The Syndicate

Can anyone tell me (the truth this time...) is there any advantage to having read the book in terms of gaining a better grasp of the theme of this game?

Golden wrote:

sig wrote:Golden why bubbles?

Because bubbles is awesome.

I am indeed happy to be back playing Mafia here with you, my friend

And you're spot on - after the utter debacle that was Arkham Mafia for me - my friend Bubbles PM'd me to encourage me. She's a good egg!

Working on the assumption that a 'Prefect' is a position of some significant authority and influence, can anyone explain to me why Golden only has one vote? I mean SERIOUSLY? He was (is?) The Syndicate's representative at the Mafia Championships. He won a s#*^load of awards on this site this year (including The Syndicate MVP). He has demonstrated an ability for intelligent analysis and shown that he has the courage of his convictions (from my experience of him in Arkham Mafia). On top of all that, he's just a really nice guy... If anyone out there is still undecided, I'll be voting for him and for the reasons stated, I think you should too.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Is there anyone here not too busy to play this?

I'll put my hand up for this! This is the first game I've played in a very long time where I've had no foreseeable issues or commitments that should impact the time I have to dedicate to this game and I'm looking very much forward to it!

Golden wrote:I appreciate the sentiment from people who think I'd make a good prefect, but it's definitely worth taking a hard pass on giving it to me this time.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:Working on the assumption that a 'Prefect' is a position of some significant authority and influence, can anyone explain to me why Golden only has one vote? I mean SERIOUSLY? He was (is?) The Syndicate's representative at the Mafia Championships. He won a s#*^load of awards on this site this year (including The Syndicate MVP). He has demonstrated an ability for intelligent analysis and shown that he has the courage of his convictions (from my experience of him in Arkham Mafia). On top of all that, he's just a really nice guy... If anyone out there is still undecided, I'll be voting for him and for the reasons stated, I think you should too.

This is a mafia game, not a job interview. We are judging whether people are civ or bad.

At this point, I have no reason at all to think that Golden is anything other than Civilian then. Do you?

OK, the deadline beckons... The leading wagons right now are 3J and INH on 7 votes with Scotty on 6 votes. All I have to go on is my experience of these players from previous games. In my latest game here (Battlestar Galactica) 3J defended me when no one else would so he'll get one of my votes. From my recollection insertnamehere did vote to lynch me and wouldn't believe me that I was Town so he's not getting my vote. That leaves me with Scotty who'd left the game by the time 'the debacle' occurred and as 3J voted for him here and insertnamehere hasn't, I'm happy to give my remaining vote to him.

What the HELL happened to Night 0?

Quin wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:What the HELL happened to Night 0?

I don't recall ever having a Night 0. Doesn't it always just go from Day 0 to Day 1?

The Story of Creation
1 In the beginning, when God created the universe, 2 the earth was formless and desolate. The raging ocean that covered everything was engulfed in total darkness, and the Spirit of God was moving over the water. 3 Then God commanded, “Let there be light”—and light appeared. 4 God was pleased with what he saw. Then he separated the light from the darkness, 5 and he named the light “Day” and the darkness “Night.” Evening passed and morning came—that was the first day.

Simon wrote:I want S~V~S to be second in command.

And I will be leader.

Welcome, Simon It's been a while - Star Wars, I believe? In any case, it awesome to have you back playing with us again. Now, speaking of S-V-S, It's been a day and a bit and there's been no sightings of her That's a shame - she always seems to have so much to say...

I'm sorry but I think voting for two of our Prefects to face off against one another is dangerous and I'm placing my votes accordingly to prevent this.

Bubbles wrote:Ok I voted JJJ and Scotty because I would like to see a dual between them, and they seem like they'd put up a good fight from what I know from their past games

I love you Bubbles but this to me is a REALLY bad idea. Considering they have all been prominent in the game so far, I don't understand why we would be wanting to remove any of them so early. I am a little annoyed at this because I've had to cast my votes to prevent what I see bad situation not of my making and not the two players I most suspected...

Given there was no NK, may we assume that Zhang Jiao is one of the non participating players in this game so far? Someone who perhaps didn't post from the latter part of Day 1 onwards perhaps?

Glorfindel wrote:Given there was no NK, may we assume that Zhang Jiao is one of the non participating players in this game so far? Someone who perhaps didn't post from the latter part of Day 1 onwards perhaps?

I'm not usually a proponent of lynching low posters but in a circumstance where we have TWO teams with NK ability (one of which has BTSC and still can't get their shit together) and there is no NK, I think I'll be looking at the low/non posters a lot more seriously this game

Dom wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:Given there was no NK, may we assume that Zhang Jiao is one of the non participating players in this game so far? Someone who perhaps didn't post from the latter part of Day 1 onwards perhaps?

