The Syndicate

Up to 13 options?

I chose 4 & 10. A lot of the other doctors lost my interest, but not those two.

You can vote for more than one.

Dana, I know what you are saying; I tend to view manic MP as baddie MP myself. But it is my observation that he was equally manic before the game started. I think he is just really, really, really excited about the game starting.

Made wrote:I always figured the point of day 0 was off topicness

I currently see zeek as overlly confrontational, but that can easily be rationalized when you realize it's his first day 0. He (assuming you're talking about his critzing speculating about civvie roles) sounds like what I would expect in a day 1 post.



Linki- oh his baddie summary, yeah, that was really help for me, having not watched much of show, it didn't occur to be to be disingenuous. I don't understand how a character trait analysis could be disingenuous if it's true.


Linki- ok this is just a petpeev, but people describing their own tells always makes me feel weird.

Weirder than clowns?

I think there is a difference between decoding civvie secrets that are known to be attached to civvie roles, and speculating on unknown roles and what their powers might be. I don't think that helps the baddies, as they can speculate as well, and more openly with less distraction in that evil chatroom. I would be more worried about Who freak baddies trying to overspeculate baddie roles and misdirecting the thread that way, actually.

Zeek has played before; why do you say it is his first Day 0?

Or did I miss a post where he said that? Totally possible, lol

?

Did part of this get cut off?

Don't clip quotes. It looks bad, tbh.

Made wrote:

zeek wrote: Day 0 before. I don't know how you guys play on this site. I don't want this to sound like tit for tat... but I find it weird you're making a big deal of my post.

Made wrote:

zeek wrote: I've never played in a game with Day 0 before.

Are these the same quote? This is like pulling fucking teeth, lol.

It took me several minutes to find that quote, and i know how to search this site fairly well. Before this conversation, i thought the whole Zeek/MP thing was chest bumping, but this had made me think I want to reread Zeek a bit harder.

Personally I am more interested in Zeek based on Mades defense of him. I was kinda doing the "well it's day zero" thing, but this whole conversation is odd. He says he is NOT defending Zeek, but it really feels as if he is.

Linki~ I was not sure myself.

I did, I did not post it since he found it at the same time.

And I do think clipping quotes looks bad. But why be so secretive all the time? We ran into this in the last game; I pointed out that a point of suspicion against someone was wrong, and you gave me grief for it, Epi. And it was wrong since he was civ.

I do not like entrapment, and that is something you do seem to like.

Epignosis wrote:

S~V~S wrote:And I do think clipping quotes looks bad. But why be so secretive all the time? We ran into this in the last game; I pointed out that a point of suspicion against someone was wrong, and you gave me grief for it, Epi. And it was wrong since he was civ.

Did I dispute your thinking that clipping quotes looks bad? Does that answer why you would coach Made in thread? What does clipping quotes have to do with being secretive? What did we run into "last game?" When was this? What did you point out? How did I give you grief for it? Who was civilian?

In Python, before we died. Someone said something about something Made said, and I said that it was in error, Made had not done what was said. you took me to task for it, and someone else scolded you for it. i can find it if you like, but not tonight.

And I see nothing wrong with coaching new players in thread, and we have a lot of them. If they do something that looks bad, we should point it out. Becasue maybe they ARE bad, and pointing it out like that makes others see it. Or maybe they are not, and they can avoid doing something that makes them look bad in future. Like I said, I am not a fan of entrapment.

Get off the high horse, Epi.

Actually it was not hard to find, you only died on like day 2.

There were a few more posts after it, but this is the jist of it. Made was a civ, i was a neutral, and you were a serial killer. Made & I were certainly not teammates.

Epignosis wrote:

Enrique wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

S~V~S wrote:This is it, one of my last posts before I was murdered

S~V~S wrote:
OMG, I said something helpful~! I must be bad,

I miss LCs "roll eyes" smiley~ I tried to get it at his website, but the smiley link was broken

OK, gonna stop letting the end of the thread tempt me.

Did you need to speak for Made on the subject? You are suspicious of him, right?

Jeez dude, this is not a witch hunt, we're actually trying to figure out whether he's innocent or not. If there's evidence on either side I'd like to see it posted.

My point was to let Made answer to see if his response jives with reality. Catching him in a(nother) lie is an excellent way to determine if someone is innocent or not. With other people answering for him, that can't happen.

What a pity.

You basically attacked me for not supressing evidence that painted someone in a better light.

Dom wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Don't clip quotes. It looks bad, tbh.

What constitutes clipping a quote?

This does:

Made wrote:

zeek wrote: Day 0 before. I don't know how you guys play on this site. I don't want this to sound like tit for tat... but I find it weird you're making a big deal of my post.

Made wrote:

zeek wrote: I've never played in a game with Day 0 before.

Out of:

zeek wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Given The Master appears to be an LMS, which makes complete sense, I would bet he has a pretty powerful role, so yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if he would resurrect after dying. I suppose The Doctor can as well though? Which means someone automatically regenerating after death could be either of those roles, potentially. So why wouldn't you mention that?

