The Syndicate

Metalmarsh89 wrote:5 smashcoins says that SVS votes LizKeen today.

S~V~S wrote:I am not playing that game and that feels very hostile tbh.

fingersplints wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:I don't know what SVS is anymore. I guess I'm currently sitting on the fence with her. Although I'm still leaning towards her being bad.

Can you explain your suspicion again to me? perhaps you will switch back to the other side of the fence.
I don't buy that a baddie SVS would defend teammates like that. None of this is her baddie game. I'd bet on it.

S~V~S wrote:

rabbit8 wrote:SVS is bad. Denying this is absurd.

BIH Epi.

Absolutely not~ insisting on it it absurd, actually. Read the thread

S~V~S wrote:I have. Have you?

S~V~S wrote:If Oliver Oliver remains with us, I am hoping he might pay me a call. We might have some profitable things to discuss.

Linki @Rabbit, no I am not acting like Zomba. You seem to be missing something staring you in the face. But OK

fingersplints wrote:

rabbit8 wrote:

fingersplints wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:I don't know what SVS is anymore. I guess I'm currently sitting on the fence with her. Although I'm still leaning towards her being bad.

Can you explain your suspicion again to me? perhaps you will switch back to the other side of the fence.
I don't buy that a baddie SVS would defend teammates like that. None of this is her baddie game. I'd bet on it.

Like you bet on Sophies baddie game?

When did I bet on Sophie?
Sophie said herself this was not her civvie game.

S~V~S wrote:Everyone who ever played with Sophie thought she was bad. Then there were the people who did not think she was bad but voted for her anyhow.

fingersplints wrote:Because that is clearly the same meaning. Voting for someone isn't the same as saying I would bet that someone isn't bad. Smashpoints. Money. shoes perhaps since Liz will be needing some to eat

S~V~S wrote:I did vote Epig

Dom wrote:

rabbit8 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I did vote Epig

Yeah, but your defense of him was very....defensive....

do u have any suspicious suspicions?

S~V~S wrote:Um, I aggressively pursued her until freaking Golden made me think I was wrong. It was like 5:30 AM, I came in the thread, and Zomba & Liz had lulled Golden into a sense of complacency. He said he did not think she was bad, I read her posts from that night and thought he might have a point. I did not trust my own gut, and I got burnt by her (and Golden). When you posted those two quotes from me that morning with Golden and Zomba and made the crack about my post, then my next post, you did NOT mention that they were 40 minutes or so apart. You also did not mention that it was like 5 or 6 AM and no one was here, lol.

But like I said, I have been very open. If you choose to ignore it, or not believe it because it would be more fun for you if i am bad, that's fine. But I am not bad, and I think you know that

Long Con wrote:Putting the blame all on Golden for your turnaround is so... convenient.

Turnip Head wrote:I have the bottle.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Dom wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Dom wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I really think SVS is civ friendly this game.

I think I buy her story too.

tbh I think I buy it. I'm a bit nervous because I think her focus on me, but then justifying not voting Epig was weird though. :/ IDK

Out of curiosity, what made you change your mind on SVS?

What do you mean?

Well when you said you buy her story, I thought you meant you're leaning civ on her. Are you now or does her not voting Epig still make you unsure of her or think she's bad?

Vompatti wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

Vompatti wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

Vompatti wrote:If Turnip Head is not bad, why did he vote for me?

Maybe he thinks you're bad, Sugar. It happens.

He should be thankful for all the votes I gave him.

Oh Vomps, you're so awesome. I am gonna feel bad voting for you. I miss your Wombat, I hope you bring it back someday.

I identify more as a horse now.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

rabbit8 wrote:I agree with everything you're selling SVS. I have a large family, I will be less active, MM, but i think all your posts are on point.

Everyone is awesome, and I love rainbows and stuff....

You have a large family, your username is rabbit8, I see the correlation.

You'll get no reciprocal feelings from me either.

rabbit, do you think I am bad?

Dom wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:I think there's a doctor on the baddie team that does vaguely worded baddie things.....which I would be very willing to interpret as poisoning and the like, given recent events.

Canuck where are your thoughts right now?

Dom wrote:

rabbit8 wrote:I'm all for voting Canuck and SVS.

Or Dom and TH. .........

Hilarious, yes....but...

Why group me and TH?

