The Syndicate

The last I saw of Quin, he was getting his ass beat in Age of Empires II.

Seriously, Quin was atrocious. I don't even remember what civilization he played.

Fucking archaeologists don't remember what civilization he played, because there was nothing left.

That's not true.

Actually, they found a dear diary entry drenched in tears praying for the deluge of Byzantine Cataphracts and trebuchets to end mercifully.

Quin wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 9:19 pm Game facilitator? Pfft. Whatever.

Agreed. In 2002 I wrote my first novel in which I predicted teachers would no longer be called "teachers" but "facilitators" by education "leaders." That came true.

Fuck that. I'm a teacher. I'll facilitate your whiny ass home if you don't learn. And you will learn.

Moderate us Quin. Moderate us. From wherever you are.

I suspect MP for his gregarious posting.

I suspect LC for his comment above. Does anyone understand the Quin-searching thing? If he doesn't understand it, why is he voting for the trendy choice?

I suspect Quin will get destroyed next time too.

Long Con wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 11:09 pm Epi's trying too hard. Usually he's bad when he does that.

So I'm normally a lazy civilian?

Long Con wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 11:11 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 11:10 pm

Long Con wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 11:09 pm Epi's trying too hard. Usually he's bad when he does that.

So I'm normally a lazy civilian?

Sorry, not falling for that.

Falling for what?

You said I'm trying too hard, and that I'm usually bad when I do that.

I think that's silly.

When I am a civilian, what do I look like?

When I am a civilian, what do I look like?

"Epi's trying too hard. Usually he's bad when he does that. "

The issue I take with this is that this is untrue, especially lately. When I have been bad lately, I have been lazy as hell.

I want LC to substantiate his claims against me, since he thinks he knows me so well.

Long Con wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:03 am Do you always get what you want?

No. Are you trying to win for the civilians or are you trying to save your ass?

As of now, you are getting my Day 1 vote, Long Con. Saying I am "usually" trying too hard when I'm bad show you don't know what I am like when I'm bad at all. You are making things up. Like you usually do when YOU are bad.

I want to hear opinions on me and Long Con. Go.

Long Con wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:33 am

nutella wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:11 am Epi vs LC, aka "El Clásico"

I know, right? I mean, I was just joking around... but Epi's reaction! I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say he totally freaked out. He demanded four times that I substantiate my claims, then he throws out a weak-ass OMGUS, and then demands opinions from everyone on it.

Not to mention he completely ignored Wilgy, who also made a very similar joke. I guess he understood that Wilgy's post was a joke, but not mine. This is unexpectedly juicy Night 0 stuff!

You mean to say I'm...nervous?

Sloonei wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:13 am

birdwithteeth11 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 9:08 pm I'm voting for Queensland because I have info that it will help the civ cause.

Let's see where that one leads us.

Let's go back to this post. Some people accepted it, all of us seem to have followed it in our votes, but I'm not as familiar with the origins of information like this being distributed. I don't think bwt lied maliciously and I see no real grounds for suspicion here, but how much stock, if any, should we put in a claim like his? Especially in a Heist.

My impression was that he was just saying stuff to say stuff.

birdwithteeth11 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 9:13 pm

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 9:12 pm

birdwithteeth11 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 9:10 pm

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 9:07 pm That said, does anyone have any idea what this search function will accomplish? It definitely is intriguing but I'm not sure how it would affect the game or how we are supposed to contemplate making the decision.

Not sure. I suppose we will find out once Day 0 ends.

So you're claiming Queensland is beneficial to the town cause but you're not sure how, do I have that right?

Yes. I figured I might as well say something since most Day 0 conversations aren't super meaningful and we can have something to go off of early on.

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:15 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 10:51 pm I suspect MP for his gregarious posting.

I suspect LC for his comment above. Does anyone understand the Quin-searching thing? If he doesn't understand it, why is he voting for the trendy choice?

I suspect Quin will get destroyed next time too.

Why would you suspect me for that?

I think I always do. Your friendliness always strikes me as false.

"Stop and ask for directions, bwt."

"Don't need 'em. I have the GPS."

Long Con wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:44 pm I felt like Epignosis' reactions were way more suspicious than my reaction to them. I don't understand why you ignore my points about his reactions and just vote for me instead.

