The Syndicate

bea wrote:

zeek wrote:Okay, so I am making the biggest U-turn in the world ever. Made wasn't lying.

And the Mad Hatter is a very naughty boy.

sooo...how does this change how you see things? I'd imagine you see things diffently now?

btw - I'm not suprised that some one is having to make a u-turn on made - or that it's you.

also RIP INH. I wanted to fuck with you "program" more than I got to.


I don't get why peeps said that was an odd kill choice any more than I got why peeps thought br was an odd kill choice. Killing INH - puts suspish directly on booms. Whom Made was made to vote for and Dom voted for of his own accord.

If I were really baddie, do you think I'd be so foolish as to complain about INH and then kill him on the very next night?

Russtifinko wrote:

juliets wrote: MP, lol I didn't play Cars but I understand what you mean in the games we have played together. I think it's because my style is pretty consistent regardless of alignment.

So this is not the best example of what I'm pointing out, but it's at least a reasonably decent one until I have time to go back and hunt for one. Lots of people (at least 4 that I've counted, though I forget who) have self-analyzed their play style so far, and this goes as far back as Day 1. Did I miss something and that's normal now, or is it a new norm? In my experience, people saying they're playing their civ game is both pointless (because 1. if they knew they had a "baddie game" then of course they wouldn't play it because it would get them caught and 2. they could be lying) and pingy as hell. It seems mostly like it's being let go this game, though.

As I said, juliets' post isn't the best example. But someone definitely said "I'm playing my civ game" or something very similar a while ago. If I find them, I plan to suspect them, and any help finding them would be appreciated.

Juliets did say, without hesitation, "I am not afraid of being closely looked at because I am civ, not bad or indy." Which seems pretty distinctly to say "I'm playing my civ game."

Russtifinko wrote:

juliets wrote: MP, lol I didn't play Cars but I understand what you mean in the games we have played together. I think it's because my style is pretty consistent regardless of alignment.

So this is not the best example of what I'm pointing out, but it's at least a reasonably decent one until I have time to go back and hunt for one. Lots of people (at least 4 that I've counted, though I forget who) have self-analyzed their play style so far, and this goes as far back as Day 1. Did I miss something and that's normal now, or is it a new norm? In my experience, people saying they're playing their civ game is both pointless (because 1. if they knew they had a "baddie game" then of course they wouldn't play it because it would get them caught and 2. they could be lying) and pingy as hell. It seems mostly like it's being let go this game, though.

As I said, juliets' post isn't the best example. But someone definitely said "I'm playing my civ game" or something very similar a while ago. If I find them, I plan to suspect them, and any help finding them would be appreciated.

I was making a statement for the lie detector, Boe, if he she wanted to check it. Also someone, I think Made, asked several people including me about the contrast in our good and bad alignment behavior. Someone, maybe llama, maybe someone else, answered the question immediately. My impression was thats why they were making that statement. I just can't remember who it was. I think tha'ts what you may be remembering and if i had to guess I would say it was llama.

MP, can you remind me of why you're suspicious of me again?

Since Zeek is indicating that Made isn't lying, I guess I feel a little better about Made, although I do wonder whether the lynch yesterday was civ/civ or civ/baddie. I do think it would be more sensible to look first at the people who voted for a confirmed civ than those who voted someone whose alignment is unknown.

DF - why limit yourself that way? Do you think that every person who did not vote llama is a civ? Or vice versa do you think that everyone who did not vote either Made or llama is good?

In essence what I am seeing DH and now you are saying is that I, a llama voter, should be scruntinized more bc I did not try and lynch Made. it just feels wrong to limit yourself in this way.

Also last time SVS and MP trusted each other turned out bad if I remember correctly.

Roxy wrote:DF - why limit yourself that way? Do you think that every person who did not vote llama is a civ? Or vice versa do you think that everyone who did not vote either Made or llama is good?

In essence what I am seeing DH and now you are saying is that I, a llama voter, should be scruntinized more bc I did not try and lynch Made. it just feels wrong to limit yourself in this way.

Actually, thats kind of exactly what I'm saying. I understand I'm unlikely to convince you that looking at a group of players that includes yourself is a good idea, but check my logic/thought process out:

Logically, in a game like this and in actual detective work, etc, it makes the most sense to start with the larger picture and work your way down into smaller chunks that are easier to analyze.

