The Syndicate

Enrique wrote:I predict Zebra or Matt will rake in a lot of last minute lazy votes. Does anyone else get that vibe?

I think I'm gonna go with sig. I don't like, well, I don't like most things he's talked about recently. I think open info sharing is a terribad idea and I'm concerned he pushed so hard with it, even going as far as to spin Epig's warning as something directed at the mafia. He's been very open to discussion, and that's great, but ultimately I just keep finding him on IMO the pro-scum side of every issue.

btw sig, I know I didn't answer your question re: zebra's plan. I don't give it importance basically because I'm not sure even she knew what she was doing, but if she did I just... don't care. It's got nothing to do with me and no one in the thread can know what's going on in her head so why dwell on it?

Abstractly I guess I saw it as a sort of WIFOM, where maybe you wouldn't go there because there's nothing. Or maybe you would because you thought she was lying. I dunno, I just think it's a bit silly.

linki: ek has only played of Montreal before, he's new here. He started that game similarly until he got some info and started working out stuff from the thread. I imagine this game looks massive to him, but he'll probably chime in when he thinks he has something.

juliets wrote:Bass, what data or information have you got to support that people who point that out are bad?

linki zebra

juliets wrote:If you are still around bass I would appreciate an answer to my question before you go.

a2thezebra wrote:In that case I think I understand what you're saying but you don't understand what I'm saying. The only reason I pointed out that I was bad in that game was because I feel that it was strange of you to suspect me for differing from a game where I was bad. Also, I don't see why responding to a suspicion based on meta with more meta is suspicious. How else would I respond to it?

a2thezebra wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:But like I said, my response was only meta-based because your suspicion was meta-based. Why is me pointing out being a baddie in that game to explain why I find your logic in suspecting me for differing from that game flawed suspicious to you?

linki - Metalmarsh, for one. I think some others did too, perhaps MacDougall.

They said something this game?

No, in Star Wars. They pointed out (MM before my flip, and MacDougall after my flip) that you were suspecting me for invalid reasons, even though you were right about my alignment.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:But like I said, my response was only meta-based because your suspicion was meta-based. Why is me pointing out being a baddie in that game to explain why I find your logic in suspecting me for differing from that game flawed suspicious to you?

linki - Metalmarsh, for one. I think some others did too, perhaps MacDougall.

I understand what you are saying but I don't think you understand what I'm saying. It's because you said "I was a baddie that game" that's what stuck out the most.

I get that (at least I think I do), and I'm asking why you find that suspicious, why that stuck out.

a2thezebra wrote:But like I said, my response was only meta-based because your suspicion was meta-based. Why is me pointing out being a baddie in that game to explain why I find your logic in suspecting me for differing from that game flawed suspicious to you?

linki - Metalmarsh, for one. I think some others did too, perhaps MacDougall.

a2thezebra wrote:But like I said, my response was only meta-based because your suspicion was meta-based. Why is me pointing out being a baddie in that game to explain why I find your logic in suspecting me for differing from that game flawed suspicious to you?

linki - Metalmarsh, for one. I think some others did too, perhaps MacDougall.

a2thezebra wrote:Not to mention that I and others already have clarified that you were misunderstanding my game during that game but you're still under the impression that I'm known for lynching low posters anyway, when that's not the case at all.

a2thezebra wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:Let me make it clear right now that I refuse to support the lynch of a low poster.

I find this odd coming from you since in the past you have been for lynching low posters.

You're obviously referring to Star Wars. For one, I was a baddie then. Two, I disagree that I was lynching low posters or even advocating the lynch of low posters. I think you got that impression because I did an ISO of every player on Day 1 to appear supatown with GTH reads on each one, but even then with most of the lower posters that I read as bad (and I read a lot of the higher posters as bad as well) I said with each one of them that I could easily change my mind because my thoughts on them came from such little content at that time, and in most cases that turned out to be true. Hell, one of the low posters that I read as bad was my teammate DrWilgy, and he was the only one I was really vocal about possibly advocating a lynch for later in the game.

I understand that but the thing that's bothering me this game with you is how you keep going out your way to say " I was bad when I did that" . I think it's typical baddie behavior to point out how they are playing the game different this game. If that makes any sense.

But I'm not the one who brought up my meta, you did. If you're going to suspect me based on how my game here is different from previous games, then the only defense I give is going to be illustrating how it's an inaccurate comparison in more ways than one. I also wouldn't say that I'm even using it as a defense, I'm just using to clarify what I feel are some misunderstandings with you about my game in general. I have never been known for lynching low posters and even in the game you're thinking of where you kept claiming that that's what I was doing, I wasn't doing that. And I was bad in that game in the first place, so I don't see how suspecting me because I'm differing from a game where I was bad makes any sense.