The past three or four times you have been bad, you've done this very thing: Manufacturing a narrative for my actions or reactions that isn't true.

I made the mistake of waving that off once or twice, citing recency bias to myself. Surely LC wouldn't keep doing the same things over and over when he is bad.

Now it's a pattern. This is just what you do when you are bad.

Long Con wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:33 am

nutella wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:11 am Epi vs LC, aka "El Clásico"

I know, right? I mean, I was just joking around... but Epi's reaction! I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say he totally freaked out. He demanded four times that I substantiate my claims, then he throws out a weak-ass OMGUS, and then demands opinions from everyone on it.

Not to mention he completely ignored Wilgy, who also made a very similar joke. I guess he understood that Wilgy's post was a joke, but not mine. This is unexpectedly juicy Night 0 stuff!

You first:

Long Con wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 10:48 pm I'm not entirely sure I understand the Quin-searching thing, but I'll vote Queensland if that's the thing.

Then me:

Epignosis wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 10:51 pm I suspect MP for his gregarious posting.

I suspect LC for his comment above. Does anyone understand the Quin-searching thing? If he doesn't understand it, why is he voting for the trendy choice?

I suspect Quin will get destroyed next time too.

Then you:

Long Con wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 11:09 pm Epi's trying too hard. Usually he's bad when he does that.

So explain what exactly is a "weak-ass OMGUS" here.

I remain amazed that my naming MP and you as my initial suspects on Day 0 followed by a Quin joke constitutes "trying too hard."

I mean, for this to be a genuine opinion of yours, the level of effort I must put forth when I am a civilian has to be somewhere just north of the players who never even open their role PMs.

Long Con wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:46 am

Epignosis wrote:I remain amazed that my naming MP and you as my initial suspects on Day 0 followed by a Quin joke constitutes "trying too hard."

I mean, for this to be a genuine opinion of yours, the level of effort I must put forth when I am a civilian has to be somewhere just north of the players who never even open their role PMs.

Yes, that makes sense, and supports the fact that I was just joking around.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 11:13 pm

Long Con wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 11:11 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 11:10 pm

Long Con wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 11:09 pm Epi's trying too hard. Usually he's bad when he does that.

So I'm normally a lazy civilian?

Sorry, not falling for that.

Falling for what?

You said I'm trying too hard, and that I'm usually bad when I do that.

I think that's silly.

When I am a civilian, what do I look like?

Long Con wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 11:43 pm You're allowed to think it's silly. I won't try to stop you.

You weren't joking.

Let me try again.

LC, you said, "Sorry, not falling for that."

I asked "Falling for what?"

You didn't answer.

You answered Sloonei, and your answer implied that your accusation of me (that I try too hard when I'm bad) was not a joke.

Long Con wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:12 am

Sloonei wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:42 am What were you unwilling to fall for?

Some sort of labour-intensive Epi-history-search to prove exactly how he acts as a Civ or a baddie.

How could you "fall" for "some sort of labour-intensive Epi-history-search to prove" how I act when I'm good or bad if the entire premise was a joke that only you were mindful of?

To put it another way, you made a claim that you say was a joke (namely that I try too hard when I'm bad). When I responded in a way that indicated that I was not privy to the joke, that would mean I was the one falling for something. How could you "fall" for something if you were the only one in on the fact that you were joking?

None of that makes sense.

Do you know what I think does make sense?

You were either drinking or tired or both.

When I asked "Falling for what?" you had a chance to explain you were joking and that I was getting my panties in a knot over nothing. I don't think you were joking. I think that was a narrative you invented later when your mind had perhaps regained clarity.

That evening, you only said to me, "You're allowed to think it's silly. I won't try to stop you" which to me is not indicative that you were joking. Quite the opposite, rather. It's ambiguous at best. That was at 11:43pm EST.

I think you were not of a mind to come up with the response you gave Sloonei some twelve hours later.

Even at first, you dodged the meat of the question:

Long Con wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:39 am

Sloonei wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:19 am

Long Con wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 11:11 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 11:10 pm

Long Con wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 11:09 pm Epi's trying too hard. Usually he's bad when he does that.

So I'm normally a lazy civilian?

Sorry, not falling for that.

What were you afraid to fall for here, LC?

Afraid?

That was at 10:39am EST.

Three minutes later, Sloonei rephrased:

Sloonei wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:42 am What were you unwilling to fall for?

