The Syndicate

Stream done, sleep obtained. Posting to get to "All posts in this topic" because I'm lazy, beginning catchup process.

But, Llama, is the universe not ever expanding, and thus there will always be more to colonize?

The on-topic conversation between us about credit is going nowhere Llama, let's just drop it.

Wilgy you tease me so.

Naturally, then, you're going to accept credit for your failures as well Llama?

You were talking about how the flip would affect your credibility before the flip. And, lo and behold, it was a moot question.

Llama this is strange.

thellama73 wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

FZ. wrote:Sorry, I'm going to sleep.


linki: so you think Lorab is a good vote? Why so? Damn you, I want to sleep

Nobody is as good a vote as sig.

I'd like to think I have a good grip on scum sig. I called him out as scum correctly in Dune and in West Wing.

I'm not so sure about my initial LoRab read anymore. She's not pinging me so much.

Mac, if Sig is lynched and turns out scum, will you give me credit for being the first to call him out?

Scumhunting has much less value when the thread believes there to be multiple scum teams. And with Zebra being what seems to be the "primary" kill last night, the possibility of multiple scum teams is significant. Why, then, are you focusing on the credit you'll get if someone flips scum as opposed to if he'll flip scum at all?



Caught up with the results now. Does me missing a vote convince anyone that I'm actually an evil mastermind plotting to murder you all? J3?

You neglected a question in my post. Do you think that saying "I don't do this as scum" will actually convince anyone that you're not scum?

Yeah Sig, it was on the last page.

While it doesn't qualify as a "case" per se, you did overlook my question from a short while ago.

DrWilgy wrote:

RadicalFuzz wrote:Re: your thoughts on Sig I don't know. I've been watching how people respond to the accusations but don't know how I feel about them myself.

That's kinda dangerous Fuzz, I understand playing a step or 2 deep is important, but what about the here and now? if you think someone's reactionary logic is flawed and accuse them for it, how would you react if it turns out to be correct?

The here and now isn't what I'm concerned about, given my soon-to-be absence from the thread. If I think someone's logic is flawed and I use logic to point that out then one of us is either objectively wrong or trying to account for future human behavior, which is inconsistent.

Re: your thoughts on Sig I don't know. I've been watching how people respond to the accusations but don't know how I feel about them myself.

I've been strong town reads on all the recent rainbow lists. Is there anyone that doesn't hold the opinion that I'm town? Because if so, I want to talk about it. If you, the person who thinks I'm not town, sees that I'm high on rainbow lists and says nothing then you're letting an opportunity slip away.

Mac I see that you're creating a league of SupaHotHeroes. Can I join?

Wilgy talk about me more. I require lots of attention. I'm evolving into a Tomodachi. Will you bury me after you neglect me and I die a slow, painful death?

Sig, I have an issue with your statement.

Well I see I have five votes, I'll need to catch up on the thread and see why this is,but from my skimming early today it seems they are voting for me based around a connection with zebra? If this is the reason then it is silly that anyone who knows my scum game would think i'd so obviously buddy up to a fellow mafia member. When I usually have little to no interaction with them.

You believe you're being lynched because you buddied Zebra, correct? And your defense is, essentially, "that's not how I play as scum, anyone who's ever seen me play as scum knows I don't do that," right? You are clearly a human being, and human beings have the ability to adapt to various situations.

Anyway, time for my question. Answer it honestly, you never know who's watching. Do you expect the defense of "I would never do X as scum, but in this game I have done X so I am not scum" to prove effective?

Just so everyone is aware of my situation, I'm going to be hosting a 24-hour charity stream on Tuesday 6 PM Central to Wednesday 6 PM Central so I'll be completely unavailable during that time and about 10 hours on either end.

And I'm relatively new here, but doesn't Epi always seem bitter?

Oh, I just thought of a fun pun.

Faraday has been...
Barry-d


I'm leaving now.

On the note of people suspecting me for that early post, Elochin (replaced by FZ now) had echoed Faraday's point and seemed to dislike me calling it that, but Dharma didn't voice anything about that despite his dislike of Faraday's point. My first post stated that I'd be playing differently this game, so the arguments of "he didn't do this as town so he must be scum" would be null. Faraday felt it "strange," would you agree with that?

