The Syndicate

What were Yuan Shao's secrets?

Glorfindel wrote:

Aragorn wrote:Congratulations to the winning factions! I was mostly useless this game, and the late entry didn't help. Once I get uni out of the way, I'll definitely play a game, from the beginning.

Now where IS that emoticon of the little guy tossing stars in the air?

It'd be nice to assemble everyone from Middle Earth, eventually.

MacDougall wrote:I think I selected every kill so blame me lol.

As for you Rico when you started ramping it up I literally posted in chat 'fuck this I ain't dealing with Rico' and killed you so I didn't have to contend with you. An honourable end.

I wasn't really killing vocal players I was just killing people who I hate playing against. Eventually I got rid of all of them but some schmo brought Jimmy back ffs. At the point where all the people I hate playing against were dead I just started killing people for no reason and kidnapping Scotty and Lorab. Oh btw I had two silences on 1 night in case that was confusing.

Glorfindel wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Oh well, pretty sure half of the clan I was part of got obliterated via lynches alone.

I'm sorry you got eliminated when you did too, Rico But to be fair, what you said wasn't quite true. 3J got eliminated by the Nanman NK, you got eliminated by the Nanman NK, I got eliminated by the Nanman NK, Sloonei got eliminated by the Nanman NK, Golden got eliminated by the Nanman... I think only TheCapsFan and Timmer were duel victims. Looks like it was those bloody Nanman (MacDougall ) that cost Team Shu the game

That was your clan, though, not mine.

Oh well, pretty sure half of the clan I was part of got obliterated via lynches alone. Congrats to the winners, didn't spectate post-death too much tbh, but I'm sure it was interesting and well-played. Thanks Nomnoms for killing me mere 72 hours after subbing in, after I've spent the first two cycles reading and prepping and wanting to sub in and play. That felt great.

Sloonei wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Today is "throw Sloonei's shameful defeats onto his face" day

There was also Arrested Development, where I got lynched Day 1 as a vanilla townie, then got brought back to replace a scum player and lost the game two days later.

Elohcin wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Elohcin wrote:I voted Sorsha and TH. I have my reasons but probably shouldn't share them with the class.

Pretty please?

Whatcha gonna offer to put on top?

Apricot.

Apricots get you nuthin.

timmer and Golden

Elohcin wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Elohcin wrote:I voted Sorsha and TH. I have my reasons but probably shouldn't share them with the class.

Pretty please?

Whatcha gonna offer to put on top?

Apricot.

Russtifinko wrote:I made it to vote! But I have to get back to dinner. Voting Sorsha and BWT, because some other people did but not a LOT of other people.

yeaah you've only just tied Sorsha with the rest of the top wagons (linki: at least until LoRab voted, just now)

dis tie suspense

Elohcin wrote:I voted Sorsha and TH. I have my reasons but probably shouldn't share them with the class.

Pretty please?

Golden wrote:BWT and TH for me.

Timmer - matches timmer town. Matches timmer scum. Can't complain with this choice, but I also feel as though in recent times timmer just always takes suspicion for being timmer. Kinda similar to how I felt about nutella. I'd like to see timmer get his feet into the game.

Kindly point to me where you suspected TH in the past (searching for "TH" in post history, c'est l'enfer, bwt).

As for BWT, all I found was something from Day 2... which didn't convert into a vote back then. So wtf.

You're my second vote, regardless of the tally, if I can't make up my mind on anyone else, come EoD. This is atrocious.

I think I'll go with the assumption that Turnip is the incapacitated one today - I didn't see any signs from sig, compared to TH appearing silent at the bottom of the pages frequently. I'll more than likely vote timmer, but I can't say I have a strong second option right now. Of the players with two votes, not feeling a Boom vote, Sorsha being vote for banter and non-contributive activity gives me the vibe of a flip that could go either way, I don't have anything on Russ from toDay except that he's been bathing in his duel victory without participating much... could someone give me a quick summary?

Sloonei wrote:What do people think of DDL?

I don't think I have any strength or time left to thoroughly go through his posts and judge him. I think the points you brought up were fairly poopy, but not major moments in his activity. I rather noted down, even during my spectating, the amount of paranoia stances he embraced, but that's about it. I don't have a proper picture to read DDL toDay, overall.

===

Boomslang, in short

+ his D3 catchup post, with a few reads: not detecting any content to have issues with or any suss'ing which feels nefarious; it also doesn't give me the vibe that Boomslang would have received an alert to act more eloquent and wordy in his posting, in case the jump in quality and quantity is an issue here

~ his duel options D0 theory: not an option I would have been sympathetic with myself, but I think it was overall D0 talk, with no effect since nominating suspects was ultimately taken as the motto; when the design allows for variations, I don't feel opposite views around how to approach that variation (or rather stay conservative / not complicate things) have a specific pattern, alignment-wise ("baddies would propose this")

- the Day 1 vote reasoning (voting two players who bantered about wanting to duel)
- his D2 questioning of Jan wanting the exact same players that he voted D1, for a similar wonky reasoning ("wanting to see them gone"), strikes a bit iffy; I mean, no doubt, I suspect Jan of the same, but for Boom to bring it up, in light of his own messy reasoning... blergh
- a bit quick, all of a sudden, jumping on Sloonei's case on DDL, with strong words like "fantastic catch" that strike me a bit too enthusiastic; full context is required, in that DDL already suss'd Boomslang. I find this DDL - Boomslang dynamic to suddenly shape up in an interesting way, there could be something to either of them trying to get each other lynched.

So not without its spottiness and the minuses seems to outweight the pluses, but I wouldn't say it'd convince me enough to make Boom one of my nominees right now.

