The Syndicate

Sloonei wrote:

LoRab wrote:Great game. Quin, you were a great BTSC partner.

MM, sorry we didn't believe the results of that check. The other piece was that we couldn't figure out why you would have survived a lynch, since that role had no secrets--and since Trice's role didn't include a lynch survival, we assumed that it was you that survived (which turned out to be correct, but it didn't dawn on us--or at least me, that it could have been because of another role).

I knew I was taking a risk in checking 3J--alas. We also had fun with outing ourselves (within the rules). Didn't dawn on us that we'd lose a day.

But, hey--all risks are just that.

Fun game. Well deserved win.

Wait! So my only suspect was the person I was trying to establish BTSC with?

pretty much, yeah.

Great game. Quin, you were a great BTSC partner.

MM, sorry we didn't believe the results of that check. The other piece was that we couldn't figure out why you would have survived a lynch, since that role had no secrets--and since Trice's role didn't include a lynch survival, we assumed that it was you that survived (which turned out to be correct, but it didn't dawn on us--or at least me, that it could have been because of another role).

I knew I was taking a risk in checking 3J--alas. We also had fun with outing ourselves (within the rules). Didn't dawn on us that we'd lose a day.

But, hey--all risks are just that.

Fun game. Well deserved win.

Mafia dawn thoughts:


Epi
Quin
Wilgy
Dom
3J
MM
sig

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I open up my spreadsheet, and it's full of blood.

Because you keep killing people? You should really clean yourself up before you update your records.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

LoRab wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

LoRab wrote:And your analysis between me and MM could be done between any 2 players and show equally inconclusive material

That's technically possible; I haven't done any other analyses of that type. Throw two names at me of players you think might be baddie teammates and I'll have a look.

LoRab wrote:Are you certain about him?

No. He's a suspect but he's not the only one. There's a lot to discuss about everyone alive.

How about do an analysis between yourself and Sig.

lol

I can include sig, but I'm not going to spend my time and energy analyzing myself. That won't help me find baddies. Who else?

Do you think sig and I are teammates?

Not really, but analyizing me won't help you find baddies either, so....

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:You got it LoRab, I'll switch my selection to that one.

(also, based on the other 2 times I've done this, that's what I'll look like after I shave my head)

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

LoRab wrote:And your analysis between me and MM could be done between any 2 players and show equally inconclusive material

That's technically possible; I haven't done any other analyses of that type. Throw two names at me of players you think might be baddie teammates and I'll have a look.

LoRab wrote:Are you certain about him?

No. He's a suspect but he's not the only one. There's a lot to discuss about everyone alive.

How about do an analysis between yourself and Sig.

Whichever of you ends up donating $50 to a charity of your choice, might I suggest the St Baldrick's Foundation, which raises money to fight Childhood Cancer, directly funding research towards finding safe and effective treatment of and cures for different childhood cancers. I happen to be currently fundraising for it, and will be shaving my head as part of my fundraising in January (but will accept donations through the end of 2017). This is also why my hair is currently purple. Just throwing it out there.... (and self promoting...anyone else can donate, too!): https://www.stbaldricks.org/participants/rabbiisa5777

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

LoRab wrote:Put my vote on G-Man for now. I will sort of be on, so I could be convinced to change it, if I am able to see posts and not be paying attention to meeting. Minly because I don't want to vote for MM because I'm too iffy on that. And because I'm finding his posts more suspicious than sig's. And anyone else on this poll, I feel pretty good about. So, ironically, it's kind of process of elimination.

Not a fan. I'm considering a Marmot/LoRab mafia team, because it's too late in the game to be concerned with voting for an insanified player. I'll look into their posts to see if I can substantiate that suspicion more conclusively.

I'm sorry that I'm unsure about my suspicion about MM. Which is really what this comes down to. I suspect him. I'm not certain he's bad. I suspect that he might be. Which is not enough for me to vote for him when I can't have a conversation with him about that.

And it's not a sudden thing for me--the fact that I turn away from voting for people who are incapacitated is well documented throughout my mafia career.

And your analysis between me and MM could be done between any 2 players and show equally inconclusive material (and no, I'm not on a baddie team with MM). Yes, I didn't support a bandwagon against you, nor did I support voting against BWT--I posted about both those things much earlier than I voted. MM was a player I was starting to suspect and I voted that way as a result, especially as I didn't like either of the other options. I knew that 1 vote wasn't enough to lynch him, so when it came to day 7, and he couldn't post, then I didn't want to lynch him, when I couldn't have a conversation with him about it. I'm still not sure about him. Are you certain about him?