This seems presuming !

What secrets do you know ? Or what do you want all of us-- the regular people-- to think?

This is not a matter of knowing any secrets, my friend - it's simple logic. If you can come up with another plausible explanation for the lack of ANY NK well, I'm listening...

MacDougall wrote:Oh look a guy who I voted for on day 1 got lynched and is bad and this time I didn't actually try making a case on him. New strategy.

Wassup Glorfindel with ignoring my comment? You scared there buddy?

Pardon, my friend?

MacDougall wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Oh look a guy who I voted for on day 1 got lynched and is bad and this time I didn't actually try making a case on him. New strategy.

Wassup Glorfindel with ignoring my comment? You scared there buddy?

Pardon, my friend?

i

I asked whether you were planning on retiring from the game if you are Mafia and came under suspicion for it?

Why would I plan for something that has no basis at all in fact, my friend. And scared? No, not remotely. What should I have to be afraid of?

Sorsha wrote:Dom is making me laugh so I'm not voting for him.

I think I'm going to vote for two of the prefects. Jimmy, Scotty, INH... See who's the toughest.

I'm somewhat puzzled by this post of yours, Sorsha. You made this statement five hours out from EoD 1. You then proceeded to engage with (some might even say, 'antagonise') two of your potential nominees (Scotty and 3J) for the next half hour before leaving, saying that you intended to return but never did I'm just wondering, did you change your mind? You seemed rather adamant to me - if there was some doubt about you returning before the deadline, why did you not cast your vote when you had the chance?

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

Dom wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:Given there was no NK, may we assume that Zhang Jiao is one of the non participating players in this game so far? Someone who perhaps didn't post from the latter part of Day 1 onwards perhaps?

This seems presuming !

What secrets do you know ? Or what do you want all of us-- the regular people-- to think?

This is not a matter of knowing any secrets, my friend - it's simple logic. If you can come up with another plausible explanation for the lack of ANY NK well, I'm listening...

Pang Tong
Strategist
Pang Tong likes to use trickery to confuse the enemy.
*Secrets*

Sima Yi
Strategist
A devious man, he is the primary strategist for the Wei faction.
*Secrets*

Zhang Jiao
Leader
The leader of the Yellow Turban Rebellion, he is able to summon the wind and rain.
*Secrets*

Zhang Bao
Strategist
The middle brother of the Yellow Turban Rebellion, he is able to summon apparitions.
*Secrets*

Zhang Liang
Strategist
The youngest brother of the Yellow Turban Rebellion, he is able to summon a rockslide.
*Secrets*

Dong Zhuo
Leader
This notorious warlord has an entourage of bodyguards, protecting him always from assassination.
Cannot be Night killed. Inherits the Yellow Turban kill.

Yuan Shao
Strategist
Military strategist and commander.
Each Night, Yuan Shao will attempt to recruit a warrior (anyone with BTSC cannot be recruited). He may recruit up to three warriors (one from each kingdom). *Secrets*

Lu Bu
Warrior
A most fearsome warrior, and rider of Red Hare.
By the third Night, Lu Bu must decide what faction he will fight for and achieve victory with. *Secrets*

Every intance of *secrets* in the setup is a way those kills could have been stopped.

Plus we know the serial killer is bulletproof.

That is true DDL but of the eight instances of *secrets that you quoted from Dom's post, three belonged to the Yellow Turbans and I can't personally see them having/using a lynch stop power when they have one of two NKs each night. Another two of the characters nominated are Independents and I can't fathom how either of them might have a power that might do that... I'll accept my original statement on this matter may have been a little impetuous and naive but I don't think (that in a game with a player base of 37 right now when we had 50% of the players fail to vote EoD 1 and a considerable number still with minimal to no posts) it is necessarily prudent to exclude the possibility that player absence could've been a factor in the result we got at the end of the last Night phase.

Jan wrote:I would like to see one out of Metalmarsh89 and Turnip Head gone. I think I'm voting both.

Hey, Jan I was wondering if you had any rationale for your votes? Sorry if you did and I missed it...
By the way, it's awesome to be playing with you again old friend

Jan wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

Jan wrote:I would like to see one out of Metalmarsh89 and Turnip Head gone. I think I'm voting both.

Hey, Jan I was wondering if you had any rationale for your votes? Sorry if you did and I missed it...
By the way, it's awesome to be playing with you again old friend

They're the loudest out of everyone else. I was actually considering JJJ as well, but this message sent to the GM smells of a scumplay. Idk.

Sorry?

Nerolunar wrote:Glorfindel seems to go out of his way to say "my friend" in nearly every post. Is he projecting his usual friendly civ playstyle? Also hey Matty

I forgot to vote yesterday, sorry about that.

