The Syndicate

Master Radishes wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 5:56 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 5:54 pm Still behind a bit.

Needless to say, copy and paste any other post of your own or someone else's you think would be important later.

Why are you trying to catch up? Come and engage in real time as the minutes tick down.

Geez.

Not the way I process information.

I don't want nova, Quin, or LLD skating by.

Still behind a bit.

Needless to say, copy and paste any other post of your own or someone else's you think would be important later.

I just got home, and I am a few pages behind and I'm still not done with my work.

All I can ask of (remind) everyone is that if you are a civilian, please make sure you've copied and pasted my work somewhere to present to those on the other side, especially as a hedge in case you decide I am the one who should be cast off. Please do not let my voice be silenced, even if you don't agree with it.

Grades are due tomorrow. It's almost 2am here. I'm out. I doubt I'll be able to do anything further here given my circumstances.

Make a good decision.

iaafr wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 11:44 pm new theory: all the syndicate regulars are scum and everybody else is town

this is now my readslist and i will be voting according to it

Syndicate regulars are all scum.

We're not in here with you.

You're in here with us.

112 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 7:13 pm

You do realize that one is named after me, right?

Evenstar wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 4:14 pm

Evenstar wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:38 pm

MacDougall wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:28 pm I dunno I tend to think that if it was left unsaid that most or at least a good portion of us would vote along similar lines if twas simply the objective to "vote for whomever you think is the most objectively scummy". If that person happens to be scum then voila.

- oh, you're betting that 112 is scum

... ohhhhhhhhh

- Yeah, Mac's right, the scum ought to be under significant pressure after the loss of their Godfather yesterday and are probably going to want to play conservatively rather than risk a second scum lynch in a row

It's worth noting I got caught out by this as well, which makes me feel a bit better about Pawn and Radishes because we're all not native to Syndicate. Still side-eyeing Michelle though: shouldn't she be used to this style of game?

It's also worth noting that Epignosis is a very long-time member of The Syndicate, where I am told that anti-claim rules like this are pretty standard. He should absolutely know better than this.

sprityo wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 4:13 pm [10] Dragomir - Benson, nutella, vanity., Long Con, Master Radishes, Hyena, Trustworthy Liberal, NANOOKTHEGREATANDFEARSOME, Pawn Lelouch, juliets
[7] 112 - Creature, Evenstar, TonyStarkPrime, novaselinenever, Elephant, Epignosis, Jackofhearts2005
[3] Evenstar - Texas Cloverleaf, sprityo, Quin
[2] Hyena - Dom, Michelle
[2] No Lynch - iaafr, boo
[1] Epignosis - MacDougall
[1] MacDougall - Dragomir
[1] nutella - Lady LambdaDelta
[1] Trustworthy Liberal - 112
No Vote: ColinIsCool, [Player #30 who im not gonna look up]

So this is MY color chart based on my two pools.

I'm my world, it looks like mafia favor the counter wagon as well as random 1 off votes.

I have not studied this yet, but I appreciate it. I want to go over it further, sprityo.

Master Radishes wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 4:02 pm

iaafr wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:26 pm I haven't been reading pages I missed

does anybody scumread epi other than lld

Since Evenstar brought my name up, let me reiterate: I think Epi fits into a scum!Eva world because I felt his analysis of her interaction with Drago was poor, and I think Epi's vote on 112 could potentially read as a scum voting slot based on how it went down. I'm not outright scumreading Epi, however. Overall I think his play has been fine.

Call him Null, or Null- perhaps.

I don't suppose you would believe that Evenstar was the very last person studied.

iaafr wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:15 am i like how nook and epi havent even commented on this theory yet

I like how Epi hasn't gotten to a theory to comment on yet.

Evenstar wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 4:01 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 8:08 pm Game isn't until 8:08, so I have ten minutes.

Master Radishes wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:20 pm
Epignosis
Voted many hours before EoD – only reason I could see was in a later readslist: “Eh. Would lynch. (Great start, right?)”
Was around at EoD and barely engaged with the Drago/112 wagons – didn’t even vote Drago to self-preserve when he was briefly the counter-wagon to Drago

Conclusion: Suspicious

As far as I remember, my vote went there for no real reason at all. Reasons developed later. One big one for me was that 112 voted for me based on something he said- not something I said- and framed it as though it made me guilty. That's trash. That's trying to keep his hands clean voting for someone nobody was really talking about. Don't believe me? 112 ended up on Trustworthy Liberal- someone nobody was really talking about.

