The Syndicate

MovingPictures07 wrote:Monkey Island -- Day 2 -- MP Rainbow #3

Epignosis -- ISO

Elohcin / motel room 2.0 -- ISO
Long Con
Nachomamma8
Snow Dog

Boomslang -- ISO
MacDougall
Quin
Scotty

a2thezebra -- ISO
Black Rock -- ISO
DFaraday -- ISO
DrWilgy
Metalmarsh89
nijuukyugou
Soneji -- ISO
Vompatti

sig -- ISO

I provided ISO links so that my posts are easier to navigate. I realize I have posted a lot of stuff this cycle, so sorry to drown you all with that, but not really sorry. Anyway, hopefully this post can serve as a good starting point for anyone who cares to look at my d2 ISO content. Please let me know what your thoughts are on these things. I need the feedback. I'll go about ISOs for the remaining folks hopefully by the end of Night 2, but I'm tired and believe it or not I actually do have things to do, so who knows.

Players still are listed alphabetically within groups... for now. I'd like to arrange them within groups after finishing ISOs though.

Note that the players who have not yet been ISOed haven't moved from my prior list. That's because I need to give them a fair shake first. So those reads are all pending some investigation.

I'm voting sig. And with that, I'm gone for a while. I need a break. See you all whenever.

Soneji wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Long Con wrote:Hello, I did check my role PM before I came here.

Scotty wrote:Man, I would hate to be on your team if I were bad.

Yeah, Wilgy is already suspicious to me.

DrWilgy wrote:Yeah, I've decided that being blind will be my meme play this game.

Indeed.

Golden wrote:Voted melee island - that's always where the adventure starts. You can't cut right to the third act.

Good point. Same-same.

You are trying too hard.

Anti-intellectualism is a thing in this community too then.

Quin wrote:I self-voted for the sake of figuring out whether they're changeable or not. Votes are not changeable.

Good of you to take on that burden.

Soneji wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Soneji wrote:@Nacho : You look to rely a lot on an ability to townread and then use PoE, even this early. How much weight do you give to conscious vs unconscious scum moves? I have noticed that you approach people's posts as if you were scum in their shoes and make your read based on if you think they'd consciously post what they did with the proposed scum intent, in my experience this is rare.

Mafia generally don't purposely post as if they are mustache twirling villains even if it comes off that way in someones scumread. Their subconscious guilt is how these slips are made.

I think that most things that mafia post are unconscious, yes, but behind each unconscious post there are typically one of three guiding principles: 1) "I want to survive", 2) "I want to look town", 3) I want to lynch town. So when I say that something seems to lack scum motivation, it's because I don't think that a player would think that it doesn't push towards any one of those goals; when I say that I don't think that Metalmarsh would share his Day 1 goal of not being instantly lynched in thread, I don't think that this would be a conscious decision, I think that it's just something that he would feel uncomfortable doing. My argument for Quin being town isn't that they would sit down and weigh the advantages and disadvantages of self-voting versus not self-voting; it lies more along the lines of thinking that he would put some sort of thought before locking down one of his weapons against town so quickly and no lines of thought really point towards "no, self-vote".

Was there a argument in particular you were referring to when you made this post?

No one argument, you addressed the main two there.

Voting isn't a mafia weapon so much as it is town's. A lot of mafia players view voting as an inconvenience rather than a tool at their disposal and being freed from any pressure to vote is a blessing. Mind you, on the forum I come from I have never played a game where votes weren't changeable, mafia would be even more uncomfortable voting if they couldn't change. That they can't change weakens it's use as a weapon for them as well. The main point in Quin's favor to me is that the host wouldn't state if votes are final, forcing someone to vote to find out. Would have been preferable for him to vote a scumread but as is, hes not high up on potential lynch candidates.

Would you say your suspicion of Long Con stems from a differing view on if chaotic posts like Wilgy's are scummy? I don't see any way to look at Wilgy's post favorably. If he is telling the truth about not looking at his role PM, then he is going against the spirit of the rules and if he did get randomized scum, will not display the subconscious guilt that comes from one knowing they are scum. If he is lying then his motivation can only be to deceive or troll.

[VOTE: ] aubergine

Soneji wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Soneji wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Soneji wrote:[VOTE: @Nacho : You look to rely a lot on an ability to townread and then use PoE, even this early. How much weight do you give to conscious vs unconscious scum moves? I have noticed that you approach people's posts as if you were scum in their shoes and make your read based on if you think they'd consciously post what they did with the proposed scum intent, in my experience this is rare.

