The Syndicate

SVS 3 minutes til the poll ends but i don't know about the post. I was confused when I was cursed or hexed or whatever about when I could post again.

And are Lizzy and sabie ever coming back (unless I missed a post of theirs)?

Finished my re-read of TH and I am back to feeling good about him. I noticed during the re-read that TH was the one that noticed MP had probably been silenced, so it made more sense to me that later he would have a theory involving MP (that MP was double targeted) because he already figured out MP was targeted by at least one person. And his theory was talking about two people on the same team targeting MP, not two silencers or two people from different factions. Anyway, that is my opinion on the issue. I know I could be dead wrong.

With that said, TH you fairly recently placed a vote on LC because you wanted him to remember you were still looking at him (or at least in the text you said you were going to. I didn't look to see if you really did). Is this from anything new that has come up or does it go back to the start of the game and LC's vote? Also, I know you've been busy defending yourself but could you give me some idea why DH is still on your list?

MovingPictures07 wrote:And with regards to S~V~S, I need to revisit her myself. I still feel she could be bad, but I'm doubting it more than I was earlier this cycle.

MP, it would be very helpful if when you review S~V~S you do more of a bullet point assessment of what you see that makes her bad. I can go over and over what you've already written but S~V~S has indicated she cannot respond to a wall of text. I could try to bullet point it but the risk is high I will get something wrong. It's very important to me and maybe some others to hear what she has to say about your accusations.

I am re-reading DH, LC, and TH. I have thought TH and DH seem like civs but there is so much chatter about them I need to re look at them. LC I suspected early but he has kind of fallen off my map but I can't remember why. I am re-reading him to remember why I thought he was bad and whether that has been resolved.

Spacedaisy wrote:I don't have BTSC and I am not bad in any way shape or form. The only way LC and I are teammates is if he is Civ, which has been my general read of him but I could be wrong because I have no inside info. I just don't see it. I'm not bad, period.

You seem to be intentionally focusing on the wrong part of Dom's point against you TH. The problem he has with your comment is not the double targeting portion but the fact that you seemed to know it was MP. the only way someine else would have know it was MP before he said so would be if they were one of the two people on the poll or if they had BTSC with that person. Until this day period I had trusted you but I am not so sure anymore.

Ok, I double checked and I was wrong. TH did mention the double targeting after the poll went up. The point I missed is what Daisy explains above - its not about the double targeting it's about TH knowing it was MP. How did he know it was MP. (I do see your explanation TH I just have to think about it). Why did it take 3 times of Dom asking the question to get you to answer? I think if you had just replied the first time like you replied just a few minutes ago this would not have turned into such a big deal. Maybe I'm wrong, but the three times does indicate you were trying to think of an answer.

I also have felt good about you up until this period. I have mixed feelings now.

Dom wrote:

juliets wrote:I'm bothered by the point that TH knew MP had been double targeted but how would a baddie know that? He would know that his team had silenced MP but how would he know the other team did as well? There is something fundamental I'm missing here, can someone help me out? (I should have had the question curse).

In the same way that my team knew MP was double targeted. I targeted MP for a silence. The next day, both me and bass were on the poll because of Tyler Durden. Thus, my team knew that both Bass and I targeted MP.

Bass's team would know the same thing.

Yes once you were on the poll. I was thinking TH's statement came during the time MP was silenced, before the silencing ended before anyone was on the poll. I'll have to check back.

I'm bothered by the point that TH knew MP had been double targeted but how would a baddie know that? He would know that his team had silenced MP but how would he know the other team did as well? There is something fundamental I'm missing here, can someone help me out? (I should have had the question curse).

lol, my advice is don't drink wine when the thread is like this. It gets confusing. I think I will put my wine glass down and walk away. It looks like I need to vote Dom because MP most assuredly outed him (at least the way I define it) and Dom has confirmed it. Sorry Dom, I really wanted you to be good. As for the rest of this I will have to wait until tomorrow.

Turnip Head wrote:So looks like I'm right about SVS too. Does that make me a baddie?

TH, what is convincing you that you are right about SVS being bad? This exchange all went pretty fast so maybe i missed a definitive point where it was proven she was bad.

SVS or TH who is Lily Potter and why should she not be believed?

Oh wait I see - you are one of the dead so I guess that counts as a player. One more thing I'll add about MP's post is he is good at finding baddies but other times he is wrong wrong wrong. So, I take his points into account and see if I can go back and find the original posts he's commenting on and how I feel about them. I think everyone should be doing the same or something similar unless they have an excellent memory of the events he is talking about.

