The Syndicate

MovingPictures07 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

AllAlongTheBoardwalk wrote:What's up with Cell voting for me? I wanting if that will cause anything to happen related to the process? Thoughts?

Whether there'll be consequences I couldn't say. Given that Cell voted off-wagons, I think he/she might be trying to get people to WIFOM about whether you're the one that placed the vote.

If it's not you.

I agree.

DrWilgy wrote:Hey Cell, would you mind explaining your vote?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Vote: Elohcin

MovingPictures07 wrote:Here were my thoughts on nutella, for anyone who cares:

MovingPictures07 wrote:That last point brings me to nutella. I think she's brought awesome knowledge with respect to the theme, but with regards to strictly game-related content she was quick to jump on both Elo and DB for DB's proposal, and I see that as potentially convenient. She said there's possible "nefarious" intent in what DB has said; considering he proposes no current plan of action, and understanding his plan as is since he has elaborated, I don't see any such intent. I would like to hear her elucidate this matter; pending her explanation, she could move back up to null. Otherwise, I'm inclined to believe she may be taking advantage of easy targets, particularly due to the relative strong diction of her wording:

Spoiler: show

nutella wrote:OK, I'm back from graduating!! and caught up.

Zebra, I have no idea how you got so confused but it's pretty weird that you voted without even looking at the poll time.

Matt's inexplicable naming of Niju as the Process is perplexing and his refusal to explain it is even more so. Matt tends to be zany but I'm keeping an eye on him for this strange behavior.

I think that Drum's alliance proposition is probably a terrible idea and might have nefarious motivations. The Process is just one role/player, so even with its many powers it probably won't be impossible to get rid of, while the Camerata team is a significant threat and more in number for us to take down. I find Drum quite suspicious for the proposal and I also find Elo suspicious for expressing interest in it and then sort of covering her tracks -- although I believe that she wasn't outright agreeing to the plan in the first place but considering it as an option, but it's still kind of surprising that she jumped on it without acknowledging its suspicious nature.

There's still a whole day but it's looking likely I'll want to vote for either Drum or Elo.


linki @ Drum: huh, I don't really understand, you think the mafia can target specific elements? if they can, will we be told a process element has been eliminated? This all seems pretty speculative, and regardless I largely agree with niju that any degree of alliance/trusting the mafia is too risky especially in such a small game.

Aaaand there's a Cell sock account

Note the contrast between "might be nefarious" and "quite suspicious" for DB and "suspicious" for Elo. I sense a disconnect.

Furthermore, it appears to me that she suspects Elo for agreeing with a plan that she doesn't agree with, but I think Elo's train of thought regarding the matter is transparent, at least from where I'm sitting, and nutella even recognizes this to some degree but still finds Elo suspect.

Moreover, the most suspicious statement is nutella's propensity to feel OK with a vote for either Elo or DB at this point in the day phase, especially not having discussed any other reads (zebra, Matt, me, anyone else). I need to hear from nutella about this ASAP.

It's snipped from the post that contained my first rainbow list. I'll need to update it here soon.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

AllAlongTheBoardwalk wrote:Well, that was a lot to read...skimmed some of it there, but I'm mostly caught up now.

I think JaggedJimmyJay and MovingPictures07 are good. I like the back and forth discussion, even if it ends up creating way more content than I want to read, and I'm taking DB's word that he was being sarcastic and tabling that discussion.

As for my vote, I'm leaning Wigly just because of his (or her?) weird behavior. And I'm not super experienced by any means, but I see no good reasoning for calling yourself mafia. Playing weird or 'fake' outing yourself because its funny isn't an adequate defense of this to me.

Thoughts on this? As of now that's where my vote is, but I will consider alternatives.

I understand Wilgy's behavior is outwardly dancing with WIFOM, but I've seen this guy (and others) behave this way and flip town before, so it's not as if calling yourself mafia is a sure tell for it. I'm with you though; Wilgy hasn't adequately defended his "contributions" thus far.

I personally think a vote for zebra equals a vote for Wilgy which equals a vote for reywaS at this point. They're all policy lynches for "unhelpful" behavior and lack of contributions, each a different flavor if you will. I'd like to think I had something more solid with my nutella thoughts, but hey, that's just me.

MovingPictures07 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.

So because you interpret this behavior to be within zebra's meta, but Wilgy's is in within meta, then zebra's behavior being "weird" makes her worthy of your vote? How is that logical at all?

Weird DOES NOT EQUAL suspicious. Can anyone actually explain to me the mafia motivation behind zebra's actions?

MovingPictures07 wrote:

DrumBeats wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

DrumBeats wrote:Anybody want to trade votes tomorrow to loophole this self-voting thing? /s

What is the proposed gain with this suggestion?

It was entirely a joke. Hence the /s (sarcasm)

Oh, so that's what the /s was for!

If you want to be sarcastic here, there are [ sarc ] tags, which make the text orange. Sarcastic orange!

MovingPictures07 wrote:

AllAlongTheBoardwalk 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?

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?

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?

MovingPictures07 wrote:Since votes are NOT changeable, I'm going to place "temporary" votes on people to express what would be votes if there were changeable votes.

AllAlongtheBoardwalk, what's up? Speak to me, bud!