The Syndicate

DrWilgy wrote:

Diiny wrote:If I die pursue wilgy and gleam. Gleam's vote for me was bad.

It'll be a sad day if we are both civ Diiny

Then make my day and flip scum

REVEAL THAT ROOOOOOOOOOOOOOLE

If I die pursue wilgy and gleam. Gleam's vote for me was bad.

Sloonei my boy. good vote.

NEARLY voted gleam you bastard. Now I might die

That first bit was directed at sig

Playing from the train station because im a sociopath. Have you ever played a game with me as town?

Wilgy your vote for fuzz and golden were both bad. Brought out of nowhere.

Don't misrepresent me, wilgy. I'm not voting for you for starting that discussion per se. I didn't go YOU'RE BAD FOR STARTING DISCUSSION. Golden can read for himself and see that you were playing really dumb with why it would be advantageous for you to do so as scum, which doesn't help. You also did fuck all else BUT discuss the setup. You didn't use it to scumhunt. And your votes so far have been bad. Just read my posts. Will hopefully be back before the deadline but I put trust in golden's ability to click on the diiny's posts button

agleaminranks wrote:

Diiny wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:I'm voting Diiny, but not because I specifically side with Wilgy or Enrique. To be honest I have no idea what the flying fart is going on in that circle.

Glad your vote is well informed.

I think Luffy made a good point against your favor. As much as I don't want to say that for how fervently he is attacking me at the moment.

Read my response.

agleaminranks wrote:I'm voting Diiny, but not because I specifically side with Wilgy or Enrique. To be honest I have no idea what the flying fart is going on in that circle.

Glad your vote is well informed.

Wilgy is scummy. Bottom line. Vote for him.

Because it had been flipped. The golden floodgate opened and votes for him came in. It'd make complete sense to reference what you just said and mention that it is no longer the case.

Mongoose wrote:OKay, so here's the deal. I don't feel comfortable randomly voting. Thank you for your comments, and I agree that an ika vote today is not the way to go -- I appreciate your candor. I'll be around a lot next weekend, and you'll get to see how talky I can be -- anyone remember the first year of TS when Sock and I would fill pages?

ANYWAY sorry I'm constant digressions.

Since I don't feel comfortable making a case on anyone or buying into the current ones (so I'm going to offer TurnipHead this since Vompatti or Llama or etc isn't around) -- TH - would you fancy a vote trade? I'm going to vote you for admittedly no discernible reason -- please feel free to return the favor!

Sorry crew, I've got to jet and I just Do NOT like to miss votes.

* votes TurnipHead *

DrWilgy wrote:

Diiny wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Diiny wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:Been trying to get my thoughts together, what is the harm in that Diiny?

He pinged me with this

RadicalFuzz wrote:Wilgy you knew perfectly well that your voting plan wasn't going to work before you posted it.

and I asked about it to no response. If I knew that my plan wasn't going to work, why did I suggest it? He didn't formulate any thoughts based upon this action of mine to share... so this quote seems rather malicious.

I think my real vote would be between Enrique and Fuzz. Doing things without reason pings me enough.

Real vote? You didn't like the response your golden vote got so it was never a real vote? huh.

And you know damn well why scum would suggest a plan that wouldn't, after discussion and feigned realisation, work, to distract from the scum hunting effort and appearing town.

Not really, it's not 5 yet meaning my vote wasn't finalized. Sorry if my definition of real vote threw you for a loop. I'm still gut reading both you and Golden as bad. Why would I finalize a vote based on gut though.

As far as I'm concerned me suggesting a plan that may or may not have worked triggered a huge bit of conversation that has led us to forming actual thoughts about the game state. Did it distract us from scum hunting if point A (game mechanic talk) made it to point B (scum hunting)? No, because we are at point B currently. Isn't mafia a great game?

If it was never a real vote, why bother making it? Are you telling me you're not distancing yourself from that vote?

We concluded after much deliberation that we should just scumhunt. Would've been faster to just scumhunt. So yes, it distracted from scumhunting. It also gave cops the chance to get involved in a pointless conversation to boost their participation without having to formulate reads.

