The Syndicate

Thanks for a great game! And thanks to Epig for Appleton or team with the riddles, I never came up with a single one fun btsc though buddy!

Epignosis wrote:

Wait, I was bad? Wattttt?

INH and Epig remind me of this.

Is there a solid case against russ2? If be up for switching my vote if someone could explain why. My thoughts on df are not strong enough to have voted him in s normal lynch but we're enough compared to Russ. But I'll listen to a pitch?

insertnamehere wrote:

DFaraday wrote:I think his play all game has suggested Yin/Yang. His outspokenness, his repeated attempts to draw Yin/Yang attention onto someone else, the fact that a player as brash as he hasn't been killed (although to be fair, the baddies are doing a terrible job at that).

I believe INH is Yang, accounting for his devil-may-care attitude, and that Russ is Yin, hence INH mentioning him as a suspect but not actually pushing for his lynch, or indeed even voting him.

Maybe I'm just not very self-aware, but I don't see how I've been "outspoken, brash, and devil-may-care" in this game at all. And I also don't understand how those assumed attitudes link me to Yin/Yang.

You've been way more active and pushy than I ever remember you being, which is why I feel like you may be yang. But I also see signs of you being a cop. I just don't think you are civ, buddy.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

timmer wrote:And what about the fact that INH and MM voted Sig together, you don't think that might make INH a Cop?

I think this very well could.

My problem is that there are enough people I am unsure about and I would need to see certain roles revealed to know which side of the fence certain people are on (Epig and INH being my big 2). And I think those people are you and Russ, but I think you're both civ so...

In back to back Posts you call me a cop and most likely civ. Am I misreading this somehow?

It's not that I'm trying to paint it as anything but his vote put Sig in the LEAD. That's not a throwaway, baddies don't go out on limbs for nothing.

If I had to list the four people I think are non civ in the game, it'd be INH, DF, Elohcin and BWT.

Seriously.

Herro?

And what about the fact that INH and MM voted Sig together, you don't think that might make INH a Cop?

DF, by your rationale then, there is a big chance a Russ lynch won't work, right? Or do you think that INH is Yang and Russ is Yin?

insertnamehere wrote:

timmer wrote:As for the other content going on, I'm starting to feel like if this lynch doesn't turn up a baddie, studying the "who can antagonize who more" group will yield up some targets. Guaranteed, one of the argumentative guys is Yang, because what do they care, they can't be lynched. Push as many buttons as they want. GTH, I'd bet it's INH. The way he was trying so hard to get rid of Sig makes sense if you consider Sig was the role who could block the kills.

You find me suspicious because I went after sig? Fine. That's fair.

But then, things being fair, you also have to suspect Epignosis for going after Sig Day 1, and leading lynches against Scotty 1.0, Sokoth, Wilgy, and essentially leading the train against Scotty 2.0, even though he moved his vote after the whole BDH clustermug.

I accept your suspicion of me because I went hard after a civ. But it would be flat out wrong to say that I've been doing that the most this game.

I can absolutely agree that Epig could be bad. At this point half of the remaining players are. But I'm not ever going to call someone bad just because they went after who turned out to be a civ. Civs do that all of the time by accident. .. its why the case against me is wrong.

But I can see specific motives for you to have gone af t rr Sig and why yiu talked so much about Yin abd Yang. That's important.

BigDamnHero wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:Russ, assuming you make it out of Day and Night 7, would you want to lynch Epignosis?

@Everyone who is not Epignosis: Would you be open to considering Epignosis for a Day 8 lynch, and if not, why?

I could potentially be for that...I'm increasingly feeling a knife being twisted in my back...and he was quick to jump onto my BWT lynch...I suddenly lyrics feel like I'm the puppet to his master...the pawn to his...uhhhmmmm....chess guy?
Things have not worked out well for the civs so I'm rethinking EVERYTHING about this game....

But it's moot for now since he's not even on the poll...nor is timmer, who I don't think I'll EVER vote for again, btw...he Maya be quiey, but quite possibly the SMARTEST player in the game....

I have no idea what any of this means. .. so, either. .. thanks? Or "eff you, buddeh"?

As for the other content going on, I'm starting to feel like if this lynch doesn't turn up a baddie, studying the "who can antagonize who more" group will yield up some targets. Guaranteed, one of the argumentative guys is Yang, because what do they care, they can't be lynched. Push as many buttons as they want. GTH, I'd bet it's INH. The way he was trying so hard to get rid of Sig makes sense if you consider Sig was the role who could block the kills.

