The Syndicate

Isaac wrote:I would be guaranteed a spot in your top 4, Balaam. Maybe even your top 2. I'm telling you, though, I'm just a vanilla who's made A TON of mistakes with my shit playing this game. I'm with Jul... I mean Jonathan No more sock games for me. Way to easy for me to mess up in my reads of others.

Stephen wrote:I also think we should start entertaining possible lynches of players that were or are absentee, lest we reach endgame after a few more mislynches and those players have not been disposed of.

Lot wrote:I know what you mean Absalom.

I'm comfortable about me, Balaam, Lazarus...

Jonathan and Rebecca could be called defensive votes (but that doesn't mean they are good).

That leaves Samuel.

Jephthah wrote:
And really, how has Rachel really helped in finding baddies? She's being aggressive, that's true. But I expect a good player to be aggressive when bad. Not all baddies come up with stupid reasons to vote. The better ones seem very civvie like. But if you look at the voting records, Rachel doesn't come out very well at all. Her only decent vote is her last, and if she was going by the notion that extreme conditions call for extreme actions, she could have thrown Ruth under the bus.

Mordecai wrote:Going over my notes, I noticed that when Ruth voted for Absalom, if she had voted for Rachel instead it would have tied the vote. In a situation where a heathen is facing a lynch, why would they not try to tie the vote so they dont die?

I'm wondering if by voting for Absalom, Ruth was actually trying to make Absalom look more civ. In the same way that a baddie's suspect reads become mostly void, Ruth's vote could be read like that as a baddie normally doesnt vote for another baddie unless the lynch is basically guaranteed. Further emphasized by that with Ruth's death, we skip another night phase. It could have been a desperation attempt to break the cycle.

Nothing very interesting from her vote pattern either. She voted alongside Deborah and Belaam Days one and 3, after not voting day 2. Voted Uzziah day 4 because she had previously called out that vote. Essentially had no choice but to double down on Uzziah day 5.

Lot wrote:I could not be further from agreeing with the reasons for voting for Jonathan. Jonathan would be more of a last ditch vote if the other options failed, for me. I'm not sure how our eyes have fallen off seriously poor voting records (Jacob, Isaac, Deborah) for one that is average at worst. I don't understand why people aren't looking at Jonathan's day three vote and seeing what a terribly bad vote it would be if he was Uzz's teammate. Not sure how it is seen by Absalom as justifying their connection?

Absalom wrote: What do you guys think of the "don't lynch me, or other people will think you're bad and you'll be next" defense he gave? Did no one else find that incredibly weird?

Absalom wrote:

Rachel wrote:Let's also just remember that Heathens might not be our only problem. While I highly doubt Absalom is a Heathen, he could be a Horseman, and we don't know how much of a threat they are.

Whoa, what the heck is up with this post? Why did you single me out? ANYONE might be a horseman, including you. I don't like what you're implying.

In the interest of fairness, I will take a hard look at Jacob before voting for Jonathan, although I find Jonathan's "if you lynch me, you're going to look bad" defense very strange.

Jonathan wrote:I'm not implying they can't. I've been wrong this game and I'm a civ. But if he votes for me he is wrong on this round.

Jonathan wrote:

Rachel wrote:

Jonathan wrote:I've looked at my past thoughts about Absalom and can't find anything that's a baddie read for me. But I know not everyone agrees with me on that. If he's good I don't know why he has chosen to attack me without reading my posts. There is a running diary of why I voted some people and not others and Uzziah is mentioned throughout the days - maybe not everyday I haven't checked that but his name pops up a lot in my thoughts about the game. He would get a fuller perspective if he would consider the two in concert.

So why would lynching you have any bearing on Absalom's alignment?

Sorry I missed this. Maybe I worded that wrong. Lynching me could have a bearing on his perceived alignment in that I am good and it could/would be seen as a black mark on his record. Maybe I'm wrong though. Maybe when I flip civ if I'm lynched people will forgive him for getting it wrong. I just don't want anyone to be able to say "she should have defended herself more".

