The Syndicate

thellama73 wrote:Llama, made cocky by his instincts on Long Con being so devastatingly correct, has returned to an earlier suspicion. I've been doing some reading, and one thing keeps sticking out to me. Here are all the posts of Kylemii talking about fighting.

Beginning in New Castle on Day 1

Kylemii wrote: i don't particularly want to fight anyone, i'd be okay with voting DH since he volunteered

Then, no mention of fighting until Wilmington on Day 4:

Kylemii wrote:everyone seems so down to fight. there must be something to it.

i'll fight anyone.

Quite a difference. Then we all came here, and Kyle appeared to become suddenly quite eager.

Kylemii wrote: I didn't fight either. i was worried about the risk until day 4 or so when i was just like "yeah whatever"

Kylemii wrote:holy shit :0

rest in peace everyone

i'd be okay with fighting

Kylemii wrote: i would be okay with fighting especially if it were against another fighting novice.

Kylemii wrote: I would still like to fight at some point in case fighting skill level ends up being important down the road but I'm not really in a hurry.

In each case, he tries to sound casual, but the number of posts seems to indicate almost a desperation for fighting. I asked him about this, and this was his response.

Kylemii wrote: i only wanna fight because i'm weak and i'm worried that fight skill may somehow end up being important in the endgame. i was worried about dying in a fight early on but now i've realized that the risk of dying early may be a fair trade-off for possibly not getting screwed in the endgame if i somehow end up living that long. Does that make sense?

Now, I may be wrong, but I smell a rat here. I think Kyle might be Tyler, who I suspect is quite powerful in fights. My theory is that he didn't want to fight early for fear of tipping his hand, but once he had a few recruits and the game was starting to go his way, he wanted to fight in order to accelerate his killing. The other possibility is that he knows something about the endgame that we don't, which would explain his last two posts on the subject.

It's also worth noting theat he studiously avoided voting for Long Con and he has been quite strong about pursuing Bullzeye, whom I trust more than just about anyone else.

timmer wrote:Kyle is a mixed bag for me. There isn't much in his posts that is pingy. He suspected bullz for a time, but I can't knock him for that, I did, too. Really, the only thing that is semi-pingy is his vote for Long Con.

Kylemii wrote:i see... *nods*

in any case, i need to vote tonight. i don't see myself voting boogs any more because his explanation felt sincere to me. i'm likely to vote for LC because of that selective quoting thing. my instincts tell me that that is a baddie-like thing to do.

I'm going to be honest here, guys. While I wholeheartedly supported the case against Long Con, there is just something about Kyle's vote. To only mention the selective quoting part in explaining why he would vote Long Con seems a bit weak to me, because that was really the weaker link in that case. Kyle voted 4th for Long Con which imo is roughly the point where baddie teammates tend to start piling on in a lynch.

I'll put kyle somewhere in the middle of the pack. His vote for Long Con doesn't feel right, but that's kind of only one thing.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Long Con has been lynched. He was a Policeman recruited to Project Mayhem.

Boogs has been lynched. He was an unrecruited Civilian.
Boomslang has been lynched. He was an unrecruited Civilian.
DisgruntledPorcupine 2.0 has been lynched. He was an unrecruited Civilian.
Leamiteo has been lynched. She was an unrecruited Civilian.
Metalmarsh 89 2.0 has been lynched. He was an unrecruited Civilian.
Vompatti has been lynched. He was an unrecruited Civilian.

bea wrote:@Kyle - and boogs - what I'd like to hear from you is well - anything. Even if it is just "I'm frustrated." I mean, I'm frustrated too. And I'm over worked too. And I'm still trying. I'd like to hear any sort of opinion you have on any of the things you read. I'd just like to hear from you. Growing quiet because you are feeling lost is not the way to go in these games. Keep trying keep plugging on - keep asking questions.

I don't want to lynch players because they are quiet (and I don't mean low posters. I mean people who normally talk but have just gone MIA with no warning.) and lost. I want them to say - I'm lost. I want them to post what they are thinking even if it is convoluted. Because suddenly quiet from normally active players sets off bells for me and I want you to turn off the bells if you are a civ.

I'm lost. My brainz are fried. Unfurl!!! we should have a fried brainz banner. Like Spacegoat.:srrsnd: But I'm trying. That's what I want from you kyle. Just what I'm doing.

DisgruntledPorcupine wrote:Well I'm probably about to die anyway so I'll just vote LC. I've been doing too much lately (mostly going to the fair. Woo.) and haven't been able to focus at all. My fault really.

Long Con wrote:

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.

Keterman wrote:And the fact that you're pushing for a LC lynch when it's pretty fucking clear that he's town does not make things look better for you.

bea wrote:I'm pretty sure I've met my posting requirements at this point, and I'm sorry for the read through in the morning of my big long posts people are going to have to read. But I am MOST DEFINITELY NOT going to be awake when the poll closes and I want to get as many of my thoughts out in the thread as I can before I make up my mind and vote and also so they are on record for those of you who will come in later and base judgements on what happened at night.

