The Syndicate

Dom wrote:TBH it's that I skimmed the thread at that point and just wanted a summary. Too many posts. So I asked for one. I have since determined that I think MM is civ and I no longer care about his reasons for his old Timmer suspicion.
Comments on it not making sense are attributed to the backwards nature of the suspicion. If you continue reading (this is the third time I have told you to actually go back and find the facts on this rather than presenting half of them), you'll see that I even apologize to him for not realizing he had corrected himself.
Any reason why you leave out key details here?

You apologized in the same post I just brought up. You're portraying this like it was a natural progression from "MM's suspicion is backwards" to "MM suspects timmer now" to "Nevermind, I apologize". You didn't forgive his timmer suspicion when you apologized, it's literally the same moment you asked him to expand on it.

If I believe there might be an inconsistency in the way you treat two people in this game under similar circumstances, that raises questions about your sincerity. I'm going to explore that scenario as much as I feel is necessary to determine whether your mindset is civilian-oriented.

Why do you keep asserting I'm leaving out details? What is the implication?

LoRab wrote:You realize that is far fetched, though? I mean, if another player posted that, in the same situation, would you just take it at face value, or would you be raising an eyebrow?

I'm sure I'd ask questions. I don't fault you for that. From the perspective of anyone who is not me, I think these are the options to choose between:

1. The civilian role which pulls a player from the poll is responsible for me being pulled from the poll.

2. I pulled myself from the poll somehow.

If you believe #2 is our reality, then what is the full description of the role you believe I have? If you believe something else happened, what is that?

LoRab wrote:Also, you credit We Drift Like Worried Fire with taking you off the poll. Which is fine. But you, MM, and I are the only 3 that didn't vote for you in the last lynch. You have mentioned suspicion of both MM and me, and yet Drift has no secret attached to it which would explain surviving the lynch.

Do you think that someone who voted for you changed their mind based on your having survived the lynch? Because that seems unlikely.

All we can do in this discussion is speculate. I can't imagine why either the SK or the mafia would want to remove me from the poll since I was likely to be lynched today otherwise. Doing so would only expose them to a lynch they'd have otherwise avoided to no public gain of their own. So that means the reason I am not in the poll is civilian in origin and there's a civilian role with the exact power in question.

Dom wrote:I also do not like how this discussion has been made about sig.

I posted earlier that WilgyTeeth was my biggest suspect. I don't see why the focus on him has waned.

My current discussion is not about sig, it is about you. The current flow of the dialogue does not change the tally, sig has no votes. What is your concern with this?

Dom wrote:No. You are very much misrepresenting that situation.
I criticized MM for voting Boomslang instead of timmer in that instance. I called his logic backwards and that if he thinks timmer is bad because of his return, then he should vote for timmer-- not for his suspected teammate.

But that's a detail you failed to mention here.

You didn't understand his suspicion of timmer. You said that:

Dom wrote:I still don't really understand why you suspect Timmer tbh

I agree that Marmot's initial vote for Boomslang was logically backwards given his stated timing beef. Independent of that Boomslang vote though was his suspicion of timmer -- that's what I'm talking about here. What made Marmot's suspicion of timmer hard to understand, and how does that compare with your current suspicion of sig?

Dom wrote:one where I didn't mention I suspected him less than two hours before.

Two hours is a long time. You voiced suspicion of him well earlier than that too. Why did it matter today?

LoRab wrote:We are officially at that point if the numbers are such that it is impossible to be wrong. I only vote for people who are incapacitated when I am fairly certain about them. It's one of the rules I made for myself a very long time ago. I'm not going to change it now. It would be breaking my own, personal ethics code of how I play to vote for a player in that situation (without extenuating circumstances). There are no extenuating circumstances here. I believe that I am suspicious of him--but I'm not certain of that fact by any stretch of the imagination. And he's hardly in a position to be able to discuss that. Therefore, I will not vote for MM this round.

With the poll and MM as they are right now, where are you leaning for your Day 7 vote?

LoRab wrote:As for your reaction, it felt very flippant, and not in a way that I would expect from a civ who just survived a lynch.