Put my vote on G-Man for now. I will sort of be on, so I could be convinced to change it, if I am able to see posts and not be paying attention to meeting. Minly because I don't want to vote for MM because I'm too iffy on that. And because I'm finding his posts more suspicious than sig's. And anyone else on this poll, I feel pretty good about. So, ironically, it's kind of process of elimination.

Ugh, crapweasel. I was thinking we had another day to the lynch, and I have not had time to look at much of anything today. Silly real life getting in the way of games.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

LoRab wrote:Also, you credit We Drift Like Worried Fire with taking you off the poll. Which is fine. But you, MM, and I are the only 3 that didn't vote for you in the last lynch. You have mentioned suspicion of both MM and me, and yet Drift has no secret attached to it which would explain surviving the lynch.

Do you think that someone who voted for you changed their mind based on your having survived the lynch? Because that seems unlikely.

All we can do in this discussion is speculate. I can't imagine why either the SK or the mafia would want to remove me from the poll since I was likely to be lynched today otherwise. Doing so would only expose them to a lynch they'd have otherwise avoided to no public gain of their own. So that means the reason I am not in the poll is civilian in origin and there's a civilian role with the exact power in question.

You realize that is far fetched, though? I mean, if another player posted that, in the same situation, would you just take it at face value, or would you be raising an eyebrow?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

LoRab wrote:As for your reaction, it felt very flippant, and not in a way that I would expect from a civ who just survived a lynch.

Flippant is a good word for it. It's nice to be alive, but I do fear my continued survival is only going to hinder the civilian cause. So long as I'm here I'm a tinfoil magnet thanks in no small part to trice, and that's both a distraction and a delay in people's abilities to SK hunt other people. I've tried to emphasize the importance of that but not many people seem to have taken my advice.

Regardless of my irritation, I'm doing my best to make productive use of my added time.

Also, you credit We Drift Like Worried Fire with taking you off the poll. Which is fine. But you, MM, and I are the only 3 that didn't vote for you in the last lynch. You have mentioned suspicion of both MM and me, and yet Drift has no secret attached to it which would explain surviving the lynch.

Do you think that someone who voted for you changed their mind based on your having survived the lynch? Because that seems unlikely.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

LoRab wrote:We are officially at that point if the numbers are such that it is impossible to be wrong. I only vote for people who are incapacitated when I am fairly certain about them. It's one of the rules I made for myself a very long time ago. I'm not going to change it now. It would be breaking my own, personal ethics code of how I play to vote for a player in that situation (without extenuating circumstances). There are no extenuating circumstances here. I believe that I am suspicious of him--but I'm not certain of that fact by any stretch of the imagination. And he's hardly in a position to be able to discuss that. Therefore, I will not vote for MM this round.

With the poll and MM as they are right now, where are you leaning for your Day 7 vote?

That is a great question, for which I wish I had an answer. GMan and Sig are the 2 that I'm trying to look at. I don't feel entirely confident about GMan's entry into the game and concern with what people thought of him (nor am I sure that I buy that he didn't know for whom he was subbing in, while he was reading back a few pages, and considering if he was going to sub in). Sig, I don't know that well, so it's hard to say, but players that come and go often make me feel squirrelly. I plan to read posts from both tomorrow.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

LoRab wrote:I am not bad. So, I know you're wrong about me. Any reason in particular you think I'm mafia?

Old suspicions from previous stages of the game linger. Currently though I just found your comment about MM and I suspicious at face value. I know I'm not an option today, but I don't see why MM being insanified would prevent you from pursuing that lynch today if you truly believe in it.

You said you don't think we're at a point yet where it's necessary to lynch people who are somehow incapacitated. When do you think we are officially at that point?

LoRab wrote:As for my suspicion of you, your reaction to surviving the last lynch raised my eyebrow a great deal and made me wonder. I was hoping to be able to discuss you more this lynch, as I was (and am) wondering if I was wrong about you.

I'm here to discuss it now even if I am not in the poll. What about my reaction concerns you so?

We are officially at that point if the numbers are such that it is impossible to be wrong. I only vote for people who are incapacitated when I am fairly certain about them. It's one of the rules I made for myself a very long time ago. I'm not going to change it now. It would be breaking my own, personal ethics code of how I play to vote for a player in that situation (without extenuating circumstances). There are no extenuating circumstances here. I believe that I am suspicious of him--but I'm not certain of that fact by any stretch of the imagination. And he's hardly in a position to be able to discuss that. Therefore, I will not vote for MM this round.

As for your reaction, it felt very flippant, and not in a way that I would expect from a civ who just survived a lynch.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Dom wrote:3J-- who is bad?

