The Syndicate

Dom wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Except that's not at all what occured. You were likely to be lynched. Not two people, just you buddy. FZ actively participated in saving you by bussing onto someone she FULL ADMITTED she thought was being genuine. Civs do not bus other civs to save other civs. The math on that does not compute any way you try to spin it.

Except I absolutely do that all the time. So you're full of shit.

Not all civ reads are the same. Some are stronger.

You wouldn't choose someone else in that scenario? Like someone who you don't think is civ?

If it's late in the phase and only two people have enough votes to be realistic final choices, I will usually pick one of them -- even if I read both as civilians. I think it's usually pointless to defiantly vote for one's own pet suspect when that vote has no chance of amounting to an actual lynch. Townies need to have accountability and responsibility for moving the game as a team.

Ricochet wrote:Town-sided role sharing town's basic win con and nothing else.

I guess so. I don't know what you're describing if that's not every town role.

I dunno what that means.

My role was originally town and is town again.

HamburgerBoy wrote:so why are you saying this now?

Whatever it takes to make people stop calling me suspicious and talking about the suspicious things I'm doing and the case to be made against JJJ and what happens if JJJ is bad and who tried to save baddie JJJ and have you heard JJJ likes pancakes it's all a huge waste of time. All of it.

Just stop already, all of you. Okay great, I'm suspicious. Lynch me. That's the solution.

In the mean time, use your time wisely for the love of God. There are like 20-25 people that need your attention. I have received enough of it. This is not productive ever.

lol as if I'm not actively trying to get lynched right now

My continued survival is the worst thing for town at this point. Y'all will never shut the hell up about it.

DharmaHelper wrote:I don't believe you. A civvie doesn't role out that kind of power, especially at this time of day.

You don't seem to know much about what civvies do.

Yeah I didn't think I was allowed to outright tell people I'm immune to lynches. Otherwise I probably would have.

Turnip Head wrote:I'll refer you to two relevant rules:

S~V~S wrote:*No reproducing or paraphrasing host PMs, or direct discussing of night results or of if you were targeted or with what.
*This game is closed set up. This allows for limited role claiming. But be careful about that, and do NOT involve other people in your claim.

We're not going to stop anyone from saying "I have a civ role", and we're not going to stop anyone from saying "My role was civ in another game", either.

Oh hey, I can claim my role.

I was immune to my first death, lynch or night kill. I tried to evade the lynch because stopping a night kill is much more productive. I knew if this happened I'd just get lynched again and here we are. Oh well, ship's sailed. I also thought talking about this would be taboo before, I'm not used to having this freedom here.

Now stop theorizing about crazy things. There's your answer.

Matt wrote:Linki - 3J, Marmot is obvi the second baddiest baddie after Epig. Do you get civ vibes from Marmot? I'm still kind of hung up on the "which team" thing. And last night, when ISOing Zeebs, I saw she and MM were frequently having back and forths. Of course, that could've also been Zeebs just buddying up. What do you think?

Sorry if this has already been addressed.

I didn't find the "which team" thing suspicious. I thought he was just asking me a little pressure question for the sake of doing it. I do think his interactions with Zebra were suspicious -- much of the WIFOM looks too blatant to be accidental. He did answer to that accusation decently when I presented it to him though. Do you have any more recent concerns about him? I think he's a mild suspect, but I couldn't give you much more without a more substantive case elapsing the full game.

Matt wrote:Rico - What do you think of MM? Nobody is talking about the Marsh Man!

We could do that. What's your concern?

Ricochet wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Any non-long-con player, your thoughts on what LC inquired.

Is anyone going to pay any attention to the Confirmed Civ? These are dark times, Rico.

Refer me to the inquiry and I'll give some thoughts.

Long Con wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Correct me if I am wrong, but Roger Rabbit was not a scum in Who Framed Roger Rabbit, so the fact that Duncan was civ is irrelevant.

My role was a Civ role in the game it came from, and it is a Civ role now. How many people have received a role whose alignment is different from the original game it came from? Is this a dangerous question to ask?

This looks like it would be against the rules, or at least the intended spirit. I say so because of what happened in Economics Mafia when the roles had to be reshuffled and players weren't allowed to even say as much as "I was mafia before and now I'm town".

Hosts?

Sorry if this has already been addressed.

juliets has been a model of carefulness all game long, and has conveyed a desire to communicate with people before she condemns them. When she communicated with me, the results were positive.