Jonathan wrote:I've looked at my past thoughts about Absalom and can't find anything that's a baddie read for me. But I know not everyone agrees with me on that. If he's good I don't know why he has chosen to attack me without reading my posts. There is a running diary of why I voted some people and not others and Uzziah is mentioned throughout the days - maybe not everyday I haven't checked that but his name pops up a lot in my thoughts about the game. He would get a fuller perspective if he would consider the two in concert.

Belshazzar wrote:

Rachel wrote:Belsh, what make you of Rebecca?

I didn't get much on her so far. Recurrent suspicions (or even votes) on Jeph, on whose flipping Day 1 she built a rather in-depth read on. First to vote Mary on Day 3 - poorly so, as well, simply latching to my objection, so that's a trigger right now, considering that Uzziah's save on that Day is partially confirmed.

Yesterday she came with the hypothesis that Ruth bussed Uzziah Day 5, which turns out to have been true - this would normally make think it can't possibly be a Heathen bussing a Heathen that bussed a Heathen, it would be too dumb of them; then again, she dropped her idea on Ruth and reverted to voting you in the same post. Still, don't think I'm close to a conclusion whether she's bad or not.

I only read her posts again, so let me know if there's anything else I should (re)consider.

Jonathan wrote:

Rachel wrote:

Jonathan wrote:Each of those votes was a reasonable vote on the day of the vote. You pointed out I voted Uzziah 4th - that was well before it was obvious he was going to take the day. I also voted him another day because I was suspicious of him. Did you read my posts? Did you see what I was thinking about uzziah? I would bet that you didn't.

You may have caught Ruth and you may get me lynched which will convince some people that are on the fence about you where your allegiance lies.

What does this last line mean?

Absalom is trying to lynch a civ is what I mean which is not likely to be good for him.

Balaam wrote: 1) Does anyone think that Samuel and/or Bathsheba are exonerated by the stoning result? Their votes were sudden and very last minute when the race was theoretically close (if Lazarus is Simon). If Laz is Simon, then Samuel's vote was the clincher. The question is whether or not he was paying attention to the vote tally theories before he jumped in and voted. Had he not been aware of it, he may have thought he was just bandwagoning. Bathsheba has barely participated in this game at all, missing 4 votes and hardly posting, which makes me think more and more that she is just an indifferent player and finally got around to doing something (perhaps after a nudge from the host?).

2) I slightly disagree with Rachel on where to look for the next Heathen. I agree on looking at those who voted for Rachel but the votes for Jacob and Pilate concern me more than the votes for Absalom. Look at my color list and consider this:
-Ruth takes an early 2-vote lead
-Esther jumps on Pilate, adding another name to the spread
-Jeph casts his vote for Ruth, making it a 3-vote lead
-Momentum stops for a while
-Rachel picks up the next 2 votes
-Pilate gets another vote
-Absalom picks up the magical mystery vote from Lazarus
-Two votes suddenly come in for Jacob now that things are pretty spread out and it looks like the Ruth wagon lost its mojo
-Rachel votes to keep Ruth 2 votes ahead of her
-Jacob votes to keep Rachel close to Ruth
-Ruth votes Absalom in the hopes of Lazarus being the Walrus
-Then things pick up again for Ruth as we become wary of the Lazarus Theory

Lots of spreading going on with the votes for Rachel, Jacob, and Pilate. Does anyone honestly have a strong positive read on any of the following:
-Deborah
-Esther
-Isaac
-Jacob
-Jonathan
-Mordecai
-Rahab
-Rebecca

I bet there are two Heathens in that list. But who?


3) While it would be a bummer to lose out on Elijah's fireworks display, there's still a chance we've got our resident spear-chucker out there. Perhaps we can come to consensus on a runner-up to be skewered?

4) It seems to me that Judah and Mlachus have abandoned the game. Anyone got reason to believe they're threatening their P-Score to play out a slothful yet nefarious Heathen plot?

