The Syndicate

Elohcin wrote:I bet the process gets to choose which ability he uses and maybe after he uses an ability, it is revealed?

Elohcin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Elohcin wrote:I bet the process gets to choose which ability he uses and maybe after he uses an ability, it is revealed?

Seems sensible.

What thoughts do you have, Elo, any? You seemed to dislike DrumBeats's declaration of swapping votes. Why?

I don't think it productive at all. It's not any better than self voting. I believe he even said it would be a way of finding a loophole. I am tired of the self voters b/c I find it a lack of participation and even more so, a hindrance to one's team whether they are civ or mafia. And I told Epi (half way through the game I just hosted) that I wish I'd have made it a rule that you cannot self vote. He liked the idea

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Elohcin wrote:I bet the process gets to choose which ability he uses and maybe after he uses an ability, it is revealed?

Seems sensible.

What thoughts do you have, Elo, any? You seemed to dislike DrumBeats's declaration of swapping votes. Why?

I don't think it productive at all. It's not any better than self voting. I believe he even said it would be a way of finding a loophole. I am tired of the self voters b/c I find it a lack of participation and even more so, a hindrance to one's team whether they are civ or mafia. And I told Epi (half way through the game I just hosted) that I wish I'd have made it a rule that you cannot self vote. He liked the idea

That's understandable; it's why I created the "no self voting" rule to begin with, and I'm glad to see it catch on.

Do you really think that viewpoint has any reflection of DrumBeats's alignment, however? What is the mafia motivation for him proposing that?

Another idea I came up with that was already created, I see. I am not sure about his alignment. It could just be a civ acting like a wild monkey again (which happens all too often in the beginning of games, sadly). I hate it b/c I feel it gives Mafia an advantage and then sends us civs scrambling to try to win towards the end of the game. I think if we stay focused, we can nip this thing in the bud and have a successful win. Rocky and Bullwinkle was a hell of a circus in the beginning and a struggle to win in the end. We ought not act like animals and suggest stupid things like switching votes to avoid a rule we want to break. SO, I told DB I would keep my eye on him. I said this not b/c I definitely think he's mafia but b/c I think he needs to shape up and stop joking around (if that's what he's doing). Like I said, YES, we need to have fun. But we still need to keep our heads screwed on.

Okay, thanks for explaining. I wasn't sure what "keeping an eye on" meant with respect to your view of his alignment.

Elohcin wrote:

AllAlongTheBoardwalk wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

AllAlongTheBoardwalk wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:
Do you really think that viewpoint has any reflection of DrumBeats's alignment, however? What is the mafia motivation for him proposing that?

That's a good question. Personally, I don't see any 'good' motivation for suggesting vote trading than other than to skate through a few votes without making a real decision. So in that respect, it seems somewhat sinister to me. However, perhaps DB is just wanting to exploit loopholes because he/she can?

Explain to me what you mean here. You seem to indicate this is in contrast to your previous assessment (that the motivation is somewhat sinister); does this mean that you think exploiting loopholes conveys a town mindset?

Not at all. What I meant by that was, while I think it is more likely a 'mafia' type move, there are other possible motivations one might have for suggesting it. So I think it COULD be either.

Or perhaps he has NO reason at all. I don't claim to be an expert, but again, after just coming off from hosting (sorry if I bore you with this phrase) I feel like people do and say weird shit that means nothing and that they have no reason for saying/doing. I feel like Mafia is less about figuring out who is mafia and instead just a crapshoot. It COULD be about figuring out who's if players would use their abilities with their intelligence instead of just flapping off at the mouth about this and that. For instance, if you know certain people in the game are good, list them as people you trust, don't list just one of those and then 2 others as your top trusts. USE the facts you learn from your power. Be sensible.

Okay, I am off my soapbox now.

I strongly disagree with the underlined. Yes, there is an element of luck, but if this were the case, then an effective strategy would be for all votes to be randomized every Day period and to never analyze any behavior. I've seen collaborative town teams before dismantle mafia for behavior in thread. Based on what you said here and your response to me, I do agree that it'd be nice to see more collaborative behavior in games around here; that's a problem I've had for quite some time now, and that's that civilians too often act as if they're LMS.

Do you have anyone you trust yet?