For me, the most logical "chunk" to analyze is llama voters.

Kinda starting from scratch today as I've thrown the Made stuff out after last night's events. Dunno where to start tbh.

Roxy wrote:Also last time SVS and MP trusted each other turned out bad if I remember correctly.

They trusted each other in Who before MP was recruited even. Not sure it's an indication of anything.

DH by your own logic we should be looking at all the people who voted Metalmarsh - something you did not seem to focus on during the last lynch - I wonder why?

Actually everyone who has insisted on looking at the llama voters why didn't you do the same for Metalmarsh? Why didn't this strong feelings of looking at civ voters turn up in the last lynch?

I am sorry but this just feels like a way to avoid any scrutiny.

Yep I voted for Metalmarsh and llama.
Mayhaps you should be looking at everyone who voted both?

Also DH the post you quoted is directed to DF not DH.

Roxy wrote:Also last time SVS and MP trusted each other turned out bad if I remember correctly.

Actually I believe it was Dr Who, both civvies (at least he was initially).

Roxy wrote:Also DH the post you quoted is directed to DF not DH.

I just felt like commenting.

Roxy, I'm not saying that only Llama voters should be scrutinized, but we don't know Made's alignment. It's still very possible that he is a baddie, in which case he probably would have had teammates vote for Llama. I was mainly making my point in regards to FZ's statement that the Made voters should be focused on, which seems counterintuitive to me.

zeek wrote:Also, I fear BR may have been the Card Czar. No CAH stuff tonight.

Yes, could be. I was really looking forward to that too :/ Or...could be Hedgeowl. She still has yest to post I think.

I don't think the Card Czar could be Hedgeowl Elo because the Car Czar requested cards on our first night and then didn't anymore. Hedgie, as you point out, never even checked in so the chances it was her are slim I think.

DFaraday wrote:Roxy, I'm not saying that only Llama voters should be scrutinized, but we don't know Made's alignment. It's still very possible that he is a baddie, in which case he probably would have had teammates vote for Llama. I was mainly making my point in regards to FZ's statement that the Made voters should be focused on, which seems counterintuitive to me.

My point is that why didn't you scrutinize the Metalmarsh voters for a poss DH save if it is such a great place to start?

Thanks SVS about the reminder that it was Dr Who.

Roxy wrote:DH by your own logic we should be looking at all the people who voted Metalmarsh - something you did not seem to focus on during the last lynch - I wonder why?

Actually everyone who has insisted on looking at the llama voters why didn't you do the same for Metalmarsh? Why didn't this strong feelings of looking at civ voters turn up in the last lynch?

I am sorry but this just feels like a way to avoid any scrutiny.

Yep I voted for Metalmarsh and llama.
Mayhaps you should be looking at everyone who voted both?

Well, I know I wasn't the target of a save. And I feel more comfortable with the llama train of thought.

Its a very convenient story DH

Jk I am not going to be limiting my options the way some are so quick to do. I do not think muchcan be made of those votes until we know DH or Mades alignment it feels like we are in Salem at the witch trials

Roxy wrote:MP Why is rey one of your top 3 trusted players? I have to say I am finding it hard to believe.

Well, my list is ever fluctuating, so "top 3" is subject to change, and it's tough to judge exactly how I feel about everyone.

With that said, what reywaS has posted, mostly in the early stages in the game, struck me as genuine all the way through.

Boomslang wrote:

bea wrote:

zeek wrote:Okay, so I am making the biggest U-turn in the world ever. Made wasn't lying.

And the Mad Hatter is a very naughty boy.

sooo...how does this change how you see things? I'd imagine you see things diffently now?

btw - I'm not suprised that some one is having to make a u-turn on made - or that it's you.

also RIP INH. I wanted to fuck with you "program" more than I got to.


I don't get why peeps said that was an odd kill choice any more than I got why peeps thought br was an odd kill choice. Killing INH - puts suspish directly on booms. Whom Made was made to vote for and Dom voted for of his own accord.

If I were really baddie, do you think I'd be so foolish as to complain about INH and then kill him on the very next night?

Russtifinko wrote:

juliets wrote: MP, lol I didn't play Cars but I understand what you mean in the games we have played together. I think it's because my style is pretty consistent regardless of alignment.