Esther wrote:Alright folks. I know I have been mostly quiet. But like I said, I am an observer in the beginning of full games. I think I can now come forth with my first true suspicion. Pilate.

His behavior in the thread has lead me to reread his posts from start to finish (which didn't take very long actually).

First of all, he missed Day 0 entirely - didn't post, didn't vote. He comes in Day 1 and says he didn't realize the game had started. So, for over 48 hours he was oblivious that the game had started? Unlikely. He comes in on Day 1 and is the 6th person to vote altogether, but first to vote for Uzziah. Well, Uzz was bad you say? Yes, but Uzz had no votes at the time. Lot had 1 vote at the time, Samuel had 2. I see Pilate's Day 1 vote for a teammate as trying to gain civ cred.

Day 2 - Says if he would have he would have voted Marth Day 2 (but he couldn't 'cause she was then dead). In the same post he says he is still suspicious of Uzz and will probably vote him, but ends up voting Job (Uzz' rival) instead.

Day 3 - misses vote entirely

Day 4 - Votes Rachel. He quotes a case made from Belshazzar and jumps on that train. However, the case that Belsh made wasn't very convincing enough for anyone else or even for Belsh himself as he voted Uzz that day (Belsh did, I mean). I think Pilate was just looking for something to grasp onto so he could keep from voting his own beloved Uzz.

Pilate wrote:I'm shocked that I don't have more suspicion by now. So this is the life of an unforgivably low poster.

This is where my suspicion of Pilate began. This post here made me look into him in the first place. It looks like he is trying to hard to apologize for not being helpful to the cause of getting baddies.

Day 5 - Pilate talks about how he'd been MIA. He wonders where the suspicion of Rachel went.

Pilate wrote:Uzziah has no reason at all to think I'm Civ, unless he's bad.

Pilate wrote:How could anyone "read" me as Civ with the way I've been playing. Hardly here, and when I am here, I say sketchy things.

These quote stands out to me. He admits his behavior thus far should be seen as baddie behavior. I think that he thinks by admitting this we will think he is civ, but not me. And I think he uses the first quote to distance from Uzz again as he is the first to vote for him and the first to vote altogether if you don't count host/non/dead option. It bit him in the ass, however when people began to follow his crazy behavior and Uzz got the most votes that day.

Day 6 - Now he just plays dumb.

Pilate wrote:What happened to the night? We lynched Uzziah, and went straight into another lynch?

AND...he votes for Absalom, the first to vote for his teammate, Ruth.

Pilate will most likely get my vote today.

Absalom wrote:

Jonathan wrote:

Absalom wrote:Jonathan, why are you so bad?

I am not bad. What would make you think I am?

Your voting record.

Day 1: You were the 5th vote for Samson, when it was safe and obvious thta no one else was going to get lynched.

Day 2: The third vote for Uzziah, after 7 votes were on Cain. A safe cover vote on a teammate.

Day 3: The second vote for Lazarus when Uzziah had three. You wanted to lynch Uzziah the day before. Here was your chance, but you voted for someone else.

Day 4: The 8th vote for Job. Safe and bandwagony.

Day 5: The 4th vote for Uzziah. Now that it is clear he's going down, might as well join in.

Day 6: The first vote for Jacob after Ruth had four. This is your least incriminating vote. I think you just wanted to stay away from what was going down.

I caught Ruth using her voting record. I'll catch you the same way.

Jonathan wrote:Each of those votes was a reasonable vote on the day of the vote. You pointed out I voted Uzziah 4th - that was well before it was obvious he was going to take the day. I also voted him another day because I was suspicious of him. Did you read my posts? Did you see what I was thinking about uzziah? I would bet that you didn't.

You may have caught Ruth and you may get me lynched which will convince some people that are on the fence about you where your allegiance lies.

Lot wrote:Before anyone throws the idea out there...

I think it's a zero sum game. Lynch a heathen, Elijah gets no kill. But for Elijah to get a kill, we have to lynch no heathen. And then hope Elijah is alive, and smites a baddie.