Lily Potter wrote:

S~V~S wrote:
And I have been reading the roles over and over~ shall I read them again Mrs. Potter?

No. I am not addressing you. Be a dear and go sit somewhere. QUIETLY.

I am here to speak for the disenfranchised. The cursed, the element that is eternally misunderstood. In life, I missed a great many of the finer points, but hindsight, well. In retrospect I see much that I missed.

juliets wrote:what the heck? is lily potter one of our sock names?

It is now

Tell me Miss Juliet, what is your opinion of Mr Socks Opus?

You are not a player in this game. And i just commented on his opus.

MP, glad to have you back commenting on the game. I've only read your post once and tomorrow I will break it up into parts to see if I can verify and have the same opinion as you. Obviously I want to hear responses from those you are suspicious of regarding your post (Daisy I'm surprised you voted so early without hearing Dom's response). I will, I'm sure have some questions and then tell you what I think.

what the heck? is lily potter one of our sock names?

Thanks for answering Snowy.

I'm going to go ahead and vote Turnip Head, picking someone with no votes.

Epignosis wrote:To be clear, you vote for the person you think is The Doctor. If you are right, The Doctor will have the option to establish temporary BTSC with you.

The pertinent thing I added to the host post is in white.

Oh sorry - I completely misread that.

Snow Dog wrote:Well that was fortunate. Getting bass I mean. You see, I was on to him but was persuaded otherwise. Right I don't know who to vote or what the spelling signifies in the host post but I must thank you, SVS for voting me and I'm glad I made you laugh.

I might vote zeek as SVS was considering him too.

Snowy, how were you persuaded otherwise about Bass? Something he said or did or someone else said or did or did it involve a curse of some kind? Also as long as we are talking about laughter DH made me laugh yesterday!

linki: Roxy, fyi Epi changed the host post. We are no longer voting for who we think is Dr. Who - we are voting for someone to be a successor to Dr. Who. Take a look up at his new host post and you will see it.

zeek, my being targeted did not include silencing. I did post yesterday.

Yay Epi that makes much more sense. Thanks for the correction. Now, who to vote.

So am I understanding this correctly? We all vote for who we think the doctor is and the person who really is the doctor gets to have bts with one of the people who voted for him/her? To decide this we have to have conversation about who the doctor is which in turn puts a potential target on one or maybe more players? There is something I must not understand about what we are doing here.

First, I don't know anything about the Bass/Dom lynch. I went through all the same feelings as you guys on who to vote. I finally decided that if they were both civ it would be better to keep Dom because as a civ (if he was one) he adds value to us as a whole.

As for me, last night I got targeted twice. It wasn't Bavmorda or the Warden or Boddy or the guy who sends you to jail. I could tell by the meat of the two messages that these two messengers were not on the same team because what they asked me to do when you put them both together were in conflict with one another. I of course asked Epi several times what I could and could not tell you guys and his answer is nothing about the message other than I got a message. And nothing about the other targeting communication other than I was double targeted.

I have wracked my brain trying to figure out which two entities to attribute these actions to. One could be Snape. And I can't remember what a horcrux is or does so it's difficult to assess the probability that one of these things was due to a horcrux. Also the mad hatter or gollum or the rogue (she is the one who steals powers right?) could be involved.

I am happy for you to ask questions and will tell you if I can answer them. If I'm not sure I'll ask Epi.

I don't know how much this matters in the context of the game but at least it was something different.

wow! I am surprised at this one.

Give me a few minutes to write up a post and see about dinner and I'll explain what I can about yesterday.

rip llama.

DharmaHelper wrote:

juliets wrote:Then when you made you comment about Mongoose really lying it furthered my bad feeling I forgot I also wanted to ask Elo what she finds suspicious about zeek? I was thinking about voting SVS or TH but then I noticed SVS only had one vote and TH none. I think my vote would be wasted if I voted for them.

In all seriousness JC can you explain what you were talking about here

Tyler wins by having more recruits than non-recruits in the game.

Then when you made you comment about Mongoose really lying it furthered my bad feeling I forgot I also wanted to ask Elo what she finds suspicious about zeek? I was thinking about voting SVS or TH but then I noticed SVS only had one vote and TH none. I think my vote would be wasted if I voted for them.

juliets wrote:

FZ. wrote:

zeek wrote:For anyone who hasn't voted yet, I would like to propose we go for an early DF voter. I believe TH to be civ, but he voted very late.