Bear in mind that if I'm bad, I am not letting my godfather get lynched Day 1. I know that might not mean anything to you since you do not know me, but when I am on a mafia team, I try to make optimal, coordinated decisions and not drop the ball. Letting your godfather get lynched Day 1 is arguably the most sub-optimal thing you can do.

If 112 is Dragomir's teammate, it makes all the sense in the world to let himself (112) get lynched. That would preserve the godfather. 112 didn't have the thread presence to push anybody else, couldn't vote for himself (and maintain any credibility), and if he voted for Dragomir late, he would be surrendering his godfather with less hope that he could be spared. I wonder if 112's hands were tied.

This is the first mention of "Godfather" in the thread and it's a strong argument put forwards by Epignosis.

Epignosis is an experienced player and absolutely should have known better than to argue this given the anti-claim rules.

Epignosis is trying to distort Town's worldview and get 112 lynched.

Radishes and Pawn then picked up the godfather idea and ran with it, IIRC. They might not be scum but they sure as heck deserve sus points for that.

*goes to ctrl-f godfather through the entire thread*

I am an experienced player on The Syndicate.

Role claiming and info-dumping were illegal in all contexts for years.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:57 pm

112 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:45 pm

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:39 pm

112 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:09 pm i understand ethics is not a science, but does it spark an idea in anyone if i call it the applied science of the Will?

It sparks disagreement or I’ve just been whooshed.

i don't mean ethics=applied science(Will) in the literal sense that it can be reduced to the application of empirically-verified scientific principles of the Will. The Will, by all definitions I know of it, is supposedly outside of the normal laws of cause and effect, and there thereby can't be any science of it in the traditional sense. To say it's an applied science with a literal implication would be nonsense.

I guess I just went through a lot of my life understanding ethics to be in the very theoretical realm; but I've recently been understanding it more as something that must be applied in some way to make any sense of itself. If there is a purpose in studying ethics, it follows that there must be sense in applying it; and there's no other means to apply it than through the application of the Will, no?

iaafr, help me out here.

No, cause free will is a lie.

Spoiler: show

I don’t actually care about determinism because we can’t test for it and it doesn’t matter unless you want to boil it down to “Is so and so someone I should hate for doing a thing or did they do a thing because they are fated to be an asshole and it isn’t their fault” and even if we somehow determined it was the later, then we’re just predetermined to be people who believe in determinism so we’re not even really having the conversation.

That is, determinism is a cop out for bad ethics or mistakes OR it’s irrelevant. There’s no world where you can evaluate that determinism is correct and live more ethically because of it.

Plus, I like to think that I’m driving and not in the passenger seat. It literally does nothing for me to pretend if I’m wrong unlike wishful thinking solutions to other existential crisises, like going to church if I’m an atheist, which has an opportunity cost. In fact, I can’t actually choose to believe in free will if free will doesn’t exist so if I’m wrong, you can’t judge me for it.

So yeah. Joke ruined.

Disagree.

112 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:04 am

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:59 am You evaded my question with "is the only thing you disagreed with in that post concerning you? "

yes but what does it mean about me?

i think the best explanation i could give you is that you did in those analyses what you're doing here- pointing to things without explaining why they mean town+ or wolf+ in terms of how a player has been trending.

So you have nothing specific to offer? Just a general taking a dump on what I put together (and in the same breath, what I'm doing now given the limited circumstances).

Okay then. Got it.

Evenstar wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:53 pm

iaafr wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:47 pm investigatives can't claim in this setup!!!!! the biggest potential payoff of a godfather is a single slot hard defending for no apparent reason!!!

*blinks*

that

is significant

and says that 112 is almost certainly town

scum are not going to hard defend their godfather under these kinds of harsh anti-claim conditions

aight who pushed the idea of the Godfather first they scum

I absolutely would defend my godfather to the extent that I believed I could. There is so much more utility than that. If a godfather gets checked, the investigator may well take that person's views as gospel, and if he or she goes down and is revealed to seemingly have had information, people can look back and say "[The Godfather] must be a civilian!"

