The Syndicate

Epignosis wrote:

juliets wrote:I think my account is cleared out now and Moving Pictures and Spacedaisy I just want to add my voice to say I greatly enjoyed the prison and it's challenges. The non-participants were frustrating but that was not your doing. I really had fun trying to guess who everyone was. The only one I got was Typhoony though.

Wait, we had men and women fraternizing in the same prison? What sinful business is this?

When every day offered the possibility that it could be your last, conjugal visits were offered to, well, everybody.

This game was an insane and complicated hooplah. It was real fun getting the opportunity to play. I'm amazed at how detailed and how much foresight had to go into the game and how much of a treat it was to watch it all unfold. Three cheers for our spectacular hosts.

Punk-ass. You've been tunneling me since the beginning. You want information? You wanna lynch me for the info regardless of my alignment, right?

Then make my day. See how much my flip will help you. Or how much it will help the baddies, I should say. Cuz I think it will hurt us good guys far more than you think.

You hack.

Okay, trying to catch up on my phone now on the way to work. I didn't see the discussion had moved towards Black Rock on the last page, I was just doing a quick read on them and didn't have time to formulate my thoughts before I left.

Luffy: "If everyone moves towards a gleam vote, I will too" (probably paraphrased)

I really don't like how your posts have been reading to me lately. It worries me. In a bad way.

My work is conflicting with the EoD so I'm going to drop my vote in real quick and run. I don't know what the current state of the votes are or even the discussion because I'm like four pages behind. Black Rock. You were on my list as a potential suspect because of the laying low during the hooplah of Day 2. I said that I thought the low posters during that time had to be hiding some bad guys. And your behavior during this day has been very hit and run.

OK, this is what I get for trying to Syndicate on too little sleep. FuuuUUUUUUuck

Silverwolf wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:Just want to reinforce that llama is a she.

Sorry about that llama!!

No, not llama. I was thinking zebra. Holy shit. Thanks Scotty. I need a massage

Just want to reinforce that llama is a she.

@Indi, this is probably... what, my fifth or sixth game here on the Syndicate? I haven't played many because I got frustrated for always being the earliest lynch/nightkill. I played a handful over on Piano and then started with the few games Socky hosted on PA. I've only ever been mafia once, and that was on a PA game.

Scotty wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:I have an idea, but I'm not comfortable enough yet to say with confidence either way. My gut read on sig is good. My gut read on Golden is bad. But those are very marginal percentages here, if we're to quantify them. And gut reads are pretty crap justification anyways.

Uh oh, better signal SOS for the impending SVS steamrolling for calling out her boy Golden like that.

If I have the most conviction of anyone here being civilian, it's SVS and Sloonei. I will take her stance into consideration when I review both of them.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:Thanks for the reply Scotty. I still don't buy most of it, but you're true to your word.

That being said I still dislike how both Scotty and Zebra have been behaving at this point in the game. That last post of Zebra's was like the only serious analysis I'd seen her make in any recent memory. I'm aiming at one of them right now. I don't like DDL's aggression either, nor his philosophy on lynching for the purpose of information. Argh. I'm split. I was leaning more towards a civilian read on him but now it sounds like he's arguing for lynching people regardless of alignment again.

Truth be told I have no idea what to think of Golden or Sig. I didn't know what to think of Long Con either. I haven't examined enough of any of their posts. Maybe that's what today will be for.

When did I ever argue for lynching people regardless of alignment? That is just not something I do.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Changing to Sig. I'm convinced to lynch him, and his flip will teach us more about other people's (including TH) alignments than otherwise.

My understanding is that here you're saying that lynching him is going to get us the most amount of useful information, whether or not he's good. So we should just lynch the little fcker. I know your reasoning for saying he's bad, which I will take into consideration once I've caught up more thoroughly. I will admit I only skimmed it. But you're also saying here that we should lynching him is gonna get us the most information out of everyone so we should lynch him for that sake.

Then a page later:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I don't believe in lynching someone just for information, but that is a bonus that should be considered.

I am also getting the impression from Sig's posts and people's posts about Sig that there seems to be a schism among players. Some people support Sig and suspect the ones who suspect Sig, while some people are in the other "camp". While I'm paranoid about the idea of calling a whole scum team out of interactions, this "divide" seems to be a lot more apparent than in most games, so I think the potential for info out of this lynch is huge.

Also Sig is shady as fuck, so there's that too.

I think you're backtracking in trying to make yourself look less worse for that sort of stance, but this doesn't disagree with my sentiments about you at all. I now think that you want him lynched on principle and are trying to cover it up with some constructed rationale. Which is reading as real scummy to me.

I have an idea, but I'm not comfortable enough yet to say with confidence either way. My gut read on sig is good. My gut read on Golden is bad. But those are very marginal percentages here, if we're to quantify them. And gut reads are pretty crap justification anyways.

Thanks for the reply Scotty. I still don't buy most of it, but you're true to your word.

That being said I still dislike how both Scotty and Zebra have been behaving at this point in the game. That last post of Zebra's was like the only serious analysis I'd seen her make in any recent memory. I'm aiming at one of them right now. I don't like DDL's aggression either, nor his philosophy on lynching for the purpose of information. Argh. I'm split. I was leaning more towards a civilian read on him but now it sounds like he's arguing for lynching people regardless of alignment again.

