The Syndicate

Lets just put my 'description of meta' in context, shall we? Before you keep saying that I'm the one who says it shouldn't be used.

MovingPictures07 wrote:It's funny you mention Talking Heads because that's the first game that showed me just how flawed meta perceptions can be and how easily they can be manipulated. They almost cost town the game. Since that game actually, I've had an increasing degree of aversion myself.

Golden wrote:A note on meta.

It's an overused tool that people often rely upon too heavily to their detriment.

But it should not be entirely dismissed. It has its times and places. In the end, correct gut reads often just come from 'this feels like what I'm used to from this player when bad'.

MP talked about them being flaws and easily manipulated, and that he had an aversion to using them. My post was a direct response to this, with the intent of disagreeing with MP that meta should not be used.

You've turned that around into me saying meta shouldn't be used - which is, in fact, the exact opposite of what I was saying.

Oh, sorry.. I have both sig and LoRab as slight baddies. Why do you find these reads uninspired? Or did you just presume I have civ reads. Because you didn't ask, you just made massive assumptions.

The things you are trying to call my reads of sig and lorab, are me criticising the reasons for other people's reads. Yes, based on meta. A good use of meta. Do you think I'm wrong that sig looks scummy frequently when town? Do you think I'm wrong that LoRab doesn't normally share a lot of her reads? If so, why do you disagree with these things?

Your suspicions are bunk because you just listed a people who had a bit of heat without bothering to engage with any countercases.

I'm not going to accidentally miss he deadline. I don't feel any pressure to vote now, despite the fact votes are changeable. You are telling me why I can vote. My question is, why do you feel the need to get people to vote now. Does it bother you that I can express my suspicion of you clearly in the thread without voting?

You 'feel that you have to push to get a strong scumread'. I don't have any strong scumreads. Your pushing me won't make me have one. If I had one, I would say what it was.

You are a mild scumread, but you are still my top scumread.

linki - nah, I think I'll vote when I want to vote, thanks.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:What's holding you back?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Nudges LoRab

You can vote now.

Why are you so interested in getting other people to vote 24 hours before the day ends?

I'll admit that I have no suspicions that are particularly strong, though. I feel like I have a lot more town reads than I do baddie reads.

But I don't think getting a 'strong suspicion' is necessarily a virtue. I'd rather be open to arguments to why my weak suspicions are wrong.

You aren't very good at representing things fairly in this game, and your suspicions are bunk.

Look at what you have just done to me twice. You misrepresented what I said about Jay, and now you're misrepresenting what I said about meta too.

That was in response to MP saying 'it should never be used', essentially. I was the one saying 'no, it should be used'. In fact, I specifically said "In the end, correct gut reads often just come from 'this feels like what I'm used to from this player when bad'."

Sig and LoRab are great examples of why. People have preconceptions about something that is face value a scum-tell. I point to how those people do those things as town. It means that the entire case for why they are bad falls to bits. That's an important use of meta. A good use, too, because instead of using meta to hang someone, I'm pushing people to look deeper before declaring someone as bad. Sig and LoRab may well be bad, but the cases on them so far do look like cases against them when they are good.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:What's holding you back?

Nothing

You

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Golden wrote:They are both town reads, but not my strongest town reads. MP is a stronger read than Jay.

Yesterday, from AP to Epi to boomslang to Wilgy, it did feel a little like my vote was being followed around. It made me tinfoil and I didn't overly like it. But, having said that... me, MP and Jay agree a lot and disagree little most of the time, and that's because we see the world through very similar eyes.

Curiously, you both haven't agreed much today.

Jay stated a suspicion of ninja for her votes over Days 1 and 2. You responded with you see solvey ninja, and pulled a post to defend it.

Jay stated a suspicion of LoRab, to which you responded that his case has no substance.

Jay called A Person a scumread on Night 2 after you called him a townread.

Jay, what do you think of Golden?

And who knows how much we agreed yesterday. Our votes happened to end up in the same places a lot, but I don't know what was going through Jay's mind.

To be fair to Jay's LoRab case, I didn't say it had no substance. I said it didn't have much substance that I could agree with. Perhaps 'substance' was a bad word to choose because people might think I'm suggesting Jay's case was meaningless. But I didn't mean it was meaningless, I meant that I disagreed with the meaning he ascribed to many of LoRab's posts.

I trust ninja more than I trust Jay. I trust LoRab less than I trust Jay.

MP does, in fairness, appear to be entirely absent from everywhere.

