special Games	Civilian: Independent:

2014 Sockys
2015 Sockys
Miscellaneous

2014 Sockys
2015 Sockys
Miscellaneous

2014 Sockys
2015 Sockys
Miscellaneous

2014 Sockys
2015 Sockys
Miscellaneous

Finish It