Truth be told I have no idea what to think of Golden or Sig. I didn't know what to think of Long Con either. I haven't examined enough of any of their posts. Maybe that's what today will be for.

Golden wrote:I'm sticking with sig for now.

I'm guessing that the baddies may have figured out who both dons are now, unless there is a doctor or other way of protecting people out there somewhere.

These are my thoughts as well. I'm guessing that right now the only way for the dons to go is to get lynch, which doesn't bode well for the civs here.

I think we need to pay close attention to patterns in lynch votes to find our cops.

Nerolunar wrote:That sounds really interesting Gleam. What are you trying to achieve with the experiment? I don´t know that much about physics though.

My physics department is doing experiments on entangling atoms in Rydberg states. Basically, entangled atoms are groups of atoms that cannot be described independently of one another, completely independent of distance or spatial location. In principle, entangled atoms are capable of "knowing" what sort of measurement is made upon the whole system, even if the entangled atoms in the system are at opposite ends of the universe. The measurements in entangled atoms happen exactly at the same time. At large distances, this is an easily observable example of the quantum tunneling effect. It's not going to allow for classical information to be transmitted at faster than light speed or anything, but it has a ton of possible applications in quantum information.

For larger atoms, the dipole moment is very strong even at large distances, making it easier to entangle pairs of atoms, but the atoms are also more susceptible to even very slight variations in electric or magnetic fields, on par with the magnitude of typical fluctuations in the Earth's magnetic field. Principally most experiments are done under the assumption of a zero magnetic field, but theoretically it's possible to induce an electric field during the experiment that nullifies any variances in electric field fluctuations, but it also requires calculating a correction from a second-order perturbation from the Stark effect, which makes the calculations in the experiment much more complicated. We did all the theoretical calculations last week and now it's a matter of implementing it.

Also, I realize I've been kind of a no-show the last few days, I have a big quantum experiment coming up and it's real nerve-wracking. I'll be a little less active in the coming week. Those Rubidium-97 atoms aren't going to entangle themselves, ya know. Hopefully once this all blows over I can get back to trying to wrap my head around this game again. Last night's EOD was madness and I still haven't gained any insights from it.

That is, assuming I last that long. I see people are wanting to lynch me again. Sigh

Ika said a long-ass time ago that he thinks he may have figured out who the don was. I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt and say that he had an inkling of his thought not related to his role, but I want to know his reasoning for thinking sloonei that are apart from the failed night kill. I want him to try and give some rationale for why he believes sloonei was targeted.

Zebra I just realized I misgendered you. My sincerest apologies. I'm better than that.

a2thezebra wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:Zebra I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't address you with the same concerns that I addressed in Scotty's case. Your really minimalist game style is... I don't know if I would say pinging me, but it worries me how little of a read I can get on you.

Excellent, that's the idea.

So you want to be difficult to read? If you were a civilian, how would this help your case?

What case? The answer is in the post you're responding to right here.

You're dodging the question purposely. What would a civilian zebra trying to hide his identity have to gain over a baddie zebra?

Methinks not much, if anything at all. It would be far more beneficial to hide your read as a baddie. And yet, at the same time, it draws more attention.

a2thezebra wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:Zebra I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't address you with the same concerns that I addressed in Scotty's case. Your really minimalist game style is... I don't know if I would say pinging me, but it worries me how little of a read I can get on you.

Excellent, that's the idea.

So you want to be difficult to read? If you were a civilian, how would this help your case?

Sig I'm reading you as a civ. But truth be told I haven't read enough into the cases against you or the other candidates enough. I'm really exhausted trying to mentally manage all the different roles and accusations in this game

Zebra I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't address you with the same concerns that I addressed in Scotty's case. Your really minimalist game style is... I don't know if I would say pinging me, but it worries me how little of a read I can get on you.

Oh, so for the present moment, Scotty.

I still need to examine the other top candidates for today's lynch but other than that, I feel like I'm still reading civ on just about everyone that's posting regularly. I really don't know what else to think. This game is getting complicated.

But I think the most suspicious would be the people that sat out the Day 2 discussion when attention was directed elsewhere.

Arrgh! THis was supposed to have been posted like 6 hours ago before I went to work, but apparently there was an error I didn't see. So, this is my train of thought from six hours ago:

I really dislike some of Scotty's actions so far this game. He says he's going to vote for the no-shows Day 1 as a rule, like it's typical Scotty action to do. I'm not going to deny it isn't.

Scotty wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Scotty always votes automatically for the most inactive player on day 1.

Ding ding ding!

If he posts, then I comb through low-posters for the quality of their posts and I pick the one that just looks off to me

Several people have argued so far that the civilians win when they get the most information, or that it's the best strategy for moving forward. What sort of information do we get for lynching the player with the least amount of activity? Practically zero.

Scotty wrote:Wow. Everyone checked in. I'm impressed.

Tranq wrote:

Scotty wrote:I will bet my [hopefully] unborn child that the 30 person coordinated vote will not work out. There will be too many no-shows. There always is in these games.

No-shows could get replaced. I see no harm in trying Wilgy's plan. For science!

Of the low posters, Tranq's only post here seems very bright-eyed and bushy-tailed. Will continue to scan the thread but he's going to get my vote right now.