I have expressed my beefs with Golden and they haven't improved so far. I have a new vibe of him being indy, maybe, but it's purely subjective interpretation of his non-committal-ness outside agreeing or (mostly) disagreeing with stated suspicion. A sort of fearing to lock on an option and face its outcome. A baddie would have no issue throwing darts at everyone, whether landing on civ or indy, as long as it doesn't backfires at him (apart from, in extremis, bussing a teammate). An indy, technically, could be in murkier waters and try to tread more carefully. His D1 votes look pretty weaksauce (DF, DP). Then on D2 he locks on significant counter-wagons, at a bad timing, according to my chart - which looks more committed and relevant, but isn't an improvement, I'd say.

linki: right there, Mac. To paraphrase: Wilgy would concoct WIFOM for MM. MM would concoct WIFOM for TH.

MacDougall wrote:I don't think Marmot is a good candidate either. I don't like that the case has trace elements of Wilgy wifom in it. Wilgy is a savant of causing wifom to work the way he wants. I feel like he would be expecting Metalmarsh to get suspicion from that post.

MacDougall wrote:
Not keen on lynching TH. Seems like a weak framejob. Probably concocted by Evil Marmot Wifombot.

A pattern arises.

DFaraday

So the accusation I vowed to go back and research was DFaraday misrepresented Dom's statements on Bass and was looking for an easy lynch subject. I'm probably paraphrasing a bit, but I think the essence is that Dom believes DFaraday is hounding him as a baddie.

This is the first reaction from Dom towards Bass and I think it can be summed up as Dom signaling that whenever Bass will drop his activity, he should be sanctioned (or unmasked) for not sticking to his word.

DFaraday's reaction was fairly swift, timeline-wise. Since Bass is known for being a low poster, DF disliked Dom's "rationale", believing the accusation easy to prepare "down the road" - in case Bass would in fact not be as active as he expressed intent.

Dom's reaction is to say that DF is "twisting the fact" and that his intentions are not good (civilian).

Day Two and DFaraday updates his accusations against Dom are "not fully addressing the points made against him" and the suspicion of "hiding behind gimmick". The latter can fall under subjective reaction towards gameplaying / or annoyance, while the former, I find that I've pointed myself at a few occasions where Dom was evasive or hollow in rebuttals. Dom replies strongly yet again, with the usual stance of having contributed behind all the Domtalk.

Finally, DFaraday admitedly trips a bit into thinking Dom has flip-flopped on the issue of reading Bass. Which strenghtens Dom's counter-suspicion to the point of implying DF is misreading Dom extensively. Further down the road, he also complains that DF's final vote on him was not "quantified".

===

I'll leave aside the fact that "suspecting DFaraday of looking for/casting an easy vote (against Dom)" because "DFaraday suspected Dom of potentially preparing an easy vote (against Bass)" is a pretty blunt NO U from Dom - maybe I'm sensitive to this issue. Apart from the misread mistake DFaraday made, I do not find that DFaraday was farfetched or reaching in suspecting Dom's projection that Bass dropping the activity would be nefarious, nor in being disappointed by the content ("addressing") or style ("gimmick") of Dom's rebuttals.

I don't see how a baddie verdict on DF can be reached purely from judging this content.

Nerolunar wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Nerolunar wrote:I think I'm going with BWT again and someone else, but I'm not sure who.

Sloonei, who are the people you have in mind?

Why would you repeat your nomination for BWT in light of him not having done anything new.

...I mean, I realize the answer could lie in my question, sort of, but still, why make it one of your two choices for the Day? Does no relevant suspect brought forth inspire you?

Not really. I guess you could say BWT is a tangent that is yet to be solved.

Do you reckon the chances of it being solved are high toDay?

Nerolunar wrote:I think I'm going with BWT again and someone else, but I'm not sure who.

Sloonei, who are the people you have in mind?

Why would you repeat your nomination for BWT in light of him not having done anything new.

...I mean, I realize the answer could lie in my question, sort of, but still, why make it one of your two choices for the Day? Does no relevant suspect brought forth inspire you?

If the general feel is to make out of Day 3 a test lynch, I could go with pitting TH and Caps.

Otherwise, I find that nominating TH strictly for WIFOM is a slight gamble (then again, about as much as pinning MM was, for the same reason) and nominating Caps for his lynch-me posts is a big gamble - seriously, Caps, do NOT express resignation if you are civilian, we are not the kind to prioritise "clean-up lynch" as a mindset and it would be detrimental to our hunt.

If sig will post by the end of the day (which he should, unless he's incapacitated), then nominating TH would be a gamble for rolling Turban or indy, because otherwise it'd make little sense for him to be Nanman if he was incapacitated - and I really see no better targets, among active players.

Off the top of my head, I'd pursue a timmer lynch right now: his vote, his DIY-like rebuttal which left me pretty meh, his possible connection via MM's own vote tactic. I don't know if I have clear second choice yet. I should still revisit players that are read baddie, like DFaraday (since Dom insists) or Boomslang (since DDL has a particular badread on him).

My linki-reply to Sloonei requires an EBWOP, because I thought Scotty had asked me that. Don't know why.

that Scotty called TH "the other Yellow Turban"? Did he slip?

MovingPictures07 wrote:Sorry guys, I'm a fail at playing mafia right now and I hate the way I'm playing with the exception of my few hours of activity and analysis on Day 2. There's just too much stuff going on that's more important for me to be able to contribute meaningfully during this phase. I'll have to do one of those drive-by votes that I have consistently hated so much.

Checking the poll, I see Boomslang has a vote already. I haven't read any posts but I want to make it clear that Boomslang is one of my TOP civilian reads. I don't have a real opinion of Nerolunar. So I don't want to vote either of them.

I feel better about Mac and nutella after I expressed beefs with them on Day 2; their responses seemed reasonable and genuine from a tone perspective, so while I won't call them town reads right now I'm not calling for their lynch either.

Dom is also one of my TOP civilian reads. Russ is a civilian read. Not voting them either.

So I'm really stuck in a position here where I have to make a shitty set of votes because I'm not caught up, and I don't feel I can make remotely informed decisions because of that and because I haven't performed any teammate analysis.

I'm voting timmer (again) for reasons previously stated, and I suppose I'll throw a second one on Dunny because I want to call attention to him over the 'main' wagons of yesterday (as I stated during Day 2, again, find my previous posts for elaboration).