Too valuable a role to lose Day 1 whether claiming is legal or not.

iaafr wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:47 pm investigatives can't claim in this setup!!!!! the biggest potential payoff of a godfather is a single slot hard defending for no apparent reason!!!

Syndicate regulars are very good about using their investigative roles to get mafia lynched even with no claiming. It's ingrained in our systems.

You evaded my question with "is the only thing you disagreed with in that post concerning you? "

112 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:57 am

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:56 am

112 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:45 pm

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:39 pm

112 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:09 pm i understand ethics is not a science, but does it spark an idea in anyone if i call it the applied science of the Will?

It sparks disagreement or I’ve just been whooshed.

i don't mean ethics=applied science(Will) in the literal sense that it can be reduced to the application of empirically-verified scientific principles of the Will. The Will, by all definitions I know of it, is supposedly outside of the normal laws of cause and effect, and there thereby can't be any science of it in the traditional sense. To say it's an applied science with a literal implication would be nonsense.

I guess I just went through a lot of my life understanding ethics to be in the very theoretical realm; but I've recently been understanding it more as something that must be applied in some way to make any sense of itself. If there is a purpose in studying ethics, it follows that there must be sense in applying it; and there's no other means to apply it than through the application of the Will, no?

iaafr, help me out here.

You post all this, but evade my question with one of your own (that doesn't go anywhere):

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:45 am

112 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:44 am

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:41 am

112 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:33 pm Epignosis - posting quantity without quality in regards to ISOs and a D1 list I seem to recall. Was on my wagon, which could be NAI in a lot of ways but also doesn't serve as a good look for him.

Quantity without quality? I made one post for each person. If there were six people I would have made six. On what basis are you criticizing the quality?

is the only thing you disagreed with in that post concerning you?

Yes. With what else is there to disagree?

and what does that mean?

You said my posts were "quantity without quality."

In what way did my posts lack quality?

112 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:54 am

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:50 am

112 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:39 pm

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:35 pm

Evenstar wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:11 pm What do you think of 112, Dom and LLD?

112: tough to get a read on because there is so much that I clearly missed for there to be a huge wagon. One thing in their favor though is that if they were scum I would expect scum to sacrifice them rather than the Godfather, right? Based on content in this thread so far I am null.

Dom: felt like the civ Dom I have seen before, with more GIFs. I understood where he was coming from eventually. Tentative thumbs up

LLD: not enough content, just a lot of GIFs and complaining. Lean more wolf than not because a wolf would prob be more predisposed toward complaining if their Godfather got lynched but that’s pretty much all I got

the thing that looks bad on me in regards to the first blurb is that i was absent for eod and left my vote on someone whose flip we don't know.

explanation that i haven't given so far- it's honestly what happened, lol:
i just wasn't in the mood to be on so left for a while and did my own things. the game got into my head and i checked right before eod and saw that i wasn't leading in votes and thought it would be best not to change anything because it'd be a bad look. i understand that might be considered a wolfy mindset, but i figure that even though i'm town, i need to take care of how i look in the thread, and i felt it would've sunk me if i intervened in anything after just ducking out. so that's my confession.

Why were you so concerned with what you looked like?

To me, you being absent when you (by your own admission) could have been in the thread raising hell because lynching you would be dumb does not improve my opinion of you.

that's ok. i don't really need your opinion of me.

You're right. You don't. Maybe a rope is what you really need.

112 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:45 pm

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:39 pm

112 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:09 pm i understand ethics is not a science, but does it spark an idea in anyone if i call it the applied science of the Will?

It sparks disagreement or I’ve just been whooshed.

i don't mean ethics=applied science(Will) in the literal sense that it can be reduced to the application of empirically-verified scientific principles of the Will. The Will, by all definitions I know of it, is supposedly outside of the normal laws of cause and effect, and there thereby can't be any science of it in the traditional sense. To say it's an applied science with a literal implication would be nonsense.

I guess I just went through a lot of my life understanding ethics to be in the very theoretical realm; but I've recently been understanding it more as something that must be applied in some way to make any sense of itself. If there is a purpose in studying ethics, it follows that there must be sense in applying it; and there's no other means to apply it than through the application of the Will, no?

iaafr, help me out here.

You post all this, but evade my question with one of your own (that doesn't go anywhere):

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:45 am

112 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:44 am

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:41 am

112 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:33 pm Epignosis - posting quantity without quality in regards to ISOs and a D1 list I seem to recall. Was on my wagon, which could be NAI in a lot of ways but also doesn't serve as a good look for him.