OK -so - also - what's been playing on my mind is that it's Day 8 and it *feels* like we should have some direction by now. But also - it's really kinda Day 4 in a game that doesn't have many leads. I know we've darn near exhausted DH's posts at this point. I'm wondering now why Project Mayhem chose to kill INH. Was it just because he was a cop? Cuz really, this is INH. I adore the boy personally, but lets be honest, he can shoot himself in the foot pretty quickly. As a baddie, I'd be inclined to just let INH be INH and ya know - civs will prolly lynch him. This is super odd to me and if I somehow forget to look at this, maybe my betters could? Or maybe they should also not trust what I find and look for themselves. Or I'm totally skipping a goove again. I feel like I type things and ideas this game and not many of them stick enough to get commented on or noticed.





If SVS is right in the idea that they can recruit OR kill, an INH kill seems...well....weird. Doesn't it? I only read the other threads once, but INH seemed particularly quiet this game. I don't really even remember him standing out. I think when I'm done here I'm going to try to find his post in the other threads. Because the more I think on this, the weirder it seems.

bea wrote:I would love to hear more from BR and Kyle. I keep forgetting about them except when they post. Leam seems to have dropped off the face of the earth since SVS dropped her suspicion.

juliets wrote:Very interesting LC. I see you took part of my vote post but didn't bother to take the whole thing because well, it looks stupider the way you chose to represent it. There is no context or comment. I wonder how many of the other vote posts you cut off part of the reason. Would a civ do that? Or an unrecruited policeman? I don't know, I'll sleep on it. And just for the record, here is the entire part of the post that had to do with my vote:

Canucklehead wrote:I love you, kylemii. I will never vote for you again as long as I live ever.

Canucklehead wrote:I WANT TO HIT SOMEONE! Vote for me to fight, you turds!

Bullzeye wrote:

Kylemii wrote:

Bullzeye wrote:You were the first to vote for me. I didn't have a lynch opponent. It wouldn't have made sense to lynch Nev, no, but I don't think it makes sense to lynch anyone on the logic that they can just replace back in. You're still going to be responsible for the death of a civ even if they can come back in someone else's role that's still one civ down.

You keep calling yourself "a civ" as if it's a subjectively guaranteed thing. Obviously lynching a guaranteed civvie so they can replace another probable civvie would be a bad plan but that isn't what the situation was. You know that.

I'm not doing that at all. What I am saying is that you literally said it would be fine to lynch me if I'm a civ because I could replace back in. YOU said that even if I was a civ it would be okay for me to die. You said that.

Bullzeye wrote:You were the first to vote for me. I didn't have a lynch opponent. It wouldn't have made sense to lynch Nev, no, but I don't think it makes sense to lynch anyone on the logic that they can just replace back in. You're still going to be responsible for the death of a civ even if they can come back in someone else's role that's still one civ down.

Bullzeye wrote:I find it ridiculous that I'm still being voted. There isn't even really a proper case against me and I've shown that already.

Dom wrote: I feel okay voting bulls. He is pinging me and I am voting based on who I am suspicious of. I do not feel guilty for it. I have, historically, been wrong about Bullz, but it's my biggest thing so far. However...

One day you will learn. Rather than saying 'historically I've been wrong' perhaps you should say 'of all the times I suspected Bullz and hounded him relentlessly over the smallest things I was right exactly once and even that was only technically because I thought he was on the other baddie team'. You've literally never been right about me but each time we play together you do the exact same thing expecting to finally be right. Have you ever played Far Cry 3? Have I ever told you the definition of insanity?

To be fair, you aren't actually hounding me here but I just wanted to nip it in the bud because it gets tiring.

Dom wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Heck, I'm not even sure about Bullz. I was all gung-ho to vote for him again today, but his defenses are starting to come off as more sincere to me.

So because someone doesn't suspect me (shocking when you consider the bulletproof case against me, I know) they're automatically suspicious?

Kylemii wrote: maybe you will someday feel less unsure about me? there's nothing really going on with me, I voted somewhat lazily for bullz, based on vibes which were enhanced by other people's thoughts, which basically describes like 60% of my thought process in almost every game i play recently until things get narrowed down. He felt that I was being disingenuous about it because i voted for him without having earlier said words about a vague feeling i had about him back before lynch polls existed and there was no purpose in bringing up suspicions.

This isn't why I thought your vote was off. First, I thought you were being disingenuous because you made a completely unverifiable claim and expected it to be believed. Second, you tried to excuse your vote just in case I was a civ by saying I could just replace back in. Again, that's no excuse for lynching a civ. If you'd said it after the fact it'd still be a bad excuse for your vote.

thellama73 wrote:Super busy today and not much time, but I want to make sure I don't miss the vote.

I'm actually going wildcard and voting for Kyle. He is on unfurl's list and I found his eagerness to participate in the last fight a little unsettling. Just a gut ping.

bea wrote:I'm going to follow llama's Kyle vote. I am not 100 percent here, but I've been reading all the stuff going on with him and it's been the part of the discussion this cycle I have the most unsure feelings about.

