The Syndicate

Cool game! We (the Police-baddies) knew my time was likely up when the PI (Llama) checked me and sent the cops a message that I was bad. I thought I could maybe take Llama down and at least kill the PI before everyone turned on me, but I pushed too hard and people got suspicious of me. Timmer, had you alignment-checked me?

Either way, at least my death got us the PI. As soon as we knew the PI knew my identity, we just watched for someone coming after me in the thread. Once we determined it was Llama (after a cross-reference with his eloquent and interesting PM communications to the police confirming it was him), we had to recruit or kill him. Luckily for him, he was recruitable.

Thanks for your solid vote of confidence in the end there Keterman, it was good to know that my sob-story Civvie acting convinced SOMEONE I was not bad. I thought it was cool how your complete belief that I was confirmed Civvie actually exonerated you from being a baddie. That's a rare one, I'd wager.

I think a mechanic where missing a vote puts you with an extra vote on yourself for each lynch thereafter might be a good way to punish... maybe missing more votes can get more severe, like: miss 1 vote, +1 vote on you thererafter.... miss 2 vote, +3 thereafter.... miss 3 votes, +6... miss 4 votes, +10. And so on. Then you'd get death for non-voters eventually. Maybe you could even have a hard-working mechanism of shedding the extra votes through solid participation.

Linki: Sweet, thanks for the win, Host! Yeah DH, my teammate I never got to be with!

Well... I'm really not supposed to talk about it...

timmer wrote:

Long Con wrote:I am the longest-lived dead man I have seen in some time. I can still dance! *dances*

So none of you figured out what Keterman was talking about?

How about you tell us, oh Wise One?

He was just kidding. Turns out his meds are all wrong.

I am the longest-lived dead man I have seen in some time. I can still dance! *dances*

So none of you figured out what Keterman was talking about?

thellama73 wrote:

Long Con wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Long Con wrote:How do I fit the bill as a Tyler recruit under your theory?

I'll let you know after the lynch result comes in.

That's bull. Where's your balls, man?! Lay it out there before the post, it will be more honest that way.

Okay, if you insist.

You fit the bill perfectly, because you have been helpful, espousing theories, talking, but not attracting any suspicions. You weren't taking lynch votes. You lost in a fight, which gains you sympathy and makes people tend to view you as more honest. You're the perfect recruit. And then your opportunistic vote for Dom with no good reason behind it gave me reason to think that you are actually bad, and your responses since have only solidified my conviction.

I enjoyed that we were both gentlemen in the fight, with the Jack statements. No spamming and obviousness.

What is Llama afraid of?

thellama73 wrote:

Long Con wrote:How do I fit the bill as a Tyler recruit under your theory?

I'll let you know after the lynch result comes in.

That's bull. Where's your balls, man?! Lay it out there before the post, it will be more honest that way.

How do I fit the bill as a Tyler recruit under your theory?

Disappointing, juliets, but I'm glad it isn't for my truncated post. I really wasn't attempting any deception with that, just shorening for brevity. I think that meaning of your vote came across just fine in the sentences I used. It's true, I am a prime Tyler recruit due to my awesomeness.

And that fight theory is something anyone who has fought could come up with, I truly know no more than anyone else about how fights are decided.

Your vote was a lot more satisfying to me than most of the other bandwagoners... probably because of the complimentary nature of it.

Good game, all, see you in the next one! Good luck, Civvies.

Actually, you voted Dom because he fit the bill of your "theory", and that vote would have no point whatsoever UNLESS he was lynched. Either you are proving the theory, or you're voting off on Dom to hide behind it.

Which was it?

thellama73 wrote:The other possibility is that I am Tyler, which I clearly am not, because I never would have recruited DH. DH and I don't really "get along."

Of course, why would you recruit someone that everyone knows you'd never recruit?

Sorry guys, I'm helping BR get loaded for this 4-day Jamboree we are going to with the Sandwich Shack food truck. Like BR said, it's a huge job, and I have to prioritized this, it's "Go Time", she's leaving ASAP (and I'm going up tomorrow morning).

Llama, I find it terribly convenient that your "reason LC voted Llama" doesn't include the original reason, the way your ass was saved in the last lynch. In fact, you didn't even start coming after me until after I brought that up.

Bea, that last paragraph is an example of why I'm confused. Llama is bad, and I thought that last lynch was a clear, brightly shining arrow in that direction, but no one has even discussed it yet. Llama's "theories" have been so full of backtracking and after-the-fact-oops-I-got-called-on-it corrections, and most people are still eating out of his hand.

Wish I could say more, I really shouldn't be on the computer right now.