My vote will most likely be going to DF. His vote pattern has been extremely blendy and he is the one who tied up the lynch which saved Eloh's bacon. It's not ideal but when faced with only these two choices he makes more sense. Also, if Russ is bad I can't see teammates. If DF is bad I see Eloh as a teammate so more benefits.

Movie's going to start in a minute at least I only have to read up on two people tomorrow?

INH do you still think he's Yin?

I'm at suicide squad so can't post but wtf is this lynch?

@BDH, I've felt pretty good vibes from you all game, so I'll listen if you want to flesh something out re: BWT. But I'd need something more than just you asking me to trust you.

BigDamnHero wrote:Now some of you may be wondering where my seemingly sudden suspicion of BWT came from...while I don't have any direct info to provide (nor would I be able to even if I had per violation of the rules set forth by the host), I can say that I have valid reason to raise some caution flags about him. In and of itself, this means nothing, and the reasons I have COULD be interpreted in a couple different fashions (good for the civs, possibly helpful to the civs or really, REALLY bad for the civs). What it comes down to really is do you have trust in ME. I'm a civ and believe I have conducted myself in such a manner throughout this game, or at the very least HOPE I have. I'm not asking you to follow me blindly (or at all even), but IF you believe I have the best interests of civ-nation at heart, then help me suss-out my concerns about BWT...an extra-set of fresh eyes and all that...

@Epi: Hosting is SOOOO much harder than playing...

i was just looking over BWT, actually. He effectively closed the door on the Wilgy lynch, putting MM two back from the lynch lead right near the end. However, he HAD been pretty vocal about Wilgy all game. Also of note, if BWT were bad, and had decided Sig was likely Yang, it would make sense not to bother voting for him as an alternate.

In short, BWT certainly seemed to put the icing on the Wilgy cake, but it was consistent enough with his posts that I couldn't say it made a case at this time.

I've made every effort to participate and to judge the cases against players as best I can. There's nothing more i can say about it. My vote the other day is right there, I didn't try to hide it or fudge anything, I explained it and went with what I thought seemed right.

If you've ever been a civ and realized after a lynch that your vote was going to VERY quickly get exploited because of how bad it looks, you know where I'm at. And if you've been there, I ask that you take a minute to reevaluate and think about the people sliding quietly through this day while we all rip each other apart.

Scotty, not referring to you as much as I am Russ:

Russtifinko wrote:
It's one thing to chance your mind. It's another to do complete 180s on two different players just because Epi said so, and supplementing it with SUUUUUPER weak reasoning. You threw two of your top reads in the garbage instantaneously! This is meant as a compliment - I expect way better from civ timmer.

When part of my change of heart comes from thinking that someone is hinting at being a certain role, I am not ever going to broadcast that and give them away. But when those thoughts suddenly seem less likely, i go back to my thoughts... it's cool, I've been here before, half of the players in this game are non-civs at this point, I don't expect everyone to listen to this. but yes, changing my mind is a BIG part of Russ' case against me.

For the moment, I'm going to put my vote on Elohcin. Of the people with votes, the thoguhts against her make the most sense to me. Note, of course, that I'll move my vote to survive if I must, but she's the best target imo.

insertnamehere wrote:
I hate that people changing their opinions on things as they both learn more about them and react to other events, is seen as negative "flip-flopping" and not as people making informed decisions without wearing tunnel vision blinders.

It's exactly what people want to lynch me for.

insertnamehere wrote:

timmer wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:
Epig seems like one of two things: Either a confuzzled, frazzled civ, or Mr. Yin. As of right now, I'm leaning towards the former. He's formed a little clique around himself, namely BDH, Elo, and BWT that I find a little bit more lynch-worthy than the man himself.

Why Mr. Yin and not Mr. Yang?

Because I believe Sig to be Yang after MM's alignment reveal. You know, like I said here:

insertnamehere wrote:As I said earlier, my wanting to lynch sig was primarily based on my suspicion of him being a Crooked Cop. Finding out that MM, who was the only one who voted with me, was a Crooked Cop basically threw that into doubt for me. Now I come down on the side of sig being Mr. Yang, and I'm crossing my fingers that the Crooked Cops realize that the Yin/Yang team have a very good chance of beating them and that they can murder some civilians another night. Although we seem to be doing a better job at it than they are.

Oh yes, this does fit with your previous thougts, sorry, trying to work and play is messing my head up.

insertnamehere wrote:
Epig seems like one of two things: Either a confuzzled, frazzled civ, or Mr. Yin. As of right now, I'm leaning towards the former. He's formed a little clique around himself, namely BDH, Elo, and BWT that I find a little bit more lynch-worthy than the man himself.

Why Mr. Yin and not Mr. Yang?

