Arkham Mafia [ENDGAME]

#7801

OK, this is interesting... because...

Did anyone else (as with me) get a very simple, unhelpful message when they visited Wayne Manor?

#7802

Golden wrote:OK, this is interesting... because...

Did anyone else (as with me) get a very simple, unhelpful message when they visited Wayne Manor?

It was a simple message but made about as much sense as the rest of them - same kind of things were talked about.

#7803

Simple? Yes. Unhelpful? No.

I'm pretty sure we're all getting the same info from the same places, though. Mac's version of Blackgate lines up with mine, TH's of the Hospital, Zebra's of the Docks, etc. I also got the same thing from the Hospital twice.

#7804

My message from Wayne Manor was about the same as the rest of the messages.

#7805

Oh. I just realised that the message wasn't unhelpful lol. I missed the link the first time. I just thought I got stopped by a security guard and got nothing.

#7806

I'm voting DFaraday to get this out of the way now and focus on my homework that I still need to catch up on aahhh.

#7807

Why are people voting DFaaday?

#7808

Dom wrote:Why are people voting DFaaday?

This is a very good question. I feel like Bullz and Typh voted me because I was suspecting them, and they didn't like my case. Enrique I have no idea.

I'd like to vote DH, but I'll hold onto my vote since apparently I need to.

#7809

Dom wrote:Why are people voting DFaaday?

I haven't voted yet, but he's one I'm considering. My own suspicion is that his suspicion of bubbles seems disingenuous, as he said that she's been around throughout the game, which just isn't true.

He also had some posts that seemed to be defending sabie without actually defending sabie. This is the one that sticks out to me:

DFaraday wrote:
Dom wrote:Who's left to vote? Wanna vote sprit with me?
I will. I think the case on Sabie has merit as well, but I feel more strongly about Sprityo.

Also, those random Mac votes look pretty shady from where I'm sitting.

#7810

I'm feeling a Dom vote, but I don't think others are.

#7811

LoRab wrote:
Dom wrote:Why are people voting DFaaday?
I haven't voted yet, but he's one I'm considering. My own suspicion is that his suspicion of bubbles seems disingenuous, as he said that she's been around throughout the game, which just isn't true.

He also had some posts that seemed to be defending sabie without actually defending sabie. This is the one that sticks out to me:

DFaraday wrote:
Dom wrote:Who's left to vote? Wanna vote sprit with me?
I will. I think the case on Sabie has merit as well, but I feel more strongly about Sprityo.

Also, those random Mac votes look pretty shady from where I'm sitting.

Bubbles has appeared at various points throughout the game. Ekeknat, Equivocate, and Bass have not. They have been wholly absent for weeks. Bubbles has appeared intermittently, meaning it's plausible that she could be sending in the PMs, whereas it is not plausible that the above guys have been, given their complete disappearance from the game.

Bubbles could potentially have been sending in PMs, since she has at least been vaguely following along, whereas the inactives seem to have abandoned the game long ago. Therefore I think it's more likely that she is bad than they are.

#7812

I'm sorry if that came off snippy, I just feel like I keep explaining my reasoning re: Bubbles and you keep missing the point of what I'm saying. Talking in circles is very frustrating.

#7813

DFaraday wrote:I'm sorry if that came off snippy, I just feel like I keep explaining my reasoning re: Bubbles and you keep missing the point of what I'm saying. Talking in circles is very frustrating.

I think you've been very clear and I agree. Bubbles has been around enough to send in kills. She has been on the site a number of times when she hasn't posted.

#7814

There's been very little discussion of a DFaraday vote and now he's in the lead. That makes my eye twitch.

#7815

Dom wrote:There's been very little discussion of a DFaraday vote and now he's in the lead. That makes my eye twitch.

Vote for DH or Bubbles to counteract it.

#7816

DFaraday wrote:I'm sorry if that came off snippy, I just feel like I keep explaining my reasoning re: Bubbles and you keep missing the point of what I'm saying. Talking in circles is very frustrating.

I understand your point. I disagree with your overall assessment. Although agree that Bubbles is suspish.