I was contemplating that myself, but I was also thinking that an earlier to middle voter could have used the knowledge that DF had negative votes and voted for him planning to change it later if it comes down to it. But when DF started getting all the votes, taking off one vote wouldn't have helped him anyway, so they left the vote.
I remember there was at least one person who said that if something changes their mind, they'll change their vote. Like they were preparing the excuse for later. I just don't remember who it was. Maybe Juliets

I believe I did say that. Is the same not true for you? You vote someone you think is bad and then someone else does something that lets you know they are certainly bad wouldn't you change your vote? That's what I meant by my comment, there was no "excuse preparing".

Ok, so FZ your question is why did I feel the need to say this. In your quote above you laid out there that I said I would change my vote if there was a reason to change it. You further indicated that the statement indicated I was preparing an excuse for later. My answer to you is that I was stating something that would probably be true of anyone who didn't vote at the last minute - that I would change my vote if something currently unknown happened to cause me to change my mind. Many people in this game have said basically the same thing. So, you put out there the idea that I was "excuse preparing", not even acknowledging that there were other reasons to say that, and i corrected you with what I was doing. I don't know why you are confused by why I responded to your statement.

FZ. wrote:
linki: Isn't that obvious? Why'd you feel the need to say it?

Are you asking me? Or someone else?

FZ. wrote:

zeek wrote:For anyone who hasn't voted yet, I would like to propose we go for an early DF voter. I believe TH to be civ, but he voted very late.

I was contemplating that myself, but I was also thinking that an earlier to middle voter could have used the knowledge that DF had negative votes and voted for him planning to change it later if it comes down to it. But when DF started getting all the votes, taking off one vote wouldn't have helped him anyway, so they left the vote.
I remember there was at least one person who said that if something changes their mind, they'll change their vote. Like they were preparing the excuse for later. I just don't remember who it was. Maybe Juliets

I believe I did say that. Is the same not true for you? You vote someone you think is bad and then someone else does something that lets you know they are certainly bad wouldn't you change your vote? That's what I meant by my comment, there was no "excuse preparing".

I will also be voting for TH.

I can vote for TH, timmer or SVS (MP I only dropped you because you already won a prize). The three are pretty equal in my eyes, I haven't suspected them at all during the game.

yay! finally a baddie! look forward to seeing you in a future game DF.

TH good catch!

I am going ahead and voting DF. I still feel queasy about boomslang but MP brings up a good question: whats in it for him if he is bad.

With DF I think TH made a strong case and MP's add on's helped me make up my mind. My only concern is DF hasn't yet responded but if he does and I think it's a strong response I'll move my vote - somewhere, I'm just not sure where.

If I did this right here is TH's case on DF: http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 85#p106185

I admit you make a good point there MP. What does he have to gain? Pointing it out to the other team he is not a part of? I don't know, it just struck me all kinds of wrong. I have only played one game with him though so it's news to me he gets lynched for the things you point out. That's a big consideration I have to take into account.

I have reviewed the case on DF and if I decide not to vote Boomslang based on your points here I will probably vote for him. It seems that everyone has mentioned DH so I'll say the DH I see in this game is the DH I associate with civ DH. Unless something else happens I'm not likely to vote for him today or in future days. Let me reiterate "unless something happens" or if i find something in the past I slid right over that becomes important.

SVS my additional ping about Boomslang came because he pointed out not once but twice that I had made a civ aligned statement and therefore had a target on my back. This makes no sense to me - it's like he's pointing at me when if he is a civ, he should just be cool and silent. I really don't understand why he brought it up again after I explained once. This really pinged me in addition to what others have said.

I'm also looking at DF for a possible vote, and LC if I come to believe he's not silenced.

I'm thinking about voting Boomslang. In addition to the things others brought up, he made a point of drawing attention to a statement I made about being civvie. He said it put a target on my back which I'm aware of, so why did he even mention it once, much less twice, making the target even bigger. Would a civ do that?

There are also some good points about LC. I sent Epi my question right after LC did and I made it broad. If I can think to do that it seems like master player LC could as well. The only thing is TH (I think it was TH) made a point about LC not posting meaning maybe he is silenced. I won't vote for someone who can't defend.

I'm still scouting others who may get my vote.

zeek, what is it about DF that you find suspicious?

juliets wrote: I was making a statement for the lie detector, Boe, if he she wanted to check it. Also someone, I think Made, asked several people including me about the contrast in our good and bad alignment behavior. Someone, maybe llama, maybe someone else, answered the question immediately. My impression was thats why they were making that statement. I just can't remember who it was. I think tha'ts what you may be remembering and if i had to guess I would say it was llama.