Quantity without quality? I made one post for each person. If there were six people I would have made six. On what basis are you criticizing the quality?

is the only thing you disagreed with in that post concerning you?

Yes. With what else is there to disagree?

Evenstar wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:45 pm ... if 112 is town, then Epi could still be a scum wagon.

... and he hasn't checked back into the thread since he dumped all his night stuff on us.

... and he said he wouldn't...

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:18 am I'm going to bed. I will not be available until evening tomorrow.

Please someone copy my stuff. Let others see it if I don't wake up.

... is this

literally

my qualifier scumgame

post giant walls, don't reply to criticism, let everyone assume no scum would ever do that much work?

the appeal to "please save my work" smells deeply of LAMIST to me

"look at all this I've done, don't let it be lost"

did I get pocketed?

Pawn Lelouch give me a second pair of eyes here I'm having a crisis of confidence

I don't know what this means.

112 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:39 pm

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:35 pm

Evenstar wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:11 pm What do you think of 112, Dom and LLD?

112: tough to get a read on because there is so much that I clearly missed for there to be a huge wagon. One thing in their favor though is that if they were scum I would expect scum to sacrifice them rather than the Godfather, right? Based on content in this thread so far I am null.

Dom: felt like the civ Dom I have seen before, with more GIFs. I understood where he was coming from eventually. Tentative thumbs up

LLD: not enough content, just a lot of GIFs and complaining. Lean more wolf than not because a wolf would prob be more predisposed toward complaining if their Godfather got lynched but that’s pretty much all I got

the thing that looks bad on me in regards to the first blurb is that i was absent for eod and left my vote on someone whose flip we don't know.

explanation that i haven't given so far- it's honestly what happened, lol:
i just wasn't in the mood to be on so left for a while and did my own things. the game got into my head and i checked right before eod and saw that i wasn't leading in votes and thought it would be best not to change anything because it'd be a bad look. i understand that might be considered a wolfy mindset, but i figure that even though i'm town, i need to take care of how i look in the thread, and i felt it would've sunk me if i intervened in anything after just ducking out. so that's my confession.

Why were you so concerned with what you looked like?

To me, you being absent when you (by your own admission) could have been in the thread raising hell because lynching you would be dumb does not improve my opinion of you.

iaafr wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:37 pm note epi and Jack both have had notscummyatallreads on nutella the whole game

maybe lld had a point and I was just blinded by her exaggeration

epis activity pattern here possibly also nagl?

I don't know what this means.

112 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:44 am

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:41 am

112 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:33 pm Epignosis - posting quantity without quality in regards to ISOs and a D1 list I seem to recall. Was on my wagon, which could be NAI in a lot of ways but also doesn't serve as a good look for him.

Quantity without quality? I made one post for each person. If there were six people I would have made six. On what basis are you criticizing the quality?

is the only thing you disagreed with in that post concerning you?

Yes. With what else is there to disagree?

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:35 pm

Evenstar wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:11 pm What do you think of 112, Dom and LLD?

112: tough to get a read on because there is so much that I clearly missed for there to be a huge wagon. One thing in their favor though is that if they were scum I would expect scum to sacrifice them rather than the Godfather, right? Based on content in this thread so far I am null.

Dom: felt like the civ Dom I have seen before, with more GIFs. I understood where he was coming from eventually. Tentative thumbs up

LLD: not enough content, just a lot of GIFs and complaining. Lean more wolf than not because a wolf would prob be more predisposed toward complaining if their Godfather got lynched but that’s pretty much all I got

I don't think mafia were coordinated at all Day 1. Dragomir himself was absent and had a vote on MacDougall.

112 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:33 pm Lady LambdaDelta - don't remember anything from her. sorry. this is my bad.

And I don't buy this.

112 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:33 pm Epignosis - posting quantity without quality in regards to ISOs and a D1 list I seem to recall. Was on my wagon, which could be NAI in a lot of ways but also doesn't serve as a good look for him.

Quantity without quality? I made one post for each person. If there were six people I would have made six. On what basis are you criticizing the quality?

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:05 pm

Evenstar wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:03 pm

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 11:45 am One other question, what are we thinking set-up wise in terms of team numbers? I’ve seen references to 8 scum but do we think 1 team? Indies, etc. ?