Interesting... so your thinking is that she forgot she had listed Wilgy briefly in the past, and said she had no pings, inferring that a civ with a genuine ping wouldn't forget it, but a baddie who is just saying stuff to say stuff might forget they had said something a few days previous?

Scotty wrote: "Still Wilgy"? She hadn't talked about Wilgy but lumping him in with LoRab and Rabbit as having 2 posts on day 2.

But suddenly, she could vote for Wilgy, right after LoRab voted for MM, to put 3 votes on him.




I'm gonna vote Elo. Anyone else see what I'm seeing?

Well, she did have this previous post:

Elohcin wrote:After catching up, I am up for voting for Scotty or Wilgy. Wilgy b/c Sokoth's ISO or whatever you wanna call it was very good and makes him look bad. Scotty b/c he SEEMS like he is very active in the game and trying to be helpful, but he really isn't. He's trying to look civ, but naming players and giving no explanations doesn't help find baddies. In fact, I will go ahead and play my vote on Scotty for now.

Did you not see that one?

Looking into DF2.0 while I've got five minutes.

I notice he supported Dom/MM a smidge back on Day 2. But, he was the vote that put mm tied for the lead into the 3-way lynch battle on Day 4, so that would be a ballsy move to make.

I won't be voting his way.

Just to be clear on this, MM's vote does not in any way look like a throwaway. He actually put Sig in the lead when he voted, if you check the poll order. He may have posted about it in a throwaway way, but as a baddie, you have to know that putting Sig into the lead was not in any way random on his part.

As for you having info, I never expect anyone with info to stand up and say it, but there have been a number of times that you've used variations on "think outside of the box" in your posts about Sig that suggested, at least to me, that you were trying to say more than you were, without saying it.

Epignosis wrote:

timmer wrote:Also incidentally, I had forgotten about the whole item thing. If anyone wants to swap items with me, I'm game for that, just let me know?

I'll trade. I was going to trade with Eloh but somebody scooped me.

Done!

@Scotty, only here for a moment, but I'll explain to you, while I can, the reason I've flopped around on INH so much.

The logic came out early on that there was a good chance that Sig was either Shawn or Yang, based on the non-lynch. And my first thoughts were, as with most people, that if Sig is Yang, nothing I can do about it, and if he's Shawn well then he needs to be left alone.

But INH, if you check his posts, started doubting that, saying on a few occasions that he wants people to "think outside the box" and look at the situation differently. To me, it meant one of two things. Either, INH is Shawn and thus knew there was a way better chance of Sig being bad than the rest of us realized, or INH was a role who could check Sig out either through power or item and had proof that he was bad. So I went along with it, because he seemed pretty insistent about it.

But then we had the lynch with the 3-way vote, and now I see that INH and MM voted together. If MM was trying to lynch Sig, in such an open and unclear lynch situation, there was no way Sig was a Crooked Cop. So suddenly, INH's motives became very confusing. If Sig isn't a cop, what's going on with INH's push? Now, the idea that Sig id Shawn and the cops were failing to kill him made more sense.

Thus, my turnaround on INH. As for today, he's definitely a viable spot for my vote as his vote record (voting with MM) and motivations for pushing against Sig are questionable.

I hope that makes sense?

Also incidentally, I had forgotten about the whole item thing. If anyone wants to swap items with me, I'm game for that, just let me know?

I've got to head to bed, man. As time permits tomorrow I will try to find my own cases but if I see something that makes sense, even if isn't my own thought, I may follow it. If it makes sense, it makes sense.

Scotty do you know what one of the most fun things I like to do as a baddie is? Make someone defend himself, over and over again, and then say "you aren't even making cases, you're just defending yourself".

You want me to make a case but simultaneously ate forcing me to defend a vote I made in good faith. And you are smart enough to know that defending isn't just for people with current votes in a poll

Once you have blinders on, anything, ANYTHING, can seem like a baddie at work. Hell we've even got Epig called out for being a vocal civ, lol. Take a second. Look at this from a safe remove. You have either convinced yourself that I am bad and are now unwilling to consider the alternative out of some kind of pride? Or you are bad and trying to save someone. If you are civ, you should be stepping back and THINKING.

Wow. If I were holding to some kind of persona, and bad, I'd have not stuck my head out on day 2.But I do, rarely, get a day off. So now you ate attempting to use the fact that I had a day off and used it to get more caught up than usual and actually think for myself against me.

Scotty, you need to take off thy blinders.

Scotty why are you disregarding the other suspicions other while ignoring the simple fact that civs change their minds all of the time and often end up voting the wrong way. It's like you ate determined to push this Trumpian notion that you and only you know the truth and everyone else is wrong.

Look at it from both sides.