I have no idea if any of you have questions or concerns for me; if I live to see Day 4, I'll try to get to them then. Apologies all around. I would replace out probably if Epi actually had a bunch of replacements waiting but as it stands I'm just going to have to continue a lower approach, just hopefully more informed than this.

MP, whenever you manage to get back to this, I'd really like to know, simply from your perspective, what defines Boomslang as topciv. Maybe Dom, too, since you also put it in terms of topciv.

Scotty wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Scotty wrote: Actually, this is precisely what Mm would do if he were bad. Mixed in with the "hey guys I'm bad" WIFOM that I've seen him use in orevious games when he was bad, he would point out all his baddie mates if he had a chance just for people like you to go, "oh, he would never do that, it's silly." Well, yes. Silly is MM's MO.

The WIFOM game is exactly how we nabbed MM with Wilgy, why not put all the pieces together and nab TH, the other Yellow Turban, who has been unceremoniously unhelpful this game

UHM

Yes?

Explain underlined, duh.

linki: that you called TH "the other Yellow Turban"? Did you slip?

Sloonei wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Sloonei wrote:I do not think the list of dead players has been fully updated. According to the first page MM is still alive, but everyone else seems to disagree.

No sign of lynch shenanigans, so it's probably the first sentence.

Who are all the dead players and how did they come to be that way?

Wilgy - lynched. noob mafia
no N1 kill
MM - lynched. noob mafia
JJJ - nightkilled. alignment unknown
SVS - nightkilled. alignment unknown

Scotty wrote: Actually, this is precisely what Mm would do if he were bad. Mixed in with the "hey guys I'm bad" WIFOM that I've seen him use in orevious games when he was bad, he would point out all his baddie mates if he had a chance just for people like you to go, "oh, he would never do that, it's silly." Well, yes. Silly is MM's MO.

The WIFOM game is exactly how we nabbed MM with Wilgy, why not put all the pieces together and nab TH, the other Yellow Turban, who has been unceremoniously unhelpful this game

UHM

Sloonei wrote:I do not think the list of dead players has been fully updated. According to the first page MM is still alive, but everyone else seems to disagree.

No sign of lynch shenanigans, so it's probably the first sentence.

*feeling that he's Night 3 fodder if people keep strongciv'ing him intensifies*

And on the second Day of the Phase, Rico said, upon catching up: there will be multiquotes. Mind you, this is just ketchup, not new reads (I'll try some of those especially on people mentioned, slightly later)

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Elohcin

Argued with me about Jay paranoia. Then some game mechanics banter and complaining about being left behind. That keeps going until Day 2. At the end of the day, she votes for Russ and MM, exactly the same vote as I made. Rico might tell us how that influenced the poll (I'm too lazy to check). Pretty null play so far, not much to suspect or trust.

Eloh pushed both MM and Russ further into first and second, respectively. The only notable detail would be that she broke the tie between Dom and Russ.

Dom wrote:
I'll GTH them. I'll humor the haters.
Boomslang - civ
Bullzeye - civ
DDL - civ
Elohcin - bad
Nerolunar - civ
Quin - civ

K what makes Eloh bad

===

Sloonei wrote:Dunny, unless this is diiny.

Lol'd hard. Hi Sloonei.

Inquisitive Sloonei is very inquisitive. Is this civlike Sloonei, normally? Can someone tell me? Can we rezz JJJ so he can tell me?

Quin wrote:Also, it was great. My favourite part was when he got struck by lightning.

I found that scene the least organically integrated one in the movie, actually. Or maybe a close second to Edward Norton green screen leaping from an explosion.

Sloonei wrote:
I know the feeling of being helplessly behind in a game. It can be daunting and frustrating. However this is not something that I'd categorize as being alignment-indicative, so I'll reserve judgment either way until more things have happened.
Hi timmer, I am no more caught up on things than you are. I've only just got here and read <10% of the thread. Tell me what you think of nutella's analysis of you in this post?

I find the empathy moment towards timmer and wanting to wait for a rebuttal from him honorable, but there's also the issue of his actual votes (and his rebuttal that followed and can be traced toDay). Could you perhaps develop an opinion on the latter?

===

Caps has dropped the lynch-me attitude completely, watsupwithdat.

===

Jan wrote:Ugh, I won't have time to make that post as promised. It'll contain justifications for my votes this round.

Bit confused by this. You 're saying you won't have time to make the post that will justify your votes? How and who do you plan on voting then, and will it be reasoned (contain justifications) of any kind or not?

===

MacDougall wrote:I have an oddball theory.

Simon has gone quiet. He seemed to have a random beef with JJJ. If he is a Nanman and is low on partners he might lose interest and he might kill JJJ. I could see a lonely Simon mafia doing that.

FYI I am just digging throught the thread for some missing pearls at the moment. Nothing has been really jumping out at me. If nothing juicy comes out I am going to revote Russ and Dunny as nothing there has made me feel any better about either of them.

There is a post from Simon that gives me the vibe of him being anything but lonely. Do you make anything of it?

--

Speedy recovery, Dunny.

Small ping on DDL repeating the busy-must-vote routine, but coming back afterwards for a few more input.

===

Glorfindel wrote:I don't know if anyone has made this observation yet but I'll go ahead anyway - If someone has, please accept my most sincere apologies.

I was going back looking at MM's votes during his somewhat limited time with us and would like to make the following observations:

Day 1: MM's votes for Day 1 were on: Dr Wilgy (21) and Turnip Head (22). I obviously don't know MM as well as most of you but is it really THAT likely that he would've voted for TWO of his Nanman team mates on Day 1 From an outsider's perspective, I should think it somewhat unlikely - which on balance is a better look for TH. I'm happy to reconsider this if anyone would like to offer an alternate opinion.