Exactly thirty minutes later, you gave a direct answer:

Long Con wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:12 am

Sloonei wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:42 am What were you unwilling to fall for?

Some sort of labour-intensive Epi-history-search to prove exactly how he acts as a Civ or a baddie.

It is a response that sounds all right, but doesn't make sense if your own original thought process was that your accusation of me was not meant to be taken seriously.

I wonder what barred you from this clear answer about twelve hours before when I asked you what you would be falling for.

Long Con wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:00 am How is it manipulative? Is there something untrue in it? I'm looking at it right now and it's a direct accounting of what happened.

And yet you have no problem with this entirely made-up post:

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:01 amThe past three or four times you have been bad, you've done this very thing: Manufacturing a narrative for my actions or reactions that isn't true.

I made the mistake of waving that off once or twice, citing recency bias to myself. Surely LC wouldn't keep doing the same things over and over when he is bad.

Now it's a pattern. This is just what you do when you are bad.

My intention was to use today pretending you were off the poll in order to consider other avenues of thought, but since you continue insisting that I am making this all up, I have no problem "falling for it" (i.e., taking a labor-intensive search through your posts to demonstrate that what I am saying is true).

I'll try to keep this brief.
Long Con's evil M.O. when he is bad is to cavalierly control the narrative to the point of outright making things up and sticking to them even when proof is presented to the contrary. He would make an admirable politician.

That's why I don't buy for a second his insistence that what he has been trying to sell as a joke was a joke.

The poll ends tomorrow evening, so I am going to lay off Long Con between now and then to give him some breathing room. It isn't good to bury Day 1. Were I to vote now, that is where I would vote.

I have another opinion on someone else, which I'll get to this evening.

This is what I was going to say earlier, but did not have time, and I'm glad I didn't since people are talking about him.

I like birdwithteeth's early move. I don't believe 3J gave him information about the poll, and I think he lied about it.

But I think he did it just to do it and, just as he said was intention, get something going.

If bwt is bad and did this, knowing he would be exposed very quickly, that's a short-term gain, long-term loss, as they say, and I'm not even sure that it's a short-term gain at all, because unless he set this up so that his teammates could gain some early credibility, I don't see any positive outcome for him at all.

What I do see is a someone throwing something out there to see who will follow him, who will question him, and who will ignore him.

Nothing wrong with that.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:35 pm I think I see BWT's false info gambit exactly as MP and Epi have expressed it as well. The only way it makes sense as a scum ploy is if he's serving us a healthy heap of WIFOM right off the bat. I don't know him well enough to say with any confidence how likely he is to do that, but my gut tells me it's unlikely.

So what made you vote for him?

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:05 pm Moving my vote to @nutella

I await Daisy's fully formed opinions, but that actually makes me feel good enough about her for now.

Wearing body marks into that couch already, are you?

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:08 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:56 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:35 pm I think I see BWT's false info gambit exactly as MP and Epi have expressed it as well. The only way it makes sense as a scum ploy is if he's serving us a healthy heap of WIFOM right off the bat. I don't know him well enough to say with any confidence how likely he is to do that, but my gut tells me it's unlikely.

So what made you vote for him?

Indecision and the speculation that players could be opportunistically piling pressure onto Long Con.

I hope I make sense with what I'm getting ready to say.

bird threw something out there that was, from my perspective, an inconsequential lie (for us) that could have probably gotten him lynched (given his track record).

You threw this out there:

Sloonei wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:41 pm Pile votes on Long Con, let's go.

To me, that's a bit more obvious bait than someone claiming Day 0 information to get people moving on a Day 0 poll.

It's so obvious, you only got (?) one person to vote, and that was...bird. If in fact you got him to vote because of what you said (I don't think you got anybody to vote LC because of your pile on post).

You counted DDL as a bite, but that doesn't make sense to me either.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:48 pm Contrary to my previous stance of "Pile all votes on Long Con", I am wary of people who have piled suspicion on Long Con, even though I count myself among them. Regardless of how I feel about the Day 1 case around him, I can't ignore that there is easy potential for this bandwagon to be driven by opportunistic scums right off the bat.