I feel you J3, I had money on the Texans. Not the best Saturday in recent memory, to say the least.

I've seen this role do fantastic things before, and Rico appears to be good at this game if you guys are any factor, so that's why I'm so happy.

Can't you tell?

thellama73 wrote:

RadicalFuzz wrote:Faraday when you say I read civvie so you're not pinged by my "strange alignment comments" what comments are you referring to?

Oh thank god he wasn't just being a giant idiot.

Llama, explain how we "lost a civilian?" His unkillable role from which he literally can't be targeted and will therefore be able to advise as a mod-confirmed civilian for the everlasting future of the game is an unfavorable outcome? I honestly think this went better than lynching scum Day 1, as Rico would surely be lynched later down the line for his actions up to this point.

Because he's dead? He died. He is no more. He is an ex-Rico. He's pushing up the daisies. He's shuffled off the mortal coil and gone to join the choir invisible.

thellama73 wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Ricochet has been lynched. He was Jacob Donner, a civilian.

If Jacob Donner is lynched on Day 1, he will die, revealing his full role. If this occurs, Donner may continue to post on-topic as if he were alive, but he cannot vote and cannot be targeted by any abilities or items.

I don't see why this is so hard for everyone. He's not an unkillable role, he's dead. Yeah, it's great that Rico can still help out with analysis, but we lost a civ vote, and our numbers are one fewer versus the mafia. Forgive me for not celebrating.

Let me phrase this event in a different light. Normal Day 1 lynches are crapshoots, for the most part. Mafia getting lynched is uncommon and there's the risk of lynching a strong civilian role. Rico's role could prevent that by offering himself as a martyr while we still keep a confirmed townie analyst for the rest of the game. But you insist this outcome is worse than hoping we've found scum in the 30+ pages of Rico trying to get lynched by misrepresenting everyone's arguments?

Thanks for reminding me Matt. To whomever is cursing the fine folks of this town: pick me next. I wanna be special.

Thanks for clarifying Faraday. While you're here and I have the ability to talk to humans at this ungodly hour, what is your impression of Wilgy?

Glad to see you're all caught up and enthusiastic about the game Timmer.

Sorry if it feels like I'm harassing you, but when you say I've come across as legitimate since then that means you feel my "playing differently" were not legitimate?

Faraday when you say I read civvie so you're not pinged by my "strange alignment comments" what comments are you referring to?

Oh thank god he wasn't just being a giant idiot.

Llama, explain how we "lost a civilian?" His unkillable role from which he literally can't be targeted and will therefore be able to advise as a mod-confirmed civilian for the everlasting future of the game is an unfavorable outcome? I honestly think this went better than lynching scum Day 1, as Rico would surely be lynched later down the line for his actions up to this point.

I remember seeing his AV but don't remember what he said. From that impression I'd lean ever so slightly towards scum, but I'd have to go back and find his posts to see if that's just my misinterpretation or not.

So what would you have me do? Help me make it easier to understand.

When you say my thoughts are written in a complicated manner are you implying that you'd rather me use smaller words so you can better understand?

Hamburger it's possible that Dharma remembered Faraday specifically because I engaged Faraday about finding me "weird." Also of note is that Elo reiterated Faraday's thoughts on that topic once but hasn't said anything about it again. If Elo is supposedly a reactionary player then I find it strange that she dropped that topic so quickly without getting distracted by something else. Also, requiring documentation of someone's past playstyle before considering how they're currently playing is flawed. According to that if I were to do a lot of scum things, but I hadn't been scum before, I would just win.

Since you brought that up Golden, your fourth reason for me being a townread shouldn't be on there. My home site Day 1 votes against me are literally used as currency, so I have literal years of experience dealing with that as either allegiance. By comparison, the only one who might illogically vote for me here is Wilgy, and he's horrible at convincing people of things early game.

Llama, I really like that word. Malicious.

timmer wrote:Holy christ, guys, 13 pages already?

I've only barely skimmed the game up to this point. Day 0 is a write-off. About the only thing I've really caught so far is Rico acting crazy all game and now people are voting him for it? I'm going to go along with it since I'm not going to have much time to catch up better than this, and in the off chance he flips bad, it'll give us a serious amount of material to work with considering how early it is in the game.

voting rico

You're voting for a player who, in your own words, only has an off chance in flipping bad?

