The Syndicate

Interesting discussion this evening. I had forgotten the no self-protect double-targeting for Hinzlemann. It could help narrow the field, but someone could also have missed a PM. Are there any others that fit the criteria here?

Eros seems quite certain of Fortuna and Poseidon and Zeus seems certain of Athena. I can't reconcile this quite, but there are some obvious explanations and some secrets.

I have a hard time believing that Eros has no candidates. I find I suspect everyone first, then slowly start trusting others, so my list is rather long, but not conclusive at this point, which is really the problem. Who to pick?

Ares wrote:I really don't have any opinions of my own, sorry.

Then get some.

Vesta wrote: I have a hard time believing that Eros has no candidates. I find I suspect everyone first, then slowly start trusting others, so my list is rather long, but not conclusive at this point, which is really the problem. Who to pick?

In other words, Vesta, you and I are at the same stage.

Eros wrote:

Vesta wrote: I have a hard time believing that Eros has no candidates. I find I suspect everyone first, then slowly start trusting others, so my list is rather long, but not conclusive at this point, which is really the problem. Who to pick?

In other words, Vesta, you and I are at the same stage.

Ares wrote:I really don't have any opinions of my own, sorry.

You've had four days of discussion to gather opinions, and have failed to do so. Maybe my vote will help motivate you.

Also, Ares, if you have no opinions, why did you show up at the last minute to vote for Fortuna?

Little Busy IRL right now.... I'm voting Fortuna. I haven't liked her style of "defense" and foudn the last lynch to be strange in tht she got more votes, but still ived? I'll try and stop by later too, but I'm voting now so I don't miss it.

I must be unfamiliar with this style of mafia, the 'don't vote so&so' method. Why would Eros endorse two players, and not expect it to paint a target on himself and the other two players? Because he isn't worried about being a target?

Now Zeus is doing the same with Athena

Anyone have an idea about whether this strategy of being blatant is a civvie or baddie thing?

Medusa wrote:I must be unfamiliar with this style of mafia, the 'don't vote so&so' method. Why would Eros endorse two players, and not expect it to paint a target on himself and the other two players? Because he isn't worried about being a target?

Now Zeus is doing the same with Athena

Anyone have an idea about whether this strategy of being blatant is a civvie or baddie thing?

It would be a bold baddie move possibly. Too bold in my opinion. Of course you may factor in WIFOM which will bring you back to us being bad again. But that still makes it a very bold move for a baddie.

Put it this way. As a civ you see another person you think is civ being put under suspicion. How would you handle the situation? So far Athena has suspected a civ and failed to vote twice. In my opinion it is more common for civs to miss votes. Not that baddies don't. They certainly do.

Zeus wrote:

Medusa wrote:I must be unfamiliar with this style of mafia, the 'don't vote so&so' method. Why would Eros endorse two players, and not expect it to paint a target on himself and the other two players? Because he isn't worried about being a target?

Now Zeus is doing the same with Athena

Anyone have an idea about whether this strategy of being blatant is a civvie or baddie thing?

It would be a bold baddie move possibly. Too bold in my opinion. Of course you may factor in WIFOM which will bring you back to us being bad again. But that still makes it a very bold move for a baddie.

Put it this way. As a civ you see another person you think is civ being put under suspicion. How would you handle the situation? So far Athena has suspected a civ and failed to vote twice. In my opinion it is more common for civs to miss votes. Not that baddies don't. They certainly do.

Don't you think it's an equally bold move for a civvie to make? It's like saying 'here I am baddies. Come and get me/us'.

If you want to go to Heaven, love thy neighbor.

But not too much, or you'll go to the other place.

Eros wrote:If you want to go to Heaven, love thy neighbor.

But not too much, or you'll go to the other place.

This is way over my head.

Medusa wrote:

Zeus wrote:

Medusa wrote:I must be unfamiliar with this style of mafia, the 'don't vote so&so' method. Why would Eros endorse two players, and not expect it to paint a target on himself and the other two players? Because he isn't worried about being a target?

Now Zeus is doing the same with Athena

Anyone have an idea about whether this strategy of being blatant is a civvie or baddie thing?