That means posts like these catch my eye:

Spoiler: show

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 5:55 pm

Long Con wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:33 am

nutella wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:11 am Epi vs LC, aka "El Clásico"

I know, right? I mean, I was just joking around... but Epi's reaction! I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say he totally freaked out. He demanded four times that I substantiate my claims, then he throws out a weak-ass OMGUS, and then demands opinions from everyone on it.

Not to mention he completely ignored Wilgy, who also made a very similar joke. I guess he understood that Wilgy's post was a joke, but not mine. This is unexpectedly juicy Night 0 stuff!

I don't like the tone of this post. Sounds like you are trying to make him look back without engaging him yourself.

birdwithteeth11 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:36 am Since votes are changeable, I'm going to go ahead and put mine on Long Con for now. But since it's still early on Day 1, it's a very weak baddie read right now, but looking back at the initial start I feel like LC looks more bad than Epig.

If I were someone else I'd be wary of me too.

As an aside, my Q and w keys are not working, so any time I need to call in either of those letters I've been copy & pasting from elsewhere on the page. I just want to document my struggle and ask if anyone knows a better solution than my Ctrl + v strategy.

I wouldn't regard either of these are piling suspicion on Long Con. You do though. And you voted birdwithteeth11, and then moved your vote to DDL.

This all strikes me a charade- a dance, if you will- intended to protect Long Con while giving yourself an avenue of looking open-minded in case he got lynched after all.

"Look at all the opportunistic mafia! All two of them!"

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:20 pm

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:16 pm

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:03 pm

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:01 pm

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:50 pm I'm voting for @Spacedaisy because I want her to say things and she makes me nervous when she isn't posting.

If this came from anyone else I could excuse it, but this guy right here knows that I have barely been on the site in the last few days. He knows that I am juggling multiple writing projects in addition to two games. He knows I've been exhausted and slept a lot more than normal. So tell me why this guy says me being quiet is shady. No, I'm not buying this.

*votes MP*

Woah, hold your horse there. I know you've been really busy and am aware of your preoccupations as well as your work schedule. It's merely a pressure vote. I didn't say you were shady; I just want you to say things and expressed that I get paranoid of you when you aren't talking.

I'm not sure what to make of this reaction, but I tentatively feel OK about it.

Here's the thing. When you are pressure voting someone you are upfront about it. No you didn't use the word shady. You said it makes you nervous when I'm not posting. You didn't say this is a pressure vote. You implied that me not posting is somehow scary. When you know that my not posting has zero to do with my alignment.

I literally said "because I want her to say things". I thought that made it evident enough that it was a vote designed to get you to say things. And it does make me nervous when you're not posting; that's a general fact regardless of the circumstances that may have been keeping you from posting in this game. You and I both know I always try to sort you as quickly as possible for that reason.

Shit dude, I can't think of a single time in my life where I have ever tried to get my wife to say things. You must be new at this marriage gig.

I placed my vote on Long Con. That is where I currently feel most confident.

I think birdie is a goodie.
I suspect Sloonei.
I suspect speedchuck. Details on this development to follow.

speedchuck wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:58 pm
The meta BWT stuff has only moved him up to a null read for me. I'm not buying that he is town just because of the N0 info lie thing. That won't cut it for me. I can see either motive for it.

Walk me through either motive that you can see.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 3:04 am

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:23 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:08 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:56 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:35 pm I think I see BWT's false info gambit exactly as MP and Epi have expressed it as well. The only way it makes sense as a scum ploy is if he's serving us a healthy heap of WIFOM right off the bat. I don't know him well enough to say with any confidence how likely he is to do that, but my gut tells me it's unlikely.

So what made you vote for him?

Indecision and the speculation that players could be opportunistically piling pressure onto Long Con.

I hope I make sense with what I'm getting ready to say.

bird threw something out there that was, from my perspective, an inconsequential lie (for us) that could have probably gotten him lynched (given his track record).

You threw this out there:

Sloonei wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:41 pm Pile votes on Long Con, let's go.

To me, that's a bit more obvious bait than someone claiming Day 0 information to get people moving on a Day 0 poll.

It's so obvious, you only got (?) one person to vote, and that was...bird. If in fact you got him to vote because of what you said (I don't think you got anybody to vote LC because of your pile on post).