My top three mafia suspects are Wilgy 2.0, Marmot, and LoRab. Gun to my head I'd place Wilgy 2.0 and LoRab as Sleep and Mladic. My top SK suspect is G-Man.

I don't think anyone looks great though short of Quin, so it's a discussion that needs to be ongoing.

I am not bad. So, I know you're wrong about me. Any reason in particular you think I'm mafia?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

LoRab wrote:@Dom: Nope, not bad.

My top 2 suspects for this round are 3J and MM, which is annoying because MM is insanified and 3J is off the poll.

Epi posting against Christmas is kind of amusing.

LoRab, you expressed doubt about my being the SK last phase due to what you called an "infodump" by trice and that I seemed too obvious. Today you've called me a top suspect that you cannot pursue due to my absence in the poll. What has changed your perspective between the phases?

I already asked about your MM comment, so please answer that too.

Sorry, I was out and about all day. MM, I don't like lynching/voting for people who are incapacitated, unless I can help it. I realize there comes a time at which it can't be avoided--I don't think we are at that point yet. Also, my suspicion of MM isn't so strong that I couldn't be swayed by a defense, so I want to give MM that chance. It's part of my personal mafia ethics by which I go about games.

As for my suspicion of you, your reaction to surviving the last lynch raised my eyebrow a great deal and made me wonder. I was hoping to be able to discuss you more this lynch, as I was (and am) wondering if I was wrong about you.

As I don't have all that many reads on folks, top suspects is a relative concept. The 2 of you, though, were the ones I most wanted to hear from and discuss--and neither of you are a real option (one of you not at all, one not a real option for me) this lynch.

Epignosis wrote:I mean who gives a fuck about Christmas?

It's a great day for movies and Chinese food. Although this year, I'll be in Israel, where it's just a day like every other day. (Didn't want you to feel left out of conversation, so felt the need to respond)

@Dom: Nope, not bad.

My top 2 suspects for this round are 3J and MM, which is annoying because MM is insanified and 3J is off the poll.

Epi posting against Christmas is kind of amusing.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:@G-Man, I think trice is considered a civilian. His role is revealed either when he's checked by Motherfucker/Redeemer, when he is lynched, when ALFOTHAD dies, or when recruited. Since it was revealed upon trice's death, he could not have been recruited (I think we all realize this lol).

But also, the setlist has him listed in pink and green, which are the Indy and civilian colors respectively.

Dom beat me to it, but the role description is pretty clear that the role is indy if not recruited. NOT civ.

Answers in this color

Dom wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Dom wrote:If 3J checked trice when he named him, the role would have gone public and it would have been obvious what happened.

My own thinking is that the SK knows that Jack knows his identity, but that the SK doesn't know Jack's entire role description. You seem to be assuming the opposite.

I get why you would vote 3J, but it just seems to be a set up to me.

If the Sk just knew who he was, why wouldn't he recruit him on night one?

Huh? Not what what I meant. I meant that the SK could know (from the start of the game) that Jack knows who the SK is. Not that the SK knows who Jack is, obviously. I don't think that the SK knew Jack's entire role description from the start, though.

Epignosis wrote:I understand that if birdwithteeth gets lynched and comes back bad I'm going to get shit for it, but I don't care.

birdwithteeth11
4
Metalmarsh89 (2), JaggedJimmyJay (9), Scotty (11), Quin (12)

Quite a party.

MM, who survived a lynch in a game where the civilians can skip a Night, block all actions including the kill, have BTSC and potential BTSC, a serious numbers advantage, among other abilities and secrets, is the first to vote birdwithteeth (a guy who apparently hasn't been around). If birdwithteeth is bad, I'd still say MM threw him under the bus (keep in mind, MM is the sort who Night killed his own teammate before).

The second is probably the serial killer and despite what he tells you, doesn't care who dies.

The third is a guy who has hardly been around.

The fourth is someone who recently subbed in, and whose best judgment was to keep a killer around simply because he posts "useful" things.

None of these votes seem well-informed or well-intentioned.

Not all of these people can be bad.

LoRab wrote:If 3J is the SK, then didn't trice break the rules of the game by info dumping?

Since when did this start regularly bearing conseuqnces?

Good point. But I also don't feel like players usually blatantly info dump. Or maybe I just get annoyed enough when people do that I block out that it happens. And am in denial when it does because I prefer to believe that people aren't blatantly breaking rules in their game play.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Oh boy.

Can you clarify what you mean by that?

timmer wrote:Seriously?

That is exactly what I was going to say.

Put a vote on MM for now. Mainly because I don't want to miss the vote, and I'm in the middle of dying my hair (oy, tht sounds so lame). I also don't think that's a bad place for the lynch to go. and, as I've said, I have doubts about the vote getters. 3J seems too obvious. BWT I have too many doubts about and I would like to see him replaced not lynched.