It would be a bold baddie move possibly. Too bold in my opinion. Of course you may factor in WIFOM which will bring you back to us being bad again. But that still makes it a very bold move for a baddie.

Put it this way. As a civ you see another person you think is civ being put under suspicion. How would you handle the situation? So far Athena has suspected a civ and failed to vote twice. In my opinion it is more common for civs to miss votes. Not that baddies don't. They certainly do.

Don't you think it's an equally bold move for a civvie to make? It's like saying 'here I am baddies. Come and get me/us'.

Not so much. Baddies want to kill anyone who isn't on their team. Doesn't matter who.

I agree with that, but my default instincts still say 'trust no one'. But I'll play along for now. If the five vouchees are off the table, and I think Aphrodite, also, that leaves 13 players. I will start rereading 12 of them now.

I would like to hear more for the less active players before the lynch if possible. For those who replaced in any insights from reading?

As of right now Athena and Poseidon are the two I am considering. Athena, while I dont think can be Hinzelmann did very quickly steer attention to Artemis and away from herself. Apollo has made a reasonable case that Poseidon in Hinzelmann. I see another explNation for him being civ if Eros is right, but its hard to know at this point.

Apollo wrote:Also, Ares, if you have no opinions, why did you show up at the last minute to vote for Fortuna?

I only checked the thread a few minutes before the vote ended, and I thought a tie would be a fair way to vote, but I apologize if you don't like it.

Medusa wrote:

Zeus wrote:

Medusa wrote:I must be unfamiliar with this style of mafia, the 'don't vote so&so' method. Why would Eros endorse two players, and not expect it to paint a target on himself and the other two players? Because he isn't worried about being a target?

Now Zeus is doing the same with Athena

Anyone have an idea about whether this strategy of being blatant is a civvie or baddie thing?

It would be a bold baddie move possibly. Too bold in my opinion. Of course you may factor in WIFOM which will bring you back to us being bad again. But that still makes it a very bold move for a baddie.

Put it this way. As a civ you see another person you think is civ being put under suspicion. How would you handle the situation? So far Athena has suspected a civ and failed to vote twice. In my opinion it is more common for civs to miss votes. Not that baddies don't. They certainly do.

Don't you think it's an equally bold move for a civvie to make? It's like saying 'here I am baddies. Come and get me/us'.

I agree with Zeus and think it is too bold of a move for a baddie. Plus, Eros is defending me, a civvie, so I know he must be civvie too.
I do think it is a bold move for a civvie, but not AS bold. If I were a civvie and knew a couple of suspected others to be for sure civvie, I think I would stick my neck out there and say, "hey, don't vote them, they are good." Even if I didn't have any evidence to show, I would still try.

Before I reiterate the case on Athena, I thought I'd give the big guy a chance to do it first.

Zeus wrote:That wouldn't be a good move.

Why would it be a good move to vote for Athena?

Nice. But I see you voted Artemis instead. Which I am glad for as I see no case against Athena.

But you do see it now. Why?

linki
Fortuna, I don't like the 'me, a civvie => my defender automatically a civvie' posts at all.

Ares, that was my intention as well, although I was surprised to see you finally make an appearance after such a long time. You only voted in the first poll.

Fortuna wrote:

Medusa wrote:

Zeus wrote:

Medusa wrote:I must be unfamiliar with this style of mafia, the 'don't vote so&so' method. Why would Eros endorse two players, and not expect it to paint a target on himself and the other two players? Because he isn't worried about being a target?

Now Zeus is doing the same with Athena

Anyone have an idea about whether this strategy of being blatant is a civvie or baddie thing?

It would be a bold baddie move possibly. Too bold in my opinion. Of course you may factor in WIFOM which will bring you back to us being bad again. But that still makes it a very bold move for a baddie.

Put it this way. As a civ you see another person you think is civ being put under suspicion. How would you handle the situation? So far Athena has suspected a civ and failed to vote twice. In my opinion it is more common for civs to miss votes. Not that baddies don't. They certainly do.