But you know this.

To voice an opinion and see what would happen, recall "I'm not feeling too good about my vote anymore" that I stated? I was making judgement based upon reaction to my vote. Also I was looking for what wagon would form faster. Golden took off mere minutes after I put vote number 2 on him, which is interesting and a better look for him.

Or we could've entered a sleeping gamestate without topic to discuss. Are you unhappy with the gamestate that we are currently in?

linki linki linki

Diiny, so what are your thoughts on Fuzz now that I've shared?

No, I had to look for it. I probably don't recall it because it was instantly obfuscated by OH HEY ENRIQUE HEHEH LET'S IGNORE THAT VOTE. It seems like you were trying to squirm away with as little fanfare from that vote as possible. You could've said something about the reaction to your vote when you moved away from it, but no, you chose to just pick someone else, calling it your REAL vote. If I voted for someone and a slurry of people followed, I'd probably voice my concern at that and evaluate those who just voted and the vote itself. You just scurried away.

I'm happy with the gamestate but that's irrelevant to whether or not it could have been better if the needless rogue discussion was avoided.

I say we take silverwolf's word for now. I have my reservations but they can wait.

agleaminranks wrote:

Diiny wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Agreeing with what you are saying doesn't equal reading you as a civ.

SVS and Sloonei pointed out something I hadn't yet noticed. I then read your posts and concluded that indeed, you were saying a lot without actually getting yourself involved in the actual game (hunting baddies).

When we're this early in the game and far more likely (statistically) to lynch a good guy, I'm more focused on minimizing civilian deaths than actively trying to suss out the police. That's just my strategy. You can agree with it or not, but that's what makes the most sense to me. Granted, once a day or two goes by and we have some patterns to examine, then the baddie hunt needs to become the main focus. If I'm still being noncommittal at that point, you can criticize me of not getting involved all you want. But I've certainly been participating in the discussion. Going all gung-ho and throwing accusations left and right isn't the only way to get involved.

The best way to minimize noble mafioso deaths is to hunt the cops. I'm glad you're admitting you're being noncomittal even now. who, out of the people with decent content, is most likely to be scum, even if you don't want to hunt them to instead focus on protecting mafia ( )

I'm still trying to decide that. I should have been working on homework for the last hour instead of trawling through mafia posts. I'll be back with a vote in a bit.

I hope I addressed every question aimed at me. If I missed something I apologize.

What response did you expect to this pile of nothing?

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I've just seen Dinny sheep on three different suspects in less than an hour.

First gleam, then Golden, and now Wilgy.

After he had already sheeped on Ika and Enrique.

Could be just a coincidence. It's not like there is a copyright on baddie reads that we are supposed not to breach. But it's uncanny. Every time player A suspects B, Dinny suddenly starts focusing on player B too.

linki: 10 posts. Fuck this. Gonna post mine then read those.

I brought golden up ages ago bruv. Which is why I said it was cool that wilgy voted him at first; I had brought him up as potentially bad myself.

I can't help it if people share my opinions. Doesn't make is sheeping unless you find a particularly noncomittal aspect to my accusations/reads. I've changed my mind on golden since he's defended himself. That's it.

linki: gleam the game's going fast. What didn't I follow up on?

DrWilgy wrote:

Diiny wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:Been trying to get my thoughts together, what is the harm in that Diiny?

He pinged me with this

RadicalFuzz wrote:Wilgy you knew perfectly well that your voting plan wasn't going to work before you posted it.

and I asked about it to no response. If I knew that my plan wasn't going to work, why did I suggest it? He didn't formulate any thoughts based upon this action of mine to share... so this quote seems rather malicious.

I think my real vote would be between Enrique and Fuzz. Doing things without reason pings me enough.

Real vote? You didn't like the response your golden vote got so it was never a real vote? huh.

And you know damn well why scum would suggest a plan that wouldn't, after discussion and feigned realisation, work, to distract from the scum hunting effort and appearing town.

