The Syndicate

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?

What were you unwilling to fall for?

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.

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.

This I believe.

birdwithteeth11 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:46 pm Since I was asked...

Epig strikes me as good for now. Only thing that makes me wonder is how he suspects MP for his large amounts of posting (which is pretty normal for him last time I checked), but then says his "friendliness always strikes me as false".

LC is....god knows what. I've given up on early reads on him.

As for my initial post, I'd rather get that kind of information out in the open early on and let people decide what they want to do with it. Some will believe me and some won't for sure. But it also helps start to generate some initial discussion when there is nothing to go off of.

Were you telling the truth?

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!

If any post produces suspicion against Long Con, it's this one. I agree with Speedchuck that there is an impression of backtracking here in his "I was joking" stance. It may be the case that he was just playfully poking at Epi initially, but the way this post is constructed gives me the impression that he is seizing on the existing backlash against Epi's response to turn it willfully into a bandwagon.

Pile votes on Long Con, let's go.

Gotta break a few eggs to catch quin

Which egg do you suggest breaking?

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.

So you admit there is some degree of suspicious behavior around your posts?

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 fail to see how any of the behavior described here is suspicious.

Long Con wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:47 am

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:17 am

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 fail to see how any of the behavior described here is suspicious.

I guess we'll see.

You were supposed to convince me.

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

Nutella hasn't said anything since this post. What do you have to say, nutella?

DrWilgy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:57 am With classic BWT style and grace. I don't like it.

BWT, you state that LC is more bad than Epi. Why? Is LC's baddieness relative to Epi's the determining factor on him being scum? What about those who haven't been here? Like me, Quin, who for some reason you all are looking for.

I would ask you the same question, Wilgy. What do you think of the less-talked-about people?

speedchuck wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:01 pm

DrWilgy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:57 am With classic BWT style and grace. I don't like it.

Does anyone have a way I can get a meta on BWT?

MP does, probably. I've only played sporadically with him over the years, so I don't have a solid meta read on him either. I have not been putting a tremendous amount of stock in his Night 0 infoclaim, but I suppose it could be concerning given that similar info manipulation on Day/Night 0 has been used in the past. But our Host was not here when that sort of thing was in style. It's foreign to Jay, so I wonder whether it's something he would include in a game of his. I don't put it past him to be aware of the idea and to want to slip it into his game as an experiment.

All the signs so far point to BWT's information being false anyway. My initial assumption was that he just made it up to give us something to talk about, but he's so far insisted that he was not lying. I don't think any of this is very telling in itself, but it's going to form the foundation of my read of BWT in this game and he's someone to keep an eye on, I suppose.

I'm trying really hard to talk about things that aren't Long Con before I offer any new thoughts on him. This has been a fairly active, but very one-dimensional start to the game.

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: 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.

speedchuck wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:04 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:48 pm 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.

Best answer solution to your question query request plea: Use different words language.

I am having a great time here in The Search for That One Australian Guy.

