The Syndicate

Well that was interesting. Mafia have made a habit, it seems, out of dropping kills. That or some presumably non-Mafia role has been blocking them. This is good news for us, I suppose, even if it's not that much information. Reywas 2 can we just vote for each other and move on with our lives? We're both getting annoyed with each other, nobody else is caring about our dispute, and we're not progressing a discussion in any meaningful way. If prompted by someone I'll provide a small recap, and then you can provide your small recap, but this is giving me a headache. I don't imagine you're having fun with our exchanges either, so is this unacceptable...

Of course you wouldn't tell someone you want them to go away, that'd more likely than not annoy them and make them stick around even longer. I wasn't claiming you had said those direct words. Please don't play dumb, it's a waste of time. I asked JUST him because I was only interested in HIS answer. If I had cared what Synonym 2, for instance, thought about it I would've asked Synonym 2. But I don't care what Synonym 2 thinks of that exchange. He wasn't involved in it, and I don't think I'll get any significant information from asking that. To turn your own logic back on you, why aren't you asking everyone why I asked MM2 that question? To be perfectly honest that wouldn't have been a bad plan, but your reaction made you look bad, not anything I said to Metalmarsh 2. So you admit that I didn't say that. That you construed it that way, in a way to make me look bad, most likely intentionally. I hope you see the irony in that. I know you were only interested in Metalmarsh 2's answer, you're proving my point. If you felt like your point was valid you would have opened it up to the whole thread. MM2 strikes me as an opinionated player capable of sharing his own opinions. He doesn't need your prompting. You did it to get buddy-buddy with him. You are getting obnoxious Reywas 2. I did not claim that you said the words "I want Metalmarsh 2 to get upset and leave." I claimed that the words you did say were said with that underlying intent. You were the only one to mention that claim of exact words. If you are of the belief that the only information we should work off of is the exact words that people post, with no context or interpretation whatsoever, then we'll have to agree to disagree. Let me reiterate something. I did not care what anyone besides Metalmarsh 2 had to say regarding the question I asked Metalmarsh 2. If you think that any question worth asking must be asked to everyone in the thread then we're going to have to agree to disagree again. Because you're so caught up on thread-wide questions, though, I'll pose one. Does anyone else think that Reywas 2 sounds frazzled or perhaps frantic? Lacey 2 that rule of "3 missed actions = modkill and 3 (at least non-consecutive) missed votes does not modkill" has been in effect since at least Day 3. I had missed a vote and then was worried about getting modkilled due to the original Bass 2 not voting Day 1, but I was corrected. Thank you for moving forward past the difficulties that have been presented Roxy & splints. I really appreciate the effort put into the game and a lot of the thought you put into it is showing...

Something a particularly sagely player I know likes to do is point out how hard it is to lynch certain players. Naturally, mafia are harder to lynch than civilians, because mafia have a tea, running interference for them. Reywas 2 you're being ridiculous. You are correct on the "buddying up" statement, however. I like making friends. Like Lacey 2, we're friends now and the game has been much more pleasant...

Here's my problem Bass 2. You asked MM2 if he thought I was misconstruing him on purpose. Why did you ask JUST him? Why didn't you ask the thread at large, or offer your own opinion before asking for MM2's? My answer to that question is you did it because you were preying upon his ego and hoping to get on his good side by engaging with him and turning him against me. Maybe there's a different, civ-friendly answer to that question but that's not how I'm viewing it atm. Of course you wouldn't tell someone you want them to go away, that'd more likely than not annoy them and make them stick around even longer. I wasn't claiming you had said those direct words. Please don't play dumb, it's a waste of time. I asked JUST him because I was only interested in HIS answer. If I had cared what Synonym 2, for instance, thought about it I would've asked Synonym 2. But I don't care what Synonym 2 thinks of that exchange. He wasn't involved in it, and I don't think I'll get any significant information from asking that. To turn your own logic back on you, why aren't you asking everyone why I asked MM2 that question? To be perfectly honest that wouldn't have been a bad plan, but your reaction made you look bad, not anything I said to Metalmarsh 2. And regarding the "Ninja killed Golden 2" theory, the possibility of a Night 1 kill on Gamer Guy 2 (Medic) plus a self-protect is minimal, but there. However, the possibility of any night kills being protected after that is extremely small, in my opinion, due to the likely lack of pure protection roles (Medic, not "replace kill" like Bodyguard) after Gamer Guy 2's death. Also I think you're reading too much into Golden 2's HIMYM "legen-dary" posts. The world that you create by saying Golden 2 is mafia is a strange one. BR2 waits for days before contesting Golden 2's flip whatsoever, the majority of Night 2 is used to set up for this supposed seemer flip, it just seems a tad excessive...