I also think good points have been brought up about GMan.

Epignosis wrote:If birdwithteeth is a civilian with momentum against him, a solid mafia strategy would be to cast doubt on the 3J business, lynch bird, and then lament that we should have lynched 3J after all, oh gosh look he killed again come on lets get him

Lorab, what's your opinion of that strategy?

That would be solid baddie strategy. But I can only speculate as to how the baddies are strategizing.

Personally, I don't think either are the right lynch. I have doubts about either. If it's a choice between the 2 of them, I think 3J is the better choice to lynch.

Epignosis wrote:And you still trust MM after it was clear he survived a lynch...adding to that the fact that a Night was skipped? One civilian role already skips a night by blocking all actions. Now there's a second night passed.

Do you still think it's reasonable that MM survived a lynch for a good reason?

I could get behind an MM vote. I am still wary of a BWT vote. He now seems like he disappeared, which is different from faking a silence--so we can hope for a replacement. I have questions about him, but I don't see him as a slam dunk like others seem to.

If 3J is the SK, then didn't trice break the rules of the game by info dumping?

Dom wrote:If 3J checked trice when he named him, the role would have gone public and it would have been obvious what happened.

My own thinking is that the SK knows that Jack knows his identity, but that the SK doesn't know Jack's entire role description. You seem to be assuming the opposite.

I get why you would vote 3J, but it just seems to be a set up to me.

However damning the circumnstantial, I'm not sure I believe 3J to be bad. It just seems too obvious a set up. And I don't understand the logic of throwing a potential teammate under the bus, in a situation in which one wasn't necessarily going down. And why if 3J were the SK, he wouldn't have checked trice after he named him. I'm not ruling out the possibility, but I'm not ready to just vote him. Yet.

I don't think we were seeing a baddie MP--that wasn't my read of him, at least. I'd need convincing to put a vote there.

BWT is a possibility for my vote. Since there was no night, we know he isn't silenced this round. So, there's no reason for him to have not answered suspicion from the last day. That he hasn't makes me more suspicious ofhim.

Metalmarsh89 wrote: Each day, it seems as though 2 players have been cursed. I have yet to see anyone's name removed from the lynchpoll.

Except for day 4 when there were 3 people cursed. And day 5 when there was 1 person cursed.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:According to casketjack, this is true.

SK doesn't know the identity of Casketjack. But we don't know how much of Casketjack's role description the SK knows--it's possible that the SK knows that casketjack knows that identity of the SK from the start of the game, or that the SK could have at least surmised that, or guessed it as a possibility.

Metalmarsh89 wrote: I imagine you're having coffee soon.

Also, bye MP, hi G Man!!

We got an indy. I'm good with that.

And things that make me go Hmmmmmm...

Would trice out a potential teammate?

If 3J were the SK, and trice implied knowing that, which implies his role, why wouldn't 3J then recruit him that night (assuming that we'd have had the role description immediately following night, as implied in the role), at least for the sake of having BTSC for a day? Or, would 3J not recruit him because he outed him? Or was it a false outing?

If 3J is the SK, then didn't trice violate the info dumping rule?

What triggered the skipping of night?

When am I going to get some coffee so that I can think more clearly about these questions?

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

Quin wrote:I just got butchered in Lost so I'm here now. I'll get onto my ISO's soon.

start with dom and lorab

Please do. I have no reason to fear someone reading my posts.

You keep saying you suspect me and I can't remember your saying why. Do you have a reason?

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

Scotty wrote:Trice is in line to get lynched and I don't like it.

Where the rest of the votes at? We have 30 minutes and for once, I'm around for a hot second

mafia is really fun when half the civs are absentee

3 players didn't vote. That isn't half the civs.

Assuming of the 12 living players, 2 mafia and 1 SK, that is 9 civs.

Also, you are assuming that they were all no shows and not somehow silenced, which given how many secrets are in this game, and given the tone of your post, is kind of rude.

Real question, trice: Does weird mean baddie to you? Because I agree that aspects of BWT's posts are strange, but I'm not sure they are necessarily suspect.

linkitis: Why would I need your permission for anything?

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote: It's something I kinda tried to do but didn't have enough time and didn't reach any conclusions that weren't mentioned here already

that is to say, BWT's arbitrary requirement for more MM votes before he would move his yesterday is weird, boomslang didn't really do anything unusual since the timmer vote, scotty has been fairly inactive but I still haven't seen anything suspicious from him, Lorab I didn't have time to check yet (been out)

linki JJJ

Does the 15:3:1 ratio have any impact upon your mindset regarding the source of that protection?

not really because I think the baddies have been given other means to compensate, namely silence and insanifier to disrupt communications and make it easier for them to control discussion. I also think mladic must be an insanifier role and I have doubts that it would be both an insanifier AND a lynch protect.