Mafia generally don't purposely post as if they are mustache twirling villains even if it comes off that way in someones scumread. Their subconscious guilt is how these slips are made.] aubergine

[VOTE:
I think that most things that mafia post are unconscious, yes, but behind each unconscious post there are typically one of three guiding principles: 1) "I want to survive", 2) "I want to look town", 3) I want to lynch town. So when I say that something seems to lack scum motivation, it's because I don't think that a player would think that it doesn't push towards any one of those goals; when I say that I don't think that Metalmarsh would share his Day 1 goal of not being instantly lynched in thread, I don't think that this would be a conscious decision, I think that it's just something that he would feel uncomfortable doing. My argument for Quin being town isn't that they would sit down and weigh the advantages and disadvantages of self-voting versus not self-voting; it lies more along the lines of thinking that he would put some sort of thought before locking down one of his weapons against town so quickly and no lines of thought really point towards "no, self-vote".

Was there a argument in particular you were referring to when you made this post?] aubergine

[VOTE:
No one argument, you addressed the main two there.

Voting isn't a mafia weapon so much as it is town's. A lot of mafia players view voting as an inconvenience rather than a tool at their disposal and being freed from any pressure to vote is a blessing. Mind you, on the forum I come from I have never played a game where votes weren't changeable, mafia would be even more uncomfortable voting if they couldn't change. That they can't change weakens it's use as a weapon for them as well. The main point in Quin's favor to me is that the host wouldn't state if votes are final, forcing someone to vote to find out. Would have been preferable for him to vote a scumread but as is, hes not high up on potential lynch candidates.

Would you say your suspicion of Long Con stems from a differing view on if chaotic posts like Wilgy's are scummy? I don't see any way to look at Wilgy's post favorably. If he is telling the truth about not looking at his role PM, then he is going against the spirit of the rules and if he did get randomized scum, will not display the subconscious guilt that comes from one knowing they are scum. If he is lying then his motivation can only be to deceive or troll.

[VOTE: ] aubergine] aubergine

[VOTE: [VOTE:

This is essentially a policy lynch vote. I don't like it. Give me something else to work with here, Soneji.] aubergine] aubergine

[VOTE: [VOTE:
This community must have a different definition of what a policy lynch is. On NF it is lynching someone who has proven time and again to offer nothing as a townie, without any posts that game that point to them being scum. Wilgy has already shown a pension for the chaotic this game and that makes him more likely scum than town.


I have posted about everything that has caught my eye so far, nor do I have reason to appeal to you in any manner.] aubergine] aubergine

Soneji wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Soneji wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Soneji wrote: [VOTE: [VOTE: No one argument, you addressed the main two there.

Voting isn't a mafia weapon so much as it is town's. A lot of mafia players view voting as an inconvenience rather than a tool at their disposal and being freed from any pressure to vote is a blessing. Mind you, on the forum I come from I have never played a game where votes weren't changeable, mafia would be even more uncomfortable voting if they couldn't change. That they can't change weakens it's use as a weapon for them as well. The main point in Quin's favor to me is that the host wouldn't state if votes are final, forcing someone to vote to find out. Would have been preferable for him to vote a scumread but as is, hes not high up on potential lynch candidates.

Would you say your suspicion of Long Con stems from a differing view on if chaotic posts like Wilgy's are scummy? I don't see any way to look at Wilgy's post favorably. If he is telling the truth about not looking at his role PM, then he is going against the spirit of the rules and if he did get randomized scum, will not display the subconscious guilt that comes from one knowing they are scum. If he is lying then his motivation can only be to deceive or troll.

[VOTE: ] aubergine] aubergine] aubergine

[VOTE: [VOTE: [VOTE:

This is essentially a policy lynch vote. I don't like it. Give me something else to work with here, Soneji.] aubergine] aubergine] aubergine

[VOTE: [VOTE: [VOTE:
This community must have a different definition of what a policy lynch is. On NF it is lynching someone who has proven time and again to offer nothing as a townie, without any posts that game that point to them being scum. Wilgy has already shown a pension for the chaotic this game and that makes him more likely scum than town.


I have posted about everything that has caught my eye so far, nor do I have reason to appeal to you in any manner.] aubergine] aubergine] aubergine

[VOTE: [VOTE: [VOTE:

I disagree with your conclusion here. Why is his behavior not town compatible?

