The Syndicate

I'll be voting for Miss Mary Eastey.

Jennet Bierley wrote:

Katharina Henot wrote:I agree with you on both counts Jannet.

I want - just for crossing t's and dotting i's sake at this point - because I can see the case - look at All of mary's posts back to back, tomorrow. I'm guessing I'll still have the same feels I have now, but ya know, leave no stone unturned and all that...

That's Jennet to you.

But yes take your time, just make it back in time to vote.

Pardon me Dame Jannet. So very sorry I misspelled. I do that often. Unfortunately. *takes a thousand lashes*

Jennet - see I did it again. *facepalm*



I'm spelling challenged.

Jennet Bierley wrote:Why are there so many people keen on voting low posters today when we've got some of the strongest leads we've had all game on others, even if they are active? If Mary flips good, then I will back off and follow another's lead, but she is the one who has to go today.

I agree about the low posters, and I agree that we need to stick together. For the sake of this, I am willing to go with you and vote for Mary, even with your insistence that it *must* be Mary. This gives me a feel of ultimatum, which I do not like.

Katharina Henot wrote:
this was so much my point. I would assume that with a one mafia team, they would split the difference. That's what I would have done. Hide some and make some vocal.

I think that blindly lynching low posters for being low posters as "they might be bad" is a bad idea. I also think the same thing about lynching vocal players.

In the end - I'd like a case please. Like a real live one . with quotes and everything.

I cut out the quote part, it was fairly broken.

I find this curious; you have been on baddie teams where you strategize on this level? "Make" some people behave certain ways? I have been on a fair number of bad teams, and I have NEVER been on a team that attempts to micromanage in this fashion. People just do what they do. The best and most successful teams I have ever had consisted of ALL vocal players.

That said, there has been SO much specific discussion today, it's Grand
So anyone trying to lynch low posters just because they are low posters, not so Grand

Alizon & Malin, with their weird vote for Maret shot waaaaay up my hit parade last night. And that is how I think of them, Alizon & Malin, like a tag team.

Someone posted a list of their Top Five, and all the same witches were on mine, my order was different:

Alizon & Malin
Entjen
Mary
Karin

Alizon & Malin shot to the top of my charts last night, but they did not have far to go. My first experience of both (Alizon voting me for wanting to read back on lynched civvies? The suspicions of a known civvie whose role potentially allowed her to know the roles of others is something only a baddie would be interested in? WTF? Alizon: "Hey, no need for you to be reading that rot" *Slaps Merga back*; Malin ridiculing someone for a spelling error, an attempt to shame them into silence) was not a good impression. Followed by their tag team distraction vote, desire to lynch low posters, etc.

Although, in reality they are all very, very close together. I suspect Alizon & Malin only fractionally more than Entjen, and she only a tad more than Mary. I need to see more of Karin in real time to make an assessment, but the points others have made are solid.

I look forward to hearing from Agnes when her reread is done, she said she saw some behavior that was making her nervous. I am hoping it is the same behavior the rest of us are seeing.

As I said, I am going to *Vote Mary Eastey* as she already is the vote leader on whom those of us who seem to be civvie minded are agreeing, and I think we all need to do that, to avoid shenanigans. This thread misses a lot of votes, and any further spread would not be in the civvies best interest.

heh

heh heh

heh heh heh

"And who are you, the proud lord said,
that I must bow so low?
Only a cat of a different coat,
that's all the truth I know.
In a coat of gold or a coat of red,
a lion still has claws,
And mine are long and sharp, my lord,
as long and sharp as yours.
And so he spoke, and so he spoke,
that lord of Castamere,
But now the rains weep o'er his hall,
with no one there to hear.
Yes now the rains weep o'er his hall,
and not a soul to hear."

I saw Merga Bien with the devil.
I saw Jennet Bierley with the devil.
I saw Alizon Device with the devil.
I saw Mary Eastey with the devil.
I saw Entjen Gillis with the devil.
I saw Sarah Good with the devil.
I saw Katharina Henot with the devil.
I saw Märet Jonsdotter with the devil.
I saw Anna Koldings with the devil.
I saw Barbara Kollerin with the devil.
I saw Malin Matsdotter with the devil.
I saw Kael Merrie with the devil.
I saw Rebecca Nurse with the devil.
I saw Alice Nutter with the devil.
I saw Anne Redferne with the devil.
I saw Margarethe Reinberg with the devil.
I saw Jane Southworth with the devil.
I saw Karin Svensdotter with the devil.
I saw Anne Whittle with the devil.
I saw Brita Zippel with the devil.