Or is it that your teammate is one of the others being looked at today, and this is your attempt at saving them? Honestly, why won't you consider the flip to your case? It smells of something.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

timmer wrote:Considering that mm voted for Sig, I'd think that my choosing not to vote for him yesterday would be seen in a good light, not a bad one.

It does in hindsight, but I'm not sure about that moment in time. To me, it looks more like you did a 180 rather than changed your mind due to new evidence. Unless I missed something where you had suspected MM previously.

Not at all, I jumped on the case. Look, you know how much time I have to play mafia these days. I cannot and will never any time soon, be a lead player. I can't follow every post, that's just not my game, and it hasn't been for some time.

So people should realize that this is who I am now; a player who picks up other people's cases and evaluates them. So if I seem to have swerved a few times, that's why.

Russtifinko wrote:

Epignosis wrote:Who would kill Lorab when someone was talking about lynching her next?

Russtifinko wrote:I think lynching LoRab would be a huge mistake. Epi, I get what you're saying about that looking like a potential bus, but I really don't think that's what's going on here. Besides, MM wasn't lynched, so he couldn't really be bussed. (By the way, thanks for that one, by the way, YinYang). I think looking at other MM connections is a much better way to go, here.

LOL @ MM.

Somebody who had a chat with her.

LoRab wrote:OK. Read up.

Thoughts on the names that have come up, because at this moments, I don't have any suspects of my own and I've been wrong about suspicions up until now, so I'm self doubting, and I didn't have time to read back through earlier posts. Also, it's less than 2 hours, and more names would only make it easier for mafia to manipulate the lynch, assuming (like Epi) many missing voters).

MM I could definitely see as bad. Especially after the vote for Sig, with no stated reason for doing so.

Russ I would be very surprised to find out was bad.

Wilgy, I'm unsure. I'm not very good at reading him. My gut tells me he is civ, but my gut could be totally wrong.

Sig, I really don't think is bad. I'm willing to revisit that at some point, but I don't see enough evidence that he's bad at this point to change my thinking.

So, I'm voting MM, because I think that's where I'm seeing the strongest reasoning at this point.

I think there's enough evidence in sig's favor. I won't vote for him. Wilgy and MM are gone. Russ got the yellow comment. I want to explore that.

The above alongside Russ's ardent "defense" of Lorab is prima facie evidence that Russ and Lorab had BTSC at one point, and that despite the initial anonymity, Russ learned the identity of his company.

Think on that. Lorab had an anonymous chat with Russ, and she clearly trusted him (given the yellow).

Have you ever been bad and received BTSC with a civilian? That can be one of the most nerve-wracking experiences in Mafia...although I'd like to think I've gotten it down to a science.

Or you might just be like Eloh, who unwittingly outed her damn self in Death Note. Good times. *Wipes away a giddy tear*.

Russ' defense is unique.

sig never defended Lorab, and by Day 5 said she warranted a closer look. Dr.Wilgy never defended Lorab. MM was evil and may well have been caught in BTSC. That leaves Russ, who came out defending Lorab.

There are five civilians left.

Shawn Spencer
Carlton Lassiter
Henry Spencer
Abigail Lytar
Woody the Coroner

I don't believe Russ is Shawn or Carlton. I have other people in mind for those two roles. That leaves Henry, Abigail, and Woody. None of those are able to check secrets or roles. And if you are one of those roles, that narrows things down even further.

Russ got BTSC with Frank, figured out that was Lorab, and killed her.

Wait wait wait wait. This analysis was all going so well until the very last line. The whole theory was super well put together, except that I don't see how the conclusion follows. So:

1) LoRab and I had BTSC.
2) LoRab and I trusted and defended each other.
3) LoRab was civ.
4) I am.....bad??

You're giving me way too much credit and not giving LoRab enough if you think I could pull the wool over her eyes like that in BTSC. I'm flattered, but you're flat-out wrong.

I'll be voting timmer again. I'd love to hear some discussion on him, as I put together what I thought was a pretty well-thought-out and airtight (although admittedly poorly timed) case, but the only real response I got was from him, so I feel like I'm talking at a brick wall. His behavior D4 and D5 was just BANANAS, right? And on a pretty pivotal day for the baddies, too!

Has Epi been elected President and Ruler of Casemaking here, or do other people get to have ideas worth talking about too?

Airtight? I do not think that word means what you think it means. You still haven't even looked at it without your blunders on.

But I'm going to concentrate tomorrow on the relevant cases, not on defending a vote that I made in good faith.

I need to double check that you've got your info right about the roles etc later when I'm not working, but yes, that is me saying that you seem to be onto something. Sometimes the greatest help a civ with an info role can provide comes only after their death, when they can be seen pointing a dead, bony finger at the culprit.