Not really, it's not 5 yet meaning my vote wasn't finalized. Sorry if my definition of real vote threw you for a loop. I'm still gut reading both you and Golden as bad. Why would I finalize a vote based on gut though.

As far as I'm concerned me suggesting a plan that may or may not have worked triggered a huge bit of conversation that has led us to forming actual thoughts about the game state. Did it distract us from scum hunting if point A (game mechanic talk) made it to point B (scum hunting)? No, because we are at point B currently. Isn't mafia a great game?

If it was never a real vote, why bother making it? Are you telling me you're not distancing yourself from that vote?

We concluded after much deliberation that we should just scumhunt. Would've been faster to just scumhunt. So yes, it distracted from scumhunting. It also gave cops the chance to get involved in a pointless conversation to boost their participation without having to formulate reads.

But you know this.

Mongoose wrote:Before I vote ika for the odd post on Silverwolf, is that something we do around here now? Vote for people to get their attention?

Ask yourself not whether people do it but whether ika would do it for the reasons they specified. Silently and without an accompanying post, mind you.

DrWilgy wrote:Been trying to get my thoughts together, what is the harm in that Diiny?

He pinged me with this

RadicalFuzz wrote:Wilgy you knew perfectly well that your voting plan wasn't going to work before you posted it.

and I asked about it to no response. If I knew that my plan wasn't going to work, why did I suggest it? He didn't formulate any thoughts based upon this action of mine to share... so this quote seems rather malicious.

I think my real vote would be between Enrique and Fuzz. Doing things without reason pings me enough.

Real vote? You didn't like the response your golden vote got so it was never a real vote? huh.

And you know damn well why scum would suggest a plan that wouldn't, after discussion and feigned realisation, work, to distract from the scum hunting effort and appearing town.

DrWilgy wrote:Been trying to get my thoughts together, what is the harm in that Diiny?

Asking before posting your own reads is a good way to test the water and alter your read in favour of popular opinion, or refrain form posting something that wouldn't be met well. It smells of someone cautious about how they appear. The same question in the same post as what you just said wouldn't have been an issue, you could even have said you feel ambiguous about him. Although it's taken you surprisingly little time to 'get your thoughts together' on the guy and now you're voting for him. After just voting golden.

Wilgy

Golden wrote: It's odd because can anyone name a time when I've waffled around not contributing when bad? Definitely not. But then, I also think it's inaccurate to say there is nothing to gain from my posts to date, as well.

I was waiting for you to say this, as this is also what I found.

Enrique wrote:umm Diiny boy i'm not sure you know what wifom means... I haven't talked about my vote except to say, um, I made it. No hint of "I'd never do that if I were bad!" so quit pulling shit out of your ass and lemme play this thing aight?

WIFOM isn't that exact sentence, brother. Posting I'M A WILDCARD when people want an explanation is wifom, whether you want to admit you're a wine-putter-in-front-of-people or not.

um yeah people care too much about first minute changeable votes for one. also diiny's a piiiiig.

first minute changeable votes that you didn't change nor explain. Did you mean to type ping or are you being RUDE?

DrWilgy wrote:What are our thoughts on Fuzz?

Why ask before posting your own?

He seems alright.

Your last few posts haven't been making me happy wilgo

Enrique wrote:

sig wrote:Why Diiny?

I just shared literally all my insight on this game. But this dude voted Wilgy without an explanation and then changed his vote to me for doing the same thing before him? Like really dude?

The explanation for my vote wasn't that it was a 'joke vote'. I have more content in my post history than a shit 'joke vote'. You outright refused to explain yours and needlessly wifommed everywhere. We voted for the same person but our votes were completely different, interesting that you're trying to push the idea that they weren't.

linki: Now it's your turn to be the one everyone knows is bad

DrWilgy wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Diiny wrote:AAAAAALTHOUGH I'm not sure I like votes based on that alone. And you've said FUCK AWW about golden this entire game.

Getting the heebee jeebees from him.

This is on par with Enrique's earlier vote.