Don't you think it's an equally bold move for a civvie to make? It's like saying 'here I am baddies. Come and get me/us'.

I agree with Zeus and think it is too bold of a move for a baddie. Plus, Eros is defending me, a civvie, so I know he must be civvie too.
I do think it is a bold move for a civvie, but not AS bold. If I were a civvie and knew a couple of suspected others to be for sure civvie, I think I would stick my neck out there and say, "hey, don't vote them, they are good." Even if I didn't have any evidence to show, I would still try.

Really? This isn't your first game of mafia, surely? This post reads as very suspicious IMO.

Ceres wrote:Before I reiterate the case on Athena, I thought I'd give the big guy a chance to do it first.

Zeus wrote:That wouldn't be a good move.

Why would it be a good move to vote for Athena?

Nice. But I see you voted Artemis instead. Which I am glad for as I see no case against Athena.

But you do see it now. Why?

linki
Fortuna, I don't like the 'me, a civvie => my defender automatically a civvie' posts at all.

Ares, that was my intention as well, although I was surprised to see you finally make an appearance after such a long time. You only voted in the first poll.

I said it wouldn't be a good move to vote Athena....quite clearly!

Fuck! I'm sorry! I did however manage to read that properly after your last post. I'll make the case soon and then crawl back under my rock.

Ceres wrote:Fuck! I'm sorry! I did however manage to read that properly after your last post. I'll make the case soon and then crawl back under my rock.

No problem. Even gods are fallible. Besides myself of course.

Did Fortuna ever post about not being lynched last time?

Fortuna wrote:

Medusa wrote:

Zeus wrote:

Medusa wrote:I must be unfamiliar with this style of mafia, the 'don't vote so&so' method. Why would Eros endorse two players, and not expect it to paint a target on himself and the other two players? Because he isn't worried about being a target?

Now Zeus is doing the same with Athena

Anyone have an idea about whether this strategy of being blatant is a civvie or baddie thing?

It would be a bold baddie move possibly. Too bold in my opinion. Of course you may factor in WIFOM which will bring you back to us being bad again. But that still makes it a very bold move for a baddie.

Put it this way. As a civ you see another person you think is civ being put under suspicion. How would you handle the situation? So far Athena has suspected a civ and failed to vote twice. In my opinion it is more common for civs to miss votes. Not that baddies don't. They certainly do.

Don't you think it's an equally bold move for a civvie to make? It's like saying 'here I am baddies. Come and get me/us'.

I agree with Zeus and think it is too bold of a move for a baddie. Plus, Eros is defending me, a civvie, so I know he must be civvie too.
I do think it is a bold move for a civvie, but not AS bold. If I were a civvie and knew a couple of suspected others to be for sure civvie, I think I would stick my neck out there and say, "hey, don't vote them, they are good." Even if I didn't have any evidence to show, I would still try.

How do you know he must be civ? That sounds like bad logic to me. Plus, if he checked you and knows your civ, he can't actually know that since there are multiple secrets in roles and a baddie that might be able to appear as a civ (at least that's what it sounds from the one line in his role that isn't secret).

And, please answer the above question. Why did you survive the last lynch?

Vesta wrote:I would like to hear more for the less active players before the lynch if possible. For those who replaced in any insights from reading?

As of right now Athena and Poseidon are the two I am considering. Athena, while I dont think can be Hinzelmann did very quickly steer attention to Artemis and away from herself. Apollo has made a reasonable case that Poseidon in Hinzelmann. I see another explNation for him being civ if Eros is right, but its hard to know at this point.

So, suspecting someone makes someone suspicious?

I wasn't trying to take attention off myself. If I were, then making a case against someone would hardly be the way to take attention away. I simply saw something that seemed off to me, commented on it, and gauged the reaction of the player. I am just a civ who doesn't know a whole lot, that is just trying to do her best in this game.

I'm fairly lost. I haven't had time to catch up, I'm sad to say, and am unsure of where to vote today. I'm going to try in the next few hours to read a bit, but I'm swamped

Hercules wrote:I'm fairly lost. I haven't had time to catch up, I'm sad to say, and am unsure of where to vote today. I'm going to try in the next few hours to read a bit, but I'm swamped

I have difficulty deciding who may be bad too. But I think you may be. No evidence, just a gut feeling for what it's worth.