LoRab wrote:I'll respond in greater length to JJJ later, but one quick point before I need to run. Yes, my strategy as a civ is different this game than it was in Mad Max--in that game, we were playing with a mafia team and no other baddies. In this game, there is a serial killer and an unknown player. So, the strategy is entirely different in terms of not helping baddies. In that game, the baddies knew that anyone not on their team was civ. That's not the case here. There's a difference in how I play in different set ups, that difference in particular.

Somehow I missed this. I still want to see the 'greater length' answer.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Golden wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:what moved you to participate in that wagon in the end? Your own feelings on Wilgy or the quotes I pulled trying to show my own suspicions? Something else?

I was moved by epi's effort at PoE. If he is putting in that effort, the least I can do is work with it to find a consensus target. The fact Wilgy crystallised as that target, from my perspective, was probably mostly based in your quotes (which actually read like a compelling case to me).

Someone else asked why you, MP and I have ended up in the same place twice. I think part of it is a drive for a semblance of consensus as we have developed our play styles to think that way. I am rarely happy to end with my vote somewhere meaningless even if that person is my biggest suspect (the only exception I can think of is where I actively disagree with all of the viable options and don't have a preference of one over another).

That was me.

I put it up for discussion, because the three of you have agreed a lot, disagree little, and we have two dead civilians to show for it.

How do you feel about Jay and MP?

They are both town reads, but not my strongest town reads. MP is a stronger read than Jay.

Yesterday, from AP to Epi to boomslang to Wilgy, it did feel a little like my vote was being followed around. It made me tinfoil and I didn't overly like it. But, having said that... me, MP and Jay agree a lot and disagree little most of the time, and that's because we see the world through very similar eyes.

Sloonei wrote:Still, what I am seeing in this game is a LoRab who is making a concerted effort to not share reads. That is not something that will ever be a town-tell in my book. I went back to Mad Max to make sure I wasn't misremembering, and I am not. I peppered her with the exact same type of question as I have here and in that game she gave me plenty of juicy substance in response. Here she's just kind of said "whatever, I have no reads and I don't care if that makes me hard to read." I'm all for townies trying to win the game by playing to their win conditions, but that means nothing if we're not also trying to catch bad guys.

OK, this is very interesting, and I want to see LoRab's response to it.

LoRab's reply to my cursing was meant in fun. I don't see anything suspicious about that.

In fact, Jay, I don't think your case on LoRab has much substance that I can agree with. Most of it just feels like standard LoRab to me.

The one point that does interest me, though, was her view on giving civilian reads. This also made me think 'standard LoRab', because it was pretty much the norm on STV and RM where we grew up. But if you legitimately have a recent counter-case, that would be interesting.

Epignosis wrote:

Golden wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Actually I can expand that to all of the other Wilgy voters (Golden, Epignosis, Dom, MovingPictures07): what moved you to participate in that wagon in the end? Your own feelings on Wilgy or the quotes I pulled trying to show my own suspicions? Something else?

I Wasn't Crazy About That Wagon, But Golly I Wasn't Going to Say So at That Stage

I wasn't crazy about it either, but did you feel that it was better than the other available choices that could have actually influenced the outcome?

What Were the Other Available Choices?

I think that's probably subjective. Although obviously AP and boomslang were two.

Epignosis wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Actually I can expand that to all of the other Wilgy voters (Golden, Epignosis, Dom, MovingPictures07): what moved you to participate in that wagon in the end? Your own feelings on Wilgy or the quotes I pulled trying to show my own suspicions? Something else?

I Wasn't Crazy About That Wagon, But Golly I Wasn't Going to Say So at That Stage

I wasn't crazy about it either, but did you feel that it was better than the other available choices that could have actually influenced the outcome?

Epignosis wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Golden, let's talk about the ninja. You said she appears solvey; what are the posts she's made that have given you that impression?

I Agree the Gal Looks Good (But Not for the Same Reason)

What would your reason be?

I'm getting more and more worried about the marmot. I don't find his reasons for things genuine, even after he has moved on from chaos marmot mode. What do you think?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: Sigurd. Sigmurd Freud. Sig Newton.

Sigourney Weaver?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:what moved you to participate in that wagon in the end? Your own feelings on Wilgy or the quotes I pulled trying to show my own suspicions? Something else?

I was moved by epi's effort at PoE. If he is putting in that effort, the least I can do is work with it to find a consensus target. The fact Wilgy crystallised as that target, from my perspective, was probably mostly based in your quotes (which actually read like a compelling case to me).