Can't really speak for Tranq seeing as how he was eliminated kind of early but yeah, Tranq wasn't very active. That being said, it doesn't seem to me like Tranq was being 100% serious with this post. Yet Scotty wants to lynch 'em for being overeager?

Scotty wrote:

ika wrote:

DrWilgy wrote: ISO me Ika.

mkay one min

This is like a girlfriend "I'm just gonna put on my makeup" minute.

Also, @Wilgy, you seem overeager to have someone ISO you like you are cocky that you have nothing to hide. It's Day 1 shenanigans, and you almost got lynched for said shenanigans, so, like, everyone should be ISOing you anyway.

I didn't find what you were saying as inherently bad in day 1 and didn't understand the traction on your lynch. But I don't like the invitation to read into you more thoroughly. You seem like you are proud that you don't *look* guilty.

Here he reads into Wilgy a bit which is fine. Wilgy, however, isn't long for this world.

Scotty wrote:

Tranq wrote:I voted Bullzeye. I feel he got replaced way too fast after his vote. He took the time to catch up, vote for me, said he'll ask to be replaced, and got replaced 4 minutes after that. Feels like the arrangements to get him replaced were already set in motion before he posted and voted.

Scotty wrote:Wow. Everyone checked in. I'm impressed.

Tranq wrote:

Scotty wrote:I will bet my [hopefully] unborn child that the 30 person coordinated vote will not work out. There will be too many no-shows. There always is in these games.

No-shows could get replaced. I see no harm in trying Wilgy's plan. For science!

Of the low posters, Tranq's only post here seems very bright-eyed and bushy-tailed. Will continue to scan the thread but he's going to get my vote right now.

Bright-eyed and bushy-tailed? I haven't heard that one before. What do you mean by that?

You are a big . Come on, why is it suspicious to be asked to be replaced? There were a bunch of pages after he voted for you, and I'll admit I was thinking the same thing: "holy camoley Batman, how am I gonna keep up with this" so this seems legitimate to me and says nothing about his alignment. He, like me, found you suspicious.

And by bright-eyed and bushy tailed, I of course mean Bambi- if Bambi were actually a 300 pound tattoo-covered Hispanic man named Carlos. I found your one post in day 1 to be naive and uninformed. Like you found the bullet point of the thread and tried to offer your opinion without actually adding anything.

Scotty, apart from your analysis of Wilgy, you had been doing the exact same thing in this game so far.

Scotty wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:You know what big, bold, brazen, and unbacked claims result in? Good guys getting lynched.

I thought that by making this point and then following up with something ridiculous like that would make it clear that this was supposed to be parody. But I guess you guys didn't catch that. I'm not endorsing that theory at all, lol. It was more trying to point out what sort of reasoning Luffy's play tactics would lead to.

Way to backtrack. I didn't read that as parody at all. Parody is more along the lines of: being exaggeratingly funny. Like Monty Python. Or a bear in a bonnet riding a tricycle.

You also tossed out a bunch of absolutisms concerning mislynching civs. Like you're the authority on the case. I can see why people would have wanted to vote you.[/quote]

Just wanted to ask: what's with all the anachronisms? Is this typical of Scotty? Or is it just a way of throwing some flash on his posts to distract from the fact that they hold no content?

Next is a nicer analysis on Golden and Wilgy, which at least is contributing.

Then:

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:@scotty: can Wilgy and I both be good?

Yes.
So can haggis. Just because I had some good haggis once when I was really hungry doesn't mean that it's universally good.

But yea.

Who is your top suspect after Day 1's events?

Tranq I think.

Still tunneling Tranq.

Scotty wrote:Why on earth did Tranq get killed? Guess I really can't read people.

Quin wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:@scotty: can Wilgy and I both be good?

Yes.
So can haggis. Just because I had some good haggis once when I was really hungry doesn't mean that it's universally good.

But yea.

Who is your top suspect after Day 1's events?

Tranq I think.

Scotty, what brought you to this conclusion? I find it weird that you didn't justify yourself to either Wilgy or Sloonei who questioned you about it. Ping-pong. That should be a smilie. From my point of view, you are the only one who has a good reason to arrest Tranq.

My vote goes to Scotty for now. It is not the strongest, but I do not agree with a Golden, Matt, Luffy or Sloonei lynch. It's not 6, unfortunately.

Tone and quality. I saw some pings from the active players, but not enough that I was looking too harshly at them.
From low-posters, however, I honestly just felt Tranq's 2 posts to be lacking. He was like a paraplegic cheerleader- wanting to be part of the game, but had a hard time dancing with the others. (Oh god I'm going to hell for that one)

But yeah I was wrong.

Didn't justify myself? Perhaps you missed this post I made prior:

Spoiler: show

Scotty wrote:

Tranq wrote:I voted Bullzeye. I feel he got replaced way too fast after his vote. He took the time to catch up, vote for me, said he'll ask to be replaced, and got replaced 4 minutes after that. Feels like the arrangements to get him replaced were already set in motion before he posted and voted.

Scotty wrote:Wow. Everyone checked in. I'm impressed.

Tranq wrote:

Scotty wrote:I will bet my [hopefully] unborn child that the 30 person coordinated vote will not work out. There will be too many no-shows. There always is in these games.

No-shows could get replaced. I see no harm in trying Wilgy's plan. For science!

