The Syndicate

We haven't heard from MP today and he has posted in other threads maybe he was silenced.

Yeah, there's no way MP could keep his mouth shut for this long on his own.

I watched the Bernard video. So we have to not trust anyone, watch out for quiet ones, and watch out for talkative ones.

@Long Con

Remember Bernard is just one civ who should have no more information than we do at that point. That's just his opinion.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:We haven't heard from MP today and he has posted in other threads maybe he was silenced.

This could mean something. We have two silencers, a civ and a mafioso. Would a civ want to make MP shut up? Or would a mafioso benefit more from that?

I think it could be either one. Someone might have targeted him just to mess with him.

If it's the Mafia silencer, it could always be the tried-and-true "silence your teammate" schtick.

So, I will have to go to work in a short time, and won't be back until after the lynch is up. Here's my Rainbow list for today's lynch: Golden, Russtifinko, Metalmarsh, Long Con. Sorry, Golden, but the limited options... you're my only suspicion of the four candidates.

*vote Golden*

Can't see myself voting for anyone else, either. None of the other three players have anything big against them in my view, and Golden has his baddie-looking post history.

Sorry Golden, it might be that you were just unlucky, or that a real baddie wouldn't slip that hard, but I can't ignore an occam's razor when it lies in front of me.

votes Golden

Hey hey, back from the campground. Still catching up but I'm on Page 12, where the vote deadline looms eminent. Very interesting to read through. Here are some thoughts and observations:

DharmaHelper wrote:In my re-reading, I am also pinged by the big deal being made out of G-Man's lie detector statements. Especially considering he said "I am not a mafia" which is an equally lie detectable statement as "I am a civvie".

Of the people making a fuss about it LoRab strikes me as most suspect, I may put my vote there.

I too am curious about why my statements became such a big deal. LoRab had to reach back a long time in history to pull out the LD point from back in my early LP days. I mean way back. Same goes for MP (i think) for going way way back to the stone age of STV too. I choose my words carefully every time. Curious how they chose to think back past an awful lot of my playing history to find a possible reason that they could use to implicate me as a baddie.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Scotty wrote:I'm still combing through 5 more pages to respond to, and I will, but for now, I'm voting Ehlo. Someone asked if DDL seemed "comfortable" and I don't really know what that means in respect to DDL because no one was really suspecting him. But ehlo's recent response seems comfortable and jokey, and it's standing out to me right now.

I also do not find anything Sloonei doing in this game different than the last game. Granted, I don't know if he was civ in that game, but it also doesn't ping me.

Can you explain why you think this makes her mafia?

Can you answer my question, when you get a chance, about whether Metalmarsh's behavior being unhelpful makes him mafia or not? You've made quite a few comments saying that regarding him, but made no issuance of whether you suspected him or not, or anything like that.

Your questions to Scotty are lose-lose questions. Perhaps he simply finds MM's unhelpful behavior frustrating. You seem to be asking him to make a judgement call on MM based off of one aspect of his play. That's an unfair question. You can be frustrated with someone's behavior while still feeling neutral about them. I'm going to keep an eye out for other poor questions from MP.

thellama73 wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I don't buy that Ninja Blooper is mafia. I am roughly 50-50 on Sloonei and G-Man, but I think I will go Sloonei today. He seems way too defensive to me.

Can you elaborate? Why?

The burden of proof is on the person trying to convince me that she is mafia. I don't have to have a reason not to believe.

How philosophical.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I'm going to go ahead and vote Scotty. His buddying up to MP pinged me at first. MP pointed out that Scotty has been part of the discussion with out throwing out any of his own suspects. He also made a big deal about me voting late in B.O.B and he has yet to vote so I found that odd.

What do you think of his Elo vote, now that he has voted?

I really don't understand why he would vote that way when he said he was looking at people who weren't posting. Elo has posted more the LC so why not vote LC.

I agree. I think you're onto something, Bass.

I think Scotty's Elo vote seems disingenuous. I actually am leaning toward casting my vote there.

His vote is super weak reasoning to me, like he had to come up with SOME reason to justify a vote:

Scotty wrote:I'm still combing through 5 more pages to respond to, and I will, but for now, I'm voting Ehlo. Someone asked if DDL seemed "comfortable" and I don't really know what that means in respect to DDL because no one was really suspecting him. But ehlo's recent response seems comfortable and jokey, and it's standing out to me right now.

I also do not find anything Sloonei doing in this game different than the last game. Granted, I don't know if he was civ in that game, but it also doesn't ping me.

Hence why I asked him to elaborate here.

He doesn't even say why "comfortable and jokey" from Elo makes her likely to be a member of the mafia. He says it's "standing out", but again, how does that mean he is casting his vote for someone that he thinks is bad?

Even further, he makes no mention of Elo being a low poster as the reason for his vote, which I find odd, since he called her out for being a low poster, and here he emphasizes he is focusing on no shows.

Combine that with the fact that he kept harping on MM being "unhelpful", which is something I've done in past games as a mafia to try to take advantage of his unconventional playstyle, yet refusing to issue an issue of suspicion on him, and I'm really starting to suspect Scotty.

