The Syndicate

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Actually, it should be "I dread supatown players disguised as mafia". Since I'm the one who fears them. Right?

Supatown.

Golden wrote:Well poo. Death sucks. Good luck!

Tell me about it.

Supatown.

Cookie wrote:
thellama73 wrote:Golden and espers don't look so hot after this lynch. Golden's is perhaps a little too on the nose, though.
I'm not sure what you mean?

I did not find Sloonei suspicious at all and I have no idea how someone picked up on his smiley's and adverbs and announced that was suspicious. I have also never played with him and don't really know how he acts. I don't know how many others have experience with him either. Well done! If I had been around for the voting, I'd have voted Elo, though.

Also, I had no idea I had to watch a video and I could see that Sloonei died but didn't know where it was posted LOL!

Golden's vote looks bad because he voted to tie Ninja Blooper with Sloonei. Could have been a baddie save attempt, but it would be a really transparent one, and I would expect better of Golden. Espers looks bad because the last minute final vote on Sloonei could have been a baddie underbussing a teammate.

Scotty wrote: linki-
@llama- sure! why wouldn't it? I certainly didn't suspect Sloonei, so why not be included in that group.

Because you presumably already know your own role.

Scotty wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Day 1's are a crapshoot.
Not when you have supatown llama on the case, they ain't.
Since you're probably the most civ-looking here, do you have any new suspects on your radar?

Yes, but people who talked a lot at Night had a bad habit of dying in Guess WHo,so you'll have to wait to hear about them.

Scotty wrote: At this point, I think it would be prudent to look at everyone who didn't vote Sloonei today (including me) and look into possible reads as to connections to Sloonei.

You think it's prudent to look at yourself?

DharmaHelper wrote:Day 1's are a crapshoot.

Not when you have supatown llama on the case, they ain't.

I like where your head's at, MP. You're in the game, and that's what we need.

Golden and espers don't look so hot after this lynch. Golden's is perhaps a little too on the nose, though.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Also what's "BIH?"

Burn in Hell, suckaz.

Sometimes I can't believe how supatown I am. Boosh!

Ricochet wrote:Epig plz it's 4:21 am post-blaze eastern pluto time here

No one actually believes you live in Vanuatu or wherever it is you claim to be from. :P

END DAT DAY and show Supatown how we do!

DharmaHelper wrote:The rest of my re-read will have to wait. I'm personally wondering why it is a Day 1 poll is so torn as opposed to an easy, blendy bandwagon.

Maybe no one is actually bad?

DharmaHelper wrote:What an interesting Day 1.

No kidding. One of the best I've seen, especially in a speed game.

MovingPictures07 wrote:
thellama73 wrote:I don't buy that Ninja Blooper is mafia. I am roughly 50-50 on Sloonei and G-Man, but I think I will go Sloonei today. He seems way too defensive to me.
Can you elaborate? Why?

The burden of proof is on the person trying to convince me that she is mafia. I don't have to have a reason not to believe.

I don't buy that Ninja Blooper is mafia. I am roughly 50-50 on Sloonei and G-Man, but I think I will go Sloonei today. He seems way too defensive to me.

MovingPictures07 wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote: Llama, how do you feel about Sloonei's behavior here versus Economics? Any glaring similarities or differences? He was supatown in that game, so I'm curious what you think, since you co-hosted that game.

If Russ could contribute his thoughts here too, that'd be awesome.
I think more active, more post-happy, and more with a hair trigger sensitivity.
More in here or there?

Here.

MovingPictures07 wrote: Llama, how do you feel about Sloonei's behavior here versus Economics? Any glaring similarities or differences? He was supatown in that game, so I'm curious what you think, since you co-hosted that game.

If Russ could contribute his thoughts here too, that'd be awesome.

I think more active, more post-happy, and more with a hair trigger sensitivity.

Sloonei wrote:@llama, what do you think of everything in my post history that is not an adverb or a smiley face?

What do I think of everything that doesn't contribute to my case that you are bad? Kind of a loaded question, isn't it?

I was all set to vote G-Man today, but you have been so obsessed with my not-even-really-a-case against you that it is pinging me a lot. You knew I was more inclined to vote G-Man than you, but you keep pestering me about it with ridiculous questions. Way overly defensive.

I think I will vote for you.

Sloonei wrote: I don't want to describe my assessment of your play style, so I won't. :P

I was conscious of the smilies because I used the same one in two consecutive posts. I would never consider a person's use of emojis as it relates to their alignment, because I would never consider such a thing to be an indicator of alignment. I use adverbs because I use adverbs. Sometimes they're a natural part of a sentence.
No offense, but this is one of the silliest cases I've ever had to respond to. But it's Day 1, and I do not object to it. How do you feel about my other posts, and particularly these replies to your case?[/quote]

I will never take any offense at someone trying to convince me my case against them is stupid.