So this is not the best example of what I'm pointing out, but it's at least a reasonably decent one until I have time to go back and hunt for one. Lots of people (at least 4 that I've counted, though I forget who) have self-analyzed their play style so far, and this goes as far back as Day 1. Did I miss something and that's normal now, or is it a new norm? In my experience, people saying they're playing their civ game is both pointless (because 1. if they knew they had a "baddie game" then of course they wouldn't play it because it would get them caught and 2. they could be lying) and pingy as hell. It seems mostly like it's being let go this game, though.

As I said, juliets' post isn't the best example. But someone definitely said "I'm playing my civ game" or something very similar a while ago. If I find them, I plan to suspect them, and any help finding them would be appreciated.

Juliets did say, without hesitation, "I am not afraid of being closely looked at because I am civ, not bad or indy." Which seems pretty distinctly to say "I'm playing my civ game."

As has been noted, I believe that's because of the existence of Face of Boe.

What are your suspects? Thoughts on Made, DH, anyone else?

Same question goes for Russ.

DFaraday wrote:MP, can you remind me of why you're suspicious of me again?

Since Zeek is indicating that Made isn't lying, I guess I feel a little better about Made, although I do wonder whether the lynch yesterday was civ/civ or civ/baddie. I do think it would be more sensible to look first at the people who voted for a confirmed civ than those who voted someone whose alignment is unknown.

This vote, primarily:

DFaraday wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

DFaraday wrote:I have found MM rather shifty, particularly his questions of Llama that seemed to be setting Llama up.

I also am wary of DH, but I've never been able to read him.

I was looking for a reaction from SVS. The question was not shifty, nor was I trying to set llama up.

That may be, but as I don't have time to analyze this DH/LC stuff, I'll still vote you because it cricked my brow.

Seemed like a way to latch onto MM and struck me as possibly contrived. I also find it suspicious you didn't comment on DH or LC, even though you previously said you were wary of DH.

S~V~S wrote:

Roxy wrote:Also last time SVS and MP trusted each other turned out bad if I remember correctly.

Actually I believe it was Dr Who, both civvies (at least he was initially).

This is true. I didn't even get recruited until Night 9 or so.

Roxy wrote:Its a very convenient story DH

Jk I am not going to be limiting my options the way some are so quick to do. I do not think muchcan be made of those votes until we know DH or Mades alignment it feels like we are in Salem at the witch trials

I don't understand anyone limiting their options either. It's a logical fallacy, IMO, and strikes me as suspicious.

Who are your top suspects right now, Rox?

Roxy wrote:

DFaraday wrote:Roxy, I'm not saying that only Llama voters should be scrutinized, but we don't know Made's alignment. It's still very possible that he is a baddie, in which case he probably would have had teammates vote for Llama. I was mainly making my point in regards to FZ's statement that the Made voters should be focused on, which seems counterintuitive to me.

My point is that why didn't you scrutinize the Metalmarsh voters for a poss DH save if it is such a great place to start?

Thanks SVS about the reminder that it was Dr Who.

The point is we both were not baddies. The last time we were baddies together was WWE, where we nearly killed each other in thread and out. When were you thinking of that we were both baddies and getting along. I don't recall that tbh.

Roxy wrote:

DFaraday wrote:Roxy, I'm not saying that only Llama voters should be scrutinized, but we don't know Made's alignment. It's still very possible that he is a baddie, in which case he probably would have had teammates vote for Llama. I was mainly making my point in regards to FZ's statement that the Made voters should be focused on, which seems counterintuitive to me.

My point is that why didn't you scrutinize the Metalmarsh voters for a poss DH save if it is such a great place to start?

Thanks SVS about the reminder that it was Dr Who.

I haven't scrutinized anyone this game; I've barely even posted. But I do think it would be more sensible to look at MM voters than DH voters, given that we don't know DH's alignment.

S~V~S wrote:

Roxy wrote:

DFaraday wrote:Roxy, I'm not saying that only Llama voters should be scrutinized, but we don't know Made's alignment. It's still very possible that he is a baddie, in which case he probably would have had teammates vote for Llama. I was mainly making my point in regards to FZ's statement that the Made voters should be focused on, which seems counterintuitive to me.

My point is that why didn't you scrutinize the Metalmarsh voters for a poss DH save if it is such a great place to start?