And you know that the insanifier is on the baddie team how?

Also, you are assuming a lynch protection. Which I agree seems unlikely. However, "so and so survives the first attempt on his/her life," seems a lot more likely as an addition on any role, good or bad. On a 3 person mafia team, I'd say that it's actually quite likely that one of the 2 living players has that as part of their role description.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Right now I'd rather lynch trice than BWT because I think the case is more conclusive. His hyper-focus on night kills/actions leaves a lot of room for manipulation, he has misrepresented me and others to an egregious degree, and I believe the failed lynch is a point against both he and Marmot. If either of them had a civilian-driven lynch protection then this game seems quite imbalanced. I am also skeptical an anti-town-borne lynch save would have been used in a way that isn't immediately beneficial to their own faction (for example a mafia save being used to prevent a lynch between two non-mafia).

I can see the connection being drawn between the two based on EOD4 and it's frustrating to have no comment from BWT himself on the matter yet.

I agree that there is more on Trice than on BWT (just looked back at posts, not uber-carefully, but read through them). He's on a list of players that I could see being a teammate of Trice, if Trice is indeed Mafia.

Also, I think it's possible he's been silenced (that there have been extra insanifications on some days is evidence of the possibility of a mimic role), and I don't want to vote for someone who is silenced unless I'm pretty sure about them. Even the possibility is enough reason to hesitate, for me. And, if it seems at a later time that he was faking it, then that's another story. But, in the short run, at least I think he should be able to defend.

Also, I suspect Trice more.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:How do you feel about BWT, LoRab?

I'm horrible at reading him in general. I get where the suspicion of him is coming from. I need to read back on his posts. I should have time this afternoon to do that. I'm heading out (into the cold....brrrr....) in a bit to station myself at a cafe to do work for a while--while I'm doing work I can also do "work" and look back at his posts.

I'm still feeling pretty strongly about my trice vote, though.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:LoRab, you seemed more engaged when you couldn't speak clearly than you do now. Why is that?

Because, irony.

Seriously, though: Because I had a really busy day at work yesterday. Also, because I tend to have more to say when other people are talking more, and no one is really talking much, so there isn't much to respond to.

Also, is Dom the only apparent curse this round? Is there someone or someones else out there who seems to have been cursed that I'm missing or forgetting?

My suspicions haven't changed since the last day cycle. I'm going to pop my vote onto Trice for now, at least. I'm trying to get used to and embrace this whole I can change my votes thing.

Back to on topic, I think the SK could be a third curser--it's possible there was a third person cursed on day 2, and it went unnoticed or something? Or the SK mimics other characters (being a recording, that could make sense maybe)--and then there could be a civ, a bad, and an indy, going back to my theory of balance.

Quin wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Quin wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Quin wrote:How many people were insanified each day? The number of people they're able to target might be increasing periodically.

2 people seemed to be cursed in some way day 2. 3 people seemed to be cursed in some way day 3. I think.

We also don't know if there were other people who could have been cursed more subtly; were cursed and did not post; or (least likely) were cursed and were killed the same night.

On day 2, I speculated there was a curser on the civ team and a curser on the bad team. I still think that is logical, because balance. Having a third player apparently cursed on the last day cycle just makes me believe that one of the players in the game has some sort of mimicing ability within their role. I still think there is a civ curser and an evil curser.

It seems entirely too imbalanced for the baddie team to be able to stop at least 3 players from effectively posting in any given day cycle (if sleep were to silence someone and Mladic were able to curse 2 people at a time. That doesn't make sense to me as a game set up.

What makes you think Mlalic is responsible for the insanifications? What if the insanifier is a civ?

I was answering Trice's speculation.

Regardless, it would still be unbalanced. Less so, but still unbalanced.

This conversation gives me inspiration for a game in which everyone is an insanifier and it's just literally what the fuck

Not sure if you've played a game yet with Long Con, but you guys are going to get along, I have a feeling. If you have nothing to do and want a rabbit hole to go down, go to this (really) old mafia game starting with day 2: http://forum.lostpedia.com/showthread.p ... ost1425751. It's the game where LC first used his insanifier (and the first seemer, incidentally), and 2 players were insanified. Too funny to watch all of us figure out what the ef was going on with the posts. And then a few pages in, the 2 of them start to have a conversation. I miss the insanity generator. He also evolved it over the years so it came to include a variety of roles from different games and new players' names and became more and less complicated at times (and more and less hard to decipher. Good times.

