The Syndicate

Enrique wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:07 pm [VOTE: Enrique] aubergine

Enrique wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:07 pm [VOTE: Enrique] aubergine

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:58 pm I do not currently see myself voting for cbob.

sig may have thrust himself to the top of my list. His recent mix up between SVS and Luna is confusing and alarming, and a quick glance at his brief ISO raised a couple other smaller red flags. I'll share those in a separate post.

Enrique wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:07 pm [VOTE: Enrique] aubergine

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:22 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:58 pm I do not currently see myself voting for cbob.

sig may have thrust himself to the top of my list. His recent mix up between SVS and Luna is confusing and alarming, and a quick glance at his brief ISO raised a couple other smaller red flags. I'll share those in a separate post.

Nah how about we don't mislynch the guy.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 4:56 pm

sig wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 4:53 pm Okay so as I said I was skimming, I recalled someone say something about the SVS and Luna exchange and called them bloodthirsty.

Turns out it was you calling Luna bloodthirsty and I misremembered thinking it was SVS being called bloodthirsty.

I believed SVS was the one being overly aggressive and throwing a bad vote on Luna therefore she was being bloodthirsty.

All that basically happened here was that I misremembered who you called bloodthirsty and Said it was SVS instead of Luna which is my view. So basically I think SVS comes out looking worse for her vote then Luna does.

For DH who said I was waffling, that’s kinda true but it’s early in the game and I don’t have any solid reads so I’m throwing out what feels wrong from a gut perspective.

This doesn't answer things. Why do you think SVS was bloodthirsty? When did you develop this idea, and what caused you to express agreement with me?

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:22 am

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:05 am

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:01 am

timmer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:56 am Just reread it. You say you have a case but then the next sentences are all qualifiers and concerns about side angles which serve to weaken it. You spend more time on the side stuff that concern you about it than your actual suspicion. I don't know how else to explain your post to you, lol. I'm heading to bed, g'night. Hopefully you will see things clearly soon.

I said I have a suspicion, but that I also have reservations about the way Colin is being treated in the thread. If it’s messy, it’s because my thought process is unsettled. Because it’s Day 1. You’ve lamented yourself how difficult Day 1 often is. I wasn’t distracted from my suspicion on Colin. I was simply discussing it within the context of the game. I then laid out my case in another post shortly after, but you’re not looking at that because it’s not included in Epi’s (intentionally) bullshit case.

To what end do you think Epignosis has fabricated this case against you?

He does things like this often. I don't care to speculate on why I think he's doing this or what his motivations could be, but I've seen him employ fake reads as a civilian too many times to be upset by it. It's upsetting that you guys are listening to him though.

I can give evidence in support of my belief that he's full of bologna though. First, let's establish that Epignosis is not a frivolous mafia player. He is calculated and clever, and puts real, honest, sincere thought into the things that he does regardless of his alignment. Now let's look at the case that he made. It starts here:

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:18 am

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:14 am

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:10 am What mafia member says, "You know what? I'm going to plop a lazy third vote down on DDL early on in the day and draw attention to myself! That's a great idea!"

Lock civilian.

a careless one

this is not my primary concern about colin anyway.

You're the one who is bad.

Short, impulsive declaration of the read. Okay. Nothing too strong yet, but this isn't the most severe introduction to a case I've ever seen from him.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:23 am Sloonei is so bad.

This is where he starts to get a bit loosey goosey (read: not serious, frivolous). This type of post is more at home in Macdougall's ISO, not Epi's. He's just stirring a pot.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:23 am I am about to dismantle you in front of your peers. Are you ready?

Colorful and playful banter. Yeah, this is not serious business Epi.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:28 am

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 am I've added another town read to my list.

I have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin, but am I little anxious about the ease with which his case gained momentum. His post about bandwagonining DDL is patented shady-nasty business, but I don't know how to feel about the seemingly exaggerated scrutiny it's received. Then again, there's also the fact that we have two scum teams. It's entirely possible for scum to pile on an easy bandwagon that ends up being correct. I'd like for Colin to say things. I'll lay out my own gripes against them so he has more variety to respond to. I was voting for Colin before it was cool, after all.