You're my sole mafia read, which means you would receive my vote right now if we had changeable votes or the deadline was soon. How is that not a compelling reason to appeal to me?] aubergine] aubergine] aubergine

[VOTE: [VOTE: [VOTE:
More likely scum than town=/=not town compatible. You say in your next post that illogical, weird and chaotic generally haven't been signs of scum in your experience and I would agree with two of those three. Weird and/or seemingly illogical posters have gotten mislynched on NF on average and I usually have fought against those lynches. Chaotic however has flipped mafia more often and is a general detriment to the game. As I explained earlier, Wilgy's claim can only be trollish, deceptive or disruptive...nothing townish to find.

I will defend my position on my vote but your post came off as wanting me to put together more reads, which I won't be doing at this time as I have already given my thoughts on everything I intend to. You are used to rainbow reads and frequent town lists here, even in the early game. On NF it isn't all that uncommon for people to have town reads but it is not how I operate, I have no town reads just varying levels of scumreads. I focus mainly on a few people at a time early on while taking note of what others are doing, sometimes you need to wait before launching your attack or else your prey will clamp up before you have a strong case.] aubergine] aubergine] aubergine

Soneji wrote:[VOTE: [VOTE: [VOTE: Not fully caught up but Epi and MP would be my top suspects at the moment. MP's vote on motel room can certainly be attributed to self preservation, yet with all the time he spent making posts d1, he didn't make any push against anyone. No courage of conviction. More then that, his response to Epi's rainbow analysis was pretty blown out of proportion, a tl;dr defense against what was a pretty ridiculous analysis by Epi.

That ridiculous analysis plus him going after an inactive at this point in the game is why I suspect Epignosis. The analysis seems more like a premeditated move than having an epiphany and pursuing it with fervor, by the way in which it was written and it being on a day one that was noticeably barebones in terms of reads. Even if his general findings were true and he did happen to notice this pattern specifically, hinging on it D1 is folly. Better to let MP continue what hes doing and get him with more concrete evidence later, then let him weasel out of your weak reasoning and straighten his act.

It is possible they are both scum, one pirate, one cannibal. MP's high volume of posts certainly lend itself towards a larger chance of slipping.

[VOTE: ] aubergine] aubergine] aubergine] aubergine

Epignosis wrote:Batten down the hatches...

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Only here between finishing teaching and a meeting, but I wanted to comment on Epi's analysis of my rainbow lists.

Epi, your analysis is intriguing, but it is myopic and fails to make any meaningful inference about my alignment for the following reasons:

1) You do not explain why my alignment would have any impact on my rainbow list behavior. What's the connection? A conclusion that I am bad because I posted my first rainbow with only slight mafia and town tiers is like saying ice cream causes crime because in the summer ice cream sales increase and crime increases. It may be an association but there is no underlying theory detailing a correlation.

You should leave the analogies to Scotty.

I don't have to explain why your alignment would have any impact on how you make your lists. The why exists between your brain and your keyboard, and I'm not privy to what transpires between the two. My whole intention was to see if any correlation could be made, and that's what I found. It is a difference I believe you would not be aware of right now.

MovingPictures07 wrote:2) You neglect the fact that your sample size is skewed by the fact that I roll scum more often than town.

The sample size is going to be small because I stopped at the point in which such lists started to be a thing. There was no point in me going back to games in 2013 or 2014 when nobody posted them.

MovingPictures07 wrote:3) You fail to consider the environment of the thread and whether conditions exist at the times you pulled those rainbow lists that warranted me splitting my reads into further categories.

How do you know what I considered? All I did was pull your first lists from three games when you were good and three games when you were bad. I hardly commented on them.

MovingPictures07 wrote:4) Perhaps most importantly, similarly to 3), you do not consider what stages of the game in terms of "Day ____" those lists are from. That is a much more meaningful indication of how tiered my rainbow lists will be. Note that for every example of a good MP you pulled those rainbows are from Days 2 and 3 after we have had at least one flip and more information by which I can sort my reads. Further, the only outlier is the Star Wars game, and the reason that game is an outlier is due to 3) here. That game's Day 1 was way more chock full of back-and-forths and discussion than this one, especially considering I made my list here with still the rest of today to progress.

I pulled the very first list I found. I wasn't concerned with what Day it was.

The outlier for Star Wars isn't as important to me because I wanted to find a good MP list that lacked nuance like the one you posted here. I could not find one.

MovingPictures07 wrote:So your analysis is bupkis.

Nachomamma8 wrote:I disagree with Epignosis's analysis but I like that it exists and that means maybe Motel Room was the right vote after all!

It wasn't an analysis. It was an observation.

Epignosis wrote:

Golden wrote:

Epignosis wrote:It wasn't an analysis. It was an observation.

I find your observation somewhat compelling.

Question - is it one you just researched now, or have you been sitting on it waiting for a time it applied?

