The Syndicate

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:Linki @MP - idk. I think it's the PoE discussion along with your mannerisms. Declaring PoE as your playstyle gives you a means to stick to something and have at least have that method of play be true. Your mannerisms make it hard to read you in general.

While I can see the argument for the first part, I disagree very much with the bolded. Since I started playing mafia, I think MP's mannerisms have changed considerably. I used to be able to tell much more quickly in games if he was civ or bad. But I think he has evolved and adapted well enough that he's become a much more difficult read, regardless of playstyle and mannerisms.

That being said, there are some thing he is more likely to do if he is civ vs. bad and vice-versa...

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:triceratopzeuhl:

In your first post you acknowledged the quick beginnings of the baddie hunting in this game with what looked like an air of approval. Your content since though has been about the POE strategic discussion. Do you derive any reads from that?

Just impressed with the gusto from some people even if it might be mostly hot air. I can't tell much on day 0 and I seriously doubt anybody else can, no matter what they claim. We don't even have a lynch vote today, no night actions have happened, there isn't even a semi-nonsensical day 0 poll like some hosts like to do (MP comes to mind). At best one of the over-enthused paragraphs here will sound funny & gather suspicion - but who is more likely to be theorycrafting and looking for a winning strategy for the civs, goodies or baddies? Baddies benefit more from not directing attention at themselves.

Anyway, if alex is going to be posting his rainbow list here instead of keeping his reads private, it will if nothing else provide fodder for discussion

Which is why I'm personally okay with Day 0 discussions. It has helped me identify and catch baddies later on. Forcing them to be active and post a lot gives more opportunities to read them and more opportunities for them to slip up.

Just popping in for a second here (won't be around for longer than to make this post), but I wanted to inquire something of you, BWT.

You emphasize that you prefer Day 0 discussions like the one we've had in this game because they provide more content by which you can find baddies subsequently. Do you have any even very minor potential leads based on what has already transpired? Or are you merely indicating that revisiting Day 0 once you have subsequent leads may bring more light to whether those reads are more or less accurate? Give me your thought process here and provide a concrete example of a read you've already started developing, if you can.

More the second. Because I'm not really sure how concrete Day 0 reads are in a vacuum and I would need to see enough evidence on that for me to change my mind. I think looking at Day 0 once you hit around Day 3 or 4 can help emphasize those current reads based on past actions or make one reconsider based on said past actions.

Reads I have so far? Uhhhh.....not much. But if I had to pick one or two:

- Scotty doesn't feel good to me yet. Seems awfully contradictory on your POE methodology.

- I was surprised this many players didn't know what POE was. But it makes me feel better that I'm not the only one. :P

- I'm iffy on Jay. Maybe I'm just used to him being more assertive and decisive. So that may be why I feel the way I do about him currently. But he's a solid grey and would lean ever so slightly civ on him.

- The theme is as awesome as I figured it would be.

- Nothing on Dom yet. Other than his naturally inquisitive self.

- Nothing on Boomslang yet. I'm just not seeing where you are coming from on him.

I think that's all of my definitive feelings, or as definitive as this Day 0 is so far.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Boomslang wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Reads I have so far? Uhhhh.....not much. But if I had to pick one or two:

- Scotty doesn't feel good to me yet. Seems awfully contradictory on your POE methodology.

- I was surprised this many players didn't know what POE was. But it makes me feel better that I'm not the only one. :P

- I'm iffy on Jay. Maybe I'm just used to him being more assertive and decisive. So that may be why I feel the way I do about him currently. But he's a solid grey and would lean ever so slightly civ on him.

- The theme is as awesome as I figured it would be.

- Nothing on Dom yet. Other than his naturally inquisitive self.

- Nothing on Boomslang yet. I'm just not seeing where you are coming from on him.

I think that's all of my definitive feelings, or as definitive as this Day 0 is so far.

I'm leaning slightly bad about this post. "If I had to pick one or two," followed by a list of six items, suggests that he's trying to plant multiple ideas into the thread while being overly casual and noncommittal about it. The combination of "Nothing on Dom," "Nothing on Boomslang," and "definitive feelings" is also contradictory, as Scotty pointed out. And again, "as definitive as this Day 0 is so far" is another way to hedge the statement while still inserting the ideas.