Quin wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Quin wrote:How many people were insanified each day? The number of people they're able to target might be increasing periodically.

2 people seemed to be cursed in some way day 2. 3 people seemed to be cursed in some way day 3. I think.

We also don't know if there were other people who could have been cursed more subtly; were cursed and did not post; or (least likely) were cursed and were killed the same night.

On day 2, I speculated there was a curser on the civ team and a curser on the bad team. I still think that is logical, because balance. Having a third player apparently cursed on the last day cycle just makes me believe that one of the players in the game has some sort of mimicing ability within their role. I still think there is a civ curser and an evil curser.

It seems entirely too imbalanced for the baddie team to be able to stop at least 3 players from effectively posting in any given day cycle (if sleep were to silence someone and Mladic were able to curse 2 people at a time. That doesn't make sense to me as a game set up.

What makes you think Mlalic is responsible for the insanifications? What if the insanifier is a civ?

I was answering Trice's speculation.

Regardless, it would still be unbalanced. Less so, but still unbalanced.

Quin wrote:How many people were insanified each day? The number of people they're able to target might be increasing periodically.

2 people seemed to be cursed in some way day 2. 3 people seemed to be cursed in some way day 3. I think.

We also don't know if there were other people who could have been cursed more subtly; were cursed and did not post; or (least likely) were cursed and were killed the same night.

On day 2, I speculated there was a curser on the civ team and a curser on the bad team. I still think that is logical, because balance. Having a third player apparently cursed on the last day cycle just makes me believe that one of the players in the game has some sort of mimicing ability within their role. I still think there is a civ curser and an evil curser.

It seems entirely too imbalanced for the baddie team to be able to stop at least 3 players from effectively posting in any given day cycle (if sleep were to silence someone and Mladic were able to curse 2 people at a time. That doesn't make sense to me as a game set up.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

LoRab wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

timmer wrote:Trice, we seem to have 3 people posting in some form of curse. Do you think all 3 are legit? If not, which do you think is lying, and why?

I'm pretty sure when roles are finally revealed at the end of the game, Mladic will be rather complication mechanics for cursing people and I don't really know what to think on it. FWIW I didn't even realize Lorab was supposed to be cursed, but if he (she? sorry don't know) is, it's similar in nature to Marmot's (contrast this with random capslocks letters like JJJ/epi) and to Golden's curse earlier in the game. Leads me to believe that if there are 3 curses today, marmot and lorab both come from same source as Golden before, and epi comes from same source as JJJ did, and it's 2 separate sources.

This is still what I believe regarding the curses

To clarify: You believe that all of the curses come from one role/player and not from multiple sources?

Yours seems a little different.

But I'd bet the other 4 do come from the same source. Golden, Jay, Epignosis, and myself have been targeted so far. Aside from Sockface (who's in a league of his own), that includes the three highest posters in the thread, plus Epignosis. There's a pattern here.

It seems odd to me, though, that 1 player would be able to target 2 different players at a time, though. His post also confuses me. But I might just be really tired.

Personally, I think each curse comes from a separate source.

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

timmer wrote:Trice, we seem to have 3 people posting in some form of curse. Do you think all 3 are legit? If not, which do you think is lying, and why?

I'm pretty sure when roles are finally revealed at the end of the game, Mladic will be rather complication mechanics for cursing people and I don't really know what to think on it. FWIW I didn't even realize Lorab was supposed to be cursed, but if he (she? sorry don't know) is, it's similar in nature to Marmot's (contrast this with random capslocks letters like JJJ/epi) and to Golden's curse earlier in the game. Leads me to believe that if there are 3 curses today, marmot and lorab both come from same source as Golden before, and epi comes from same source as JJJ did, and it's 2 separate sources.

This is still what I believe regarding the curses

To clarify: You believe that all of the curses come from one role/player and not from multiple sources?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:At this point, I'm willing to accept that trice is civilian and Jay is bad.

I doubt the mafia would have the ability to survive a lynch. Also, Jay is a clever person who I think would target me on Night 3.

Why wouldn't the mafia have that ability? On a mafia of only 3 there is often a survives the first attempt on one's life kind of thing on one of the roles.

Also, didn't you argue in the post before this about certainty of insanifiers being necessarily bad? How does this make jjj bad?

I is confused.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

LoRab wrote:Before I respond to anything else, a word of ambiguous thanks. If you don't know what I'm talking about, please don't ask--I will not elaborate.