Flippant is a good word for it. It's nice to be alive, but I do fear my continued survival is only going to hinder the civilian cause. So long as I'm here I'm a tinfoil magnet thanks in no small part to trice, and that's both a distraction and a delay in people's abilities to SK hunt other people. I've tried to emphasize the importance of that but not many people seem to have taken my advice.

Regardless of my irritation, I'm doing my best to make productive use of my added time.

Dom wrote:Jay do you think his return is a bit oddly timed?

No. I think he showed up when he showed up. What kind of timing wouldn't have been odd?

EBWOP to fix the quotes...

Also for Dom:

Dom wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Question for the masses.

I make arbitrary and nonsensical votes, and nobody gives a shit.

I catch something I find suspicious and vote based on that, and people do give a shit.

For those of you whose read of me matches up with these statements, why is it so? I don't understand.

When you find things suspicious for nonsensical reasons like you did today it's a bad look.

MM's suspicion of timmer/Boomslang on Day 1 was timing based -- one player was absent for a time until his name was spoken and he reappeared. MM found this suspicious, and in this post you call that suspicion "nonsensical".

Now, you're calling sig suspicious because he reappeared after a period of absence soon after you mentioned the possibility of voting for him.

What is the fundamental difference between your suspicion of sig and MM's suspicion of timmer in these two scenarios?

Also for Dom:

Dom wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Question for the masses.

I make arbitrary and nonsensical votes, and nobody gives a shit.

I catch something I find suspicious and vote based on that, and people do give a shit.

For those of you whose read of me matches up with these statements, why is it so? I don't understand.

When you find things suspicious for nonsensical reasons like you did today it's a bad look.

MM's suspicion of timmer/Boomslang on Day 1 was timing based -- one player was absent for a time until his name was spoken and he reappeared. MM found this suspicious, and in this post you call that suspicion "nonsensical".

Now, you're calling sig suspicious because he reappeared after a period of absence soon after you mentioned the possibility of voting for him.

What is the fundamental difference between your suspicion of sig and MM's suspicion of timmer in these two scenarios?

Question for Dom:

Dom wrote:Sig's last post was on day 4.
I mention that I am thinking of voting for him and he shows up within hours.

Suspicion of sig was voiced before this phase during sig's period away from the game, and he didn't conveniently appear at those times. You made sig a minor emphasis during your own insanified period, Dom. I'd assert your comment here is more opportunistic than sig's appearance is convenient.

I've decided I like sig's return to the game today. He showed up, he took a look at the votes after having seen them compiled by G-Man, and made some judgments. He didn't force himself to catch up with every detail, and I don't think he appeared opportunistic. He worked with recent content and provided a fair effort to involve himself in the continuing dialogue in a productive way. He wasn't afraid to stab his finger into the chest of Epignosis or Dom, and he wasn't afraid of promoting a lynch against an insanified player.

G-Man, could you point to specific vote(s) from Epignosis you didn't like and vote(s) from me you did like and explain what circumstances of those votes led you to your conclusions?

Dom wrote:Jay - why aren't you on the poll?

Seemingly 'We Drift Like Worried Fire' didn't want me there.

LoRab wrote:I am not bad. So, I know you're wrong about me. Any reason in particular you think I'm mafia?

Old suspicions from previous stages of the game linger. Currently though I just found your comment about MM and I suspicious at face value. I know I'm not an option today, but I don't see why MM being insanified would prevent you from pursuing that lynch today if you truly believe in it.

You said you don't think we're at a point yet where it's necessary to lynch people who are somehow incapacitated. When do you think we are officially at that point?

LoRab wrote:As for my suspicion of you, your reaction to surviving the last lynch raised my eyebrow a great deal and made me wonder. I was hoping to be able to discuss you more this lynch, as I was (and am) wondering if I was wrong about you.

I'm here to discuss it now even if I am not in the poll. What about my reaction concerns you so?

A point about the trice controversy that I'm not sure has been adequately addressed:

Those who think I'm the SK and trice exposed me -- do you assert that trice wasn't genuinely trying as hard as he could to get me lynched?

sig wrote:Looking over GMAN thing we literally have the same people mislynching and leading the lynches over and over again.

