The Syndicate

Sorry, Bea, I didn't realize it would bother you that much.

In Mafia I don't consider anybody off limits, I wouldn't feel like I'm playing fair that way.

You did suspect me a bit, but my main fear at that point was Scotty, since he'd come up with that accurate case on me. But I figured it would be much too obvious to take him out. You were just the right mix of not voicing support for me but also not having gone hard after me.

Scotty wrote:
DFaraday wrote:Also, our team had the absolute worst luck. I recruited an inactive, then Nero was lynched right off the bat, THEN my first kill failed. This just wasn't the Maronis' game.
Yah man, you got the shit end of the stick on that one. You hung in there, though, and did your best!

Thanks, Scotty. You were the only one who saw right through me, and luckily nobody really followed up on that.

Also, our team had the absolute worst luck. I recruited an inactive, then Nero was lynched right off the bat, THEN my first kill failed. This just wasn't the Maronis' game.

Yes, I killed Batman!

Though apparently I didn't hit anyone I actually needed dead.

I know people thought my kills were weird choices, but I was specifically trying to take out people that couldn't be in any way traced back to me. I think I succeeded in that at least.

Die civvies

For posterity, my suspects are LoRab, DH, and Bubbles, in that order.

Long Con wrote:
Golden wrote:Anyway, the better question might be how does LC resolve lynch ties lol!
All voters die in a tie!

Then that means the final four would be DH and the inactives. I'd almost be okay with dying just to see that happen.

Golden wrote:
DFaraday wrote:Come on, Equivocate, Bass, Ekeknat, now would be a great time for you guys to come back to the game.
What if they voted for you?

At least I wouldn't have to wait in anticipation. I forget, did the hosts establish how ties are resolved?

Come on, Equivocate, Bass, Ekeknat, now would be a great time for you guys to come back to the game.

LoRab wrote:And, to be clear, this is the post I was commenting on that first time:

DFaraday wrote:
LoRab wrote:
DFaraday wrote:
Golden wrote:Scotty made a case in the early game on DFaraday that I really agreed with but now have entirely forgotten about.
Here it is. And here is my response.

I don't agree with the Matt suspicion. He's still coming off as an earnest civ to me.

My main suspicion at the moment is on Bubbles, because here vote was still shady to me, even without Glorf as a teammate. I also feel like Lorab merits looking into some more. I suspected her early on, so I may revisit that.

I still don't think going after inactives is a good idea, since the baddies are still sending in kills and so that limits the number of baddies inactives could be.
I agree about Bubbles. I don't agree about me, but read my posts and ask me questions--I think you'll see that I'm a civ who has been really distracted IRL for most of the game.

Also, you say your main suspicion is Bubbles and then say that you don't think we should go after inactives. I mean, technically Bubbles has now posted, but I think she is still on the not-so-active list, no?
Except Bubbles is generally present at least once each phase, so she could very well be sending in PMs. There's no evidence that Bass, ekeknat, or Equivocate have even remembered that this game exists in the last week or so.
I think the intent that she was pretty much here every phase is the general, understood meaning of your words.

Yes, "pretty much" means not exactly, but close to it. And I overestimated it, but I think my point is still valid. But I'm done with that issue.

LoRab wrote:
DFaraday wrote:
MacDougall wrote:Voting for DharmaHelper to be contrarian.
You're a gentleman and a scholar, Mac.

Linki: That's because your point about Bubbles each time is that I said she was around consistently, which a) is not what I said, and b) is irrelevant to the point I was making about Bubbles. Okay, so I misremembered how much she was around. What does that change? She's still been around enough to send in PMs, which was my point to begin with.

As for Sabie, I thought there were good points made against her, but I suspected Sprit more. That's really all there was to that.
Right. I don't necessarily agree that she would have been around to send the pm's. Possibly, because at times she posted elsewhere, but not on every night (or every other night). That said, I do believe she has a partner, and that is the crux of my suspicion of her.

And my point is based on your words. And you did say she's been around. You are twisting the truth by going back on what you actually posted and saying that you didn't say she's mostly been around. In fact, she hasn't been mostly around.

I didn't use the word consistently, you did. I've quoted myself in this back and forth before. I said "more or less", and I stand by that. You don't agree, okay. Since you already voted for me, I'm not going to keep spending time going in circles over it.

MacDougall wrote:Voting for DharmaHelper to be contrarian.

You're a gentleman and a scholar, Mac.

