The Syndicate

Nicol Bolas

I think Chiles and Whatley were trying to hide Peterson's Godfatherly role, but were mistakenly hoping Peterson would show up to change his vote.

Nicol Bolas

That...

works...

too?

Nicol Bolas

Tim Whatley wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:33 pm
Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:31 pm Whatley, what about Steinbrenner man. What about him.
I thought he was covering 4 me

He checked the Godfather. Think about it.

Nicol Bolas

George Costanza wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:32 pm There can't be 2 cops

You are so bald.

Nicol Bolas

If Whatley is the cop, "Big Stein" and "Uncle Leo" are in for a beautiful surprise vacation together.

Nicol Bolas

Tim Whatley wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:30 pm K I'm cop, Leo's a Mafioso. I haven't used my 2nd check. This is why Elaine s claim game spooked me.

I see.

Nicol Bolas

Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:28 pm
Elaine Benes wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:26 pm
Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:20 pm
Jackie Chiles wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 8:21 pm Well, hopefully we'll find out. *votes J Pederman*
At this point he had previously named three suspects -- the Costanzas and Elaine. So his Peterman vote was just the self-preservation opportunity I think. Moreover, he had not contributed to that Peterman wagon before (and prior to Elaine's hard claim it looked like Peterman was going down). Jackie's failure to comment on Peterman otherwise, or contribute to that wagon, to me looks like a mafioso keeping his distance from a mislynch. Had Peterman been his teammate, he had opportunities there to fish for credit with accusations against Peterman or even defend him outright -- something. I think that makes Peterman look a bit better.
Well, forgive me Jerry, if I don't trust your judgment. You were Jackie Chile's bowling partner a few days ago.

Vote J. Peterman

I think your paradigm of what's going on in this whole deal is way off. I think Jackie was the only person on his team really paying attention (unless you're on his team, of course), so I wouldn't put too much effort in trying to figure out their strategy. I think the mafia just are no good at what they do. Like men.
Would this imply Peterman and Leo then? Who else doesn't know what they're doing?

I think that's reasonable, or Peterman and Whatley. I think Whatley falls into that category too. He was just around last minute, but hadn't been much around before.

Nicol Bolas

Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:23 pm
Elaine Benes wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:19 pm I think you give the mafia too much credit, Jerry.
Could be. Is there a living teammate for Peterman that you think fits the paradigm?

Jerry.

Today was hell.

Hell.

Nicol Bolas

Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:20 pm
Jackie Chiles wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 8:21 pm Well, hopefully we'll find out. *votes J Pederman*
At this point he had previously named three suspects -- the Costanzas and Elaine. So his Peterman vote was just the self-preservation opportunity I think. Moreover, he had not contributed to that Peterman wagon before (and prior to Elaine's hard claim it looked like Peterman was going down). Jackie's failure to comment on Peterman otherwise, or contribute to that wagon, to me looks like a mafioso keeping his distance from a mislynch. Had Peterman been his teammate, he had opportunities there to fish for credit with accusations against Peterman or even defend him outright -- something. I think that makes Peterman look a bit better.

Well, forgive me Jerry, if I don't trust your judgment. You were Jackie Chile's bowling partner a few days ago.

Vote J. Peterman

I think your paradigm of what's going on in this whole deal is way off. I think Jackie was the only person on his team really paying attention (unless you're on his team, of course), so I wouldn't put too much effort in trying to figure out their strategy. I think the mafia just are no good at what they do. Like men.

Nicol Bolas

I think you give the mafia too much credit, Jerry.

Nicol Bolas

The "mention" feature is awful. Please stop using it.

I think Jackie didn't know what to do when I exposed him. Were Peterman another goon, Jackie could just vote him and be done with it. What if Peterman was the Godfather, and Jackie didn't want to see him go, but didn't want to go either? Remember that Peterman wasn't around to change his vote. That can put a teammate under a lot of "What do I do?" kind of pressure.

Nicol Bolas

I am in no way caught up. Like I said, today was the suck.

But think back to the day Jackie got lynched. Jackie Lynch!

Get it?

HA HA HA.........HA HA HA

She's a real estate agent in Arlington Heights, Illinois. Come on people.

Anyway, when Jackie was lynched, Peterman was the one running away with the votes.

Jackie Chiles wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 8:17 pm George Costanza, Frank Costanza... Elaine Benes.

Jackie Chiles wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 8:21 pm Well, hopefully we'll find out. *votes J Pederman*

That last statement, "Well, hopefully we'll find out" was in response to my eleventh hour accusation of Jackie. That makes me think Jackie was not wanting Peterman lynched, but was resigned to his fate and hoped he could save himself and lynch ME for saving Peterman (who I think is mafia because of this interaction).