And, no information from the lynch, without knowing who won (or, I guess lost) the coin toss, and therefore which had some sort of power which enabled them to survive the lynch. So, I'm looking forward to another round of the same, personally. I don't know about anyone else.

triceratopzeuhl wrote:So far 2 bad players have voted for me, and the other two haven't been in the thread since I made my case nothing to do but wait it out

Exactly how many bad players do you think there are in this game?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I would also invite Boomslang, Dom, Epignosis, Sloonei, and timmer to the funeral.

The invitations will not be extended to JaggedJimmyJay, trice.

Others may or may not be permitted. I'm still stricken with grief.

I can haz funeral attendance?

Yes, yes I think you deserve it.

Thank you for your care!

<3

Before I respond to anything else, a word of ambiguous thanks. If you don't know what I'm talking about, please don't ask--I will not elaborate.

And, no information from the lynch, without knowing who won (or, I guess lost) the coin toss, and therefore which had some sort of power which enabled them to survive the lynch. So, I'm looking forward to another round of the same, personally. I don't know about anyone else.

triceratopzeuhl wrote:So far 2 bad players have voted for me, and the other two haven't been in the thread since I made my case nothing to do but wait it out

Exactly how many bad players do you think there are in this game?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I would also invite Boomslang, Dom, Epignosis, Sloonei, and timmer to the funeral.

The invitations will not be extended to JaggedJimmyJay, trice.

Others may or may not be permitted. I'm still stricken with grief.

I can haz funeral attendance?

triceratopzeuhl wrote:MP, the important part is that vompatti was moya

triceratopzeuhl wrote: List of other people Golden voiced suspicions of within a day or two of his death: A Person, Dom, Lorab, MM, Sig
List of people Sloonei voiced suspicions of before getting silenced by Sleep: Lorab, Scotty, Dom, INH, DrWilgy

triceratopzeuhl wrote: List of people dom has defended or said he thinks are good: Timmer, JJJ, Scotty, BWT, Boomslang, MP, epi

He also defended BWT from JJJ accusations, so you can cross the latter off that list (you can anyway since he's SK not mafia).

Of the above he also leveled accusations of varying degrees at BWT, boomslang and MP on different occasions

Cross referencing with the other two lists I posted, Dom, Lorab, and scotty are the only ones who appear more than once

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Hey BWT, are you able to produce some summarized/quick reads for me (whether rainbow or not)? I'm curious where your head is at right now.

Linki: Same question to Trice.

Confident civ: the late Golden, Sloonei, you, me

tentative/probably civ: epignosis, Timmer, MM, sig

Mafia 1: was vompatti
Mafia 2: Dom
Serial Killer: JJJ
Iffy shortlist for Mafia 3: Lorab, scotty, BWT, boomslang

(more info needed): ninja blooper

After I die this is the info the remaining civs need to capitalize on

This makes a big assumption about how both the SK and the Mafia are strategizing their kill. I wonder if you actually know how one of those 2 chose their target.

triceratopzeuhl wrote:if poll trickery kills me anyway, and I don't have the opportunity, somebody please check voting patterns of my mafia 3 shortlist, as posted earlier

I have been civ reading scotty most of the game but he could just be a good liar... he's one of the 3 people who appear multiple times in my lead lists

Also, this last post, coupled with the one before it totally read like the set up for a player who has a seemer role (or at least an aspect of their role that is a seemer).

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:5. town trice v. serial killer JJJ

Quick question, trice:

You've said repeatedly today that I'm the SK, and you've also repeatedly questioned the sincerity of my reads (suggesting I am deliberately misrepresenting or OMGUSing or what have you). If I am specifically the SK and not mafia, I don't know who the bad guys are and thus have the ability to provide real scum hunting effort. What is the motive to fake my reads in this scenario you've painted?

beats me, I can't read your mind

even if you can provide scum hunting effort, you also have another night kill tonight, unless we have another secret role blocker (hint hint if we do there's a foolproof way to prove JJJ is the sk, just saying)

Wait...how do you know how often the SK kills? I didn't see that in the roles.

Alternatively, if you're civ (which I don't think you are, but if): there's no way that writing something like that in the thread could possibly go wrong! Baddies never read the thread and that plan is certainly fool proof!

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

timmer wrote:And has Sloonei been around? They are the only vote missing.

Actually, that reminds me. Can we pretty much confirm that Vomps is bad now? Because unless I'm mistaken, everyone posted during this phase.

We can assume Vomps is bad because Sleep made the kill, not because no one posted. Sleep killed last night, therefore Sleep could not silence anyone last night. But because Sleep killed, we can assume that Moya is no longer in the game.