Then, with nothing but a meta read from MacDougall, she participates in my attempted murder -- after resisting the case against me consistently before I went to bed.

juliets wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:

juliets wrote:I am taking the position that Tranq is not silenced. I mean, who would silence him he's been silent all game. Now he comes in and votes for Lorab after being in no conversation about the dynamic of this lynch. I am voting him.

Place it where it matters, vote Jimmy to negate Tranq's vote.

Hmmmm - Mac who has played with Jimmy in over 50 games see's his behavior as scum. I said I wasn't going to vote for JJJ but Mac is pretty persuasive. And I don't mind changing my mind at the last minute so ok - I will negate Tranqs vote by voting Jimmy.

This looks like opportunism. I'd like to hear from juliets before I condemn her though.

DharmaHelper wrote:Aren't you supposed to be laying down and taking it today?

Absolutely not. I'm supposed to be telling DharmaHelper he's mafia-aligned as the guillotine is being set u[, and seconds after my head is removed I might even manage a wink.

Long Con wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Any non-long-con player, your thoughts on what LC inquired.

Is anyone going to pay any attention to the Confirmed Civ? These are dark times, Rico.

Refer me to the inquiry and I'll give some thoughts.

DharmaHelper wrote:Yeah you're right I guess looking back on it now, the complete shift in thread momentum with less than an hour and a half to go totally makes logical sense. I can see now how a literal bloc of votes shooting LoRab into first place on the lynch totally has civvie written all over it. Makes complete sense.

If you wanna get a little history lesson, know that I absolutely hate that kind of blatant B.S train bandwagon crap. Look at MP's Avant Guarde mafia for a great example of that, maybe it was AG 2. I saw what I believe (and what the evidence suggests is) a shifty bandwagon forming and pumped the breaks on that shit. Not in my house.

It doesn't have to have civvie written all over it. It has "bangwagon" written all over it, and it's a common component of any active end of day sequence. If your resistance was purely a matter of your perspective, I think you're wrong. I don't get a vibe of resistance from your posts as much as "Haha, these people are doing something that I can easily capitalize on, I'd better start yelling."

DharmaHelper wrote:Lol. I dunno what I find more funny, the idea that you think insulting me is going to accomplish....anything? Or the idea that you think Any of the 4 players I mentioned aren't foolish enough to try to save a teammate in such an obvious way.

The point is that I don't think you really believe in the points you're making. So it isn't an insult of your ability, it's an assertion that you're full of it. You strike me as a capable player, and that is not a capable suspicion. No, I don't think those players are that foolish individually or collectively -- or me for that matter. I'm supposed to be on their team right? Am I a fool too for allowing that or endorsing it?

DharmaHelper wrote:Is that what I said? What I said was "Pay particular attention to the most suspicious of the voters, setting aside *****FOR NOW**** the less suspicious."

Great, so it is suspicious? Is motel room also on my mafia team?

Ricochet wrote:Was your answer serious? I shall not be asking again, mind you...

Tangerines are my favorite fruit. This question is strangely ominous.

I'll expand on why I felt Burger seemed more genuine. I think his conversation with Golden just prior to and after my lynch evidences a lot of conviction for his suspicion -- to the point that he falls into confirmation bias. I associate that fallacy with town more than mafia, though the potential for multiple mafia teams in this game does lessen that effect some. Examples:
Each of these posts in some way or another shows Burger rationalizing my behavior from a mafia mindset in just about every way he can think of. I think a number of them are too specific to be realistic for anyone, but Burger is often one to generate highly specific theories like these. He's wrong, and Golden was absolutely right about nearly everything he said as the day ended. But I don't read wrongness as malevolent.

Ricochet wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Ricochet wrote:FRUIT

uh... tangerines.

DharmaHelper wrote:Except that's not at all what occured. You were likely to be lynched. Not two people, just you buddy. FZ actively participated in saving you by bussing onto someone she FULL ADMITTED she thought was being genuine. Civs do not bus other civs to save other civs. The math on that does not compute any way you try to spin it.

Except I absolutely do that all the time. So you're full of shit.

Not all civ reads are the same. Some are stronger.

Ricochet wrote:FRUIT

uh... tangerines.

DharmaHelper wrote:I don't think you understand anything you just said.

Good talk, I'm glad you're so interested in critical thinking. Don't respond to me again unless you have something valuable to contribute.