At least I explained it's a gut feel.

as I read through Golden's posts I feel like I don't gain anything or absorb anything from them. Strikes me as odd. I also feel the same feel from Diiny, but I'm noticing a trend of commonly gut reading him as bad. I'm unsure if I want to act on that feel.

Linki - I suddenly feel less sure about my feel. Hey Enrique! What took you so long?

Why didn't you mention this when you placed the vote, but instead mentioned the far less useful/reliable ease-of-lynch thing?

Enrique wrote:Hey folks I'd like to remind you that there are six friggin cops so manipulation of tight lynches should be easy. I suggest y'all get your shit together and join me in voting Diiny because he's clearly the right choice

Or come to a consensus yourselves. It's been a way hectic past couple days for me and I'm not really following the game as well as I could be, and I can't say I have many reads besides being freaked out by Diiny's over-eagerness (supatownin?) and general vagueness to his actions.

jeez dudes the game just started why are you being so demanding already

btw wilgy's plan is terrible and the don would have to be a silly billy to go through with it

I know it's pedantic and over-eager to ask for an explanation to a terrible vote, and I should really calm down and just vote for anyone cuz it's only day one I guess.

I'm also laughing at En- 'uh joke vote' -rique calling me vague

Sloonei wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Diiny wrote:AAAAAALTHOUGH I'm not sure I like votes based on that alone. And you've said FUCK AWW about golden this entire game.

Getting the heebee jeebees from him.

This is on par with Enrique's earlier vote.

It's bad.

linki: EASY LYNCHES EH WILGY?

AAAAAALTHOUGH I'm not sure I like votes based on that alone. And you've said FUCK AWW about golden this entire game.

Balls. Scum sloonei is more timid in my experience.

linki: a fairly good option imo

EBWOP, meant to only include the you haven't done either part. This game is about scumhunting.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Point is: I'm totally fine if your plan is to loom for civs instead of looking for cops. It can be pretty helpful. But you haven't done either.

I endorse this statement

Ignore the linki, I thought the bottom of gleam's last post was sloonei in response to me. lol

He asked me where I thought the meat was, I answered. that wasn't meant to be an investigative, scumhunting post. I was answering a question and sharing how I feel about certain people.

As for my questioning of you, I got all I needed from you not being forthcoming, so I let off.

linki: epi voted for me? and I shared my views in response to golden. Shared em on you, zeb, golden, ika. And my stance on Enrique should be pretty clear. I've asked people for information aside from accusing people, namely silverwolf for her stance on ika. I'm playing mafia

agleaminranks wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Agreeing with what you are saying doesn't equal reading you as a civ.

SVS and Sloonei pointed out something I hadn't yet noticed. I then read your posts and concluded that indeed, you were saying a lot without actually getting yourself involved in the actual game (hunting baddies).

When we're this early in the game and far more likely (statistically) to lynch a good guy, I'm more focused on minimizing civilian deaths than actively trying to suss out the police. That's just my strategy. You can agree with it or not, but that's what makes the most sense to me. Granted, once a day or two goes by and we have some patterns to examine, then the baddie hunt needs to become the main focus. If I'm still being noncommittal at that point, you can criticize me of not getting involved all you want. But I've certainly been participating in the discussion. Going all gung-ho and throwing accusations left and right isn't the only way to get involved.

The best way to minimize noble mafioso deaths is to hunt the cops. I'm glad you're admitting you're being noncomittal even now. who, out of the people with decent content, is most likely to be scum, even if you don't want to hunt them to instead focus on protecting mafia ( )

Sloonei wrote:

Diiny wrote:If you had to pick a non-low-content poster, Sloon?

You, but I don't want to lynch you right now since it's too early to really tell. Some of your posts have felt only to be having the appearance of scum hunting, but I can't say that I feel a lot more confidence than your posts seem to express either. I'd like to see how your reads develop on Day 2.

Which ones? If you're accusing me of the same lack of focus that you're admitting I'm confused as to why that accusation is happening in the fist place if you're scum.