Boomslang wrote:Nevertheless, the statement makes a pretty firm commitment to a "civ" game. Because if Boe does check it, and finds it to be false, things could get awfully hairy for you. Unless you're an indy role with some secret that blocks lie detection... Hatter's insanity could be related. Just throwing that out there for consideration.

I don't think we disagree. I am making a firm commitment to a "civ" game. Maybe I'm missing your point but I think we agree.

Dom, i think reywas can only talk with pictures today. He has 3 posts: two are emoticons and one is a picture. I would like to hear from him regarding your misgivings but I'm not sure thats going to happen today.

EBWOP: I see now why you are shaking your head yes rey, it's because Dom asked if his ideas are rubbish and you're saying "yes".

I'm not sure i understand - reywas Dom thinks you could be bad and you're shaking your head yes?

Dom one reason I'm kinda hesitant on the theory is back when I played on a bts team with timmer and we were civ, he had a lot of trouble posting because of some things going on in RL. I'm wondering if he's having those same problems because of the post he made. rey I don't know about so it does put a question mark in my mind, though rey too has not been posting much in games recently. It's a theory I'm going to keep in mind as we move forward. I'd like to know what some others think too.

I don't think the Card Czar could be Hedgeowl Elo because the Car Czar requested cards on our first night and then didn't anymore. Hedgie, as you point out, never even checked in so the chances it was her are slim I think.

Russtifinko wrote:

juliets wrote: MP, lol I didn't play Cars but I understand what you mean in the games we have played together. I think it's because my style is pretty consistent regardless of alignment.

So this is not the best example of what I'm pointing out, but it's at least a reasonably decent one until I have time to go back and hunt for one. Lots of people (at least 4 that I've counted, though I forget who) have self-analyzed their play style so far, and this goes as far back as Day 1. Did I miss something and that's normal now, or is it a new norm? In my experience, people saying they're playing their civ game is both pointless (because 1. if they knew they had a "baddie game" then of course they wouldn't play it because it would get them caught and 2. they could be lying) and pingy as hell. It seems mostly like it's being let go this game, though.

As I said, juliets' post isn't the best example. But someone definitely said "I'm playing my civ game" or something very similar a while ago. If I find them, I plan to suspect them, and any help finding them would be appreciated.

I was making a statement for the lie detector, Boe, if he she wanted to check it. Also someone, I think Made, asked several people including me about the contrast in our good and bad alignment behavior. Someone, maybe llama, maybe someone else, answered the question immediately. My impression was thats why they were making that statement. I just can't remember who it was. I think tha'ts what you may be remembering and if i had to guess I would say it was llama.

MovingPictures07 wrote: Juliets, thanks for clarifying. I realize now I should have used different language -- "I THINK you're lying" v. "You're lying". Because what I've learned from Cars and other games is that I really just don't know whether you're lying, despite if I really feel like you are.

I understand your reasoning now, but I just wonder why you weren't more transparent with that when you were able to post after the contest was over.

It's odd because you felt strongly about Made lying, but you then voted Llama, so it stuck out to me.

How do you feel about Made now?

MP, lol I didn't play Cars but I understand what you mean in the games we have played together. I think it's because my style is pretty consistent regardless of alignment.

As to why I didn't post when the contest was over I just didn't think about it immediately though I should have. I can understand why you would question that because it did look odd.

As for right now I'm still not inclined to think Made is bad for many of the same reasons as others. Mainly I feel like we must be missing some pieces of the puzzle of the whole forced vote brouhaha. Made very well be bad but I no longer feel there is enough to vote for him. As always, I have to add that further evidence could change my mind.

bea, I went back and re-read the role description for Tyler and Tylers recruits don't change roles or alignments so it's not like the recruits we are used to from other games. Tyler wins by having more recruits than non-recruits in the game. From reading the description it doesn't look like being a recruit has any bearing on the recruit.

Dom wrote:

juliets wrote:rip llama. I became convinced that Made was not lying and that you were trying to take him down. Then when you made you comment about Mongoose really lying it furthered my bad feeling, throwing a friend under the bus to get out of a lynch. I couldn't see a civ doing that. Even with that though I should've given more thought to you both (you and Made) being civ.

I agree with FZ. that if Made is civ there are baddies on his list of voters. I also agree that TH seemed genuine yesterday defending Made and so he is a potential for me to give a vote to. Others are as well though so I'm going to think on it a little more before I vote.

Dom wrote:We know Llama is civ, why aren't there baddies on his list of voters?