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

Dom wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:what do people think of bwt?

I have no thoughts. Do you?

Just what I said above.

S~V~S wrote: What about them Mets?? Baseball season, my favorite time of year

Long Con wrote:yyyyyaaa

oooo o o ooooo o o ooooooo o o o
o o o o o o o o o o
o o o o oooooo o o o o
oooo o o o o o o o o o
o o o o oo o o o o o
o o o o o o o o ooooo o
oooo oooo o ooooo

Turnip Head wrote:Elo hasn't posted at all Day 7. Could she be silenced?

juliets wrote:We sure are a quiet bunch without Long Con and SVS. rabbit, I did read Elohcin but i just couldn't find anything to grab onto to show that she is bad OR good. I guess that says something in itself. But, it looks like she's silenced today so I need to find someone else.

Bullzeye wrote:

S~V~S wrote: Now, re this "us" thing of Doms. That is an astonishingly quibbly question, lol. I am not sure why bad Dom would pose it, especially to Juliets on Day One. I understood what she meant right off the bat, and when i first read that question it raised my brow a bit. Again, not sure why bad Dom would ask it. Then not sure why civ Dom would ask it, either.

Kinda reminded me of the Pokemon game where he decided I was his prime suspect because I'd asked a question (I think about the NK?) that I'd have already known the answer to if I was bad. We were both civs. Sometimes I think Dom has... interesting reasons to question/suspect people (I usually only think this when it's me, tbf) but he's not unique in that way. I'm still feeling pretty okay about him right now.

S~V~S wrote:I don't love self voting either, like LC says (if he did not say it in this game, he said it in another) it's an easy way to set yourself up for no accountability when you ARE a baddie. And I can understand that. When I first started playing, like many people, my civvie game was very distinct from my baddie game. Most people in that situation try to make their baddie game more like their civvie game. I did the opposite. I took a lot of lynches in civvie games, but it set me up for the old "but she acts like this bad or good" chestnut for quite a while until the aggression started creeping back into my civvie game, and more hosts started running one Mafia games. Hosts, y u do that?

I don't usually mind or care about self-voting, especially on day one, but we do have a baddie who gains power from votes (do we even know what that means?). It might be something worth bearing in mind. Not everyone who self-votes can be that baddie, but it's still a possibility for someone.

S~V~S wrote:This is a Llama game. Want to hear a helluva lot more from Mongoose. Quiet Mongoose is scary Mongoose. Other than the self vote, I want to hear more from MM~ is he posting content, or snappy comebacks & jokes? Who does Bullz suspect? I don't recall anything BWT has said, like at all.

Good question! Hopefully I'll let you know somewhere in the course of this post. Am catching up and quoting/responding to things as I go.

rabbit8 wrote: Because my other thought would be BF. Who does not consider all roles when they get info. Baddies with an agenda, or....................civvies who are too gung ho to actually think before they post. So this one is, meh.

Good point. It's why I don't currently think BF is bad. I just think he's a 'gung ho' misguided civ who has a different way of thinking to many of our community. Doesn't make him bad, but looking at the poll I'm one of only a few who think that way.

Zomberella12 wrote:

blindfaeth wrote:Oh well, if people are interested in lynching me I suppose I'll share what I know. At least if I die, SVS won't be able to lie to you about whose will it is. It is Zomberellas will. The reason I did not come after her in the thread as many of you suggested is because she was literally absent for so long. Which I think is oddly convenient, but whatever. Final thoughts, I think dom is bad, he's only analytical like this when he has a team. I think epi and bills are bad. Think SVS is misguided. Good luck

Well, I think BF ruined my role. Thanks, for that. Civvie or not, you blew it!

Does anyone else think if Zomb were actually the baddie BF is so sure she is, her team would've coached her a better response than this?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Epig said it before, it was convenient for BF that the "name" on the will was someone who hadn't been around to discuss or defend herself. BF pointed it out as baddie behavior, but I feel like we already know why Zomba wasn't around, and it speaks nothing of alignment. And on that note, I didn't post at all until about the same time Zomba did, and nobody's pointing fingers at me for it.

I would find it more believable that the player's role name would be listed on the will rather than the player name.

Linki: Hi Bullzeye.