Sloonei wrote: I can't say I know exactly what he means though, I don't remember Golden ever being opposed to discussing the setup and mechanics of a game.

There's a substantial player focus and drive to scumhunt on day one that I'm not seeing in this game but that I did see in past games. I'm not saying I think he's scum because he's discussing the setup per se, just uncomfortable that there's no driven scumhunting alongside it.

If you had to pick a non-low-content poster, Sloon?

research = looking back at early game posts from games we've played together, yes. Not sure what else it could mean.

Sloonei wrote:cop-out.

Silverwolf wrote:

ika wrote:

Diiny wrote:@ika

If you said anything before you were called out on it, whether you voted first or after, I wouldn't mind as much, but this way it looks like that's just the excuse you came up with for that vote. Get where I'm coming from?

Yes and all I can say is that it's a NAI thing. Any game me and silver play my first vote will always be going to her and most if not all my posts will be addressed at her till I sort her.

If you still think the same then I don't got much else to say.

I'm still mobile so I might be around tonight

ika-the best way for you to sort me is to interact with me or ask me questions. Voting me and saying you want to sort me just looks like busy work. I know you think I had questions about the setup but I think I've got them all answered now. Do you have a read on anyone else based on what's been posted so far?

Diiny wrote:Silverwolf, are you giving your friend advice because you think they're town or are you saying you think they're scummy?

DrWilgy wrote: Why is that interesting?

Less likely to be a role-requirement where you have to insert it into every post and more likely to be something voluntary.

Golden wrote:Voting Diiny for now

He reminds me of the game where we were bad together, getting stuck in and creating a supatown image very early. If we are talking about there being meat to the bones, I think Diiny has been happy chasing bones with no meat at all.

Diiny - which bones that you've been chasing do you actually think have meat? You seem to be asking a lot of questions of people to provide reads, but the only read I really get a sense of from you is ika (I don't even know if you genuinely suspect wilgy). What are your current views on who seems good and bad?

What about all those games where I'm just supatown?

I think often the best way to find out which bones have meat on them in the first place is to chase them, provoke activity and reactions from things that may only be partially suspicious.

That said, I think there's certainly meat on the ika bone, but I want to hear back from silverwolf. I don't suspect wilgy that much, and the oinking doesn't bother me. That said, thinking about it I'm not sure how much I like his plan shenanigans taking the focus of most of day one. His response to my dumb vote was what it probably should be, though. I'm still a tad iffy on you, and although you have some people you won't vote for your only ping is town.

I was unsure on sloonei earlier so I pushed and prodded him a bit, but I'm not getting that distinctive armoatic scum sloonei flavour. His response to ika's latest post reflected pretty much what I thought.

Zeb hasn't hounded me yet, which is odd, and isn't at the head of the game so far as I'd expect her to be, but I've read through her PH with her last (scum) game in mind and none of her posts have pinged me at all so far.

I don't understand your joke vote, Enrique. Explain the joke to this humourless fuck, because I just see a vote that's unexplained, not one that has any humorous value based on the context. I'd also like to know why you're civ/mafia.

linki: I'm really not sure PLACING a vote activates a traitor. Sounds too complicated logistically.

Enrique wrote:

Diiny wrote:Is Enrique normally like this?

Why shouldn't we lynch you for not explaining your terrible vote?

Because I'm a civ.

Diiny, why did you hop on my joke vote?

I wanted to see how he'd react to me 'exposing' him, would've done it whether you voted for him or not. And he glossed over it like the bullshit it was so I'm happy for now. I'm willing to let his oinking slide for now, though it's interesting that he's stopped.

agleaminranks wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I thought he was implying that, here we go, we already have people saying they are not caught up to the thread and it is only halfway through day one.

Nah. I was just amazed that I vote the guy and he shows up and posts.

I'm fine with hunting me as an inactive

What do you mean?

Sloonei wrote:

Diiny wrote:Silverwolf, are you giving your friend advice because you think they're town or are you saying you think they're scummy?

Linki: a read on you.

Thoughts so far?

I'll let you know later.