You qualified your suspicion of Colin as "genuine." If you are a civilian, what else could it be? Why is the adjective necessary?

I know people will roll their eyes, but someone literally did this in the Mafia Universe game I was in, and I backed off on it, and the mafia won.

Fuck that. Fuck adverbs and adjectives and adjuncts.

The bottom line is that you started out with telling us your suspicion of Colin is genuine, but then you talked about how anxious you feel about other people agreeing that he's bad.

After that you have to talk about two bad teams. Who the fuck cares?

Voting Sloonei.

This is the case. This is a very narrow-minded case from Epignosis. Yes, he picks at linguistic oddities from time to time, but that's the only typical Epignosis characteristic in this post. I believe he knows exactly what I meant when I qualified my Colin read. I also don't believe he's suspicious of a person for expressing reservations about a Day 1 read. Epignosis, serious Epignosis, understands that Day 1 reads are fluid, unsettled, and changing. He might have a little bit of suspicion against me. He does not have "Sloonei is so bad, I'm going to dismantle him" level of suspicion. Certainly not 24 hours into a game.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:38 am

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:33 am

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:28 am

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 am I've added another town read to my list.

I have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin, but am I little anxious about the ease with which his case gained momentum. His post about bandwagonining DDL is patented shady-nasty business, but I don't know how to feel about the seemingly exaggerated scrutiny it's received. Then again, there's also the fact that we have two scum teams. It's entirely possible for scum to pile on an easy bandwagon that ends up being correct. I'd like for Colin to say things. I'll lay out my own gripes against them so he has more variety to respond to. I was voting for Colin before it was cool, after all.

You qualified your suspicion of Colin as "genuine." If you are a civilian, what else could it be? Why is the adjective necessary?

I know people will roll their eyes, but someone literally did this in the Mafia Universe game I was in, and I backed off on it, and the mafia won.

Fuck that. Fuck adverbs and adjectives and adjuncts.

The bottom line is that you started out with telling us your suspicion of Colin is genuine, but then you talked about how anxious you feel about other people agreeing that he's bad.

After that you have to talk about two bad teams. Who the fuck cares?

Voting Sloonei.

"Genuine" because the first play in the Day 1 Sloonei playbook is to throw crap at the wall and see what sticks. Case in point: My Tranq vote which I just talked about in my previous post. Or, you know, any other game I've ever played on the Syndicate. I clarified that my Colin suspicion is genuine to iterate that this is more than just pot-stirring. My vote is on him because I actually find things he's said to be suspicious, not solely because I want to make people respond to my vote being on him.

If your suspicion of Colin was true, none of the red shit I highlighted would logically follow. If you truly believe Colin is bad you wouldn't care if other people think so too (in fact, you should welcome it), you wouldn't care how many teams there are (who gives a shit?) and you wouldn't care if bad guys lynch other bad guys.

You are bad. This is obvious to me.

The bullshit alarms are sounding all over this post, but I don't care. This post presents my read as if all Day 1 reads should be black and white. "If you believe Colin is bad you wouldn't care if other people think so too, as if everything that is happening here is in its own little vacuum and my read should be concretely settled because I believe in it. He then reaffirms how "obvious" it is that I am bad as if any of this stuff holds weight, or as if he'd really be so sure this early in a game. This is not a sincere case from Epginosis.

Epi is my strongest town read in the game.

sig wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 4:53 pm Okay so as I said I was skimming, I recalled someone say something about the SVS and Luna exchange and called them bloodthirsty.

Turns out it was you calling Luna bloodthirsty and I misremembered thinking it was SVS being called bloodthirsty.

I believed SVS was the one being overly aggressive and throwing a bad vote on Luna therefore she was being bloodthirsty.

All that basically happened here was that I misremembered who you called bloodthirsty and Said it was SVS instead of Luna which is my view. So basically I think SVS comes out looking worse for her vote then Luna does.

For DH who said I was waffling, that’s kinda true but it’s early in the game and I don’t have any solid reads so I’m throwing out what feels wrong from a gut perspective.