Someone else asked why you, MP and I have ended up in the same place twice. I think part of it is a drive for a semblance of consensus as we have developed our play styles to think that way. I am rarely happy to end with my vote somewhere meaningless even if that person is my biggest suspect (the only exception I can think of is where I actively disagree with all of the viable options and don't have a preference of one over another).

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Golden, let's talk about the ninja. You said she appears solvey; what are the posts she's made that have given you that impression?

Just did a quick iso. She has 17 posts, more than half of which I'd say are legitimately solvey, particularly those that appear in the second half of lynch days.

This post, in particular, shows a particularly good mindset for somebody who is doing their best to solve with the limited time they have (and it's worth noting, it wasn't lip service - she followed through).

nijuukyugou wrote:I'm gonna start with ISO'ing Epi votes, since I didn't even know that was a train (shows how much I've been paying attention, lol) and it stands out to me because of that reason (unexpected). It's probably all I'll be able to get through for tonight, but it's a start, I suppose.

If anything, I think that if you are civ and have a genuine suspicion of ninja, it might come more from the natural tendency we civs have to suspect those who incorrectly suspect us. Because she has expressed suspicion of you a couple of times, but it's not all she's done by any stretch.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Fine.

The only player on the roster I think would fail to send a kill is A Person, and I'm not even sure he would. I think it's more likely something else happened.

My sweetest...

No, wait... I agree.

Ricochet wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Rico:

Must the baddies send night actions individually or can they send them as a team?

Ah, good, you are from the golden school of hosting

Scotty wrote:Looks like no one died?

That's all I can get out of it as well.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:nijuukyugou, both of your votes on the first two days have landed on outlier wagons which were unlikely to develop into lynches.

I disagree with this assessment on both accounts.

Okay. What is your read on the ninja?

I still think I see solvey ninja. Her votes and her rationales have all indicated a genuine effort to be keeping up as best as possible.

I tried to find photographic evidence of mafia diapers, but perhaps they think the subject matter is inappropriate for babies or something...

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Golden wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Golden wrote:Also, replying to another point, I think it would be very unusual for a baddie to target one of their own with a curse on night one. Psychologically speaking, I think they want to nail at least one other person first - you always want to get a bit of joy out of your power first. I can't recall a time where I've seen them do it on night one.

And I'm not sure that, if Jay was bad, cursing himself offers any strategic benefit (especially since we have no guarantees the curses even came from a baddie).

I would not hesitate to do this, personally.

I know. You wouldn't hesitate to curse your teammate Jay even if he asked you not to, either.

I was going to call you out specifically, chaos marmot.

Still, I seem to remember being on a team with you when you wanted to do this, and I still think you only started wanting to do it from around day 2.

A Gentlemen's Guide to Love and Murder is the only game I remember being a mafia teammate of yours, and we didn't have any sort of curse/silencing role.

What game are you thinking of?

Must have been that one. It might have been that you wanted to kill yourself to clear yourself

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Golden wrote:Also, replying to another point, I think it would be very unusual for a baddie to target one of their own with a curse on night one. Psychologically speaking, I think they want to nail at least one other person first - you always want to get a bit of joy out of your power first. I can't recall a time where I've seen them do it on night one.

And I'm not sure that, if Jay was bad, cursing himself offers any strategic benefit (especially since we have no guarantees the curses even came from a baddie).

I would not hesitate to do this, personally.

I know. You wouldn't hesitate to curse your teammate Jay even if he asked you not to, either.

I was going to call you out specifically, chaos marmot.

Still, I seem to remember being on a team with you when you wanted to do this, and I still think you only started wanting to do it from around day 2.

LoRab wrote:The benefit being so that players say exactly what you're saying now.

That's fair. Although I wouldn't be saying what I'm saying now if it wasn't for the fact that others raised suspicion about it in the first place.

Sloonei wrote:

Golden wrote:Also, replying to another point, I think it would be very unusual for a baddie to target one of their own with a curse on night one. Psychologically speaking, I think they want to nail at least one other person first - you always want to get a bit of joy out of your power first. I can't recall a time where I've seen them do it on night one.

And I'm not sure that, if Jay was bad, cursing himself offers any strategic benefit (especially since we have no guarantees the curses even came from a baddie).

I have a hard time seeing Jay faking a curse/cursing himself under any circumstances.

So do I.

Also, btw, I knew nothing of Nine Inch Nails and had never heard of the song before I was cursed with it, and that song was really bitchy for how useless the lyrics were for me to do anything helpful with.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Golden wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:Yeah, this. I would be shocked if sig wasn't bad at this point.