Thanks SVS about the reminder that it was Dr Who.

The point is we both were not baddies. The last time we were baddies together was WWE, where we nearly killed each other in thread and out. When were you thinking of that we were both baddies and getting along. I don't recall that tbh.

You are prob right as my memory is shit at even remembering what roles I have had in games but I was thinking it was a TP game - I want to say it was awhile back and the theme had something to do with computers or something recruiting-wise. I wish I had some sort of TP directory of games. So many great memories on that site.

MP - I am doing some reading I'll get back to you.

RIP INH.

Timmer, I hope things get better. Sadly, I can relate, even though I hope what you're dealing with is very different from this. Fucking cancer has taken 2 close friends recently and is now threatening to take a family member from me. So this game is a struggle for me as well. Sometimes though, it's a good escape from RL. I think that's why I keep playing.

DharmaHelper wrote:

Roxy wrote:DF - why limit yourself that way? Do you think that every person who did not vote llama is a civ? Or vice versa do you think that everyone who did not vote either Made or llama is good?

In essence what I am seeing DH and now you are saying is that I, a llama voter, should be scruntinized more bc I did not try and lynch Made. it just feels wrong to limit yourself in this way.

Actually, thats kind of exactly what I'm saying. I understand I'm unlikely to convince you that looking at a group of players that includes yourself is a good idea, but check my logic/thought process out:

Logically, in a game like this and in actual detective work, etc, it makes the most sense to start with the larger picture and work your way down into smaller chunks that are easier to analyze.

For me, the most logical "chunk" to analyze is llama voters.

I'm not fully caught up yet, but I just needed to address this post. Since we now know Made was not lying, at least about what every person who voted for him voted for, then your reasoning sucked, and if anything, this just proves what I said before. That since the voters for Made had a more "solid" reason to vote for him, it's much easier for baddies to bandwagon on that lynch then it was on llama's.
Taking into consideration that there are two groups of baddies, and the fact that we know civvies make mistakes and lynch other civvies, I see absolutely no reason to assume that there are more baddies on llama's list then there are on Made's.
And that's even without assuming Made is a civ. If he turns out to be a civ, I'd say the odds of finding baddies on Made's list are even higher

I love this bit. Thanks Rob.

Epignosis wrote:
“Awareness is expensive in Finald,” said Vompatti.

FZ. wrote:RIP INH.

Timmer, I hope things get better. Sadly, I can relate, even though I hope what you're dealing with is very different from this. Fucking cancer has taken 2 close friends recently and is now threatening to take a family member from me. So this game is a struggle for me as well. Sometimes though, it's a good escape from RL. I think that's why I keep playing.

DharmaHelper wrote:

Roxy wrote:DF - why limit yourself that way? Do you think that every person who did not vote llama is a civ? Or vice versa do you think that everyone who did not vote either Made or llama is good?

In essence what I am seeing DH and now you are saying is that I, a llama voter, should be scruntinized more bc I did not try and lynch Made. it just feels wrong to limit yourself in this way.

Actually, thats kind of exactly what I'm saying. I understand I'm unlikely to convince you that looking at a group of players that includes yourself is a good idea, but check my logic/thought process out:

Logically, in a game like this and in actual detective work, etc, it makes the most sense to start with the larger picture and work your way down into smaller chunks that are easier to analyze.

For me, the most logical "chunk" to analyze is llama voters.

I'm not fully caught up yet, but I just needed to address this post. Since we now know Made was not lying, at least about what every person who voted for him voted for, then your reasoning sucked, and if anything, this just proves what I said before. That since the voters for Made had a more "solid" reason to vote for him, it's much easier for baddies to bandwagon on that lynch then it was on llama's.
Taking into consideration that there are two groups of baddies, and the fact that we know civvies make mistakes and lynch other civvies, I see absolutely no reason to assume that there are more baddies on llama's list then there are on Made's.
And that's even without assuming Made is a civ. If he turns out to be a civ, I'd say the odds of finding baddies on Made's list are even higher

Since the reasoning for voting for llama was weak (apart from it being proven false), it'd be equally as easy for baddies to bandwagon onto him. By what you JUST posted, you've proven my point. You say the odds of there being baddies that voted for Made would be higher if we was proven civ? LLama *was* proven civ.

EBWOP: If *he was, not if we was.

