The Syndicate

Synonym 2 wrote:omg wait, JJJ 2 was Long Con? He was actually on my side I think lmao.

Gonna consider my vengeance extracted on his sock then. We good, my man.

Dom 2 wrote:

Cookie 2 wrote:Went with American Gods, it was a good book.

Agreed.

Agreed. I liked Good Omens much more though.

I have no new friends, but it's good to see Long Con 2 go as a baddie!

Hello, my name is JJJ2, and I am definitely not a doctor!

I asked LC2 that same question and he never answered. Well, a similar question. Maybe a different question altogether! But it was relevant. I'll vote LC2 again!

Crappy result. Looks like this Long Con takes after his namesake. Did you switch the lynch to GamerGuy LC?

Long Con 2 wrote:

SVS 2 wrote:

Long Con 2 wrote:I agree with this. SVS says that I pushed too hard on the Syn and mafia issue but I really didn't. I kept getting asked to clarify my initial reaction to Syn's post. I think the fact that I reiterated my initial thoughts three times, or so, made everyone go after me as if my theory was a huge deal. Have I pushed for a Syn lynch? No, not at all. I voted for him in order to save myself, that is all. My original reaction/theory to Syn's post was blown out of proportion and everyone who is still on it needs to move on.

This may have some merit. I read back for context and you did raise the issue when prompted aside from the first time. I'm still bothered by it though because you maintained it as a real cause for suspicion and I really don't think it is, even on day 1. Synonym could have named any number of people and this logic could apply the same way, suspecting him for naming five people instead of four or six or whatever seems forced. Also there's this:

Long Con 2 wrote:SVS-I have no specific example at the moment as I need to hurry off and prepare some sandwiches. However, I can say off the top of my head that I have seen mafia throw names out in the beginning of a game in order to gauge reaction from the civilians. I guess this allows them to see who it is best to "find suspicious".

I'm assuming there's no need to make any sandwiches now, so I hope you can address this point. I asked you for an example of a mafia member blurting out a pile of names on day 1 because you said you think baddies do that. I don't see how baddies would gain anything by "gauging reactions" about random names at the very beginning of the game.

Not blurting out a pile of names, but bringing up a person or persons begin mafia when there is nothing to go on yet just to see how they and the thread reacts to those specific names. It a way to know their next move, who they should seriously consider making a "case" for. In all honesty I don't know how to give you a specific example without going back and reading Day 1 of the games I have been in before and I don't have to time to do that as I have played several games over the years. Please forgive me but mafia doesn't mean THAT much to me that I would spend hours searching for those examples. I am shocked that you have never seen such a thing happen. I have even had a fellow mafia player tell me (outside of mafia) that he/she does this on a regular basis at the beginning of his/her game.

And I have done that as a Civ as well. I agree, the practice of throwing out a name or names just for early-game reactions is a common enough thing, but it's not a baddie tactic in my experience. You are trying to pin it down as only something a baddie would do to make it into a suspicion instead of an observation, and that pings me. *votes Long Con*

SVS 2 wrote:I can't wait for people to start referencing this game at some point in the future for the sake of meta without realizing they're remembering a sock.

I'm pretty much taking the players at face value... meaning, when I talk to you, I just feel like I'm talking to S~V~S herself. Too many mental hoops for me to be jumping through otherwise.

I have my own reasons for promoting a Long Con 2 lynch, and that's all I'll say about that.

And I would like to correct "Sig 2" in the last post to "Synonym 2", please pardon the misnaming.

So, I was accused of flip-flopping or something on Day 1 because I changed my mind based on things people said. Maybe it's my fault for not typing my whole thought process. I thought the idea that Sig 2 knew there were 5 baddies was sketchy, but then his defense was rock-solid, and I didn't think that anymore. I still think Long Con 2 has got to go, and I will absolutely be willing to vote him in any lynch that he's a viable candidate. Fortunately for me, he's still a scrutinized and suspected baddie, so it won't take much to make it happen.

I don't follow a few cases here.

Why are people comparing "Llama"s play to thellama73's previous games? Is this artistic criticism?

Also, what's with the alphabetical order obsession? I don't understand what the order of players has to do with finding baddies.

Interesting Day 1 lynch result. So Synonym had more votes, which means there's some vote manipulation going on. I have none, and my vote is worth merely 1. In my experience, vote manipulation is more often a baddie ability, because it messes with the town's ability to decipher a lynch. So that makes me think that Long Con or a baddie teammate wanted to make sure that the "tie" wasn't so risky.

In addition, Syn2 survived the lynch, and instantly tried to push the civilian angle on that... however, that don't impress me much. The most likely player in any reasonably regular game to have a lynch protection is the baddie leader.

I also found his interaction with the hosts strange. I think he asked why he was forced to use his power if the lynch was a tie and no one should have been lynched. (Note that this was before the clarification from Rox about how the lynch-tie rules work). A lynch pardon isn't something I would think would be automatically used by a host, especially when the player wouldn't know if it was needed or not. Automatic use sounds way more like "you have one automatic lynch protect" than "you may pardon one lynch".

Dang, I should Preview my posts!

Cool, I'll 'snap' this one up before anyone else does. It's a clear winner, that's massively cute in several ways.

I'm with Sig 2 and Cobalt 2. Long Con 2 has to go.

Long Con 2 wrote: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.

I agree, that does seem like a slip to me.

I'm not too concerned right now about who has what sock account. Beyond it being fun to try and figure out, it's just not that relevant to baddie-finding. Timmer 2, are you trying to steer discussion toward irrelevant topics in order to prevent real detective work from happening?

Golden 2 wrote:

Jagged Jimmy Jay 2 wrote:Hey Syndicate, sorry I hadn't checked in yet, I was doing some sort of JTM stuff. Big stuff! I'll catch up in a sec. I love rainbow lists!

Lol, background fail? RYMers will want to have a word with you...

I only just realized that I used the wrong acronym there. Sorry, real JJJ, I was drinking last night.

I voted for Grimm's Fairy Tales because it is quite special to... someone I know.

Gamer Guy 2 wrote:

Jagged Jimmy Jay 2 wrote:Hey Syndicate, sorry I hadn't checked in yet, I was doing some sort of JTM stuff. Big stuff! I'll catch up in a sec. I love rainbow lists!

Considering JTM has been dead for the past week, I highly doubt this.

As if you can be trusted.

Hey Syndicate, sorry I hadn't checked in yet, I was doing some sort of JTM stuff. Big stuff! I'll catch up in a sec. I love rainbow lists!