I've been trying to spark some conversation about non-Long Con players because I don't want today to stagnate the LC puddle, but it would be irresponsible to remove him entirely from my radar. He's still the most prominent suspect, at least, and the only player I feel comfortable saying I have a scum read on at this point. For me that read is derived almost entirely from his reaction to accusation. Perhaps his "nervous" attack is Freudian on some level, because that's a word I could use to describe his activity from the moment Epi first named LC as his first suspect: The two have had a standard Day 1 back-and-forth to here. Epi lays down the hot take about his intended vote, citing real substantive reasons (by Night 0 standards) for doing so. But all LC can muster in response is eyeroll.gif. This strikes me as an exaggerated attempt to shrug off or downplay a silly case against him.
This is the kind of post sirengif was made for. More of the same attempt to shrug off Epi's (relatively substantial) case against him, this time turning it full OMGUS against him. Here he makes his first mention anywhere about his initial jab being a joke, and then decries Epi for reacting strongly against it. I am unsure why Epi should be strung up for taking a comment at face value rather than assuming it is a joke when there exists no evidence whatsoever that the comment is a joke. Epi's reaction was to refute LC's claim, whereas LC's angle here is that Epi "freaked out". "Freaked out" is a very subjective term, so it's not entirely clear what LC means here, but let's see how his own response to early pressure fits under this term of "freaking out": A three-point bulleted list about why the honorable Speedchuck is flat out wrong in his two-line statement of suspicion against him. Note there is no attempt at clarification here, only insistence that his accuser is not correct. I do not think his follow-up responses paint him favorably either. Here he tries to absolve himself via the "I was just joking" defense whereby Epi may be read as suspicious for responding to anything he said early in the game, but all things LC himself said are to be read through the lens of "a joke" and therefore not worth bothering with. This exchange with speedchuck is dripping with freak-outedness, in my opinion. He acts as if all suspicion brought against him is absurd or unfounded in a way that seems deliberately misunderstood ("You would prefer I not discuss reads?"), and there is again very little attempt at clarification on his part. I got another dose of that in my own interaction with him later on: I as actively seeking any sort of further commentary from LC on his case against Epi, but his response as the biggest shrug I've ever seen. I don't object to Long Con naming Epi as a suspect when he did, and I even don't doubt that his initial comment was not meant to be taken seriously. But his behavior since then reads as a player who is angling for a specific position rather than one who is working to figure things out from his position.

sanmateo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:59 pm

birdwithteeth11 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:22 am

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.

How about this for a plan then? We lynch you today for your backtracking. If you flip civ, then we lynch Epig on Day 2 since he was clearly egging you on and trying to start something!

yeah that seems like a terrible plan. none of what i've seen from the epi/LC thing moves me particularly. it's a bunch of tepid day 1 stuff. but more importantly, if getting into weird arguments in-game is really a recurring thing between them, then obviously we need to look elsewhere because anything coming from either of the two about the other one holds less weight.

where else shall we look?

sanmateo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:04 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:02 pm

sanmateo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:59 pm

birdwithteeth11 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:22 am

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.

How about this for a plan then? We lynch you today for your backtracking. If you flip civ, then we lynch Epig on Day 2 since he was clearly egging you on and trying to start something!

yeah that seems like a terrible plan. none of what i've seen from the epi/LC thing moves me particularly. it's a bunch of tepid day 1 stuff. but more importantly, if getting into weird arguments in-game is really a recurring thing between them, then obviously we need to look elsewhere because anything coming from either of the two about the other one holds less weight.

where else shall we look?

well there's already a bandwagon forming against long con so that seems like a great starting point

Do you mean the people voting for/putting pressure on him? what have you got to say about those hooligans?

sanmateo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:05 pm is there a way to link posts without quoting the whole thing?

Click the big blue "Re: The Search for Quin [Day 1]" heading at the top of the post.

EBVOP: Or by clicking the post number, I suppose.

I moved my vote to birdwithteeth.

sanmateo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 7:04 pm the thing about bird that i feel is throwing me off is jay's post at the beginning of day 1 and the bwt night 0 claim.

You and I have known Jay the longest of anyone in this game. What do you think are the chances that he provided birdwithteeth with information, true or false, about the Day 0 poll?

DrWilgy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 7:16 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:29 pm

DrWilgy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:57 am With classic BWT style and grace. I don't like it.

BWT, you state that LC is more bad than Epi. Why? Is LC's baddieness relative to Epi's the determining factor on him being scum? What about those who haven't been here? Like me, Quin, who for some reason you all are looking for.

I would ask you the same question, Wilgy. What do you think of the less-talked-about people?

That I am hungry and indifferent.

which players are you most hungry and indifferent about?

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.

Moved my vote to Sir Dragon D. Luffy.

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:02 pm A reads/preliminary rainbow list for me right now would look something like this:

Moderate Town -- would NOT vote
birdwithteeth11
Epignosis
sanmateo

Slight Town -- would NOT vote
speedchuck

==================================================

Neutral-- would potentially vote
Dom
Dragon D. Luffy
DrWilgy
NewTraditionalist
nutella
Serge
Spacedaisy

Slight Mafia-- would potentially vote
Long Con
Sloonei

Players are not ranked within groups, only across groups.