DharmaHelper wrote:

FZ. wrote:RIP INH.

Timmer, I hope things get better. Sadly, I can relate, even though I hope what you're dealing with is very different from this. Fucking cancer has taken 2 close friends recently and is now threatening to take a family member from me. So this game is a struggle for me as well. Sometimes though, it's a good escape from RL. I think that's why I keep playing.

DharmaHelper wrote:

Roxy wrote:DF - why limit yourself that way? Do you think that every person who did not vote llama is a civ? Or vice versa do you think that everyone who did not vote either Made or llama is good?

In essence what I am seeing DH and now you are saying is that I, a llama voter, should be scruntinized more bc I did not try and lynch Made. it just feels wrong to limit yourself in this way.

Actually, thats kind of exactly what I'm saying. I understand I'm unlikely to convince you that looking at a group of players that includes yourself is a good idea, but check my logic/thought process out:

Logically, in a game like this and in actual detective work, etc, it makes the most sense to start with the larger picture and work your way down into smaller chunks that are easier to analyze.

For me, the most logical "chunk" to analyze is llama voters.

I'm not fully caught up yet, but I just needed to address this post. Since we now know Made was not lying, at least about what every person who voted for him voted for, then your reasoning sucked, and if anything, this just proves what I said before. That since the voters for Made had a more "solid" reason to vote for him, it's much easier for baddies to bandwagon on that lynch then it was on llama's.
Taking into consideration that there are two groups of baddies, and the fact that we know civvies make mistakes and lynch other civvies, I see absolutely no reason to assume that there are more baddies on llama's list then there are on Made's.
And that's even without assuming Made is a civ. If he turns out to be a civ, I'd say the odds of finding baddies on Made's list are even higher

Since the reasoning for voting for llama was weak (apart from it being proven false), it'd be equally as easy for baddies to bandwagon onto him. By what you JUST posted, you've proven my point. You say the odds of there being baddies that voted for Made would be higher if we was proven civ? LLama *was* proven civ.

No, what I'm saying is, a baddie would be much more concerned in voting with what would appear as "solid" evidence, than a civ would. And the reason for voting llama was allegedly weaker, because there wasn't any "evidence". So I think if a baddie had to vote for one of two who weren't on his team, he'd vote for Made. And if Made is a civ, there are two teams who'd be more likely to do that. Hence the higher likelihood of finding baddies on the Made list

Well we can ping and pong this back and forth all we want but I think the crux of it is "Different strokes for different folks."

I find what I find suspicious, you evidently do the same.

DharmaHelper wrote:Well we can ping and pong this back and forth all we want but I think the crux of it is "Different strokes for different folks."

I find what I find suspicious, you evidently do the same.

Apparently
That said, I think that the whole Made thing has kind of sidetracked us. It's made me focus on those who went after him, making him unjustifiably appear more like a civ. Now that it seems as the doing of an independent role, it brings Made back to being a suspect just like everyone else, but without him having to do anything that would make him squirm when pushed to the corner. Too bad

What does everyone think of my thoughts on Rey and Timmer? Rubbish?

Dom wrote:What does everyone think of my thoughts on Rey and Timmer? Rubbish?

Dom wrote:What does everyone think of my thoughts on Rey and Timmer? Rubbish?

I'm not sure i understand - reywas Dom thinks you could be bad and you're shaking your head yes?

Dom one reason I'm kinda hesitant on the theory is back when I played on a bts team with timmer and we were civ, he had a lot of trouble posting because of some things going on in RL. I'm wondering if he's having those same problems because of the post he made. rey I don't know about so it does put a question mark in my mind, though rey too has not been posting much in games recently. It's a theory I'm going to keep in mind as we move forward. I'd like to know what some others think too.

EBWOP: I see now why you are shaking your head yes rey, it's because Dom asked if his ideas are rubbish and you're saying "yes".

reywaS wrote:

Dom wrote:What does everyone think of my thoughts on Rey and Timmer? Rubbish?

Dom wrote:What does everyone think of my thoughts on Rey and Timmer? Rubbish?

So is this a smiley curse?

Dom, I don't think we can say much about Timmer, but the whole thing you suggested is something I really hope baddies don't do. I like baddies that actually try to play and look like they are baddie hunting. So even though some baddies actually do nothing and let everyone else do the hard work for them, my default is to think that people who so obviously don't contribute and don't even try to hide it, are civvies. Could be wrong, but I hope not.