@Bass could you explain your vote to me as well? Reywas 2 misunderstood Metalmarsh 2 in a strange way earlier in the thread. When I asked MM2 about whether or not he thought Reywas 2 intentionally misconstrued what he had said, Reywas 2 claimed that I was only acting interested in MM2's thoughts and aggressively asked me to put forth what I thought, not ask MM2. I think it's fair to say this is strange. The fervor with which Reywas 2 spoke to me said that I had hit a nerve. That, combined with the statement that seemed to be intentionally misconstruing Metalmarsh 2's position, tells me that Reywas 2 doesn't want Metalmarsh 2 to contribute, even going so far as to say that Metalmarsh 2 is "playing into my hand" when I had made I believe 2 posts asking for MM2's opinion on things. I can't see a logical reason why we should keep a person attempting to shut someone out of the game around, there's no situation I can imagine in which a civ-aligned player would want to aggressively dissuade someone from posting. I'd be complacent with a Dom 2 lynch because their activity level has dropped dramatically since the Cookie 2 ISO post. Haven't posted in just over 48 hours. I'm not looking to trim unnecessary fat, so to speak, but it's strange for someone to drop off the face of the earth like that. Dom 2 was actually the first to post after the Gamer Guy 2 rezz, only a minute afterwards, so for that person to initiate radio silence for 2 days is disconcerting. No, that's the genuine Gamer Guy on Golden 2. He wouldn't have noticed That Goofy Clown otherwise...

I'd be game for a Dom 2 lynch as well, though I'd prefer Rywas 2 after his most recent string of posts. Cobalt 2 can you give your reasons? Roughly ten hours left is not the time to be sitting on stuff like that...

Are you as game as I am for a Reywas 2 lynch MM2? Also, game aside, I'm sorry you're getting upset, I'll try to more actively engage with you. Reywas 2, you're right that I was manipulative. I wanted to get Metalmarsh 2 back into the thread because it seemed he was being intentionally ignored. Manipulation is an underrated civilian tool, loaded questions can get you some surprisingly useful answers from people you don't even ask. I couldn't help but notice that Cobalt 2 was the only one to vote so far, 20 hours before phase end. That's much different than the previous days, and I assume it's because people are afraid of throwing the first stone in the wrong place, so to speak, where as until today there were very obvious wagons that people could flock to. I'll take that burden off your hands for you, aren't I such a nice guy...

Metalmarsh 2, do you think Reywas 2 was intentionally redirecting your question to avoid discussing the possibility of multiple baddie teams and/or independent roles, or do you think he misinterpreted your statement? What do YOU think, and why are you asking Metalmarsh 2 about it? Trying to act interested in his thoughts? I think you read what Metalmarsh 2 had said and decided to misconstrue hiis words in order to discourage him from talking about it further. At that point MM2 had, multiple times, stopped contributing when others were ignoring him. This is, of course, giving you the benefit of the doubt that you can both read and understand English, and you haven't given me any indication otherwise, so I'm inclined to believe you understood what he was saying. I'm asking Metalmarsh 2 about it so that he will give his thoughts about it? Maybe you have telepathy, but I don't, so I ask people what they think. Also, how would you know if I'm "acting" interested in his thoughts or legitimately are interested in his thoughts? Are you assuming that I don't care? If so, why...