Generally I prefer to stick to POE and usually don't feel comfortable making any firm mafia reads at this stage, but despite being hesitant because I do feel LC is a player who can get himself into trouble early on, I'm relatively convinced by Epi's pursuit of LC and would call him a sole slight mafia read. I also am a bit wary of Sloonei; perhaps it's a bit leftover shock still from Street Fighter, but without taking an in-depth look at his ISO I'm not sure I buy Sloonei's attempts to start discussion to be genuine. Specifically, he doesn't seem that interested in actually developing reads and seems a bit too hoppy. But those are just general impressions and maybe I'm being overly paranoid of him.

As for my neutrals, well, I'm not sure how to sort Wilgy or DDL yet. Everyone else has been too quiet or essentially nonexistent, which is disconcerting. Hopefully we hear from them before the deadline.

I'm going to be pretty busy tomorrow, so my activity will be less than ideal. I'll be here in the hour or two leading to EoD though at a minimum; I think I can set aside that time at least.

where do my reads fail to meet your standards? There have been slim pickings in the non-Long Con division of this game, most of my posts so far have been geared toward generating content so that I can develop reads.

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.

[mention]MovingPictures07[/mention] I mean, look at your rainbow list. You have 7 people in the neutral territory. How can I be blamed for having lackluster reads when you yourself agree that more than half the players in the game are more or less unreadable at this stage?

linki: fair enough. I look forward to your ISO. I can't blame you if there's lingering suspicion from Street Fighter. I made a deliberate effort to buddy you.

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:18 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:14 pm MovingPictures07 I mean, look at your rainbow list. You have 7 people in the neutral territory. How can I be blamed for having lackluster reads when you yourself agree that more than half the players in the game are more or less unreadable at this stage?

linki: fair enough. I look forward to your ISO. I can't blame you if there's lingering suspicion from Street Fighter. I made a deliberate effort to buddy you.

Do you think I'm unfairly questioning you?

I feel your initial read of me was made using a point that should not apply. There's nothing unfair about questioning me.

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:17 pm Sloonei, briefly glancing at your post history I don't see anything alarming per se, but I do think your opinions are relatively... predictable? Not sure what a better word for it would be. You didn't find anything suspicious in Epi's behavior, you then made some good points against LC's reactions but only after Epi already started making them, and then you moved your vote to BWT after sanmateo expressed that things should be shifted to the LC bandwagoners. Your opinions just seem to be moving with the tides of the thread, and now that Epi and I expressed a town opinion of BWT you've shifted again. You're also asking a ton of questions, which I know is your norm, but I don't get the sense from a lot of them that you're forming reads about any of the people you're inquiring from -- Wilgy, sanmateo, etc. It all just seems very safe, like you're trying to seem like you're hunting but ruffling as few feathers as possible. I also felt like you may have shifted your vote to BWT hoping that he would be a mislynch but without really pushing it hard, but now you've backed off of it seemingly. Maybe it's an unfair characterization of your posts, I don't know, and I realize it's possible I'm being overly paranoid due to recency bias. I wouldn't say it's anything other than a minor suspicion at this point, but I do still stand by my overall assessment of it.

The BWT vote was a pressure vote and an attempt to slow the roll on the Long Con wagon. As of right now he's still my intended vote-recipient. But, again, we need more varied discussion, so I'm throwing it around. I'm developing reads. I hope they'll be here soon. I won't pretend to have them before they arrive.

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:22 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:21 pm

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:18 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:14 pm MovingPictures07 I mean, look at your rainbow list. You have 7 people in the neutral territory. How can I be blamed for having lackluster reads when you yourself agree that more than half the players in the game are more or less unreadable at this stage?

linki: fair enough. I look forward to your ISO. I can't blame you if there's lingering suspicion from Street Fighter. I made a deliberate effort to buddy you.

Do you think I'm unfairly questioning you?

I feel your initial read of me was made using a point that should not apply. There's nothing unfair about questioning me.