You counted DDL as a bite, but that doesn't make sense to me either.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:48 pm Contrary to my previous stance of "Pile all votes on Long Con", I am wary of people who have piled suspicion on Long Con, even though I count myself among them. Regardless of how I feel about the Day 1 case around him, I can't ignore that there is easy potential for this bandwagon to be driven by opportunistic scums right off the bat.

That means posts like these catch my eye:

Spoiler: show

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 5:55 pm

Long Con wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:33 am

nutella wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:11 am Epi vs LC, aka "El Clásico"

I know, right? I mean, I was just joking around... but Epi's reaction! I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say he totally freaked out. He demanded four times that I substantiate my claims, then he throws out a weak-ass OMGUS, and then demands opinions from everyone on it.

Not to mention he completely ignored Wilgy, who also made a very similar joke. I guess he understood that Wilgy's post was a joke, but not mine. This is unexpectedly juicy Night 0 stuff!

I don't like the tone of this post. Sounds like you are trying to make him look back without engaging him yourself.

birdwithteeth11 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:36 am Since votes are changeable, I'm going to go ahead and put mine on Long Con for now. But since it's still early on Day 1, it's a very weak baddie read right now, but looking back at the initial start I feel like LC looks more bad than Epig.

If I were someone else I'd be wary of me too.

As an aside, my Q and w keys are not working, so any time I need to call in either of those letters I've been copy & pasting from elsewhere on the page. I just want to document my struggle and ask if anyone knows a better solution than my Ctrl + v strategy.

I wouldn't regard either of these are piling suspicion on Long Con. You do though. And you voted birdwithteeth11, and then moved your vote to DDL.

This all strikes me a charade- a dance, if you will- intended to protect Long Con while giving yourself an avenue of looking open-minded in case he got lynched after all.

"Look at all the opportunistic mafia! All two of them!"

This whole post strikes me as a poor reading of my own posts. I think it's pretty clear that my position on Long Con has not wavered. He has been my preferred lynch candidate for the entire day to this point. However, I was wary of the ease with which a bandwagon was forming against him, and the one-sided direction of the conversation in the thread, a point which I have brought up several times today. Epi himself has expressed the same sentiment, and yet he holds it against me for doing exactly what he himself is doing.
Furthermore, he interprets this post of mine in a much harsher light than I think anyone should. I obviously have a self-favoring bias here, but I think my first paragraph emphasizes the point that I'm not accusing either bwt or ddl of nefariously piling on suspicion, rather merely acknowledging the possibility of such a strategy being used at this stage in the game:

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:48 pm Contrary to my previous stance of "Pile all votes on Long Con", I am wary of people who have piled suspicion on Long Con, even though I count myself among them. Regardless of how I feel about the Day 1 case around him, I can't ignore that there is easy potential for this bandwagon to be driven by opportunistic scums right off the bat.

There's also a clear indication that my "pile votes on LC" comment was to be taken as a true stance of mine, and not a trap being set for others, as Epi so liberally discerned. I then highlighted two posts which might represent this hypothetical strategy I had become wary of and Epi presented a case against me based off of this as though I had come down hard on both bwt and ddl in an attempt to save Long Con, the player whose lynch I was advocating for at the time.

I do not think this is an honest case from Epi, but that might just mean he's pushing my buttons to see how I'll react. However, this has given me just enough pause to make me reconsider my stance on Epi and, by extension, LC as well. I'll see where my head is at in the morning, but I wanted to get this out before going to sleep.

I have never been concerned with a bandwagon here. My post you linked to only concerns myself- I did not want to exhaust my energy on one person today.

And I'm not going to stop issuing my interpretations of what people say just because they might reconsider their stance about me.

Long Con wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 1:32 am I don't know why I am even bothering to do this. I'm sure it's a serious personality flaw that I have that I'm compelled to do this.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:04 pm I'll try to keep this brief.

Spoiler: show

In Mass Effect, an evil independent LC kept calling me nervous. We've had this argument since, but I maintain that I was not nervous, but rather was gleeful that my little scheme to out a member of the mafia was working.

Yes, he'll remind you that I wasn't a civilian (True: I was at the time a neutral who could eventually side with either good or bad) and that he wasn't mafia (True, but he was last man standing, which is a role civilians need dead to win, and is therefore "bad").

My point is that LC framed my posts in such a way that supported his narrative (to get me lynched) rather than one to help the civilians (to get mafia lynched).

No.