Metalmarsh 2 analysis: He begins the game on Day 0 by listing people he won't be voting for. His criteria was seemingly that he didn't want to vote for people who hadn't appeared yet. However, the below quote convinces him to not vote Cookie 2, but instead vote either Long Con 2 or Synonym 2. You are correct, cookie. I was trying to begin discussion, not stifle it. The act that Synonym talked about the skin of his sock account doesn't bother me as much as him saying that there are five baddies among us. How would he know that unless he was one of them. The next player he won't vote for is Dom, for this reason. I believe it is a common mafia strategy to call out names in the beginning of the game to gauge reactions I don't believe it is a common strategy at all He then clarifies that he won't vote for the real Dom because he believes the real Dom was involved in the lynch stop. Next he disputes boo 2's illogical assertion that because there are 25 players someone MUST be playing as their own sock. He then appears to have been "Timmer cursed", turning this post into borderline nonsense: timmer, this is ridiculous tbqh. timmer hasn't given a single reason to suspect timmer other than that timmer has been acting like timmer in order to try and last longer in a gme that timmer has, lately, been NK'd in a lot for very little reason. The next day he asks people why they suspect Long Con 2, and in a response to why people don't suspect him, he says that there is virtually no reason to suspect him, and all suspicion thrown his way has been unsubstantiated. He is asked by Golden 2 about what his contributions for the day are. Votes, suspicions, plans, anything. Metalmarsh 2 states that he's been ignored, saying that he's asked questions and participated, but people have been rude. Later that day, when Synonym 2 was excited about Long Con 2 flipping scum, Metalmarsh 2 is one of the first to bring up the possibility of two baddie teams. Literally 14 hours later nobody had responded to that statement and he quotes himself asking if anybody wanted to contribute to his post. After this, SVS 2 responds by saying that it's the same question as "How does Synonym know if there are five baddies" and Metalmarsh 2 disputes the equality of the two statements. This goes on, and ends with Metalmarsh 2 lamenting his fate of being ignored and then treated suspiciously. Metalmarsh 2 asks Epignosis 2 how in response to his statement about being curious towards MM2's posts. Reywas 2 asks people why they're voting Synonym 2, and Metalmarsh 2 responds saying Syn 2's immediate declaration of innocence after Long Con 2 flipped scum is premature at best, as we don't know if there are multiple baddie teams, independent roles, recruiter roles, etc. Reywas 2 misconstrues this and begins preaching that Synonym 2 is most likely not on Long Con 2's team, which is something Metalmarsh 2 has stated repeatedly. Metalmarsh 2 appears to be genuinely frustrated at everyone ignoring him. For this reason I don't believe he's on a scum team, or at least a scum team with teammates, as literally a fourth of the game ignored him. While it is common for baddies to not interact with each other very much in thread, he has been asking questions that have been flat-out ignored, and his consistently ignored status appears uncoordinated. While I don't know if he's necessarily civilian, I'm pretty confident that he's not scum. Metalmarsh 2, do you think Reywas 2 was intentionally redirecting your question to avoid discussing the possibility of multiple baddie teams and/or independent roles, or do you think he misinterpreted your statement? I find it unlikely that if Black Rock 2 believed that there was only one civilian Tracker, and if she was that singular civilian Tracker, she would wait days before contesting Golden 2 in any way aside from planting a seed. After seeing the flip and knowing that juliets was behind the sock, do those actions add up more than they seem to without that knowledge? I'm unfamiliar with the player and I'm trying not to discount playstyle differences...

I think it's unlikely that we have perfect doubles of every role. Two Ninja civs would've resulted in much more bloodshed...

I don't agree with the accusation that Golden 2 voted me to avoid Black Rock 2 being lynched. It was much more likely an error than an attempt to extremely slightly influence the vote away from Black Rock 2. I'm unfamiliar with how roles are commonly distributed on this site, so I'll leave the theorycrafting of "would Mafia have X, Y, and Z roles?" to others. MM2 I'm sorry that you feel ignored. I'll start looking back through your posts to more accurately assess if you're speaking sense, if I believe you're clean, and in general what topics you like talking about. I enjoy how easy it is to ISO, makes it really easy to collect players' post histories, even if they're attempting to hide behind everyone else's discussions...

BR2 I feel like you're dwelling on when you subbed in too much. It feels like you're trying to use that as an excuse for behavior that seems scummy. If you really thought you hadn't done anything "baddie-like" I don't think you would be so defensive of your actions using your sub in as a defense...