Not off the top of my head Mac. I'm sure it's been brought up before but I don't remember the circumstances.

Also I hate this last page. Reasonable words and people thinking I'm a coolio. We'll never talk of it again.

As both. It's much more entertaining and productive to have people out for my head. When it's Fuzz versus the world I know what side everyone else is on, but when some people think I'm clean and some don't life gets complex.

So he compliments people with the intent to legitimately compliment them? That bugs me, one of my pet peeves is feeling manipulated when people say nice things about me. That's why I prefer people to suspect me, I know where their mindset is.

I might've not said hypothetical or theoretical when referring to "2 wagons" in my short conversation with Golden, or maybe he didn't, mostly irrelevant and we've cleared up the confusion.

Yeah, that in addition to his compliments unnerve me. The entire chain of events feels like:
"Fuzz I like how you think"
"Fuzz engage me in this conversation"
"Fuzz is my strongest town read, I wanted to get his perspective to understand where he's coming from"

Now, I love my name being thrown around like hot potato, that's not the issue, but it feels like an accelerated process. Even taking into account the fact that "strongest town read" is a fickle thing on Day 1 this trust Golden has built feels artificially quickened, if that makes sense.

Golden wrote:But yeah, I was talking in the theoretical because I am in particular one of those who would criticise people voting off wagon without much explanation, and so I think talking through Fuzz's perspective is helpful for me to understand him.

Fuzz is my strongest town read right now.

Explain something to me. How can I, with my reasoning for voting Llama literally attributed to "I'm following the guy who can only speak in smileys," be your strongest town read when in the same post you claim you would criticize people voting off wagon without much explanation?

Fair enough Marsh. You realize, then, that if we're going to operate on the possibility of separate scum teams that catching scum provides very little credibility, correct?

"The two of you repeatedly said 2 major wagons"

hypothetical two main wagons...

Yep, that's both repeatedly and convincgly the phrase "2 major wagons."

Mac what's your avatar from? MTG?

Golden I think we're arguing the downsides to two extremes here. I'm saying it could produce poor results and you're saying it will prevent scum from sliding under the radar. If that's correct, then my stance is somewhere in the middle of those two. If not then I've misunderstood somewhere along the line and I apologize.

Marsh if we're teammates in a bad kind of way, but you're scum, wouldn't that make us teammates in a good kind of way?

Golden wrote:

RadicalFuzz wrote:The issue with declaring which of these hypothetical two main wagons you would vote for, Golden, is that it rarely helps the one declaring intent to vote. If they get lynched and flip scum then it was "free credit" because they didn't vote for the scum. If they get lynched and flip civ then it was "distancing from a mislynch" because they appeared flip-floppy. If that player isn't lynched it's almost worse, since there's no conclusion to this "I'd rather X be dead than Y" preference. My experiences show that scum hiding on a main wagon usually have worse reasoning than scum hiding on off wagons, as they can bandwagon and literally say "I agree with X's statements" without risking genuine interaction.

The advantage of forcing them to say IS that it rarely helps them. It means they aren't doing it for themselves, they are doing it for the record. Scum then can't avoid making some form of statement about teammates when they have heat. Ultimately, though, it all comes down to how genuine you believe someone to be in their reads, regardless of what those reads actually are.

So you'd prefer every off-wagon voter to, whether directly asked or not, give information about which of the main wagons they'd rather see succeed? The issue I have with that is that you're forcing opinions from people. If a player is indecisive or split on the main wagons then pulling an opinion from them will inevitably cause a contradiction. When that player happens to be scum all is right in the world, however if that player is a townie then it creates a rabbit hole out of a mole hill, so to speak.

Mac the number of main wagons is irrelevant in this discussion, as far as I can tell. If there are 5 wagons with the same number of votes then the conversation would be the same.

The issue with declaring which of these hypothetical two main wagons you would vote for, Golden, is that it rarely helps the one declaring intent to vote. If they get lynched and flip scum then it was "free credit" because they didn't vote for the scum. If they get lynched and flip civ then it was "distancing from a mislynch" because they appeared flip-floppy. If that player isn't lynched it's almost worse, since there's no conclusion to this "I'd rather X be dead than Y" preference. My experiences show that scum hiding on a main wagon usually have worse reasoning than scum hiding on off wagons, as they can bandwagon and literally say "I agree with X's statements" without risking genuine interaction.