Tranq wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:30 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 4:56 pm

sig wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 4:53 pm Okay so as I said I was skimming, I recalled someone say something about the SVS and Luna exchange and called them bloodthirsty.

Turns out it was you calling Luna bloodthirsty and I misremembered thinking it was SVS being called bloodthirsty.

I believed SVS was the one being overly aggressive and throwing a bad vote on Luna therefore she was being bloodthirsty.

All that basically happened here was that I misremembered who you called bloodthirsty and Said it was SVS instead of Luna which is my view. So basically I think SVS comes out looking worse for her vote then Luna does.

For DH who said I was waffling, that’s kinda true but it’s early in the game and I don’t have any solid reads so I’m throwing out what feels wrong from a gut perspective.

This doesn't answer things. Why do you think SVS was bloodthirsty? When did you develop this idea, and what caused you to express agreement with me?

SVS always plays a bit aggressive. Bloodthirsty isn't the word i'd use but it doesn't mean the exact opposite either. I can see why sig would assume that word was used to describe her playstyle.
Is this the point you have against sig? Walk me through it.

Also, if this isn't the first time SVS wakes up in the middle of the night bloodthirsty thinking about luna, we might have a bigger problem here

Enrique wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:07 pm [VOTE: Enrique] aubergine

MacDougall wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:10 pm Guys I just woke up after having the most vivid dream that Enrique was Mafia.

MacDougall wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:10 pm Why is the timing of that holy shit. Guys it's a god damned sign.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:19 pm I'm giving sincere consideration to trusting Mac's dream vision.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:41 pm I don't understand how I can be anybody's "strongest town read."

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:38 am together. one civ. they were one person all along

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:43 pm

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:38 am together. one civ. they were one person all along

That explains why I smell.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:42 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:41 pm I don't understand how I can be anybody's "strongest town read."

speedchuck wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:44 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:42 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:41 pm I don't understand how I can be anybody's "strongest town read."

It's okay. Scum never townread the people that suspect them.

speedchuck wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:58 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:09 pm

Turnip Head wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:07 pm idk how I feel about Sloondog suspecting Luna for essentially having the same suspicion as him but with less waffling. I think a baddie would at least be cognizant of how hypocritical that looks.

Hypocrisy is a staple of thr civilian playbook

But self-aware-ness is a staple of the mafia playbook.

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 4:36 am #StopSuspectingPeopleForThinkingInShadesOfGrey2k19

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:49 pm

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 4:36 am #StopSuspectingPeopleForThinkingInShadesOfGrey2k19

It sounds like you have a personal stake in this movement.

Spoiler: show

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 4:23 am

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:28 am

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 am I've added another town read to my list.

I have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin, but am I little anxious about the ease with which his case gained momentum. His post about bandwagonining DDL is patented shady-nasty business, but I don't know how to feel about the seemingly exaggerated scrutiny it's received. Then again, there's also the fact that we have two scum teams. It's entirely possible for scum to pile on an easy bandwagon that ends up being correct. I'd like for Colin to say things. I'll lay out my own gripes against them so he has more variety to respond to. I was voting for Colin before it was cool, after all.

You qualified your suspicion of Colin as "genuine." If you are a civilian, what else could it be? Why is the adjective necessary?

I know people will roll their eyes, but someone literally did this in the Mafia Universe game I was in, and I backed off on it, and the mafia won.

Fuck that. Fuck adverbs and adjectives and adjuncts.

The bottom line is that you started out with telling us your suspicion of Colin is genuine, but then you talked about how anxious you feel about other people agreeing that he's bad.

After that you have to talk about two bad teams. Who the fuck cares?

Voting Sloonei.

HOT SAAUUUUCE

Spoiler: show

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 4:38 am

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:22 am

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:05 am

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:01 am

timmer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:56 am Just reread it. You say you have a case but then the next sentences are all qualifiers and concerns about side angles which serve to weaken it. You spend more time on the side stuff that concern you about it than your actual suspicion. I don't know how else to explain your post to you, lol. I'm heading to bed, g'night. Hopefully you will see things clearly soon.

