The Syndicate

Epignosis wrote:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:This is a bad argument and it made you look bad that you kept making it.

I don't care how it made me look. How I looked was never my concern.

Epignosis wrote:

Golden wrote:This was epi's response to me and jay saying we think more of his civ game than his baddie game.

I didn't know what to do. Civilians kept coming after me because they thought I would have killed Eloh to win a heist. Um, no. People were dicking around (thanks Wilgy). There was nothing to dig into, and the only reason why I didn't call out llama earlier about the (obvious) bullshit about mixing people up was that I still confuse Golden with G-Man and vice versa.

No reason this game shouldn't have resulted in a mafia win. Nice job civilians. Jesus. Can we put a little more effort in next time?

Epignosis wrote:I don't know. Ask Jack.

MacDougall wrote:Voting for Faraday who is bad

Epignosis wrote:Listen, I'm still not voting for Jack. If he gets lynched today, so be it. But most of the votes S~V~S took were civilian votes. And I told you FZ. was good.

I need to reread Day 2 and consider how everyone handled that rather unique circumstance. I'm happy Scotty revealed him rather than killed him.

DrWilgy wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I agree with this. My second choice would be Wilgy, who I already suspected, and whose vote for SVS has done him no favors in my estimation.

Now you are just assuming things Llama. My vote for SVS has done wonders for me. We confirmed she was civ.

What I would like is some opinions from Faraday following her lynch.

I have a tonal bad read of Epi following his recent posts. What does admitting how civvie you are do for us other than WIFOM defense to LC's suspicion? I've killed Wilgette n1 several times when I play with her and some friends around a table.

DrWilgy wrote:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:Also, my team is Epi, LC, Marmot and Quin.

One of these 4 are bad.

DrWilgy wrote:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:Spoiler alert: We're killing LC.

Why LC? Is it fun being a bucket of WIFOM with no regrets other than waiting for the inevitable end?

thellama73 wrote:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

Marmot wrote:Mac's like your regular Conservative, making things far bigger than they need to be.

Disclaimer: I'm just trying to get Hillary points, I don't actually think this way about Conservatives, and think they're wonderful people.

Us Republicans are all nice and definitely not serial killers.

Quiet, you.

Marmot wrote:Mac's like your regular Conservative, making things far bigger than they need to be.

Disclaimer: I'm just trying to get Hillary points, I don't actually think this way about Conservatives, and think they're wonderful people.

Long Con wrote:

Marmot wrote:DrWilgy and jack both snuck in with votes on SVS. That's interesting.

Jack would get no credit if he voted on the lynch of a mafia member. He doesn't have a lot to gain by putting his vote there if SVS is his teammate, especially to tie the lynch the way it is.

But hey, the day isn't over yet, things could happen.

Sure he does, he makes it look like he's cool with lynching her. If she's his teammate, that WIFOMy bluffery can definitely be a gain.

Marmot wrote:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:@Marmot

You should keep an eye on my vote it could go anywhere!

Just remember that your ballot won't be accepted if you punch a hole for each candidate.

thellama73 wrote:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:@Llama

There's nothing bad about conservative values.

I don't think I said there was?

Marmot wrote:

FZ. wrote:Say it is SVS. Who would be bad with her?

Jack.

Do I need to find another potential teammate to justify my suspicion?

FZ. wrote:Okay Jack, for you I'll vote SVS

DFaraday wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

DFaraday wrote:

FZ. wrote:I'm reading through. I have to say I'm leaning on agreeing with Epi on Scotty. Some of his posts feel to me like how I would play when mafia, by trying to look helpful in his attempt to analyse the host's post, and by looking like he's doing some serious hunting, while it doesn't feel genuine to me.
I have two reservations:
1. the part where he randomly chooses a low poster. That's poor hunting, and I think Scotty is smarter than that. 2. I also understand where he's coming from, with his suspicion of the marmot. He tends to lay low and be more fluffy when he's bad.
So

FZ. wrote:I really don't like MacDougal's vote, and the fact he's just following Scotty's vote just makes it worse. Though I doubt both are bad...

FZ. wrote:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

FZ. wrote:I really don't like MacDougal's vote, and the fact he's just following Scotty's vote just makes it worse. Though I doubt both are bad...

If only one of them is bad, which is it?

Gtth, if you will.

I'd say Scotty.

Epi, couldn't flipping a coin just be a figure of speech?

All of the above read like someone who's trying to cover their bases regardless of the lynch outcome. She expresses suspicion, then gives herself outs.

That doesn't make any sense to me. If FZ. is bad and MacDougall isn't on her team, then what bases is she covering? She would know that lynching either would not eliminate someone from her team. She would have no reservations about lynching someone who isn't on her team. At best, your accusation can only be interpreted to mean that FZ. faked her restraint.