Hey Jan! I didn't realize it was you. It is a pleasure playing with you

Hey, Magnus It's great to have you back playing with us again And no, I'm certain that you know me well enough by now to expect me to be courteous to my fellow players
I notice that you missed the vote at EoD 1. I'm just wondering - were you simply undecided about for whom you'd vote or was there some other reason?

I'm sorry, it seems I've lost the ability to quote anyone here for the moment

Dom, if I may make an observation - during this current Day phase, you've referred to Quin as "Fibbin' Quin". You accused DFaraday of being bad and said that he can't be trusted. You inferred some skepticism against Nutella for having said that she wants to lynch you because she found you annoying. You told 3J that you distrust him and referred to him repeatedly as 'Tricky Jay'. You referred to Scotty on a number of occasions as 'Lyin' Scotty'. These are five players in whom I currently have confidence (in differing degrees) in terms of their alignment. You are coming under fire at the moment (perhaps wrongly) but I think it's the tone of your responses concerns me here and I don't know that it's doing you a lot of favours.

You even accused me of knowing 'secrets' (which is not true) in response to my somewhat naive assertion that the lack of an NK last Night phase was the consequence of baddie absenteeism and followed that with "Or what do you want all of us-- the regular people-- to think." 'Regular people'? Really? I'm frankly left wondering just how 'regular' you are after that comment

Further, at EoD 1, Sorsha said that she wouldn't vote for you and in the same post came up with the absurd notion (as far as I'm concerned at least) that it was better to vote between our three Prefects. Your response was "Look at my Sorsha over here! Just look at my Sorsha!" I trust your response reflected your opinion of her support for you and not of her approach to the vote (which incidentally she didn't follow through on).

I really hadn't considered you a viable candidate this Day Phase but find myself second guessing myself a little. You say you're trying to contribute and I think I can see that. I'm just not sure...

Dom wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Dom, whenever you get in here, can you name your suspects and in some kind of preference order? If you could expand upon some of your thoughts too, that'd be great.

DFaraday - a liar who has lied about me many times and has clearly used me as a scapegoat, despite my posting style doing nothing to inhibit my gameplay
Sig - see above


nutella - see above


scotty - don't trust him, gut feleing, folsk, those are important! !


jjj - don't trust him as much as i'd liek , see scotty!


Some people are looking to make me an easy loser. I'm the ultimate winner.

Why are you doing this, Dom? You never responded to my post I know you're a good player and all but this approach is really not helping...

I must confess, I'm seriously considering Sorsha as an option here. That whole EoD 1 'Voting for Prefects thing' didn't impress me much.

Golden wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'm voting now because the site keeps crashing and I don't want it to happen when it's too late. Russtifinko and timmer.

I was wondering if it was just me having issues.

Nope, I think it's all of us...

Gone with Dom and Sorsha...

I would like to apologise to everyone here. I started work this morning at 8:00 am and have been engaged in training sessions and meetings solid until now. It is nearly 10:00 pm as I write this and I need sleep. I will be back in the morning after some sleep. I'm sorry.

Welcome back, Ricochet - it's good to have the opportunity to play with you again

It appears the thread has slowed to a crawl since 3J's demise - I wonder if that might (at least partly) be the result of a repeat of the issues a lot of s experienced at the end of the last Day phase? I can't speak for anyone else but I'm finding the time it takes to load (when it doesn't time out altogether) very frustrating...

I find the following exchange mildly concerning...

Golden wrote:

Dom wrote:SVS is tired and not that in the mood for PLAYING mafia, I think. She would have been more energized if she had a team with her !

I think this read on SVS is both accurate and genuine.

I'm really feeling good about Dom this game.

As Ricochet has already pointed out, S-V-S herself stated in the first of her only two posts this game:

S~V~S wrote:Hi all, I just found out this started. I will do my best to get caught up on phone (no wofi for another week or so, and post as much as is feasible on phone.

Given that, your comment Dom, seems to lack logic. If she doesn't have access, whether she was a part of a Mafia team or not would have been irrelevant to the degree of energy that she had exhibited in this game.

As for you Golden, my friend, I trust your second statement isn't predicated on the first? Assuming that to be the case, can you shed any light on the reasons for your views on Dom?

Hey, Sig How's Uni going? I hope it isn't proving too stressful for you If you wouldn't mind, if you have the time, I'd just like your comment on something please...

In a statement you made early on Day 2, you said:

sig wrote:I find JJJ a little pingy, due to his logic on the day 0 votes, but he is being active and seems civvie. I think we should keep an eye on him and maybe have him duel soon...

MM for the reasons laid out by JJJ, I'd rather not lynch MM today though.