Except sig is always like this when good, so how do ever know with him?

I think you need to look past face value scumminess and look for motivations.

So, here's what I've got so far...

He was ok voting for boom, despite not really seeing the case, but not if it tied the votes.

Sig - it looks like you wanted your vote to be on one of the big wagons (even if you didn't agree with the case), but not to actually risk counting. Why did you not want to tie the votes? Why were you happy voting boomslang when you only left him a vote behind?

Anyone else - what's the baddie motivation for this from sig? Just to look like his vote mattered? But even a cursory iso would tell you how it actually went down...

While we're on this train of thought. What sorts of things would sig have to do for him to get your vote?

I'm not saying he definitely won't get my vote for what he has already done.

I guess for me it's looking less at what sig has done, and more trying to figure out if I can see where his brain is at and what his motivations might be. So, I couldn't answer this with a single 'if he does x, he is bad' example.

Also, replying to another point, I think it would be very unusual for a baddie to target one of their own with a curse on night one. Psychologically speaking, I think they want to nail at least one other person first - you always want to get a bit of joy out of your power first. I can't recall a time where I've seen them do it on night one.

And I'm not sure that, if Jay was bad, cursing himself offers any strategic benefit (especially since we have no guarantees the curses even came from a baddie).

birdwithteeth11 wrote:Linki: Why do you say he is always like this when good? Not sure what you mean here.

Sig has a knack for making himself look terribly scummy even when he isn't, I've seen him be lynched a fair few times now when civ for similar things.

That's not to say he MUST be good, just that I think more work is needed to figure out what is going on with him.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:Yeah, this. I would be shocked if sig wasn't bad at this point.

Except sig is always like this when good, so how do ever know with him?

I think you need to look past face value scumminess and look for motivations.

So, here's what I've got so far...

He was ok voting for boom, despite not really seeing the case, but not if it tied the votes.

Sig - it looks like you wanted your vote to be on one of the big wagons (even if you didn't agree with the case), but not to actually risk counting. Why did you not want to tie the votes? Why were you happy voting boomslang when you only left him a vote behind?

Anyone else - what's the baddie motivation for this from sig? Just to look like his vote mattered? But even a cursory iso would tell you how it actually went down...

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:What if, e.g., Sunshine + Gasoline's secret is that night powers targeting one will affect both of them?

Or if something in Mladic role (I believe he is probably the mafia insanifier) says "if you target one of a btsc pair it affects both of them" or something along those lines?

Maybe. I feel like we need more time and evidence to confirm or deny this though.

I really don't think we do.

I spent half the first day suspecting Jay. That is not something I do with a btsc partner (at least, a civ btsc partner I guess).

But also

1) my curse was incredibly specific in its detail, and looked nothing like Jay's - therefore, whoever used their ability would have to know that two of us would be affected and come up with two completely different sets of curse terms.
2) It would be a de facto 'btsc hunter' role, which doesn't seem likely.

Epignosis wrote:

Golden wrote:3) I also think that epi's reasoning for AP is ok, but not a slam dunk. Trice said it well. There are three baddies, and the idea that APs voice would decide who was killed doesn't mesh for me. In fact, killing vomps and then moaning about load players is a good way to 'clear yourself'.

Nobody Said Anything In His Defense But Me

Fair point, but would you expend much effort trying to save him if you were his baddie teammate?

Overall I'm agreeing with you and have ap as a town read. Just not a slam dunk.

MovingPictures07 wrote:I'm sorry I didn't try to interact with you more, but I'm dense and I had a really hard time trying to figure out what you were saying, even if you were slightly easier to understand than JJJ.

It's all good. You didn't even figure out I was 'the one playing a song on loop' - although epi figured it out nearly immediately - so you are forgiven!

But, in all honesty, it is completely possible to work with people who have curses by asking them to respond to particular important words. The most frustrating thing was seeing someone being upset about the cursed people 'spamming the thread' when I am busy trying to get points across. I have to make more posts to get a point across because people just assume that I can't be understood and don't try.

In the future, when more people inevitably get cursed, we can work together to give them a framework of response words to be understood.

triceratopzeuhl wrote:Speaking of epignosis, he seemed strongly against lynching either A Person or boomslang, and then ended up voting for a civ. This means either his judgments haven't been as sound as some of us have assumed, or that it was actively malicious

Isn't it possible that he just had correct reads of 2 civilians? There are some people, like timmer, that I think I would fight against their lynch but that doesn't mean the person I vote for is guaranteed to be bad.