Day 2: MM was the last to cast his votes for Dom (54) and Russtifinko (55). Prior to placing his votes, Russ was 'runner-up' wagon on 7 votes. The next highest wagon was timmer on 6 votes. So assuming MM's vote was a 'hail Mary' self preservation vote, wouldn't it have been more logical for him to have voted the next highest wagons (Russ and timmer) than to place his vote on Dom? Admittedly, timmer's last vote (6) was made immediately before MM's (by Nutella) but I wonder what conclusions could be drawn from that? The vote for Dom was on a slow burn from the beginning of the Day phase (starting on vote (5) and followed by votes (9), (13), (23) and (43). In comparison, timmer's vote was meteoric - picking up 6 votes in a matter of hours (votes (26), (31), (33), (41), (48) and (53). If self preservation were his goal, I'd have thought MM would've voted timmer before Dom

Good stuff.

1) I was pinged by MM as soon as he made that 'voting Wilgy and JJJ as prefects because of Talking Heads meta", because wtf Wilgy was bad in that one. And lo and behold, Wilgy was bad in this one as well, and so was MM. I could indulge in the belief that this "triumvirate" could have taken the banter-WIFOM path, only for it to crash down on their heads, but there's also the vibe I get that either sig or Turnip are incapacitated today. If true for Turnip, that makes him non-Nanman compatible - unless fakery or inner-team-targetting shenanigans.

2) I'm also wondering the same about MM not choosing (or disregarding altogether in reads, IIRC) timmer, over the other counterwagons.

===

Pressing 'Submit' now, sweet Mary Jesus please go through.

Turnip my man, I see you active and present at the bottom of the page, speak if you can. \o/

Scotty wrote:RE: INH being incapacitated Day 2? Maybe. What doesn't help this theory is that he still hasn't posted on Day 3, so I feel as though he's just plain not here. I wonder if putting vote pressure on our other prefect could wake him up (wake him up inside, wake him up inside, save hiiiim)

Agreed, but if there's reason to believe he might have been silenced for being prefect elect and such, it reduces the odds of him being Nanman, at least.

It'll be slightly harder to discern if anyone was incapacitated toDay, all the vocal players seemed to have checked in by now, except maybe sig and TH.

... oh.

Glorfindel wrote:Welcome back, Ricochet - it's good to have the opportunity to play with you again

It appears the thread has slowed to a crawl since 3J's demise - I wonder if that might (at least partly) be the result of a repeat of the issues a lot of s experienced at the end of the last Day phase? I can't speak for anyone else but I'm finding the time it takes to load (when it doesn't time out altogether) very frustrating...

Hi.

There are issues, no doubt, but I'm personally not demotivate from trying to post whenever I have something to say. Can't really comment on the effect on this phase being thinner in content.

You voted Dom yesterDay, any update on those feeling towards him? Anything you can extract out of the lynch progression, what MM's remaining teammates might have done? Interested in your thoughts whenever you have some, have the time or the bandwidth allows it.

linki @ Glorfindel: nvmd, it seems you're ready to look into things

LoRab wrote:
It seems from your post after this that you missed the fact that there were 2 kills last night. But if you know that it's day (which you do, because we're posting), I have to assume you read the night post.

Maybe he just noticed that the thread is open again and he can post.

On a more serious note, Caps and Jan are pretty much the only players I recall exhibiting issues in perceiving either our gameplay methods, the game's design or events throughout the course of the game. I noted a slightly positive, can't-act-this-clueless-if-he'd-have-BTSC-support (unless pretending very convincingly), from Caps in my spectating. Jan's derps should normally fall in the same spot, but I'm less sure, given how recurrent his tripping over the cord is. Could be nothing, could be feigning cluelessness. His vote wording is more problematic, anyway (voting players to 'see them gone', 'see how they flip').

TheCapsFan wrote:I would be comfortable being voted for.

Hello, Caps. I get it if it's stressful to keep up and figure how things work, but I'd argue that, generally (and not counting Scotty ), we like the idea of finding baddies and lynching them, rather than doing clean-up lynches of inactives / low posters of any kinds, if that's what you're suggesting.

Unless you happen to be waving the white flag. Are you?

Scotty wrote:I think Rico's finding on TH's WIFOM PB&J in the MM/Wilgy link is AOK. I could vote TH today.

We have SO many no-shows this game. I could also vote for INH for disappearing into the darkness.

Or Mac. He wasn't really on my radar until Mm flipped (and actually I think he looked rather civ) and now his soft defending looks bad to me.

Linki @Caps: O rly? Where for art thou getting comfortable?

Do you mean my small bit of looking into TH's connections with MM or did you confuse me with LoRab's more elaborate quotes? Just asking to make sure.

What do you think about my idea that INH is among the most significant candidates (if not the one) to have been incapacitated (silenced + stripped of voting) on Day 2?

I'd inquire people's vibes on Russ post-lynch, purely on the feeling that he's been less talked as the Duel 2 victor compared to how the Duel 1 victor was (Scotty). FWIW, while MM has been vocal about wanting to do the dance of swords with Russ and two fifths of the Nanmans have been revealed so far to be WIFOM burger chefs, I don't get the sense of him and Russ being teammates. MM even voted to push Russ into clear 2nd spot, which would be pretty defeatist.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:I will be checking in and out all day at work so if anyone wants an option on anything just ask.

Dom.

A better grasp on your voting tactic from the previous Day, given that you've went for top wagon (MM) and zero wagon (yourself).

Some thoughts on who to consider for nomination toDay, based on the vote evolution (see my chart on previous page, if it helps) or any other criteria you might consider.

How's Roxy doing?

Dom wrote:

Ricochet wrote: 1. It murks the lines between being confrontational with your sussers simply because it's in your persona's bloodstream and actually disapproving or deflecting suspicions in a valid way. This is a entirely hollow banter reaction to JJJ finding your suss on Bass to be weak. This is just one example of how blurry the line between 'spittin' Domald' and NO U'ing can get - and frankly, I tend to label NO U'ing Dom as bad Dom. I basically don't spot any player to have suspected you that didn't get this treatment: JJJ and DFaraday most of all, to a lesser extent nutella, Quin, Scotty.

Quantify your assertion that No-U Dom is bad Dom, please.

Look folks, I'm a busy, busy man. I set a trap for players to fall in wtih my very very good brain. I've got the best words and now I know what they're up to. I know more about the baddies than the HOST does! Okay, folks? Believe me, we're going to make teh syndicate safe again.