I said I have a suspicion, but that I also have reservations about the way Colin is being treated in the thread. If it’s messy, it’s because my thought process is unsettled. Because it’s Day 1. You’ve lamented yourself how difficult Day 1 often is. I wasn’t distracted from my suspicion on Colin. I was simply discussing it within the context of the game. I then laid out my case in another post shortly after, but you’re not looking at that because it’s not included in Epi’s (intentionally) bullshit case.

To what end do you think Epignosis has fabricated this case against you?

He does things like this often. I don't care to speculate on why I think he's doing this or what his motivations could be, but I've seen him employ fake reads as a civilian too many times to be upset by it. It's upsetting that you guys are listening to him though.

I can give evidence in support of my belief that he's full of bologna though. First, let's establish that Epignosis is not a frivolous mafia player. He is calculated and clever, and puts real, honest, sincere thought into the things that he does regardless of his alignment. Now let's look at the case that he made. It starts here:

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:18 am

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:14 am

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:10 am What mafia member says, "You know what? I'm going to plop a lazy third vote down on DDL early on in the day and draw attention to myself! That's a great idea!"

Lock civilian.

a careless one

this is not my primary concern about colin anyway.

You're the one who is bad.

Short, impulsive declaration of the read. Okay. Nothing too strong yet, but this isn't the most severe introduction to a case I've ever seen from him.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:23 am Sloonei is so bad.

This is where he starts to get a bit loosey goosey (read: not serious, frivolous). This type of post is more at home in Macdougall's ISO, not Epi's. He's just stirring a pot.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:23 am I am about to dismantle you in front of your peers. Are you ready?

Colorful and playful banter. Yeah, this is not serious business Epi.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:28 am

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 am I've added another town read to my list.

I have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin, but am I little anxious about the ease with which his case gained momentum. His post about bandwagonining DDL is patented shady-nasty business, but I don't know how to feel about the seemingly exaggerated scrutiny it's received. Then again, there's also the fact that we have two scum teams. It's entirely possible for scum to pile on an easy bandwagon that ends up being correct. I'd like for Colin to say things. I'll lay out my own gripes against them so he has more variety to respond to. I was voting for Colin before it was cool, after all.

You qualified your suspicion of Colin as "genuine." If you are a civilian, what else could it be? Why is the adjective necessary?

I know people will roll their eyes, but someone literally did this in the Mafia Universe game I was in, and I backed off on it, and the mafia won.

Fuck that. Fuck adverbs and adjectives and adjuncts.

The bottom line is that you started out with telling us your suspicion of Colin is genuine, but then you talked about how anxious you feel about other people agreeing that he's bad.

After that you have to talk about two bad teams. Who the fuck cares?

Voting Sloonei.

This is the case. This is a very narrow-minded case from Epignosis. Yes, he picks at linguistic oddities from time to time, but that's the only typical Epignosis characteristic in this post. I believe he knows exactly what I meant when I qualified my Colin read. I also don't believe he's suspicious of a person for expressing reservations about a Day 1 read. Epignosis, serious Epignosis, understands that Day 1 reads are fluid, unsettled, and changing. He might have a little bit of suspicion against me. He does not have "Sloonei is so bad, I'm going to dismantle him" level of suspicion. Certainly not 24 hours into a game.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:38 am

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:33 am

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:28 am

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 am I've added another town read to my list.

I have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin, but am I little anxious about the ease with which his case gained momentum. His post about bandwagonining DDL is patented shady-nasty business, but I don't know how to feel about the seemingly exaggerated scrutiny it's received. Then again, there's also the fact that we have two scum teams. It's entirely possible for scum to pile on an easy bandwagon that ends up being correct. I'd like for Colin to say things. I'll lay out my own gripes against them so he has more variety to respond to. I was voting for Colin before it was cool, after all.

You qualified your suspicion of Colin as "genuine." If you are a civilian, what else could it be? Why is the adjective necessary?

I know people will roll their eyes, but someone literally did this in the Mafia Universe game I was in, and I backed off on it, and the mafia won.