Thank you for the compliment, also.

Mac Wilgy does this to an extent whenever we play, even IRL, because he has my number, for lack of a better term. In basically anything but Smash Bros he knows exactly what I'm going to do and why. If we can cooperate then we are a decent team but he takes legitimate glee in watching me struggle to find out his allegiance that I often can't trust him even with good reason.

Gonna follow MM and Wilgy with their votes.

You're going to follow Wilgy who is following me who is following J3 with your vote, more specifically.

I'm sad that I was left out of the Kool Kids List from Zebra. Whoever's cursing people, can you target me next time so people have to acknowledge my strange and less-than-ideally-literate existence?

Rico that "kill list slip" is optimistic at best. I've been down that path, one time a townie said "So we're killing [person] tonight?" asking if that was the lynch candidate and we turned on him faster than a pack of wolves on steak. Yes it's technically more probable that someone who "slipped" like that was thinking of the term "kill" rather than lynch and as such has the ability to kill directly, but it is not a solid method of investigation.

"Llama omg jedi battle"
"Jimmy sitting on ice cube large mouth"

I have faith in our general J3 and am changing my vote from Wilgy to Llama.
Llama

I haven't heard your vocaroo. If you think we should stop fighting and just be friends then which of us would you rather see gone? I also really dislike it when people say votes not on leading wagons are going to waste. It's a very narrow-minded viewpoint that completely ignores any effect of lynch votes aside from voting to kill.

Hey Mac, question. If you had to blindly trust one player for the rest of the game, who would it be?

Long Con wrote:

RadicalFuzz wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

RadicalFuzz wrote:Wilgy

Zebra that wasn't a statement about any given case in this game, it was a generalized statement about how to present suspicion of someone who disagrees with you. It sounds more legitimate to say "this case is logical, and you disagree with it, so you are illogical and wrong" than "you disagree with me so you are illogical and wrong."

Dharma, Faraday did expound a little bit when I requested him to. Elo, as I had said then, didn't add anything but reiteration to Faraday's suspicion against me.

What is with the you and Wilgy stuff?

I don't know.

It doesn't seem familiar to you?

It's common on JTM for players to vote for me, whether jokingly or with intent to lynch, for no reason. His doing it here doesn't really tell me anything aside from he wants this to be an issue this game. He usually manipulates me well, which might lean towards scum, but it's Wilgy so his tendency to screw with people cancels that out. I'm content to reciprocate his vote and mostly ignore him aside from that.

I mean, it's entirely possible he's peeved at me for implying that we would hang out over the holidays and then promptly dropping off the face of the earth, but I find it unlikely. He wouldn't think being teased with the carrot of companionship only to get the stick of loneliness would be worth harboring any grudges.

MacDougall wrote:

RadicalFuzz wrote:Wilgy

Zebra that wasn't a statement about any given case in this game, it was a generalized statement about how to present suspicion of someone who disagrees with you. It sounds more legitimate to say "this case is logical, and you disagree with it, so you are illogical and wrong" than "you disagree with me so you are illogical and wrong."

Dharma, Faraday did expound a little bit when I requested him to. Elo, as I had said then, didn't add anything but reiteration to Faraday's suspicion against me.

What is with the you and Wilgy stuff?

I don't know.

Wilgy

Zebra that wasn't a statement about any given case in this game, it was a generalized statement about how to present suspicion of someone who disagrees with you. It sounds more legitimate to say "this case is logical, and you disagree with it, so you are illogical and wrong" than "you disagree with me so you are illogical and wrong."

Dharma, Faraday did expound a little bit when I requested him to. Elo, as I had said then, didn't add anything but reiteration to Faraday's suspicion against me.

Twisting words can be beneficial, but what about trying to convince everyone else that you're right? What about suspecting people simply for not agreeing with you?

There is a time and a place for nearly all forms of manipulation, misinterpretation, and various other social skills. Twisting someone's words after their death can be very useful, usually as scum but on occassion as town. Suspecting people for not agreeing with you looks bad but suspecting people for not agreeing with this logical case you've made looks better.

Many of these things happen frequently, but aren't extreme cases so they go unnoticed.