Linki: lol 9 pages beg to differ

To be fair, I figured this would start as just a couple of thoughts. But then it turned into a stream-of-consciousness view of the thread so far. So I guess I have stronger/more opinions than I figured I would. Especially given how long it usually takes me to come up with more than just one or two ideas as to what I think is going on.

And yes, that was a very poor and contradictory word choice on my part. I will admit that. But I was just giving MP a response to his question to me and not really thinking about how I was wording it.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Sloonei wrote:So you have in fact read my case?

Nope, and I've pointed that out already.

Anything else I can help you with?

Linki: you're a sexy one Ms Sloonei.

Still not feeling good about you, but this response made me laugh way too hard.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Sloonei wrote:This trio of posts from birdwithteeth intrigues me:

Spoiler: show

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:I lost interest after reading PoE 3 times

JJJ and MP, are you teammates again?

I don't use POE myself that much if at all, but I do find it an interesting strategy and, while not perfect, can be effective in certain situations.

What makes you think they're teammates? Just because they have similar feelings on certain players, albeit with slight disagreements on other opinions? Because I have null reads on both so far.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:Linki @MP - idk. I think it's the PoE discussion along with your mannerisms. Declaring PoE as your playstyle gives you a means to stick to something and have at least have that method of play be true. Your mannerisms make it hard to read you in general.

While I can see the argument for the first part, I disagree very much with the bolded. Since I started playing mafia, I think MP's mannerisms have changed considerably. I used to be able to tell much more quickly in games if he was civ or bad. But I think he has evolved and adapted well enough that he's become a much more difficult read, regardless of playstyle and mannerisms.

That being said, there are some thing he is more likely to do if he is civ vs. bad and vice-versa...

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:That's exactly what a baddie would say.

Eh, I guess it was the mannerisms were just subject of my thoughts at the moment, but you are correct. This defined PoE playstyle is what has my feathers rustled. Your argument that it produces content doesn't settle my stomachache either as I know you have the potential to out tons of posts as a baddie just as you do while civvie.

Sooooo....you feel his defined playstyle and him stating so bothers you, but then say it isn't indicative-alignment right afterwards?

I thought you were trying to make your mind up on something. Are you sure you aren't just trying to stir the pot early on?

All three posts are responses to DrWilgy about MP. In all three he is either vaguely defensive of MP or vaguely critical of Wilgy, or both. BWT has also been very wishy-washy with regards to Edgar Allan Poe all game long with posts like this one where he expresses skepticism of the strategy but does not condemn it or MP at all.
birdwithteeth, how are you reading Wilgy right now? How are you reading MP? What compelled you to respond to these posts in this way?

Others, how do you feel about these posts?

I felt slightly not good about Wilgy before. But I often feel that way about him early on in games so I'm waiting to see more from him before I make up my mind.

I am reading MP as if Spacedaisy gave him way too much coffee and he is pulling an all-nighter. So hyperactive and super enthusiastic to be playing. I'm leaning civ on him still.

I responded to those posts that way because I was trying to pick Wilgy's brain and figure out where he is coming from while trying to form my own opinions. If I felt strongly enough or his posts had pinged me enough, then I would have placed a vote on him. And while several things have pinged me so far, nothing strong enough has happened to make me place a vote yet, plus I am still catching up after not having checked in at all yesterday.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

sig wrote:Sloonie I see what he is doing as early day 1 reads. So he might not be taking a strong stance, but I don't think that is alignment indicating. I also don't want to lynch bwt today since he always seems to get lynched early and rarely (if ever) is mafia when lynched day 1/2

MovingPictures07 wrote:Hey Boomslang, have my vote. Convince me you're town. What are your current reads and why? They don't have to be anything substantial by any means.

I don't like this post, not saying it is a mafia post or pingy I just don't like it. We have just started day 1 how many accurate and true reads can you have at this point? In fact i'd be more suspicious of people who have any strong reads since it would imply buddying/mafia town reading people they think are town.

I feel like we are moving way to quickly for a day 1 and that it could cause harm to town in mid game.

insertnamehere wrote:at this point, I'm waiting for the actual game to start, because reading into this pre-game nonsense is giving me nothing.