Elohcin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Elohcin wrote:
Or perhaps he has NO reason at all. I don't claim to be an expert, but again, after just coming off from hosting (sorry if I bore you with this phrase) I feel like people do and say weird shit that means nothing and that they have no reason for saying/doing. I feel like Mafia is less about figuring out who is mafia and instead just a crapshoot. It COULD be about figuring out who's if players would use their abilities with their intelligence instead of just flapping off at the mouth about this and that. For instance, if you know certain people in the game are good, list them as people you trust, don't list just one of those and then 2 others as your top trusts. USE the facts you learn from your power. Be sensible.

Okay, I am off my soapbox now.

I strongly disagree with the underlined. Yes, there is an element of luck, but if this were the case, then an effective strategy would be for all votes to be randomized every Day period and to never analyze any behavior. I've seen collaborative town teams before dismantle mafia for behavior in thread. Based on what you said here and your response to me, I do agree that it'd be nice to see more collaborative behavior in games around here; that's a problem I've had for quite some time now, and that's that civilians too often act as if they're LMS.

Do you have anyone you trust yet?

I just mean that it COULD be more about strategy than it is if people would take it more seriously than they do. And, yeah, I think I trust you so far. I wish more people would talk so I can have the chance to trust more people.

As for The Process, Wiki says this: Cells are a form of The Process. When any type of The Process is destroyed (excepting of course Badcells), Cells are the natural result. They are immobile and do not attack, and are collectable by Red for unknown use. If they are not quickly attended to, they will either turn into Badcells or regenerate to their previous form. They are composed of four floating white metal pieces and a red orb. Cells do not have a Limiter page.

Anyone care to try and interpret what we should do with this info?

Matt wrote:Yeah let's lynch the Bloops. She's the Process, right?

GAH!!! THIS! This is the type of post that is driving me nuts these days. Either be helpful or hush. Matt, you are giving me gray hairs already this game.

And don't take this frustration as a defense of Niju, y'all. Cause I know that's what at least 2 of you are thinking.

Elohcin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

So, just so I understand you correctly regarding your reads: You're town reading "the few actives" (who is that exactly?) and you have mafia reads on Elo and DrumBeats for their thoughts on the proposal but minor ones, yeah?

This is funny as DB and I are a part of the "few actives"

Matt wrote:

Elohcin wrote:You just want to throw a name out there and see what happens.

So? Why are you against this? Lotta people hunt, but I'm not a hunter. I fish. niju came in and made fun of me, that was that. I'm currently null on her right now btw. Derp.

Meanwhile, shortly before this post of yours, Dr Wilgy posted this gem...

DrWilgy wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Any thoughts on what has transpired thus far, Wilgy?

RYUU GA WAGA TEKI WO KURAU!!!

Your respone? Nada.

Then, at 5:30 PM (my time)

DrWilgy wrote:I'm mafia and I decline your offer Drum.

6:16 PM

Elohcin wrote:

DrumBeats wrote:
Once again since few people are acknowledging this: My plan only applies after the scum shoots an element first. The plan in no way is a "lets hunt the process while the mafia kills us" its a "hey mafia, you should kill an element instead of us, and if you do we will lynch an element too. We both need the process dead, so while we have the man power it would be best to take care of it early.

@ Epi - can scum shoot an element as their night kill instead of shooting a player?

DB I am not seeing where you are getting this info.

Again, nada on Wilgy.

How is it you came at me for my way of trying to find the bad people but you let Wilgy off the hook for saying he's a bad guy?

Here we go...another Matt vs. Elo show (sung as if said by a tv host). **crowd boos**

I guess I just don't like your zany playstyle b/c it comes off as you not caring.

As for wilgy, I just figured he was cursed or something. Did he post otherwise in plain English? If so, I mis-remembered.

Matt wrote:
Discuss. Also Elohcin is bad.

Goin' fishin' again?

Well I ain't bitin'

Matt wrote:
Aaaaand I'd like Elo to explain herself.

Well, I am a 33 year old Christian woman. I've been married to our wonderful host for just under 13 years and we have three crazy, intelligent, beautiful, and hilarious children. I homeschool these children as well as run my own cakery. It allows me to help provide for my family but also be there for my kids 24/7. I believe in raising my own children and being independent from the "village" that society says we ought to be a part of. I have made my own village for my children which consists of our homeschool group of about 30 families. Politically, I am a libertarian. I think America has gotten way too big for it's britches and saying that the government has too much control is an understatement. How's that for explaining myself.

My POINT is, you aren't specific enough in your "fishing" as you call it.

a2thezebra wrote:This has got to be the most confusing game I've ever played.