I saw the devil.

Mary, here you are one of the top suspicions for the day, and you act like this. What are you doing?

Contra vigiliarum Diabolo surgere illum venit Deus, qui repulisti nos

ukusithethelela izono futhi nawe usindiswe

M nwere ike na-eche-akpalikarị, ọbụna ugbu a. Na-abịa, soaring-erepịa ihe niile ha ụzọ

Diruto magna qui exterminabat, et omnia in viam, suus 'O miserere te ut plane proxime ad te elevat

Merga Bien wrote:Malin ridiculing someone for a spelling error, an attempt to shame them into silence) was not a good impression.

That's absurd. There was neither ridicule nor shame. You've blown a harmless joke way out of proportion.

o induere audio unum ad gradus hortatione

Mary Eastey wrote:Contra vigiliarum Diabolo surgere illum venit Deus, qui repulisti nos

Sectumsempra




*votes Mary*

yea I'm voting Mary. It seems she has admitted defeat at this point.

I would like to hear what Agnes has to say before voting but since Mary has chosen not to defend herself and just talk in other languages I just don't know if what Agnes has to say would change my mind today. I'll wait a bit though before voting - there is plenty of time.

Mary Eastey wrote:I saw Merga Bien with the devil.
I saw Jennet Bierley with the devil.
I saw Alizon Device with the devil.
I saw Mary Eastey with the devil.
I saw Entjen Gillis with the devil.
I saw Sarah Good with the devil.
I saw Katharina Henot with the devil.
I saw Märet Jonsdotter with the devil.
I saw Anna Koldings with the devil.
I saw Barbara Kollerin with the devil.
I saw Malin Matsdotter with the devil.
I saw Kael Merrie with the devil.
I saw Rebecca Nurse with the devil.
I saw Alice Nutter with the devil.
I saw Anne Redferne with the devil.
I saw Margarethe Reinberg with the devil.
I saw Jane Southworth with the devil.
I saw Karin Svensdotter with the devil.
I saw Anne Whittle with the devil.
I saw Brita Zippel with the devil.

The devil is rubbish, he is a muggle invention designed to keep the meek in line. Similar to his function in this game apparently.

Malin Matsdotter wrote:

Merga Bien wrote:Malin ridiculing someone for a spelling error, an attempt to shame them into silence) was not a good impression.

That's absurd. There was neither ridicule nor shame. You've blown a harmless joke way out of proportion.

I disagree, it is my experience that ridiculing people has a chilling effect on discussion, and Maret herself seemed offended by it. Making jokes at the expense of others is not harmless. It is a standard baddie tactic.

To be clear, I wasn't offended by the pun she made. I was more irritated that she chose to focus on that instead of my actual content. And then, when she did focus on the content of my post, she essentially said, "How trite! What a useless idea!" AND THEN she had the gaul to turn around and vote for me for.... quashing and steering discussion.

Jane Southworth wrote:I cannot believe people are still pushing the lynching of low posters after yesterday's debacle.

I cannot believe people are pushing the lynching of strange posters after day 2's debacle.

Jane Southworth wrote:Alizon, while I agree that it is likely that at least one, if not more of the baddies are playing the silent game underneath their socks, I don't think it's a good place for us to start our search for the Death eaters there. It is smarter to find a talkative baddie first, get her out of the game before she does any more damage, right? And hopefully once we get our first mafia lynch, we'll have some breadcrumbs to follow, perhaps allowing us to pinpoint the witch's quieter teammates. There is at least one witch playing keeper for her mafia quidditch team.

But Alizon did not end up voting for a low poster, she voted for Maret and quite abruptly. Alizon, what makes you so convinced about Maret? Can you point to specific things and why those things convinced you to vote for Maret?

I would rather lynch a quiet baddie and use the voting records to piece things together. Anyway No one wants to take my suggestion seriously and that's fine. So I voted for a loud person I think is talking like a baddie and has a bad record.