In which DH acts soooo surprised and perturbed by the LoRab wagon, as if it was somehow inherently more suspicious than the Boomslang wagon or the llama wagon. Again he is only interested in touching the observable surface of the thread and not actually think about anything. It's transparent bullshit.
In which DH asserts literally four mafia team mates coordinated a mass exodus from one counterwagon to another for the sole purpose of rescuing me, because apparently my survival is more important to the team's chances than oxygen. This is absolute crap; the kind of suspicion I would expect to see from someone playing in their first or second game ever.
Oh, but the motel room vote is cool though. Somehow he doesn't fit into the narrative. That's not arbitrary.

In which Mac makes himself the authority on meta reading me, and then makes the same erroneous b/s comments about my play he was patently wrong about in Trees Mafia in this game. I don't think he just forgot that I wasn't playing to his perception of my tryhard meta merely one game ago -- he is conscious of it and is still casting this suspicion.

Trees Mafia (in which JJJ was lynched and flipped town):

MacDougall wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:I would prefer a Diiny lynch over JJJ because I think that JJJ is more likely to be misunderstood (and extremely unlucky) this game, but I'm content with either lynch and I'm willing to switch to JJJ if there's a CFD on a player I'm less confident about than the two currently leading the votes.

I'm the other way. Jimmy is the scummiest player in the game and he hasn't even bothered answering to his sins. For a civilian Jimmy I find that incredibly hard to take. Civilian Jimmy would be supatowning on his phone trying to hunt the real scum in the toilet at this point imo.

Champions 2015 (in which JJJ will be lynched and flip town):

MacDougall wrote:And you're going to sleep on a day where you are looking like a good chance to get lynched and you haven't left us with a legacy post either which is totally unlike you. You've picked a candidate to hang your counterwagon on and expect it will work. That doesn't sound like the actions of a civilian JJJ.

DharmaHelper wrote:1. What civ minded person would participate in the lynching of someone they FULLY ADMIT THEY BELIEVE TO BE A GENUINE CIV

In which DH pretends civilian-motivated preferential votes don't exist. "Two people are likely to be lynched. Any other vote would be pointless. I am going to vote for the bigger suspect of the two". This is not outlandish at all and there's no way you really believe it is.

DharmaHelper wrote:2. What civ minded person says "Sure JJJ *could* be bad, and if he flips bad, don't look at the people that saved him, look at the people that voted to lynch him"

In which DH pretends to be incapable of grasping the an extremely basic concept within FZ's mindset. "If JJJ is mafia and his lynch was prevented by his team, then there was no immediate reason for his team mates to rush collectively to his rescue in the tally instead of some hiding on his own wagon in some mixture or another".

Since I know with 100% certainty that I am not on any mafia team with FZ, I can see her perspective pretty easily. I think DH can too. Instead of truly showing any interest in engaging FZ on her thought process, he just grabs a few points and shits all over them for their surface appearance. This is textbook mafia behavior in my experience (literally, I've done it many times). A failure to think critically and instead just scream about the most obvious shit is not at all civilian and DH looks so much worse than FZ as a result.

None of you may care about my perspective now, but you should after you kill me.

DharmaHelper wrote:What a joke that is.

I laughed when you didn't make any valid points but presented the invalid ones as loudly as you did.

FZ is my strongest town read.

Yeah juliets, I'll definitely expand. Long story short: his grasp of my meta is eroded, and he made many of the same points erroneously in Trees Mafia. I doubt he simply failed to learn his lesson.

Remember that time a whole mob of team mates came together right in front of everyone to save one guy, who they also lynch-stopped?

Yeah me neither.

If I'm a bad guy, all of you are playing into my hands by talking about me and only me. I'm already dead, but the distraction lives on. Huge waste of time.

Here's a face value read that I'll substantiate when time permits: HamburgerBoy is very sincere in his suspicion of me. MacDougall and DharmaHelper are not.

For now though, I'm off to work.

Go ahead and lynch me. Talk about someone else while you do it. Stop wasting 3.1 on the guy who is clearly going down regardless.

I intend to spend 0% of this phase defending myself. It's clearly pointless, I'd be talking to a brick wall.

I'll endeavor to figure out who among my accusers is swimming in confirmation bias like a good wrong townie, and who is delighted by my plight like a baddie. I'll share my reads.

And then I will die. Oh well.

FZ. wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

FZ. wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I really have to go. I'm set for 6 hours of sleep if I can fall unconscious right... now.

Nope.

Anyway, I'm going to leave my vote on Boomslang. I've decided I prefer him over llama, and I think he's a more viable candidate right now than LoRab (I'd support her lynch too). I encourage y'all to continue having this productive discourse all the way to the final buzzer of the phase. Make EOD exciting, that's when people crack.