I'm eyeing Epi, Dom, and MM due to his list, but plan to ISO them and see what I see. I had some suspicion of MM, but nothing to lynch on before now though we have almost lynched MM twice, failed both times lynching civs instead and the people who were pushing his wagon were killed by the mafia. I want to try and lynch MM this phase again. Looking back the cases and points made against him are good , but like I said I'll ISO him at some point.

Also I'm not saying it isn't possible, but it is unlikely that both insanfiers are still alive. I think one is faking it.

Also there comes a point where if we have to lynch silenced/insaneified people then that is what we have to do. Especially if the mafia is doing it to their own.

Which of the insanified players do you think is more likely to be faking it? Based on what do you suggest an insanifier has likely died by now?

There's also the non-lynch of Day 4 which remains unresolved. There was a reason my mind went straight to balance when it came to judging what happened there. That's a problem still for MM even if he can't really answer to it.

LoRab wrote:@Dom: Nope, not bad.

My top 2 suspects for this round are 3J and MM, which is annoying because MM is insanified and 3J is off the poll.

Epi posting against Christmas is kind of amusing.

LoRab, you expressed doubt about my being the SK last phase due to what you called an "infodump" by trice and that I seemed too obvious. Today you've called me a top suspect that you cannot pursue due to my absence in the poll. What has changed your perspective between the phases?

I already asked about your MM comment, so please answer that too.

I think this'd be a good time for another round of GTHs all around actually since I think many people's reads are in flux right now. It'd also be compatible with the insanified people with a little creativity.

There aren't many people around presently, but it's something to keep in mind later. Maybe towards the end of the phase when people are dropping in to vote ahead of the deadline,

Dom wrote:3J-- who is bad?

My top three mafia suspects are Wilgy 2.0, Marmot, and LoRab. Gun to my head I'd place Wilgy 2.0 and LoRab as Sleep and Mladic. My top SK suspect is G-Man.

I don't think anyone looks great though short of Quin, so it's a discussion that needs to be ongoing.

I'm afraid I don't follow the second post there.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:That would also likely eliminate sig from SK contention. The only alternative in those cases would be randomized kill targets when a kill isn't submitted. Some hosts have done that on other sites I've played at, but I've never seen it on The Syndicate. I'm content to assume it's not the case.

QX

So you think sig is a SK candidate?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Dom wrote:I think Epi is a civ.

Why?

QFPI

Following your prior code, if I understand you, those four letters mean "civ" right?

If so, please indicate via quote which one you're calling a civ:

Epignosis

Dom

That would also likely eliminate sig from SK contention. The only alternative in those cases would be randomized kill targets when a kill isn't submitted. Some hosts have done that on other sites I've played at, but I've never seen it on The Syndicate. I'm content to assume it's not the case.

To be frank: I don't give a crap whether someone isn't here to speak or they are insanified. There aren't enough people left alive to give people a pass for that kind of stuff.

A valid argument to consider is that Sleep and the SK have both been present to make their kills. That might eliminate BWT/Wilgy 2.0 from candidacy for the SK, for example, since there's no teammate in that context to associate with the kill. He could still be Sleep. Also, earlier in the game Rico refused to answer me when I asked whether the mafia team can send actions as a group or if individuals must send their own actions period. That leaves the door open for group actions, which allows anyone alive to be either scum role.

Dom wrote:I think MM is a civ.

Why?

Dom wrote:I think Epi is a civ.

Why?

LoRab wrote:@Dom: Nope, not bad.

My top 2 suspects for this round are 3J and MM, which is annoying because MM is insanified and 3J is off the poll.

Epi posting against Christmas is kind of amusing.

Why do you care whether MM is insanified?

sig wrote:

Dom wrote:Sig's last post was on day 4.
I mention that I am thinking of voting for him and he shows up within hours.

So im what lurking for days, and screwing up the game, and my chances of winning, by not voting, but decide to show up since you mentioned me? Get real, your either mafia looking for an easy lynch or not thinking.

My question for you sig:

You've returned to the game after a few days away and immediately dived right back into the discussion of who should be lynched and why. That's a nice thing, but I don't understand how you can even have a clear perspective of anything that's gone on lately. Do your reads translate from where they were when we last saw you, or have they developed in some manner since that point?