Hi! You make some good points here. A quite quiet person might be expected to not actually show up and defend themselves in the time it would take for them to be bandwagoned after being "outed". I also don't think being quiet is baddie behaviour anyway. In fact, when I'm bad I feel more compelled to post. As a solo civvie I'm only letting myself down if I don't post but when I have teammates of any alignment I feel like I'd be letting everyone down by not being around. Also agree re: the player's role name. I don't see Llama giving away the name of a baddie for free.

S~V~S wrote:What would be interesting is if she really was the Millionaire. Then by mentioning her name, BF would be getting her votes, but her lynch is far from a done deal. He did not mention her name until he had several votes. So if she is that role, BF would actually be helping her get some votes, which her role could use if she is not lynched. And if she was lynched, he would get tons of cred.

When life hands you lemons, make lemonade, right?

There is also the fact that if they were both working together, there are enough anti-infodump people to ensure that she'd probably be safe for a few days to gather just a small number of votes - not enough to kill her but enough to charge up a baddie's power. I dunno though. I don't think I actually believe that's what has happened at all, just throwing stuff out there.

Dom wrote: I mean we're entering a world with many glasses of wine that are just sitting there to be drunk.

Sounds like a fun world to live in!

Dom wrote:

blindfaeth wrote:Don't be sorry, please pile on the votes, I would rather die than talk to walls

Why is everyone who disagrees with you a wall?
Why won't you provide evidence for your "suspicion" of me?

If it's anything like his "evidence" against me, I wouldn't worry. I still don't think BF is bad. He's not helpful, but that doesn't make him bad.

Not sure who to actually vote for. I can see how MM or any self-voter could be bad but they can't all be and there's not much else to go on in that debate. I do think it's odd how Liz voted for Zomb without comment and seemingly without considering the range of alternative explanations but I don't feel strongly enough about that. I will spend some time considering where to put my vote, but I'm aware of how little time is actually left.

Linki - agree with TH, giving up doesn't help anyone at all.

Bullzeye wrote:So I said the other day I think at least one of the group that included MM/TH/LC/Epi was bad. Given TH's silence, I'm less inclined to vote him. So basically I guess I think one of LC or Epi is bad and with 10 minutes to vote I've not got the time to read them both properly. In the debate between the two, I feel like LC is coming off better. So I'm gonna put my completely inconsequential vote on Epig, and give both a proper read through tomorrow.

Turnip Head wrote:Rest in peace LC And welcome back DF, you got some 'splainin' to do!

Bullzeye, I have been leaning civ for Dom recently simply because he hasn't picked up on SVS's hints. I feel like that's something the baddies wouldn't be able to miss. But idk, maybe I'm reading the situation the wrong way Dom seems like he has tunnel vision which I usually associate with civvieness. I'm not really sure where to look atm though. Dom, if you're wrong about me and SVS, where else would you look then?

Linki. Oh snap rabbit comes out swinging against Bullz

Bullzeye wrote:So, forgetting the potential slip discussion which seems to have sprung up during the course of reading her older posts, there are a few things that concern me about Liz. She sometimes seems to reach odd conclusions about things and I feel like she tries to cause confusion with some of her posts:

LizKeen wrote:I feel like the Celestials and the mafia are voting the same people. I can see why the mafia would do it but is there some reasoning the Celestials would do it? Either that or there's some recruited folk.

For instance, this whole post just feels like fear-mongering to me. One the one hand "The neutrals are working with the baddies!" and on the other "The baddies have recruited people!". No supporting evidence to either claim, but one or the other is happening.

LizKeen wrote: Is there usually this much requoting in Syndicate games? I'm really wondering if it's a mafia tactic just to be a massive distraction. If so then you're doing well.

I questioned the intent behind this ages ago, as did others, and I don't think anyone got a response.

LizKeen wrote:I think the simple solution is we're going to have to come up for new words for theory and Possibility, for clarification purposes.

Speaking of which, has anyone theorized the possibility the millionaire could gain more power to recruit?

Baseless speculation, but again reads like fear-mongering as well. Trying to make people afraid of recruits so that nobody is really safe to trust any more? Maybe I'm the only one who sees it this way, or maybe I'm not explaining it right, but it feels odd to me. Some of her explanations for her votes also don't ring true with me.

LizKeen wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Why?

Because I couldn't get past that he had the elephant charm and I didn't understand why anyone would want to steal that item.