I can't really say that I support your view there on 3J and given his demise at the end of the last Night phase, I think it's fair to assume that he was seen as a major threat (at least by the Nanman). Anyhow, can you explain what you meant by the second comment I quoted above? Were you saying that you found MM suspicious based on the case put by 3J (someone you found "a little pingy") but despite that, you didn't feel the evidence was sufficient for him to attract your vote?

Later, towards the end of Day 2 (about 5 hours out from EoD) you said:

sig wrote:Okay I'm voting Dom for reasons previously stated and lorab since she has posted yet hasn't caught up or in fact posted again since she made her first one that is odd. I'm unsure of MM but wouldn't mind seeing him duel. I don't recall the case on Russ at all so I won't vote there.

Firstly, I don't think you actually placed a vote at all that Day phase? Secondly, at the time you made that statement, MM already had 6 votes (by my calculation). A less charitable mind than mine might consider that some kind of an attempt to distance yourself from a team mate were you also a Nanman. Thanks in anticipation of your reply.

Sloonei wrote:I figured I'd have a look at the roster and identify all the Strangers. I've not played with or have very limited experience with the following:
Glorfindel (I think we played a heist together a few months ago)

I'm really sad that Bubbles felt compelled to leave this game...

Hi, Sloonei No, I don't recall that I've ever had the pleasure... You sound very... 'motivated'? I look forward to playing this game with you my friend

I don't know if anyone has made this observation yet but I'll go ahead anyway - If someone has, please accept my most sincere apologies.

I was going back looking at MM's votes during his somewhat limited time with us and would like to make the following observations:

Day 1: MM's votes for Day 1 were on: Dr Wilgy (21) and Turnip Head (22). I obviously don't know MM as well as most of you but is it really THAT likely that he would've voted for TWO of his Nanman team mates on Day 1 From an outsider's perspective, I should think it somewhat unlikely - which on balance is a better look for TH. I'm happy to reconsider this if anyone would like to offer an alternate opinion.

Day 2: MM was the last to cast his votes for Dom (54) and Russtifinko (55). Prior to placing his votes, Russ was 'runner-up' wagon on 7 votes. The next highest wagon was timmer on 6 votes. So assuming MM's vote was a 'hail Mary' self preservation vote, wouldn't it have been more logical for him to have voted the next highest wagons (Russ and timmer) than to place his vote on Dom? Admittedly, timmer's last vote (6) was made immediately before MM's (by Nutella) but I wonder what conclusions could be drawn from that? The vote for Dom was on a slow burn from the beginning of the Day phase (starting on vote (5) and followed by votes (9), (13), (23) and (43). In comparison, timmer's vote was meteoric - picking up 6 votes in a matter of hours (votes (26), (31), (33), (41), (48) and (53). If self preservation were his goal, I'd have thought MM would've voted timmer before Dom

Dunny wrote:hey guys, sorry a lot of shit happened and I've been in hospital. Will do my best to try and catch up

I hope you're OK, my friend

Sloonei wrote:I have looked into the Turnip thing and I do not understand where the suspicion is coming from. Who wants to explain it to me?

I'm in the same boat on TH. It seems the case revolves around the assumption that MM nominated TWO of his team mates in his Day 1 lynch votes (a fact which, despite not knowing him well, I'm struggling a little to grasp) and the fact that he hasn't answered Scotty's question despite (as I understand it) he hasn't been around this Day phase and some general feeling of disquiet about his posts. I can't say that I've observed anything that disturbing in his behaviour that leads me to suspect him right now.

My votes this Day phase will almost certainly be for Sorsha (again) and timmer as a consequence of the MM Day 2 vote.

LoRab wrote:So after that lynch, this post from Glorf I'm reading in a different light:

Glorfindel wrote:I don't know if anyone has made this observation yet but I'll go ahead anyway - If someone has, please accept my most sincere apologies.

I was going back looking at MM's votes during his somewhat limited time with us and would like to make the following observations:

Day 1: MM's votes for Day 1 were on: Dr Wilgy (21) and Turnip Head (22). I obviously don't know MM as well as most of you but is it really THAT likely that he would've voted for TWO of his Nanman team mates on Day 1 From an outsider's perspective, I should think it somewhat unlikely - which on balance is a better look for TH. I'm happy to reconsider this if anyone would like to offer an alternate opinion.