I'm going out of town for the weekend, and my participation will be minimal until roughly Monday afternoon again. I'll reread your argument and BR2's counter later Lacey 2, but aside from BR2 do you have any other suspicions? Having one suspect is equivalent to betting on one specific number in slightly-more-informed roulette. Apologies for the confusion, I thought Long Con 2 has used his lynch switch ability to turn the lynch to Synonym 2, but I think that was Gamer Guy 2 (real Wilgy) that was the victim of that particular ability. If that is the case then Long Con 2 never "bussed" Synonym 2 like I said, I was mistaken on the target...

@Bass 2, that wasn't what I had in mind when I asked, no. But sure. I'm glad I made a new friend! Are you going to pursue Synonym 2 even though events seem to indicate he was bussed by Long Con 2...

No, I've been here, I replaced the "real Bass 2" on Day 2, it just wasn't announced. That explains the change in activity "over the weekend"...

Dom the joke is that Synonym 2 is the real Cobalt and flipped out, so now Cobalt 2 is pretending to flip out. Same gif and whatnot...

Whoever you are, Cobalt 2, you're my hero...

For what it's worth, I thought on Cobalt more after I voted him and decided that his tone wasn't "hiding" per se. While this doesn't clear Synonym 2, as people have brought up the possibility of multiple baddie teams, it makes it pretty unlikely IMO that they were on the same team. Willingly turning Day 3 into a Syn 2 VS Long Con 2 debate would be a lose-lose for them. Lacey 2 answer me, am I your friend? I like friends...

Did anyone make a new friend Day 3? If you did and you will talk about it in thread, I have a question for you. Do you count...

Unless someone wants me to vote Long Con 2 for numbers purposes I'm just going to vote myself. There's no heinous/manipulative intent in that, but I'm sure you'll find some, and that's the name of the game so c'est la vie. So why do it? To avoid a potential Bomb/Jester-esque ability, in the event that LC2 is lying and was saved by another player's ability. To avoid having to vote somewhere else. If I move onto a player that's about to be lynched and he's Mafia, I was last-minute bussing. If he's Civ, it was a vote to ensure he died. If I move onto another player I haven't talked about, as Lacey 2 brought up, then it looks equally bad but without any closure. Plus, to the best of my knowledge, there's no role that gains anything out of voting themselves, so it minimizes any threat I may have. Freaking Goofy Clown antics, you nut. I'll respond to you in depth once I have the time to Lacey 2. Which will most likely be tomorrow early afternoon. I can stop in for a few minutes prior to that but only via mobile so I won't want to type everything on my phone...

I did answer at the bottom of a large post, so that's why you didn't see it. And yes I think Syn 2 is playing to fit the sock. I don't know if that leads to a conclusion of him being town or not, but it explains his actions better than other possibilities I've thought of....

Yes, I am aware you have not voted for me. You also haven't mentioned a single other person you are considering. As far as I can tell, if you were to vote for me, you have not yet actually given a reason that makes any sense. Yes and that's not my problem. My problem is that not only are you not die-hard committed, you are not committed at all. I did not say I think it was your intention to succeed in leading other people to vote for me. I only think it is your intention to make it appear to the thread at large that you genuinely believe you have a legitimate reason to vote for me. I dislike that, because the intention behind it does not feel civilian. You would look cleaner if you had discussed the possibility of voting anyone other than me before saying that you may not vote for me. Because right now, if you don't vote me, your only option is placing a vote on someone you will have never previously talked about, and people don't have a tendency to look on that kindly. So you're saying that me changing my mind about you looks dirty? I have publicly stated my reasons for wanting to vote you. You think they are insufficient, by your standards, but you're incorrectly claiming I haven't stated them. I think we're suspecting each other of similar things. The first question of mine you answered I asked you to elaborate and you didn't, therefore I thought you wanted to have a reason to seem like you were suspicious of me without having actual content to back it up. You say that me only discussing you as a potential vote is for the ability to appear that I'm suspicious of someone without having actual content to back it up. This also ties in with your disagreement of my reasons to vote you. Unless someone wants me to vote Long Con 2 for numbers purposes I'm just going to vote myself. There's no heinous/manipulative intent in that, but I'm sure you'll find some, and that's the name of the game so c'est la vie...

I think we're gonna need a lot more votes for LC2 if we want this to work. LC2 has 8 votes while Synonym 2 has 5 votes. Do you think LC2's prospective ability would protect him from that much of a deficit...