That's how I read that.

Nicol Bolas

Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2017 7:03 pm Lanie where are you?

STUCK ON THE SUBWAY, JERRY

Nicol Bolas

George Costanza wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2017 6:36 pm Would be hilarious if Jerry is scum though. I mean really, hats off to you. While no one is questioning Elaine and Steinbrenner, you're not even a confirmed PR and no one's questioning your alliance.

It would certainly not be hilarious. I have suspected Jerry many times, some of them with serious intent, and some of them without. Killing that bastard the Soup Nazi was a boneheaded move. Jerry's an idiot, sure, but he's not a bonehead.

Nicol Bolas

I'll play Mafia if I don't have talk.

Nicol Bolas

Oh my God, today was a hell of a day, and only just got worse.

Nicol Bolas

George Costanza wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:41 pm Catching up. Sorry peeps, RL has kicked me in the ass majorly.

Elaine Benes wrote: ↑Sat Oct 14, 2017 12:29 am
Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Sat Oct 14, 2017 12:20 am
Elaine Benes wrote: ↑Sat Oct 14, 2017 12:15 amWhat are these reasons, Jerry?
At the time of those reads:

Elaine - role claim
George Costanza - decent, effortful infusion into the thread soon before those reads
Steinbrenner - consistently relevant contributions under the role play, handles questions gracefully
Jackie - strong start to the game, tonally agreeable
Soup Nazi - Indignant and irritable, particularly in my direction, in a way that seemed civilian
Leo - A few incidents where I felt he exhibited genuine hunting effort
I want to take a peek myself to see if I can find the nipple in somebody's soul.

I'll start with George.

I get slightly negative vibes from George:

George Costanza wrote: ↑Tue Oct 10, 2017 5:46 pm I'm feeling good about you people
Kramer
George Steinbrenner
Uncle Leo
Jerry
Jackie

I got bad feelings about you people
Elaine
The Soup Nazi
Estelle
Dad

I got no feelings about the rest of ya.
I'm good and STELLA! is dead.

This last post though:

George Costanza wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2017 5:46 pm Jackie has been quiet.
This is such a...I don't know...random thing to say about someone he felt good about, but said he felt bad about Estelle, who had said even less than Jackie Chiles.
what is this even.

You know, I did think it was rather farfetched that all four main characters of the show (George, Seinfeld, Elaine and Kramer) would RANDOMLY be picked as town. Kramer was town, I'm town, pretty sure I have good feelings about Jerry...so Elaine, as someone who roleclaimed and wasn't night killed, what's your deal?

Sure Estelle is dead. Yes, I felt peculiar about her. No, I didn't vote for her at any time. Suspicion arises. Everyone is suspicious at some point.

Jackie was a lot more vocal, and when he was, I had good feelings about him. He disappeared, he missed voting. I questioned it. What's up with that? How is it random? I liked the way Jackie was talking, I didn't like the direction Estelle was headed. I'm allowed to make judgement calls based on how I see them.

This post stinks worse than Kramer's laundry. Bear in mind that I knew Jackie was bad news when I posted this, so my interest in George calling Jackie quiet was piqued.

If the roles are randomly assigned, why would it be farfetched that we're all good guys?

By the logic George presented, he has to be bad!

But this kind of thinking has me thinking he isn't. Even I- confession!- have fallen victim to the erroneous thought that somebody in the main of the theme has to be bad, and I know better!

And nobody was calling Jackie bad.

Unvote.

Nicol Bolas

Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Tue Oct 17, 2017 1:35 pm I'm going to engage in a little dangerous night kill analysis for Soup Nazi. I just stated that his being killed over me is something I've considered, and there is also at least one discernible motive I can conceive of to kill him over the two role claimers -- their reads. If the mafia team decides that none of the three (Elaine, Steinbrenner, and Soup Nazi) is going to be lynched, then they have less obvious interest in killing a role claimer given that both are claimed to be expended. Their choice can then be otherwise motivated. I want to see what Soup Nazi's reads looked like in his final day.

Where did I claim to be expended, Jerry?

I am not all out of sponges at all.

Nicol Bolas

George Costanza wrote: ↑Tue Oct 17, 2017 2:47 pm Again, do we think Jackie is going to be that blatant in bussing a team mate? I don't honestly believe you believe that----deep down.

When you leave the tracker AND the cop alive, what other options do you have?

Nicol Bolas

George Costanza wrote: ↑Tue Oct 17, 2017 2:47 pm I think you should give Long Con as a player a little more credit than that. That said, no doubt he's laughing in his grave now at how he got the two most vocal posters to vote for me without a hesitation. Well done Jackie. You played it well.