Of the low posters, Tranq's only post here seems very bright-eyed and bushy-tailed. Will continue to scan the thread but he's going to get my vote right now.

Bright-eyed and bushy-tailed? I haven't heard that one before. What do you mean by that?

You are a big . Come on, why is it suspicious to be asked to be replaced? There were a bunch of pages after he voted for you, and I'll admit I was thinking the same thing: "holy camoley Batman, how am I gonna keep up with this" so this seems legitimate to me and says nothing about his alignment. He, like me, found you suspicious.

And by bright-eyed and bushy tailed, I of course mean Bambi- if Bambi were actually a 300 pound tattoo-covered Hispanic man named Carlos. I found your one post in day 1 to be naive and uninformed. Like you found the bullet point of the thread and tried to offer your opinion without actually adding anything.

And lol. If I were a cop, why on earth would I arrest Tranq? I was probably his main detractor! This kill seems totally random, or switched via Daisy power.

Day 2, Tranq is arrested. Scotty says his read was wrong.

"If I were a cop, why on earth would I arrest Tranq?" Yes, you were his main detractor. It would almost make it too obvious if Tranq gets arrested right after you pull for him. As if you were being framed. Which is possible, but also a lazy cop-out if you are a cop, and easier to get sympathy so early in the game.

Scotty wrote:Putting a vote on Gleam for now. Because.

Now he votes for me. Because.

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:@ Quirinius: I don't agree with your vote on Scotty. I don't see a clear connection between him suspecting Tranq and Tranq getting thrown in the slammer last night. It doesn't add up for that to be the Police strategy. Also, and take this for what it's worth, I just nabbed Scotty as scum on Day 1 in Rocky & Bullsinkle, and I'm not getting the same vibes from him in this game. He hasn't done anything to earn himself a town read, but he's not a scum read either. Not to toot my own horn or anything, but uh, toot toot.

thanks for the Cred, man!

As for me voting gleam: it's mostly a continuation suspicion of my night 1 eyeing of him for being a floppy pancake. But I'm far too lazy to look it up right now. About to enter a poker tournament.

This isn't just. Throwaway vote on a wagon. It's just gut, and he happens to have a bunch of votes piles on as well, so there's that.

For being a "floppy pancake"? Where the hell was I flopping? In switching my vote to Diiny? He was the only vote I made.

Scotty wrote:Did you guys know that "sig" spelled backward is "cop"?

sig

Scotty wrote:I just did a read of Quin.

He's a cop.

Hey Quin, what is your opinion of sig? Straight up.

[/quote]


The rest of Scotty's posts up till now are either just shitposting or lazy stuff like this.

I think I see some connections between you and Wilgy. Scotty, you're reading to me like the laziest cop. I have to go now but I just really dislike everything coming from you so far. You also stayed in the chat during the hours I said to look for low posters just enough to stay on radar, but without really contributing anything. Baddy baddy BADDY. You'll be getting my vote probably.

The circumstances on Silverwolf and ika have given me enough reason to change my initial read on both of them. I'm personally getting more of a civvie vibe from Quin. I don't know what else to add that's relevant here.

Scotty, it seems like all of your reasons for voting, and explanations for anything, have been on "gut", or lack thereof, because of "laziness". I really don't like this at all. This calls for an ISO later.

agleaminranks wrote:I have more thoughts on today's discussion, but a quick post just as an observation: ika has only been posting in pictures since the night started. Is it possible that maybe this was his "payment" for a role in the vote loan, if he took part in it? Is there a role akin to insanifying but with pictures? I need to go back and reread the roles real quick.

Update, there aren't really any police roles that give something like this. It's possible that it has something to do with Team Socky's secret role but since the action started at the very beginning of Night 2, I'm inclined to believe it's his payment for vote loans.

I have more thoughts on today's discussion, but a quick post just as an observation: ika has only been posting in pictures since the night started. Is it possible that maybe this was his "payment" for a role in the vote loan, if he took part in it? Is there a role akin to insanifying but with pictures? I need to go back and reread the roles real quick.

I haven't had time to catch up since the night actions but I want to say RIP Wilgy and Matt, I was wrong about my Wilgy read but at least I was right about him being good. Matt I hardly knew ye. Sorry to see so many civs die after a successful lynching.

Without reading anything since then it feels like I should look into Matt's tunneling against Golden. It probably won't reveal much but it's worth a shot.

Busy days ahead for me, will try and catch up and contribute as much as possible.

Sloonei wrote:@ gleam: I did see that post and I liked it. I just wanted to see how you responded to Metalmarsh's accusation. Right now I'm reading both of you as town.

Ah, okay. Well, to try and paraphrase then, responding to Marshie, I wasn't saying that there was nothing wrong with Fuzz's vote, I'm just saying that I think I interpreted the "not getting involved with Silverwolf/ika" statement different than the people who started the CDF, so I don't know if I would have had as strong of an argument to back it up over, say, anyone else who made a claim about using their vote for a tiebreaker. If memory serves me right, Serge made a vote on ika just before Fuzz did, and that had tied up the votes against me and ika at five, yet no one really jumped on him. I don't have a read for Serge, but my worry was just that since I didn't interpret the initial post correctly, from my position, it felt more like a matter of chance that they hopped on Fuzz versus anyone else, and throwing a lynch vote up to chance is more likely to get a civilian lynched than a baddie.