First of all, are you say there is NO U, in the form of simply sussing back others who suss you, is a civvie trait? Explain.
Variation b) to this: are you saying NO U'ing is part of your civvie traits? Elaborate.

Anyway, if it's meta you want, I'm not going to go search for it at this stage. I think I backed up above with examples how your reactions to suspicions on you look like. While NO U, in some degree, might be a part of your game pedigree even when you are playing a civ game, I'm talking about serious strong tone here. You bark and lash back more at players you're in an opposing relation with, that's my take on it. The only other element I remember as baddie Dom, but not quite seeing it in the game so far, is you picking on / questioning players, from small details and pings to sharp inquiries, on your own volition. Instead, most of your game so far is made up of reactions.

Plus, there's a difference between "I disagree with your suspicions because a, b, c and I think you're bad by doing this" and "I disagree with your suspicions because [void] and I think you're bad by doing this" and I'm seeing the latter.

Dom wrote:

Ricochet wrote: 2. Your ratio between full banter posts and meaningful ideas/messages behind the façade has improved over the course of the game, quite in sync with the wave of mixed or negative reactions you received. I'm inclined to read this as trying to patch things up. "Fine tuning! Bad!" I mean, your very last post is completely devoid of gimmicks. Look how serious you've gotten all of a sudden, when having to vouch for civreading a fallen player (SVS) or being asked repeatedly to state your suspicions.

This is some tired, lazy crap. Someone oughta show this guy what a real point looks like.

Tired implies overuse of this accusation, and yet it's the first time I brought it up.

Dom wrote:

Ricochet wrote: 3. It's not about deserving BTOD or not, it's about getting it. I think it's safe to say you survived having to duel on Day 2 because of a new wave of players reading kindly into your performance, particularly your antics: "he wouldn't do that if he'd have a team agenda", with opinions as strong as the hunt on you being called BS. On my side, I believe you could very well be experimenting with a new playing angle, after a series of games in which you were either bad all the time or in which you weren't, but wasn't exactly trusted given your baddie legacy and usual style (*raises hand*). This "experimentation" could be happening to simply refresh your style a bit, regardless of alignment, but points 1) and 2) still make me lean on spotting baddie traits from you. Plus, if you're bad, you've obviously done a good enough job to create some "oh, he wouldn't do this if bad" impressions.

Okay folks, let's break this down.
Let's present two options either I'm bad (ha!) or I'm civ. (waits for applause)

I don't think in a single game I played this year, I was civvie other than this one. I can't remember one. I mgiht have, but the vast, vast majority of games, I was bad. In fact, I faced some joke supsicion over this in my last few games, especially given my inspiring performance in each of those games-- either winning or coming close to winning each time. Now, it is true, I am the greatest mafia player of all time. Yes. Yes, folks, it's true. BUT in this game, I am a civilian. No matter what I did this game, this criticism would be here unless I played no differently than usual-- in which case, I'd get the "Dom is always bad" rap.

You were civ in the Championships, which I referenced by "raises hand". I gave you the "Dom is always bad" rap in there and you were more solid in pointing out how the points I've made don't stand up to your actual performance. I'm seeing less of that here.

Dom wrote: So, this is a lazy, low energy argument and I expect better out of you, Rico.

Number 3 wasn't an argument, as much as an interpretation/assumption concerning your adopted playing style.
Anyway, what is the better me or the better you'd expect from me? Could you quantify your expectations?

Dom wrote:I have launched an attack on DFaraday and Nutella. I have defended others, or expressed disinterest in their votes. I don't know what you want from me.

Less of (see points 1 and 2), for starters.

Dom wrote: You seem (like nutella) more annoyed with how I am playing than having any actual points that make me bad because of how I am playing. This makes me think nutella is bad for a multitude of reasons-- one of which is that, she, ya know, tends to be bad, in my experience, when she calls me annoying. Rather than quantify her suspicion against me, she labels it as "annoying" and looks to get me out. It's rather easy and no one really pays attention to it ! Surprises me, folks.

DFaraday has repeatedly lied about what I have said. He has totally changed the narrative about my words on Bass. Civ DFaraday wouldn't do that. Bad DFaraday looking to place a vote on an easy target absolutely would.

I have explained these suspicions ad naseaum. For any of you to try and imply that my personality is keeping me from expressing valid suspicions is just... it's not just not right. Believe me, civvies love me more than anyone else, and if you're trying to just undermine that because you are jealous or maybe-- i don't know-- maybe you have got something else going on-- i don't know-- plenty of people have written that, maybe. I don't know.

I'll revisit your exchanges with DFaraday.
I can accept your theory on nutella punching a ticket by picking on your gaming, when bad, but would inquire if it's that frequent or consistent of her to do so. Besides, she being bad for unsubstantiated / moody criticism of your game and you find her bad because she tends to pick on you when so are argument I'd rank about at the same level of weaksaucery, in principle.

MacDougall wrote:If Dom is Mafia he has me fooled.

I'm sure Epignosis is laughing at how much of a dumbass I am, if that's true.

Golden wrote:No soup for you!

Ok, here's an independent read from me Rico. I think you are town. I'm cool with Mac too. I don't see the fuss about df. But all of that is still ill-informed, because as I said I have no intent of putting in effort for at least this phase, I need a brain break after champs.

But demanding baddie reads from me ain't going to work, I'll have some when I have some.

I'd just like to see more than this pattern of disagreeing with others' suspicions, t'was my point.

On LoRab re: Turnip, I agree that his early posts would shape up the suspicion of being a third voice in our WIFOM choir, in light of Wilgy's and MM's flip, but I'd inquire what her interpretation of Turnip's voting intents and pattern, concerning MM, during Day 2.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:SK is serial killer. The fact it needs to fulfill requirements to start killing doesn't change what the role is.

Causality doesn't work that way, but ok, I have a better understanding of why you openly treated the role as SK, I suppose.

Dom wrote:Finnicky Rico-- now that you've started playing, why don't you make a real opinion and not just jump on the hater wagon ?? Sad !