Sig looks scummy as all fuck therefore sig is good.

Thank goodness I can talk normally again.

1) Epi just played PoE very well. I don't know why people (eg Dom) would say he is showing its flaws. It also paints his comment about MP from day one in another light. He is giving legitimate reasons for people to be town, and they are legitimately good reasons, they aren't just crap, and epi was suspicious of MP saying he was playing a PoE strategy but not taking his 'reason why inh is town' on board. I voted for epi briefly because I didn't like what felt like a complete lack of effort to try to engage with me or understand me (that continued throughout). But, epi is now probably my strongest town read when all is said and done. He warded me off voting AP and boomslang because, he was right, they didn't belong in a "PoE" because there were legitimately good reasons why their behaviour didn't mesh with what is bad.

2) I think Epi is wrong about MP, though. But also a little disappointed MP made no real effort to understand or engage me. The only person who did was scotty. He gave me an in to be a little understood, and yet still people essentially ignored and chose not to engage with me. I think that looks real good on scotty.

3) I also think that epi's reasoning for AP is ok, but not a slam dunk. Trice said it well. There are three baddies, and the idea that APs voice would decide who was killed doesn't mesh for me. In fact, killing vomps and then moaning about load players is a good way to 'clear yourself'.

4) I don't believe Jay was faking. But I don't know for sure. I would never 'fake a curse', and I don't believe Jay would either. FAR too restrictive for such high posters. MP isn't a good barometer for what high posters would bring on themselves, because he's a suicidal moron. I always screw up curses, and so have to suffer the consequences. If I was bad and had the ability to curse someone within the time, I might consider REALLY cursing myself or someone in my team though. And I think town cursers are entirely possible. I don't assume that Jay is good just because he was cursed. But I very much doubt the curse was fake.

5) @boom - I do not feel like I've taken any heat (the rants weren't people trying to vote for me, just bitching about me generally), but thanks for explaining what you meant - it checks out for me.

sig wrote:Also moving over to boom I don't like the case on Wilgy or Mp's last minute switch

Crown of shit

MovingPictures07 wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:What if, e.g., Sunshine + Gasoline's secret is that night powers targeting one will affect both of them?

Or if something in Mladic role (I believe he is probably the mafia insanifier) says "if you target one of a btsc pair it affects both of them" or something along those lines?

Possible.

I will let you down

MovingPictures07 wrote:Revisiting my Scotty suspicion as we speak.

My sweetest friend...

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:Do Not Let the Song on Repeat or the Angry Caps-Lock Internet Guy Lead You Astray About Me or Anyone Else Like They Did With the First Victim

At least I'm trying. You're the guy in the group that keeps shooting down everyone else's ideas without really bringing any of your own.

Could that be because you know who the townies are?

You are Neither One of Those Cats, You EgoManiacTM

Wait, I'm not the song on repeat? Lol.

The old familiar sting...

MovingPictures07 wrote:What's "the needle tears a hole"?

My sweetest friend?

Epignosis wrote:the Doctor

A million miles away

Dom wrote:i think he's purposefully exposing how flawed poe is

I will let you down

Epignosis wrote:Both Trains Should Be Abandoned: There Are Seventeen Fucking Names Up There and You Aren't Limited to Two (Like in Real Life)

My sweetest friend

triceratopzeuhl wrote:turns out to be part of a civ btsc pair

Golden wrote:

Epignosis wrote:Very Interesting and Very Foolish

birdwithteeth11 wrote:Boomslang

My sweetest friend?

My sweetest friend!

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:JURRWOOUFETVXRFVGAACC

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Scotty wrote:DrWilgy

My sweetest friend

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

LoRab wrote:For what it's worth, I think MP is civ.

I also think he should take a deep breath and come back to the game.

I'm voting A Person. At least for now. If they come back and give a reason for their post advocating for killing high posters, then I may reconsider.

A Person Complained About Volume...He Could Have Killed the Source of the Volume (But He Didn't)

You're playing POE better than anyone here.

My sweetest friend!

Epignosis wrote:So Far It's Working Like Shit

I will let you down

Dom wrote:IDK where to vote.

My sweetest friend

birdwithteeth11 wrote:Linki: Then who is a better option? Give me a good reason to look at someone else and I will. I have the time to do so right now.

My sweetest friend!

Epignosis wrote:Both Trains Should Be Abandoned

If I could start again...