Did it at work while I was waiting for students to finish a test. I hate rainbow lists, so I wondered if they could be useful in another way- finding out how someone uses them early on from one alignment to the next. I know MP consistently does them early on.

I wanted to see what I could see, and I saw.

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:I'm trusting my process and voting MovingPictures07.

Your process is BS and I think you know it.

Is that a formal accusation?

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:I'm trusting my process and voting MovingPictures07.

Your process is BS and I think you know it.

Is that a formal accusation?

No, I think you're town. I just think you're shaking trees to see what falls out. I don't appreciate being the tree though considering how close I came to death yesterday and how I'm low hanging fruit headed into Day 2.

How many trees did I shake?

What fell out?

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Golden wrote:

Epignosis wrote:It wasn't an analysis. It was an observation.

I find your observation somewhat compelling.

Question - is it one you just researched now, or have you been sitting on it waiting for a time it applied?

What is compelling about it, even remotely? I don't get it. I cannot fathom anything even remotely compelling about it. I've already debunked it.

I showed things about your previous games. I quoted posts. I did not analyze or evaluate anything beyond giving you my Day 1 vote. What was there to debunk?

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Golden wrote:

Epignosis wrote:It wasn't an analysis. It was an observation.

I find your observation somewhat compelling.

Question - is it one you just researched now, or have you been sitting on it waiting for a time it applied?

What is compelling about it, even remotely? I don't get it. I cannot fathom anything even remotely compelling about it. I've already debunked it.

I showed things about your previous games. I quoted posts. I did not analyze or evaluate anything beyond giving you my Day 1 vote. What was there to debunk?

That it literally has any indication of my alignment. You fucking voted me for it and so did others, even Golden finds it "somewhat compelling" and he should know me better. Stop being purposefully obtuse.

How do I know that? I like what I found today. I think you're surprised that I found it. You think I'm good (so you say), but I know my process is BS and I'm being purposefully obtuse? What's the point of that?

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Whatever, it's a bullshit pattern,

.

It isn't bullshit, and it isn't really a pattern. It's a tendency.

MovingPictures07 wrote: If you can't see why Epi's observation is absolutely myopic and a waste of time, I don't know what to say. If you all are going to mislynch me, just save me the trouble. I'm done talking about this nonsense.

I can only wonder if you would be this passionate about how much I'm wasting my time if I were discussing someone else.

Epignosis wrote:

Golden wrote:I believe you, mp.

Actually, mostly I wanted to test whether I believed epi was genuine. I do. So I have both of you as town reads.

But you shouldn't confuse wrong with meritless. If you extract yourself from being the one accused, I think you would see the need to test.

How did you test this?

Epignosis wrote:

Golden wrote:Epi, what do you make of MPs reaction? Or are you not willing to say?

MP gets angry and storms off often when he gets suspected for any reason he feels is stupid, which doesn't mean anything to me. I never know when it's an act.

He says he thinks I'm good, but everything he says about my contributions regarding him indicates that he thinks they are contrived. That I don't understand.

On the one hand, he seems to think I'm just doing this to get a reaction out of him, but if he knows this, then why be pissed and angry and say I'm taking it too far? How far is too far? On the other hand, if I genuinely suspect him, then he should know I'm not going to back down because he calls the observation I raised a waste of his time, bullshit, etc.

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:Mad Max is a perfect example of a civ MP making three-tiered lists.

It's either an example or it isn't. The word "perfect" is unnecessary in this sentence. Quin is bad.

Quite right. I don't like commenting on ongoing games, so I didn't even bother to look at that one.

Epignosis wrote:Time to cull the less actives.

Epignosis wrote:Two people should have died. Only one did.

thellama73 wrote:LeChuck - The infamous ghost pirate. Kills nightly.

The Cannibals (3) - Just want to be left alone on Monkey Island. They kill nightly and win if both other teams are dead (with the exception of Herman Toothrot and the Head of the Navigator, whom they can tolerate.)

There's a blocker, a protector, and the Head of the Navigator, but there's also this:

thellama73 wrote:Night ends in an hour and I am still missing lots of actions.

Epignosis wrote:I'm not interested in MP right now. I want to give him room Day 2 to get his ideas out there (like he ever needed room for that ), but I want to know who missed a kill. That's a team of four and a team of three. One of those teams fell asleep at the wheel.

Epignosis wrote:I want to lynch Black Rock.

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:I want to lynch Epignosis.

Voted for Black Rock.

Your turn.