I'm starting to worry about you, MP. This sudden "a-ha" moment on Scotty feels forced and flimsy. I feel like I understood what Scotty was trying to say about Elo's demeanor. Either you're overthinking things far too much or you're trying to manufacture a case against Scotty.

Golden wrote:Completely frantic at work.

Haven't caught up on thread since I last posted. Haven't even looked at poll situation. Voted Ninja. Will we back in about two hours.

Interesting that he makes a point to specify that he hasn't even looked at the poll. Almost like it is a built-in excuse for later when people come after him for tying up the poll between Sloonei and Niju. But it's curious- why point that fact out? Have people pointed that sort of thing out before when they vote in a rush or do they say later "oh, gosh, I didn't even know I was tying the poll up when I voted!". Golden strikes me as smart enough to know that playing dumb about tying up a poll after a lynch doesn't make you look any better. This feels calculated to me.

I see I already have four votes.

I suggest to all of the town that they reconsider a vote for me very strongly. If I die, you will be losing one of the most important roles you have.

The case on me is terrible anyway, everyone virtually admits that I wouldn't have been so obvious about being a teammate of sloonei. So why are you all voting for me? It's because once again I'm the easy vote.

But I will reinforce this. If you are town and want to win, I am the stupid vote.

At this stage, there is literally no point me defending any further, so I'll make my legacy post now, but I'll still be back later in case I can use my vote self-defensively.

1) I think it's worth people sharing whether Dr Manhattan's lab got anyone else info other than MM. Is espers lying? Is MM lying?
2) The approach DDL has taken in going after me very much makes me think of my Guess Who teammate, and not econ civ DDL. Even his last post where he talks about me 'slipping'. What would be the slip I made, exactly? The Occam's Razor comment - you really think Occam's Razor is that a teammate would be so blatantly defensive? Nothing in anyone's mafia history that is playing would suggest that is the most likely explanation here.
3) I feel pretty good about Elo, MP, MM, LC.
4) Cookie, you are doing just fine I' glad you are playing.
5) Don't forget about LoRab, everyone. Don't forget Timmer's play as Deborah either. Oh, and remember to read every post he rights as though he was Sadness from Inside Out. It makes them more epic.

FFS G-Man it does not feel calculated to you nor should it to you or anyone else.

When everyone knows that I DO NOT LIE ABOUT THINGS LIKE THAT

To lie about and calculate things like that is honestly stupid. Anyone who does it should be lined up against the mafia wall of shame and shot because it is not an effective tactic as mafia, it would be the stupidest thing you could do as mafia.

If I was mafia and knew I was tying up a vote, I would own it. It's the only way you can spin it to look good later.

But of course, as I think everyone knows - I wouldn't have tied it up anyway. Nothing in econ or guess who would lead anyone to believe that would be true.

Which is why you should be treating the bandwagon landslide that is against me hours before the poll should be looked on as being shady as all heck.

Don't forget these names...

Timmer, Long Con, Cookie, DDL

They are the people who voted before I even came back to the thread.

But LC is the one I blame the least. You could call his vote self-defensive in the circumstances.

Page 13:

Russtifinko wrote:

Scotty wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote:WHAT HAVE YOU ALL DONE WHY ARE THERE ALREADY 7 PAGES

I'm going to bed. I'll catch up with this tomorrow

You know, I've been in bed now for 2 hours. One of the biggest mistakes I ever made was bringing my laptop with me. Good on you, ninja

I sympathize with Ninja.

The G-Man alignment discussion started out feeling to me like a really solid case, but as I thought about it more it got so WIFOM-y that I really can't make head nor tail of it now. I will say, though, for what it's worth, that every single non-civ role in this game seems pretty darn anti-civ, especially now that we know for sure Watchmen are civs. So saying you're not anti-civ = saying you're civ, in my mind. I don't think that would fool a lie detector test, but I also can't figure why he'd bother wording it so carefully. (By the way, as MM pointed out, the LD discussion seemed super superfluous. Who even brought that up?) I could potentially see myself voting there, but I can't say I'm fully convinced he's bad.

I believe it was LoRab who brought up the LD issue, culling from the annals of LP history. Bass kind of agreed with her and MP concurred with LoRab, culling from the annals of STV history.

Russtifinko wrote:Went G-Man. Mainly because what I said about always being suspicious of Elo. I think I should give her a breather.

Seriously? Even after you just went to length at explaining how the case against me gradually eroded in your mind and the whole LD issue seems nonsensical? Wow.

Russtifinko wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Elo, thanks!

How about: Where are you leaning for your vote today? Has it changed at all?

Linki with Ninja

If no one was finding me suspicious, I would most likely vote for G-man or sloonei (I know I said I would table my thoughts on sloonei). But, I am still back and forth on sloonei. He now finds me suspicious b/c I reread him and decided that I couldn't find any hard evidence against him? What?!? I wish G-Man would come in and talk.

But it looks like I may be trying to save myself :/

Why did you read him as "scummy" the first time, then? Moreover, why did you give in to a "vibe" rather than rereading him, if it would have left to the same lack of hard evidence, in theory?