Otherwise, your accusation only makes sense if she and MacDougall are bad together with the now exposed JackofHearts, but you didn't mention MacDougall in your pool of suspects.

What I was trying to say is that it read like FZ didn't want to commit too strongly, so that if Scotty came back civ, she wouldn't look like she was pushing for his lynch too hard. Of course she would know he wasn't Mafia, but he could also (and was) a dangerous Indy, and helping to lynch an Indy would not look as bad as lynching a civ.

Anyway, I'm voting Jack right now for self-preservation.

Epignosis wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

Quin wrote:One benefit to lynching Jack today is to remove the WIFOM factor from his posts. Since he became confirmed he's only interacted with Epi. I refuse to read into that but I can see it being argued one way or another.

I realise we shouldn't be arguing about Jack right now, but that needed to be said

He's probably interacting with Epi since Epi is in charge of saving him.

Let's make a deal; if we lynch anyone other than Jack, and they are not bad, we lynch Jack next, no arguments, no questions. I have played whole games as an outed baddie and the longer you let it go on, the harder it is to get rid of the outed one. If we lynch someone who IS a baddie, I will shut up and tow the party line re lynching Jack.

Although, again, I would much rather lynch Jack.

No deal. I don't understand how it's harder to lynch Jack later. If this were a job or side mission, I might agree with you, but this is a heist, and I don't believe the mafia will win because an outed teammate is left alone for a while.

Here's an exercise: Jack isn't outed. You are a role checker who caught him. Now you're looking for his team. Who are they?

S~V~S wrote:

Quin wrote:One benefit to lynching Jack today is to remove the WIFOM factor from his posts. Since he became confirmed he's only interacted with Epi. I refuse to read into that but I can see it being argued one way or another.

I realise we shouldn't be arguing about Jack right now, but that needed to be said

He's probably interacting with Epi since Epi is in charge of saving him.

Let's make a deal; if we lynch anyone other than Jack, and they are not bad, we lynch Jack next, no arguments, no questions. I have played whole games as an outed baddie and the longer you let it go on, the harder it is to get rid of the outed one. If we lynch someone who IS a baddie, I will shut up and tow the party line re lynching Jack.

Although, again, I would much rather lynch Jack.

DrWilgy wrote:Boo! Boo!

Jack votes are weak and lazy.

Boooo!

Epignosis wrote:

MacDougall wrote:If we leave Jack alive we need to have unanimous lynch candidates or he can literally pop up and hammer people he knows to be civ. So basically if we are reaching end of day and have no unanimous candidate, we have to lynch him.

Otherwise yeah ignore him for the rest of the day and if we can find a unanimous candidate ignore everything he does as wifom.

I would love to see him literally pop up and hammer people.

Epignosis wrote:

notsawyer540 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:
Your time doesn't change because you lynch Jack. You still get Day 3, do you not? People will make fewer posts during Day 2 if Jack is automatic lynch.

If you lynch Jack now, you get Day 3 and nobody talked about anything else Day 2.

If you leave Jack alone now, you get Day 3 and you force everybody else to talk about other people instead of Jack Day 2.

See?

I see what you're saying, but we're having a discussion now. And other people will weigh in on the things we say and we can weigh in on the things that they say, etc. I guess it's just a matter of strategy, but advocating not lynching a bad guy definitely seems odd to me.

Listen:

The objective to Mafia is to find out who is bad. Lynching them is the easy part.

Granted, if this were some scenario where there were secrets involved and vote manipulations, I'd be all for lynching the bad guy and being done with it.

In this particular scenario, there is one team, probably with three powerless people, and no independent to muddy things. As far as I'm concerned, Jack is already dead. His vote is useless because nobody is going to follow him. His voice is useless because it's just white noise now.

Use Day 2 to find his team. Lynch them. If you're wrong, so what? You would have been wrong Day 3 instead.

MacDougall wrote:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

MacDougall wrote:I remember this feeling. Where nobody agrees with my mafia read. It usually ends in a Mac tantrum. So I am heading over to Redtube to cool off.

*fapfapfap*
Why won't anyone believe me?
*fapfapfap*
I know Jack is bad.
*fapfapfap*
I have really weird fetishes.
*fapfapfap*

So what's your plan for the next phase?

MacDougall wrote:I remember this feeling. Where nobody agrees with my mafia read. It usually ends in a Mac tantrum. So I am heading over to Redtube to cool off.

MacDougall wrote:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

Marmot wrote:I learned something new today, votes are not changeable in this poll.

But you are allowed to vote multiple times, if you're an imaginary illegal Mexican democrat.

Nice job lurking around at EoD making no posts badguy.

Marmot wrote:I learned something new today, votes are not changeable in this poll.

Marmot wrote:None of the Post links in the OP work.