Well, I've already put down a case against Boogs for the way he saved Llama from getting lynched last time, so he's another one of my top suspects. His last vote was incredibly sketchy and I don't understand why more people aren't paying attention to it... I think literally one other person has even acknowledged it at all. I'm going to have to get used to how Mafia is played over here, I think, I'm a little confused by some of the gameplay I'm seeing.

Kylemii wrote:I haven't actually been able to read all that's happened in the last day phase, I've been busy on vacation and am not all that sure what's been happening since the last lynch. :x

I don't really have any feelings about any of the current vote havers, I know this is kinda lame but I think I have to randomize for now. I'll be able to catch up and kick ass in a couple days when I'm home and mg sister is back in her current state of residence.

*votes random sorsha*

Are you kdding me, Kylemii? What exactly did I cut out of this post that makes it have ANY different meaning whatsoever? You randomized your vote because you didn't have a clear idea of who you thought was bad.

I've been bandwagoned for bullshit reasons many times, but this one is right up there. I cut those vote posts down so as to not make a big chunk of quoted text to read, mostly because there was no reason to have that for what I was doing. It's not like I was using it to accuse you, or any of the other people, of anything. I was just comparing voting reasons when mine alone was singled out as sketchy.

Well, I have five votes now, obviously I'm 250% lynched already as Llama has warned me - in this game, everyone should know that 2 votes is enough to lynch a person. I tried, Civvies. I'm going to cast my vote for someone that you all REALLY need to take a second look at. He's been talking about nothing but his 'big theory' for most of the game instead of discussing actual suspicions, and his big theory has done nothing except get a Civilian lynched, and it's about to happen again. You need to stop being distracted and start looking at the facts of the game; they're right out there for you to see.

Good luck guys, you need to start lynching the bad guys very soon. *votes Llama*

I thought that the basic intention of your vote was clear in the part I quoted, juliets. I wasn't trying to deceive anyone about your reason for the vote - you were voting MR as a kind of a prod to provoke him into posting more, right? The part I quoted gets that across just fine in my opinion.

Have a look at any of the posts if you think there's more context that should be known, but I really don't believe I altered anyone's meaning.

I don't understand why someone said that my vote on Dom is 'suspicious'. Here's a sampling of the votes that were cast that day. Clearly there was not much consensus on who was guilty that day, because of the spread-out-ness of all the votes. I may be guilty of a lack of conviction on who is bad in this game, but that's all I'm guilty of. I mean, look at this sampling of voting reasons:

Boomslang wrote:Throwing my vote at Leamiteo to discourage revenge voting. Seems like an unnecessarily aggressive action.

Leamiteo wrote:I'm voting SVS because she is dead wrong about me.

Kylemii wrote:*votes random sorsha*

juliets wrote:So Mr. R, where have you gone and would you please come back to the game?

votes Mr. R

Canucklehead wrote:Imma vote for Elochin. She's been super absent, and possibly missed sending I her kill PM last night.....Basically random...but with the semblance of reason!

There's a whole rainbow of weak reasons people voted for people, and yet mine alone is suspicious. And because he's so interesting, let's look at Llama again, and his theory:

thellama73 wrote:Okay, here's the thing (are you ready to hear the thing? Cause here it is): The police can search someone every night to see if they are bad and kill them if they are, right? There have been no police kills lately, so I am going to assume they have been failing at this job. Who would the police likely search? Presumably the people they find suspicios in the thread, the same people they re voting to lynch. This leads me to conlcude that someone who has taken a lot of votes (like Bullz, for example) is almoost certainly innocent (until Tyler reads this and immediately recruits Bullz.)

For this reason, I am going to vote for someone who has taken NO suspicion, someone who the police would have no reason to check.

That person is Dom.

So, Llama, you wanted to vote for Dom because he was the best, most prime example of someone who fits your big theory on how Tyler recruits. What did you hope to accomplish with this vote, really? Either you wanted Dom to be lynched and found baddie, in which case you got what you were aiming for, and the results don't please the public, so now the OTHER votes on Dom (not yours) are suspicious because he was a Civilian. Or, you wanted NOBODY else to vote Dom, in which case I can think of two scenarios: a) you wanted to just poke at someone you thought was a baddie, without lynching them, which would make you a baddie target, which is pretty foolish, or b) you already knew Dom wasn't a baddie, and you didn't expect anyone to follow along with your vote, allowing you to hide out indefinitely behind your overdiscussed recruitment theory.