Katharina Henot wrote:

Alizon Device wrote:

Merga Bien wrote:We have some really good serious discussion going on about several people, and you want to lynch low posters? Really?

If the low posters are letting the high posters take the flak (which is all that's been going on), then YES really.

again I have to ask specifically which low posters outside of my case which is strong and I'm undecided on?

My top choice is Sarah Good, who voted for Mary before. So if Mary flips good, that's where I'll be looking. I am not confident that Mary E. is bad because of the bizarre behavior. Briget Bishop acted weird and people lynched her for it.

Alizon Device wrote:

Jane Southworth wrote:I cannot believe people are still pushing the lynching of low posters after yesterday's debacle.

I cannot believe people are pushing the lynching of strange posters after day 2's debacle.

Jane Southworth wrote:Alizon, while I agree that it is likely that at least one, if not more of the baddies are playing the silent game underneath their socks, I don't think it's a good place for us to start our search for the Death eaters there. It is smarter to find a talkative baddie first, get her out of the game before she does any more damage, right? And hopefully once we get our first mafia lynch, we'll have some breadcrumbs to follow, perhaps allowing us to pinpoint the witch's quieter teammates. There is at least one witch playing keeper for her mafia quidditch team.

But Alizon did not end up voting for a low poster, she voted for Maret and quite abruptly. Alizon, what makes you so convinced about Maret? Can you point to specific things and why those things convinced you to vote for Maret?

I would rather lynch a quiet baddie and use the voting records to piece things together. Anyway No one wants to take my suggestion seriously and that's fine. So I voted for a loud person I think is talking like a baddie and has a bad record.

Katharina Henot wrote:

Alizon Device wrote:

Merga Bien wrote:We have some really good serious discussion going on about several people, and you want to lynch low posters? Really?

If the low posters are letting the high posters take the flak (which is all that's been going on), then YES really.

again I have to ask specifically which low posters outside of my case which is strong and I'm undecided on?

My top choice is Sarah Good, who voted for Mary before. So if Mary flips good, that's where I'll be looking. I am not confident that Mary E. is bad because of the bizarre behavior. Briget Bishop acted weird and people lynched her for it.

So let me get this straight:
You find low posters more suspicious than me, but vote me (5th highest poster in the game) instead. You say I am talking like a baddie, yet fail to highlight a single one of those instances. You also fail to recognize that your suggestion WAS taken seriously, several people asked you who to look at, and you completely ignored them. You didn't say, "I dunno, I'm lost" or "I'm stuck, let's have some discussion"-- you ignored those people until now. You dismissed every single one of my ideas, were very derogatory in your remarks, and then continued to vote for me out of nowhere-- an ideological inconsistency. You didn't vote for a viable alternative to Mary, rather, you voted for me because I disagree with you. This absolves you of any responsibility or vote tracking and now you can't be tied to anything.
Who's acting like a baddie?

I would also hardly say that Mary is being voted for based solely on bizarre behavior. She has insisted that teachers are a huge threat, and I do not think they are. Who would want us to think that the teachers are public enemy number one? Voldemort.

I find it interesting that Alizon's talking point changed from active/high posters to bizarre/strange posters.

You should check out Mary's voting record too, something I completely forgot to mention in my case.

Märet Jonsdotter wrote:To be clear, I wasn't offended by the pun she made. I was more irritated that she chose to focus on that instead of my actual content. And then, when she did focus on the content of my post, she essentially said, "How trite! What a useless idea!" AND THEN she had the gaul to turn around and vote for me for.... quashing and steering discussion.

I feel I need to refresh the memory of the group on the sequence of events.
1. You made a very brief post asking about lynch leaders that I, personally, did not see much value in.
2. I made a joke.
3. Merga asked for a more serious response.
4. I provided one, explaining my reasoning in a perfectly polite way.
5. You, apparently unsatisfied, asked me to comment again.
6. I did, being a bit more honest and less diplomatic than the first time.

AT that point, I was the only person who actually expressed an opinion on your post. If I were you, I would be more suspect of the people who outright ignored you than the ones who took the time to actually respond and offer opinions.

Mary's got my vote.

Malin Matsdotter wrote:

Märet Jonsdotter wrote:To be clear, I wasn't offended by the pun she made. I was more irritated that she chose to focus on that instead of my actual content. And then, when she did focus on the content of my post, she essentially said, "How trite! What a useless idea!" AND THEN she had the gaul to turn around and vote for me for.... quashing and steering discussion.