Athena, I think Fortuna said she didn't know how she survived.

Here it is

Fortuna wrote:
linki, no I didn't realize. Last I looked it was Arty 7, me 5. Then I was writing a post and getting all kinds of linki. When I finally posted..state choices were up. I have no clue how I survived if what you say is true. Someone must have protected me. Thank you to whoever did :)

Thank you, Zeus.

In an attempt to give Athena a chance to defend herself, here are my thoughts:

1. The Artemis episode was extremely confusing. I went back and forth on who was the non-civ in that equation because to me this was too elaborate to be a civ on civ dispute, and at one point I really thought there were two baddies involved. Artemis made a 'slip', which could have been completely plausible at the time, but that is not what made me suspect her, it was her very calm and calculated reply to Persephone's post. Athena on the other hand, has the "I know I'm a civ", "I'm just a civ' rhetoric which to me always sounds like baddies trying to convince themselves that they are civs.
2. Survived a night kill.
3. She has explained why she used the term 'curse' when people were talking about insanification in Arte's case, but I still get the feeling that she knew something the rest of us didn't.

This is the best I have so far, although I have to admit that Fortuna is in a similar situation:
1. 'I know I'm a civ which means that my defense attorney is also a civ.'
2. Managed to survive on day 3.

I think right now I'm in between Athena and Fortuna for my vote today. For Athena, her surviving that NK and the whole thing between her and Artemis would be enough for me to put a vote her way. Unlike Ceres however, I disagree on the 'curse' bit. I believe her explanation on that one at least.

As for Fortuna, all of the "Since X is defending me, that means they are civvie" posts do not sit well with me. At all.

I'm going to try and read up a bit more on both before I decide on my vote.

Ceres wrote:In an attempt to give Athena a chance to defend herself, here are my thoughts:

1. The Artemis episode was extremely confusing. I went back and forth on who was the non-civ in that equation because to me this was too elaborate to be a civ on civ dispute, and at one point I really thought there were two baddies involved. Artemis made a 'slip', which could have been completely plausible at the time, but that is not what made me suspect her, it was her very calm and calculated reply to Persephone's post. Athena on the other hand, has the "I know I'm a civ", "I'm just a civ' rhetoric which to me always sounds like baddies trying to convince themselves that they are civs.
2. Survived a night kill.
3. She has explained why she used the term 'curse' when people were talking about insanification in Arte's case, but I still get the feeling that she knew something the rest of us didn't.

This is the best I have so far, although I have to admit that Fortuna is in a similar situation:
1. 'I know I'm a civ which means that my defense attorney is also a civ.'
2. Managed to survive on day 3.

1. It was either civ on civ, or she's a seemer type role. And I can't help but know my own role. I'm sorry if stating that I'm civ is suspicious. I'm not sure I see how it is, but whatever.

2. Yes, I did. And I am thankful for having been protected. How is that suspicious?

3. I really don't understand this one, still. In my mafia experience, the term curse is generally used as a posting restriction that a player has. How is that not what was happening? What term would you use for "a posting restriction that is given by another player through their role or by the hosts"? Curse has always been what I've seen used, and so I use that term.

Your reasons don't add up to me being bad. I respect that they make you suspect me, although I don't really see how any of them are suspicious. But, like some others didn't see what I did in Artemis' posts, we all play the game differently. Sometimes, things that are not how we play look suspicious because it's not what we ourselves would do.

linkitis: Again, how is surviving a night kill attempt suspicious? And how does suspecting another player and making a case mean someone is bad?

Pluto wrote: As for Fortuna, all of the "Since X is defending me, that means they are civvie" posts do not sit well with me. At all.

You know, you're absolutely right.

I could be a rotten apple defending a good apple so that, in the case of my lynch, I take down the good apple in my wake.
Or, in the case of the good apple's lynch, it validates what I had been saying all along. Anyone ever consider that possibility?