Nobody is voting for you because of what Jackie said.

Nicol Bolas

George, your hair IS FAKE.

Nicol Bolas

This does increase Frank's chance of being mafia to 20%, however.

*eats another Pez*

Nicol Bolas

No soup for any of us.

That was the most boneheaded kill I've ever seen.

Nicol Bolas

No, Tim Whatley is on my good side for his vote. Plus good dental recovery when someone goes nuts on the Pez dispensor.

Nicol Bolas

In case I kick it, I don't suspect Frank at all. I have the merest eye-twich suspicion of Jerry. I don't suspect Stein. I mostly suspect Peterman (my suspicion of Jerry would increase if Peterman is bad, because this would mean Jerry loved Jackie and is now muting any suspicion of Peterman), and I mostly suspect George. The Soup Nazi is probably all right, even though he can blow it out his ass. Tim Whatley is yadda yadda yadda.

Nicol Bolas

Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2017 6:39 pm
Elaine Benes wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2017 6:29 pm
Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2017 6:09 pm If it's unclear why I think better of Peterman now:

He placed his vote on me yesterday when he was leading the lynch clearly and I had no votes. I wasn't a likely lynch at all, and he didn't care. He stated his grievance with me and placed his vote accordingly. Moreover, he left his vote there all day long, probably expecting himself to be victimized or at least in grave danger. He didn't try to save himself at any juncture, and I think that's suggestive of a civilian low on time trying to promote the most genuine suspicion he had -- of Jerry Seinfeld, the guy who most vocally wanted him dead.

It's still a behavioral judgment and not concrete stuff, so I won't color him dark green for it. But it's a nice look I think and enough for me to prioritize other suspects well in front of him.
If he's bad, what were his options if he never talked about Jackie?
I don't think he'd have ever voted Jackie anyway because he wasn't present at the end of the day (and that wagon developed very late). I am referring to the earlier portion when the votes were pretty well spread. Peterman himself had 3 votes and then about 5 other people had one vote each. I wasn't one of them. He just stuck yet another solo vote on me (and I think I would have been a very difficult lynch to generate). He could have placed a second vote on any of those other players to improve his chance of survival, but prioritized his suspicion of me over that.

How do you know he wasn't present? Just because you post doesn't mean you aren't present.

Nicol Bolas

Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2017 6:09 pm If it's unclear why I think better of Peterman now:

He placed his vote on me yesterday when he was leading the lynch clearly and I had no votes. I wasn't a likely lynch at all, and he didn't care. He stated his grievance with me and placed his vote accordingly. Moreover, he left his vote there all day long, probably expecting himself to be victimized or at least in grave danger. He didn't try to save himself at any juncture, and I think that's suggestive of a civilian low on time trying to promote the most genuine suspicion he had -- of Jerry Seinfeld, the guy who most vocally wanted him dead.

It's still a behavioral judgment and not concrete stuff, so I won't color him dark green for it. But it's a nice look I think and enough for me to prioritize other suspects well in front of him.

If he's bad, what were his options if he never talked about Jackie?

Nicol Bolas

Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2017 5:43 pm
Elaine Benes wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2017 5:42 pm Apparently, Jerry didn't have enough Pezzes. That should say 17%.
Could you show your work? I believe you, but I can't math right now. I just took a math test and my brain is melting. I just wanna make sure we're operating with the right numbers.

There are nine left. Frank is unemployed, because he isn't a cop or a tracker. That leaves seven. One in seven is 14%. I forgot to exclude the vanilla mafia he can't be if he was checked, so that makes one in six, which is 17%

Is it possible I'm not as mathematically strong as I think I am?

Nicol Bolas

Apparently, Jerry didn't have enough Pezzes. That should say 17%.

Nicol Bolas

George Steinbrenner wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2017 12:28 pm Elaine was a top suspect at the time and I didn't read a direct claim or accusation against Jackie. I believe you were hesitant to buy into her claim as well. Her comment about the tracker looked to me more like a general statement about the mafia team's ineptitude than a claim of her own, and I took it to be made out of frustration.

To get all of our cards out on the table, I am the cop. I checked Kramer on Night 1 and Frank on Night 2. He came back clean, but my presence means that there's also a godfather in this game. This is why I never believed Elaine's vigilante claim.

I had to borrow Jerry's Pez dispenser to figure this out, but there's only a 14% chance Frank is bad. Lynching the godfather next clears old man Costanza.