So for me, I think our better option is to do our utmost to find a heathen, and if we fail at least Elijah might have the chance to make up for it.

Belshazzar wrote:Let's lynch Jacob.

4 posts containing anything about Ruth. 4 posts in six chapters. All of them the previous Day.
"Case on Ruth is intriguing."
"Ruth is unlikely to be Uzziah's teammate because she hunted him consistently."
"Feeling ambivalent about Ruth, don't feel like voting her."
"Hope you're right about Ruth"

Jacob wrote:

Rachel wrote:

Jacob wrote:Yes of course I read your exchange Rachel, I commented on it. And yes I've been flippy-floppy with regards to you, so what? I'm having trouble reading you and sometimes I change my mind, does that make me baddie mcbadderson?

Convenient that you flip to voting me once I state I am suspicious of you.

Huh? I have been considering you for this entire day. I've gotten some mixed vibes as I said, but they're bad enough to warrant a vote that's not going to end in you being lynched anyway, it's more of a prod. I said once a few days ago that I thought you could be civvie but ever since I've felt weirder about you.


linki: okay, sure, I believe you. Sorry I was so inattentive to this game in the first few days. My bad. I was busy and overwhelmed by all the discussion and missed some stuff. I'm paying more attention now.

Absalom wrote:The upsetting thing is, my days are numbered if Lazarus keeps voting for me. He has declared his intention to keep voting for me until I am dead, no one will lynch him now because he has hinted at being a civ, and the baddies will not kill him because they want to waste a lynch on me. I don't see a way out of this.

Jacob wrote:I don't know, I guess for some people Uzziah was a strong suspect from the beginning, but I remember "root"gate and that seemed weak, and if there were more reasons to suspect him in the subsequent couple days I missed them.

Belshazzar wrote:

Jacob wrote:@Belsh: Because you realized they weren't at all damning? That I was just being honest, and may have inadvertently worded it in a way that was easily misinterpreted :/

Not really. I'd redact Uzziah from your trust list, but that Day 3 quote still bothers me and no matter the ambivalence on Uzziah, he was never really a "mild suspect", according to your criteria.

linki: strong efforts there, Sam and Bath

linki: no, Rachel, he imprisoned, meaning no post and no vote

Jacob wrote:Yes of course I read your exchange Rachel, I commented on it. And yes I've been flippy-floppy with regards to you, so what? I'm having trouble reading you and sometimes I change my mind, does that make me baddie mcbadderson?

Jacob wrote:How did I pull a "No U"???

Mordecai wrote:Out and about, got through the thread a bit last night and then fell asleep. Havent been home since like 6am. Unless I manage to get home with enough time to tear through all 43 pages, I may place my vote on Rachel.

Rebecca wrote:Ruth was the 6th vote for Uzziah when Jeph had 3, and also suspected Uzziah throughout.

Save one baddie by sacrificing a teammate is not the most optimal situation for a team, but it happens.

It looks like Jeph tried to push Samuel with 3 votes on Uzziah already, and that may have backfired when other votes were cast for Jeph himself.

However, he has 0 votes at the moment. And in lieu of that, I feel most comfortable about casting a 2nd vote on Rachel, most likely to be his and/or Uzzy's teammate who had to vote to sacrifice him.

Deborah wrote:

Lazarus wrote:

Deborah wrote:

Lazarus wrote:I think Pilate read my mind.

Had you meant to reply to his post?

Yeah

Well what was your reply?

Balaam wrote:

Belshazzar wrote:

Balaam wrote:

Lot wrote:All I can say is that if noone else got any more votes from now I can only assume Absalom would be lynched.

If Laz is Simon, then I think his vote would be worth 5 today, potentially making it 6 votes for Abs atm.

Was there really any need to state that so openly?

The foreplay is getting old. The only people who probably wouldn't have that figured out by now are Bathsheba, Judah, and Deborah.

Jacob wrote:I feel pretty equally ambivalent/very slightly positive about both Absalom and Ruth and don't really want to vote for either of them, so I'm voting Rachel.