I am often accused of knowing nothing of strategy, but honey, love is a battlefield.

Baddies defend civvies all the time. Baddies even defend other baddies sometimes. Since the possibility of a seemer role coming up, I can't help but wonder if that's what you're setting up.

I find Fortuna the most suspicious. In addition to what's been said recently, I noticed this in one of her posts (http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 248#p39248):

Fortuna wrote:

Medusa wrote:Fortuna, if you are suspicious of me, I hope you will make a case on me. You, not your teammates.

First of all, I was unaware any civvies had teammates. I want a teammate! Second, this post below is what made me put my eye on you.]

This sounds too much like she's trying to sound like a civvie. And, actually, the civvies are a team. And, in fact, there are 3 civs who have BTSC, if that's what she meant.

This is also the post right after the one where she suddenly realizes that she had the most votes in the last lynch and had apparently been saved. You'd think that after seeing that, she'd go to the roles to see who might have saved her. And it happens that the lynch switch and lynch save belong to the civvie group with BTSC.

All of this just isn't adding up for me.

And I'm not really seeing the suspicion of Athena. And Apollo's case that Poseiden could be Hinzelman based on being MIA is too circumstantial for my taste.

Eros wrote:

Pluto wrote: As for Fortuna, all of the "Since X is defending me, that means they are civvie" posts do not sit well with me. At all.

You know, you're absolutely right.

I could be a rotten apple defending a good apple so that, in the case of my lynch, I take down the good apple in my wake.
Or, in the case of the good apple's lynch, it validates what I had been saying all along. Anyone ever consider that possibility?

I am often accused of knowing nothing of strategy, but honey, love is a battlefield.

Baddies can defend civvies. I've seen it happen before. I've also seen baddies cleverly avoid managing to get lynched after taking civvies down. Nothing is impossible in mafia.

My statement about Fortuna wasn't even about you. It was about why I would be considering a vote for Fortuna. You seem awfully quick to jump down my throat about most of the statements I've been making lately.

Ok breathe

I have caught up mostly and the first thing I want to say is this the kind of game we are playing where someone says don't vote for X because I say they are good? Or I am civ so they are civ - vouchy vouchy nicey nicey? No reasons or thread evidence? /rant over maybe


I started feeling suspicious of Hercules the day of Prometheus lynch (Day 2). He had previously voted for Prometheus Day 1 because the movie was shit - his words not mine. Then he succeeded his goal Day 2 though Artemis had more votes Prometheus was lynched ( its sad to know they were both civs it was a lose/lose day no matter what would have happened ). Then while insanified Day 3 he seemed to know exactly what was going on and voted Perse (who I read as civ) of course being insanified has its good side no real reason behind your vote was ever given. There was quite a few people vouchung for Fortuna. But only Hercules voted on Eros suspicions for Perse who was then promptly killed Night 3. Now today he is totally lost what up with dat? He seemed to know everything going on last lynch so what gives so suddenly? Why not blend in again and use someone elses suspicions to make your vote again?

I must vote now or risk missing the vote. I am at work.

VOTE=Hercules

I do see the case on Fortuna but I do not have time to make two cases and this one I feel more strongly about.

I'm going with Fortuna for now. Although I agree with some of what Aphrodite says about Hercules, I would want to have enough time to hear from him before voting.

The case on Athena is not conclusive enough for me. I think she made a good point about not being sure if a player is who they appear to be and I want to think about that some more

voted fortuna

Laura wrote:Baddies defend civvies all the time. Baddies even defend other baddies sometimes. Since the possibility of a seemer role coming up, I can't help but wonder if that's what you're setting up.

I find Fortuna the most suspicious. In addition to what's been said recently, I noticed this in one of her posts (http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 248#p39248):

Fortuna wrote:

Medusa wrote:Fortuna, if you are suspicious of me, I hope you will make a case on me. You, not your teammates.

First of all, I was unaware any civvies had teammates. I want a teammate! Second, this post below is what made me put my eye on you.]