Hey serial killer:

You thought I was a freebie today and now you're at risk. *vulgar arm motion*

G-Man, I appreciate your effort in vote analysis, but I am struggling to follow it. Could you please expand on why you like or dislike the votes for each player at least briefly?

G-Man, I'd like to see your response to this:

Epignosis wrote:

G-Man wrote:Doing the sheeple thing and voting Jimmy. Epi's case is intriguing but speculative. Sometimes you have to go with speculative in order to break a game your way. Jimmy's votes don't look good or bad, which gives me pause, but I also haven't had enough proper time to dig through them all to look for tinfoil patterns. I can see them as the intentional work of a baddie or the unintentional work of a civvie but not the intentional work of a civvie.

I know you just got here, but this post reeks of trying too hard to say very little.

First, I don't really have a "case" against 3J. Somebody who knows who the serial killer is called 3J the serial killer. That's about all there is to that.

Second, if 3J is the serial killer, how is looking at his votes is a useful way to spend your time? If you've read my "case," then your comment about 3J's votes doesn't make sense.

Third, that last sentence...

timmer wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

LoRab wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Oh boy.

Can you clarify what you mean by that?

If nothing else I'm glad to see the discussion has started to move in a direction other than *cricket* "lynch JJJ" *cricket*.

Has it, though?

Yes I think so. I know I'm still most likely being lynched, that's not my meaning. I mean yesterday that's nearly the only thing anyone bothered to talk about which is a giant waste of civilian time. That needs to change even if I am lynched. It has started to.

LoRab wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Oh boy.

Can you clarify what you mean by that?

Nothing really. A sarcastic acknowledgment that this fun will continue for me.

I'm going to the Bengals game today so I'm again out of commission until later. If nothing else I'm glad to see the discussion has started to move in a direction other than *cricket* "lynch JJJ" *cricket*. I'll do my best to use my time productively when I have it.

Oh boy.

I'm about to leave for this movie and I'll be out for most of the evening thereafter. I may be able check in on my phone a little bit but I make no guarantees.

Voting BWT

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Join the circumstantial suspicion club.

Do you feel the circumstantial suspicion you've faced has been unfounded?

I'll note: the matter of balance has been addressed for the SK. A recruiting power is always a strong boon. The mafia team however remains unaddressed in this regard: a 3-player team against 14-15 high-powered civilians and a recruitment-capable SK still sounds like it needs help.

Quin, your read on BWT develops a lot like my own: positive marks in the games earliest eras for what looks like genuine investigative effort followed by a gradual decline in that positivity to this point. I think he's a viable suspect in general, mafia or SK. I hope he's able to appear today to discuss the misgivings which have been voiced by a number of people now.

I will have no ability to influence the progression of this tally later today, so I'm going to make an Official Statement right now:

If you're going to lynch me, there will be an effort void left in the civilian faction. Believe that or don't, this is about preparation. I want to know that someone else will be willing to take on the mantle of the analytic and faciliatory grind in my place. Being lynched would be a frustrating thing, but not as frustrating as watching this thread turn into a cadaver afterword. There are baddies out there who are delighted by my plight right now, and their advantage will be felt as long as the thread moves like a snail. That thoroughly irks me.

If you lynch me, you accept the responsibility to kick it into high gear. That is my demand.

G-Man wrote:Dude. Branding the new guy the serial killer when he lacks the time and resources to disprove such an accusation is lame. That being said, I'm also curious about the case on BWT. Can anyone fill me in on that?

I understand you're not in an advantageous position to answer to that material, though I'm not sure anyone is. It's a combing of trice's posts and the reads develop from that content. One special variable applying to you and Quin which I've not considered yet is that of replacement. Neither original player was under pressure really, and it appears the replacements occurred before the casketjack reveal. It's fair to question whether they'd be as likely to bail on the game as the SK given the circumstances. That could be one point in your favor.

I'm done for the night. My time will be pretty limited tomorrow; I'll be seeing Rogue One and doing other Christmas-related shit. I should have a little time to be around to talk about whatever in the morning/early afternoon.