Sloonei wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:WHOA whoa whoa. I go to take a shower and I come back and everyone that had voted for me all of sudden switched bandwagons entirely??

I don't understand this at all. I take it that it was in response to some questionable action that Fuzz took to tie a vote? In wondering whether or not it's to save a teammate?

I'm reading over the posts now and yeah, it does seem like Fuzz is flipping a bit on some opinions. I truthfully haven't examined him at all prior to this point. I will try and examine some posts before the day is over but I don't know if I'll get to it in time.

But I recall a few instances of a couple people wanting to use their votes to break some ties, even being said so in this forum. What am I missing that was special about Fuzz's vote?

LLLLLINKIIIII

This post reeks of BTSC, and not the good kind.

could you elaborate?

The way the post is laid out.

Gleam starts out with an astonishment at the bandwagon switch, and understandably so.

Then gleam asks why, as well as offering some sort of possibility for Fuzz getting the votes he did. But the way I understand the post through the second paragraph, gleam had not yet read what happened in the thread, but still seemed to know what Fuzz's vote did.

The third paragraph, he states he has read what happened.

The fourth paragraph, he generalizes the idea of breaking ties as not a bad thing. I think he was trying to imply there was nothing wrong with Fuzz's vote.

Solid points. I look forward to gleam's response.

I mean that paragraph was kind of written in a few points. I could have separated it into separate posts to indicate the timeline.

But, with regards to this, I elaborated on this earlier when I talked about your issue about civ paranoia, Sloonei. Just last page, maybe you missed it:

agleaminranks wrote:

Sloonei wrote:I am baffled by the number of people who are saying it's more liky that Fuzz was buzzed than the scum scrambling to save their teammate yesterday. There was no fuzz bandwagon at any point. It came up in the last hour of the day, completely out of the blue. It was the easiest thing in the world for people ro resist, and the cops could do so without necessarily being suspicious or appearing to defend your teammate. You can talk about head games all you want, but if thay CFD was a scum-orchestrated thing then what strategic value does it have? I'd love an answer to that question.

This was frankly one of the best moves I've ever seen in a mafia game. The plan came to fruition and worked out perfectly, but it seems the sentiment in the thread is to go in the complete opposite direction with the results. It's frustrating. I'm certain at least a few of the detractors are cops themselves, but there's still a good number of paranoid civs in that bunch. To them I say: stop being paranoid. There are 24 good guys to 6 bad guys in this game (or 22 to 5 now). That's 4 times as many civs. The threat is not all around us, it's lurking in a small, concentrated area.

I think the CFD was ballsy, and I'm pretty frankly impressed that it succeeded. I think Silverwolf did a commendable job catching something like that, and I'm impressed everyone else was able to rally around it. Even if I do think Silverwolf was acting awfully scummy earlier, as well as Ika. But the results are telling me that I should reconsider my opinion on both of them. Which I will. Silverwolf for doing something incredibly helpful to the civs, and ika for being Fuzz's target, logically give me much more reason to believe they're both in the town as opposed to being bad. I don't buy into the idea of the cops starting the anti-cop bandwagon. Even from a diversionary standpoint it makes almost no sense.

My only paranoia around the CFD was that Fuzz wasn't the only one talking about making a vote to break a tie. I recall at least two others talking about using their vote as a tiebreaker. When he went ahead and did use it as a tiebreaking vote (to tie up ika's votes against mine), that was when the accusations flew out. I can see the contradiction that Silverwolf pointed out between the posts (where he mentions not wanting to touch the Silverwolf/ika thing with a 39 and a half foot pole) but my understanding of that post was that Fuzz just didn't want to get involved with the drama that was surrounding it at the time. It was when things were kind of emotionally heated. Or at least that's how I interpreted the post, not as being related to voting actions or anything. Maybe I misread. I guess I worry that any other of the people who were talking about using a tiebreaker vote and then actually doing so could have suffered the same fate, and they could have been civilians just acting because they didn't want another civilian to get lynched.

When Fuzz was pressured at the end, though, I think he made some definite slips. There was one line in particular (about not caring who got lynched) that definitely moved him into overt baddie territory. I think had I not been on my way out the door at that time I probably would have moved my vote. But the lynch succeeded regardless, thankfully.

That's one hell of an ISO, Luffy-kun. Golden was next on my list to investigate as well.

Where does that put Matt in all of this, then? He's been pushing for almost singularly Golden since the beginning.

Sloonei wrote:I am baffled by the number of people who are saying it's more liky that Fuzz was buzzed than the scum scrambling to save their teammate yesterday. There was no fuzz bandwagon at any point. It came up in the last hour of the day, completely out of the blue. It was the easiest thing in the world for people ro resist, and the cops could do so without necessarily being suspicious or appearing to defend your teammate. You can talk about head games all you want, but if thay CFD was a scum-orchestrated thing then what strategic value does it have? I'd love an answer to that question.

This was frankly one of the best moves I've ever seen in a mafia game. The plan came to fruition and worked out perfectly, but it seems the sentiment in the thread is to go in the complete opposite direction with the results. It's frustrating. I'm certain at least a few of the detractors are cops themselves, but there's still a good number of paranoid civs in that bunch. To them I say: stop being paranoid. There are 24 good guys to 6 bad guys in this game (or 22 to 5 now). That's 4 times as many civs. The threat is not all around us, it's lurking in a small, concentrated area.