Here's what happened, not what Epi's specially selected words choose to tell you. Epi was a complicated Indy who could go either way, and he had a fakeclaim from the host to use. He tells the thread his fakeclaim on Day 2, which I find weird. It made me suspect he was bad, and using a fakeclaim. He wants to spin it like I was some "evil independent" but what do you think my strategy was? Frame someone? I didn't have a team to work with, or for, what I needed was some level of credibility. I was trying to find baddies in as genuine a way as if I were a Civilian.

If you see similarities between that game and this one, then that makes sense enough to me, because my goal was to find baddies in both. In Mass Effect, I was right to go after Epignosis because he, as predicted, joined the baddies. Listen to me again for the first time, here in this game, maybe I'm right again.

If people would have listened to you, they would have wasted a lynch. You weren't right to go after me. Nobody was, because nobody needed me dead to win.

I don't know how else to spell that out for you.

Long Con wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 1:32 am

Spoiler: show

In Blue Velvet, LC was bad, I was good, and we had a back and forth on Mass Effect. Here is LC's big, misleading post about me.

That was an awesome meta case, thanks for linking it. It has no similarities to this game though. It seems you just brought it up because it's an instance where I made a case against you... that doesn't really make the cut for doing anything to prove your point here.

I don't agree.

Long Con wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 1:32 am

Spoiler: show

In Night Vale, Long Con and I were both bad- teammates even. What does he resort to?

Long Con wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2017 8:15 pm

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:46 pm I look nervous to you, LC?

The line I referenced looks like textbook nervousness... it's not a general thing with all your posts or anything, but come on - you read that line and tell me I'm wrong.

I recall seeing this and rolling my eyes. "Not this 'nervous' bullshit again. Were I not on LC's team, I would have crucified him for it.

FALSE. This is a bogus entry, because I wasn't in any way making a case on Jack. I was laughing at how his post read to me. Try this link to see THE ENTIRETY of the exchange. As in, I wasn't pursuing it as any form of case at all. Epi's attempt to make you believe otherwise is deception.

Long Con wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:23 pm

Boomslang wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2017 6:24 pm

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:09 pm Most inclined to vote Sprityo for self preservation lolololol or Epi for picking on someone he may view as weak.

Why that many "ol" additions the first time? Possible tell that you were thinking too hard about that post, and baddies must generate content whole-cloth. Could be an indication of teamwork, again playing off meta.

"Mind Meld" I guess - I thought it looked like nervous laughter.

Golden wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2017 6:27 pm Long Con could yet get my vote too, although I tend to start reading him well if I give him some time, which I'm always mindful of.

I need more content, I think. I haven't fully gotten into this yet. Just caught up.

You...you mean you said something that could be construed as a serious suspicion and later indicated it wasn't serious?

Long Con wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 10:37 am

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 10:02 am

Long Con wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 1:32 am I don't know why I am even bothering to do this. I'm sure it's a serious personality flaw that I have that I'm compelled to do this.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:04 pm I'll try to keep this brief.

Spoiler: show

In Mass Effect, an evil independent LC kept calling me nervous. We've had this argument since, but I maintain that I was not nervous, but rather was gleeful that my little scheme to out a member of the mafia was working.

Yes, he'll remind you that I wasn't a civilian (True: I was at the time a neutral who could eventually side with either good or bad) and that he wasn't mafia (True, but he was last man standing, which is a role civilians need dead to win, and is therefore "bad").

My point is that LC framed my posts in such a way that supported his narrative (to get me lynched) rather than one to help the civilians (to get mafia lynched).

No.

Here's what happened, not what Epi's specially selected words choose to tell you. Epi was a complicated Indy who could go either way, and he had a fakeclaim from the host to use. He tells the thread his fakeclaim on Day 2, which I find weird. It made me suspect he was bad, and using a fakeclaim. He wants to spin it like I was some "evil independent" but what do you think my strategy was? Frame someone? I didn't have a team to work with, or for, what I needed was some level of credibility. I was trying to find baddies in as genuine a way as if I were a Civilian.

If you see similarities between that game and this one, then that makes sense enough to me, because my goal was to find baddies in both. In Mass Effect, I was right to go after Epignosis because he, as predicted, joined the baddies. Listen to me again for the first time, here in this game, maybe I'm right again.

