The Syndicate

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

Scotty wrote:This might be cliche but I'm not thrilled with any of Marmot's 7 posts so far. Granted, that was Day 0. But he could probably shave the fluff, that naked rat

What's a townie Marmot look like?

Something akin to this

This might be cliche but I'm not thrilled with any of Marmot's 7 posts so far. Granted, that was Day 0. But he could probably shave the fluff, that naked rat

G-Man wrote:

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON D.C. 20503

January 20, 2017

MEMORANDUM FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF SECRET SERVICE PROTECTION

This Presidential memorandum calls for the extension of a Secret Service protective detail to anyone of the President's choice on the night of January 21, 2017. This memorandum requires the Director of the United States Secret Service to provide a list of qualified and capable service agents not already assigned to other work to the President no later 4:30 p.m. on January 21, 2017. At that time, the President will provide the name of the person to be protect that evening.

I totally missed this.

so it sounds like 2 power roles are the President and the Director of the Secret Service. Which would mean the mafia has a powe role too to balance it out, right?

Or...is the director indie? I mean, the real life secret service protects the president only because it's their job, not because they have loyalty to any one party.

It sounds like this director can just make a list of us, the president picks one, and if the mafia targets the president to die that night, one of us will die in his place. That sounds logical right?

Epignosis wrote:Quin, I feel that you just like getting into arguments to see who is right.

That's not happening here. This is American politics. Being right has no place.

Do you find Quin's antics as alignment indicative or merely argumentative?

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

Scotty wrote:Everyone's checked in, so...ima thinking one of the low posters is definitely bad.

Jackofhearts, I see you.

Hi, Scotty.

Do you still think that low posters are definitely bad? Specifically me? Any other leads?

Quin wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Quin missed my original point and misinterpreted my question. Hence we are talking in circles.

Placeholder vote on Quin. I don't think my original point was that obscure.

You had the chance to reiterate your point. Why didn't you take it, and instead choose to believe that I'm (assumedly purposefully) misinterpreting your question?

Quin, aren't you known for having several page long arguments over nuances of language aka talking in circles?

I don't fault S-V-S for this at all. That said, I don't think it's necessarily a scumtell for you so.

And that's all I have to say about that.

Epignosis wrote:

I predict a mechanic that stops the person with the most votes from being lynched and the lynch is actually decided based on the location of each voter.

Epignosis wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

Long Con wrote:I don't know, Eloh. I think Quin's response is not suspicious, just quality friendly snark.

That's okay. It's normal for people to think my suspicions are off. I even get lynched for them sometimes.

So I see a lot role-claiming. I thought this was illegal. G-Man...will those who have claimed an alliance have negative consequences?

(Still have a bit of catching up.)

Spoken like a true Democrat.

I don't get it.

Quin wrote:

thellama73 wrote:Quin, I feel like you are not taking my efforts to lynch you seriously.

I'm not.

Epignosis wrote:Nobody gets a fucking "red peek" Day 0. If you do, the game is pointless and we might as well do something else.

What's a red peek?

I actually flipped a coin among a few of you that had low posts and you came up, but since you're around and talking:

Do I "still" think low posters are bad? I don't know where the "still" came from. Still from last game? Just generally?
The low posting is not what makes you bad, but what you make of your posts. I would say some baddies are bound to be pretty slinky on day 1, so I don't give passes to low posters. No.

DF is an example of someone that gets heated when I talk about low posters, so his response to my vote for you is pretty much on par for him.

"Quin, aren't you known for having several page long arguments over nuances of language aka talking in circles?

I don't fault S-V-S for this at all. That said, I don't think it's necessarily a scumtell for you so.

And that's all I have to say about that."
So do you suspect Quin or not? That's all you have to say, but you really didn't say much of anything.

And you're using a lot of smilies my man. Seems pretty happy go lucky.

Ima keep my vote on you for now

Everyone's checked in, so...ima thinking one of the low posters is definitely bad.

Jackofhearts, I see you.

Marmot wrote:Epignosis was pushing hard for a game to start. I find his lack of activity suspicious.

Don't worry- if he's good, mafia will surely kill him night 1. And if he's bad, then we'll just lynch him! See how easy it is?

notsawyer540 wrote:

Scotty wrote: What did you learn from your 2 page catch-up?

That people like pantsuits, mostly. What have you learned?

A lot actually!

Quin doesn't know what he's doing.
Marmot is bad, via Mac.
Llama and SVS are here to playnotargue, while Elo is here to playnotdebate.
I checked FZ's rolecard per marmot's request and he's a she.
Epi is bad, via Wilgy.
Wilgy is bad, via Mac.
You like pantsuits.

Sounds like we got a good chunk of mafia already sniffed out to me!

notsawyer540 wrote:Hey guys. Had people over last night, so I just caught up. I LOVE Hillary's outfits that she gets from Kim-Jong Un, but voting for that would be sexist, so I'm going with her husband. That dude is a pimp with a capital "P."

What did you learn from your 2 page catch-up?

Marmot wrote:

Quin wrote:

Marmot wrote:

Quin wrote:I would like this FZ. person to check in. I don't think I've played with him before.

FZ is a she, and it's good to have her back.

Are you two teammates?

I don't know, I haven't checked her role card.

Have Scotty do it, I hear he's good at that.

thellama73 wrote:

Marmot wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I think it's clear my vote is an ironic one.

I know you can iron pantsuits, but how do you iron honesty?

You don't iron it, but you have to take it out and shake the dust out of it once in a while, Metalmarsh89.

I would prefer if you called me themarmot73.

Yeah I'll check her role card

thellama73 wrote:

Marmot wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I think it's clear my vote is an ironic one.

I know you can iron pantsuits, but how do you iron honesty?

You don't iron it, but you have to take it out and shake the dust out of it once in a while, Metalmarsh89.

Who is MetalMarsh89?

S~V~S wrote:The poll doesn't assume you like Clinton, it asks you to find one thing about her that you do like. Different thing.

That's assuming you like anything about her. There's not even an option for Non-players on this poll. You're either with Her or you're not!

Elohcin wrote:I don't know where to place my vote. The poll assumes we like Clinton. **scratches head** I think I will have to pick pantsuits.

Lol do you not?

Checking in.

Just putting out that I did in fact read my role card on Day 0 this time, since I missed some instructions in GoC.