Looking ahead, if tomorrow doesn't work out well at all for whatever reason, it will be a 4-2 count after the kill, which is an even count with no margin for error. At that stage, I recommend a no-lynch to narrow things down to 3-2. If you choose to go that route though, don't make it a quiet time. Really get into people's faces.

Nicol Bolas

Oh my God, Jerry just slipped with the name of his other teammate!

HA HA ......... HA HA HA

Nicol Bolas

I'm totally anti-Steinbrenner now.

George Steinbrenner wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 6:40 pm Do you want to be lynched, Elaine?

George Steinbrenner wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 6:16 pm So you know who is bad, but it's in the vault?

J Peterman
4
33%

Voters: Uncle Leo, George Steinbrenner, Jackie Chiles, The Soup Nazi

George Steinbrenner was here after I posted what I did, and instead of considering the dump I took in the thread, he only voiced aggression and a threat, and left his vote on Peterman. Maybe he thinks I don't have any grace.

Nicol Bolas

Nicol Bolas

Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 8:09 pm A hard claim is a conclusive claim with a pledge that it's not cover-claim.

I did the fake (fake, get it Jerry? HA HA HA ....HA ) thing twice already trying to make the Mafia think I was covering. I'm still alive for it, because the Mafia are idiots!

I'm hoping Peterman is bad too, because the lawyer hasn't voted yet, and it looks like people voted and scrammed.

Nicol Bolas

Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 8:01 pm Just saw Elaine's claim. Elaine, give me the word "hard claim", and it's secure.

I don't know what that means. I tracked no one Night 1. I tracked Johnnie Cochran Night 2. He killed Estelle.

I waited as long as I could to get as many interactions and as much information as possible. I also wanted to see if he would hint or claim vigilante since the host post was so vague. He didn't.

Book 'em Danno.

Nicol Bolas

Jackie Chiles wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 7:35 pm
The lie is that you tracked me and saw a murder.

What is my motive for lying?

Nicol Bolas

Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 7:26 pm lol I have to miss EOD sorry gang. Helping friend with studies.

/hypocrisy

If you don't change your vote to Jackie Chiles, you are mafia. Mafia, Jerry.

Nicol Bolas

Jackie Chiles wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 7:18 pm Why don't you tell us?

You're an imposter.

For example, for a lawyer, you aren't very good with your wording.

Jackie Chiles wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 7:15 pm
Elaine Benes wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 6:35 pmI'm suspecting you because of your ineptitude at eliminating the two-shot tracker.
Well, that's a flagrant lie.

The Mafia have eliminated no civilian power roles. Both of them are still alive. So you and your goons have done a piss poor job of getting rid of them. Saying, "Well, that's a flagrant lie" to the above statement means that the Mafia have done a good job eliminating the power roles.

You don't even know how to lawyer.

Nicol Bolas

Jackie Chiles wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 7:15 pm
Elaine Benes wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 6:35 pmI'm suspecting you because of your ineptitude at eliminating the two-shot tracker.
Well, that's a flagrant lie.

What is my motive for lying?

Nicol Bolas

George Steinbrenner wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 6:40 pm Do you want to be lynched, Elaine?

Is that a serious question?

Nicol Bolas

Jackie Chiles wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 6:22 pm Ms Benes. Are you suspecting me because you didn't like my method of analysis, or because I've been absent lately?

I'm suspecting you because of your ineptitude at eliminating the two-shot tracker.

Hi.

Nicol Bolas

Spoiler: show

Nicol Bolas

Nicol Bolas

Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 6:07 pm Elaine who bad

I can't tell you!

Nicol Bolas

I finally show up and nobody has anything to say.

Nicol Bolas

Nicol Bolas

George Steinbrenner wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 1:07 am I suspect you, Elaine.

I'm just amazed that you managed a thought in five or fewer words.

Nicol Bolas

Jerry Seinfeld wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:48 am Regarding Elaine:

I can conceive of a universe wherein she's just been having a ball with WIFOM in this game as a mafioso. It's a tinfoil I am taking seriously. However, with half the players making themselves impossible to trust given their consistent absence, I don't think it's likely I will vote for her barring a convincing argument.

If you're a civilian and people suspect you, freaking do something about it. Fight.

Nobody suspects me, Jerry. And wine isn't my thing. You should know.

Nicol Bolas

George Steinbrenner wrote: ↑Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:31 am What does "willingish" mean and why is Jackie your strongest mafia read?

If you had a dictionary in that big ass office of yours, you would see that "Willingish" means I'm in the vicinity of willingnesshood.

I didn't say anything about a strongest mafia read, but the shyster spent a lot of time coloring when he could have been doing more productive things. Don't you agree?

Search found 106 matches