If that's the case then why start off by saying I was a baddie then? Why not just clarify that I was misunderstanding your game?

Because it's a valid point that I was a baddie then, so I find it odd (and still do) that you're saying it's suspicious of me to be differing from a game...where I was a baddie.

a2thezebra wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:Let me make it clear right now that I refuse to support the lynch of a low poster.

I find this odd coming from you since in the past you have been for lynching low posters.

You're obviously referring to Star Wars. For one, I was a baddie then. Two, I disagree that I was lynching low posters or even advocating the lynch of low posters. I think you got that impression because I did an ISO of every player on Day 1 to appear supatown with GTH reads on each one, but even then with most of the lower posters that I read as bad (and I read a lot of the higher posters as bad as well) I said with each one of them that I could easily change my mind because my thoughts on them came from such little content at that time, and in most cases that turned out to be true. Hell, one of the low posters that I read as bad was my teammate DrWilgy, and he was the only one I was really vocal about possibly advocating a lynch for later in the game.

I understand that but the thing that's bothering me this game with you is how you keep going out your way to say " I was bad when I did that" . I think it's typical baddie behavior to point out how they are playing the game different this game. If that makes any sense.

But I'm not the one who brought up my meta, you did. If you're going to suspect me based on how my game here is different from previous games, then the only defense I give is going to be illustrating how it's an inaccurate comparison in more ways than one. I also wouldn't say that I'm even using it as a defense, I'm just using to clarify what I feel are some misunderstandings with you about my game in general. I have never been known for lynching low posters and even in the game you're thinking of where you kept claiming that that's what I was doing, I wasn't doing that. And I was bad in that game in the first place, so I don't see how suspecting me because I'm differing from a game where I was bad makes any sense.

a2thezebra wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:Let me make it clear right now that I refuse to support the lynch of a low poster.

I find this odd coming from you since in the past you have been for lynching low posters.

You're obviously referring to Star Wars. For one, I was a baddie then. Two, I disagree that I was lynching low posters or even advocating the lynch of low posters. I think you got that impression because I did an ISO of every player on Day 1 to appear supatown with GTH reads on each one, but even then with most of the lower posters that I read as bad (and I read a lot of the higher posters as bad as well) I said with each one of them that I could easily change my mind because my thoughts on them came from such little content at that time, and in most cases that turned out to be true. Hell, one of the low posters that I read as bad was my teammate DrWilgy, and he was the only one I was really vocal about possibly advocating a lynch for later in the game.

a2thezebra wrote:Let me make it clear right now that I refuse to support the lynch of a low poster.

juliets wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:OK just caught up and I can remember who else said something about my tone but if someone could tell me how my tone has seemed bad this game that would be real helpful.

Bass, Mac made a post about your tone that provided some examples, unless what you're asking for is more examples from other people.

MacDougall wrote:Bass I appreciate you wanting me to quantify my tone ping with posts but when I read the posts for content the content is not bad. The content is not the issue, the context of it ... the timing and tone. So me sharing these quotes with you isn't going to help but here goes anyway...

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I agree with Enrique. I don't think any of the cops are going to want the game to end if there win condition isn't met.

This is the sort of post I find early game scum use to start to blend in. You buddied and it's non provoking content.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:This is the same reason I thought zebra was bad last game u played with her. She just says shit to make it seems like she cares.

This is again latching on to other people's content. Easy hunting. Pings me tonally.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Null = Nothing.

You were alarmed literally by *nothing*

I'm with S~V~S here.

I also agree. If you think the option was bad why would you think any of the people who voted it to be bad?

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I would like to hear DH's thoughts about everything that has happen today.

Buddying up to DH. This irks me for different reasons.

Like I said Bass I'm trying to avoid reading the content as much as reading whether the tone is natural here and you are one who has come across like your posts conceal something about your intention. You are lending your weight to other peoples theories not creating your own as well which is bad. And you've already started buddying. Your reaction to me seemed alarmed as well which isn't fantastic.

Also day zero Mac is 95% accurate so you might as well concede.

a2thezebra wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I am very seriously not sure why . I don;t think anything I have said is all that awful.

It's not your fault, it's mine. Apparently I am just the worst person in history at communicating what I want to communicate, because every time you've responded to me for both this game and the last it's felt to me like you've responded to an imaginary person with an imaginary post.

I feel this way a lot but I don't think it's anyone fault I think it's the lack of tone and not knowing someone that makes it hard to communicate. Just take the night off and relax its just a game nothing to get mad about and ruin your night.