Linki: That's because your point about Bubbles each time is that I said she was around consistently, which a) is not what I said, and b) is irrelevant to the point I was making about Bubbles. Okay, so I misremembered how much she was around. What does that change? She's still been around enough to send in PMs, which was my point to begin with.

As for Sabie, I thought there were good points made against her, but I suspected Sprit more. That's really all there was to that.

LoRab wrote:Voting DF. His responses to my suspicion amount to saying I'm missing his point, and not actually defending. And my other suspicions are not here. And Bubbles I have enough doubt about that I'm holding off for now.

I don't know what I'm even supposed to defend against, but I guess it's moot now that you've voted.

Dom wrote:There's been very little discussion of a DFaraday vote and now he's in the lead. That makes my eye twitch.

Vote for DH or Bubbles to counteract it.

I'm sorry if that came off snippy, I just feel like I keep explaining my reasoning re: Bubbles and you keep missing the point of what I'm saying. Talking in circles is very frustrating.

LoRab wrote:
Dom wrote:Why are people voting DFaaday?
I haven't voted yet, but he's one I'm considering. My own suspicion is that his suspicion of bubbles seems disingenuous, as he said that she's been around throughout the game, which just isn't true.

He also had some posts that seemed to be defending sabie without actually defending sabie. This is the one that sticks out to me:

DFaraday wrote:
Dom wrote:Who's left to vote? Wanna vote sprit with me?
I will. I think the case on Sabie has merit as well, but I feel more strongly about Sprityo.

Also, those random Mac votes look pretty shady from where I'm sitting.

Bubbles has appeared at various points throughout the game. Ekeknat, Equivocate, and Bass have not. They have been wholly absent for weeks. Bubbles has appeared intermittently, meaning it's plausible that she could be sending in the PMs, whereas it is not plausible that the above guys have been, given their complete disappearance from the game.

Bubbles could potentially have been sending in PMs, since she has at least been vaguely following along, whereas the inactives seem to have abandoned the game long ago. Therefore I think it's more likely that she is bad than they are.

Dom wrote:Why are people voting DFaaday?

This is a very good question. I feel like Bullz and Typh voted me because I was suspecting them, and they didn't like my case. Enrique I have no idea.

I'd like to vote DH, but I'll hold onto my vote since apparently I need to.

Bullzeye wrote:
DFaraday wrote:
Bullzeye wrote:
Typhoony wrote:I have no read on LoRab at all.
I have a slight baddie read on df.
Is it for the same reason I do? His Mac voters thing kinda seemed like feigned involvement to me. Maybe I just felt like that because he called me out for it though. I mean I did spend a significant portion of this game suspicious of Mac and tried to get him lynched maybe three times.
I try to point out what looks like a save, and everyone thinks I'm just doing it for show. I still think it looked shady, but I don't find your posts suspicious, so that was the end of that.
It's not like the Mac suspicion came out of nowhere. He had to out himself to get away from it after all. I don't see why it looks shady that some people voted for a guy who'd been getting heat all game. Not everything is a save attempt.

That's fair. I think it was the timing that stood out to me the most, I think. Sabie took 2 votes, then Mac took two. Then more votes on Sabie, more votes on Mac. I just felt like someone in there didn't want Sabie lynched.

Bullzeye wrote:
Typhoony wrote:I have no read on LoRab at all.
I have a slight baddie read on df.
Is it for the same reason I do? His Mac voters thing kinda seemed like feigned involvement to me. Maybe I just felt like that because he called me out for it though. I mean I did spend a significant portion of this game suspicious of Mac and tried to get him lynched maybe three times.

I try to point out what looks like a save, and everyone thinks I'm just doing it for show.

I still think it looked shady, but I don't find your posts suspicious, so that was the end of that.

juliets wrote:
Matt wrote:Sorry to do this, but I have to get ready for work and jet.

I'm voting DH. Don't think he genuinely wanted Nero lynched, and it shows.

Good luck town!
You didn't even let him respond.

Matt said he had to go to work, so it seems odd that you were considering voting him for that.

Linki: I had like 6 other tabs open and when I looked back, Typh voted me.

As far as my reads right now go, I'd put Matt, Golden, Mac, and MP as strong civ reads, with Enrique up there too. Typh, Bullz, Dom, snd SVS are middling for me, as well as the inactives. I think there could be something to the DH case, I'm still looking over Lorab, and I didn't like Juliets' reasoning for her suspicion of Matt, but otherwise haven't been pinged by her.