I guessed 8 because 30/4 = 7.5 and you round up for large games, but that's probably not a unified team. Right now I would be betting ~6 team scum with ~2 independents, given that there were six team members in the movie plus Mal as a 3rd party plus maybe the target as another 3rd party. There could be surprises in there: I for one can't wait for someone to suddenly get hit with a train from out of nowhere

A unified 8 feels like an awful lot for the Syndicate but it’s been a while since I was in a big game so maybe I am misremembering.

The first game I hosted had two mafia teams of six and two independents.

Master Radishes wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 4:26 am

Epignosis wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:48 pm

Master Radishes wrote: ↑Tue Oct 29, 2019 5:51 pm Welp, [VOTE: Dragomir] aubergine then. Not sold on a 112 lynch.

Beyond the reason supplied here, I have no idea why Radishes voted Dragomir.

There were 30 players in the game and my time is limited. I paid little attention to drago but I liked who was on his wagon more than who was on 112's. I had wanted a TSP lynch but my fellow TSP voters switched off to Drago.

Also, meta. 112's town game is full of inconsistencies and unexamined read switches. I think their round was poor, and am very willing to entertain them as scum, but I read it as a lack of effort as opposed to a nefarious agenda. Either way, I'd love to see more from them today.

Fair enough.

MacDougall wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 4:04 am Epi is a writer and English teacher. He cares about words a lot.

I care about killing as many words as I can.

iaafr wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 4:02 am

Lady LambdaDelta wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:54 am Pawn the posts were fucking giant and in sequence of each other, it was a fucking slog to read in which I felt my eyes glazing over multiple times

any assertion that this is not the truth, and that it's not intentionally done given the way the quotes were setup feels a bit disingenuous, at best.

there are so many town players who create annoying walls who dont seem self aware of how annoying their walls are to read

epi's quotewalls were like

in the 20th percentile of unreadableness at worst

if it was intentional he couldve made them a lot worse while still having plausible deniability

Pawn Lelouch wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:46 am

iaafr wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:16 am

Lady LambdaDelta wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:50 am Anyway Epi's posts are performative, not informative and they're designed to seep into the nature of people's want for content.

It's IIoA. They say many words, but not much in the end.

More than that, they're doing the Bullets for Bullets tactic I outlined in my scum guide. It feels like the goal of the posts is to be unreadably long and make you skim and say generally "agreeable" things people can't exactly contest without strictly committing anywhere.

@Pawn Lelouch at some point i want your thoughts on this thought in particular

Well for starters I laugh at the idea that the posts were unreadably long and designed to skim when they barely break 2 paragraphs total for the longest ones.

Now the question here is if they actually fall under informative or not. And I know you're going to call me a fence sitter again but I'm conflicted for that aspect.

He has some genuinely good insights in some of the posts, but oftentimes he is posting one to two word answers on if he agree with a post or not without ever explaining why he thinks this. So leaves the thought process blank and let's people just think up a reason and let's our imagination do the work for him as to why he feels this way.

Some of this could absolutely be the clear laziness he felt in some of the later ones showing up, but it's honestly semi-consistent as I am reading through them all.

I town lean read him regardless of this analysis, but in regards to LLD's assertion I think one is flat out wrong and the other one is very much one that depends on perspective. Since it feels like very little to me but I am also a heavy wall poster when I am doing proper analysis so I have a self admitted bias on this front.

While the flat out wrong section is a small ding against LLD imo.

A bit of clarification:

1. The one or two word answers (usually "Okay" or "This exists" or some variant thereof) means I don't find anything of substance in the interaction one way or another, but that I found the interaction noteworthy enough that I should keep it for context and perhaps someone else might spot something.

2. There is no "laziness (I) felt in some of the later ones showing up." I did not do these in alphabetical order.

iaafr wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 11:23 pm IIoA = information instead of analysis, in reference to the belief that scum players tend to rehash the obvious and simply describe situations without having inserting significant amounts of independent thought more than town players, who naturally tend to have such independent thought, and don't need to force content by rehashing the obvious

Well then I don't see how she arrived at that at all.

Lady LambdaDelta wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:50 am Anyway Epi's posts are performative, not informative and they're designed to seep into the nature of people's want for content.

It's IIoA. They say many words, but not much in the end.