Roxy wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

Roxy wrote:

DFaraday wrote:Roxy, I'm not saying that only Llama voters should be scrutinized, but we don't know Made's alignment. It's still very possible that he is a baddie, in which case he probably would have had teammates vote for Llama. I was mainly making my point in regards to FZ's statement that the Made voters should be focused on, which seems counterintuitive to me.

My point is that why didn't you scrutinize the Metalmarsh voters for a poss DH save if it is such a great place to start?

Thanks SVS about the reminder that it was Dr Who.

The point is we both were not baddies. The last time we were baddies together was WWE, where we nearly killed each other in thread and out. When were you thinking of that we were both baddies and getting along. I don't recall that tbh.

You are prob right as my memory is shit at even remembering what roles I have had in games but I was thinking it was a TP game - I want to say it was awhile back and the theme had something to do with computers or something recruiting-wise. I wish I had some sort of TP directory of games. So many great memories on that site.

MP - I am doing some reading I'll get back to you.

Computer Lab, STLGirl hosted. I was bad with Kate, DP and I don't recall the third. Tranq was on the other bad team. I don't know that MP played that one. Kate was recruited, she won and I was not and did not. The recruit team was the Botnet.

juliets wrote:I'm not sure i understand - reywas Dom thinks you could be bad and you're shaking your head yes?

Dom one reason I'm kinda hesitant on the theory is back when I played on a bts team with timmer and we were civ, he had a lot of trouble posting because of some things going on in RL. I'm wondering if he's having those same problems because of the post he made. rey I don't know about so it does put a question mark in my mind, though rey too has not been posting much in games recently. It's a theory I'm going to keep in mind as we move forward. I'd like to know what some others think too.

My thought on timmer, though, is that he posted MULTIPLE times throughout day 2, but NONE of it had any content whatsoever... it just seems like a cop out- ya know?

I understand real life issues, and I don't want to penalize timmer for them, but he posted more than INH did through Day 2 (someone I would say was fairly active), but said absolutely nothing.

S~V~S wrote:

Roxy wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

Roxy wrote:

DFaraday wrote:Roxy, I'm not saying that only Llama voters should be scrutinized, but we don't know Made's alignment. It's still very possible that he is a baddie, in which case he probably would have had teammates vote for Llama. I was mainly making my point in regards to FZ's statement that the Made voters should be focused on, which seems counterintuitive to me.

My point is that why didn't you scrutinize the Metalmarsh voters for a poss DH save if it is such a great place to start?

Thanks SVS about the reminder that it was Dr Who.

The point is we both were not baddies. The last time we were baddies together was WWE, where we nearly killed each other in thread and out. When were you thinking of that we were both baddies and getting along. I don't recall that tbh.

You are prob right as my memory is shit at even remembering what roles I have had in games but I was thinking it was a TP game - I want to say it was awhile back and the theme had something to do with computers or something recruiting-wise. I wish I had some sort of TP directory of games. So many great memories on that site.

MP - I am doing some reading I'll get back to you.

Computer Lab, STLGirl hosted. I was bad with Kate, DP and I don't recall the third. Tranq was on the other bad team. I don't know that MP played that one. Kate was recruited, she won and I was not and did not. The recruit team was the Botnet.

I remember that game! I was civ and sucked

The civs had issues in that game, I think. I replaced a basically outed baddie (I am pretty sure that was the "Hey Man" game where he was outed, too, now that I think of it, Hey Man was the other teammate), I changed my avi to a really evil picture, and put my location as "I am a baddie" or something to that effect, lol, and you guys still didn't lynch me. Good Times

Just got home, time to catch up on the finger pointing, at work I basically just skim for my name lol.

Dom wrote:What does everyone think of my thoughts on Rey and Timmer? Rubbish?

I think your thoughts have merit. Timmer did say he was having RL issues, but I agree that their exchanges didn't contain much meat at all. I expected more to be said as they were waiting for each other to be able to do back and forth, when it culminated into essentially nothing. So you're thinking that it was just a way to look like they were saying something, but not actually reveal their opinions so as not to look bad? Or any particular way?