Day 2: MM was the last to cast his votes for Dom (54) and Russtifinko (55). Prior to placing his votes, Russ was 'runner-up' wagon on 7 votes. The next highest wagon was timmer on 6 votes. So assuming MM's vote was a 'hail Mary' self preservation vote, wouldn't it have been more logical for him to have voted the next highest wagons (Russ and timmer) than to place his vote on Dom? Admittedly, timmer's last vote (6) was made immediately before MM's (by Nutella) but I wonder what conclusions could be drawn from that? The vote for Dom was on a slow burn from the beginning of the Day phase (starting on vote (5) and followed by votes (9), (13), (23) and (43). In comparison, timmer's vote was meteoric - picking up 6 votes in a matter of hours (votes (26), (31), (33), (41), (48) and (53). If self preservation were his goal, I'd have thought MM would've voted timmer before Dom

It looks like a whole bunch of smoke and mirrors to get people to turn away from TH and towards Russ. I know this post was influential in m own thinking about Timmer. I can't help but wonder if this wasn't the push of a baddie to get a lynch train going at the top of the hill so that it could speed up on its own.

More suspish of TH now. Starting to be suspish of Glorf.

Can someone summarize why people are suspicious of Sorsha?

LoRab, for the record, I made an observation based on the facts as I saw them before me and placed my vote on an interpretaion on those facts. I take responsibility for that. If you (or anyone else) regards me as suspicious for actually trying to contribute in this game, so be it. I'm still learning a lot about playing these games and even I would feel less suspicious of someone genuinely trying to contribute than what I've seen so far this game from some other players.

Sloonei wrote:Hello Glorfindel, I wrote a post about you

Sloonei wrote:I was looking at some of the timmer voters overnight and a found a few questionable things in Glorfindel’s history. First, These two posts represent his only noteworthy contribution to the Day 1 proceedings, and all he is doing is rejecting a voting strategy proposed by others. He does not propose anything of his own and I see no commitment to anything, really. Looks like Glorfindel spent most of the day in the shadows and then stepped out late to position himself against what could be perceived as a bad lynch (Bubbles, aka me, voting for JJJ and Scotty. I assume Jay was town and have no read on Scotty at this point).

That’s one thing. I read that and was feeling a mild tingle, but then I got to his next string of posts and the tingling intensified.
There’s no nightkill Night 1, so Glorfindel immediately jumps to the conclusion that there’s an inactive scum who simply forgot to submit the kill and then proposes the strategy, which he’s normally against, of lynching quiet players because of this. On the following page people started pointing out all the numerous other ways that a nightkill could be prevented, but Glorfindel doubled down on the “inactive scum” theory, even suggesting it’s the most logical explanation. I would not say it is logical to assume that every single scum player (if any scum player is capable of submitting a factional kill, idk how Epi’s doing it this game) simply forgot that there was a responsibility to submit a kill on Night 1, rather than the list of other possible explanations (doctor, unkillable role, roleblocks, etc.). Glorfindel sort of acknowledged this here but also stuck to his guns.

What do y’all think of this? I am not at all familiar with Glorfindel’s playstyle, so any useful knowledge there would be helpful.

Indeed you did, my friend. It was addressed (rather obvious;y to every other player in this game) not to me. I expressed an opinion to explain what I thought was (in a game this size) the rather odd occurrence of there being no NK Night 1. Others expressed their views and I accept the validity of them. As I said earlier, I may very well have been naive in my assumption but from my perspective, in a game of 38 players, I should think that equally, the odds of both NKs being negated through role blocks, etc would be pretty long. Again, it's just an opinion.

I've been keeping my own maps of the EoD voting results that (I think) are a little more reader friendly than Ricochet's version which I'm happy to post but I'm not sure they will post properly... Let me test it and see if it works...



OK, it appears not. If anyone thinks it's worthwhile and has a clue how I can post it so it shows in it's entirety, I'm all ears...

Sloonei wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Hello Glorfindel, I wrote a post about you

Sloonei wrote:I was looking at some of the timmer voters overnight and a found a few questionable things in Glorfindel’s history. First, These two posts represent his only noteworthy contribution to the Day 1 proceedings, and all he is doing is rejecting a voting strategy proposed by others. He does not propose anything of his own and I see no commitment to anything, really. Looks like Glorfindel spent most of the day in the shadows and then stepped out late to position himself against what could be perceived as a bad lynch (Bubbles, aka me, voting for JJJ and Scotty. I assume Jay was town and have no read on Scotty at this point).

That’s one thing. I read that and was feeling a mild tingle, but then I got to his next string of posts and the tingling intensified.
There’s no nightkill Night 1, so Glorfindel immediately jumps to the conclusion that there’s an inactive scum who simply forgot to submit the kill and then proposes the strategy, which he’s normally against, of lynching quiet players because of this. On the following page people started pointing out all the numerous other ways that a nightkill could be prevented, but Glorfindel doubled down on the “inactive scum” theory, even suggesting it’s the most logical explanation. I would not say it is logical to assume that every single scum player (if any scum player is capable of submitting a factional kill, idk how Epi’s doing it this game) simply forgot that there was a responsibility to submit a kill on Night 1, rather than the list of other possible explanations (doctor, unkillable role, roleblocks, etc.). Glorfindel sort of acknowledged this here but also stuck to his guns.