Really? Not even a Celestial? We can't know for sure that he was one but I think it's a safe bet. She's not the only DP voter in the pack, but I do think there was a really good explanation for why DP might've had the charm. So good in fact, that it's probably why he's dead now.

LizKeen wrote: Like you pointed out, I voted early because it was either that or chance missing another vote and at that point I had no way of knowing how the lynch was going to go. The suspicion at that point seemed to be me or Zomberella so a vote on Vompatti wouldn't have made sense. If you look at the posts you 'll see I wasn't back that day before the vote. Given how many votes he got that day and that post he made yesterday I think it may be a very good thing he didn't get any more votes. It seems he actually wants them. And actually my suspect list hasn't changed much, if at all. My only problem is there's about 7 people on it and there's supposedly only 4 mafia left.

Vomp quite regularly plays the way he is playing here, and is often lynched for it. 9 times out of 10 he's not even bad. It would be a huge coincidence then, if he was the millionaire. Even so, you believe he is bad but have an arsenal of excuses for why you don't vote for him. You say you've got 7 suspects but I feel like you've only ever mentioned 3 who are still alive: SVS, Vomp, Epi. Please correct me if I'm wrong, or feel free to name the other 4.

LizKeen wrote:

S~V~S wrote:There is something bothering me after reading your posts, I have to read again and try to put the posts in context, and make them fit with your voting record.

Make them fit? Just to make me look bad?

This feels like a NO U to a post that wasn't even that accusatory.

LizKeen wrote: Vompatti as I've said twice now seems to want to be voted for. Which could explain his useless odd posts. No, I won't vote for him at least not right now because either he's the millionaire or for some reason wants us to think that. If he is is the millionaire then by my count he has 8 votes already (that could explain the day 1 self-vote) and who knows how much power and if one of those powers is the ability to avoid a lynch I don't want to waste a vote AND give him more power.

If you're so suspicious of Vomp, when will you vote him? He's probably not getting NKed any time soon if he's not bad, and if he is bad then you obviously know we need him lynched at some point. So when? Ever?

LizKeen wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:What is your opinion on Liz?

My opinion on Liz is that I think you're right, and she's as bad as they come. I'm surprised she hasn't been lynched yet.

Wow really? No reciprocal benefit of the doubt? Ok then.

Touched on this previously, but I'm going to mention it again. Seems like she was expecting trust or some kind of defense from MM for not going after him.

S~V~S wrote:Not sure how I feel about this push at Bullz. There are some good points, tbh, but I have not really gotten a bad feel from him. And I watch him pretty carefully. He is someone who deals with what he's got, or doesn't. So I am interested in hearing his thoughts about pretty much everyone else before I make a decision about that.

I may be back a bit late tonight, after work I have to stop at the store. A friend of mine was sold a necklace, and does not like it as much as the giver thought might be the case. My friend wants their money back, if possible. Let's see how that goes

Bullzeye wrote:

rabbit8 wrote:
Subtle Zomba defence?

Not really subtle at all. At the time I thought it was quite a good point, and it stuck with me til Zomb was lynched. With all the arguments against her, I just thought a baddie team would've helped her defend better than she did. Especially since she wasn't actually the millionaire. Obviously I was wrong about her, but as I say that one point came up every time I thought about the case.

Sure.......You have been wrong a lot. So have we all, b ut when you look at YOU'RE voting record it paitns a bad picture.

Bullzeye wrote:So I said the other day I think at least one of the group that included MM/TH/LC/Epi was bad. Given TH's silence, I'm less inclined to vote him. So basically I guess I think one of LC or Epi is bad and with 10 minutes to vote I've not got the time to read them both properly. In the debate between the two, I feel like LC is coming off better. So I'm gonna put my completely inconsequential vote on Epig, and give both a proper read through tomorrow.

Rabbit8 wrote:This is when Zomba was lynched. Distancing Bullz?

You voted for Liz 11 when Epi was lynched.

If I wanted to distance, why not just vote Zomb. Yeah, I voted Liz a few times because I thought she was really suspicious. As did a number of others.

Zomba was getting lynched. You knew this. You can look like a dumb civvie and distance yourself from Epi at the same time. Then when you try to help Epi out later it does not look so bad.

rabbit8 wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Rest in peace LC And welcome back DF, you got some 'splainin' to do!