That said, I also suspect you.

#7817

I would vote for DF before voting for bubbles.

DH, I'd consider, though.

#7818

I liked Matt's case on DH, but I want to hear his response.

#7819

Dom wrote:I liked Matt's case on DH, but I want to hear his response.

Me too.

#7820

Golden wrote:I would vote for DF before voting for bubbles.

DH, I'd consider, though.

If DH is silenced (which seems like itmay be the case), I'd not be comfortable with a DH vote.

#7821

I thought he posted earlier in the day, but it was just before the night ended. He may be silenced.

That makes me

Matt's vote a bit.

#7822

Dom wrote:I thought he posted earlier in the day, but it was just before the night ended. He may be silenced.

That makes me Matt's vote a bit.

Why? The silencer is a civilian, there is no reason for Matt to realise it when none of the rest of us did.

#7823

Yeah but none of us actually voted DH so hastily.

I'd imagine he'd want to use caution in this regard if he cares about who he lynches.

#7824

There is no evidence that Matt has been able to be around for the rest of the day. Perhaps he had to vote that early.

#7825

Ugh. Need to vote soon because falling asleep, but still unsure for whom to vote.

#7826

Voting DF. His responses to my suspicion amount to saying I'm missing his point, and not actually defending. And my other suspicions are not here. And Bubbles I have enough doubt about that I'm holding off for now.

#7827

Golden wrote:There is no evidence that Matt has been able to be around for the rest of the day. Perhaps he had to vote that early.

Regardless, a quick check like I just did would have shown him that a regular poster like DH had not posted in a while. Since before the day started. Even if he couldn't vote later, I think the vote was hasty. I already suspect him and I don't like that vote one bit.

#7828

LoRab wrote:Voting DF. His responses to my suspicion amount to saying I'm missing his point, and not actually defending. And my other suspicions are not here. And Bubbles I have enough doubt about that I'm holding off for now.

I don't know what I'm even supposed to defend against, but I guess it's moot now that you've voted.

#7829

Voting for DharmaHelper to be contrarian.

#7830

DFaraday wrote:
LoRab wrote:Voting DF. His responses to my suspicion amount to saying I'm missing his point, and not actually defending. And my other suspicions are not here. And Bubbles I have enough doubt about that I'm holding off for now.
I don't know what I'm even supposed to defend against, but I guess it's moot now that you've voted.

I've made a few posts about you. Your answers have been that I've misunderstood your points about Bubbles. I'd love to see explanations of what I've actually said about your bubbles points and about the fact that you seemed a bit indifferent to a sabie lynch.

You're not lynched this round, yet, so an explanation could still be helpful.

#7831

MacDougall wrote:Voting for DharmaHelper to be contrarian.

You're a gentleman and a scholar, Mac.

Linki: That's because your point about Bubbles each time is that I said she was around consistently, which a) is not what I said, and b) is irrelevant to the point I was making about Bubbles. Okay, so I misremembered how much she was around. What does that change? She's still been around enough to send in PMs, which was my point to begin with.

As for Sabie, I thought there were good points made against her, but I suspected Sprit more. That's really all there was to that.

#7832

DFaraday wrote:
MacDougall wrote:Voting for DharmaHelper to be contrarian.
You're a gentleman and a scholar, Mac.

Linki: That's because your point about Bubbles each time is that I said she was around consistently, which a) is not what I said, and b) is irrelevant to the point I was making about Bubbles. Okay, so I misremembered how much she was around. What does that change? She's still been around enough to send in PMs, which was my point to begin with.

As for Sabie, I thought there were good points made against her, but I suspected Sprit more. That's really all there was to that.

Right. I don't necessarily agree that she would have been around to send the pm's. Possibly, because at times she posted elsewhere, but not on every night (or every other night). That said, I do believe she has a partner, and that is the crux of my suspicion of her.

And my point is based on your words. And you did say she's been around. You are twisting the truth by going back on what you actually posted and saying that you didn't say she's mostly been around. In fact, she hasn't been mostly around.