I was concentrating on the baddies, don't think it's helpful to discuss the potential secret powers of civs until necessary.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Consequently, while I do believe you have some logical and astute observations, in the end, I question the true intent behind your post. I've seen baddies (and I always try to do this myself as bad) who try to appear as helpful as possible but while simultaneously causing unnecessary paranoia, so just because I find myself agreeing with you, when I read your post part of me wondered if you are trying to set up misconceptions and paranoia.

Because you agree with me and I was trying to be helpful, I might be bad? I'm not, I was simply trying to help inform the non-Whovians who are playing. If the baddie teams were the Weeping Angels and the Slytheen I still would have speculated on likely secret powers. Due to the nature of those groups there wouldn't be a potential recruitment though, so would I have drawn your suspicion?

It's Day 0, and I've never played in a game with Day 0 before. I don't know how you guys play on this site. I don't want this to sound like tit for tat... but I find it weird you're making a big deal of my post.

Especially on this site, where we can't link to the original post via the quote. Taking things out of their original context can change the meaning sometimes. When someone asks you to produce a quote, as I asked Made "where did Zeek say that", producing the whole thing is better, cutting and pasting parts of it out looks like you are trying to hide something. This is only my opinion, of course, but I am fairly sure other people have said similar things in other games.

And yeah, I have done the "edit instead of quote" thing in other peoples posts, too. For some reason it's easier for me to do that by accident on phone, so I try to avoid quoting on phone if possible. I usually catch it in preview, when I realize that my comments are in the text ~ it's one reason I avoid that trendy "replying in another color in the body of the quote" thing. I have only actually posted it once.

Wow that was bad formatting, lol. Too early

I think of it as cutting a line out of a paragraph, or out of a single persons post. I cut out other peoples quotes too

Like I said it is my opinion, that's all. I would not have brought it up again, but Dom asked.

Roxy wrote:Dana - they usually are not allowed to fact check sentences that contain any of the following words:
Civvie
Baddie
Mafia
Townie
Good
Bad
Etc.

Ld's need to be creative when checking statements.

Yeah, in the older games, pretty much everyone would make an overt statement as their first post. It kinda kills the fun. I do make overt checkable statements if I am taking suspicion, though. Not my favorite role, its too much like info for my taste, and it is a hard role to play if you have a host with strict guidelines, or very careful baddies.

Yeah, Splints, that was weird, Lol, and !maybe why the civs won most of the time at STV.

STV did have it's good points; I played there for a bit after having played in other places. The players were enthusiastic, and fun. For the most part there was very little of the whole jaded, too cool, vibe Mafia seems to cultivate. I thought the rules were a bit harsh, and I thought the mods were a bit harsh. I learned alot playing there~ LDs had gone out of vogue at LP by the time I started playing, so I learned more about subtle, which is not something that comes naturally to me, at STV. I won my first game there, as a baddie, and I was immensely proud of that win. It was hard being bad at STV

The parabolic orbit of the asteroids as opposed to the more circular orbit of the planets?

In a not unexpcted development you are both freaking me out~

Epignosis wrote:This.

Enrique wrote:You know, I'm usually on SVS's side whenever she has the argument with Epig, but I really would've liked to see zeek's response here

I'll take it, though. That'd be a really weird thing to slip on.

I tried that in Monty Python. I might have gotten away with it, but I got Night killed.

You however, are saying the exact same thing I said. S~V~S even referenced it.

"Usually"? How often has this happened?

My initial reaction to MP was that he was being a bit manic, but had been being so in the sign up thread, indeed, all over the site; playing thread games, posting random, etc. But if the whole Zeek thing was a "gambit" (so gimmicky, lol) and now the Enrique thing, I don't know. I need to see if he settles down or not, or if he moves his vote. If this was a permanent vote poll, that vote would look a lot worse to me.

But when people push suspicions, and then drop them, saying things like, "Oh I just did it to gauge reactions", it almost always feels bad to me. Especially MP, with his whole <3 distancing thing.

Epignosis wrote:This.

Enrique wrote:You know, I'm usually on SVS's side whenever she has the argument with Epig, but I really would've liked to see zeek's response here

I'll take it, though. That'd be a really weird thing to slip on.

I tried that in Monty Python. I might have gotten away with it, but I got Night killed.

You however, are saying the exact same thing I said. S~V~S even referenced it.

Indeed I did, but in reference to something totally different It was rather a notable baddiesque move on your part, IMO. I will likely reference it in every game for the rest of forever. Supressing evidence that could exonerate someone, or tend that way, does not seem like something civs should do, or advocate. And it wasn't. Although as an SK, you would have had similar motivations to those a civ would have, so I chalk it up to being Epi. It explains to me why you always win when bad, but never when civ.

S~V~S wrote:I think there is a difference between decoding civvie secrets that are known to be attached to civvie roles, and speculating on unknown roles and what their powers might be. I don't think that helps the baddies, as they can speculate as well, and more openly with less distraction in that evil chatroom. I would be more worried about Who freak baddies trying to overspeculate baddie roles and misdirecting the thread that way, actually.