I don't deserve the benefit of teh doubt. I deserve a real argument to be made against me, and none has been made. I am the best there ever was and Dfaraday is the worst . okay, folks? The way he jumped on me here-- hey, maybe I was looking for it, I don't know??

It is inaccurate to say I simply jumped on any wagon. I do have a real, monitor read on you. I think you developed your persona and posting style roughly when the contests and bids for prefect started happening, which was fine: you got inspired by in-game interactions, got creative and developed a "gimmick" a-la-G-Man (though I'm not sure why you didn't save this one for a more appropriately themed game ).

The problem with how this posting style, at least in my perception, gels with your actual activity has to do with some of the following:

1. It murks the lines between being confrontational with your sussers simply because it's in your persona's bloodstream and actually disapproving or deflecting suspicions in a valid way. This is a entirely hollow banter reaction to JJJ finding your suss on Bass to be weak. This is just one example of how blurry the line between 'spittin' Domald' and NO U'ing can get - and frankly, I tend to label NO U'ing Dom as bad Dom. I basically don't spot any player to have suspected you that didn't get this treatment: JJJ and DFaraday most of all, to a lesser extent nutella, Quin, Scotty.

2. Your ratio between full banter posts and meaningful ideas/messages behind the façade has improved over the course of the game, quite in sync with the wave of mixed or negative reactions you received. I'm inclined to read this as trying to patch things up. "Fine tuning! Bad!" I mean, your very last post is completely devoid of gimmicks. Look how serious you've gotten all of a sudden, when having to vouch for civreading a fallen player (SVS) or being asked repeatedly to state your suspicions.

3. It's not about deserving BTOD or not, it's about getting it. I think it's safe to say you survived having to duel on Day 2 because of a new wave of players reading kindly into your performance, particularly your antics: "he wouldn't do that if he'd have a team agenda", with opinions as strong as the hunt on you being called BS. On my side, I believe you could very well be experimenting with a new playing angle, after a series of games in which you were either bad all the time or in which you weren't, but wasn't exactly trusted given your baddie legacy and usual style (*raises hand*). This "experimentation" could be happening to simply refresh your style a bit, regardless of alignment, but points 1) and 2) still make me lean on spotting baddie traits from you. Plus, if you're bad, you've obviously done a good enough job to create some "oh, he wouldn't do this if bad" impressions.

I have no way to explain this properly in English, but there's a wretched garbage musical genre in our country called "manele / mynele" in which 70% of the lyrics are "death to my haters and enemies", and, to simply paraphrase, I think a lot of your posts are just that, either in a total bantz way, either with rebuttal intent that comes off, however, as NO U'y or evasive.

Golden wrote:I think this read on SVS is both accurate and genuine.

I'm really feeling good about Dom this game.

I don't have any issue with considering SVS a civ victim (the most remote tinfoil would be that the Turbans thought she could be a dormant baddie opponent), but what part of Dom stating obvious, accurate things about SVS is an alignment indicator?

I could add, in fact, a detail that Dom omitted, which is that SVS is probably still in no-internet limbo. Would this earn me any points? Does it need to?

timmer wrote:So I'm not just not going to try to catch up but rather start fresh from here. I'm sorry if my spontaneous vote strategy confused or offended some people, it made sense to Mr at the time. I figured, many of the people holding back votes will be plotters on bad teams, if one of their own is up for lynch. So since I had no idea about anything, I pushed the #2 and #3 guys up to ry to force baddie to get agitated and sloppy. It made sense at the time

I will observe the day's events and vote with my gut when the time for it comes.

Please try to clarify why you thought making uninformed, yet relevant (shaping up the dynamic of the main wagons) nominations was the best move, as opposed to other tendencies exhibited by other players, who were just as out of the loop as you, such as: self-voting, sideline voting, voting because the initials match, etc. I'm also open to the concept of teammates holding back, but I'd also like to get a sense of why your move, in contrast, would simply be a civilian faux-pas, rather than a hidden save move, at a reasonable time for results to change.

MacDougall wrote:Dare I say Jan scumslipped?

Citation needed.

But speaking of Jan, his clumsy posts are starting to land on the thin line between "how derpy can you get" and "can this be a façade".

I'm multiquoting in the morning for over an hour instead of studying. Ah, this ol' mafia feeling...

Quin wrote:
Night 1 was without a night kill and tonight had 2. I'd imagine that there are criteria that have to be met before the Yellow Turbans can make a kill (just like in Psych). As for the Nanman, maybe they went after Dong Zhuo night 1. I highly doubt five (well, four) mafia members were all inactive.

Host design says that both mafia teams kill every Night (plus, I remember the Host alluding prior to the start of the game that it will run far smoother and quicker, because of the double nightkills). What makes you think there are limiters, after all?

Since Wilgy and MM were Nanman, I think the odds that Nanmans derped on sending the kill Night 1 are close to 0%. I even recall (though not sure if I remember this correctly) MM suggesting at least one night kill failed - which now reads as what probably that team experienced.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:This game is probably reaching a record for number of players I'm afraid of reading as civ in the same game.

My only read game-based paranoia is the recruiter, tbh. Any given Day, it's likely for one civ read to turn into a indy and coast away with the cred.

I finished my notes after all and will leave them here for discussion, but off to bed soon. Picking it up tomorrow.

D2 voters' sentiments about MM being sent to duel or not + any side remarks on their activity I might have right now

Simon: nothing on MM, in fact nothing except a few daily posts on treating the duel as fun and poking at JJJ; somewhat, I doubt we'll see posts of a different caliber from him, maybe throughout this entire game. However, there is one post (actually, two) that made me wonder if Simon is the "candid" type of player. I'd rank him null based on his actual activity, but gut tells me slight town for the latter detail, for some reason.