Fuck that. Fuck adverbs and adjectives and adjuncts.

The bottom line is that you started out with telling us your suspicion of Colin is genuine, but then you talked about how anxious you feel about other people agreeing that he's bad.

After that you have to talk about two bad teams. Who the fuck cares?

Voting Sloonei.

"Genuine" because the first play in the Day 1 Sloonei playbook is to throw crap at the wall and see what sticks. Case in point: My Tranq vote which I just talked about in my previous post. Or, you know, any other game I've ever played on the Syndicate. I clarified that my Colin suspicion is genuine to iterate that this is more than just pot-stirring. My vote is on him because I actually find things he's said to be suspicious, not solely because I want to make people respond to my vote being on him.

If your suspicion of Colin was true, none of the red shit I highlighted would logically follow. If you truly believe Colin is bad you wouldn't care if other people think so too (in fact, you should welcome it), you wouldn't care how many teams there are (who gives a shit?) and you wouldn't care if bad guys lynch other bad guys.

You are bad. This is obvious to me.

The bullshit alarms are sounding all over this post, but I don't care. This post presents my read as if all Day 1 reads should be black and white. "If you believe Colin is bad you wouldn't care if other people think so too, as if everything that is happening here is in its own little vacuum and my read should be concretely settled because I believe in it. He then reaffirms how "obvious" it is that I am bad as if any of this stuff holds weight, or as if he'd really be so sure this early in a game. This is not a sincere case from Epginosis.

Epi is my strongest town read in the game.

This post deserves a gold fucking medal

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:48 pm

speedchuck wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:58 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:09 pm

Turnip Head wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:07 pm idk how I feel about Sloondog suspecting Luna for essentially having the same suspicion as him but with less waffling. I think a baddie would at least be cognizant of how hypocritical that looks.

Hypocrisy is a staple of thr civilian playbook

But self-aware-ness is a staple of the mafia playbook.

I guess this is the other main comment I was referring to, and it also weirdly insinuates sloonei is bad in a removed sort of way.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:47 pm Also, some heads are fixing to roll around here.

Spoiler: show

The Panthers just lost to the Browns.

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:04 pm

Tranq wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:07 am

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:02 am

Tranq wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 4:55 am Yeah i'm not feeling this Sloonei case. He reads civ to me. Also voting the top poster on Day 1 isn't a great idea.

G-Man is someone i want to hear more from today. I want to see how he responds to DDL and INH (maybe others?) calling him out.

I don't like this post

Why not?

Input on sloonei feels kinda fake and the G bit sounds like a forced attempt to change the topic to something, anything with a weird specific-but-vague reference to the callers-out.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:40 pm I described Luna as bloodthirsty here for the way she pursued Colin. Sig then expresses unclear support of the notion here, and after clarifying it turns out his stance is actually opposite the one he thinks he's agreeing with, here. Timmer, juliets, and I have all asked for clarifications, but he hasn't really settled anything (for me, at least). I'm still unclear on what he sees in SVS that is being labeled as "bloodthirsty."

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:40 pmIn my reading of this in which sig is bad, I see him as wanting to agree with a case that already exists, but he misunderstood the details and was caught making a phony accusation. Instead of trying to reverse course, which would probably be the shadiest thing possible, he's doubled down on the SVS and continued to insist on her, but hasn't provided an elaboration on why his read is what it is. I'm not sure why he thinks SVS looks worse than Luna in their exchange. I'm not sure if anyone else has that view either.

There are also some smaller pings I laid out in this post.

I can see an angle in which sig is town, but he hasn't provided any answers that I like so far. I remain open to other names as well, but sig is the player who I feel the most inclined to pressure at the moment.

Turnip Head wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:00 pm DrWilgy dropping a vote and peacing out is nothing new

Tranq wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:08 pm

Turnip Head wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:00 pm DrWilgy dropping a vote and peacing out is nothing new

As civ,mafia,both?