I don't think you're a fool, Llama. I do think you've devoted a great deal of posting to seeming pro-Civvie - like you're going to crack the code of who has been recruited through patient logic, but your first attempt to actually pick a name that fit your theory fell flat on its face, whatever the result you might have been hoping for. Then, when I brought up the convenient nature of Boogs saving you from lynch at the last minute, you immediately turn on me and try to discredit me. What do they call that on this site, a No U, an OMGUS? Whatever it is, you clearly did it.

As I recall, a number of people randomized that last vote. I don't think my vote for Dom was lamer than a randomization. It was practically a randomization, I just picked a player to vote for because not voting is big trouble around here. I didn't particularly suspect Dom any more or less than most of the other players, I just threw a vote his way for fun. I certainly didn't expect him to be lynched, unless a few other people at least would have voted for him, but the vote was very spread out.

First, "trying to shut me up" is a euphemism for trying to kill me. Killing me is the only way you'll shut me up.

And your backpedaling doesn't hold up too well either. In the fight votes before lynches started, the votes were spread out and low because a) people wanted to fight, and b) sometimes a town didn't have more than a handful of people.

The more we shine a light on what you say, Llama, the less it stands up to the scrutiny. I've never played with you before, so I don't know if this mixture of lazy errors and endless discussion without a solid endgame is your usual, but it feels like you are just spinning in circles and then accusing your accusers.

You've done a lot of "theorizing" about Tyler and his recruits... So which players fit your theory? Have you named names, or just floated possibilities for others to form conclusions?

thellama73 wrote:I'm voting for Long Con because I think his vote for Dom after me seems opportunistic, and his explanation didn't satisfy me one bit. Why would you place a second vote on someone, knowing that n this game, the vote is spread out and two votes is sometimes enough to get someone killed, over a grudge from a previous game? It doesn't pass the smell test.

When was two votes enough to get someone killed? Did you bother to check your facts, or do you just want to get rid of me before I continue to come after you and Boogs?

Day 5 vote leaders had 5, 5, 4, and 4 votes.
Day 6 vote leaders had 7 and 3 votes.
Day 7 Dom was lynched with 3 votes, which you, Llama, also had.

Have a look at the polls yourself if your memory is giving you trouble, Llama. Don't deliberately misrepresent the facts to try and make me look bad - what is opportunistic about placing a second vote on someone? Was every second vote placed on a person in the Day 7 lynch also opportunistic?

thellama73 wrote:Also, SVS, I wish you would devote the same amount of energy to disputing the numerous, absolutely ridiculous theories of "who Tyler can recruit" based on nothing but wild guess from people like Timmer, Hedgeowl and Long Con.

I can tell you this, Dom would be very happy to see the way you're posting now, Llama. I've had unbelievable trouble with him in the past few games, accusing me of things that never happened, and dropping grossly distorted facts like they're a given. I'll let you try and dig yourself out of this one though - just show me one post where I gave a theory of "who Tyler can recruit" and your credibility can be maintained.

I was thinking of voting Boogs over you for the Llama-lynch-save fiasco that got Dom killed, but this kind of desperate attempt to shut me up is really steering my vote your way.

thellama73 wrote:What I don't understand is why people were following my (basically random) vote for Dom. Given the fact that he flipped unrecruited civ, I think it looks bad. Furthermore, no one even gave a reason for following me.

Long Con wrote:I should vote now, could be my last chance. Not too sure about who's guilty here, so I vote Dom, because I think I owe him one.

That makes no sense.

As far as I can tell, Boogs gave no rationale for his vote at all.

Can you two explain your votes? Because I think they both look pretty shady.

Well, Dom has given me a hard time in the past and gotten me lynched before, so in the absence of a solid suspicion, I tossed a vote his way. It was the second vote on him, and I was surprised to see him get lynched with just one more vote.

I've already laid out my suspicion of you and boogs that Kylemii just mentioned. Immediately after you received your third vote, Llama, boogs gave Dom an equal number of votes, very much saving your life.

And I'd like to add, that if the part about posting mattering is right, that's a great way to reward players for participation. I love the idea.

Ok, here is Long Con's Grand Unified Theory Of How Fighting Works. From what I've read, a lot of people know some things about fighting, so I thought over what I know about it, and here's my theory. There are several elements that seem to affect fights. I hope I'm allowed to talk about them all, but from what I have seen, the 'possibly secret' parts have already been pretty well discussed.

1. Fighting Level - we all (I assume) started with a fighting level. I further assume that most of us started at level 1, and that winning increases your level. People who have won can confirm or deny that, if they're allowed. I also assume that a higher fighting level means you're a better fighter. A level 1 fighter CAN beat a level 2 fighter, I had that host confirmed.