More than that, they're doing the Bullets for Bullets tactic I outlined in my scum guide. It feels like the goal of the posts is to be unreadably long and make you skim and say generally "agreeable" things people can't exactly contest without strictly committing anywhere.

I feel like I'm reading a foreign language- I'm not familiar with many of these abbreviations and terms.

Let me see if I can transliterate and address what's here.

Lady LambdaDelta wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:50 am Anyway Epi's posts are performative, not informative

Everything in Mafia is "performative." Even not showing up qualifies (in a "John Cage" sort of way). You are correct in calling them not "informative," as they were not meant to provide more information (a curious irony, that, since my posts are the only relic of the old world anybody has).

Lady LambdaDelta wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:50 am and they're designed to seep into the nature of people's want for content.

I didn't design them to seep into anything. That's a strange assumption on your part, and another curious irony, which leads me to my grievance with you. You have made nineteen of twenty-four posts in which you either post a cartoon or complain about circumstances.

Your biggest annoyance would be that you cannot access the old thread.

While it is not perfect, I have at least provided everyone here with a partial access of the previous thread, with additional commentary. At not one point did you attempt to make lemonade out of cat piss. Toys out of the pram.

Lady LambdaDelta wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:50 am It's IIoA.

I don't get the reference.

Lady LambdaDelta wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:50 am They say many words, but not much in the end.

No, they do not say many words (from me). They only say many words because they are quotes from the people who said them. My commentary is rather terse.

Rather than comment on how "much" I've said in the end, why not comment on whether my observations are sharp or obtuse, and why?

Lady LambdaDelta wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:50 am More than that, they're doing the Bullets for Bullets tactic I outlined in my scum guide.

I don't know what that means, but I assume is means mafia players make lists (or should make lists- I've not had the privilege of purchasing or reading your guide).

Lady LambdaDelta wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:50 am It feels like the goal of the posts is to be unreadably long

I suppose Dostoevsky wanted to make me skim when he penned The Brothers Karamazov. Hmm.

No, the goal of the posts is to provide a semi-comprehensive overview of how each person interacted a known mafioso.

That you would regard those posts as "unreadably long" when you chose to spend your time here among us complaining and posting pictures of cartoons is unfortunate. Really unfortunate: You were here in some capacity from 11:20 pm EST Wednesday night to 4:05 am EST Thursday morning. That's over four-and-a-half hours in which you could have read even some of my observations and discussed them or raised questions about them.

Lady LambdaDelta wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:50 am and make you skim and say generally "agreeable" things people can't exactly contest without strictly committing anywhere.

I am not really sure that it is within my power to "make [someone] skim." People read or they skim or they ignore. I have no power over that. I likewise have no power over what others say in response. Why can't they contest the things I've said? What is wrong with getting people to make decisions?

There is no civilian reason to discredit my effort without attempting to engage with it in some capacity. If you believe I am mafia, then you should be able to show how the content of my effort is compatible with that hypothesis rather than merely claim that the effort itself is compatible with your hypothesis. That latter claim means nothing.

I hope you will respond.

Although...

oh dear...

I fear I have made this "unreadably long."

I miss our rabbit. Haven't seen him in a while.

Let me state for the record that I made another lucky decision today. I did not try to read this thread at work.

iaafr = "I am a fucking rabbit."

Am I correct?

Pawn Lelouch wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:34 am

iaafr wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:26 am the main issue I have with pawn is a negative space one where I'd assume he has more takes on my actual takes but he seems cagey

also this whole dom push on me is obviously scummy and scum pawn would be aware of that and it feels like he's on the fence about that too

I've already called him as shading Epi though? So I've already been calling him out. My issue right now is seeing if he's lying/joking or is serious about some of his takes.

Since I don't generally derp clear but he's doing it so consistently, if obv scummily from my perspective. So it's this weird case of conflicting views.

And the rest of the takes has been due to general household chores taking up time from me doing major commenting. Laundry, dinner, arguing about UPS needing signatures to drop off a laptop charger cord without signatures since they deliver during class times. You know, the usual stuff that is just kinda more difficult than usual to post while doing.

For whatever it's worth, I didn't interpret Dom's question that way.