Yes zeek, this was aimed at you. What is the problem with it?

And what do you mean by "not genuine"? Do you think it was staged?

Zeek, Did you think I was saying YOU were s Who freak baddie? That was a general obsetvation , not a comment on you. I was offering my opinion on the discussion; the post directly before that one was a post of yours.

I feel a bit tag teamed here,Lol.

zeek wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Zeek, Did you think I was saying YOU were s Who freak baddie? That was a general obsetvation , not a comment on you. I was offering my opinion on the discussion; the post directly before that one was a post of yours.

Yes, as the post was directed at me surely it's implied I am a Who freak baddie? Also implied I'm misleading the thread with my speculation and I don't feel I have. Most of it is pretty obvious speculation, but stuff I wanted to share with the non-Whovian players.

Your back and forth with Made doesn't belong. You could have easily found my quote yourself and you did, you say, at the same time as Made. But surely you could and should have found it quicker than that. May have been staged, may not have been. But it sticks out like a sore thumb.

Um, no, I was discussing your opinion on talking about secrets. That is why it was directed at you.

A tad paranoid methinks.

I don't see the SVS case either, tbh. Smoke, mirrors and vapors.

I am not a Dalek, one of the cybermen, or anyone other than a civvie.

Is that STV enough for you Zeek?

Is it just me, maybe because he's pushing at me, but does Epignosis feel really, really evil to anyone? Every time I read one of his posts, I picture him like this:

Gonna reread him; to be fair he almost always seems sinister to me, but he usually has a more sinister edge when he's bad.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Oh, and as to Epi sounding evil, I think that seems like a really weird accusation. He sounds like his regular old self to me. No clue about his alignment yet, but I have no reason to particularly distrust him.

I did say he always sounds evil to me. <----- Like that guy. But maybe a bit more than usual. I don't think it's "weird". It's just my opinion.

Daisy, I was talking about Epi, not MP.

And tbh, I am nowhere near close to voting for anyone in particular myself, either.

I thought a number of people were responsible for catching MP in Python, Epi, but whatever. If you say so

What convinced ME in Python was Daisys read on him, not unlike how I tend to trust Epis read on Eloh. Now someday, they will be on the same team and rook us, but for now I tend to trust Daisys read on MP. Even if work runs like it has, too busy for much online, I will have more than enough time to catch up tonight.

Also, there are quite a few people from whom I would like to hear more.

zeek wrote:I'm going to try to sleep now. I'm not particularly comfortable with my vote but I have little else to go on.

Not pleased with the vote stuck on me so I'd ask MR to actually read the thread before the deadline is up. k thanks.

I may set an alarm to get me back up to see the lynch post. Laters.

If you are not comfortable, why did you make it?

As I said, STV style just for you, zeek~ I am not a baddie~ not a dalek, not a cyberman, not an indy, not a secret role. I am totes a civvie.

And I have not read all the way back yet, but juliets sounds incredibly genuine to me, at least the last few posts. Why is she taking votes?

TH, can you pull these two posts?

Those are possibly the bandwagony-est votes I have ever seen.

It does not end for an hour?

I don't particularly think Juliets or Enrique are bad. So i am gonna vote Zeeky Peeky for saying he was gonna unvote me and not doing so. I thought we had an hour, but Angry Bea says otherwise so better safe than sorry.

Linki~ what posts of Juliets are we talking about? There are so many

Wait Zeek did not say that, changing it to Rey cause i want to poke him and make him post!!!

Linki~ Juliets, can you link me to the post, I have no idea what the issue is.

I would like to see the posts everyone is talking about. She has many posts, and I have asked like3 times.

And I said you did not say that before you posted, you must have seen it in linki

S~V~S wrote:Wait Zeek did not say that, changing it to Rey cause i want to poke him and make him post!!!

Linki~ Juliets, can you link me to the post, I have no idea what the issue is.

Posted 7:59:09

zeek wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I don't particularly think Juliets or Enrique are bad. So i am gonna vote Zeeky Peeky for saying he was gonna unvote me and not doing so. I thought we had an hour, but Angry Bea says otherwise so better safe than sorry.

Linki~ what posts of Juliets are we talking about? There are so many

I know you're bad at finding posts and all, but could you find where I said that? Because I didn't.

You have been so soft in your opinions (or lack there of) and now you tit-for-tat vote for me? Wow, you really don't want to give anything away do you?

Posted 7:59:57

You must have seen my post in linki.

Well, you got kinda snarky about it, and i immediately retracted it. So it kinda does, imo.

And there were 2 posts.

Those two posts have nothing in common; I thought people were saying she CHANGED a post?

And Bea & Epi each posted once between my post and yours. Two. But it isn't important. I admitted i was wrong.

This seems par for the Juliets course. I will be surprised if she comes up bad, but not shocked. I won't be voting for her. She has a bit of a disingenuous tone i view almost as a tell. i am not seeing it here, but I could be wrong.

Linki~ I don;t have any firm opinions yet. It is day 2. I have a bad habit of tunnelvisioning; I am trying to break it.