Jephthah wrote:

Rachel wrote:Lot, having read the votes, I come to the same conclusions. A reread of those players is in order.

I think a reread of you is in order. I think you're the kind of baddie I like. The kind that is aggressive, that goes after people and doesn't shy away from confrontation. The kind that hopes that when their record shows they've supported the wrong person, people would think you wouldn't have been so aggressive about accusing Job, nor defending Uzziah. Especially, when you kept saying you're not ruling out Uzziah as a baddie, just sure that Job is one.

If we look at your voting record, which I'll summarize later, I think we'll see a baddie. And the following post doesn't make me feel better about you at all.

You choose the easiest person to go after- the one that missed the vote. I think this is BS. His posts are not as thought through as yours so it's easy to catch him in what appears as baddie behaviour.

My two top suspects this day are Mordecai and Rachel. I'm still looking at Samuel, who could be another one.

Isaac wrote:

Rachel wrote:Now for my re-read of Isaac.

Isaac wrote:Going with Job because of reasons discussed between myself and Rachel. Publicly, I might add

This read strangely to me because Isaac has been buddying up to me for a while now. This shows it. The publicly line could be trying to set me up to be lynched if he is as well.

Isaac wrote:The difference is that Uzziah's focus on Job is revenge, for lack of a better term.

Now, the rationalization of Uzziah's actions never made sense to me. I just assumed we had a non-rational player on our hands that would have to be caught another way if they were truly bad. Saying that Uzziah's posts and actions had a certain logic to them is strange and overly defensive of the Heathen, if you ask me.

But this is what stood out. That's it? Jesz....

I've never tried to lynch you, Rachel. I've even defended you.

I also never said Uzziah's actions were logical, either. Far from it actually. I simply stated that his focus on Job began as soon as Job focused in on him. That's all

Isaac wrote:Thanks, Balaam, for making realize just how useless I've been this game :P I know I've been super flip-floppy (I'm about to do it again, for crying out loud!) and unsure of my votes and reads on people. I haven't been as invested in this game as I'd like to be.

After reading Jeph's post (I think it was Jeph), I realize I may have been played. I trusted Rachel fully from the beginning, and now she turns around and says I tried to get her lynched because of my wording and based on my vote patterns? You slyyy devil, you. I don't care if I'm lynched today. If I am, it will certainly help the cause. But when I am lynched I really hope that people analyze yours and Lot's voting patterns until you're on the chopping block. It took no time at all for you 2 to put me there.

Whichever way this goes, there are no hard feelings, Rachel. You've played a mighty fine game. votes

Lot wrote:No. Day 4 is when Job was lynched. Day three was Mary Mag. But who was lynched is not important. The fact was that at the time there were two votes on each of Uzz, Job and Rachel. Voting Lazarus would be an odd thing to do right at that point in time if bad. I could understand him voting Job or Rachel right then, or holding his vote till later and voting Lazarus a little later. But right then, voting Lazarus seems like an unlikely move when Uzz might need saving.

Not an impossible move, just that it would definitely have been to the detriment of the heathen team in that moment.

Isaac wrote:Believe it or not, I think you're a legit civ, Lot. I'm pretty confident that Rachel is a baddie, though.
I'm also inclined to trust Jep at this point. But I'm not going full on "here, hold my knife while I lace my sandals up" level of trust. I did that with Rachel, and got shanked.

Isaac wrote: I have no idea what Rachel means by that last line, though.

Jacob wrote:I have to agree with Isaac here (regarding Lot's methods etc.), and since I'm in a similar boat I'm willing to give him and Jeph BOTD for now because they seem like they are also genuinely civvies who inadvertently look bad. Voting patterns are by no means any more of a secure way to determine who's bad than anything else in-thread. When I voted for Mary Mag I really thought she was bad, whereas Uzziah didn't seem like a threat. I posted my honest thoughts and now it's come back to bite me because I happened not to vote for a baddie and because I happened to vote at a certain time? Sorry I don't fit your flawless formula for innocence

Interesting quote from Rachel there. Not sure what to make of it. I've been getting weird vibes from her all game and am definitely considering looking at her for today. There are a couple other players whose posts I might look through if I have time. I'm really afraid of wasting another lynch, but it's so hard to be sure of anyone.