Thanks for the support, from you that means a lot since I've always thought you disliked me. I do think it's my fault in this case because I feel like I'm doing a piss-poor job of articulating what I mean so S~V~S (and everyone in general really I guess) can give the kind of response that I hope for. I'm not mad I'm just overwhelmed at myself and wishing I could do better.

linki @ SVS - It's not you, really it's not.

a2thezebra wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I am very seriously not sure why . I don;t think anything I have said is all that awful.

It's not your fault, it's mine. Apparently I am just the worst person in history at communicating what I want to communicate, because every time you've responded to me for both this game and the last it's felt to me like you've responded to an imaginary person with an imaginary post.

S~V~S wrote:I am very seriously not sure why . I don;t think anything I have said is all that awful.

MacDougall wrote:

bea wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:How about a new discussion point: What do you all think of this post by MacDougall?

MacDougall wrote:Checking in to say that Turnip Head is bad.

I haven't said anything about it yet myself.

I personally read it as Mac being Mac. And poking TH just cuz. Kinda like his verson of "ya game!"

No, TH pinged me. His posts are either half committed or come across like falsified opinions. I intended for it to inspire people to take a closer look at Turnip Head.

Turnip Head wrote:Well I'm sorry that you don't like my opinions Mac.

I can appreciate that you haven't got much else in the way of capacity to argue with the way I laid out my opinion so despite this post being something I could easily be antagonised by I'll give it a point in your favour tbh.

Bass_the_Clever wrote: Why me?

Tone ping.

MacDougall wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Looks like I'm going to have a lot to comment on huh Bass?

Yeah this is challenging. But good.

So far I have been tone reading everything. The content is verbose and largely pointless thread pulling where there are no loose threads so I'm focusing on trying to see who is being disingenuous.

The one who I keep coming to is Turnip Head.

All the prolific posters are coming across fine to me. That's your Doms, Goldens, Zebras, MPs, SVS, Ernriques ... but not Turnip Head.

Lorab's couple of posts had the vibe I commonly find in day 0 baddies as well. Bass_the_clever has made me squint some. bea made my intuition glean a little.

I can totally vibe with DharmaHelper's play so far because after the GoC I am fence sitting the fuck out of this and I expect he wants to as well.

I've liked spirityo's feel too. Also nerolunar has seemed quite natty which is good. Matt looks natty.

Just want to reiterate that I barely read any of the actual content because I found much of what I was reading dramatic over exaggeration of irrelevant points.

So to reiterate here's some of these

For Turnip Head, Lorab, Bass and bea.

DharmaHelper wrote:Looks like I'm going to have a lot to comment on huh Bass?

sig wrote:I don't see a real case against me at all TH I see you taking things out of context, I have not brought stuff up before as a civ and civ sig always gets lynched for "speaking his mind", and when I did answer Bass's point you used it to build a case against me SO I was right in not answering and you prove my point of it being a set up.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:As for Sig when I made that post about what you said I was just joking. I thought you knew that and that's why you never said anything about it. You bringing it up way later makes me wonder about you.

I didn't bring it up TH did and that is why I mentioned it. If you were joking then fine, however you saying this right after TH case seems staged to me. Also your post in no way seemed like a joke and if it was why didn't you comment earlier on TH's thoughts that it was just a joke? I don't think it was a joke and you're saying it is to further an attempt to lynch me.

I also find it odd TH that your first post was what I saw as joking back

Turnip Head wrote:

sig wrote:It wouldn't be a new record so no thank you, if you can lynch my day 0 then go ahead otherwise I'd prefer not to get lynched until mid game.

Why do we fall, sig?

But now you are trying to get me lynched for me making a jokey post and not responding to what seemed like an attempt to set me up. This is a weak case based around a weak reason. You also claim to have watched/played with me and never seen me not address something. How do you now what I choose to address or not? I'd also think after just hosting me and me getting mislynched day 1 for making jokey posts you'd be less likely to form a case against me based around a jokey post.

DharmaHelper wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I would like to hear DH's thoughts about everything that has happen today.

i'll comment tomorrow.

MovingPictures07 wrote:The last thing this thread needs right now is a pissing match between two high posters. It was starting to develop between Enrique and Golden, and I legitimately saw nothing there, so I made that vocally aware. Now with zebra, Dom honestly asked me to name someone I thought looked most suspicious gut-wise out of Day 0, I answered him honestly, and what has ensued in the surrounding time is a zebra misunderstandingfest, but now that I've seen more from her on it I understand her viewpoint. Consequently, I was able to erase my very vague gut-based suspicion in mine and others' attempts to engage her in conversation about it. I understand that civilians feel alone because literally anyone could be deceiving them, but people need to be equally skeptical and yet actively trying to understand everyone else as much as possible, rather than laser-focusing on one player. Especially this early in the game.

sprityo wrote:The game hasn't even started and I can't even begin to consume the 5 pages that were made just today. Like damn.