2. Individual Challenge - fighters each get to have a personal challenge against their opponent, which, when judged to win by an independent party, assists them in their fight.

3. The Unknown Factor - some base decision-making thing that is somewhat random, or, even better, players earn without knowing it. I already gave my opinion of what I thought would make sense: the amount a person posts during their fight.

4. Ummm.. I was thinking it over in the car, and I thought I had four factors, but I can't remember what the other factor might have been. Maybe there was only three.

So, it's something like this: (# of posts during the fight + winner of fight-challenge gets ten points) x fighting level = your fight outcome. The player with the higher outcome wins the fight. The greater the difference between the outcomes, the greater the injury to the loser. Too great a difference, and they die.

And that's my theory.

It's probably safest to just work under the assumption that the baddies share BTSC. They must have some form of unity... If it's blind then lynches don't tell us as much I guess.

I think it's worth going over each fight to see if the person who posted more that night always won. I believe that it's likely that I posted less than Llama the night I fought him and lost.

So, BWT, what is the theory? Is it that participation in the thread is analogous to fighting when you're in the ring? Or is it that unfurl is bad?

Llama was just saying what you were saying, Jules!

Looks like it's MR and Keterman tonight!

The vote you can have, my friend... As soon as another contender arrives and asks.

Who wants to fight? I might even owe some folks a vote for voting for me, so speak up! Say "i want Long Con's vote!" And it shall be yours.

Sorsha, I'll look back at your question when I get home tonight from the fair... I could try fighting again if no one else wants to, though I'm a bit scared considering that I have already been seriously injured once.

Ok, so after BWT and Dom had two votes each, Llama received three later votes to put him in the lead. Boogs was voter 21, voting directly after the 20th vote which was Llamas third. Long story short, Boogs may have intentionally saved Llama's life. Could be cops together, could be Project Mayhem together... Could mean the same thing for all we know.

Definitely looked like a save though.

Wow, that was some seriously spread voting! Sorry Dom, I didn't think putting a second vote on you would lead to your untimely demise! That's what comes of such unsure Civvies, I guess. Boogs was the third vote that put Dom into the tied position, so that could mean something. I want to look at the poll and track how it went - was Boogs possibly saving someone?

Who wants to fight tonight?

I should vote now, could be my last chance. Not too sure about who's guilty here, so I vote Dom, because I think I owe him one.

DharmaHelper wrote:Was I rezzed yet?

Many people will die in this game, and their names will drift away on the breeze. Your death was important, DH. Your death gave this game something it very much needed - some focus. I think I speak for us all, when I applaud you for making the ultimate sacrifice to make this game better.

Vompatti wrote:I wouldn't mind being recruited.

Would you mind if I voted for you for this sneaky comment?

Hey, posting here from the Fenelon Falls fairgrounds, just taking advantage of a slow time to check in... They have free Wi-Fi here, so that's cool.

Maybe we should start tracking Tylers here... Like, pick a person to call Tyler, and then track where they went. If it doesn't include a DH connection, then they're not Tyler. Otherwise we can make lists for each Tyler possibility, and see whose name comes up the most for possible recruits.

Just a thought, obviously I'm not doing that here. At the fair.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Leamiteo wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Oh God I almost forgot

I am not seeing the cases here other than as related to proximity. I am voting Lea again as not only was she in the right place at the right time, but that whole exchange she had with DH felt off to me, and now she I's apparently using it to clear her from association with him.

It was not an effort to clear association with him, it was stating that I am not connected with him. Different. He was bad and trying to draw attention from himself to me. The end. You continuing to point to this exchange which was simply me trying to diffuse a miffed baddie being called out for being bad makes me you and all those who join this silly bandwagon you keep trying to form.

For someone who is trying to "clear association with him", this sounds a bit defensive and overly emotional. And what bandwagon? I don't think you've been in severe danger of getting lynched yet, so I don't see how you can claim that a bandwagon is forming against you.

She didn't claim that a bandwagon was forming, she claimed that S~V~S and others were trying to form one. I don't know Lea too well, but if she has played a lot of Mafia, then she probably has good enough instincts to see where the wind is blowing. As soon as it sticks that she is connected to DH, then she's as good as lynched. THEN the bandwagons would circle up.

And in a quick read of my own post here, I can see that S~V~S said Lea is "apparently using it to clear her from association with him", THEN Lea said "It was not an effort to clear association with him"... BWT, you then started in with 'For someone who is trying to "clear association with him", this sounds a bit defensive and overly emotional.'... as if you are quoting lea with the "clear association" thing... and yet you quoted her oppositely. See what I'm saying?