I've compiled all the final votes placed in this game by players who are still alive. The information is presented as follows:

[total number of votes received by] Player X: living players who voted for him/her
Civilian
Deceased with unknown alignment
Independent

Day 1:
[3] Epignosis: Scotty
[6] insertnamehere: JJJ, MP/G-Man, timmer, Sloonei/Quin, sig
[2] timmer: MM
[1] trice: Epignosis

Day 2:
[2] A Person: LoRab
[4] Boomslang: MM, BWT, sig
[5] DrWilgy: JJJ, Epignosis, Dom, MP/G-Man
[1] LoRab: Scotty

Day 3:
[6] A Person: LoRab, BWT, timmer, JJJ, MM
[1] BWT: Dom
[1] Dom: sig
[1] LoRab: Sloonei/Quin
[4] MM: MP/G-Man

Day 4:
[6] MM: timmer, Scotty, BWT, MP/G-Man
[1] Sloonei/Quin - sig
[6] trice: Epignosis, JJJ, Dom, LoRab, MM

Day 5:
[3] BWT: MM, Scotty
[1] Scotty: Sloonei/Quin
[5] trice: LoRab, JJJ, timmer, Dom, Epignosis

A few statistical extractions...

Votes cast for players who were lynched the same day phase (nobody is being counted here for Day 4 because it was a tie and nobody died):
BWT: 1
Dom: 2
Epignosis: 2
MP/G-Man: 2
JJJ: 4
LoRab: 2
MM: 1
Sloonei/Quin: 1
Scotty: 0
sig: 1
timmer: 3

I'd say the standout here is Scotty with that goose egg. His votes leave him untraceable by the alignments of each lynched player, none of whom have been on the mafia team. That's not a great look. The exception for him is on Day 4 when he contributed to the tie, but the [non]-result leaves us unable to draw much from that.

Votes cast for confirmed non-members of the mafia team (including trice):
BWT: 1
Dom: 3
Epignosis: 4
MP/G-Man: 2
JJJ: 5
LoRab: 4
MM: 2
Sloonei/Quin: 1
Scotty: 0
sig: 1
timmer: 3

It occurs to me having counted these that the numbers are very similar to the previous tally plus Day 4 (not exactly that, but close). So the insight may be limited. Scotty's zero is the same zero, so there's nothing to add on him.

At the moment I feel okay with LoRab's 4 non-mafia votes. She has gotten her fair share of crap for most of the game but has still been willing to stick her votes on people whose flips did not reflect beautifully on her at face value. It's very easy for mafia to stay out of trouble in this regard since they already know with 94% certainty everyone's alignment from the beginning (and 100% certainty who's not on their own team). I get the impression a baddie LoRab would have been more evasive in her voting pattern than this.

MM's 2 may as well be a 1 since one of them was a self-preservation vote. It should be stated though that in two cases his votes ended days on multi-vote wagons which were at least somewhat relevant. Boomslang especially was quite close to being lynched on Day 2. In that regard I am not super troubled by his voting record. I am less thrilled with his record of uninspiring vote rationales.

Votes cast which did not have a meaningful impact upon the development of EOD discussion and the final tally:
BWT: 0
Dom: 1
Epignosis: 1
MP/G-Man: 0
JJJ: 0
LoRab: 1 (D2 A Person vote is debatable)
MM: 1 (D1 timmer vote is debatable)
Sloonei/Quin: 2
Scotty: 1
sig: 2
timmer: 0