Russtifinko wrote:
I think their votes are better justified than yours. How is "other people did it too" a defense?

I'll be honest - I probably was going to continue to suspect you regardless of how you responded to my case, because the case itself struck me so hard. But your reponses are doing even less to change my opinion than I imagined they would.

How about you compare your blinkered thinking on me with what Scotty just threw down on LoRab? Because that's a great reentry into the game. Your thoughts on me, on the other hand, are completely ignoring the fact that civs make bad calls all of the time. I've followed the cases I thought were best and voted accordingly.

Russtifinko wrote:

timmer wrote:Sorry Russ, but if the criteria for civ game is "doesn't change his mind" then you will be voting me forever, I'd say. I admit freely to changing my views on people in this game. .. because that's what you do when someone presents a good case?

Considering that mm voted for Sig, I'd think that my choosing not to vote for him yesterday would be seen in a good light, not a bad one.

And as for alphabetical order, you're right, it isn't something a baddie would deliberately do. It's also not something a civ would do. It looks like an absentminded mistake. But it's the kind of mistake more likely to be made by a baddie, imo.

It's one thing to chance your mind. It's another to do complete 180s on two different players just because Epi said so, and supplementing it with SUUUUUPER weak reasoning. You threw two of your top reads in the garbage instantaneously! This is meant as a compliment - I expect way better from civ timmer.

The bolded sentence makes absolutely 0 sense whatsoever. Your vote for Wilgy is one of the most damning things you've done! You said all along you suspected sig, but you refused to vote for him because that would cause a tie and make it possible for MM to be lynched. You stated this explicitly in your post. MM turned out to be bad. Instead, you voted Wilgy, whom you had only brought up once 2 days before that - and the time you brought Wilgy up, you were defending Dom/MM from him. Dom/MM, once again, was bad. I literally cannot make myself clearer on this point.

In what topsy-turvy universe is your Wilgy vote and justification for it yesterday anything but horrible?

Again, four people voted for Wilgy, what do you think of the others?

Sorry Russ, but if the criteria for civ game is "doesn't change his mind" then you will be voting me forever, I'd say. I admit freely to changing my views on people in this game. .. because that's what you do when someone presents a good case?

Considering that mm voted for Sig, I'd think that my choosing not to vote for him yesterday would be seen in a good light, not a bad one.

And as for alphabetical order, you're right, it isn't something a baddie would deliberately do. It's also not something a civ would do. It looks like an absentminded mistake. But it's the kind of mistake more likely to be made by a baddie, imo.

I'm going to vote Sokoth now. Epig's and LoRab's thoughts have me convinced, and I believe INH is bad, as well. He was reading very sensible to me, but his voting with MM against Sig, and Sokoth's putting him last on her list... nope.

Also, in terms of LoRab's game play, this feels like her civvie game. When she's called out as bad she tends, imo, to post less and get more defensive. Here she's much more activelty defending herself and calling people out which fits civ lorab.

sig wrote:
This looks bad for Timmer, he sets up his vote for Wilgy, but makes it in such a way he could switch to me and provides an excuse for when Wilgy flips civ. He also is very agaisnt lynching MM who we now know is mafia.

I could vote here.

I'll look over Sokoh and INH today as well as go over Dom some more,. :P

I can certainly see how my vote looks theoretically bad, but when I came in to the thread, the lynch was clearly going to one of the three main vote getters. I concentrated on their posts and the cases against them and made the call I made, nothing I can do about that now. What do you think of the four other people who also voted for Wilgy?

LoRab wrote:Also, Mr. Klingon, in your big post where you list all of the players and your thoughts on them, every player is in alphabetical order except for INH. Is that because his name is in a different place in your own list of players because he's your teammate?

Because it's really strange to me that everyone else would be in alpha order except that one.

That's an excellent catch, right there. And the fact that he is an "undecided" is classic baddie teammate.... throw a bit of shade, but not enough that you'd be voting there.

I've put a vote on Wilgy.

Looking back through, I feel like both Wilgy and Sig could be bad, while I'm less sold on the MM case. I trust INH in this game, and haven't trusted Sig all game, however I also see the Wilgy logic, and Eloh is exactly right about the pingy tone of lorab's post, and so it makes more sense for me to vote him and put him ahead than to vote Sig and create a three-way tie that could be open to shenanigans and cause a dead MM instead.

Am I correct, when considering time zones, that there is just over an hour left to this day? I need to study the vote-getters and quickly, but a difference of an hour or two would be good to know about!

Thanks that gives me a bit more time to read back!