I didn't give into a vibe, I just mentioned it. He challenged me to reread him and I found nothing astoundingly scummy. That was all. But his response to my response IS scummy to me.

MP your case on scotty makes a lot of sense.

There's a case on Scotty? I think I missed it. Anyone with a reminder or link to the case?

MP, your policy of underlining names to direct things to people is super helpful, btw.

I found the "case" on Scotty to be weak (at least MP's justification for voting Scotty). I'll have to go back and look for any potential buddying up to MP though.

Ricochet wrote:This is impossible to fully address. How 'bout we start endgame two hours earlier next time? Sticking with Eloh for now.

I certainly hope you took the time to elaborate after the poll closed. I will be looking for that or else I will ask you to elaborate when I am finished re-reading.





MP criticized a few people who voted Sloonei because something felt off about him and they could not put it into words to MP's liking. Two of those people have experience playing with Sloonei in the past I believe (Dragon and espers), so I find MP's criticism to be weak. We put forth reasons for why he did not suspect Sloonei without it feeling like a defense- I would think an experienced player like MP would know how to do that effectively. As of right now, I suspect MP of being Sloonei's teammate. He ran with early suspicion but indirectly defended Sloonei with posts explaining why his suspicion of Sloonei broke down. He went into detail and going into detail is a sneaky way to be persuasive without being obvious about it. I'm watching you, bro.




I feel like this post by Scotty is pretty solid.





And Slooeni was a baddie! You know what that means....



BIH Sloonei!

PS- If you play or follow the Frisky Dingo game, you'll get to see me back in action with wacky themes. This one is going to be just as memorable as Econ!

Oh, I forgot G-Man hadn't caught up yet. OK, I take my comment about G-Man back.

Ok, I have not been very active in this game at all and I am truly very sorry for that, guys. Like, I've been reading the thread and somewhat keeping up with it (I usually have 4 or 5 pages to catch up on). As I go to respond to someone's posts with theories or questions, someone else has already addressed the same thing. Should I post it anyway? I usually have things typed up and ready to post, and I continue reading and someone has posted the same thing. Yesterday I posted I was catching up but I didn't even post anything because all had been addressed by the time I had finished reading.

I originally did not find Golden to be suspicious and I still do not find him the most suspicious out of all players (not listed in the poll), however, his vote to tie the vote for Sloonei and (I don't remember who... Niju?) makes me think that his attempt was to prevent Sloonei from getting voted out. It's very weak, I know. Someone later said that Golden is a more experienced player and would not do something so inept. So I just don't know who else to vote as there is not enough information against anyone else, in my opinion.

Cookie, I often post my thoughts as I catch up. If someone else has already discussed it, oh well. But I'll have forgotten them by the time I've caught up, so it's better just to do it as I read it. No-one will mind. It's up to you, really, how you want to go about it.

G-Man, sorry if I sound condescendent, but what exactly do you intend to achieve with those long post-by-post analysis of stuff that happened 48 hours ago?

Wouldn't it be better to just read everything and then move to the current discussion? There is stuff that is going on and you're ignoring it by talking about stuff from 6 pages ago.

I'm saying this because the last player I saw doing this was coolkid in the champions game, that one that Turnip played. The guy was mafia. And he was always catching up, and making huge walls of text about stuff nobody cared about anymore.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Scotty wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Nice picture, Llama!

Scotty, my bad, didn't realize you were unfamiliar with the terminology. OMGUS and NO U are essentially the same. OMGUS stands for "Oh My God You Suck", which was popularized in the greater mafia community, whereas NO U tended to be what was always used in my mafia history. It refers to when you respond to a case against you by turning around and suspecting the player that accused you, and is generally seen to be a desperate or suspicious tactic, particularly if the content of the rebuttal is suspect.

Ah, gotcha. Thanks for clarifying.

I'm turning on you in the past few minutes because of the manner of which you voted me. I'm not suspecting/OMGUS/NO U for Bass, because he's been actively attempting to come after me, which I think is a notable civ move. It's the wrong civ move, because I think his argument centered around "buddying" around you is rather weak (though it is Day 1. Everything's gonna be bloody weak). You've been waffling on GMan all day, and I guess were willing to latch onto whoever seemed the most tunneled. THAT seems like mafia behavior, tbh.

Ah, have to respond to this first, then I'm gone.

You know what seems like mafia behavior?

Spending all of Day 1 waiting. Waiting to see if anyone would no show. Not issuing a single affirmative opinion about any other player, despite posting considerably. Then voting for Elo, over an even lower poster, because of a "jokey" post and apparently because she ironically is one of the lower posters in the thread despite wanting to vote out low posters. Never explaining how that makes her mafia. Never explaining your thought process with transparency. Never answering my questions. Never explaining if you think Metalmarsh's behavior as "unhelpful" makes him either civilian or mafia. You still refuse to do that. Then you turn on me at the last minute merely because I caught onto your incredibly weak vote and explained all of this as to why I suspect you?

I didn't "latch" onto anything. If you think you were the most tunneled player on Day 1, you are severely mistaken.

I definitely think you're bad.