Sloonei wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
thellamae73 wrote:My read on Sloonei honestly has to do with the use of smilies and adverbs. I know it seems silly, but there is some truth to it, particularly the smiley part, and the fact that he was self-conscious about it makes it worse.
We have not played together before, but you have hosted both of the Syndicate games I have played prior to this one. How much attention did you pay to those games? Are you familiar at all with my playstyle, or in this case, my writing style? What do you know about me as a player?
Also, what is the rationale behind this adverb/smiley theory?
I know enough. The rationale is primarily observation based, but it also makes sense in that baddies have to walk a line, and it's easier to equivocate with emoticons and adverbs. Where a civvie might say "You are bad! I'm sure of it!" a baddie might say "You are bad, in my opinion." The softener gives them more cover if things don't go their way.

Golden: Adverbs, smilies.
Okay, but if you look at the context of my adverbified post and my smilies, does it seem like I am walking a line of being cautious? A lot of the content in question is unrelated to this game.
Also, what is "enough"? Could you describe your assessment of my playstyle?

It's not a conscious thing, just a tell of a guilty conscience. I think you realized you were using too many smilies, which is why you pointed it out in a joking fashion.

I don't want to describe my assessment of your play style, so I won't. :P

MovingPictures07 wrote: Also, Llama, can you elaborate on Russ? I have him as a null read.

This post:

Russtifinko wrote:Sooooo the game started, and I worked all day.....

You guys do realize you averaged over a post per minute between 9:30am and 10am, right? And I haven't read the last 3 pages yet, but it's gotta be close to that for most of the evening.

MP has already demanded no less than 7 answers to questions from EVERY SINGLE PLAYER....and that was 3 pages ago.

Sheesh.

I'd have not voted Rorschach's journal. If he's all he made out to be, he'd write a shorthand or code known only to him in case it fell into the wrong hands.

Also, I have a policy of supporting policy lynches. Let it be known that I will bandwagon onto all policy lynches forthwith, henceforth.

Welcome new players! And new players who used to be old players before I was around. And regular players.

Baddies who haven't said anything yet don't need to read the thread closely. They are thereofre less likely to be frustrated by a lot of posts. Also, just tone. He sounds like a less scemey, more carefree Russ.

Sloonei wrote:
thellamae73 wrote:My read on Sloonei honestly has to do with the use of smilies and adverbs. I know it seems silly, but there is some truth to it, particularly the smiley part, and the fact that he was self-conscious about it makes it worse.
We have not played together before, but you have hosted both of the Syndicate games I have played prior to this one. How much attention did you pay to those games? Are you familiar at all with my playstyle, or in this case, my writing style? What do you know about me as a player?
Also, what is the rationale behind this adverb/smiley theory?

I know enough. The rationale is primarily observation based, but it also makes sense in that baddies have to walk a line, and it's easier to equivocate with emoticons and adverbs. Where a civvie might say "You are bad! I'm sure of it!" a baddie might say "You are bad, in my opinion." The softener gives them more cover if things don't go their way.

Golden: Adverbs, smilies.

MovingPictures07 wrote: Llama, I agree that G-Man's phrasing in several posts, including this one, have been odd, as if he can't justify lying outright. However, wouldn't that quickly sink him if he actually is mafia? Would he play it that riskily?

In addition, is it possible that G-Man has rather unconventional and literal phrasing in his typical posting behavior? What do you think?

Wouldn't it quickly sink him to claim to be a Watchman on Day 1 if he actually was one? It's asking for an NK. People always make fun of my "Are you bad" type questions, but a shocking number of people have trouble actually flat out lying and I have caught baddies with it before. Therefore, I always think those kind of answers are telling.

MovingPictures07 wrote: Llama, thanks, your explanation seems sincere and logical in light of your posts. Perhaps there was a reason I was taking everything so seriously.

I am curious: Can you elaborate on your reads? Why do you feel good about Golden? More significantly, why do you feel good about Russ?

I noted Sloonei as one of my two slightly mafia reads in my first Rainbow List. You seem to have the same two suspects. I know why you suspect G-Man, but why Sloonei? I'm particularly hoping you can articulate in as much detail as possible regarding Sloonei, since I'm having trouble fully explaining why he has pinged my radar.