What do y’all think of this? I am not at all familiar with Glorfindel’s playstyle, so any useful knowledge there would be helpful.

Indeed you did, my friend. It was addressed (rather obvious;y to every other player in this game) not to me. I expressed an opinion to explain what I thought was (in a game this size) the rather odd occurrence of there being no NK Night 1. Others expressed their views and I accept the validity of them. As I said earlier, I may very well have been naive in my assumption but from my perspective, in a game of 38 players, I should think that equally, the odds of both NKs being negated through role blocks, etc would be pretty long. Again, it's just an opinion.

It certainly is an opinion, but I can't dismiss the point entirely on the fact of your opinion. So much of this game is built around forming opinions of things, and my opinion is that this particular opinion you expressed gives the impression of something dishonest. It is not unreasonable to entertain the thought that all potential scum killers could have simply neglected their duties, but to jump to that conclusion as strongly and as swiftly as you did seems like quite a leap. It seems like you were trying to work a specific angle or spread an agenda, or avoid something else.

Please elaborate my friend on precisely what "specific angle" I was working or what agenda I was trying to spread or what it was I was intending to avoid by making the comment that I did. For what it's worth, given the number of absent and semi absent players in this game, I don't know that it is necessarily that long a bow to draw. In any case, if you consider that sufficient grounds to suspect me, it looks like the Mafia teams will have an easy ride of it this game.

Sloonei wrote:The whole timmer wagon was the reason I looked at Glorfindel in the first place. Not that I resisted at all, but in hindsight I can't not see timmer as a potential low-hanging fruit, so anyone who advocated for his lynch becomes more suspicious. I followed up on a few players, Glorfindel came out looking the least good in my eyes.

For the record, I had no reason to suspect timmer before I made that observation and yes, I allowed that interpretation of events to influence how I voted and I said as much. If you are genuinely looking for Mafia, I'd recommend you consider those players that voted for timmer WITHOUT any justification...

Sloonei wrote:I think you were trying to work the angle of pushing for low-posters to be lynched, or at least creating that as an avenue for yourself to pursue so that you could stay out of any more heated cases later on. Your other vote was on Sorsha, so you cast two votes on players whose biggest mark against them was silence. Consistent, but also safe. I also do not like the method of defense that attempts to entirely brush off and discredit an accusation, which you are using here. I think I've stated a fairly reasonable concern and your response is to mock it as being so bad that I am helping the scum out; which at least suggests that you believe I am town, so it's good to know that.

I am not mocking you, my friend and yes, you're right - You are reasonably high on my town list at the moment - if I come across as sarcastic, I apologise. I do happen to believe you are misguided in the conclusions you're drawing here.

Sloonei wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

Sloonei wrote:I think you were trying to work the angle of pushing for low-posters to be lynched, or at least creating that as an avenue for yourself to pursue so that you could stay out of any more heated cases later on. Your other vote was on Sorsha, so you cast two votes on players whose biggest mark against them was silence. Consistent, but also safe. I also do not like the method of defense that attempts to entirely brush off and discredit an accusation, which you are using here. I think I've stated a fairly reasonable concern and your response is to mock it as being so bad that I am helping the scum out; which at least suggests that you believe I am town, so it's good to know that.

I am not mocking you, my friend and yes, you're right - You are reasonably high on my town list at the moment - if I come across as sarcastic, I apologise. I do happen to believe you are misguided in the conclusions you're drawing here.

You are not coming off as sarcastic, but you were coming off as a little frustrated and maybe a bit flustered there. And this is something that I am programmed to find suspicious, unfortunately. I can't go against my programming.
Why do you think I'm town?

Frustrated, perhaps. Every game I play here, despite how hard I try I inevitably end up being falsely accused for reasons that range from the spurious to the ridiculous (and if you don't believe me, go back and read Matt's Two-Face accusation of me - it's typical). I understand that you may find my reaction in this regard suspicious but as you say, you're not familiar with my play style and I'll admit I'm probably somewhat 'unique'

Why do I think you're Town? I didn't say this previously but I was disappointed to lose 3J from this game. His posts were (as usual) masterpieces of analysis and interrogation and that's what I want to try to emulate. Consequently, I have little doubt that he was Town. When he got eliminated, I thought we'd lost that but then we got you and Ricochet that have kept the conversations going (clearly not a Mafia agenda). I see some logic to some of your conclusions (clearly not at least one...) and you are clearly an asset to us. I find some of your conclusions aligning to those I've reached so obviously that helps to.

LoRab wrote:

Diao Chan wrote:你好朋友
誰今天我們殺

So, uh, are we going to talk about this?