Bullzeye, I have been leaning civ for Dom recently simply because he hasn't picked up on SVS's hints. I feel like that's something the baddies wouldn't be able to miss. But idk, maybe I'm reading the situation the wrong way Dom seems like he has tunnel vision which I usually associate with civvieness. I'm not really sure where to look atm though. Dom, if you're wrong about me and SVS, where else would you look then?

Linki. Oh snap rabbit comes out swinging against Bullz

Bullz picked up on hints, easily......

I'm sorry but this

S~V~S wrote:Really?

Worst baddies ever, Day 6, and the only actual civvie they killed came back, lol. In my opinion of course

@Llama~ if a team is eliminated, will the thread be told?

RIP, Splints.

So who are we gonna lynch?

Is pretty damned obvious. It's only the first one that came to mind too. The constant defences of TH, and everything between Sophie's lynch and Splints' death make it pretty clear what she's pretty much claiming to be.

It's not that obvious, IMO.

rabbit8 wrote: This post was made when things could have gone either way on LIZ EPI. Bullz votes for Liz......pretty early.

It was a pretty good case. Setting Liz up even if Epi was lynched that day.

I voted Liz because I suspected Liz. Her being civ doesn't change the fact that a lot of her behaviours were very suspicious. I wasn't the first to suspect her, and the case I made wasn't pulled out of my ass in hope of defending someone, it was based on careful reading. I chose to go after her instead because it was something I felt strongly about.

I know you were not the first to suspect her, but you went hard after her once she was suspect and Epi was as well. You IMO tried to help Epi out of a jam. It did not work. Following others suspicions is a great baddie tactic. Jump in and then claim I was not the only one to suspect her. Had Epi not turned up baddie I would not even really think anything of this.

rabbit8 wrote:Just checked and When Bullz voted for Epi it was the earliest vote in a lynch he has ever made. Looks like he has been trying to hide his vote. The only other time he voted earlier was when Liz was lynched. But that was a given after the case he made to save Epi, which failed.

How does one hide a vote when polls (and even posts for that matter) are recorded? I nearly always vote late, I like to see all the discussion of the day first. When I feel confident about someone, or if I have another commitment, I vote earlier. I don't remember why I voted Epi early but I probably had something else to be doing irl that would've made me miss the vote. This post makes a lot of assumptions and acts like they're all facts.

Bullzeye wrote:

rabbit8 wrote: Sure.......You have been wrong a lot. So have we all, b ut when you look at YOU'RE voting record it paitns a bad picture.

Am I the only person with a bad voting record? Is yours so perfect?

rabbit8 wrote:Zomba was getting lynched. You knew this. You can look like a dumb civvie and distance yourself from Epi at the same time. Then when you try to help Epi out later it does not look so bad.

Voting Vomp would've been the better way to protect one of my teammates. When I want to save someone, I save them properly.

rabbit8 wrote:I know you were not the first to suspect her, but you went hard after her once she was suspect and Epi was as well. You IMO tried to help Epi out of a jam. It did not work. Following others suspicions is a great baddie tactic. Jump in and then claim I was not the only one to suspect her. Had Epi not turned up baddie I would not even really think anything of this.

In your opinion. Sums the whole thing up. I wasn't following other people's suspicions, I took the case on her and built it up. I'll accept blame for her lynch if you want but it doesn't make me bad.

rabbit8 wrote:You near always vote late, except when trying to save Epi or be consistent with your Liz vote because if you had not been consistent your vote to save Epi would have looked worse. I have other things to do in reall life too, I just don't use it as an excuse in my defense. Baddies do all the time though. Players should look at the polls, you votes are very suspect.

Rabbit, I think the last time I played with you was at least two years ago. I ALWAYS vote late if possible. Literally every game I've ever played, if the poll ends at a reasonable hour for me, I will vote late. Unless there's someone I really suspect and know that my opinion won't be changed. I haven't tried to save anybody this game. Saying I have other things to do isn't an excuse, its the truth. I'm at uni, I spend half my life going out and getting pissed. Sometimes that means I have to vote early in mafia games so I don't miss the deadline.

Bullzeye wrote:Funny you mention low posters being bad, I think there's at least one or two quiet/blendy baddies. Blendy doesn't = low poster but I intend to look at a number of people I think meet one or both of those classifications today. Of course, since you've decided I'm bad you'll disregard everything I say but perhaps others won't.