I feel I need to refresh the memory of the group on the sequence of events.
1. You made a very brief post asking about lynch leaders that I, personally, did not see much value in.
2. I made a joke.
3. Merga asked for a more serious response.
4. I provided one, explaining my reasoning in a perfectly polite way.
5. You, apparently unsatisfied, asked me to comment again.
6. I did, being a bit more honest and less diplomatic than the first time.

AT that point, I was the only person who actually expressed an opinion on your post. If I were you, I would be more suspect of the people who outright ignored you than the ones who took the time to actually respond and offer opinions.

You don't think your complete dismissal of everything I said completely crushed discussion?
I suspect Alizon more than you, for what it's worth. But you, also, did a 180. You went from wanting to lynch a low poster to voting for the person who now has the 4th most posts in the game.

Märet Jonsdotter wrote: You don't think your complete dismissal of everything I said completely crushed discussion?

No. First of all "everything you said" consisted of one question of no more than a dozen words. I merely offered an opinion on it when asked. I fully expected others to say "I agree with Malin because..." or "I disagree with Malin because..." I thought that was how discussion was supposed to work. Do I have to agree with you in order to encourage discussion?

Malin Matsdotter wrote:

Märet Jonsdotter wrote: You don't think your complete dismissal of everything I said completely crushed discussion?

No. First of all "everything you said" consisted of one question of no more than a dozen words. I merely offered an opinion on it when asked. I fully expected others to say "I agree with Malin because..." or "I disagree with Malin because..." I thought that was how discussion was supposed to work. Do I have to agree with you in order to encourage discussion?

Really? Because you seemed pretty read to kill my discussion from the get go.

I think Alizon was more guilty of killing discussion than you were, though.

Malin Matsdotter wrote:

Alizon Device wrote:I voted Merga Bien. That last post didnt sit well with me. Why reread Krys when Krys died a civvie?

Voting for someone who can't be lynched today is a good way of avoiding accountability.

However, this post of yours is quite interesting to me.

Karin Svensdotter wrote:Mary's got my vote.

nothing else?

Märet Jonsdotter wrote: Really? Because you seemed pretty read to kill my discussion from the get go.

Well I wasn't. I don't know what else I can say. I can't control what other people choose to discuss or not to discuss.

Malin Matsdotter wrote:

Märet Jonsdotter wrote: Really? Because you seemed pretty read to kill my discussion from the get go.

Well I wasn't. I don't know what else I can say. I can't control what other people choose to discuss or not to discuss.

Of course not directly.
However, you can help form attitudes and such.

In addition, I do believe we have reached such a discussion. I do believe that the discussion about Mary and entjen, etc has been in this line of reasoning. So, I do think people eventually responded to my question, just not directly.

You however, chastised Alizon YESTERDAY for voting someone who was not going to be lynched. Why did you vote me?

Märet Jonsdotter wrote: You however, chastised Alizon YESTERDAY for voting someone who was not going to be lynched. Why did you vote me?

Flase. There is a difference between voting for someone who won't be lynched (which I had no way of knowing at the time of my vote anyway) and voting for someone who CANNOT be lynched because the hosts explicitly told us not to vote for her. Please stop mischaracterising my statements.

Anyway, I was mostly just giving Alizon a hard time for not reading the hosts' instructions. I didn't seriously think she would have voted that way unless it was an oversight.

Not a lot of time. Voting Mary. She never responded to my questions and I think she realizes she's been caught. She isn't bothering to defend herself or even offer any suspicions other than Jennet, a suspicion that only really makes sense if Mary is a Death eater. Now she's just posting nonsense. Definitely looks like she's given up.

Jennet I haven't forgotten about the points I want to make about the Margaret lynch. I also think it's interesting that Karin voted for Mary even though the points brought up about them both are remarkably similar and Karin refuses to offer any insight into her votes.

I can agree with you about Karin. I think I made a comment about her a little while back (Day 4 I believe) in that she has done nothing but vote. Though it seems to me that she is not the only one who's been quiet today.

And not only has she just voted, but they've consistently been bandwagon votes.

i think speaking in latin and posting about the devil seems like "i've given up" behavior.

can't wait to see how this shakes out.