This sounds too much like she's trying to sound like a civvie. And, actually, the civvies are a team. And, in fact, there are 3 civs who have BTSC, if that's what she meant.

This is also the post right after the one where she suddenly realizes that she had the most votes in the last lynch and had apparently been saved. You'd think that after seeing that, she'd go to the roles to see who might have saved her. And it happens that the lynch switch and lynch save belong to the civvie group with BTSC.

All of this just isn't adding up for me.

And I'm not really seeing the suspicion of Athena. And Apollo's case that Poseiden could be Hinzelman based on being MIA is too circumstantial for my taste.

I did mean BTSC. And, you are right, I could have gone to the roles to try to figure out how I was saved from the lynch after I found out. But, I didn't. I had so much going on at the time. With my job I'm usually crazy busy a few days out of the week. Anyway, I know you don't like the whole "I'm civvie" defense, but I don't know how to prove it to you.

linki with Medusa

Pluto wrote: My statement about Fortuna wasn't even about you. It was about why I would be considering a vote for Fortuna. You seem awfully quick to jump down my throat about most of the statements I've been making lately.

Is that so?

You and I have had three exchanges.

If two of these three things:

1) Calling you Dr. Phil,
2) Requesting that you form your own opinions when you asked me to "throw out a few names," or
3) Being humorous by stating the obvious

are "jumping down [your] throat," then I suppose your statement is correct.

I have to attend to matters of the universe now so I will vote. It's a gut thing, but I will

VOTE HERCULES

Something about him bothers me.

I was "up to date" on Perse because I felt Eros' post about her was correct. Plain and simple. I'm at the point now where I don't have any clear leads or the time to properly read back.

If I'm going to start taking votes for being largely absent the last few days, that's crap.

I'm going to vote Fortuna to protect myself.

Hercules wrote:I was "up to date" on Perse because I felt Eros' post about her was correct. Plain and simple. I'm at the point now where I don't have any clear leads or the time to properly read back.

If I'm going to start taking votes for being largely absent the last few days, that's crap.

I'm going to vote Fortuna to protect myself.

Don't do that. It will make me more inclined to vote for you.

Fortuna wrote:

Laura wrote:Baddies defend civvies all the time. Baddies even defend other baddies sometimes. Since the possibility of a seemer role coming up, I can't help but wonder if that's what you're setting up.

I find Fortuna the most suspicious. In addition to what's been said recently, I noticed this in one of her posts (http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 248#p39248):

Fortuna wrote:

Medusa wrote:Fortuna, if you are suspicious of me, I hope you will make a case on me. You, not your teammates.

First of all, I was unaware any civvies had teammates. I want a teammate! Second, this post below is what made me put my eye on you.]

This sounds too much like she's trying to sound like a civvie. And, actually, the civvies are a team. And, in fact, there are 3 civs who have BTSC, if that's what she meant.

This is also the post right after the one where she suddenly realizes that she had the most votes in the last lynch and had apparently been saved. You'd think that after seeing that, she'd go to the roles to see who might have saved her. And it happens that the lynch switch and lynch save belong to the civvie group with BTSC.

All of this just isn't adding up for me.

And I'm not really seeing the suspicion of Athena. And Apollo's case that Poseiden could be Hinzelman based on being MIA is too circumstantial for my taste.

I did mean BTSC. And, you are right, I could have gone to the roles to try to figure out how I was saved from the lynch after I found out. But, I didn't. I had so much going on at the time. With my job I'm usually crazy busy a few days out of the week. Anyway, I know you don't like the whole "I'm civvie" defense, but I don't know how to prove it to you.

linki with Medusa

For me, the best way to prove it is to discuss how you feel about other people playing the game. Getting as many thoughts out there as possible from as many people as possible gives us more information. Had you explained earlier that you were often busy and offered up something other than "I'm a civvie. See? Others are saying the same thing!", then I would be more inclined to believe you. Alas, at this point, I feel like you're trying to throw this out as a last-minute defense.

@Aphrodite: I completely forgot about Hercules. Especially with his Prometheus vote and still unexplained, insanified vote. I'm thinking he might be someone else good to examine for a vote. I'll try and read up on him quickly.