G'night folks. Beware shenanigans.

If Golden feels Boomslang is a civ, maybe we should switch to someone else? If you split your votes, you'll end up being lynched

LoRab?

After Sorsha's vote, maybe her?

Just the first in a wave of late drive-bys, I imagine. Doesn't really make me feel anything about Sorsha. I'll go LoRab. Okay really now, sleepy time.

FZ. wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I really have to go. I'm set for 6 hours of sleep if I can fall unconscious right... now.

Nope.

Anyway, I'm going to leave my vote on Boomslang. I've decided I prefer him over llama, and I think he's a more viable candidate right now than LoRab (I'd support her lynch too). I encourage y'all to continue having this productive discourse all the way to the final buzzer of the phase. Make EOD exciting, that's when people crack.

G'night folks. Beware shenanigans.

If Golden feels Boomslang is a civ, maybe we should switch to someone else? If you split your votes, you'll end up being lynched

LoRab?

I really have to go. I'm set for 6 hours of sleep if I can fall unconscious right... now.

Nope.

Anyway, I'm going to leave my vote on Boomslang. I've decided I prefer him over llama, and I think he's a more viable candidate right now than LoRab (I'd support her lynch too). I encourage y'all to continue having this productive discourse all the way to the final buzzer of the phase. Make EOD exciting, that's when people crack.

G'night folks. Beware shenanigans.

MacDougall wrote:Jimmy how come every time I interact with you to put pressure on you you react like a scolded dog?

I'm sorry, I shouldn't lash out like that. Forgive me. It's just frustrating to be held to the "massive legacy post/make posts from bathroom stalls/be a lunatic" standard all the time.

MacDougall wrote:That is obviously the question, why wouldn't you just put the foot down on Llama's throat. Why haven't you? Was your previous suspicion of him disingenuous?

I've talked about that in the thread recently, just have a look.

Golden wrote:I just realised - Boomslang currently has the curse Draconus had on day one.

I hadn't noticed this either. Good eye.

I'm willing to bet the question-curser is on a separate mafia team to Zebra's. Unless Boom was cursed by a team mate (here we go again), that'd be a tick in his favor at least for one side.

MacDougall wrote:I actually can see where HB is coming from. Plucking Boomslang's name out and making him the counterwagon makes me feel like you've done it quite deliberately because you know that there has been suspicion on him from other players so he's a very good chance to be counterwagoned.

Boomslang and I have been at odds in this game and my feeling is hard to put aside but I can't deny what I am seeing.

And you're going to sleep on a day where you are looking like a good chance to get lynched and you haven't left us with a legacy post either which is totally unlike you. You've picked a candidate to hang your counterwagon on and expect it will work. That doesn't sound like the actions of a civilian JJJ.

If I want a counterwagon, why on Earth wouldn't I just go after llama, the very same guy I've been after for the whole game prior? He is tied with me. When I mounted that Boomslang case the thread was even more anti-llama in climate than it is now -- due in part to my own shift. That doesn't make sense.

You're gawd damned right I'm going to sleep. I don't have fucking time to leave you a legacy. I'm so sick of this crap -- it's not going to happen, I've said that eight hundred times. Me getting enough sleep on a work night is more important than staying a live in a bloody Mafia game. I would love to be a part of EOD, but I have to have priorities.

HamburgerBoy wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:It's always possible that contextual details are overlooked in an ISO. It's a restricted view of thread content, deliberately. From the Boomslang ISO, it looked to me like he was frequently asking people to measure their read on him against the behavior of Tranq, and I think it's reasonable for me to find that suspicious. If I did miss important context, then could you please display it here instead of just talk about it? I don't remember each of these sectors of the thread clearly enough to follow your train of thought without quotes.

You quoted part of it:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Spoiler: show

Boomslang wrote:

Long Con wrote:*votes Boomslang*

Boomslang was the first vote I cast in the game, as I recall, because he made me suspicious back then:

Spoiler: show

Long Con wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Boomslang wrote:Tranq's slip of calling Finn McMissile mafia (the role was part of a second civ team) is too easily fact-checkable to be intentional, imo.

It wasn't a slip. It was Tranq being a nub. Hence my opening post.

What I'm seeing here is, on the surface, a possible Boomslang-Tranq baddie teamup. That's just surface though, and I don't really think that's what's going on here.