I actually agree with this, I've read day 0 and have gotten very little from it so far.

I could not disagree any more with the bolded part. Is there a chance for collateral damage? There always is for a Day 1 vote. Do we help the civ cause by keeping thoughts in and not putting everything out in the thread early on? Nope.

I would rather have much more content to wade through later on and have firmer opinions, rather than get to the middle of the game, with nothing to go on but a trail of dead civilians. I've had too many games like that I've played in where I get to Day 3 or 4 and don't have any idea where to go.

Maybe a bit of my bias is present here, but you jumped way up on my list for a Day 1 vote.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:It's a Sin to Kill a Bird With Teeth on the First Day.

What do you feel about the cases against me so far?

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Scotty wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Vompatti wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Vompatti wrote:Would you believe me if I told you all the INH voters are bad?

I would not k.

What makes you think that?

Why else would they have voted for a civilian?

In hindsight, I still think he was the best choice for a Day 1 vote. Nobody else convinced me otherwise, but Scotty came close for me.

I think I would have liked to leave my vote on bwt.

How come? I was just admitting that hindsight was 20/20, and that I felt INH, at the time, was the best Day 1 vote option.

You still seem awfully defensive, but given how wrong I was about the INH lynch, I am willing to re-assess my options for Day 2. So I could be wrong about you.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Fuck this game. Seriously. I don't even care if you other townies win anymore.

MovingPictures07

HETHZBEMADWDGFLMCECRSALOKYHNENMTEKTXEJSYVQOPXMHNCKBJRIBNJHBDITEUMGUBXUMD

This curse sucks.

Indeed. Anyone have an idea what the code for it is?

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

timmer wrote:Yeah, I'm conflicted. On one hand, A Person isn't evidently trying, short of asking the baddies to kill high posters which is actually the opposite of trying. On the other, is that indicative of him being bad? Or just unengaged? i don't like putting votes on people for acting weird, until that weirdness outweighs the cases in front of me.

He's definitely not engaged. I think the better question is "why isn't he engaged?"

Three options that I can see:

1) He's a civilian who is accustomed to playing in a brand of Syndicate Mafia from the pre-Economics era where games tended to move a little more slowly and conversation was engaged with a little less intensity. He doesn't feel like adjusting to this newer scene and is content enough to express his laziness brazenly as a contest to the style of play he is averse to.

2) He's a baddie who is accustomed to playing in a brand of Syndicate Mafia from the pre-Economics era where games tended to move a little more slowly and conversation was engaged with a little less intensity. He doesn't feel like adjusting to this newer scene and is content enough to express his laziness brazenly as a contest to the style of play he is averse to.

3) He's a baddie who was overwhelmed by the early pace of the game and decided to keep a low profile -- and now as the game has progressed he has felt a need to maintain that profile for the sake of consistency and filling the lurkbait role he's fallen into.

I am hesitant to give him too much credit for the possibility of #1 is that it can apply similarly from the other side (#2). I'll grant though that #2 would represent a careless approach that is less common in baddie team contexts where allies are known. That'd be a let down. #3 is at least a strategically logical notion, though it requires more of what feels like reaching (and it'd be a bit of a let down in its own right).

Having typed all that out, #1 actually feels the most sensible. It's all muddy because the dude has single digit posts, but it's something. I welcome other thoughts on this.

I came up with similar ideas as well. But I voted for him already for 2 reasons:

1) I'm playing the Law of Averages here. Which would state there is a 66% chance AP is bad.

2) I want to see if it motivates him to come in here and give us some more substance.

Most of my reasoning is on #2 right now though. Because I do not have a super-definitive read on him yet. But re-reading Lorab actually made me feel better about placing a vote that way.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

Epignosis wrote: Way to Characterize My Contributions

in a 50 page game you can only point to 3 counterexamples, my characterization stands completely

But still, with how much posting has already occurred in this game, I'm not sure that argument stands. Epig has been correct about 3 out of 3 mislynches here so far.

And from what I have seen in this night phase so far, it seems like he is finally starting to expound on some of his thoughts. So I am willing to listen.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:Sig: rico was brought over from progarchives (not a mafia website) a few years ago by MP, same as me, epignosis, BWT, and A Person

Golden targeted by mafia twice in 3 nights, seems they didn't like what he's been saying.