Perhaps I should've been more joking with my tone in that second part about being/not being like the sock. It wasn't intended to be a completely serious statement. Lacey 2, let me clarify something. I have not voted for you yet. All of this "holier-than-thou" talk about not thinking out my vote when I have been actively discussing with you to get more information before I vote is not appreciated. You say I'm easily swayed but how many players had already decided on who they were going to vote for ahead of time? Both the Synonym 2 and Long Con 2 trains had 3 players on them almost immediately when the day started. Now LC2 has 7 voters and Synonym 2 has an additional one. Nearly half the LC2 voters, and most of the Synonym 2 voters, had locked their vote extremely early in the day considering votes cannot be changed. You yourself were the first player to vote, locking on Synonym 2. I'm not bringing this up to argue that certain players should've thought their votes out more, I'm only bringing this up to point out that I'm not die-hard committed to voting one single player regardless of what happens. it isn't a compliment or opinion, it's a fact that you are more perceptive than you are letting on, because no one can have a presence in a game and maintain the limited views that you are talking about So what you're saying is that it is an indisputable fact that I am aware of more than I am letting on? Because, to the best of your knowledge of the human race, nobody can "have a presence" (be checking the thread and posting?) and be as unaware/tunnel-y/etc as I appear to be? you haven't discussed having any other suspicions, you haven't discussed with anyone else their suspicions, you haven't discussed anything else at all, essentially. Asking the question and the subsequent follow up has been the only thing you have spoken about so far Follow me through with this train of thought for a moment. A hypothetical world in where you are civ and I am not and I want you dead. Why would I focus on one specific person, knowing that if I succeeded I would immediately not only look bad, but appear to have wasted the vast majority of my posts? then you are misreading me. And also ridicuoulosly easy to sway, apparently Excuse me for not locking in my vote immediately at the beginning of the day and trying not to get locked into one mindset where I have to be right on everything or else everything crumbles apart. So if I had instead insisted for no reason that you were civ and didn't even attempt to hear other possibilities I would've looked cleaner? And yes I think Syn 2 is playing to fit the sock. I don't know if that leads to a conclusion of him being town or not, but it explains his actions better than other possibilities I've thought of...

Something humorous to note: Two or three people have been accused of hiding behind their sock but none of them have been Synonym ...

"I died with 2 what on me yesterday?" My bad, I was listening to Lacey 2. No, I don't like the idea of taking a single vote, seeing as Golden 2 got lynched with only 2 votes on him And as for how I'm acting with regards to the sock, what do you people want from me? I don't say much, Lacey 2 calls it "hiding behind the sock", I talk more and you give me crap for not acting like Bass. Could you guys at least get on the same page before you tell me what to do...

And this post is the sort of thing I mean. You acted with your initial question to me like you had just come off reading through everything, so your recall of the unanswered question and nothing else did not seem genuine to me. It has also been the only real thing you have discussed, which I find troublesome. I think you're the strongest example of someone in this game hiding behind the sock, because the more you post, the clearer to me it is you are nothing like the real Bass, and are quite aware of what is going on. The obvious issue there is, why would a civilian the hide behind the sock, when they could clearly be contributing far more then they are. Which makes me believe you are up to no good. You make one important assumption with this last paragraph. You assume that I could clearly be contributing far more than I currently am. Do you know without me telling you when I'm not working and available to post? Do you know for a fact that I'm not saying every conclusion I come to? I appreciate the assumption that I'm perceptive and/or smart (and/or Mafia, as that's what you're getting at) but those aren't necessarily facts just because you think I'm not saying everything I know. Regarding the "recall of the unanswered question and nothing else" I'd argue that is the normal outcome. If you've just read over 100 posts and you're not going to go back and get the specifics, as I clearly didn't, then wouldn't the opposite be true? If I had remembered everything about that interaction perfectly wouldn't that have been strange? Can you clarify on what you mean by the "only real thing" I've discussed? At the time I'd made two or three posts. Do you want me to discuss game mechanics when roles are hidden? The conclusions we can draw with knowledge of the two players that've died by Day 3, both through strange means? As for being afraid of a singular vote because Golden 2 died with 2 yesterday, have you taken steps to better understand what happened? Long Con 2 explained that, to some extent, it is difficult to lynch him. Did you consider the possibility that one of the two voters on Golden 2 had an ability that interfered with the lynch? Why do you assume that I have some kind of ability that threatens you if I vote you? Or, if you fear a lynch-switcher ability, are you assuming that the switch target would need to have a vote? You say you're afraid because shenanigans happened yesterday but, and be honest with me for a minute here, how much thought have you put into it? You're giving me conflicting vibes, with the only constant being fear of death, and you're not getting lynched today unless something radically changes, so if it'll make you feel better I won't vote you...