Matt, your points about DH and Nero are intriguing, but it should be noted that the baddies didn't recruit until Night 1, so DH's Day 1 comments about Floyd would have been made before Floyd was a baddie.

Still, I think there could definitely be a connection based on the Nero situation, so I'd like to hear from DH on the subject.

LoRab wrote:
Matt wrote:
MacDougall wrote:If you are still going on about the riddler thing, he didn't lie about that Matt. His explanation of the Riddler matches my experience, not yours.
Well, I can't very well argue with that then. Maybe a fake Riddler targeted me.

If most are agreeing with Turnip's version of events, then I don't really suss Typh any more. Most agree Mac is who he says he is. I've actually come around myself on MP being who he says he is.

@Dom - Ummm no I didn't stop trying to find baddies. I don't know where that came from?

Lorab - Do you think Bubbles is a good lynch? Or DF? Your questions towards him lead me to believe you suss him somehow, and I'm wondering if you believe they are both mafia or just one. Also, I think you arguing with him over his comment on Bubbles still being around is...kinda interesting. I understood his point, Bubbles is still around so she can still send in kills, not exactly an inactive the likes of eke, Equiv, and Bass.
I am going back and forth on bubbles. I think she has been very suspish, and I'm frustrated that she hasn't answered questions that I started asking ages ago. I'm uncomfortable with how she suddenly popped up last cycle. But she's also an easy lynch and I fear that we will lynch another civ.

I am starting to suspect df. And he did not say hey she is still around. He said she's been around consistently in each cycle. That is simply inaccurate. I think they both may be bad.

MacDougall wrote:10/10 would lynch Lorab or DharmaHelper.
I wouldn't lynch me. DH I don't know about.

I didn't say consistently. I said generally, which is this case means "more or less", which is the opposite of consistently. And yeah, I thought she was around more than she was, but you're ignoring my point, which is that Bubbles has vaguely maintained a presence in the game up to the present, whereas the other guys dropped off the face of the earth a long time ago. Therefore, it's more plausible that she's a baddie sending in PMs than it is for the inactives.

Misconstruing my words and sidestepping the point behind them is definitely pinging me.

LoRab wrote:
DFaraday wrote:
Golden wrote:Scotty made a case in the early game on DFaraday that I really agreed with but now have entirely forgotten about.
Here it is. And here is my response.

I don't agree with the Matt suspicion. He's still coming off as an earnest civ to me.

My main suspicion at the moment is on Bubbles, because here vote was still shady to me, even without Glorf as a teammate. I also feel like Lorab merits looking into some more. I suspected her early on, so I may revisit that.

I still don't think going after inactives is a good idea, since the baddies are still sending in kills and so that limits the number of baddies inactives could be.
I agree about Bubbles. I don't agree about me, but read my posts and ask me questions--I think you'll see that I'm a civ who has been really distracted IRL for most of the game.

Also, you say your main suspicion is Bubbles and then say that you don't think we should go after inactives. I mean, technically Bubbles has now posted, but I think she is still on the not-so-active list, no?

Except Bubbles is generally present at least once each phase, so she could very well be sending in PMs. There's no evidence that Bass, ekeknat, or Equivocate have even remembered that this game exists in the last week or so.

juliets wrote:
DFaraday wrote:
Golden wrote:Scotty made a case in the early game on DFaraday that I really agreed with but now have entirely forgotten about.
Here it is. And here is my response.

I don't agree with the Matt suspicion. He's still coming off as an earnest civ to me.

My main suspicion at the moment is on Bubbles, because here vote was still shady to me, even without Glorf as a teammate. I also feel like Lorab merits looking into some more. I suspected her early on, so I may revisit that.

I still don't think going after inactives is a good idea, since the baddies are still sending in kills and so that limits the number of baddies inactives could be.
DF, why do you feel Lorab bears looking into? Did you see something that pinged you? She did a great job of asking Bubbles questions that we'll never get answers to but they show why there should be some suspicion on Bubbles - someone that you suspect too.

I mainly feel she bears looking into because pretty much nobody has this game. I can hardly remember Lorab being brought up by anyone, so I think she could use some scrutiny.

Golden wrote:Scotty made a case in the early game on DFaraday that I really agreed with but now have entirely forgotten about.

Here it is. And here is my response.

I don't agree with the Matt suspicion. He's still coming off as an earnest civ to me.

My main suspicion at the moment is on Bubbles, because here vote was still shady to me, even without Glorf as a teammate. I also feel like Lorab merits looking into some more. I suspected her early on, so I may revisit that.