I'm sorry Zeebs, but this seems like such an act.

And lastly, @JJJ - I just don't see zany behavior from Matt as productive and it makes me think he doesn't care about the game. I don;t think Matt is BAD. I never said that. I also don;t think I ever said that his tactics were baddie-like or un-civ. I just think they are unproductive and uncaring. That is all.

Elohcin wrote:You know, I am not going to be distracted by Matt's foolishness this game. I don;t think he is bad. I think he is just zany and his playstyle frustrates me.

My top suspect is Zebra and it is not only her overly confused behavior which seems forced and over the top. But it's also her comment about being able to trust DB in his plan to vote for an element if and only if the mafia takes out an element at night instead of a civilian. I believe her question, asking DB if she can trust him/the civs was a baddie slip.

Elohcin wrote:

DFaraday wrote:And no, I don't think Wilgy is being very helpful either, but he does this regardless of alignment. I don't recall Zebra ever behaving this way.

If I had to name the top zany people on this site (right now) it would be Matt, Wilgy, and Zebra.

But you are right in that Zebra is extra zany this game. I am going to go ahead and vote that way. ZEBRA

agleaminranks wrote:Sure. I'll address the third point first about active discussers. At that point it was mostly yourself, JJJ, Drumbeats, and Elo leading the discussion for the day. I did feel good because (again, I mentioned it before, I didn't like DB's strategy but I wasn't inclined to read him as bad) all of those people, yourself included, felt like they were trying to encourage positive, strategy-oriented discussion. But it is also Day 1. When I say I'm feeling good about someone, I'm leaning like 10% civ at most. To say I'm more confident of alignment on day 1 is absolutely ludicrous and unfounded.

To address the other points: I was the only one that cast significant shade on sig before he was nightkilled. You were the only person that rebutted my accusation of him. Sig then proceeds to get nightkilled. It felt like it would have been a good opportunity to set the ball rolling against me. People were voting for Elohcin and I felt slightly more sure about her being good than bad. I was wrong, but I still stand by that statement in hindsight. She was good at acting like a civilian in my eyes. So I voted for you because I did not have any stronger suspicions on anyone playing the game, and if I were in your position and I were bad, I would have used my misjudgment of sig to try and set up a wagon against me. If I were a baddy playing against myself in this game, your position would be the most likely to try and set up such a nightkill after voicing your opinion on me. Is it somehow illegal for someone to change reads?

I also was not entirely convinced you were silenced. I thought it possible some people could be faking it, like yourself, to try and not arouse suspicion. In fact, after Matt was nightkilled last night (the person I suspected first), I thought it even more likely that you would have been faking it by setting up two of my suspicions as nightkills and attempting to frame me. In fact it really does feel like someone now is trying to frame my position.

I was all set to come back and accuse you again until I saw this role revealed on the front page:

Royce Bracket
Flood ( )- Sometimes…people can be…contagious. People can be contagious. Whoever targets your target the same Night will be silenced and unable to vote while they recover.

So with that revelation in mind I'm suddenly feeling like I cannot hold that suspicion on you anymore. Given that (if memory serves me correctly, I'll have to go back and reread the votes) you were on one of the vote trains the first day, it's entirely possible you were legitimately silenced. So I am forced to recind my analysis of your position in light of this evidence. I daresay I think slightly better of you now, even.

I'm frustrated, so I'm going to stop speculating and look at the facts in light of the new role. If we believe you were silenced, which I think I now can believe with less doubt, someone else who voted for Elo on Day 1 is a baddie and was bussing, probably the baddie here in question, unless there's another silencing role in that crowd.

I do see nijuukyugou on that list. I will go back to check and see their posts as well as who else may have been possibly silenced/missed a vote the previous day.

So someone forced these three into the spotlight

agleaminranks wrote:I voted for Matt because I didn't like his general attacks or discussion style up to that point, but I can't point to one specific post that highlights this uneasiness of mine; rather, it was more of a strong gut feel. I will analyze his posts more thoroughly and attempt to gain some insight into it.

There's also has to be some significance to sig being nightkilled. I will revisit his posts as well. I mentioned that I found it highly suspicious and unlikely that both sig and zebra were silenced and insanified, respectively. MP was one who voiced disdain for my claim, and while I agreed with him about disliking the zebra vote, he did not seem to agree with me. In fact, if sig were lynched after I made such a claim, it might put me in a bad position. If MP were mafia, it seems sensical to me to make such a nightkill to put the doubt upon myself in this case. I feel a little less good about MP all of a sudden. I don't have much concrete evidence other than that theory, but I don't like it much.