If people would have listened to you, they would have wasted a lynch. You weren't right to go after me. Nobody was, because nobody needed me dead to win.

I don't know how else to spell that out for you.

No one wants to read Mass Effect arguments:

Spoiler: show

That's just not a logical assessment of the situation. If you chose to turn Civ, then the Reapers would likely kill you. Turning Civ was never a good option. So you turn Reaper. Civs need all Reapers dead to win. Civs need Epignosis dead to win. But fine, I'll concede that there are multiple ways to look at the situation, and your role can be put into a very different light depending on what you want to believe is likely and logical versus a cold take on a role read. That's as far as I can go, because I have the biggest proof that what I put forth many times in that game was right: it's exactly what happened. Yes, I have the actual past on my side of the argument. Let's drop it.

I would not be pleased if you got lynched and are a civilian.

If you don't believe I think you are bad, then I don't know what to tell you. I am taking what I have seen of you in previous games and what I am seeing now, and when I analyze it, I draw the conclusion that you are not a civilian. That's how this works.

speedchuck wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 11:02 am
Scum likes people to talk, make cases, and get to the lynchy bits. So long as scum it's getting lynched. I see nothing alignment indicative here. Along with the meta-read of BWT just ruining my case on him, I've placed him at null.

I'm not understanding this. Can you rephrase?

The one thing I would note is that Dom hasn't really said anything either, so why poke Spacedaisy and then a newcomer?

The timing of MP's "pressure vote" and Spacedaisy's reaction looks somewhat suspicious to me. Eleven minutes after MP posts, Spacedaisy reacts to it and puts a vote on MP.

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:01 pm

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:50 pm I'm voting for @Spacedaisy because I want her to say things and she makes me nervous when she isn't posting.

If this came from anyone else I could excuse it, but this guy right here knows that I have barely been on the site in the last few days. He knows that I am juggling multiple writing projects in addition to two games. He knows I've been exhausted and slept a lot more than normal. So tell me why this guy says me being quiet is shady. No, I'm not buying this.

*votes MP*

Note that this is only her second post of the game. Her first was:

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:57 am I'm here. I swear I am. Ok, maybe I just showed up. Maybe I haven't read anything yet. Maybe...

I am going to get a shower and then catch up.

There is roughly an eleven hour difference between the two posts. By my count, there were 52 posts between Spacedaisy's first and second posts, several of them quite meaty.

Here is my concern: Of all those 52 posts in just 11 minutes, how did Spacedaisy react to MP's harmless vote so quickly? It almost looks like she knew to respond to it- a fabricated, planned interaction between the two.

Yeah, that makes sense.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:21 pm I am leaving my vote on Epi. Long Con and I both made the same observation about him in our respective defenses against his casing, and I observed him treating Spacedaisy in the same way earlier today (accusing her and MP of coordinating reactions, when it's evident she was simply responding to a notification). All of this looks like an Epi who is deliberately misconstruing facts in order to paint multiple players in a negative light. The possibility that he's doing this intentionally as a scum hunting tactic, to bait and draw reactions out of players, has been in my mind all day, but when it seems all of his game-related energy is committed to this tactic (from my perspective), I become less confident in his motivation.

I hope that you all carry on with the discussion about all of the names available to you as we wind down to the deadline. This is where my vote stands now, and I won't be able to offer anything else until night.

I accused you of acting like you were suspicious of Long Con while leaving yourself an out in order to avoid voting for him. You said:

I think it's pretty clear that my position on Long Con has not wavered.

Now you are voting for me when Long Con has two votes. I am sure I will receive a vote from Long Con, which will tie me up with him.

I don't think you were ever genuinely suspicious of Long Con, and the fact that you are using what I have said to reevaluate your stance on Long Con (instead of what LC himself has said) reinforces that thought:

I do not think this is an honest case from Epi, but that might just mean he's pushing my buttons to see how I'll react. However, this has given me just enough pause to make me reconsider my stance on Epi and, by extension, LC as well. I'll see where my head is at in the morning, but I wanted to get this out before going to sleep.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:21 pm I won't be able to offer anything else until night.

Like a kill?

speedchuck wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:35 pm I'm curious: Where do you come from, @NewTraditionalist ?

Epi, do you still suspect me? Ever gonna follow through and elaborate why?