You know what else seems like mafia behavior? Turning your verbosity into a bully pulpit to demand responses from people who have lives and then using a lack of response to multiple questions as evidence to justify a vote. Not answering a question isn't always indicative of alignment. You should know better. I feel like I understood where Scotty was coming from but you required every detail to be spelled out for you in no uncertain terms. And if it isn't, well then that just shows how "bad" he is, right? Just because you like to write a book every six or seven posts doesn't mean you can expect the same out of everyone else. You set the bar so high when grilling someone that it is impossible for you to be satisfied. I feel like that is normal for you but this time it feels different and I'm going to keep calling you out on it every time I see it occur.

Until I find evidence to the contrary, I definitely think you're bad.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Good job everyone. I knew something was off with him.

Says the guy who voted for someone else for vaguely crap reasons.

DharmaHelper wrote:Day 1's are a crapshoot.

Indeed. There was a lot of crap shot into the thread Day 1.





The forum won't let me quote this because it quotes too many quotes.
Now I really need to go back and look at MM- I still have him listed as no concrete reason for voting Niju. I must have missed it leading up to the other votes.

Golden wrote:I'm working my way through now.

If I'd been able to catch up with the thread before voting, I would not have voted Ninja. Her subsequent posts were pretty good looking.

I probably still would not have voted Sloonei, although the stuff started by llama about how sloonei reacted to the case on him, and where even llama admitted the original case was silly, really did go back to my Aces in RR thing, and I appreciate llama successfully catching a baddie in that way.

With that said, at the point I'm up to now I think that my vote may have gone to timmer, the point of his approach to the game when deborah is something that rang true to me (I had forgotten timmer was deb).

A very good point from Golden the Coward . I too will have to check back on Timmer when I have time.

Long Con wrote:Well, crap, 24 hour days, eh? Sorry I missed the first lynch. I don't even know who got lynched yet, or if they were bad. So RIP someone!

I haven't engaged fully yet because today was the Stouffville Food Truck Frenzy, which Black Rock (my wife) and I attended with The Sandwich Shack. Last night was spent scrubbing several fifty pound bags of potatoes clean for our fresh cut fries. Went to sleep at 3:30am, and then got up at around 9 to take our kids to my mom's. I came back, and spent my day preparing for tonight. No time for sitting at the computer, or even doing any phone posting. I'll do some catching up now, see how the lynch went, and try to get some opinions formed.

Tomorrow is a little bit busy, in that I work from 11 to 4, and then I'm taking the opportunity to go to a comic book store and play some Magic: The Gathering - I usually work Friday evening and am unable to go to this Friday night event... so I'm going for it tomorrow. Tomorrow night will be Night 1's end, and Day 2 will begin. On Saturday, I will be sure to devote some time to this game and I'll give some opinions for everyone to judge, etc.

I did see MP's question to me about whether or not I was serious about not voting G-Man because of "fewest". Yes, I was pretty serious about that. I liked it, I want to be a grammar/spelling enforcer a lot of the time, but I hold back because people just don't like it when they get corrected. That doesn't stop me from enjoying a solid correction, especially when it was supported by that delicious Stannis Game of Thrones clip that I had forgotten about. The enjoyment I got from it was worth Day 1 immunity for G-Man in my books. Obviously, I ended up voting for no one, so it didn't matter much, but yes, it was a true statement.

For this post, I will not be voting for Long Con today.

Long Con wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I agree with lorab.

What parts do you agree with and why? Does this mean you are suspicious of G-man? Who else do you suspect?

I agree that he seemed to be trying to get around the LD with the way he worded it.
I think he has played enough to know that a lot of games people just come out say "I'm civ" and it's not consider info dumping or role claiming. I think there are two watchmen who we know can turn on the civves or need a civvie dead to win if I'm reading the roles right.

LoRab wrote:

Sloonei wrote:If you think G-man phrased his post oddly because of he was wary of the lie detector, does hos exact wording mean anything to you? He does not "pose a threat to the civvies." Does that strike you as the sort of thing scum would say to avoid being caught by a lie detector.
His rationale about not claiming civ due to role claim restrictions does seem a bit odd, i'll give you that.
And I'll also ask for more suspects again. Who besides G-man are you looking at, LoRab?

"Does not pose a threat to the civies" does seem like the sort of thing a baddie would say, yes. Especially if they don't have a power that doesn't have a direct, negative impact on others.

I guess I should look at the roles again... but if all the baddies have "gotta kill the Civs" as part of their win condition, then every baddie who utters the line "I do not pose a threat to the Civs" would be 100% Detectable in their Lie.

I think Bass and Lorab (opinion stands as I read, maybe more will step up) are a bit suspicious for saying they think G-Man was trying to dance around the Lie Detector. His statement, in my opinion, is totally kosher as an easy Lie Detect option. If he's a baddie, then a Lie Detect will catch him for that statement, plain and simple.

This post may very well get you immunity from my vote on Day 3 too!

Cookie wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Cookie wrote:

thellama73 wrote:Golden and espers don't look so hot after this lynch. Golden's is perhaps a little too on the nose, though.

I'm not sure what you mean?