Epignosis wrote:

sig wrote:I do think our mafia members either didn't vote or voted on a non wagon avoiding both major lynches. I do however, believe night kills where submitted and I don't think we should just start lynching lurkers on the off chance an entire team forgot/wasn't around to submit a kill.

On what basis do you believe both kills were submitted?

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:

sig wrote:I think its just as likely one of the roles stopped the second night kill.

@Quin why Epi

You answered your own question. There's a core difference between this game and RoT3K in that while in that game there weren't any protector roles, in this game there are 3 that may have been responsible for a missed NK.

You didn't know that. A number of my roles had secrets, and on top of that, there were dozens of items that offered special abilities, which were also secret.

Quin wrote:Yet he's pushing the inactive route, likely for an easy mislynch.

Is that my master plan now? Gun for MP all of Day 1 and then switch it up Day 2 for- your words- "an easy mislynch."

Pretty rich coming from the guy who voted himself Day 1, preemptively washing his hands of that lynch to find out if votes could be changed or not.

Epignosis wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Scotty wrote:Again the entire premise of lurking low posters only works if there's ample evidence. I'm not sure it's the best course of action, but it is something. I happen to be on Epi's side based on that fact that there were missing actions. I don't know what constitutes "lots" but it's a pretty good assumption.
If a role were blocked by the blocker, I'm not even sure how that info would be leaked since we can't infodump.

Or as I already mentioned, both teams targeted golden.

Those are the 3 options I see here... I'm just not sure what to do with that. Might as well be playing lawn darts with the low posters, which I'm not sure is worth gambling with yet. Im keeping my eyes on Black rock, Boomslang and Soneji as suspects, but I'm not even close to pulling the trigger on any of them yet

There's an inherent bias many people will have. Consider: If you are the blocker or the protector, and one of the kills didn't go through, you will want to believe that you played a part in stopping that kill. You will either suspect or trust the person you targeted, and that's fair. I'm not faulting anyone for playing it that way. However. given confirmation that there were "lots" of missing PMs an hour before the Night ended leads me to believe that the protector and the blocker should both dial back on their respective levels of confidence.

That's assuming either of them did dick last Night.

That being said, do you currently suspect those non-posters that I listed? And if so, how would you go about weeding them out if none come back and post?

I'd lynch any and all of them.

Add motel room to that list.

Epignosis wrote:Quin is either bad or a fool.

Epignosis wrote:Listen.

Black Rock has two posts. That's it. If she's good, she isn't doing anything to find Mafia. If she's bad, bingo.

Couple that with the knowledge that lots of people missed Night 1 and only one person died, and again BINGO.

Stop being cute.

Epignosis wrote:I voted for Black Rock.

Who opposes her lynch, and why do you oppose it?

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:I voted for Black Rock.

Who opposes her lynch, and why do you oppose it?

I'm not particularly opposed, but I already have one other player I'd rather vote for (sig), and there is still plenty of time left in Day 2 and plenty of players to ISO. So I likely won't be joining you, but we'll see.

What do you think of sig?

sig is one of those individuals I always find myself needing more concrete evidence against; a lot of people have a history pegging sig wrongly. Not that it matters much since one team did kill, but I don't think sig would miss a kill. In any event, I already voted, so I'm not the one you need to convince today.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:Listen.

Black Rock has two posts. That's it. If she's good, she isn't doing anything to find Mafia. If she's bad, bingo.

Couple that with the knowledge that lots of people missed Night 1 and only one person died, and again BINGO.

Stop being cute.

You could say this (bolded/underlined) about other players though. I'm not inspired.

Epignosis wrote:

Soneji wrote:Not fully caught up but Epi and MP would be my top suspects at the moment. MP's vote on motel room can certainly be attributed to self preservation, yet with all the time he spent making posts d1, he didn't make any push against anyone. No courage of conviction. More then that, his response to Epi's rainbow analysis was pretty blown out of proportion, a tl;dr defense against what was a pretty ridiculous analysis by Epi.

That ridiculous analysis plus him going after an inactive at this point in the game is why I suspect Epignosis. The analysis seems more like a premeditated move than having an epiphany and pursuing it with fervor, by the way in which it was written and it being on a day one that was noticeably barebones in terms of reads. Even if his general findings were true and he did happen to notice this pattern specifically, hinging on it D1 is folly. Better to let MP continue what hes doing and get him with more concrete evidence later, then let him weasel out of your weak reasoning and straighten his act.

It is possible they are both scum, one pirate, one cannibal. MP's high volume of posts certainly lend itself towards a larger chance of slipping.

[VOTE: ] aubergine

[VOTE:

Your attributing "rainbow analysis" to me troubles me more than your vote.] aubergine