@ merga - no - I've not, when I've been mafia before, people's natural habits and such kinda draw that line for them. I've not been a baddie in a sock game before so I figure there may be different discussions.

Not feeling any better about mary so I'm voting there.

wtf was that? mega - I've got no idea how I did that but I did NOT intend to vote you.

Well, Agnus I still want to know what you have to say but I've got to go out and am not sure i'll be back in time for the lynch. I continue to have bad feelings about Mary trying to pursue the teachers when there are baddies to find, and I don't like the way she uses inflammatory words to describe them ("super shady indie team"). And then on top of that, she's not defending at all, just writing in different languages, laughing, and reprinting something from GOT. I agree this seems like "i'm giving up" behavior. She really feels bad to me so I'm going to go ahead and vote for her.
*votes Mary Eastey*

I wouldnt be at all surprised if Mary comes up a teacher.

Malin Matsdotter wrote:

Märet Jonsdotter wrote: You however, chastised Alizon YESTERDAY for voting someone who was not going to be lynched. Why did you vote me?

Flase. There is a difference between voting for someone who won't be lynched (which I had no way of knowing at the time of my vote anyway) and voting for someone who CANNOT be lynched because the hosts explicitly told us not to vote for her. Please stop mischaracterising my statements.

Not my intention. I quickly read over the exchange-- there is a difference, and I apologize. Also to be fair, this is the FIRST time I've mischaracterized you. Nice try.
Still stands: you are vowed to lynch low posters, yet you vote me-- for still no reason given. Still.

Alizon Device wrote:I wouldnt be at all surprised if Mary comes up a teacher.

Can you please explain what you know about the teachers?

Märet Jonsdotter wrote:

Alizon Device wrote:I wouldnt be at all surprised if Mary comes up a teacher.

Can you please explain what you know about the teachers?

There are four of them. They are Minerva McGonagall, Filius Flitwick, Pomona Sprout, and Severus Snape. They are the heads of the four houses of Hogwartz. They are independents. They did not begin with BTSC. They all have secrets.

Hope that helps.

Alizon Device wrote:

Märet Jonsdotter wrote:

Alizon Device wrote:I wouldnt be at all surprised if Mary comes up a teacher.

Can you please explain what you know about the teachers?

There are four of them. They are Minerva McGonagall, Filius Flitwick, Pomona Sprout, and Severus Snape. They are the heads of the four houses of Hogwartz. They are independents. They did not begin with BTSC. They all have secrets.

Hope that helps.

I am not a teacher, but I'll say what I can say:
I would be very much shocked to see a teacher lynch.

I think the case on Mary is pretty compelling. I'm placing my vote there.

Mary Mary quite contrary.

Day 5

Who is an extremely lousy Death Eater?

Poll ended at Tue Feb 25, 2014 5:51 pm

Merga Bien
1
Katharina Henot (15)
5%

Jennet Bierley
1
Mary Eastey (4)
5%

Alizon Device
0
No votes

Mary Eastey
12
Jennet Bierley (3), Anne Redferne (7), Barbara Kollerin (8), Merga Bien (9), Märet Jonsdotter (10), Entjen Gillis (11), Karin Svensdotter (12), Alice Nutter (13), Jane Southworth (14), Margarethe Reinberg (16), Agnes Sampson (18), Sarah Good (19)
63%

Entjen Gillis
0
No votes

Sarah Good
0
No votes

Katharina Henot
0
No votes

Märet Jonsdotter
2
Alizon Device (5), Malin Matsdotter (6)
11%

Anna Koldings
0
No votes

Barbara Kollerin
0
No votes

Malin Matsdotter
0
No votes

Kael Merrie
0
No votes

Rebecca Nurse
0
No votes

Alice Nutter
0
No votes

Anne Redferne
0
No votes

Margarethe Reinberg
0
No votes

Jane Southworth
0
No votes

Karin Svensdotter
0
No votes

Anne Whittle
0
No votes

Brita Zippel
0
No votes

Wormtail (Hosts/Mod/Deadies)
3
Lizzy (1), S~V~S (2), A Person (17)
16%


Total votes : 19

Missing votes: Anna Koldings, Kael Merrie, Rebecca Nurse, Anne Whittle, Brita Zippel