I did not find Sloonei suspicious at all and I have no idea how someone picked up on his smiley's and adverbs and announced that was suspicious. I have also never played with him and don't really know how he acts. I don't know how many others have experience with him either. Well done! If I had been around for the voting, I'd have voted Elo, though.

Also, I had no idea I had to watch a video and I could see that Sloonei died but didn't know where it was posted LOL!

Golden's vote looks bad because he voted to tie Ninja Blooper with Sloonei. Could have been a baddie save attempt, but it would be a really transparent one, and I would expect better of Golden. Espers looks bad because the last minute final vote on Sloonei could have been a baddie underbussing a teammate.

Ah, thank you for clarifying and I agree with you.

I'm inclined to disagree with this- if espers has played with Sloonei in the past, then it makes sense that he would pick up on something being off with Sloonei. It's possible for his vote to be bussing but knowing someone's meta goes a long way. The only reason Golden's vote pings me is because he specifically stated that he hadn't even bothered to look at where the poll was at before he voted. To intentionally make that known feels like a preemptive defense.

Golden wrote:Don't forget these names...

Timmer, Long Con, Cookie, DDL

They are the people who voted before I even came back to the thread.

Oh ffs Golden, you are better than this.

We already argued in the morning, I explained why I thought you are mafia and you didn't manage to convince me. What else should I expect from you? I don't like to vote late, and I made up my mind about this vote early, so there was no point in waiting.

You jumped on the ninjuu wagon, the same sloonei was trying to push, and you defended Sloonei. You did both things multiple times. You are in the wrong side of that lynch. In a normal situation I might try to compare you with other players, but the other players are only 3, and none of them have any big evidence compared to what you have. I'm not going to bad tonight knowing I let a possible mafioso live because I didn't believe he would be that obvious.

Catching up via phone now, but will post more substantially later. BoB has reignited my wariness of easy bandwagons, and I'm not liking how this poll is looking so far.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:G-Man, sorry if I sound condescendent, but what exactly do you intend to achieve with those long post-by-post analysis of stuff that happened 48 hours ago?

Wouldn't it be better to just read everything and then move to the current discussion? There is stuff that is going on and you're ignoring it by talking about stuff from 6 pages ago.

I'm saying this because the last player I saw doing this was coolkid in the champions game, that one that Turnip played. The guy was mafia. And he was always catching up, and making huge walls of text about stuff nobody cared about anymore.

Sorry if it bugs you, Dragon. I'm still bitter about losing that huge response post the other day. The stubborn blockhead in me is determined to accomplish what I set out to do. I'm up to page 15 now, so maybe I can just make one more gigantic post for the remaining pages. Ordinarily, I'd find it odd for a player to request I skip over commenting on game content but I understand your mindset. Plus, I want to get my thoughts out there because everyone's input matters. I may catch something that was overlooked by others and I want to recognize others who caught good stuff or try to make a point out of a load of crap. This is just my way of dealing with that lost post I guess.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Oh ffs Golden, you are better than this.

No, I really think people should lynch you tomorrow.

That's what legacy posts are for, dude. Worried about it because you already know I'm not flipping mafia?

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I'm not going to bad tonight knowing I let a possible mafioso live because I didn't believe he would be that obvious.

Stuff like this DDL.

Everyone is a 'possible mafioso'.

Page 15: In the homestretch...

Long Con wrote:

Golden wrote:Well, I read Sloonei's responses to you differently than you did. I'm not sure which of us is wrong. I thought he was saying it was you he found suspicious in BoB, but he hasn't been able to determine whether or not it is relevant because Epi 2.0 is still alive and we don't know his role.

At this point, I'd say I'm highly likely to vote for Ninja today. The only other real issue I have is with G-Man, and I think I've talked myself out of that. I need to revisit the LoRab stuff about lie detectors more closely before I pursue that.

Golden pings me here, equivocating on Sloonei, and then pushing three other suspects. G-Man could be a Sloonei teammate based on this post.

Bwa-huh? How so? (This may eliminate that proposed Day 3 immunity)





I owe MP an apology- he did not bring up the STV-era LD stuff. Golden did. Sorry MP. I still am not a fan of you this game but I must admit that I wrongly accused you of culling up the STV-era LD stuff. It does make me wonder a tad more about Golden though. He brought it up but then backed off of it when others continued on with the subject.

Elohcin wrote:

G-Man wrote:

Elohcin wrote:G-Man, what is your favorite color?

Is there a particular reason why you're asking? If so, please tell me why.

So untrusting.

G-Man wrote:
3) I don't have a theme for this game and that fact disappoints me. I couldn't find a decent avatar, I couldn't come up with a fun theme to pull (though I thought about trying the alphabet thing again), and I'm fumbling all over the place by trying to be more like STV G-Man. He was as friendly as a balrog at times and I'm finding that I just don't have what it takes to drink from that well again.

How about this?





P.S. Be careful searching for images of the letter G when kids are around. Oh yes, you get the pictures of things like 'G is for girl' and 'G is for garbage' with an Oscar the grouch from Sesame Street on it. But, G is also for G-sting. I saw a lot of butts during my search and even a penis too

Sorry, Elo. Having another man's wife ask me about my preferences is something that I'm not accustomed to. I see now that it was innocent in nature. And yes, image searching the letter G is more hazardous that one might suspect.