I think the CFD was ballsy, and I'm pretty frankly impressed that it succeeded. I think Silverwolf did a commendable job catching something like that, and I'm impressed everyone else was able to rally around it. Even if I do think Silverwolf was acting awfully scummy earlier, as well as Ika. But the results are telling me that I should reconsider my opinion on both of them. Which I will. Silverwolf for doing something incredibly helpful to the civs, and ika for being Fuzz's target, logically give me much more reason to believe they're both in the town as opposed to being bad. I don't buy into the idea of the cops starting the anti-cop bandwagon. Even from a diversionary standpoint it makes almost no sense.

My only paranoia around the CFD was that Fuzz wasn't the only one talking about making a vote to break a tie. I recall at least two others talking about using their vote as a tiebreaker. When he went ahead and did use it as a tiebreaking vote (to tie up ika's votes against mine), that was when the accusations flew out. I can see the contradiction that Silverwolf pointed out between the posts (where he mentions not wanting to touch the Silverwolf/ika thing with a 39 and a half foot pole) but my understanding of that post was that Fuzz just didn't want to get involved with the drama that was surrounding it at the time. It was when things were kind of emotionally heated. Or at least that's how I interpreted the post, not as being related to voting actions or anything. Maybe I misread. I guess I worry that any other of the people who were talking about using a tiebreaker vote and then actually doing so could have suffered the same fate, and they could have been civilians just acting because they didn't want another civilian to get lynched.

When Fuzz was pressured at the end, though, I think he made some definite slips. There was one line in particular (about not caring who got lynched) that definitely moved him into overt baddie territory. I think had I not been on my way out the door at that time I probably would have moved my vote. But the lynch succeeded regardless, thankfully.

Also worth noting that ika still had more votes than Fuzz at the end of the day. So someone was definitely involved in the vote loans from the past day.

Socky said there would be a price to pay, I don't know what that price might be but it's worth looking to see if anyone in the coming day is acting or talking noticeably stranger. This might be another indication of alignment.

Color me surprised. I don't think I would have caught his intentions in the wave of other people talking about tiebreaker votes.

Good job on the lynch.

Now I don't know if ika or everyone who all of a sudden switched sides is more suspicious. This bandwagon is insane. I don't have enough time to process it.

Linki @ Dragon: I remember that quote, I just don't know if he was specific about voting or just getting involved in the situation. Which was pretty heated at the time.

Double linki: Fuzz, you don't care which of us dies? Now you ARE starting to sound like a baddie.

WHOA whoa whoa. I go to take a shower and I come back and everyone that had voted for me all of sudden switched bandwagons entirely??

I don't understand this at all. I take it that it was in response to some questionable action that Fuzz took to tie a vote? In wondering whether or not it's to save a teammate?

I'm reading over the posts now and yeah, it does seem like Fuzz is flipping a bit on some opinions. I truthfully haven't examined him at all prior to this point. I will try and examine some posts before the day is over but I don't know if I'll get to it in time.

But I recall a few instances of a couple people wanting to use their votes to break some ties, even being said so in this forum. What am I missing that was special about Fuzz's vote?

LLLLLINKIIIII

Sloonei wrote:Gleam, tell me what you think of myself and Matt. Please.

I have a highly favorable opinion of you, Sloonei. My initial conception on day 1 I think was grasping at straws to come up with something against someone who had voted against me. You've been good at stirring discussion, calling people out on challenging ways of thinking, and you've been active and useful in formulating thought processes. You are a good civilian. And I love bearded dragons and am in love with your avatar.

Matt: slightly suspect. He started this Golden train early in the game and has been relentless in pursuing it, while at the same time saying stuff that's all over the board. Then he places a vote on me and then flips around again. He's been a little more talkative lately, but I read him as someone with an agenda. In my experience, it's too early for the good guys to have an agenda.

Golden wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Golden wrote:I think its pretty telling that none of our regulars are voting ika... we are actually pretty good at giving interesting different play styles some rope.

Thats because lots of us also play in odd ways.

@TH - I'm I guess expressing my own view from where I'm up to (which is about page 15). I have found both suspect but I feel like with ika its his playstyle and with gleam it's more the actual content of the posts that I find bad, less the style. So, I guess I don't mean objective in an 'everyone should think so' sense, but objective more in the specific aspects of how gleam comes across as bad to me.

I haven't even got to a point where I understand why Epi is taking votes.

Okay, I understand that. What specific aspects of Gleam come across as bad to you?

Bearing in mind, again, that I'm addressing basically only things that happened up to, maybe, the nightkill or a bit before... the two things which stood out to me the most, and almost got me to vote gleam yesterday, was that I felt he made an attempt to link SVS and DDL as teammates that seemed transparently insincere and an attempt to discredit his current voters at that time (which they were), and then his vote for diiny did not look good to me.

Holy hell, are we still talking about this? I said that was sarcasm. Parody. It was in response to something I thought Luffy said was outlandish, so I said something equally outlandish in return. Oy vey.

