Kwatchi

Just to pile on (poor Phred), I noticed the FTA entry has a negative PIPS balance at the moment; something went wonky there. It might be time to add a column to the spreadsheet just for this. It would help with clarity.

((sip)) So, like, we need one vote to lynch the person who arguably has been acting the most suspicious for the last long while... and now who won't even defend herself. Yesterday, there was a massive outcry and bullying of a juror into line. Today... silence. The only reason this is not settled already is that LadyK won't commit. Curious. ((sip))

My "fishing scene" ended up being licensed as a residence, because fishing was just a backstory for the build. It really comes down to what the context is.

Cute

((sip)) Just caught up with today's sermons. Considering how closely you have been working with Gary since day 1 - my opinion - it's kind of gutsy for you to forward this as a working theory. Brave or ballsy or probably nothing in the end. To be honest, after yesterday's we need a lynch fiasco, this spread of votes is fascinating to me. AMANDA 2 ANTHONY 2 TONY 1 We're, like, heading to a split at this rate and four votes haven't even been cast yet. Well, hopefully I can turn things around. I'm torn at the moment. Anthony's situation is so unique to me due to his predecessors that I don't want a bias to creep in to my reading of him. But at what point does that attempt to eliminate bias skew my thinking too ? #mindblown Tony has made a partial case and it would resolve the confusing situation. So I nearly went this route. LadyK and Gary... I don't have the energy anymore to deal with you two really, but your splitting your votes has me wondering what happened to that pseudo-town block Gary alluded to Day 3? Not really worth a vote over tbh, but I don't think that claim looks as solid when you do this kind of thing. And we desperately need a solid foundation for us to work off of. So I am back to Amanda. Regardless of Gary's weird objection (sorry dude, that is as lame reason as any I have heard since we started and once again a "you're scummy" threat chaser. It's getting old.), quiet means she may be trying to fly under the radar, and that is far more suspicious behaviour than Dez exhibited. Brock made a good case for this too, so that is where my vote is going. Vote: Amanda Callahan (Khscarymovie4) That leaves us needing 2 for the lynch that the vocal minority keeps telling us we desperately need. Time to step up or... ((sip))

((sip)) What exactly did I just wake up to? I guess should be thankful I woke up at all tbh, but it looks like I can sleep soundly every ‘odd’ night! Punny right? My first thought is that there was a cry to lynch Clifford - who turned out town. There WAS a lynch of Dex - he flipped town. We are our own worst enemy at the moment. ((sip))

Hi. IN a bit of rush, but I'll check in if I can later. Dez's behaviour worries me less than Amanda's long silence followed by pop-up essays. VOTE: Amanda Callahan (Khscarymovie4)

Mistress Lund was born in a farm village on the Rum Islands (Garvey) to a family with five daughters. When her prospects for marriage proved to be close to nil, she took her meager dowry and headed to Freeport with the dream of running her own inn. While she never managed to realise her dream, she did found a rather successful Fried Fish Shoppe. Her clientele is mostly composed of dock hands and sailors, though she does get the occasional custom officer or trader stopping in for a quick bite for lunch. While her fried fish is a well thought of dish, the fact she also serves beer and grog may also account for her shop's popularity. The Free Trader's Association recently took up residence at the former counting house next door, and she is aware that their factor Mr. Nilsen (an older but distinguished gentlemen by the looks of him) has been spending a lot of his time looking out her way. Perhaps one day soon he'll come over and introduce himself. ===/===/=== Once again, I approached this build with the intention of mimicking the aesthetic that Sir Stig set out for Freeport in the Jameis Farstrider's Guide entry for Garvey. I am fairly happy wit the result and believe if you dropped these besides his work they would not look completely out of place. The difference is that I approached both Freeport builds with one eye on game play, rather than solely as display pieces. Comes with having young kids I guess. Originally, this second section of dock was going to simply be open air warehousing for the FTA office. When faced with a shortage of roofing bricks, the office footprint was reduced and I decided to split the build into two rather than scrap the remaining half. This will be licensed by me as a small artisan in Freeport (GAR). Additional photographs:

As part of the efforts of the nascent Free Traders Association to grow their commerce, a decision was made to reinvested profits into their ports of call. This was to have the two-fold benefit of raising awareness of their brand and wares, but also give them a permanent local staff to help navigate the customs and laws which vary wildly across the island colonies. The first of these offices was founded in Freeport, located on Garvey's Rum Isles. Established in a former counting house, the location by the docks proved by advantageous by being close to the custom house and docks, but also in what was regarded as a higher class portion of shore line. The office was staffed by Mstr. Kai Nilsen, an older well spoken gentlemen familiar with Garvey. He is a quiet man who generally keeps to himself and stays out of trouble. While he serves the FTA captains who use him as liaison, he helps maintain the profitability of the office by acting as a currency exchange for foreign traders at a reasonable fee. Of course what is not common knowledge is Nilsen is himself a retired privateer, but those days of excitement are long behind him. He now has a comfortable life. When there are no trade ships in port, Kai finds himself with ample time to stare out his door, tea in hand, and enjoy the daily hustle and bustle of the dockside. The truth be told, he also has a fond eye on the fish shop proprietress next door. ===/===/=== I approached this build with the intention of mimicking the aesthetic that Sir Stig set out for Freeport in the Jameis Farstrider's Guide entry for Garvey. I am fairly happy wit the result and believe if you dropped these besides his work they would not look completely out of place. The difference is that I approached both Freeport builds with one eye on game play, rather than solely as display pieces. Comes with having young kids I guess. My original plan was to have a larger office building with an open air warehouse attached. Unfortunately, I ran out of roof bricks. So rather than scrap my other half of dock, I split things into two small builds. It ended up being a fun little project I could work on in manageable chunks. My grandiose plan is to do something similar in each port the FTA convoy stops in, but considering this one pertains to the Nov/Dec MRCA it seems I am already woefully behind. This will be licensed by the Free Traders Association as a small commerce in Freeport (GAR). Additional photographs:

((sip)) I got some welcome general advice last night about how a jury... flows day to day. None of it had any bearing on the specifics of this case, but I will thank the anonymous person who took the time to give me as a new juror a friendly chat. As a consequence, my outlook will be changing somewhat going forward, and I'll try to not be so stubborn and rigid. But I will say to Gary, your over-the-top aggressiveness at the moment is a real issue for me. The dangers of vouching was explained to me last night so I now sort of understand your reaction, but since you seem to attack the last person who answers I frankly don't want to engage with you at all at the moment. Sorry, it is what it is. Unvote Stephanie Diaz (Lady K) I am leaning Tony, Anthony, or Amanda at the moment, with Stephanie & Gary tied a distant third. I'll have my vote and explanation in before the day is out. ((sip)) PS: Ugh. Three "at the moments" in the same post. I need a thesaurus.

((sip)) Really? What is there then to stop me saying: "I was talking to the protector last night and they tell me that Clifford is town because they blocked a kill action on day 1." Gary could be being truthful and earnest, or he could be guarding Stephanie by simply coming at me hard, or even both at the same time. I dunno for sure. However, I'm not over-reacting to an uncorroborated statement that is possibly just trying to bully me back into line. ((sip))

((sip)) Last things first. I agree that it is very quiet at the moment. We need more people talking. Second last point: Why this constant push for the lynch? I really don't see the point of it. It simply speeds things up to end game without much value. Still disagree on this strategy. First point: Semantics, but my swinging my vote either way would not have pushed it over the 7 majority on day 1 or 2 so I was hardly splitting things. We were deadlocked both days regardless of what I did. In fact it seems I am being punished for NOT bandwagon' ing. That is interesting to me. BUT, since you are now vouching for Stephanie as town I will make you a deal. I'll drop my Stephanie vote if someone will vouch for you (publicly or privately). ((sip))

@Capt Wolf Just an FYI, the Sirrus, Fluttering Petal, Gargoyle, and Night's Whisper are all owned by the FTA as of last month. I'm not sure entirely why the print out has them under their previous owners, but it may be related to the way they were transferred in the database. ( @Phred, I am guessing I created double entries for these ships too during the ownership switch. We may need to rename the new versions FTA xxx to fix things.)

((sip)) I have tried to be open about my stance from day 1 about this, though I probably could have been more eloquent at times. My voting has come down to two (2) things: 1) I don't believe "blind" lynching is a valid strategy. My belief is keeping as many potential town in the game - and therefore as many power-roles active and collecting information - is a better philosophy than whittling down numbers in a blind hope of a hit. That info will be crucial in a very short amount of time. Frankly, the lack of day 1 kills was a gawd-send in that respect. The fact that Oldman was high in votes two days running, and then flipped town last night seems to bear out my thinking. I realize not everyone agrees here, and I'll assume not includes a good number of town members, but that is my stance. I'll continue to vote based on my perception of behaviour and not go with the crowd. And that of course leads to... 2) I have have not wavered in my suspicion of Stephanie (LadyK). I've have done my best to explain that I have identified her using PR/debate tactics that both deflect and obfuscate, which would be the definition of suspicious behaviour far beyond what I'd expect for someone under the pressure of a single vote. My make no apologies for this and my hope is that should I unhappily not make it to the end of the trial, that the spotlight will shine immediately on her and I'll get my woman from beyond the grave. Now, I do have a slight change in my suspicions of Stephanie. I can longer assume she is simply Balagio but now I have to consider she may be Moletti instead. I am still trying to figure out the risk/reward of that fact. And thanks for the experienced jurors who have helped undertsand the nuances of the possible roles. While can't say I am flattered or happy by this, but I'm not going to complain about it. We obviously have very different philosphies on "blind" lynching. You are for and I am against. Since I disagree with your stance, I naturally do keep an eye on you as well. But the important thing is he has put it out their publicly, and that I applaud because this is info we will need later. And since someone will ask, my vote at the moment will either be Stephanie or someone who continues to push for blind lynching. It is not a threat so much of where my thought space is right at this moment. And since everyone is still being cagey, I'll start things off in unsurprising fashion. One way or another, I want my suspicions of Stephanie confirmed. Vote for Stephanie Diaz (Lady K) But as I have stated since day 1, if anyone can make a valid case for me to change my vote to someone else, based on facts and not "hunches", I will consider it. ((sip))

Did we ever get paid out for the last MRCA (Nov/Dec)? I'm not seeing it anywhere.