G-Man wrote:I owe MP an apology- he did not bring up the STV-era LD stuff. Golden did. Sorry MP. I still am not a fan of you this game but I must admit that I wrongly accused you of culling up the STV-era LD stuff. It does make me wonder a tad more about Golden though. He brought it up but then backed off of it when others continued on with the subject.

This is incorrect. LoRab brought it up. All I did was suspect LoRab for it, and defend you from accusations of writing your post around it.

Golden wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Oh ffs Golden, you are better than this.

No, I really think people should lynch you tomorrow.

That's what legacy posts are for, dude. Worried about it because you already know I'm not flipping mafia?

What is even the point of this question?

Of course I'm worried, I can't know for sure if you are mafia, and like anyone else I should avoid being lynched.

Golden wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I'm not going to bad tonight knowing I let a possible mafioso live because I didn't believe he would be that obvious.

Stuff like this DDL.

Everyone is a 'possible mafioso'.

Wordplay. I explained why I suspect you at least twice already. You are more suspicious to me than "everyone".

G-Man wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:G-Man, sorry if I sound condescendent, but what exactly do you intend to achieve with those long post-by-post analysis of stuff that happened 48 hours ago?

Wouldn't it be better to just read everything and then move to the current discussion? There is stuff that is going on and you're ignoring it by talking about stuff from 6 pages ago.

I'm saying this because the last player I saw doing this was coolkid in the champions game, that one that Turnip played. The guy was mafia. And he was always catching up, and making huge walls of text about stuff nobody cared about anymore.

Sorry if it bugs you, Dragon. I'm still bitter about losing that huge response post the other day. The stubborn blockhead in me is determined to accomplish what I set out to do. I'm up to page 15 now, so maybe I can just make one more gigantic post for the remaining pages. Ordinarily, I'd find it odd for a player to request I skip over commenting on game content but I understand your mindset. Plus, I want to get my thoughts out there because everyone's input matters. I may catch something that was overlooked by others and I want to recognize others who caught good stuff or try to make a point out of a load of crap. This is just my way of dealing with that lost post I guess.

No problem. I'm not criticizing you for doing it, every player has their style.

I'd just like to see your opinion about that is happening in the current lynch, preferably before it's over.

Page 16- stopping my posts here. I'm going to read through Day 2 and vote. Looks like Day 2 was on the quiet side. That can't bode well for us. Expect one big response post tomorrow along with some vote analysis.

Golden wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I said before I thought the ninja bandwagon was forced, and I still do.

What bandwagon?

There were literally three people who voted that way - one was our known baddie.

One of the biggest pings I had yesterday was when MP called ninja the easy vote. What????? People like Ninja are NEVER the easy vote. People like me are the easy vote. People like sloonei, like llama, like epi... people like ninja do not get lynched on day one very often at all, and its certainly not an easy vote.

I have to agree with Golden here. Two consecutive votes doesn't make much of a wagon when the thid vote comes way later. If anything, it's as if Sloonei and MM tried to get momentum on Niju early but failed. I'm still up in the air on MM though, so don't take that the wrong way.





Fear not, MP. I will analyze Day 1 and Day 2 votes together. It will be glorious.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

Golden wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Oh ffs Golden, you are better than this.

No, I really think people should lynch you tomorrow.

That's what legacy posts are for, dude. Worried about it because you already know I'm not flipping mafia?

What is even the point of this question?

Of course I'm worried, I can't know for sure if you are mafia, and like anyone else I should avoid being lynched.

Golden wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I'm not going to bad tonight knowing I let a possible mafioso live because I didn't believe he would be that obvious.

Stuff like this DDL.

Everyone is a 'possible mafioso'.

Wordplay. I explained why I suspect you at least twice already. You are more suspicious to me than "everyone".

DDL, I don't believe a word you are saying.

If I am lynched today, I suggest everyone takes a long hard look at you tomorrow.

You are primarily worried about me painting you as bad. If you think I am bad, why are you worried? You seem to be overreacting to my suspicion, convinced that you need to defend yourself against the guy who appears to be going down and who you are convinced enough is bad to have been the one person today absolutely sure that your vote could go no other way and that it was worth voting for me so early even though you'd be around.

Honestly, I think your posts today betray that you feel the need to make a pre-emptive defence against my flip, your posts read to me like you already know I'm not bad.

@Golden

This isn't black and white. I may think you are my biggest suspect, and that you are the best one among the four I have to pick from, but I'd be foolish to be 100% sure if you are mafia. And if you're gonna accuse me, I have to defend myself. If I'm right and you're mafia, then no problem, I'm safe. But if I'm wrong, I'd better start defusing the bomb you're trying to plant on me.

And the reason I voted earlier is that I always do that. I hate voting late, because I know I'll look bad because of it regardless of whether I lynch civ or bad. I'd rather vote earlier and risk my neck, and show I put my vote where my mouth is.

Taking the easy way out and voting for Russ. His vote for me Day 1 was crap and I don't want to be on Rorschach's hit list if we lynch a civ today.