With regards to the new player thing, ika, it is frustrating. I have played a handful of mafia games here and at piano, it's tough to get integrated into a community that's had each other for a while. The Pikmin mafia I played most recently was the first game on this site where I wasn't lynched or nightkilled in the first voting period. Hence the very low post count for someone who has been here since 2013. And even so, this game is the first real mafia game I've gotten any sort of a platform whatsoever.

I get that frustration entirely. I was maddeningly frustrated for someone who just wanted to play a mafia game somewhere. But I think if you stick with the community it'll become more enticing.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Hey gleam, how do you feel about Epignosis? I know ypu mentioned previously that he seems different than he was in Pikmin, but what do you think about his actions in this game?

Well, I posted some thoughts about it earlier. I disagreed with your analysis of him flip-flopping. He had voted me pretty early to get me to come out and participate, which I did. He then moved his vote off of me fairly quickly. That's why I wasn't phased by his vote.

You then said that you stated his actions as being misleading when he claimed I might be bad, and then went on to talk about how he didn't understand the votes against me. I think this is a little misleading. The original quote was this:

Epignosis wrote:As of this point, I'd say Wilgy, and if Wilgy is bad, gleam is with him after that wild speculation in defense of Wilgy.

He was speculating Wilgy, and if Wilgy flipped and was bad, the suspicions would turn on me for my defense of Wilgy's alignment.

He later went on to say that he thought my analysis of Wilgy was bum, which doesn't disagree with what's up here, and even furthermore that he suspects Wilgy of being good. None of this is really flip flopping, all he did was change his status on what he believed of Wilgy's alignment, and the rest logically follows. And thank goodness, because if Epi was acting illogically, the very nature of reality would unfold as we know it.

So, I don't suspect him of anything. I was worried about at the difference between this mafia and Pikmin, where he was much, much more aggressive and he was spearheading every discussion about certain characters. I think he made a valid explanation for his more deflated presence, especially considering the high tempers running in this game. I am not exempt from that accusation either. He is also hosting another mafia right now isn't he?

Epignosis wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:@Epignosis, what do you think about Wilgy right now?

I mean, you said you think he's a civ, but what made you change your mind?

Dunno if you have the time to answer this now, but I'll leave the question for when you do.

I won't be voting for him. I don't think it's a good idea to say why.

This is interesting. He kind of berated me earlier for asking the same thing, I assumed jokingly, but here it makes me think that he can't say why without role outing. If he were good for the whole game, like I thought, he probably would have known about Wilgy's identity to begin with.

So a couple things may have happened:

Maybe something about Wilgy's role changed, that Epi is privy to, and cannot divulge the information without role outing.
Maybe Epi knew about Wilgy's role to begin with and feigned suspicion to cover his position.

I still want to think that I'm reading Epignosis as town. So I'm going to go with the former. I'll have to look into when exactly his posts about Wilgy started to change and to see if they coincide with the night events. If the latter were true, it would say something a bit more insidious about Epi's position. But I'm still convinced about my Wilgy read so don't think that's likely to be the truth either, at least to me.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Why don't you just admit you are voting for Ika because you need to survive the lynch?

It would look more honest.

That's not my primary concern. I don't think I'm going to survive today. I expect some bandwagon to build up at the last minute and take me down.

I knew that changing my vote would cast more suspicion on me. It's probably going to give the people who are on the fence a better reason to swing my way. But I'm trying to focus on what I think is right and what I think I know. To the best of my abilities.

Nerolunar wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:Silverwolf, I'm calling your bluff. I went back and examined the Wilgy case and I don't have anything stronger to go on there. I think my rationale will stand for itself. I have a long day of classes and I'm not 100% sure I can check in again before the deadline.

Silverwolf

If you have a well-build case against Wilgy, then why don´t you just vote for him?

I have what I think is a case for Wilgy being good. That's why I'm not voting for him.

Sloonei wrote:Why is Silverwolf more suspicious than ika?

Truthfully I don't know if I had much more a reason to suspect Silverwolf over ika. Maybe it was because Silverwolf got the ball rolling and was the source of my frustration. I only stopped back in to cast my vote but I'm thinking it over now after I've had more time to cool down. Both were being very unhelpful as far as giving explanations or reasonings behind their actions. I wanted to claim ika's vote for wanting to believe his friend was town.

But when I look back at it, Silverwolf eventually yielded to saying she did it to get a reaction out of me. Which I think is total backpedaling, but it's better than nothing. I'm also wondering if maybe there's something to her trying to provoke me into a vote. I don't know if she has security or what, but I'm pondering it more. There has been a time where I was coaxed into voting for someone by their own provocation and it ended poorly for me.
Unless I completely missed it, I haven't really seen any similar (weak notwithstanding) justification from ika apart from wanting to defend Silverwolf. So I think it's unlikely, statistically, that both are scum, but they sure as hell are acting like it, and ika is being a bit more scummy. Perhaps one is.

So, in lieu of this, and despite me really, really wanting to vote for Silverwolf after the huge argument and case I made against her, I think I have slightly more reason to think that ika is bad. So thank you, Sloonei, for getting me to step back once further and reexamine my thoughts.

I'm changing my vote to ika.

Silverwolf, I'm calling your bluff. I went back and examined the Wilgy case and I don't have anything stronger to go on there. I think my rationale will stand for itself. I have a long day of classes and I'm not 100% sure I can check in again before the deadline.