I think they are both better players than that, actually. As a planned strategy of avoidance, I dunno. And speaking of quiet, where is TH? He has not posted since before the night post. Could he be silenced? He was quiet-ish Day One. Then he was more vocal yesterday.

I would like to revisit the Day One lynch. So many people were so sure of Boomslang & DH. Then I butted in with my MM paranoia. I take the responsibility for the MM lynch. But what about everyones feelings about DH & Boom? Who was saving who? Anyone? No one?

Moving my vote, cause I gotta a few times.

I have no actual intention of remaining on you, S~V~S, I just know you'll be mature enough to understand.

Waiting for me to make a Federal Case out of it, aren't you?

nijuukyugou wrote:

Dom wrote:What does everyone think of my thoughts on Rey and Timmer? Rubbish?

I think your thoughts have merit. Timmer did say he was having RL issues, but I agree that their exchanges didn't contain much meat at all. I expected more to be said as they were waiting for each other to be able to do back and forth, when it culminated into essentially nothing. So you're thinking that it was just a way to look like they were saying something, but not actually reveal their opinions so as not to look bad? Or any particular way?

I just think it's strange that they clearly had time to a) post and b) participate in a contest that required tag team posting, but not to make any real contribution to the game whatsoever. Why is that?

S~V~S wrote:I think they are both better players than that, actually. As a planned strategy of avoidance, I dunno. And speaking of quiet, where is TH? He has not posted since before the night post. Could he be silenced? He was quiet-ish Day One. Then he was more vocal yesterday.

I would like to revisit the Day One lynch. So many people were so sure of Boomslang & DH. Then I butted in with my MM paranoia. I take the responsibility for the MM lynch. But what about everyones feelings about DH & Boom? Who was saving who? Anyone? No one?

I am still HIGHLY suspicious of Boomslang, but I remain undecided on DH-- I feel like I don't know his game very well at all. I have never been able to read him. Can you give me the highlights on that?

S~V~S wrote:Waiting for me to make a Federal Case out of it, aren't you?

What does that me :P

*mean

nijuukyugou wrote:

Dom wrote:What does everyone think of my thoughts on Rey and Timmer? Rubbish?

I think your thoughts have merit. Timmer did say he was having RL issues, but I agree that their exchanges didn't contain much meat at all. I expected more to be said as they were waiting for each other to be able to do back and forth, when it culminated into essentially nothing. So you're thinking that it was just a way to look like they were saying something, but not actually reveal their opinions so as not to look bad? Or any particular way?

reywaS wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote:

Dom wrote:What does everyone think of my thoughts on Rey and Timmer? Rubbish?

I think your thoughts have merit. Timmer did say he was having RL issues, but I agree that their exchanges didn't contain much meat at all. I expected more to be said as they were waiting for each other to be able to do back and forth, when it culminated into essentially nothing. So you're thinking that it was just a way to look like they were saying something, but not actually reveal their opinions so as not to look bad? Or any particular way?

What exactly does this imply?

Dom, I know my opinion. I am seeking the thoughts of those with strong opinions on Day One. But for me, the short version, I thought DH was trying to poke Rey & I to see what happened. I thought he was making something out of nothings, which he is THE MASTER at doing. *Bows*

But to be fair, the last time he did that to me in a major way, he was a civvie (in Rabs never-to-end Gotham Game at RM). SO, pairing that with some things he has said, I am not as sure as I was.

I never saw the case on Boom. It seemed trumped up to me tbh. The fact that he fit some "profile" and suddenly became public enemy number one when DH was taking votes did not help for me. But Llama was a big part of that for me, and he flipped civ. And Lorb knows I know that having a bad voting record does not make one bad. So I would like the tl;dr version of the case on Boom, since I just don't get it. And understanding it will help me to clarify how I feel about DH.

zeek wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Waiting for me to make a Federal Case out of it, aren't you?

What does that me :P

Apparently they do not have a Schoolhouse Rock for "Federal Case" but i did find this informative graphic.




Linki~ it looks to me like he's saying she's fanning the flames. Another old timey expression, eh? I got it right away.

Dom, i think reywas can only talk with pictures today. He has 3 posts: two are emoticons and one is a picture. I would like to hear from him regarding your misgivings but I'm not sure thats going to happen today.