What do I think of you, Wilgy? I want to lynch you. What do you think of me?

J3 can you answer my question from earlier? What is your quest?
(And I promise I'm not getting information just to manipulate a possible lynch-or-lose scenario a month down the line if that makes you feel any better)

You're looking at it from a black-and-white perspective. If I say what is 2 and 2 then that's an ambiguous question. It's either 4 or 22. Both have logical paths and could be considered reasonable in their own right.

Zebra I disagree. Intentionally twisting words to gauge reactions isn't necessarily an anti-Town strategy. It stirs up trouble, sure, but most players would have different reactions to being misinterpreted based on various variables, including allegiance.

If you're annoyed by seemingly pointless questions, Rico, then this is gonna be a hell of a game.

Matt, the answer is his silence.

I misread. And I incriminated myself. But I didn't have any objectively positive effect for town, like leading a wagon against scum, or using my ability in a manner that hindered scum or helped town.

I don't to butt heads. The market has determined that I am the better writer, since I get paid for it

Delicious irony.

"I killed it" by providing minimal contribution aside from causing supatown J3 to nearly lose the game for us after a full month's worth of effort. It was definitely fun, and I'm still amazed at how Wilgy managed to lose that one for scum, but I did an objectively poor job.

On that note my "ask J3 a weird question" alarm has gone off, so it's that time again.

J3: What is your quest?

That fits with his current style of "throw shit and hope it pisses off people" and would encourage him to be lenient and open with his reads.

^Would that qualify as a mention, and be safe if we only refer as "him" or "the eye?"

You know how to read, Zebra. I like you.

And no, Rico, people have talked about you enough. We have stances from multiple people on you that are rooted in posts, whether they be misconceptions from anyone is irrelevant in that regard. Explain to me where everyone with the ever-so-strong stance of "I've never played with this Fuzz guy but he IS acting strange" went.

Thanks for the clarification Zebra.

I'd like to bring the lack of talking about me to attention. Concerning because I was, for the early parts of the phase, generating many heebie-jeebies and generally "he's acting weird" sentiments. Why has that stopped? Is it because people have attention spans equivalent to however loud the next poster is shouting at someone? Or is the explanation that I'm actually a scum mastermind who's subconsciously manipulated everyone to talk about me and then forget about me so I can say I haven't been coasting?

I'm glad I'm here to watch this. Aside from the humor of being referred to as a "champion" after one game where I did little of consequence aside from screw with J3's paranoia, this is a lot more entertaining than I expected.

Also, rebuttal to his daily reminder, Lynch Wilgy.

Zebra I understand your frustration at seemingly being misrepresented, but you're committing the same premature conclusion fallacy you're accusing Rico of.

I like to save my conclusions for when I'm given enough meat to form a conclusion

In a single post you pretend that my response was a deflective defense when it's not, while at the same time using deflection as your own defense because you don't have a reasonable answer as to what I accused of...because I hit the nail on the head

What exactly was his supposed defense against "you're trying to look as town as possible?" Did you expect him to refute that point, that he isn't trying to look town?

Something that concerns me, however, is this post you make shortly after the above. You say the following:

Nice continued lack of defense to a legitimate and shared suspicion by the way.

Nobody else has commented on your suspicion, it's literally two posts after you initially stated it, so how is it "shared?"

Ease in reaching out: 4
Timely response to your inquiry: N/A
Friendly & courteous service: 3
What level of civvieness would you rate his services? 3
What level of baddieness would you rate his services? 3
How satisfied are you with his products or services? 4
What aspect of his product or service could be improved? Doesn't talk about me enough, my ego will shrivel up without that
Overall experience: 3

Elo that post where you agreed with Faraday contained no original thoughts, it was essentially a +1 to his point. Which isn't objectively bad but I don't like that out of the gate your contribution is "I agree with this person on why that other person is suspicious."

These Vocaroo messages are annoying in that they take longer to listen to than it would to read them. I get super impatient when I'm trying to read though, so it forcibly prevents me from skimming, which is nice. J3 would you be interested in any specific individuals recording Vocaroos?

Okay, so no more Vocaroos. No love lost from me, I don't like hearing people, particularly when that voice doesn't match what I think they sound like given their posts.

Does anybody want to join me in lynching Wilgy?