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:15 pm If we’re all lukewarm at best on sig, how are we feeling about Colin? He’s been a suspect all day long, but other subjects have come up to block him from being the center of attention. Where do we all stand on him right now?

timmer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:19 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:15 pm If we’re all lukewarm at best on sig, how are we feeling about Colin? He’s been a suspect all day long, but other subjects have come up to block him from being the center of attention. Where do we all stand on him right now?

I thought you were heading off to write a paper?

I see Colin has having a goofy kind of Day 1, which isn't alignment-y to me.

Tranq wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:08 pm

Turnip Head wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:00 pm DrWilgy dropping a vote and peacing out is nothing new

As civ,mafia,both?

juliets wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:30 pm

Lunalee wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 6:41 pm Really feeling a Colin vote right now. Mostly for the way he hopped on DDL so early.

Luna, in this post you say "mostly" for the way he hopped on DDL so early. Are there other maybe more minor reasons you voted for him?

timmer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:30 pm @Tranq, are you still feeling that Sloonei reads as civ? How do you feel about the posts last night by both DH and Epig ?

nutella wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 3:41 pm

Tranq wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 1:26 pm

juliets wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 1:20 pm

Tranq wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 1:15 pm

LoRab wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 8:27 am Can I suggest that we change the vote word from aubergine to something that is not one of the role names? I mean, if the point is to be easily searched, then it seems to me it would make it easier if it were a word that isn't likely to come up. Also, lol to the hosts for putting that in there.

This aubergine thing sounds silly. Why is there a need to have a vote word?

Because since the poll itself no longer shows vote order some people may want to go back through the thread and track the vote order so the word aubergine was attached to in-thread votes (using the vote tags). That way you can search aubergine and bring up the votes and see the order.

Ok, i previewed a vote and see how it works now. I thought y'all were literally typing aubergine every time.
Still, looks like not everyone uses the vote tags so it doesn't really work imo. The whole thing looks ridiculous

Tbh I think it doesn't actually work lol. Since the word is part of the tag code it's not actually searchable text. So it's kinda pointless.

Tranq wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:50 pm

timmer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:30 pm @Tranq, are you still feeling that Sloonei reads as civ? How do you feel about the posts last night by both DH and Epig ?

Sloonei so far yeah. I don't have time to go back and reread everything but i have no reason to suspect Epig and i'm not gonna bother with DH just yet.

Who would you vote for if you had to right now?

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:05 pm ***But I am not caught up so I might change my mind again

Enrique wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:07 pm [VOTE: Enrique] aubergine

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 11:34 am

S~V~S wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 11:18 am

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 11:08 am

colonialbob wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 9:33 am Jackofhearts2005-bydoobydoo, where are you? We have much to discuss

It's my daughter's fourth birthday today so I'm not going to be super active for the rest of the phase.

Would love to be atmentioned with cases and questions though.

When we had played in the past, I recall you as having a certain slightly mean edge to you when you were bad. I reread you (you have not said much) and am not seeing it at all here. You could have changed, I guess, but I think it looks like you are taking joke votes.

I’m sometimes a little mean to get what I want, usually when I’m town and utterly convinced I’m right or when I’m scum. You’re not going to see that D1 regardless and when I’m scum, you’ll see it more in late game.

Mac’s not joking. He’s doing that thing where he goes after someone hard early on but doesn’t put forth a convincing case. He often does this to actual mafia members and tends to not actually get a lynch. I’m not sure if the later thing is intentional. Not sure why Nutella is voting me but whatever.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:19 pm I'm giving sincere consideration to trusting Mac's dream vision.

timmer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:42 pm tHEN WHY SAY MOSTLY?

timmer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:54 pm

Tranq wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:50 pm

timmer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:30 pm Tranq, are you still feeling that Sloonei reads as civ? How do you feel about the posts last night by both DH and Epig ?

Sloonei so far yeah. I don't have time to go back and reread everything but i have no reason to suspect Epig and i'm not gonna bother with DH just yet.

Who would you vote for if you had to right now?

I think Sloonei. This morning's posts backed me off a bit, but the last few hours have felt a bit like Sloonei NEEDS to feel like the thread is heading towards a different lynch, and we've gone sig-colin-luna in a real hurry.