Regarding DH: I don't find it out of character at all that he wouldn't want to use rainbow lists. DH is definitely an aggressive baddie hunter, but he does like to play some cards close to the chest, and doesn't like to play by anyone else's rules but his own. He is currently a null read from me, until I see just a bit more from him, since everything aligns with what I would consider his normal meta. He is a crafty baddie, so I've been hesitant to raise him to very slightly civilian read, but I'm getting there.

My read on Sloonei honestly has to do with the use of smilies and adverbs. I know it seems silly, but there is some truth to it, particularly the smiley part, and the fact that he was self-conscious about it makes it worse.

I feel good about Golden because a) his posts seem in character for him and b) he agreed with my read on G-Man for largely the same reasons as me.

I agree with you on DH. I just thought it was worth mentioning.

Cookie, don't panic! You're doing great, and it will all seem like old news by the time the game is over.

Metalmarsh89 wrote: You've made a mistake llama. I am on neither of your lists.

Which one should you be on, and why?

You've been winning a lot of games lately, Bass. WHo are you thinking of voting for?

MovingPictures07 wrote: Llama, why did you decide to poke me a lot today? Just curious.

Good question. I noticed you were in rather a literal mood, and I saw an opportunity to feel you out, so I took it. Your responses made me feel a lot better about you for what that's worth.
So far I feel good about:
MP
Golden
Russ

and I feel bad about:
G-Man
Sloonei

DH's not feeling like doing a rainbow list is noteworthy too, though not enough for a vote yet. I know I am always a little more apathetic about baddie hunting when I am myself bad.

Everyone else has yet to make a strong impression on me.

G-Man wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
G-Man wrote:I've got about 10 more minutes before I unplug for the night. Any questions?
Are you a member of mafia?
I am not a member of the mafia.
I am not Moloch.
My role does not pose a threat to the civvies.

Interesting phrasing. Not "I am a civvie" but "My role does not pose a threat"

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:@llama: I have heard of this theory and do not support it, whether it's being used against me or somebody else.
Okay. I'd rather vote for G-Man than you anyway.
How settled are you on that choice? I have been alarmed at how early people decide on suspects in games here, but I'm getting more used to it as I play more. It just seems to be the way y'all do it. That does not mean I agree with it though. If the Day 1 poll went up right now without changeable votes, what would be the likelihood of you casting a vote for G-man?
People like to be transparent around here.

It all depends on what happens between now and then. If I had to vote right now, I would vote for G-Man. But I don't have to vote right now, and many things could cause me to change my mind. It's a confusing question. If anyone says they are "settled" on a lynch vote, it means literally nothing could happen to change their opinion, which is obvious nonsense.

Interesting discussion. I'll just add that I famously like lynching non-participants and it famously gets me killed. Do I learn though?

No. No, I don't.

Sloonei wrote:@llama: I have heard of this theory and do not support it, whether it's being used against me or somebody else.

Okay. I'd rather vote for G-Man than you anyway.

That theory encompasses smilies as well.

Sloonei wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:That's two straight posts with winky faces, for those scoring at home.
Not to meantion...

Sloonei wrote:The two games i've played with G-man were Economics (where he was town but posted entirely in pictures for the whole game) and Bullets over Broadway (where he was scum and replaced in after Day 2 or 3 and was roundly suspected before he even entered the game), so I can't say I am familiar with his usual style, but some of his early posts here had the appearance of being sincere to me when I looked at them. I will look further into this and re-analyze later tonight, after work when I'm on my laptop.

Also, MP's behavior around the policy lynch/"overreaction" stuff reminds me a lot of his Day 0 posts in BoB, which had me feeling mildly suspicious at the time. I still do not know his alingment in that game, can y'all lynch Epi 2.0? But this time I can at least understand where he's coming from and fully support what he said, whether he's town or not. A close-minded Day 1 (or Day anything) is a terrible way to approach the game, and policy lynches should be few and far between. MP is a player who I think will become easier to read later in games, but that doesn't mean I wish to give him a pass for any amount of time.
Adverbs are the utterances of the gods

Epignosis believes that baddies use adverbs more than civvies. I think he's right.

Sloonei wrote:That's two straight posts with winky faces, for those scoring at home.

Not to meantion...

Sloonei wrote:The two games i've played with G-man were Economics (where he was town but posted entirely in pictures for the whole game) and Bullets over Broadway (where he was scum and replaced in after Day 2 or 3 and was roundly suspected before he even entered the game), so I can't say I am familiar with his usual style, but some of his early posts here had the appearance of being sincere to me when I looked at them. I will look further into this and re-analyze later tonight, after work when I'm on my laptop.