Linki: So Hercules votes for Fortuna to "protect himself", even though we still have a boatload of votes left to come in?

Eros wrote:

Pluto wrote: My statement about Fortuna wasn't even about you. It was about why I would be considering a vote for Fortuna. You seem awfully quick to jump down my throat about most of the statements I've been making lately.

Is that so?

You and I have had three exchanges.

If two of these three things:

1) Calling you Dr. Phil,
2) Requesting that you form your own opinions when you asked me to "throw out a few names," or
3) Being humorous by stating the obvious

are "jumping down [your] throat," then I suppose your statement is correct.

I used that phrase because I feel like you've had a smartass attitude with me. This might make me sound like a grouchy old man, but I like to try and treat other players with respect. And I expect others to do the same. What you did was cock an attitude and try to avoid answering my questions.

Now that being said, I also believe that (in most cases), people should be allowed to play the way they wish, with the style they wish. But I do feel you've been very aggressive towards me with your attitude. And avoiding my questions initially doesn't make me feel very good about you either.

Or maybe I'm just misreading you entirely. Which is always possible. But that's currently how I feel about you.

There's less than an hour to go. Boatload or no, that's not much time.

Pluto wrote:

Eros wrote:

Pluto wrote: My statement about Fortuna wasn't even about you. It was about why I would be considering a vote for Fortuna. You seem awfully quick to jump down my throat about most of the statements I've been making lately.

Is that so?

You and I have had three exchanges.

If two of these three things:

1) Calling you Dr. Phil,
2) Requesting that you form your own opinions when you asked me to "throw out a few names," or
3) Being humorous by stating the obvious

are "jumping down [your] throat," then I suppose your statement is correct.

I used that phrase because I feel like you've had a smartass attitude with me. This might make me sound like a grouchy old man, but I like to try and treat other players with respect. And I expect others to do the same. What you did was cock an attitude and try to avoid answering my questions.

Now that being said, I also believe that (in most cases), people should be allowed to play the way they wish, with the style they wish. But I do feel you've been very aggressive towards me with your attitude. And avoiding my questions initially doesn't make me feel very good about you either.

Or maybe I'm just misreading you entirely. Which is always possible. But that's currently how I feel about you.

You asked me one thing (several questions, but one thing, really). I answered, "I don't know." That's an answer.

In any event, I didn't mean to cause offense. Baby Herman is my direct descendant. Did you know that?

You know something else? In my experience, it's usually the rotten apples that express getting offended by stuff right before a lynch.

Hercules wrote:There's less than an hour to go. Boatload or no, that's not much time.

You've voted when only a fraction have done so- to save yourself. Why not actually vote someone you think is up to no good and try to convince us to follow you?

Thank you Athena for your reply, but like you said, we all play the game differently and as far as baddies go, you are my best bet at the moment.

Hercules wrote:There's less than an hour to go. Boatload or no, that's not much time.

If you were unable to stick around, I could understand that. But to vote hastily like that, and then continue to post? Why not see how the lynch starts to shape out a bit more?

I went back and read through your posts. Didn't take too long since I skimmed most of the insanified ones. I feel like you've been fairly absent because of RL for sure, but I also feel like most of your posts are more about you trying to post. And often times not saying all that much. Maybe you said more in some of your insanified posts, but I had a hard time understanding most of them.

I think my vote will come down between you, Fortuna, and Athena. Although Athena is becoming a bit less likely.

Linki: Yes. But then that was immediately followed with this:

Eros wrote:

Pluto wrote:

Eros wrote:

Pluto wrote:

Eros wrote:I am here willing to talk if anyone else would like to do that.

Who are you currently looking at casting a vote for today? And why?

Therein lies my problem, Diablo. I don't know.

Are you suspicious of anyone or looking at anyone at least? Or are you fairly lost at this point?

Beg your pardon, but are your own leads so dead that you must worry about mine when I have said I don't know?

So you'll forgive me if I view it as a bit more than you just saying "I don't know".

If you think I'm a rotten apple, then that is your opinion for now. So think it all you want.

More linki