#7833

LoRab wrote:
DFaraday wrote:
MacDougall wrote:Voting for DharmaHelper to be contrarian.
You're a gentleman and a scholar, Mac.

Linki: That's because your point about Bubbles each time is that I said she was around consistently, which a) is not what I said, and b) is irrelevant to the point I was making about Bubbles. Okay, so I misremembered how much she was around. What does that change? She's still been around enough to send in PMs, which was my point to begin with.

As for Sabie, I thought there were good points made against her, but I suspected Sprit more. That's really all there was to that.
Right. I don't necessarily agree that she would have been around to send the pm's. Possibly, because at times she posted elsewhere, but not on every night (or every other night). That said, I do believe she has a partner, and that is the crux of my suspicion of her.

And my point is based on your words. And you did say she's been around. You are twisting the truth by going back on what you actually posted and saying that you didn't say she's mostly been around. In fact, she hasn't been mostly around.

I didn't use the word consistently, you did. I've quoted myself in this back and forth before. I said "more or less", and I stand by that. You don't agree, okay. Since you already voted for me, I'm not going to keep spending time going in circles over it.

#7834

DFaraday wrote:
LoRab wrote:
DFaraday wrote:
MacDougall wrote:Voting for DharmaHelper to be contrarian.
You're a gentleman and a scholar, Mac.

Linki: That's because your point about Bubbles each time is that I said she was around consistently, which a) is not what I said, and b) is irrelevant to the point I was making about Bubbles. Okay, so I misremembered how much she was around. What does that change? She's still been around enough to send in PMs, which was my point to begin with.

As for Sabie, I thought there were good points made against her, but I suspected Sprit more. That's really all there was to that.
Right. I don't necessarily agree that she would have been around to send the pm's. Possibly, because at times she posted elsewhere, but not on every night (or every other night). That said, I do believe she has a partner, and that is the crux of my suspicion of her.

And my point is based on your words. And you did say she's been around. You are twisting the truth by going back on what you actually posted and saying that you didn't say she's mostly been around. In fact, she hasn't been mostly around.
I didn't use the word consistently, you did. I've quoted myself in this back and forth before. I said "more or less", and I stand by that. You don't agree, okay. Since you already voted for me, I'm not going to keep spending time going in circles over it.

Your actual wording was "generally" just to be accurate.

More or less is not the same as generally. And I haven't used the word consistantly since my initial post, after you responded. It wasn't the most accurate word to use, and I have described your posts differently in all but my first post about your posts about bubles. And really, that's irrelevant to my overall point, that I've posted about several times.

#7835

And, to be clear, this is the post I was commenting on that first time:

DFaraday wrote:
LoRab wrote:
DFaraday wrote:
Golden wrote:Scotty made a case in the early game on DFaraday that I really agreed with but now have entirely forgotten about.
Here it is. And here is my response.

I don't agree with the Matt suspicion. He's still coming off as an earnest civ to me.

My main suspicion at the moment is on Bubbles, because here vote was still shady to me, even without Glorf as a teammate. I also feel like Lorab merits looking into some more. I suspected her early on, so I may revisit that.

I still don't think going after inactives is a good idea, since the baddies are still sending in kills and so that limits the number of baddies inactives could be.
I agree about Bubbles. I don't agree about me, but read my posts and ask me questions--I think you'll see that I'm a civ who has been really distracted IRL for most of the game.

Also, you say your main suspicion is Bubbles and then say that you don't think we should go after inactives. I mean, technically Bubbles has now posted, but I think she is still on the not-so-active list, no?
Except Bubbles is generally present at least once each phase, so she could very well be sending in PMs. There's no evidence that Bass, ekeknat, or Equivocate have even remembered that this game exists in the last week or so.

I think the intent that she was pretty much here every phase is the general, understood meaning of your words.

#7836

LoRab wrote:And, to be clear, this is the post I was commenting on that first time:

DFaraday wrote:
LoRab wrote:
DFaraday wrote:
Golden wrote:Scotty made a case in the early game on DFaraday that I really agreed with but now have entirely forgotten about.
Here it is. And here is my response.

I don't agree with the Matt suspicion. He's still coming off as an earnest civ to me.