Glorfindel wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

Sloonei wrote:I think you were trying to work the angle of pushing for low-posters to be lynched, or at least creating that as an avenue for yourself to pursue so that you could stay out of any more heated cases later on. Your other vote was on Sorsha, so you cast two votes on players whose biggest mark against them was silence. Consistent, but also safe. I also do not like the method of defense that attempts to entirely brush off and discredit an accusation, which you are using here. I think I've stated a fairly reasonable concern and your response is to mock it as being so bad that I am helping the scum out; which at least suggests that you believe I am town, so it's good to know that.

I am not mocking you, my friend and yes, you're right - You are reasonably high on my town list at the moment - if I come across as sarcastic, I apologise. I do happen to believe you are misguided in the conclusions you're drawing here.

You are not coming off as sarcastic, but you were coming off as a little frustrated and maybe a bit flustered there. And this is something that I am programmed to find suspicious, unfortunately. I can't go against my programming.
Why do you think I'm town?

Frustrated, perhaps. Every game I play here, despite how hard I try I inevitably end up being falsely accused for reasons that range from the spurious to the ridiculous (and if you don't believe me, go back and read Matt's Two-Face accusation of me - it's typical). I understand that you may find my reaction in this regard suspicious but as you say, you're not familiar with my play style and I'll admit I'm probably somewhat 'unique'

Why do I think you're Town? I didn't say this previously but I was disappointed to lose 3J from this game. His posts were (as usual) masterpieces of analysis and interrogation and that's what I want to try to emulate. Consequently, I have little doubt that he was Town. When he got eliminated, I thought we'd lost that but then we got you and Ricochet that have kept the conversations going (clearly not a Mafia agenda). I see some logic to some of your conclusions (clearly not at least one...) and you are clearly an asset to us. I find some of your conclusions aligning to those I've reached so obviously that helps to.

Every game everyone plays many people get falsely suspected. If that weren't the case, there wouldn't be much of a game.

And I would like clarification. Your theory upon seeing no kill after the first night was that 2 entire mafia teams did not show up at all on night 1--not a single member--to send in the team's kill? Can you explain why you thought that was the most plausible explanation?

Also, have you ever seen that happen? Where no one from 2 different mafia teams showed up, on night 1? I'm pretty sure I haven't. So, if it happens regularly in games I'm not playing in, or on other sites, then please enlighten me.

And now that we know that this wasn't the case for at least 1 of the mafia teams, since we've lynched 2 people on those teams, why are you still actively advocating for the lynching of low posters?

Allow me to explain my friend - I'll admit (as I've already done on a number of occasions) that the assumption to which I jumped was a little rash and naive.

Whilst I have never witnessed an absent Mafia team miss their NK, I have likewise never played a game of 37 players where a single Mafia team (one of multiple) make up as little as 8% of the game populace with the extraordinary level of absence and lack of contribution that we've seen this game. Then, there's the fact that one team (on the only time they've had an NK attributed to them) took out a player who'd indicated they would be absent for a substantial period of time and only had two posts...

I also am of the opinion that you are misrepresenting my posts. You claim I'm 'advocating' the lynching of low posters when the ONLY statement I've made in that regard is:

Glorfindel wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:I'm not usually a proponent of lynching low posters but in a circumstance where we have TWO teams with NK ability (one of which has BTSC and still can't get their shit together) and there is no NK, I think I'll be looking at the low/non posters a lot more seriously this game

I can't speak for you or for anyone else but that is hardly what I'd call 'advocating' their lynching and to pursue this matter further, I don't recall having given that as a reason for any of the votes that I've submitted since I made that statement (above)

LoRab wrote:Uh, about 20% of the players are mafia (not even considering dangerous indies). And, even if one team is 8%, given that any team member can send in a group pm (according to the posted rules) I just don't think it likely that no one from the team showed up. You have never seen ithappen. I have never seen it happen. Ihave trouble understanding why you came to the conclusion that that was the most likely possiblity (other than blocks, protections, etc).

And not sure how that team's choice of targets makes it more likely that they are inactive. can you explain what you mean by that?

And you have definitely advocated for/supported the idea of lynching low playing players. Several times. I don't particularly want to go through all of your posts and link every time you've supported that idea, but I'm happy to if you really are going to deny that you've done so.

Let me get this straight - Day 1 our duel contenders were decided on a vote of only 50% of players who signed up for this game and you're discounting the possibility of the absence of a Mafia team consisting of a mere 8% of the populace of this game? Under the circumstances, I think to a degree, that in itself may be a little naive. Clearly, as been pointed out - other forces (like protection, role blocking, etc) may have been at work that Night phase but in the case of TWO Mafia teams in a game this size? I'm not so sure. And as for your accusation that I have "advocated for/supported the idea of lynching low playing players" - knock yourself out!