Scotty: voted early and approved of MM being lynched, even for WIFOM reasons; later on, while voteless, embraced the idea of a timmer lynch, but didn't mellow from his actual nominations either; I have no pings from him noted down; not inclined to auto-civ-cred him for surviving Duel 1, due to second mafia, indies, recruits, i.e. the whole "thread carefully in your civreads" package - in fact, I think he (or was it DDL?) made the same point at one time, which is right up my alley of skepticism

Jan: fairly unreasoned vote for MM; early timing of his vote doesn't really exonerate him imo: if he's on a team in which both Wilgy and MM are bantzing around, he could easily have said "hell naw". Right now, I'm not inclined to raise the red card for his voting language ("want to see X gone", "want to see how X flips"), nor play the "he would be informed by teammates how things run" given how he tripped into thinking the messenger's read on JJJ was genuine, then 'scumplay'. Strange behaviour nonetheless, I'd definitely like to see more focus and get better vibes.

DF: gained more attention for his Dom vote/reasoning, rather than MM, which can arguably be defined as "following JJJ's case". As a teamie, his votes would be nothing but buss (and an early ticket at that, as well), but it's about as tinfoilable as Jan's above, so hard to judge. Null.

DDL: idem, early vote, "JJJ's case sound goods", won't/can't-read-further-into-MM attitude. The fact that he initiated Russ' wagon is a note-to-self in case depending on Dom's flip, perhaps. [Otherwise, I noted down a couple of pings of him using so much paranoia talk during D1, plus some mention he made D2 about there being a bulletproof serial killer. Did he mean the indy leader? How is he SK until the Turbans are eliminated? Otherwise, wat. Still, insignificant notes right now.]

Quin: also part of the push-MM forward quartet, with a slightly more polished reasoning (MM being defensive towards JJJ, not scumhunting). Later, out-of-the-blue voteless support for a nutella lynch slightly makes my nose twitch. No formed read on him, otherwise.

Mac: declared disapproval for both MM and Dom as current wagons, pushes Russ (MM's ultimatel opponent) forward. Sticks out right now, for obvious reasons, but it wouldn't be Mac if it weren't tricksy to read into it. THM Mac has me thinking he would not buss a teammate without first creating some antagonism/distance; GoC Mac has me thinking he would not only not buss a teammate, but also rub defense in our faces ... (huh, have I never played with civ Mac?). I can't quite get a read on what this here looks like, but it sure correlates with MM's own interest to duel Russ and a halt in MM going forward as the pick-of-the-day. General thoughts are maybe best for a separate entry, but in short: I don't have issues with him using meta or baiting/poking to read, but his pokes so far are just that, pokes, plus he's civread a confirmed mafia so far and an equally sketchy player (Dom), so I'm inclined to utter the words "Mac looks civ" for the moment.

Dom: first in the sequence to sideline completely; no stance on MM and Russ (his counterwagons at that time, or in general), which tells me he was either too focused on No U'ing his opponents, didn't care one bit about the wagon topics or himself being one or couldn't actually do something about himself or a teammate wagon, in case MM is his teammate. As for general read, time is short now and it's maybe best for a separate enty, but in short, my reaction is constantly "kill it with fire". We've just caught bantz duo Wilgy and MM, I don't get why Gimmick Man here should get BTOD.

Ninja: more sidelining, but of the uninformed / no-time-to-ketchup kind

Birdwithteeth: self-voter and sideliner / no-time-to-ketchupkind

timmer: no-time-to-ketchup/apologetic voter, however votes for MM's counter-wagons. His ISO is too opaque to discern how much he would have been willing to risk or not aiding MM or whether it's just a huge omelette that landed on his face, but all in all his votes are no doubt total blergh.

Nerolunar: principled votes on random voters, nothing in regards to any of the main wagons. There's nothing about this to tilt the needle in a particular direction - his reaction to timmer's vote would stand out as better compared to BWT's, but it could have been such an easy "hiss" for civs and mafia alike to make, in light of timmer's move. I have two pings on his D1 "I see a lot of discussion and that's good" remark (though he did admit intentionally staying UTR) and his pick on Glorfindel's use of "friendly" was very weaksauce. Definitely on my shortlist of "want to see more and improved".

Bass: self-vote and MM (first vote to start pushing him forward again in a long sequence); my real-time reaction to his vote post was a ping, because he suddenly switch from being active and testing a few leads to dropping some votes, one of which for the main wagon and the other completely harmless/pointless in the equation of generating a second duel candidate; not to mention that, to add to the disappointment, it happened right after someone (Mac?) noted that Bass can tend to appear active at first, then drop the ball. So yeah, not his finest moment. My feelings on Bass have fluctuated a lot during my spectating: he pinged me at first with his sidelined, unreasoned prefect choices, plus he gave me the vibe of being too active and wordy - then made me feel bad, as he declared his intent to participate more - then gave me a real good vibe with his stance to not make out of lynching inactives a main dish (D1, I think) - then I'd say his D2 feels... lukewarm.

Bullzeye: self-voter and... nothing else. No impact.

JJJ: he dead.

MP: declared dissident to the main wagons, except for the one brewing on timmer. Could find it understandable, given his open, detailed reasoning, even if not on the same page (especially re:Dom). Not convinced of his angle on nutella either, but I didn't get any knitting vibe from that case-making either. If there's one gripe I have so far, it's his use of "CFD" terminology and lobbying. a) I know MP has experienced on foreign/"traditional" forums, but I can't say or don't recall actually having played a game with him embracing a CFD as the option-to-go-with for a lynch phase; b) his call to CFD timmer (and then nutella) is slightly questionable both as timing (poll was still hours ahead of concluding) and format (MP having reasoned / made cases on them being suspicious, so why the shout out for them to be burned CFD-style, which is more of a spontaneous EoD bait method), if not for the tally required (i.e. both timmer and/or nutella needing a lot of votes to change the outcome of the main wagons). I admit I may be reading too much into it, but something about the "hey guys here is my case on X, now how about he CFD da hell out of him" phrasing gave me the wrong vibe, at least as far as using CFD as motive or lobby goes.