My main suspicion at the moment is on Bubbles, because here vote was still shady to me, even without Glorf as a teammate. I also feel like Lorab merits looking into some more. I suspected her early on, so I may revisit that.

I still don't think going after inactives is a good idea, since the baddies are still sending in kills and so that limits the number of baddies inactives could be.
I agree about Bubbles. I don't agree about me, but read my posts and ask me questions--I think you'll see that I'm a civ who has been really distracted IRL for most of the game.

Also, you say your main suspicion is Bubbles and then say that you don't think we should go after inactives. I mean, technically Bubbles has now posted, but I think she is still on the not-so-active list, no?
Except Bubbles is generally present at least once each phase, so she could very well be sending in PMs. There's no evidence that Bass, ekeknat, or Equivocate have even remembered that this game exists in the last week or so.
I think the intent that she was pretty much here every phase is the general, understood meaning of your words.

Yes, "pretty much" means not exactly, but close to it. And I overestimated it, but I think my point is still valid. But I'm done with that issue.

#7837

LoRab does Bubbles have to be here every phase for her to be bad and send in PMs?

#7838

Hey guys! I've been ditching Epi with the hosting for the last little while, but a bunch of JERKS lynched me in Battle of the Hosts so now I'm going to try to act responsible again.

I'll be writing the lynch post. Lynch ends in 1 hour.

#7839

The answer is no. She would only have to be around every other phase.

#7840

What's been going on in the game? I haven't been able to keep up with the thread lately. Someone fill me in! Looks like 8 out of 17 voters have voted so far, so this lynch could go anywhere, right?

#7841

Long Con wrote:What's been going on in the game? I haven't been able to keep up with the thread lately. Someone fill me in! Looks like 8 out of 17 voters have voted so far, so this lynch could go anywhere, right?

That's if we get people to show up

#7842

I'm not really feeling a Dfaraday lynch, I don't think. The suddenness of the case coupled with the fact that I don't really see why those points make him bad does not sit well with me.

I'd rather lynch Matt or Bubbles or Golden.

#7843

Dom wrote:The answer is no. She would only have to be around every other phase.

Hmmmm this is true. Dom how do you account for those votes she made for Wayne Manor?

#7844

Dom wrote:I'm not really feeling a Dfaraday lynch, I don't think. The suddenness of the case coupled with the fact that I don't really see why those points make him bad does not sit well with me.

I'd rather lynch Matt or Bubbles or Golden.

I'm not overly feeling a DF vote either, but you can't count on my vote for any of the people you named.

#7845

I'm not overly opposed to a DF vote either. I'm essentially ambivalent.

#7846

Golden wrote:I'm not overly opposed to a DF vote either. I'm essentially ambivalent.

Yes, this is what I'm feeling on DF. I'm actually considering voting myself.

#7847

I missed MP coming in. He voted Bubbles.

#7848

juliets wrote:
Dom wrote:The answer is no. She would only have to be around every other phase.
Hmmmm this is true. Dom how do you account for those votes she made for Wayne Manor?

I don't know. That is a weakness that this case has.

Golden wrote:
Dom wrote:I'm not really feeling a Dfaraday lynch, I don't think. The suddenness of the case coupled with the fact that I don't really see why those points make him bad does not sit well with me.

I'd rather lynch Matt or Bubbles or Golden.
I'm not overly feeling a DF vote either, but you can't count on my vote for any of the people you named.

Is there anyone we do agree on?

juliets wrote:I missed MP coming in. He voted Bubbles.

That's where I want to vote but I want to make sure that I can stop DFaraday from being lynched. I really don't think he's bad.

#7849

juliets wrote:
Golden wrote:I'm not overly opposed to a DF vote either. I'm essentially ambivalent.
Yes, this is what I'm feeling on DF. I'm actually considering voting myself.

I wouldn't do that. I think failing a better option, we should just vote someone we have some suspicion of.

#7850

Dom wrote:Is there anyone we do agree on?

Possibly not. I actually think DH is a good vote except for the fact he appears to be silenced. I would feel guilty about that.

Who killed no one?