Dom wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:21 am

Pawn Lelouch wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:09 am

Dom wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:06 am

Pawn Lelouch wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 11:45 pm

Dom wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 11:38 pm

Pawn Lelouch wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 11:37 pm

Dom wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 11:34 pm

You're assuming they have access to the old thread. Why?

No, I said had. The thread was locked, it was still visible. Only posting was restricted. Wouldn't be hard to ISO and grab quotes at night

What I was doing was assuming you were shading Epi for it with how you phrased your words.

I'm confused as to what shade I'd be throwing here.

My thought process of how your words lead your words potentially lead towards a conclusion is this.

Wondering how he had access so effortlessly. Wondering how he had access when we don't. Only those left behind have access. Town can't contact those left behind, while scum probably can. Epi is scum and getting info from teammates.

..."left behind".

That's specific.
Why do you say it?

Epignosis wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 11:59 pm

Dom wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:45 pm Epi, your analysis of iaafr makes a lot of sense to me.

I appreciate that, but I'm torn. Do you draw an opinion one way or another?

I don't trust iaafr whatsoever.

...

Because I'm fairly certain we went down a level since we were the ones who lost access to the original thread. The fact that we lost it means that the others are likely all still posting there.

Hence, they were left behind on the first level while we went deeper. Not really that much to say there. It legitimately seems rather straightforward.

Epignosis, what do you think of this one?

I don't know that they don't have their own thread, entirely new and entirely separate. You do. Why?

If you are asking me to speculate on the mechanics of this "place," I will admit that I always assumed the participants had been split into two new threads- it had not occurred to me that a select group goes into a new "level" while everyone else remains behind. Vaguely remembering the film (I saw a long time ago and I was deep in my cups), that latter theory makes more sense, I think. If that's the case, then I would assume we have these special rules and everybody else gets a normal poll, etc. I would also assume mafia BTSC would be split accordingly, but really that's a guess on how I would run it.

To take it one step further, I would speculate that there are roles (or maybe even just one) that selects this group (aren't we special?).

I have to pay the mortgage.

Pawn Lelouch wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:20 am

iaafr wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:10 am pawn wheres your needle on me rn

I keep getting vibes you're the TMI bussy scum in this game, any way for me to rule that out?

Also I doubt you'll believe self meta for obvious reasons but I lean far more on the Beck side of the scale. I bus only when I have to and I'm not going to constantly call out a teammate as scummy and vote them up when there are other wagons available.

Especially when they are the godfather. It doesn't matter if I think they're being sleazy, I can work with that, I've certainly worked with worse. I'm not going to throw away that mechanical advantage for any level of credit Day 1.

You and I operate in the same way then.

Dom wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 11:25 pm i don't know how epi was accessing it so effortlessly

I did it all Night 1, before it got eaten.

Looks like I made a lucky decision.

Master Radishes wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 7:11 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 7:10 pm Today was a circus. I would not have been surprised to have looked out into the hall and spied a juggling bear on a unicycle. I saw plenty else.

Did someone say you were a teacher? Me too. I empathise.

What's your subject?

I'm going to watch spooky stuff for a while and if I have the strength I'll return to talk more.

Today was a circus. I would not have been surprised to have looked out into the hall and spied a juggling bear on a unicycle. I saw plenty else.

I'm going to bed. I will not be available until evening tomorrow.

Please someone copy my stuff. Let others see it if I don't wake up.

Dom wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:45 pm Epi, your analysis of iaafr makes a lot of sense to me.

I appreciate that, but I'm torn. Do you draw an opinion one way or another?

*dressed

Epignosis wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:25 pm I am going to finish posting my commentary, and then I'm going to watch the World Series and root for my favorite pitcher.

This guy couldn't get dresses Sunday morning.

He's a World Series champion Wednesday night.

Go Nats!

GO NATS

iaafr wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:34 pm

MacDougall wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:33 pm

iaafr wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:33 pm

MacDougall wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:31 pm @iaafr can you explain why you dropped out altogether?

for fun

i never intended to stay on 112, i wanted to make the wagon look viable and like i would townread people for joining it

getting on scum lynches is boring and might give me too much cred to live

That would require you to know who the scum are?

drago was obvscum in my book

Nobody else can read your book, and even if they could, it means nothing. If things had gone even a little bit differently, Dragomir might not have been lynched.

Please vote if you are a civilian unless it's endgame and no lynch makes sense. If you are bad, cool. Don't vote.