Sorsha: self-voted and picked on the absent prefect out of principle; fair and square, but still sidelining from any meaningful attempt to shape the duel. Speaking of meaningful, I must confess I disliked Sorsha's D1 tactic profoundly (probably on the same level as JJJ did, in direct interaction with her): taking it easy on keeping up with the events is one thing, but bantering your way through the process of voting, reasoning, rebuting and such... Instant dislike, at least from someone like me.

Spacedaisy: no-time-to-ketchup mode, voted the self-voters who did more than self-vote... errok

Elohcin: voted MM and Russ, mentioned liking JJJ's case on MM, but no prior mention of Russ; might be interested in a Dom-flips-bad-storyline, in regards to her vote pushing Russ ahead. As for simple vibes, I have none on her so far.

Golden: same situation as timmer, although more reasoned in his action: either eggsplashed by MM's flip or considered there is room to wiggle and actively try to pull MM out of dueling spots; clear dissident of MM as a wagon, needless to say. As for his reads - while I understand the UTR-mode during his Finals - I get too much "I don't agree with ... being bad" and too little "I myself find ... bad". Not quite sure what kind of Golden tactic this is and how to fully read it, but I'd rather have the civ-vibe-giving Golden instead, regardless of the rhythm, pace and intensity it's provided: reads, debating, risk-taking.

Glorfindel - voted Dom and Sorsha, going with ping on former, retroactive on latter; doesn't stand out as someone who addressed / was cognizant of the other wagon topics

Turnip - voted MM and sig; honestly, if there would be a third spot on the WIFOM carousel, Turnip would definitely cross my mind, becuase of how much he openly bantzed with MM, but idk, his suspicion on MM appears early during D2, could easily be a vibe turned into a vote. I'd inquire why he picked sig over timmer, given that he labelled both as "soft defenders of MM". It's too 3am to consider ISO'ing Turnip in full right now.

LoRab - sideliner, no ketchup whatsoever, self-voted + leetic; sort of did a variation of Ninja's "voting two players with same letter" stunt, but that's just a curio. There's absolutely nothing to extract from this, at the very minimum I recall her working on small vibes to reason votes, so I imagined she'd make the same decision regardless of alignment.

DP - does what DP does; still notable that he voted inside the main wagons

Boomslang - voted a suspect he developed his own case on (Jan), plus MM (content with case developed by others on him). At this point, it can only be buss or bust, in case any late voter is an MM teammate. Boomslang's votes and reasoning don't translate super well from D1 (voted MM to TH "because they wanted to duel") to D2, but idk, small vibration on the radar so far.

Nutella - voted MM (long time suss) and timmer (for his votes). Overall, I understand the type of case and skepticism that MP tried to convey towards nutella's activity, but I'm not getting the same vibe at the moment. She is right to say that her waffleness has gotten her in trouble in the past (*raises hand*), compared to which she might feel able to make a more determined or focus effort this time. Again, I know and have felt the sensation of crafted / baked contributive activity in the past, I can't say I'm reading nutella as such at the moment. Needless to say, this is huge distancing from MM, in case she's a teamie, but I'll either reevaluate later if necessary or treat it as genuine.

nutella wrote:
Linki: Well now I look silly since Rico just mentioned the same three people. I don't at all understand what's going on in that chart though, could you explain it a bit more?

It expands upon the order in which players voted (first column, from top to bottom) and how the tally evolved (other columns, to be read from right (players who got just one) to left (all the way to MM getting 10 votes in total)).

linki:

I'm not done with individual reads on D2 voters and it's 2:30am, but here is a first half of prepared post that I can publish for now, to get discussion started.

"So I'd say the best path to figure things further is to look into the votes that influenced MM's lynch. Not to say I wouldn't embrace correlating both lynches or ISO'ing, but honestly I haven't managed to look into that just yet (as for the latter, as far as I'm concerned, at a current roster of 30-something, noooooooooope). Besides, I think the prospect of losing a second teammate should in theory have buzzed a few alarms among the Nanmans - granted, they've now been reduced merely to the same number as the other mafia team and still seem the stronger one on paper*, so maybe "alarm" is a strong word at this point, but I think there's cause to look at potential players who either might have attempted to steer the train away from MM, either trust his odds, let him have his duel and distance themselves from all of it.

*this also reminds me to point out the incapacitator within their ranks. Admist the D2 absentees, there have been a couple of significant names: I'd say INH probably ranks as the likeliest target, particularly given his prefect anointment - he didn't exactly have a marvellous activity on D1 either, but still... - which is something I noticed a few people, when they expressed their disdain at his inactivity, never bring up or consider; other prisoners could have been Dunny or leetic, I suppose; then there are the near or complete inactives (SVS, rabbit8 back then, Soneji), but I find it hard to imagine what would the incapacitator have gained from targeting them.

As you will see below, MM was constantly in pole position and the odds of him escaping a duel spot altogether seemed generally remote, but I do spot a few pressure points when the tally was close. At vote value, I find that timmer and Golden look the worst, for narrowing the distance between MM and the other wagons, plus, in fact, voting the other wagons. A third player to have done in principle the same would be DisgruntledPorcupine - late EoD, but poll was still an hour away from closing, so not inconceivable for things to have changed - however I'll let you gaze on your own at the inscrutable nature of his glorious single, unreasoned, un-anything vote post.

Here's how the tally evolved yesterDay. (Asterisks in front of a voting player means that they've self-voted, which was an interesting trend to note).

"Saved" is such a vague term. Is it supposed to mean protected? Is it supposed to place him in civ camp? It is supposed to be an informed information, coming from a Messenger? Who previously called JJJ bad? (granted, the second team scenario exists for JJJ as well)

I find the message conflicting with my own read on Dom's activity, which can be basically summed up as kill it with fire.

Turnip Head wrote:Personally I think this game has moved at the perfect pace. No crazy tangents, no back and forth bickering over something small, only a few signature MP novellas, a JJJ ISO here or there. If we just got a few more posts from the less active players I'd be in mafia heaven.

Ricochet in sign-ups wrote:The best marketing method is to make people realize that, if the game won't start in the next two weeks and I'll be able to join, everyone will have to deal with catching up on 20 pages per phase. So sign up to prevent that.