I feel like the day is going in circles, and I don't like that. Votes are spread, and I don't like that. I don't have anything with me to eat, and I don't like that.

Worst of all, though, I don't really have any town reads. This never happens. I usually just bandwagon on with a townie for the wins. Uhhhh.... Leaning toward voting Epi or LC, for info and thread-clearing clarify and decent odds that one of them are scum.

Suspect? I have no reason to think you are a civilian, I'll just say that.

I do think it's naive at best and suspicious at worst for you to claim that you will clear me or LC by lynching one of us. It's naive because it assumes LC and I are not capable of manufacturing this back and forth if we are both bad. It's suspicious because it sets you up with an easy vote tomorrow if we are both civilians.

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 6:28 pm Ooookay. I have read everything.

1. Long Con vs. Epi... reading this same basic argument every freaking game you guys play together can be summed up as follows:

If only people will come to the light and tell him how wrong he is about Mass Effect, we would all have a merry Christmas.

MP, has Spacedaisy ever lynched you incorrectly when you were both civilians?

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:40 pm Epi, I don't know if I have been or not. But it is certainly always possible I'm wrong about him. my suspicion of him should by no means be taken as foolproof evidence.

I would never take it that way. I only wondered if it's ever happened before. Eloh has never lynched me incorrectly (or at all, I don't think).

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:44 pm Daisy is wrong about me and Wilgy is right? What the hell? What universe is this?

Was there a game on here in which you and Spacedaisy were teammates?

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:48 pm "dogpee" MP

Already been done.

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:50 pm

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:17 pm I just looked back and I think I don't understand what he was saying.

It is unclear how speedchuck is changing his reads. He says he has no town reads, but earlier in the game he had clearly stated town reads in Epi, Sloonei, and (perhaps) sanmateo. What alarms me further is that speedchuck is saying he doesn't like how all over the place the thread is (but he's worse than almost anyone else in that regard, at least from what I saw) AND he says he wants to vote for either LC or Epi "for information" when he clearly was defending Epi as a town read earlier. I found no substantiated reason for his change of mind.

I therefore believe that he is likely fabricating his reads.

My problem with this is that speedchuck is quite careful and a devious kind.

Do you think he'd forget he said I was good and then call me bad later?

I don't.

DrWilgy wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:17 pm Hey Epi, whats on the fprefront pf your mind rn? It doesn't have to be game related.

Fuck you Max Scherzer.

Michael A. Taylor with an in-the-park Grand Slam.

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:20 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:16 pm

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:50 pm

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:17 pm I just looked back and I think I don't understand what he was saying.

It is unclear how speedchuck is changing his reads. He says he has no town reads, but earlier in the game he had clearly stated town reads in Epi, Sloonei, and (perhaps) sanmateo. What alarms me further is that speedchuck is saying he doesn't like how all over the place the thread is (but he's worse than almost anyone else in that regard, at least from what I saw) AND he says he wants to vote for either LC or Epi "for information" when he clearly was defending Epi as a town read earlier. I found no substantiated reason for his change of mind.

I therefore believe that he is likely fabricating his reads.

My problem with this is that speedchuck is quite careful and a devious kind.

Do you think he'd forget he said I was good and then call me bad later?

I don't.

That's a fair point. I'm not sure he'd "forget", but his opinions just seemed all over the place to me. I guess it's potentially genuine inconsistency as opposed to opportunistic fabrication.

I'm not even sure I've personally seen a mafia-aligned speedchuck.

Night Vale. He was brilliant.

If speedchuck is bad, he's playing dumb to his own posts, and based on his performance in Night Vale, I don't see that.

For those who don't know, speedchuck painstakingly went over games he wasn't even in so he could craft curses that would frame people who were in those games.

He was top-notch mafia.

Forgetting you just called a guy good on Day 1 isn't top-notch mafia.

Yeah, this isn't good. speedchuck getting lynched because he looks inconsistent? That's what mafia do? Look inconsistent on Day 1? Fuck outta here.

birdwithteeth11 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:46 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:44 pm Yeah, this isn't good. speedchuck getting lynched because he looks inconsistent? That's what mafia do? Look inconsistent on Day 1? Fuck outta here.

If you're going to go that far, you could use the same argument for me on most of my D1 lynches. And as I stated in my opinion, there's more to it to me than just being inconsistent.

And I defend you all the time on Day 1.