It's like if I even tried to start poking at someone, it'd be lost in the sea of arguments and finger pointing.

I mean that and the 4 quotes deep quote boxes (which are giant on my phone mind you)

a2thezebra wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:This is the same reason I thought zebra was bad last game u played with her. She just says shit to make it seems like she cares.

And the last game you played with me, the reasons why you suspected me were incorrect. Even when I am bad I am more genuine than not with how I express myself and I never just say shit, thank you very much.

Haha how were they incorrect I felt you were picking on low posters to seem like you were trying to find scum among them. You were bad and I was right.

Oh boy, I am not game for arguing about a game that is long over, but I also cannot let you think you're right when you think that I was picking on anyone, let alone low posters. That's fucked and I don't do that, so you were wrong for reading me as scum because of that, even if you were right for reading me as scum in general. Again, I never just say shit.

a2thezebra wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:This is the same reason I thought zebra was bad last game u played with her. She just says shit to make it seems like she cares.

And the last game you played with me, the reasons why you suspected me were incorrect. Even when I am bad I am more genuine than not with how I express myself and I never just say shit, thank you very much.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Null = Nothing.

You were alarmed literally by *nothing*

I'm with S~V~S here.

Golden wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I agree with Enrique. I don't think any of the cops are going to want the game to end if there win condition isn't met.

Oh good. Then you also agree with me, I assume. Because I don't disagree with that, and it is not where Enrique and I disagree.

Enrique wrote:you can just answer dommmm

I swear I'm just trying to play. I've been very irritable lately, but that's not what's happening here, I am legitimately trying to get a point across and that's not gonna happen if nobody lays anything down.

DharmaHelper wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Eighth

God I have missed playing mafia with you and everyone else. Also on that note I know the games that I signed up for in the past I didn't participate or subbed out its because I got into a serious relationship and couldn't figure out how to balance the two. Me and my lady friend have moved into together so it should make balancing the two a lot easier. So my hat goes off to anyone who has a significant other and plays mafia because it's extremely hard if your significant other is like mine and doesn't like cell phones or laptops out while we are hanging out. Lol

Well Golden! That's a nice big glass of WIFOM, mind if I have a sip? Why did you wait until we were in game to let us know about this? You could've mentioned it in the pre game lobby... Er... Maybe you did. Didn't really check but I'm assuming you didn't based upon your posts. Also... Are we hinting at rolls already Golden? *sings* ~Epi's gonna kill you!~

I'd like to go GCPD.

*Looks at this post for any sign of Golden*

Golden wrote:

Enrique wrote:

Golden wrote:@Hosts - what happens if both crime families try to buy off the same cop?

Bass's idea sounds sensible enough, but I'd also point out that everyone from the Asylum appears to be independent. So, it might not help us find the crime families (who seem more analagous to mafia).

But a lot of those independents don't seem exactly friendly.

Independents whom most civvies need dead to win

They do? It doesn't look to me like ANY civilians need the independents dead, to me. Whereas the town definitely needs the crime families dead.

This is literally the first think I noticed when I got my role card, so right back at you.

Golden wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Eighth

God I have missed playing mafia with you and everyone else. Also on that note I know the games that I signed up for in the past I didn't participate or subbed out its because I got into a serious relationship and couldn't figure out how to balance the two. Me and my lady friend have moved into together so it should make balancing the two a lot easier. So my hat goes off to anyone who has a significant other and plays mafia because it's extremely hard if your significant other is like mine and doesn't like cell phones or laptops out while we are hanging out. Lol

It really is. The key is negotiation. Good luck bass! And congrats, I'm happy for you!

MovingPictures07 wrote:Yay game! Can't wait to play this.

Like Golden, however, I anticipate that I will be playing a quieter game than normal. I need to come up with that dissertation, among many other things. But I'll inevitably get sucked in still I'm sure.

Didn't even realize this is a map game... so that's pretty sweet. Should have assumed it would be with LC at the helm though. Where do we want to go?

MovingPictures07 wrote:Yay game! Can't wait to play this.

Like Golden, however, I anticipate that I will be playing a quieter game than normal. I need to come up with that dissertation, among many other things. But I'll inevitably get sucked in still I'm sure.

Didn't even realize this is a map game... so that's pretty sweet. Should have assumed it would be with LC at the helm though. Where do we want to go?

S~V~S wrote:Eighth

sig wrote:It wouldn't be a new record so no thank you, if you can lynch my day 0 then go ahead otherwise I'd prefer not to get lynched until mid game.