Hi, so I'm officially Nocturnal. No school, so i woke up at 6 <_< anyways, lots of interesting stuff.
I think this situation Llama v Made voters is very similar to that of Made V The World in Monty Python.

Found it:

Roxy wrote:Day 3


Get on with it!
Poll ended at Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:49:18 pm


Bea
0
No votes
birdwithteeth11
0
No votes
Boogs
0
No votes
Bullz
0
No votes
Canucklehead
0
No votes
Dana
0
No votes
Hedgeowl
0
No votes
Juliets
2
birdwithteeth11 (19), reywaS (23) 9%
Long Con
0
No votes
LoRab
0
No votes
Made
5
thellama73 (7), Hedgeowl (8), Metalmarsh89 (9), nijuukyugou (13), Boogs (14) 22%
Metalmarsh
1
Mister Rearranger (5) 4%
Mister Rearranger
9
Made (2), Keterman (11), S~V~S (12), bea (16), juliets (17), Bullzeye (18),Enrique (20), Mongoose (21), Dana (22) 39%
Mongoose
1
Canucklehead (15) 4%
nijuukyugou
0
No votes
reywaS
0
No votes
Spacedaisy
0
No votes
S~V~S
1
Long Con (10) 4%
Thellama73
0
No votes
Oh, anyway, on to scene 24/ Hosts/Mod/GOD/Dead Folk/Nons
4
Roxy (1), MovingPictures07 (3), DisgruntledPorcupine (4), Dom (6) 17%
Total votes : 23

baddies in red.
SVS was Neutral.
While it doesn't prove anything, it a jumping off point. I have a few more close lynches like this if more data is needed. I'm really good at getting lynched. Maybe instead of looking at those who voted me or Llama, we look at those who didn't make a decision to do either

I think the Night poll just proved nothing more than People know who MP is and people like him. This has more to do with who MP is than what his alignment is.
That said does the wand do?

Also Dom, historically, what has been your opinion on "wasting votes", voting for someone you know won't get lynched? I have my own personal philosophy on the subject, but i'm curious of yours.

linki- to tag on to what Juliets said, I think Reywas should do was he did earlier, underline phrases and show whether he agrees or disagrees with them with smiles or pictures.

S~V~S wrote:Dom, I know my opinion. I am seeking the thoughts of those with strong opinions on Day One. But for me, the short version, I thought DH was trying to poke Rey & I to see what happened. I thought he was making something out of nothings, which he is THE MASTER at doing. *Bows*

But to be fair, the last time he did that to me in a major way, he was a civvie (in Rabs never-to-end Gotham Game at RM). SO, pairing that with some things he has said, I am not as sure as I was.

I never saw the case on Boom. It seemed trumped up to me tbh. The fact that he fit some "profile" and suddenly became public enemy number one when DH was taking votes did not help for me. But Llama was a big part of that for me, and he flipped civ. And Lorb knows I know that having a bad voting record does not make one bad. So I would like the tl;dr version of the case on Boom, since I just don't get it. And understanding it will help me to clarify how I feel about DH.

TL;DR of Why I Suspect Boom
1) Boom singled out people who did not vote in the D0 post as possible lynch candidates. I asked why they might be bad. He said because more people voted than did not vote, there are more civvies in the people that voted. This tells us literally nothing and is not an actual reason. It doesn't make much sense. I pointed this out to him and I was pretty much ignored. That rose my suspicion.
2) Boom then said he was suspicious of INH for not posting. INH had not yet posted. INH could have been silenced. I asked him who he suspected and this is how he responded. That perked my brow big time. The only person he cared to lynch wasn't around to defend himself.
3) None of the questions I posed in this post were answered.

I will admit that I was shocked by how many people followed me on d1.

Made wrote: Also Dom, historically, what has been your opinion on "wasting votes", voting for someone you know won't get lynched? I have my own personal philosophy on the subject, but i'm curious of yours.

linki- to tag on to what Juliets said, I think Reywas should do was he did earlier, underline phrases and show whether he agrees or disagrees with them with smiles or pictures.

I'm going to be honest, I don't know that I have a philosophy on that. I usually vote for whomever I suspect, I think, though. I don't really know that I have a solid personal opinion on that.

Not really TL;DR, but certainly a summary.

Anyway, the Questions I posted-- I mean I don't even think I got a response to it at all. And if Boomslang did respond, it was very non-material.