I'm not advocating for a witch hunt of Llama voters, but I am using the same logic to reach that conclusion-- one that FZ opposes, apparently. I find that odd, Juliets.

I think there are baddies both in the llama list and the made list. Until FZ. posted people had only talked about baddies in the llama voting list. I was indicating agreement that they were likely to be in the Made voters too. I also believe there could be baddies in the people who voted for other people so they wouldn't have to get involved in the Made vs. llama vote, or maybe people who didn't vote at all. I do not believe that all baddies voted for Made and llama, especially if they are both civ.

I was thinking about voting SVS or TH but then I noticed SVS only had one vote and TH none. I think my vote would be wasted if I voted for them. Then I saw they both voted for MP. So, I'm going to vote for MP.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

juliets wrote:rip llama. I became convinced that Made was not lying and that you were trying to take him down. Then when you made you comment about Mongoose really lying it furthered my bad feeling, throwing a friend under the bus to get out of a lynch. I couldn't see a civ doing that. Even with that though I should've given more thought to you both (you and Made) being civ.

I agree with FZ. that if Made is civ there are baddies on his list of voters. I also agree that TH seemed genuine yesterday defending Made and so he is a potential for me to give a vote to. Others are as well though so I'm going to think on it a little more before I vote.

Wait, what? You're lying.

juliets wrote:I also sent Epi the question and recieved an answer, and based on that answer can determine Made is a liar. I know there is an argument that says even if he lied about that he may not be bad but I just don't see it that way. Why would a civ lie about that? To get a response? What kind of response? And remember how he said he had some kind of plan if Epi screwed him (not his words but I'm pretty sure I'm paraphrasing)? I thought that was pingy when he said it. So now lets see if he comes up with a reason Epi would not tell us the truth. So, I'm going to go ahead and vote for Made and then if he comes on and defends it to the point I believe him, or something even more concrete comes out about someone else I will change my vote.

Speaking of votes, several people have named DF as someone who could be bad. I read everything he's posted which isn't much and nothing jumped out at me. What is the crux of the argument DF is a baddie? I tried to search to see exactly what people have said about him but you can't search two letters. I also tried to search 'llama' to try and understand a little more about the case against him but it said llama was a word that was too common. Ha! Common?? But anyway, whats up with the DF suspicion?

linky i see made replied so I will read his response before I vote and if there is anything that makes me back down I just won't vote

This was your LAST post before your "Rip llama" post.

I became convinced Made was not lying by things that were said after my post including Mades defenses and TH's defending. Note in my post I said if I read Mades post and it made me pause I would not vote for him. I could not post a vote post because Dom had not posted. Also, if I remember correctly llama's post about Mongoose was also after my post (his second post about Mongoose). This is not lying this is changing one's mind. And I am not afraid of being closely looked at because I am civ, not bad or indy. Maybe Boe would like to check my statement.

I forgot I also wanted to ask Elo what she finds suspicious about zeek? That was an odd vote in my eye.

rip llama. I became convinced that Made was not lying and that you were trying to take him down. Then when you made you comment about Mongoose really lying it furthered my bad feeling, throwing a friend under the bus to get out of a lynch. I couldn't see a civ doing that. Even with that though I should've given more thought to you both (you and Made) being civ.

I agree with FZ. that if Made is civ there are baddies on his list of voters. I also agree that TH seemed genuine yesterday defending Made and so he is a potential for me to give a vote to. Others are as well though so I'm going to think on it a little more before I vote.

I also sent Epi the question and recieved an answer, and based on that answer can determine Made is a liar. I know there is an argument that says even if he lied about that he may not be bad but I just don't see it that way. Why would a civ lie about that? To get a response? What kind of response? And remember how he said he had some kind of plan if Epi screwed him (not his words but I'm pretty sure I'm paraphrasing)? I thought that was pingy when he said it. So now lets see if he comes up with a reason Epi would not tell us the truth. So, I'm going to go ahead and vote for Made and then if he comes on and defends it to the point I believe him, or something even more concrete comes out about someone else I will change my vote.

Speaking of votes, several people have named DF as someone who could be bad. I read everything he's posted which isn't much and nothing jumped out at me. What is the crux of the argument DF is a baddie? I tried to search to see exactly what people have said about him but you can't search two letters. I also tried to search 'llama' to try and understand a little more about the case against him but it said llama was a word that was too common. Ha! Common?? But anyway, whats up with the DF suspicion?

linky i see made replied so I will read his response before I vote and if there is anything that makes me back down I just won't vote