Just bringing that up because I'm sure it would frustrated Lea to be misquoted in that way, then she'd have to correct you, and then someone would say "Look how defensive she is, she can't give it up!"... and if we're going to lynch someone, I'd rather have it be for real things, not drummed-up meta-defensiveness over lazy quoting.

Dom wrote:

Long Con wrote: Anyways, ten minutes left to vote... I was diggin' on the case against Vomps until several people practically vouched for him, so I'm not going to thrust him back into the tie-spotlight so soon.

I felt a bit differently about this. Can you expand?

Not sure how to expand. The case on Vompatti I was referring to was laid out here, and that stood out the most to me among suspicions. Then at least three people made a point to say that they're not voting for Vompatti, that they're feeling his Civvieness or something. To see that many people sticking their neck out to defend him made me more uncomfortable to vote for him.

Dom, you felt differently about that situation, what is your angle on things?

timmer wrote:I trust Long Con to not cheat if he's going to help BR vote. However, it's prob not a good thing to do... what if lc logs on and sees that br has four waiting msgs or something. .. it might get his brain turning even if he wouldn't read them. Again, I trust lc and br, but next time man, you might need to wake her and tell her to vote herself

When you're married and use the same computer, you learn to work around each other in a Mafia game. It's just something we always have to deal with, and we generally ignore each other for most of the game to make things easier, and to ensure that any suspicion of trust either of us garner is strictly for in-game behaviour.

Hate to see you get bored Elohcin. I'll vote for you to fight too!

unfurl wrote:Holy bandwagon in a sort of last hour!

Long Con wrote: Also, BR is still asleep (we were up late last night), so I'm just going to get her vote from her and do it. I don't want to see her die. She can post later when she gets up.

Is allowed that people can vote for others?, sorry, if I sound too serious but that feels unfair imo, even you too are realated, I dont think it will be allowed for other players

She was just using me as an extension of her hand on the mouse. It was her vote, made by her.

I got seriously injured last time. Not sure I want to fight again.

Long Con wrote: Blooper was an honest cop. RIP, and thanks for your service, nijuukyugou.

Never mind, must have been a Host mistake... and I saw it!

Blooper was a regular Civ. Unrecruited, though. Not as bad, but still... not good.

Blooper was an honest cop. RIP, and thanks for your service, nijuukyugou.

I'd say that five people missed the vote... lemme go see who.

BWT
Elohcin
Leamiteo
Mister Rearranger
Spacedaisy

Yikes guys... yikes.

Hi Juliets, I have been quiet this game because a) I've been a busy guy lately, not to mention I was just away at the cottage for the long weekend, and b) until recently, the game was very unmafialike and I was doing more listening than speaking, because I didn't really know what to say. I said "pick me for a fight" because fights were the only thing going. Actually, c) I was seriously injured in my fight, and ended up unable to post for a day and night period.

Anyways, ten minutes left to vote... I was diggin' on the case against Vomps until several people practically vouched for him, so I'm not going to thrust him back into the tie-spotlight so soon. I'm going to go with BWT or nijuukyugou... oh wait, nijuu is way out in the lead since I last checked. Nijuu is getting lynched already. Ok, I'll vote Nij.

Also, BR is still asleep (we were up late last night), so I'm just going to get her vote from her and do it. I don't want to see her die. She can post later when she gets up.

thellama73 wrote:Maybe it's the fact that I'm operating no 3 hours sleep, but the paranoid little voice inside me is starting to wonder whether Timmer is playing the greatest baddie game of all time.

Is that just a random feeling, or do you have a case on him? This is Day 6, but it still feels so early with where suspicions are.

What was the case on Vompatti again? Keterman seems to think that he would be automatically receiving votes because he came so close to lynch last time, but was there a solid case against him, or did votes just kind of fall his way in a lazy semi-bandwagon?

timmer wrote:So the roles say the cops have btsc... so if one gets recruited, the others are goners, I guess? Yikes...

It definitely behooves the cops to check their own ranks as soon as possible. Perhaps the host has safeguards against a domino effect like that, but better safe than sorry.

And I wasn't lurking, I was catching up after being gone all weekend.

I didn't vote to go to Chicago. I had already decided to stay in Wilmington after missing the vote to leave... I found that staying in the same thread would minimize of back-reading I would have to do, which appealed to me in a time that it seemed everyone was just talking about fighting without understanding what fighting was or meant. So, that's just another reason why a person wouldn't vote for Chicago, it's not from some nefarious intention, I just wanted to stay where I knew the thread.