Silverwolf

If my speculation is bad :[ then what are your reasons for dropping suspicions on Wilgy, Epignosis? I mean I agree with you but I want to hear your reasoning too.

Trying to catch up now. Interesting development.

Sloonei wrote:What so other people think of ika? Am I alone in thinking his behavior stinks of deliberate unhelpfulness? On Day 1 he kept saying he wanted to sort silverwolf first and foremost, which is a reasonable strategy, but on Day 2 he just seems to be saying she's town but not really working together in any capacity with her like he seemed to suggest, and most of the reads he's posting are minimal at best. He is falling back on a meta-defense when I (or anyone else) press him. I can understand differences in culture and playstyle, but this also wreaks of a player who's taking advantage of these differences to hide behind them.

I just want to kind of bounce off of what Sloonei was saying here, I think a lot of ika's posts have been in defense of Silverwolf and her strategy, which given their personal connection outside of the game I think is fine. You'd want your S/O to be on your side after all. I think he's calling town because he wants her to be town. I guess I don't have a problem with that, I don't think it's a good strategy but I understand. That being said, with regard to any other defenses ika has also felt fleeting, as far as contributing to the game outside of Silverwolf's domain.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:Addressing some things real quick:

Silverwolf, you spun your wheels pretty hard when I asked you to explain why you voted for me with no prior explanation. Then you said that you refused to elaborate, only when another person chimed in did you backtrack and say it was to see how someone reacted. Then when you were asked about what you thought of my reaction, you said it was just OMGUS.

You also said it was impossible to start a bandwagon that early in the game. I beg to differ. All it takes is a margin of one or two votes to start a bandwagon.

Could everyone else please go back to the very beginning of the day period and look at my criticism of Silverwolf's behavior. I honestly, truly believe she is acting completely irrational, and the fact that no one else is pointing it out is absolutely fucking mind boggling. I honestly thought it would speak for itself.

Marmot, would you please explain your vote too and quit with the shitposting.

Also Scotty, how was I acting like a, whatever it was you called me? Wet pancake or something? The hell does that even mean?

I need to go to work and then to some school matters. I probably won't be around until much later tonight.

Sure.

Epignosis voted for you on Day 1, hoping you would say something. You said something 30 minutes later, and didn't seem perturbed by Epignosis's vote. I think it was a coordinated action. I know you have 6 votes now instead of 1, but you did not shrug off my vote like you did Epignosis's.

Thanks for answering.

I kind of shrugged off Epignosis' vote because it felt like he was only voting me to get my attention. I think he said that in his post where he voted me too. He also changed his vote pretty quickly afterwards.

I'm not sure if I agree with your analysis of him, but I do agree with whoever (was it Luffy maybe? Zebra? I'm sorry I can't keep track) that said that he's being unusually distant from this game. In Pikmin mafia when he was civ he was on the offensive all game, kind of spearheading any sort of attack on anyone in the spotlight. He's made a few good analyses as to be expected and there's his usual humor but his presence is so tiny compared to what I'm used to seeing. Maybe it's because this is a big game. I don't know. I still don't know if I'm suspicious enough of him to have any discernible doubts.

I still think Silverwolf is acting irrationally and illogically and, above all, scummily. I wouldn't have cast any suspicions on ika during Silverwolf's accusation of me, but the last couple pages has me reconsidering. I understand frustrations from feeling personally attacked, but I don't know if it's good enough of a reason to excuse the lack of participation. I would favor a vote for either above others right now now, but I don't like doing retaliatory votes and I also dislike bandwagon votes.

I went back and looked at what I think I know about Wilgy and the Day 1 votes and everyone there is someone I'm more inclined to believe is a civilian. With the exception of Golden, who still hasn't posted much, but at least they came in with what I think is a reasonable read of Matt. If he were less active I would be more suspicious.

I would also think that in a time like this when the heat is focused on a specific small group of people, the nonparticipants have the best opportunities to hide under all the ruckus. It's a tactic sure to favor baddies. If the next few days turn out to be civilian lynches I think the no-shows right now would be the best place to look, moving forward. I don't know if I'll survive the day at this rate.

Holy linki.

Addressing some things real quick:

Silverwolf, you spun your wheels pretty hard when I asked you to explain why you voted for me with no prior explanation. Then you said that you refused to elaborate, only when another person chimed in did you backtrack and say it was to see how someone reacted. Then when you were asked about what you thought of my reaction, you said it was just OMGUS.

You also said it was impossible to start a bandwagon that early in the game. I beg to differ. All it takes is a margin of one or two votes to start a bandwagon.

Could everyone else please go back to the very beginning of the day period and look at my criticism of Silverwolf's behavior. I honestly, truly believe she is acting completely irrational, and the fact that no one else is pointing it out is absolutely fucking mind boggling. I honestly thought it would speak for itself.

Marmot, would you please explain your vote too and quit with the shitposting.

Also Scotty, how was I acting like a, whatever it was you called me? Wet pancake or something? The hell does that even mean?

I need to go to work and then to some school matters. I probably won't be around until much later tonight.

I'm really damn tempted, Silverwolf. I don't like to retaliate vote on principle.

I'm not going to vote until the end of the day period when I'm absolutely sure. I still want to follow up with my theory about Wilgy and reread some old posts. Maybe I'll call your bluff by then.