What point shouldn't apply specifically?

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:02 pm Generally I prefer to stick to POE and usually don't feel comfortable making any firm mafia reads at this stage, but despite being hesitant because I do feel LC is a player who can get himself into trouble early on, I'm relatively convinced by Epi's pursuit of LC and would call him a sole slight mafia read. I also am a bit wary of Sloonei; perhaps it's a bit leftover shock still from Street Fighter, but without taking an in-depth look at his ISO I'm not sure I buy Sloonei's attempts to start discussion to be genuine. Specifically, he doesn't seem that interested in actually developing reads and seems a bit too hoppy. But those are just general impressions and maybe I'm being overly paranoid of him.

You made this point after posting a rainbow list in which more than half the players were listed as null reads. why am I to be blamed for failing to develop reads in the same thread?

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

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.

You misunderstand me. I was not trying to bait anyone with my "Pile on" post. The thread was quiet, I wanted people to talk, LC was a top suspect, I made a facetious post instructing everyone to pile on.
Later I expressed concern that Long Con could be town and players are opportunistically bandwagoning on him. I count DDL among players who have expressed suspicion of Long Con, and nothing else. I want to hear more thoughts from him.

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:31 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:29 pm

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:22 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:21 pm

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:18 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:14 pm MovingPictures07 I mean, look at your rainbow list. You have 7 people in the neutral territory. How can I be blamed for having lackluster reads when you yourself agree that more than half the players in the game are more or less unreadable at this stage?

linki: fair enough. I look forward to your ISO. I can't blame you if there's lingering suspicion from Street Fighter. I made a deliberate effort to buddy you.

Do you think I'm unfairly questioning you?

I feel your initial read of me was made using a point that should not apply. There's nothing unfair about questioning me.

What point shouldn't apply specifically?

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:02 pm Generally I prefer to stick to POE and usually don't feel comfortable making any firm mafia reads at this stage, but despite being hesitant because I do feel LC is a player who can get himself into trouble early on, I'm relatively convinced by Epi's pursuit of LC and would call him a sole slight mafia read. I also am a bit wary of Sloonei; perhaps it's a bit leftover shock still from Street Fighter, but without taking an in-depth look at his ISO I'm not sure I buy Sloonei's attempts to start discussion to be genuine. Specifically, he doesn't seem that interested in actually developing reads and seems a bit too hoppy. But those are just general impressions and maybe I'm being overly paranoid of him.

You made this point after posting a rainbow list in which more than half the players were listed as null reads. why am I to be blamed for failing to develop reads in the same thread?

I have to discern whether your behavior is genuine or not; I'm not questioning your lack of reads or hoppiness inherently but specifically thought they seemed opportunistic as I was brainstorming my thoughts on you. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

This is fair. My efforts have been genuine, but I don't expect you to just accept that. Let me know if you find any specific posts that ring false to you.

speedchuck wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:59 pm Geez, MP, scourge of lurkers

Thoughts on DDL?

nutella wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:27 pm Thoughts from catching up -

I'm torn on LC. Epi's references to other games are somewhat compelling; I was in those games and thus am fully aware of why Epi feels the way he does about LC, but I'm not necessarily convinced that he has to be right. Players don't always fulfill the patterns you expect across alignments. LC's reactions (especially the one after my post) were pretty over-the-top though and I can definitely see him being a caught baddie here.

At the same time, I'm torn on BWT as well. The circumstances of his info claim and its apparent misguidedness are intriguing, but I grant that it seems unlikely he would claim bad info openly if bad, so it's more likely it was just misguided/misleading false info. But his over-eager "let's all lynch LC" post was very suspicious. I've been considering voting for him but MP's post here rings pretty true to me and I'm inclined to trust his read:

MovingPictures07 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:14 pm BWT is being indecisive as fuck. That means he's town. If he was bad, he would force consistency.

I might look into joining Sloonei in a DDL vote; I'll look back at DDL next. Not feeling MP's and Epi's suspicion of Sloonei; I'm seeing town behavior.

Thoughts on speedchuck?