JJJ, I am inclined to disagree with llama and Mac. At least from my perspective (again, someone who has had no mafia experience with you before this game, I believe), it feels much more likely that a civilian would be willing to put that much time and effort into extensive ISOs regardless of the day. This game is very clearly serious at this point. There is much to discuss and much to analyze.

agleaminranks wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:Going back, Matt has done little but tunnel Elohcin since the last night phase. But his retorts seem a little more serious this time, and he is pressing for serious questions.

I don't know how I feel about Elohcin at this point. She had one post that pinged me but her clarification made me backtrack that thought. I will try to get a read before the day ends.

Just glancing back over her posts, Elo feels like a frustrated civilian to me more than a baddie. I believe her claims about extra-game commitments, it does feel to me like she's just frustrated from answering a lot of the same questions over and over again. I am hesitant to place my vote on her today.

What does worry me more is MP. It's possible he was silenced, it's equally possible he's just busy, but it also seems a little convenient from my perspective his absence and antecedent remarks about speculated abilities and nightkills.

MovingPictures.

agleaminranks wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Elohcin wrote:I think this is crazy interesting. If we all decided to work together, civ and scum, and get rid of the process by voting his element each day, we could rid ourselves of him completely (or at least make him vanilla) so we don't have to deal with him at all really.

How much commitment would you be willing to offer to this notion of consistently lynching Process terms rather than players? You seem to be fully on board in your language here without must hesitance or consideration, which is a curious thing in the face of any suggestion that town and baddies openly coordinate on anything.

Elohcin, I don't think this is the right strategy to take. I'm thinking the Process is a single lynchable person with formes. I'll explain in a bit.

Catching up, DrumBeats, I am extremely against this idea of the scum and the civilians secretly teaming up. Roles are scarce but given that it's a side mission it's probably safe to assume that mafia has some nightkill ability. What the hell is there in the promise of not killing civilians? Ring of Gyges, folks. Even if given the opportunity to act in unison with the whole group, they have the option of completely screwing over the civilians with a nightkill from the anonymity of this arrangement. Civs could pretty easily be getting themselves into a bind. It sounds like an inherently bad situation where the civilians are going to get the short end of the stick.

Also, thoughts re: Cell. So, Cheerleader won the poll yesterday is my guess. Host says the Process will manifest itself in many ways. I'm guessing the Process is manifest in the Cheerleader form now, and it has that ability, and this is why it was revealed.
The Cheerleader role also specifies that it can protect a Process element from being nightkilled. And here Cell shows up in the daily lynch section.
It seems most likely that possibly the Process is either able to change elements on a daily basis and this will be what reveals the role, is my guess.
My original guess was that perhaps by voting the element it would force the Process to change to that element, but given that the Cheerleader role mentions nightkill protection from elements, they're capable of being killed, and this would then prevent the Process from becoming that element. So, we have one element on the lynch list which we could eliminate. But I wonder why Cell specifically shows up, versus other elements, or elements as a whole. Something to do with the Process's selection, or Host's discrimination? Maybe it's what element the Process is planning on taking tomorrow?

So, tl;dr, I think the elements are formes that the Process takes, rather than someone being behind it, as someone speculated earlier (don't remember who at the moment, sorry). I think we can vote to kill the element to prevent the Process from taking that forme later, but the Process is still someone out there amongst our ranks. Given that we don't know what the hell the role does and if this is true we're lynching essentially nobody, it's giving the civilians fewer opportunities to nab a baddie early on. In a bigger game I would want to focus more on preserving civilian life without eliminating indiscriminately, but I don't think we have that luxury here. Gotta get on the hunt, or the civs are in trouble. Look at Barry Lyndon.

I propose we skip the Cell voting for now. Focus on baddy hunting. Right now, the Process has a defensive element and is less able to do anything serious. This is the moment to strike.

Initial reads on the few actives on here have been pretty good. I can follow up more on that if anyone wants. DrumBeat's post about strategy seems to favor the baddies but it only strikes me as marginally pingy. I would be tempted to vote for them, but it's a little too early to have more than just a sinking suspicion on little evidence. Elohcin glomming on to that strategy might be something of note too.