Golden's recent posts are not very becoming of him and yet it also doesn't quite feel like baddie Golden. After getting schooled by him in Econ and Guess Who, this kind of stumble-fumble collapse doesn't feel right. Could just be an off game.

No real suspicion of Log Con yet and I am still a neutral read on MM.

G-Man wrote:Taking the easy way out and voting for Russ. His vote for me Day 1 was crap and I don't want to be on Rorschach's hit list if we lynch a civ today.

Golden's recent posts are not very becoming of him and yet it also doesn't quite feel like baddie Golden. After getting schooled by him in Econ and Guess Who, this kind of stumble-fumble collapse doesn't feel right. Could just be an off game.

No real suspicion of Log Con yet and I am still a neutral read on MM.

Why is it an off game? I don't think there has been any stumble or fumble or collapse in my game.

Unless people want to hold me to a higher standard - the kind of standard in which being busy at work isn't actually allowed, and I have to be fully up to speed with the thread at all times. Which is, frankly, unreasonable.

The idea that I wouldn't be honest about exactly how my vote comes about is daft, because I hold a very public view that lying about stuff you don't need to lie about is the height of stupidity as a mafia, and that I always do my best to do exactly what I would do as a civilian. I don't do elaborate set ups like what I've been accused of. It reminds me of when I played in RYM86, which I'm not sure anyone else is around who was playing in that one, but I basically got lynched for being honest about stuff around the vote too.

I'm glad there is someone who voted russti. He would be my preference for a self-defence vote. He is the only person on there I have any slight suspicion of at all.

I voted for LC. This game really started at an awkward time for me and the 24 hour Days isn't helping me get my footing. I am trying though and I should have some things to say in the near future.

I'm going to go ahead and vote my good friend MM. Out I'm really not comfortable vote any of them, In Econ he was quick to throw his teammates under the bus so I don't think he would have defended Slooni if they were on a team. Nothing Russ or LC have said made me think they are bad.

Golden wrote:

G-Man wrote:Taking the easy way out and voting for Russ. His vote for me Day 1 was crap and I don't want to be on Rorschach's hit list if we lynch a civ today.

Golden's recent posts are not very becoming of him and yet it also doesn't quite feel like baddie Golden. After getting schooled by him in Econ and Guess Who, this kind of stumble-fumble collapse doesn't feel right. Could just be an off game.

No real suspicion of Log Con yet and I am still a neutral read on MM.

Why is it an off game? I don't think there has been any stumble or fumble or collapse in my game.

Unless people want to hold me to a higher standard - the kind of standard in which being busy at work isn't actually allowed, and I have to be fully up to speed with the thread at all times. Which is, frankly, unreasonable.

The idea that I wouldn't be honest about exactly how my vote comes about is daft, because I hold a very public view that lying about stuff you don't need to lie about is the height of stupidity as a mafia, and that I always do my best to do exactly what I would do as a civilian. I don't do elaborate set ups like what I've been accused of. It reminds me of when I played in RYM86, which I'm not sure anyone else is around who was playing in that one, but I basically got lynched for being honest about stuff around the vote too.

I'm glad there is someone who voted russti. He would be my preference for a self-defence vote. He is the only person on there I have any slight suspicion of at all.

What I mean is that in those other two games I had no idea you were bad until the end. The fact that I think I see signs of your badness gives me pause. You're not a clumsy player so to think I see that doesn't make sense and makes me worry. It's almost too easy or convenient.

Oh, yes, I get what you mean now.

Going through each person on the poll to make my choice:

Golden - I don't think he's playing his baddie game, or he's doing a clumsy one (sorry, Golden, I know you just said something along the lines of being held to too high of a standard, but take it in a good way from me :P ). As much as it pains me to say it, he's right about my attempted lynch train yesterday - I have only been voted out once on Day 1 in Cars, and it was for some nitpicky BS verrrrry similar to what went down yesterday - I chose to say whatever came to mind and people weren't used to it, so they lynched me. I was a civ (and I'm still bitter about not being able to use my awesome role ). Long story short, I don't usually stand out, and I'm NOT an easy lynch (that's not an invitation BTW). This, however, looks like an easy bandwagon, and Golden seems genuine in his responses.

MM - I'd forgotten that he'd mentioned me quite early in the game (Day 0) in discussion of quieter players. Most of his posts look like fluff and witty banter. His "suspicion list" is smileys. He asks Epi if the poll is a standard lynch poll. I don't even know why he asked that. He mentions me twice (that includes the Day 0 mention) before voting for me, but qualifying it with "but I have no real baddie reads." Also don't really understand that. Actually, most of his tone after the first lynch seems a bit snarkier than usual, but that may be in response to Scotty's persistent questioning? Also, he self-voted, which he does all the time, but gosh, the WIFOM. Would be some shit if he voted for himself as the only candidate he's "comfortable" with because he's bad :P But I always see MM as bad, so that gives me pause.

LC - Misses first vote due to busy reasons. Understandable, once again. Mostly discussion of game mechanics and roles, and later responses to earlier discussions. Suspects Golden, listens to his reasoning, feels a bit better, but votes for him out of today's candidates. It looks like a rational thought process, even though I don't agree with the sentiment, which scares me, because I always suspect LC. Always. And I'm not getting crazy vibes.