I buy Epi's suspicion against me more than MP's.

birdwithteeth11 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:22 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:16 pm 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.

Dingdingding! We have a winner!

Thoughts on Sloonei?

I don't condemn speedchuck for backing down on the LC bandwagon. I am in the same position. For a time he was the only subject anyone had talked about. Most of my efforts today have been about introducing new things into the conversation. This day was in danger of stagnating and producing very little content for us to work with. But I understand what you are saying and I do not wish to stand in anyone's way of reading speedchuck one way or another. @ nutella

birdwithteeth11 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:36 pm

nutella wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:27 pm
I might look into joining Sloonei in a DDL vote; I'll look back at DDL next. Not feeling MP's and Epi's suspicion of Sloonei; I'm seeing town behavior.

What do you see from sloonei that strikes you as civ behavior? I see a guy that made claims of a "bandwagon" against someone (LC) and used that to throw shade on someone else who made a bold, gutsy move early in an attempt to see what direction it made the winds blow (me).

Do you feel my suspicion against you is or was unwarranted?

birdwithteeth11 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:47 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:39 pm

birdwithteeth11 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:36 pm

nutella wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:27 pm
I might look into joining Sloonei in a DDL vote; I'll look back at DDL next. Not feeling MP's and Epi's suspicion of Sloonei; I'm seeing town behavior.

What do you see from sloonei that strikes you as civ behavior? I see a guy that made claims of a "bandwagon" against someone (LC) and used that to throw shade on someone else who made a bold, gutsy move early in an attempt to see what direction it made the winds blow (me).

Do you feel my suspicion against you is or was unwarranted?

I mean, I'm biased and disagree with it. But I also understand why I would take some flak for what I did for N0. I've already explained my reasoning for why I did it so I won't repeat it again. Whether you take it or leave it is up to you.

But that wasn't the reason I expressed suspicion of you.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:21 pm I buy Epi's suspicion against me more than MP's.

I reverse this opinion.

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.

sanmateo wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2017 7:57 am i think given what people have said about bird i wont vote for him today. sloonei threw out both of the posts that i singled out beforehand but he still seemed steadfast on voting for LC until i wrote that post. something doesn't really track there, i was taken aback by him being that easily convinced but it seemed like people were moving away from that bandwagon so it'd make sense that scum sloonei (scoomei?) would switch. if what he said about looking at bwt's claim in the same way as mp07 and epignosis is true, then why wouldnt he vote for dragon from the start?

that's less simple than the reason i suspect dragon, so it feels less likely to be true. thus im probably voting for dragon. but my uni canceled classes today so i have time to spare

I had not made up my mind about birdwithtweeth earlier. I changed my vote when I came to see his behavior in a more favorable light. This is the most attention I've ever received for a Day 1 pressure vote.

Long Con is accusing Epi of the same thing I argued for last night; he is deliberately misconstruing facts to fit his argument. If this is a legitimate accusation then it is not a good look for Epi. However, I did not necessarily feel that he was doing it in a sinister way against me last night (though his underwhelming response doesn't inspire much confidence), and I also still do not have enough trust in Long Con to side with him definitively in their back and forth. Also, sanmateo presented a similar, though less extreme, interpretation of my behavior as Epi did last night, so it's possible I've come off a bit shadier than I believe.

Does anybody else get the sense that Epi is being intentionally deceptive in his arguments?

It has been a surprisingly long time since I played with DDL. I also remember him being a force early in most of our games together though. I do not hold it too much against a player when it simply appears that they've been more absent than passive, which is the case with DDL right now. I was hoping to hear more from him today. I have the same minor reservations about his Long Con position, but that's about it.

As seems to always be the case these days, I will be at work when the deadline comes.

[mention]Dragon D. Luffy[/mention], when you have caught up, I'd like to hear your thoughts on Epi. Do not worry about answering me if you still have stuff to read.

nutella wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:27 pmI might look into joining Sloonei in a DDL vote; I'll look back at DDL next. Not feeling MP's and Epi's suspicion of Sloonei; I'm seeing town behavior.

What are the results of this search, nutella?