I'm about to pass out now and I know I'm not going to be up at stoopid o'clock in the am to vote.


so vote kyle

Bullzeye wrote:

Kylemii wrote:

Bullzeye wrote:

Kylemii wrote:i'm going to a party that won't be over until the poll end time, so i need to vote now. i'm going with bullz.

worst case scenario, if he's an unrecruited civ then he can just replace back in for nevi.

This is really lazy. You haven't actually contributed to anything against me, just said you'd been thinking about it earlier. When exactly was this 'earlier'? We were only in the same city twice iirc, right at the beginning when only DH wanted to fight and then on day 3 when I was injured and couldn't post. Also saying it's fine to lynch a civ because I'll just replace back in sounds like you know you're wrong and are coming up with an excuse before it's proven so you can fall back onto it later. Pretty weak really.

no, it's just good strategy. the poll was leaning towards voting a player who was likely not a recruit. we've seen dead unrecruited civs replace in in the past so there is precedent for it.

i hadn't contributed anything against you because there was no motivation to do so. we were all neutral until very recently and there was no lynch mechanic.

I know dead civs can replace back in, but it's not an excuse for lynching them. If I'd been lynched and then replaced back in you wouldn't have been able to rid yourself of your part in my death by saying "oh it's okay he came back in". Plus for all you know that 'strategy' could kill an active civ and then replace an inactive baddie with an active one. Maybe not in this game where it's likely that the recruits are players who'd been relatively active, but still.

Plus you saying you'd had similar thoughts to people airing suspicion of me is completely unverifiable since you never mentioned it before, and since you never gave any examples of things that had made you think that it could just as easily be a lie. Basically your vote feels like a classic low flying bandwagon vote. I've done it before, used a prior engagement as an excuse to drop a quick throwaway vote onto someone who looks like a likely bandwagon target and hoped my vote would be forgotten in the shuffle.

Kylemii wrote:Is fighting really important? Like.... does it do anything besides make you better at fighting if you win?

Even though I'm not in that list

thellama73 wrote:

Keterman wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Keterman wrote:I wish by now we at least knew what's the cause for potential death in the fights. Really even the smallest piece of information would be greatly useful in deciding who to vote for to fight, but as it is, I'm just not sure. I'm leaning towards vomps now as the next lynch candidate, but I'm not sure if him being in a fight would be a good idea. What if we wins and gets a lynchproof prize or something? Everything is speculation.

I'm assuming (without much hard info) that the fights are determined by comparing the fighters' strengths, plus some kind of randomized process to introduce uncertainty, and that a final difference between fight levels determines whether the loses is injured or killed.

I'm leaning towards agreement with you, but that's a lot of assumptions without much hard info as you admit yourself. And even accepting that this is the case, the public isn't aware of this final difference between fight levels that you speak of so we don't know who would be a wise candidate against whoever we want dead.

We do know how many fights each person has won or lost, though, so if we put up a winner against a loser, the odds are good of seeing the outcome we desire.

By my calculations, the only people left who haven't fought are Kyle, Boomslang, juliets, DP 2.0 and Elohcin. If this is your first night at Fight Club, you have to fight, so maybe it would be wise to pick two of them.

Bullzeye wrote:

Kylemii wrote:i'm going to a party that won't be over until the poll end time, so i need to vote now. i'm going with bullz.

worst case scenario, if he's an unrecruited civ then he can just replace back in for nevi.

This is really lazy. You haven't actually contributed to anything against me, just said you'd been thinking about it earlier. When exactly was this 'earlier'? We were only in the same city twice iirc, right at the beginning when only DH wanted to fight and then on day 3 when I was injured and couldn't post. Also saying it's fine to lynch a civ because I'll just replace back in sounds like you know you're wrong and are coming up with an excuse before it's proven so you can fall back onto it later. Pretty weak really.

Spacedaisy wrote:So I was thinking of it like fighting would be considered being part of fight club, but it hit me today that each of those threads were fight so anyone in them, whether they fought or not were in a fight club. I don't think the fight participants thing holds water when I realized this. It was a blonde moment, what can I say? It is interesting to think Tyler could have recruited from the fight club he was in. That would make more sense to me.

Bullzeye wrote:I'm going to be seriously annoyed if I get lynched today over nothing. There's no connection between me and DH. I just disagreed with certain people's views on something he said, that isn't me defending him that's me having opinions. If I didn't obviously need to hold onto my vote in hope of saving myself I'd vote Kyle because his vote for me essentially says "I'm jumping onto a bandwagon, pretending to agree with it, and excusing myself from accountability when Bullz inevitably flips civ".

Canucklehead wrote:I think the bullz bandwagon is weird, even for a Day-5-that-is-basically-Day-1 lynch. I absolutely do not get the case against him, and I will vote for someone who has voted for bullz because I have to vote now and that's the most wacky thing to me.
I'm going to vote for kylemi because he was first to jump on the bandwagon, without providing anything convincing (though that may be because he is insanified??).....so, yeah. I don't feel strongly about this vote, but I'm going to go ahead and do it anyway.

Roxy wrote:Am I the only person who did not fight?

Also I miss the small groups as I really do not like playing large games.