Jacob wrote:I feel like Uzziah is too much of an easy target. He could turn out to be bad, but for now it doesn't seem all that worthwhile to go after him.

I'm not really clear on what the cases are against Absalom and Job. I felt okay about Absalom, and I think Job said he wouldn't be around so I don't really want to vote there.

I think I am most likely to vote for Mary Mag at this point. She jumped in, didn't even wait to finish catching up, saw someone's (I forget whose) point about Rachel (I don't think it was even that great a point) and immediately votes based on that. It's like she just assumed that she was going the popular route at the time and was a bit too eager to establish her willingness to go along with others' suspicions.


And I'm sorry my posts have been sparse and fluffy. I've had a really busy couple of weeks, and I'm still having a hard time keeping track of all the names and suspicions going on in this thread. I'm trying to keep up but I don't have the greatest mental picture of this game.

Jacob wrote:I'd be happy to see either Uzziah or Jephthah gone today. Honestly I'm surprised Uzziah wasn't lynched within the first couple days, since he was acting weird and has been a consistent back-burner suspect ever since -- somehow other stuff always came up that pushed discussion of him away. I think both Uzz and Jeph are bad and I'm honestly having a hard time deciding which one to vote for (though it looks like Uzz is more likely to be lynched at this point)

Isaac wrote:Going with Job because of reasons discussed between myself and Rachel. Publicly, I might add

Isaac wrote:The difference is that Uzziah's focus on Job is revenge, for lack of a better term.

Lot wrote:People who I think look particularly bad based on that vote...

Mordecai, Isaac, Jacob, Deborah, Absalom. Possibly Jonathan and Ruth.

In those seven, I guarantee there are heathen. Probably more than one.

Lot wrote:Day one is actually way better! Some Samson votes could easily be an Uzz save. Don't have time to transcribe right now, if anyone else can that's great, otherwise I'll do it in a bit.

Awesome, thanks Rachel. I hadn't clicked as to what that one meant. In that case, I have to say... Balaam's negative predictions be damned! We're in this!

Lot wrote:Good job!

Finally, some info.

Looks like we are straight into another day, given the poll??? Host, can you clarify?

Consider my suspicion of Absalom severely reduced. I don't think he can be heathen.

I'm going to do a careful reread to see if I think Jephthah could be Uzziah's teammate or not.

Absalom wrote:Uzziah and Rachel led lynches against Job, a confirmed civ (which is exactly how many lynches I've led against confirmed civs). Does that make them bad too?

Pilate wrote:So maybe we can try lynching Rachel tomorrow? She's a baddie, she's worse than lice in your kid's hair.

Lot wrote:And I certainly suspected both of them before you.

I'm feeling pretty ok about you again. And you should go back and think about why I stated I voted for you, exactly, and see how consistent it is with what I've been saying today.

Lot wrote:What am I dropping?

Lot wrote: And the opposite is true. How hard you fight is not, nor has ever been, a good indicator of who is bad.

Lot wrote:Nicodemus - what you said is bollocks, and absolutely does not match the empirical evidence from past games.

Baddies will fight to the end even when they have a team and could relax.
Civilians will take votes against them calmly and hope people see the truth of their words.

And the opposite is true. How hard you fight is not, nor has ever been, a good indicator of who is bad.

In fact, none of your case on Balaam was sound to me in the slightest. And your vote was opportunistic.

I admit, though, that of the three I named, you are the one I believe most likely to be good.

Jephthah's snaky indecision was, for me, the greatest sin. His words were the words of a man who knew neither were heathen.
Absalom's sin is a close second, because he keeps trying to lead lynches, and for some reason people keep following him.