However, my ideal civ-mindset would hold back and wait to see if anyone jumps on Tranq opportunistically, rather than defuse the situation with some textbook "let's not get too finger-pointy" sanity. Short-term "obvious Civ" statements can be long-term "don't worry about me, I'm cooler than being cool" baddie groundwork.

And recently his sig vote twanged me in the twingiest of ways. So, Day 3 starts with a vote on him, foremost of my suspicions.

Never thought too much about it before, but Boomslang is a pretty kick ass handle.

Do you think Tranq is civ? Do you think his behavior over the past few nights has changed the value of that (very early) post of mine?

It's Day 3.0 and I'm still seeing this -- Boomslang asking people to read him based upon the behavior of someone else (Tranq). I do not like that.

But I think this shows fuller extent of the suspicion against him. I don't understand the purpose of an ISO if you deliberately don't try to find his apparent motive for saying the things he said.

That's definitely not what I do. Understanding motive is definitely important. What I'm saying is that within the limitations of an ISO, it can be easy to overlook context (not deliberately ignore context) because it's such a fragmented view of the game.

The Day 3.0 post you've referenced shows LC returning to his suspicion of Boomslang for a new reason (his vote for sig). In the process of stating that, he restated his earliest suspicion of Boomslang for the sake of a more complete post. So yes, there is at least a relevant reason for Boomslang to talk about Tranq, but I still think his focus on that perceived connection is too much. At every opportunity he seems to be trying to break that connection down, and every time he does so by talking about Tranq's content and not his own. "You shouldn't be suspicious of me because this other guy's behavior [lack of behavior] is indicative of our not having a team mate relationship". That doesn't look like an organic mindset to me, he isn't approaching his accusers' assertions with his own content -- the only content that truly matters when reading into his alignment.

juliets wrote:First, i agree with FZ. regarding the JJJ voters. I was thinking about who I trusted out of that list when you posted.

Second, JJJ I am also willing to put in a Boomslang vote especially since two people I see as leaning good have already voted him. Like Epig though, I would like to see his response before I make a final decision. On the contrary side, like people are saying, this is beginning to look like a rush to Boomslang which makes me uneasy.

I encourage you to do just that. I hope he shows up and offers some responses. I probably won't be here to see it though unfortunately.

FZ. wrote:I'd also like to point that I don't think I trust any of the JJJ voters, except for maybe LC. I think Wilgy is trying a different scum game where it's all jokes and no business from him. If not, he should start being more productive.

MM did not contribute anything to the game since I joined it, and Dom, well, I'm not sure what to make of him yet, but he's not on my highly trusted group for sure.

I've stated my misgivings about LC. I think Doc is more suspicious than MM at this point. At least MM has provided one good answer to an accusation in this game that I thought could evidence a town mindset (no time to reference specifics, it was just before the sig lynch was finalized). Doc has done essentially nothing in this game except talk about the now-deceased Fuzz, and a lot of that was just banter. I don't struggle at all to see him as a bad guy candidate -- especially if he doesn't do anything with that vote on me.

FZ. wrote:I'm okay with a Boomslang vote, though it's kind of worrying that everyone is okay with a Boomslang vote

Yeah that is a thing, isn't it. Off the top of my head...

JJJ
FZ
Golden
llama
LC
Epignosis (awaiting Boomslang response)

All have voiced willingness to lynch/suspicion of Boomslang since I put that case up.

It should also be noted that only two people have actually placed the vote though (the two people currently at greatest risk of being lynched).

I have to go to sleep soon. The discussion has moved nicely but the tally remains particularly gross. If I get lynched that'll be two town lynches in a row for me, and that's not how JJJ plays ball.

HamburgerBoy wrote:I'll just address the most immediate problem I have with the anti-Boomslang case first:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Spoiler: show

Boomslang wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Boomslang is bad. Discuss.

If everyone agrees to lynch Golden, Boomslang, and Matt on Day 1, do you think the hosts will let us?

But if the "case" against me, as far I understand it, is that I "buddied up" to Tranq as a Mafia defense, why aren't you including him in this list?

MM lists three relatively arbitrary names for lynch candidacy including Boomslang, and Boom offers a somewhat curious response -- insisting that a Tranq connection should exist. This says to me that if Boomslang is mafia-aligned, Tranq is probably not on his team.