Russti - Constantly catching up and says he's busy, which I can understand. Is on the fence about G-Man like me (agrees with my sentiment in the thread, that is), and eventually votes G-Man, citing that he often suspects Eloh and gives her a pass. I agree with a lot of what he says. I wish he were here now to post thoughts about the current situation, but he said he's in the wilderness. Alas. Nothing sticks out except that there's nothing definite. Golden, you said he was the only person you'd use as a self-preservation vote because you have slight suspicion of him - why? I'm not seeing it.

So, out of these lovely gentlemen, I'm most likely to vote MM, but I'd like to hear other thoughts and there's still time.

Golden's use of the "I'm a very important civ" defense may have earned him my vote. Because, in my experience, civs don't usually use that defense.

G-Man wrote:Hey hey, back from the campground. Still catching up but I'm on Page 12, where the vote deadline looms eminent. Very interesting to read through. Here are some thoughts and observations:

DharmaHelper wrote:In my re-reading, I am also pinged by the big deal being made out of G-Man's lie detector statements. Especially considering he said "I am not a mafia" which is an equally lie detectable statement as "I am a civvie".

Of the people making a fuss about it LoRab strikes me as most suspect, I may put my vote there.

I too am curious about why my statements became such a big deal. LoRab had to reach back a long time in history to pull out the LD point from back in my early LP days. I mean way back. Same goes for MP (i think) for going way way back to the stone age of STV too. I choose my words carefully every time. Curious how they chose to think back past an awful lot of my playing history to find a possible reason that they could use to implicate me as a baddie.

Eye me all you want. But I haven't played a game with an LD (that I remember at least) since back in that time. I wasn't thinking about your playing history in general, but how I have noticed people respond to LD's in games. Those games just happen to be old ones. I notice patterns in posting and patterns of behavior. It's how I always play and always have played. If that makes me suspicious, so be it. I'm just trying to find the bad guys and point out behavior and posting that I happen to find suspicious. I'm not trying to implicate you. I suspect you. There is a difference.

nijuukyugou wrote: Golden, you said he was the only person you'd use as a self-preservation vote because you have slight suspicion of him - why? I'm not seeing it.

Because he said he found himself suspicious, which I found odd. Reminds me of Vomps being Uzziah in Biblical.

But I'll put my self-defence vote wherever it will help me best - he is just my preference.

LoRab wrote:Golden's use of the "I'm a very important civ" defense may have earned him my vote. Because, in my experience, civs don't usually use that defense.

In my experience, I don't often use that defence.

But in this case, it's true.

Are you sure I'm not earning your vote because I keep reminding people I suspect you?

I mean that as a legitimate question to - like, is it colouring your vision.

Golden wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote: Golden, you said he was the only person you'd use as a self-preservation vote because you have slight suspicion of him - why? I'm not seeing it.

Because he said he found himself suspicious, which I found odd. Reminds me of Vomps being Uzziah in Biblical.

But I'll put my self-defence vote wherever it will help me best - he is just my preference.

Are you referring to this post?

Russtifinko wrote:I'm thinking Elo, G-Man, or llama, myself. Probably in that order of suspicion. Though G-Man, then Elo, might work too. Have to vote, ahhhh!

When I read it, I'm seeing him saying (if you switch the wording around) "Myself, I think I'm voting Eloh, G-Man, or llama." Like, he's not actually meaning to vote himself, but he's saying it's his decision. I had to read that a few times.

That makes sense Ninja. That interpretation hadn't occurred to me.

Golden wrote:I mean that as a legitimate question to - like, is it colouring your vision.

It's a fair question and a good one (and I took it that way). And not really. I don't mind suspicion--I actually kind of like being suspected. Especially as a civ. Keeps the game more interesting and sometimes keeps me alive a little bit longer. I also expect it. For this vote, it's more that I have to vote one of you and I don't really highly suspect any of you right now and then you posted that.

I also meant to say earlier that there hasn't been a lot of discussion about LC's point earlier about it being somewhat strange that Night Owl chose this power to use so early, before knowing any information. With bringing up ideas like that he's either working for the town or he's the biggest of the bads--I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt for now.

Oh, I thought you were only joking when you thought he found himself suspicious. haha

I'm gonna go ahead and vote before I forget, and out of the four, my strongest suspicion is MM, and it's weak as hell even so.

I hate having only four choices. I look forward to discussion of more people.

At this point it looks probable that my vote is going to be for MM. You never know what happens, I guess.

I actually think of Golden as being more careful a player as a civ than as a baddie--I love having civie golden on my side. I'm not sure I'm seeing that.

MM went along with sloonei, so that doesn't look great. Russtifinko I have no idea. LC I already said before I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt for the moment because he's asking good questions and bringing things up others aren't--but I have an eye on him.

I could vote MM to create a tie, just for fun. Maybe I'll see where the vote is when we get close.

I don't like this whole choice of 4 thing. Especially not this early. Meh.

Remember the tie already exists, Golden will vote for the one who is winning the poll, so right now it's virtually 4-4.