Quin wrote:By the looks of it, Alfothad may have been triggered to begin killing either Night 2 (just because of the mass role block) or Night 3. Motherfucker=Redeemer could very well have been responsible given role descriptions. If that's you, I'd look back at those you checked for both your BTSC connections and your living checks before Night 3.

Thank you! It was driving me crazy that people were talking about the SK without talking about what could have triggered the SK. Any other thoughts on this from anyone?

Although, it seems as though Rockets Fall on Rocket Falls probably triggered the mass block.

triceratopzeuhl wrote:Who has JJJ suspected today?

Lorab, who posted suspicions of him (1, 2)

Salacious, abominable distortions.

triceratopzeuhl wrote:
Despite my beef with epignosis I've realized I MUST be wrong for one reason only:

Spoiler: show

LoRab wrote: Seeing a different nuanced Epi. Sans suspicion.

Metalmarsh89 wrote: I know you will change your mind in a heartbeat. My point is that your most recent read of him is good, and that you only voiced suspicion of him after he claimed you are not a civilian. I do agree that Epignosis has been taciturn on who to lynch this game, but there's still the matter that he has been accurate on his civ-reads, and I believe some of his reads have been well-placed.

MovingPictures07 wrote: Moderate Town:
Epignosis

Golden wrote:

Golden wrote:EPIGNOSIS

Moderate town

(I know there's even more examples but "epi" is too short to search the thread for)

I bet you ANYTHING at least one of these people has role-checked him, especially in a game where his playstyle is so cryptic.

I still think Dom is one of the baddies.

List of other people Golden voiced suspicions of within a day or two of his death: A Person, Dom, Lorab, MM, Sig
List of people Sloonei voiced suspicions of before getting silenced by Sleep: Lorab, Scotty, Dom, INH, DrWilgy

Dom and Lorab are the only names in common there

Sorry. Ain't devious.

triceratopzeuhl wrote: Another point that just occured to me:

Spoiler: show

Motherfucker = Redeemer (2) Do not begin the game by sharing BTSC, but can search for each other during each Night (in addition to their individual ability). Can win as a team, if they gain BTSC. Randomly, one player will be assigned to role check a living player every odd Night. If the checked player is Mafia, it will have a 50% chance to also kill him. The other player will be assigned to role check a dead player every even Night. If the checked victim is Civilian, it will have a 50% chance to resurrect him. Both the kill and the resurrect will be activated automatically and work only once, regardless of the outcome. M=R can continue, however, to role check accordingly afterwards. Their assigned roles can be affected by Storm, once they gain BTSC.

I was wondering why no civs have been resurrected yet, but thinking about it - night 1 nobody dead yet, night 2 powers blocked by Rockets Fall On Rocket Falls, night 3 I bet the half which was assigned dead players wasn't the same player who originally killed vomps, and they checked vomps

Somewhat Asinine Deduction. No Even Sunsets Succeeded.

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:Dom posting the same way I'm criticizing JJJ and epignosis for - deliberately misleading when not outright lies in their accusations. Wouldn't be surprised if all three are bad, civvies can and do play honest the way virtually everybody else has been

"lies"

I don't know your alignment. I'm trying to figure it out. That's why I put up that eight page dissertation on your posts yesterday. You didn't question my honesty then, when I concluded you look more civilian than not. You may not like every accusation hurled at you, but you're treating all of them in this broadly negative light as though there can be no genuine intentions. That's bunk.

No, what's bunk is you making 2 incredibly disingenuous accusations of me ("everybody knows you can't read vompatti but trice is suspicious for not trying to read vompatti" and "Trice's vote for A Person was suspicious even though I voted the exact same way later for the exact same reasons"). Nobody seriously trying to find baddies would use those arguments.

birdwithteeth11 wrote: But still, with how much posting has already occurred in this game, I'm not sure that argument stands. Epig has been correct about 3 out of 3 mislynches here so far.

No he hasn't, he voted to lynch DrWilgy. We don't whether he is right about boomslang's alignment (who we haven't lynched). He has been correct about 2 of them though, and I realize now he has been correct about JJJ consistently for several days now.



My thinking this game has started to be very clear, ironically it was JJJ being legitimately helpful that made it all click:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: Vompatti being bad and killed Night 1 could be attributed to the Motherfucker = Redeemer role. Each odd night, one in that pair checks a living player. If the living player is mafia there's a 50% chance it'll kill that mafioso.

This fits too perfectly to not be the case. However, JJJ wouldn't be posting it if he was mafia, so he must be the serial killer. He killed Golden right after Golden switched from a moderate town read of him to posting suspicions. I believe JJJ's posting changed perceptibly at a point, and I wouldn't be surprised if it coincided with the activation of his night kill.

Seriously? Accusitive drivel.