I didn't ask you why you found me disconcerting, I asked you what other conclusions you drew from what I said. You didn't answer, and that led me to believe that you didn't have an answer. It's evident that you're upset. It appears that you're taking out your frustations towards Synonym 2 on me. It's not my intent to be rude, so if something upsets you tell me and I will stop. You read annoyed or cautious in your post answering me yesterday but after I announced intent to vote you today you became aggravated towards me, hostile even, and attempted to shake suspicion with a No U. One person saying they'll vote you, when two other players already have small trains forming on them, shouldn't be enough to cause that reaction. Therefore I believe that you aren't on my side. For clarity, here's the timeline of our interactions: Lacey someone had asked you a question about something and you disappeared. You returned to post a picture of a turtle but still ignored them. Why? If by "someone" you mean Synonym, yes, like I said, I'm done talking with him. I'm not going to try and engage with a brick wall that just has a temper tantrum every now and again, it's a waste of time. "Disappeared" also isn't really accurate, I was around, posting, then left. Just because Synonym 2 expected an immediate response because it suited him doesn't make what he said true. And the fact that you can remember that it was me, someone, and something, all really seems selective and disconcerting to me. So :eye: on you. Aside from "disconcerting", what conclusion would you draw from what I said? *I receive no response* I intend to vote for Lacey 2. *Long Con 2 asks me why* Ignoring someone's posts (Syn 2) when she had a feud with them is understandable. I asked her a question last night and she came back without an answer. She said she found my post "disconcerting" but chose not to elaborate when given the opportunity. That tells me that the comment wasn't thought out, just put out there to make it appear as if she was suspect of multiple people. That's mafia-aligned survivalist behavior. Except I did answer, because your question was based on your ability to remember that I had not answered a question, but inability to remember who asked it, why they asked it, and what they actually asked. In answering that question, I said that your asking me about it was what I found disconcerting, and then your follow up question was why I found you suspicious. Which was literally in the post I made responding to you. I don't know if you're just trying to do a full-on accurate Bass impression; and if you are, so far so good, but your question was ridiclous in the context of someone freshly caught up and for some reason needing to ask, and that you are now basing a vote on... whatever exactly your basis is, is even stranger. Short of this being forced, I see no scenario where you look good here. For the record, you also contradict yourself by saying you didn't respond to Synonym 2 when posting a turtle picture because he isn't worth trying to argue with. However, you respond to him immediately after your most recent post towards me...

Ignoring someone's posts (Syn 2) when she had a feud with them is understandable. I asked her a question last night and she came back without an answer. She said she found my post "disconcerting" but chose not to elaborate when given the opportunity. That tells me that the comment wasn't thought out, just put out there to make it appear as if she was suspect of multiple people. That's mafia-aligned survivalist behavior...

I intend to vote for Lacey 2...

And the fact that you can remember that it was me, someone, and something, all really seems selective and disconcerting to me. So :eye: on you. Aside from "disconcerting", what conclusion would you draw from what I said...

Lacey someone had asked you a question about something and you disappeared. You returned to post a picture of a turtle but still ignored them. Why...

Sorry for going missing over the weekend, I'm all caught up now and will be able to dedicate more time to this game. I find the night poll intriguing...

I won't be online tomorrow because I work all day and I need to vote now. There is nothing I feel comfortable basing my vote on yet so I will need to vote randomly. I'm gonna go for Cobalt...

I didn't read people had info on the poll before voting. Probably should have paid attention. I'm not familiar with those games, so I just voted the thing of them that I actually know, which is the Rolling Stones. (Yes, I've never seen Monty Python. They don't have this shit in Nauru.) I did the same...

My mom Roxy told me I had to clean my room before I could vote on mafia. Sorry I haven't really been around until now. My room is clean. :...

This will be interesting...