Golden wrote:

Epignosis wrote:This Fellow [JJJ -ed] is Not a Civilian

I did not like his reasons for being against the Marmot vote. He broke the tie, and it amounted to him claiming that MP and I only suspected him because he suspected us, which was chronologically inaccurate. It was almost like a brush aside.

I could see a Marmot/Jay team. Heck, I could see a Marmot/Jay/Dom team.

Golden wrote:Or maybe Marmot is an innocent bystander.

In any event, epi, I agree about Jay. He worries me. I feel like there is a lack of fire in his opinions. His whole game feels - clockwork, like a man calculating the impact of each post. I can't describe it any other way. He's always bothered me a little but in this lynch it felt much stronger than just tinfoil.

I could see him being NK'd once as a possible misdirect kill, but both mafia and SK trying to kill him implies they were uncomfortable with his reads

Also as per my earlier theory, if one of the insanifiers is civ then that player at least thinks JJJ is bad. I wonder if the role also has an info-getting element? As me and MP have both said this game, civ insanifier use could be reckless if you end up removing teammates' ability to communicate

triceratopzeuhl wrote:biggest change in Golden's theories over the course of day 3 was JJJ from Moderate Town & less likely than sloonei to be bad, to worried about JJJ

As much as I was enjoying the slugfest with epignosis, which I will surely resume when he's un-insanified, I would like to know what others think about this as it's the direction I'm looking most right now

I mean, it's certainly possible. I think mafia primarily makes 1 of 2 types of kills:

1) They kill players who do not make any sense i.e. untraceable kills

2) They kill to steer the thread, either because they do not like what someone is saying or they are trying to discredit someone.

I think Golden's death firmly falls with Option #2. The questions I have at this point is: Are JJJ and Marmot bad? And if one of them is bad, what is the possibility they are teammates?

I thought I was figuring some stuff out, and that the Golden death threw a wrench into some of my thoughts. But I'm starting to think his death might be pushing us in the right direction for finding baddies.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'd like to know what others think of Scotty right now. Each time I look at the player list his name stands out loudly to me.

I kind of feel the same way about him as Dom. I think both have struggled to find their grounding in this game. You quote Dom's self-assessment as proof of this. I think Scotty's is a bit different, in the sense that every time he tries to catch up, he fails and falls further and further behind.

I read Scotty as bad earlier. And I do think a baddie could use the "not caught up" excuse for quite awhile before the ruse becomes apparent. But I do not feel like I am seeing that from Scotty yet.

I do feel like he never stated what he saw from me that made me think he was bad though. So I am curious if he does come back soon to know what that is.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'd like to know what others think of Scotty right now. Each time I look at the player list his name stands out loudly to me.

I kind of feel the same way about him as Dom. I think both have struggled to find their grounding in this game. You quote Dom's self-assessment as proof of this. I think Scotty's is a bit different, in the sense that every time he tries to catch up, he fails and falls further and further behind.

I read Scotty as bad earlier. And I do think a baddie could use the "not caught up" excuse for quite awhile before the ruse becomes apparent. But I do not feel like I am seeing that from Scotty yet.

I do feel like he never stated what he saw from me that made me think he was bad though. So I am curious if he does come back soon to know what that is.

I see the difference between Dom and Scotty this way: Dom has struggled to find his grounding as you say, but not for lack of trying. His time in the thread has been limited to shorter stretches, but when he's been here he has seemed to try to push things in some direction or another. He states clear reads, he hurls clear accusations, and he doesn't seemed bothered by the consequences. That's a nice thing. Scotty's appearances however have appeared more lifeless, like he has given up on making use of himself just because he hasn't read every post. That follows what I perceive to be a suspicious post history before his time constraints tightened.

I agree about Dom. He is at least trying to contribute to discussion, and is doing his never-ending prodding in regards to things he does not like and does not care if he gets heat for it or not.

Scotty just seems distant period. And like I said, the "not caught up" excuse can only go so far for so long before I start to see it develop into "you can't lynch me because I don't know what's going on".

So of the two, I definitely feel worse about Scotty right now. But it's more a ping rather than a gut feel.