Also, MP's behavior around the policy lynch/"overreaction" stuff reminds me a lot of his Day 0 posts in BoB, which had me feeling mildly suspicious at the time. I still do not know his alingment in that game, can y'all lynch Epi 2.0? But this time I can at least understand where he's coming from and fully support what he said, whether he's town or not. A close-minded Day 1 (or Day anything) is a terrible way to approach the game, and policy lynches should be few and far between. MP is a player who I think will become easier to read later in games, but that doesn't mean I wish to give him a pass for any amount of time.

G-Man's response is very interesting. It sounds like he is trying to convince himself. "Llama couldn't have possible figured me out this early, right? He must just be fishing, right? Right?!"

G-Man wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
thellama73 wrote:Guys, I think G-Man is bad.

Discuss.
I think it is a bood and unexpected assertion by thellama to suggest that G-man is bad. Why does the llama think this?
He's probably just fishing. I refuse to believe anyone can spot a baddie with 100% certainty on 1, let alone a Day 0. I have yet to meet anyone that good, if they even exist.

Where did I say 100% certainty, Captain Straw Man? I just said I think you are bad. It's a vibe I'm getting from you based on what I know of you from past games and contrasting with other players who have a similar style to you. You've been vocal today, but not as productive as DDL and Golden, who I think of as playing somewhat similarly to you. As I said, vague, undefined, but a hunch nevertheless. WHich is why I wanted other people's thoughts.

Guys, I think G-Man is bad.

Discuss.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I don't think MovingPictures07 is acting suspiciously. I just think this is what happens when you have a player who is incredibly addicted to mafia and is not allowing himself to play often right now.

I agree. I have been poking MP a lot today to see how he reacts. He hasn't seemed fishy to me. He seems like normal, hyper-engaged civ MP.

G-Man wrote: Sorry MP, you may be have multiple accounting degrees but I have a degree in accounting AND a degree in communications (I'm good with words but apparently formatting them on this site is hit or miss for me ). I simply cannot team up with someone who fails to differentiate between lowest, least, and fewer.

I have a degree in Economics, Film Scoring, and Russian & Eastern European Studies. I plan to vote accordingly.

MovingPictures07 wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote: A policy lynch would be any of the following:
- Voting the player with the most or least posts
- Voting the player who is seen as most or least apt to contribute
- Voting a player who just completed a successful baddie win
- Voting a player who is consistently a good baddie
etc.

I intend to vote for the player I find most suspicious and generate as much discussion as I can in order to determine suspicion.

Policy lynches only work when, after generating discussion all throughout Day 1, there is still is no suspicious behavior, and there is a player who is very unpredictable (like a Vompatti) or a complete no-show that could prove to be a problem down the road.
What?
I don't understand. What's confusing?

I'm just seeing how long I can troll you before you catch on.

MovingPictures07 wrote: A policy lynch would be any of the following:
- Voting the player with the most or least posts
- Voting the player who is seen as most or least apt to contribute
- Voting a player who just completed a successful baddie win
- Voting a player who is consistently a good baddie
etc.

I intend to vote for the player I find most suspicious and generate as much discussion as I can in order to determine suspicion.

Policy lynches only work when, after generating discussion all throughout Day 1, there is still is no suspicious behavior, and there is a player who is very unpredictable (like a Vompatti) or a complete no-show that could prove to be a problem down the road.

What?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:That's probably Ricochet scary as fuck of getting killed in n1 again.
That would make him a civilian then.

If I were bad, I would NK Ricochet Night 1.

Let the WIFOM begin.

MovingPictures07 wrote:
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
thellama73 wrote:I voted Rorschach because it is a nifty ink blot test.

I see we've already got MP in full overreaction mode, which is a good start.
What about my posts is an overreaction?
Everything.

We are joking about lynching people who screwed up with us on previous game and you're going full mama bear on us.

Well at least I know I'm joking, can't speak for the others.
I just wanted to make it clear that I don't support policy lynches, in the event that anyone was actually seriously considering one for Golden or anyone else, that's all.

What do you mean by "I don't support policy lynches"? Can you elaborate?

MovingPictures07 wrote:
thellama73 wrote:I voted Rorschach because it is a nifty ink blot test.

I see we've already got MP in full overreaction mode, which is a good start.
What about my posts is an overreaction?

You're vigorously arguing against an obvious jest that no one intended to carry out.

I voted Rorschach because it is a nifty ink blot test.

I see we've already got MP in full overreaction mode, which is a good start.

Like G-Man and Cookie, I am not familiar with the theme, so don't expect me to know things about things.

I am still annoyed at Golden about Guess Who, so I would be up for lynching him Day 1. MP is getting my

for so eagerly defending him.

Search found 48 matches