((sip)) I think it would be safe to say that Moletti and a vigilante would be acting so similarly in practice as to be essentially synonymous in our case. The big difference is the win condition and whether they are solo or teamed up. If we don't experience anymore multi-death nights in the future, we'll have our answer regardless of what Andy was. I can't speak to Serial Killer or Vengeful, as I don't have any practical knowledge on how they work. ((sip)) Sorry. I made a typo. Andy should be Alan (Kotz).

((sip)) I was, like, thinking along the same lines this morning over my morning joe. I have the beginnings of a theory anyway. - Alan was likely killed by Balagio (as Moletti would not kill off one of their own). -Oldman was killed by Moletti, Whether that be by Alan or a compatriot cannot be determined yet. On day 2, he responded to Stephanie's assumption that there were 3-4 crime family members by saying he thought that was a little high. I am going to take a leap of faith and say he dropped a truth here and therefore make the assumption that there are/were only 1-2 Moletti in the jury. So it is the why that I am still trying to figure out. Alan consistently (in my view) tried to direct conversations towards refreshing inter-juror conflicts or lynches. So Moletti's "win condition" may involve identifying and eliminating Balagio or it may involve taking over the jury themselves. One consequence of the Oldman kill is that it could shift pressure to Actor-Builder from Jluck, or a new target that would have come to light today. If we take Balagio's Alan kill, it could have been either a direct attack or to put pressure on Jluck from Actor-Builder today. So the good news for us is that they are working at cross-purposes. Whether they are protecting there own assets or not is a key question to look at it. (And I haven't even considered a double-bluff here tbh) I'm no where near my vote yet unfortunately, other than my regular Stephanie one. I hoping to carve out some time later today to see if I can identify someone who supported these moves in discussion. ((sip))

I have had some of success just using a regular photo and running it through a black & white filter. Here's an example. It is by no means a perfect representation of night time conditions but the fact of the matter is we want to see your builds on this site for some reason , so it is a compromise that adds mood but doesn't lose much detail. My 2 coin.

((sip)) I'm not going to lie. I'm, like, completely stunned right now. Going to sleep on things, and try and pick a part the last two days and try to come up with a pattern. ((sip))

((sip)) Objectively, is this not a complete impossible situation for Anthony? He has inherited a legacy of two previous jurors who's behaviour was 1) quiet but possibly explained due to outside circumstances, 2) so brief it probably isn't worth even considering, combined with literally hours to come to grips with the present voting patterns. I can't imagine he can come up with any answer to these accusation that will satisfy; guilty or not. Would it not be safer to "park him" for a day? I am not being rhetorical; I am truly asking if the risk of a single night outweighs the potential result of a false positive based on flawed data. ((sip)) At the end of day 1, and start of today too, I stated openly that I would consider, like, switching my vote off Stephanie for a compelling argument. I'm not seeing one in this case for Anthony. Tony, I can begin to see one for you as you are one of the most vocal for lynching Anthony (not the only one ofc). But that comes directly because I am not in the WE NEED A LYNCH camp but rather trying to evaluate persons based on speech and behaviour patterns I'm recognizing from... internet research I may have done in a past life. So the push for lynching strikes me as counter productive behaviour while so little known. ((sip))

Beat me to it. I'd like to know how she came to this number. This came right out of left field. (Having said that, my first time on a jury so maybe there is a formula I don't know about).

Not exactly. You can wear a dress if you want. It just doesn't have to be up to code.

((sip)) Fixed that for you. Honestly, until the Cathy/Jimmy/whomever situation is resolved I am not sure there is much point in rabble rousing us into circular discussions ad nauseum. We have a lingering vote that may be invalid and four cast votes for a potential non-entity; that equates to trying to decipher a truth while utilizing a faulty variable. Once the judge weighs in officially, we can go back to our finger pointing. ((sip))

Charlatan Bay had its own mercenary soldiers for a while... until I had Mardier slaughter them IC. If a Sea Rat can have their own private army, I figure anyone could.

((sip)) Stephanie, you are now, like, voting for Tony based on what exactly? The exact same behaviour you yourself have been exhibiting (e.g. based first vote on wild speculation over a fluff post and not contributing anything you deem useful to the discussion)? I may be the only one who doesn't trust you but... there it is. Sorry. Vote for Stephanie Diaz (Lady K) I'll stick with my Day 1 opinion until I there is a compelling argument to change. With Cathy's illness throwing her actions in a complete new light, I honestly don't see anything at the moment that has me convinced I should. ((sip))