I still don't think going after inactives is a good idea, since the baddies are still sending in kills and so that limits the number of baddies inactives could be.

Typhoony wrote: You've got my eye now, DF. Genuine is not what I would call your suspicion of Bullz/me, seemed more like you wanted to generate some content and then realized that the reason for your suspicions made no sense since you're doing worse in that regard.

I thought the surge of Mac votes was worth looking into, I went over y'all's posts, and I didn't find anything shady, so I dropped it. Would you rather I keep hounding you despite a lack of evidence?

RIP Glorf.

I hope you will come back sometime!

Matt wrote: in multiple games I play people threaten to quit cuz nobody likes them

I feel like this happens several times in every game these days.

I'm not finding anything in the Mac voters' posts though, so I was probably wrong about that. Bubbles' vote here is really weird and has little reasoning behind it, so I'm voting her since I might not be back again this phase.

Typhoony wrote:"Ey Typh I'm not looking at you because of your voting record. Nah, I'm looking at you because of this Mac vote you made during the sabie lynch".
Yeah that sure does look like you're suspecting me because of my voting record df, so don't give me that bs. Good thing that you made all these throwaway votes during the baddie lynches huh?
Made the 3rd vote on Sig when Nero already had 6, put the 2nd vote on sprit when sabie already had 5, 2nd vote on sprit again when Floyd had 5. All in all you probably have the worst voting record in this game.

It's not that you voted Mac per se, it's that that particular wave of Mac voters had very slight reasons and felt like a Sabie save attempt to me.

Well, I finished my Bullz review and didn't find any connections to Sabie. He didn't really voice suspicions of Nero, but I only suspected him as trying to save Sabie, so that's not a notable finding to me. All in all, Bullz seems alright.

I'll try to look over Typh's posts tomorrow, but I'll be at work for most of the day.

S~V~S wrote:Theonly person inthis thread less likely to save Sabie besides me is Typh. And DH. Maybe TH.

You get the point. I have only seen Typh actively save a teammate ONCE, and that was Juliets. The only time.

Yet more meta, but okay, I'll take that into consideration. Thanks SVS.

Typhoony wrote:Ehm, my voting record beats yours DF.
Not only have you not voted for a baddie, you have only voted civs. You have voted Scotty, sig, MP and sprityo. Given that, talking about voting records may not be the best look for you. Maybe focus on posts, see what you can find. And I'm looking forward to your findings!

As I said earlier, my reason for looking at you isn't about your voting record per se (although that's not helping), it's that you were one of the voters on what felt like a Mac bandwagon to save Sabie. Loads of people in this game haven't voted for the baddies, and I don't suspect any of them for it. But when I already have a reason to suspect someone, their voting record is another factor to consider.

Also, what's going on with Bubbles is pretty shifty too. It looks like another possible save attempt, but if so, a rather haphazard one.

Turnip Head wrote:
DFaraday wrote:Linki: I'm kind of unclear about TH too. Everybody seems to be taking it for granted that he's civ and I feel like I missed why.
Maybe it's not being taken for granted. Maybe other players are critically thinking about my contributions and have concluded that I'm playing a strong game for the town. Have you read my posts DF? Have you looked into my contributions? Or are you just sort of skating by and not thinking deeply about what's happening?

Okay, I just waded through your 574 posts and didn't see anything shady (other than implying I'm playing poorly just because I don't think you're obviously civ, which was unnecessary). I think it's easy to see a player contribute a lot throughout a game and just assume they're civ as a result, which I personally fall into a lot.

On a different note, I've looked at Typh and Bullz' voting records as part of my attempt to look at the Mac voters, and I have to say, their voting records are doing them no favors. The only time either of them voted for a baddie was fairly late in the day when Floyd was likely done anyway. I haven't gotten to their posts yet, but that's a bad look for them.

Dom wrote:Can I just say the amount of role claiming in this game is getting tiresome?

Seriously.

Dom wrote:
Matt wrote:Chillin'. You?
Wondering why you haven't been doing much lately.

DFaraday wrote:I kind of get what Glorfindel is saying. Players like Mac, Golden, and MP are typically the most vocal players, and tend to spearhead lynches and the general direction of the thread. If a baddie team wants to manipulate the thread it would make sense to take out players who might lead a lynch on them. I don't think that's a reason to suspect any of those players are bad though.

Glorf, why do you suspect Typh? I feel like he hasn't been trying to help the civ cause very much, but I haven't seen anything specifically suspicious about him.