Turnip Head wrote:Where are you looking to vote for today's duel, Glorfy?

I'll be getting back to you on that later TH. I've been out most of the day and am hoping to spend some time this evening looking through things. I still have bad vibes on Sorsha. I have some things I need to look back on before I commit to anything though.

nutella wrote:I am of course aware of all of those posts. None of them, however, except for that one that was already brought up, actually advocate for the lynching of low posters. He repeatedly discusses the odds of one of the teams being inactive, which I guess you could say implies that he thinks it would be a good idea to go after inactives, but only once does he say it outright, and he never really follows up on it. I guess you and I interpreted his posts differently, but to me, advocating for lynching low posters is a very different thing from stating observations about mechanics and numbers in the game.

THANK YOU! A voice of reason at last...

I think this distraction has gone on long enough and derailed this game for too long. If you think any of what you have accused me of LoRab justifies your vote on me, go right ahead. I'm moving on from this - I'm not going to contribute to this distraction any longer and intend to focus my efforts on removing Mafia.

Golden wrote:It especially doesn't seem likely in an epi hosted game, who I think would reroll if he rolled a list that included a team likely to be inactive. I think epi would make sure he had at least one player he could rely on to be active before accepting the randomised list.

However, one idea I could see as a bit more possible is that some of the baddies in the yellow turbans are amongst those who have been nked early.

Glorfindel looks townie to me. Very townie. Enough to vote in his defence.

Thank you for your support Golden, I certainly appreciate that.

With respect to your other comments, our only NKs so far have been 3J, S-V-S and Ricochet as far as I can recall. Am I correct in understanding that you are proposing that at least one of them may have been a Yellow Turban?

@Sorsha: I'm not sure if you've answered this or not (please forgive me if I missed it) But Day 2, these were two consecutive posts you made:

Sorsha wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Sorsha wrote:I'm here

Hi Sorsha! What's going on? Do you have any suspects? What do you think of Dom, MM, and Russ?

Have only been skimming. Looks like Dom is mostly getting votes for the trump schtick, mm for some connection to wilgy and I have no idea what Russ did to be suspicious. My own suspicion is inh but it could probably be more of an annoyance than suspicion. Lobbying for prefect and promising to be active and then bailing.
I don't really find Dom suspicious I could be ok with a mm vote, Russ I don't know yet.

Sorsha wrote:Voted for myself and inh

I'm wondering if you can cast any light on why the change of heart on MM? He was the only one taking heat that you considered worthy of your vote at the time MP questioned you. I acknowledge your reasoning for the INH vote but are you really saying that in the space of three hours you concluded that you were a better choice than MM?

nutella wrote:Actually Glorfindel, I'd like your opinion on something. Considering Lorab hadn't even been aware that the game had started at the time of the YTs' first missed kill, and considering her outright despisal of your hypothesis, do you think she could be one of them? (I personally don't really think so but it would be pretty funny if so)

Nor do I, my friend but anything is possible I suppose.

Just another observation here...

As I understand it, part of the case that brought MM undone was his inconsistency in voting for Dr Wilgy for Prefect on Day 0 and then voted to have him duel on Day 1 - is that correct? I note that another player did a similar thing in that Boomslang voted MM for Prefect on Day 0 and then voted him for the dueling ring on Day 1.

The vote for MM's prefecture was mid-poll (i.e. 39th out of 62) so it wasn't really influential and it was MM's only vote for Prefect. I'm not sure what this says but personally, I didn't vote anyone for Prefect about whom I had doubts

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:Just another observation here...

As I understand it, part of the case that brought MM undone was his inconsistency in voting for Dr Wilgy for Prefect on Day 0 and then voted to have him duel on Day 1 - is that correct? I note that another player did a similar thing in that Boomslang voted MM for Prefect on Day 0 and then voted him for the dueling ring on Day 1.

The vote for MM's prefecture was mid-poll (i.e. 39th out of 62) so it wasn't really influential and it was MM's only vote for Prefect. I'm not sure what this says but personally, I didn't vote anyone for Prefect about whom I had doubts

You weren't the first to notice it:

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 59#p296459

Well actually, I did read that post and it really didn't draw the correlation (and inconsistency to my way of thinking) linking Boomslang's vote for MM's Prefecture on Day 0 and subsequent duel nomination on Day 1 that I pointed out in my post above nor the comparison to the Wilgy/MM case. Again, my apologies if I got that wrong.

Also...

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Glorfindel is always nicer than a puppy.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Glorfindel is illogical as fuck and I've caught myself lynching him for that when he was just being a clueless townie.

Your post makes sense but I'm not sure if it's possible to read Glorf by evaluating his posts as nonsensical. He is nonsensical by default.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Glorf is kind of obnoxious...

Remind me to never come to you looking for a character reference, my friend