It's unlike Sloonei to have any of these. I think he typically views off-wagon flier votes with as much suspicion as I do. Unfortunately he can't talk about that now, and I am willing to chalk it up to his having been too busy to be involved. Quin had the second one and he is much more known for those. sig's couple of whatever votes aren't my favorite things. He's had difficulty keeping up, but that hasn't stopped him from stating opinions. Also, on Day 2 he was eager to involve himself in the more dramatic EOD proceedings. It was that Boomslang vote that got him into some trouble after all, so that he abandoned any effort to involve himself similarly after that point is not great.

~~~

The voting records which thrill me the least here are Scotty's and sig's.

Quin wrote:It's been like 3/4 of an hour and I'm still only on the first page of BWT's ISO.

A recommendation from the resident ISOFreak which you can accept or ignore as you please:

Sometimes it's very easy to get absorbed into the ISO process and feel the urge to comment on everything. If that's happened to you: don't. It usually ends up making the review post so massive that it is less likely to be read in full by anyone short of the subject of the ISO, and it probably doesn't help you much to convey your read in a way that will influence others. It makes things a bit more convoluted. Save your energy for the moments which truly inspire the most substantive responses from you.

I'll look into the mafia team now as best as I can before I collapse from exhaustion. There's much less conclusive evidence to work with on that front, but I don't think votes have gotten due attention yet so I'll start there.

Based on all those checks, here's a loose order of how likely I feel each remaining player is to be the SK, from most likely to least likely:

G-Man
BWT
MM
Scotty
LoRab
sig
Quin
timmer
Epignosis
Dom

Trice and timmer:

~ Prods timmer among some low posters. timmer probably didn't deserve to be lumped into this group
~ Questions Marmot for his suspicion of Boomslang and timmer / Continued / Again but this time with suspicion of Boomslang (this was a point of focus for much of Day 2)
~ Sharp language used against timmer with regard to suspicion of sig -- "I just have better reading comprehension"
~ Parlays timmer's grievances with Epi into a new statement of suspicion of his own
~ Neutral theorizing of role mechanics in response to timmer
~ Insists to timmer specifically that I'm the SK and provides his "rationale" / Dialogue continued

Conclusion: There's again not much to be said, though trice interacted with timmer quite a lot throughout the game. The effort he went through to try to convince timmer of his specific case that I am the SK makes me wonder how timmer could be the SK himself. That'd be a backwards way for trice to manage that dialogue unless he just had no desire to be found by the SK in the first place. I'd call timmer an unlikely SK.

Trice and sig:

~ Pseudo prod of sig among other low-posters
~ Defensive of sig with strong language -- suggested his critics responded "obtusely" to his Boomslang vote on Day 2
~ Specific mention of the SK to sig
~ Talks about A Person with sig
~ Discusses high posters with sig after sig's assertion that one of them is likely bad. The SK is mentioned again, this time with trice implying it could be one of the high posters

Conclusion: There's not much here. One thing to say is that there's at least one possible moment which can be viewed as a signal, in trice's earliest unsolicited mention of the SK to sig. The second mention of the SK seems to discount that though, since he theorized aloud about other people being the SK -- something that'd likely throw sig off the casketjack trail if sig is the SK. I think that second moment is more meaningful than the first, which would be a nice look for sig.

Quin wrote:You're right, 3J. ISO's incoming.

I'm glad to have a fresh perspective arriving. I look forward to seeing how you feel about everyone without the blinders of 5 previous day cycles and reads entrenchment.

Trice and Scotty:

~ Supportive of Scotty's early suspicion of BWT
~ Same "arrogant" comment he attached to Dom
~ Idle mechanical chatter
~ Kind of halfway supports MP in his suspicion of Scotty, in an offhand way while actually discussing MP himself
~ Light contest of Scotty's theory about a low poster being responsible for insanification
~ Implicates Scotty as a possible silencer of Sloonei, but also gives him positive marks for his play on Night 1
~ Again discusses Scotty in relation to Sloonei being silenced without stating a conclusive read
~ Day 3 prod of Scotty in his effort to catch up
~ Asks me for clarification on my suspicion of Scotty
~ Mafia shortlist on Day 4
~ A bit of a waffle in that read -- seems to imply Scotty looks good at face value but not in the evidence
~ Still unwilling to take a harsh stance against Scotty

Conclusion: This one feels similar to the LoRab review -- there are some valid indicators but none of them are inspiring. He was willing to implicate Scotty in the evidence but otherwise he left Scotty well enough alone. There'd be no clear signal if Scotty is the SK. The reads progression is at least compatible.

This phase has not moved enough. Last phase was too slow and this one is even worse. Whatever your beliefs about the circumstance in this game right now, the effort level needs to improve. I understand we don't all have all day to play this game, but this is still not good enough. There's barely been 30-40 posts this phase and half of them are mine. There are at least three baddies out there and given the current trajectory of discussion it's not getting any better this phase. Find baddies or lose. Period.