I still think one of the Mac voters is probably bad. Aside from SVS, whom I still think could be bad, I'll look over the others tomorrow.
Well two of the three players you named there outed themselves or gave strong enough role hints that they've dropped off the face of discussion.

I know, and I don't suspect any of the above. I was just indicating the general reason one might expect those guys to get NKed. I'm not sure why Glorfindel is specifically calling them out in this game though.

Linki: I'm kind of unclear about TH too. Everybody seems to be taking it for granted that he's civ and I feel like I missed why.

I kind of get what Glorfindel is saying. Players like Mac, Golden, and MP are typically the most vocal players, and tend to spearhead lynches and the general direction of the thread. If a baddie team wants to manipulate the thread it would make sense to take out players who might lead a lynch on them. I don't think that's a reason to suspect any of those players are bad though.

Glorf, why do you suspect Typh? I feel like he hasn't been trying to help the civ cause very much, but I haven't seen anything specifically suspicious about him.

I still think one of the Mac voters is probably bad. Aside from SVS, whom I still think could be bad, I'll look over the others tomorrow.

So much meta defense in this game. But I think Golden is right, this doesn't seem like his style.

I went ahead and voted Sprit. since SVS is at least offering some defense, and Sprit isn't even bothering that.

Also, there are 3 post curses in this game? And that's not even counting the silencer.

S~V~S wrote:Faraday, would you have tried? I am sure her real teammates did not try.

It depends on the circumstances. If there were a viable lynch train forming on someone else and it wouldn't look shady for me to vote with it (eg. if I hadn't expressed support for that person before), I might. Especially if Sabie were my only teammate remaining, though I suppose we don't know whether that is the case here.

I admit it would be awfully brazen, but I have a hard time believing that the Mac train just picked up steam out of nowhere for no reason. I think at least one baddie is one it.

I don't like that SVS is going "I've won awards for throwing teammates under the bus!" as if to say she'd never defend a teammate. Players typically don't stick to the same strategies regardless of circumstance, and the fact that that was the only attempt at defense she's made regarding the Sabie connection makes me wary of SVS.

I see MP's point about low posters, but I don't think they should be our focus. Even if one or more of them is a baddie (I think it's unlikely that more than one is at this point), every day spent lynching inactives is a day giving a pass to the active baddies.

I'll be voting either SVS or Sprit, but I'd like to see if he shows up and tries to engage at some point.

RIP MM. I was leaning civ on you.

Enrique wrote:
DFaraday wrote:Why do people think TH is the Riddler? Did I miss it?
Am I missing something? Who said this?

Matt wrote:
Dom wrote:It sounds like you could be wrong, Matt.
No.

From the impression I got, I very well should've been posting funny on Days 4, 5, and 6 as well, until I got the riddle correct. Suddenly though, nothin'.

But everyone's keen on Turnips, so what can I do? Guess I'll move on.

I guess I misinterpreted this to mean that people were thinking TH was the Riddler, when it probably meant they just agreed with him.

Glorfindel, the acronym is a reference to players whose names or signature creatures on here are animals (marmot, mongoose, llama, etc.). I forget what exactly it stands for though.

Why do people think TH is the Riddler? Did I miss it?

Good result! If there's no kill tonight it would lend credence to the third member being inactive too, although they did get one kill in, so I'm thinking probably not Equivocate or Bass.

I've been totally swamped today, so I haven't been able to catch up. I'll go ahead and *vote Sprityo* because I still suspect him. When I get to catch up I'll look over the Mac voters and see what stands out.

RIP Scotty, even though you suspected me. I definitely got a civ vibe from you.

I'm still looking at Sprityo, since he's not really done anything to sway suspicion, but I also feel like at least one of the Mac voters is Sabie's teammate. That Mac train felt like a brazen save attempt.

Barely made the night poll! Going to Fish Mooney's because I haven't been there yet.

Dom wrote:Who's left to vote? Wanna vote sprit with me?

I will.

I think the case on Sabie has merit as well, but I feel more strongly about Sprityo.

Also, those random Mac votes look pretty shady from where I'm sitting.

So far I'm reading the DH/Golden thing as opinionated and snarky civ clashing. DH's approach to Juliets read as a genuine thought process to me.

Sprityo is a good bet to me, but I'll also take a look at Sabie in the morning. A bunch of people have brought her up, but I haven't really looked at their reasons in detail yet.

Search found 92 matches