The inclusion of Boomslang was not arbitrary and the Tranq mention wasn't just pulled out of a hat. A quick review of the earliest mentions of Tranq in the game show that Long Con was the first to suggest a Boomslang-Tranq connection, and that Mac rapidly latched on (yet again). You quoted the post in your ISO, but only in your "It's Day 3.0 and I'm still seeing this", which is especially disingenuous of you when we're talking about a day 0 case, revived on day 3 by Long Con, and being surprised that Boomslang chooses to discuss Tranq/day 0 when that's what the day 0 case was about.

It's always possible that contextual details are overlooked in an ISO. It's a restricted view of thread content, deliberately. From the Boomslang ISO, it looked to me like he was frequently asking people to measure their read on him against the behavior of Tranq, and I think it's reasonable for me to find that suspicious. If I did miss important context, then could you please display it here instead of just talk about it? I don't remember each of these sectors of the thread clearly enough to follow your train of thought without quotes.

Some input on the Golden/llama discussion:

I don't think Golden has said anything unfair or manipulative; I get a strong feeling that he genuine conviction for what he's saying -- particularly his frustration at his points being ignored (as he perceives it). If Golden is guilty of anything, it might be that he is demanding a higher degree of specificity from llama than llama has realized, and I think that has led to this lengthy and continuing exchange in which llama feels like he is repeating himself. I don't get the impression that llama is deliberately avoiding Golden's points, because I do think he has answered to them in ways that make sense within the mindset he is conveying -- even if they don't meet the specificity standard within Golden's mindset.

That disconnect has led to this most recent series of posts, including Golden's list of grievances and llama's response to those grievances. I think the exchange reads genuine on both sides, to a degree enough that it has shaken me from my llama suspicion in general (aided of course by my heightened suspicion of Boomslang). When I look through the llama posts that Golden has brought out, this is the one I think is most important:

thellama73 wrote:The RadicalFzz kill was obviously because so many people were calling him a definite civ. Today I intend to look at those who were eager to paint a target on his back.

My immediate reaction to this was negative. I understand why Golden might think this looks like a pre-meditated maneuver, particularly considering the fact that Golden knew he was going to be a primary suspect emerging from llama's proposed approach. However, I do have one doubt about this line of thinking: if llama and his team consciously planned to kill Fuzz and then cast suspicion upon the people who were calling him a town read, then this post evidences a very transparent effort by llama to execute that plan. It'd almost be like a person farting in an elevator and then shouting "OH MAN WHO RIPPED ONE" despite already having drawn disgusted looks from at least one other person inside.

I'm also still mulling a LoRab vote, though I've done less legwork with her than with Boom. Anyone who feels she is the best choice could provide/restate their reasons now.

Boomslang is probably my most substantive red read, and llama might be my least. I don't think his conversation with Golden has made him look worse, most of my concern still stems from the earlier stage of the game. There's more to work with now.

Matt wrote:3J - I still don't see why Zebra wouldn't put a curse on you as her teamie. As you said yourself, you've been major busy with personal stuff and you've also admitted Mafia fatigue. So why wouldn't that be ideal, Zebra curses you, you get to take it easy and a bit of sus is lifted off of you at the same time?

Sounds logical from where I'm sittin'.

From your perspective it can sound logical. Imagine being the one who was cursed and immediately being confronted by conspiracy theories when it ends. That's very frustrating, and I think I displayed that. I think it's stupid, frankly, but we've had this conversation already. If I get lynched in part because of what if tinfoil, then there's not much I can do about that. It would definitely make Zebra's curse a highly productive move for her team, so kudos to them for even putting me in this position.

Matt wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

thellama73 wrote:Well, I'm not happy with the direction this is going. I feel that I've answered the charges against me very clearly, and am rather surprised people are buying into them. I don't want to vote for JJ, but I will to defend myself, because unlike Golden, I care whether I die.

Would you consider a Boomslang lynch?

Forgot to respond to your question about how well me and Boom know each other...

We've only played with each other once before, in Pet Sounds as Mafia. He seemed to coast by there, while here it looks like he's putting in an effort. G2H I'd say Boom is good.

He has averaged 8 posts per game cycle. What effort specifically have you noticed?

thellama73 wrote:Well, I'm not happy with the direction this is going. I feel that I've answered the charges against me very clearly, and am rather surprised people are buying into them. I don't want to vote for JJ, but I will to defend myself, because unlike Golden, I care whether I die.

Would you consider a Boomslang lynch?

Rico, do you think my Boomslang suspicions are or or or or something else?

Another general question for all of the non-juliets people: would you consider it typical or atypical for a civilian juliets to develop her reads very gradually, and remain on the fence until highly convincing material is presented (or she produces that material herself)?