The Syndicate

yay, its begun!

I could rank every Doctor pretty easily but I won't. The Tenth is MY Doctor, closely followed by the Fourth.

I know some people aren't Whovians so I'd just like to point out I think its pretty likely the Cybermen leader can recruit at some point. The Cybermen are human being carved up and put into their suits. Dalek Sec is a half human, half dalek - so might also have a recruit (or evolution of a human). More likely there is just one recruit and it's with the Cybermen I think.

Also likely the Master will resurrect, as he's a Time Lord like the Doctor and can regenerate after death.

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.

Like I said, I'm not speculating on civ powers at this point in the game because that would only help the baddies. But any Who fan would bring up regeneration could mean the Doctor or the Master. And as I said in my original post, they both can regenerate.

You're welcome to question my intent and my tone. I didn't respond angry or frightened, so perhaps my wording made you think I was overreacting, I just don't want to be accused of hiding from your questions.

I'm not sure of your assessment but it's possible.

I don't know how you play on this site but Day 0 suspicions seem odd, especially when I was genuinely just trying to help everyone out. And it was my second post. That's not weird? I haven't played mafia in years but that seemed weird to me. Suspicious even. But only slightly. Seriously, I could just lay low but I'd rather help. You say baddies often do this and that, but baddies generally change strategy a lot and this could be applied to anyone at any time.

linki: I do feel a little defensive MP and I'm not going to play any sympathy cards but I'm new to this site and someone start interrogating me on first post of substance. But I appreciate your response.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Your response here makes me feel a bit better, but I have my eye on you.

And I, you

MovingPictures07 wrote:Seriously, I just read his post again and to me it reads like, 'I'm trying to appear helpful by saying I'm providing insight because some people aren't Whovians', 'but here's some information regarding recruits, oh, and probably only one baddie team has recruits'. I think they were interesting and astute observations, largely anyway, but it just seems so random and odd, I can't get over my initial gut reaction to it. I realize the rational part of my brain thinks my interpretation is ridiculous, but nonetheless, that's why I commented on it. I realize there's practically no evidence to incriminate anyone on being bad this early, and even sometimes I would think Llama is crazy for some of us suspicions he generated on D0, but that's just how I read it.

Then re-read my responses to you and feel better again, instead of rehashing a point that didn't work the first time.

keys56000000000 wrote:First, my two cents on the issue of speculating on role powers. IMO it's better to put all our cards on the table. Baddies will be trying to figure this stuff out regardless of anything posted here.

Second, while I agree that it's too soon to really judge anyone, it kinda seems like MP hit on a nerve. Do I detect a bit of Dana defending Zeek? Or is it Dana jumping the gun on what she identifies as an easy lynch? Hard to tell at this early stage, but very possibly. At any rate, I certainly don't suspect MP yet, whereas Dana has "pinged" my suspicio-meter.

First, I disagree. Say a baddie team has nobody on it with a clue about Doctor Who, there is no way I'm giving them the info they need by speculating on civvie powers. Second, I don't need anyone to fight my battles. I don't know Dana's motives but she's entitled to her opinion and I'm glad I wasn't the only one who thought MP was jumping on me. But maybe she's trying to buddy me, I don't know.

Dana wrote:

zeek wrote:But maybe she's trying to buddy me

Will you be my friend?

Made wrote: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.

I'm overly confrontational? What about MP?

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

Who is this about?

Ah okay, thanks for clearing that up.

I was talking to Made :P But you bring up a good point, clowns can be scary

Let them google stuff and discern what were important events to each character and likely powers. I'm just not going to potentionally help them by giving my thoughts yet, and I won't talk about it unless an event/reason requires my speculation.

Maybe I'm in the minority of this but whatever.

Canucklehead wrote:Question: Can I start watching Dr. Who with just the "reboot"? Or do I need to watch the originals? Where/when does the "reboot" start?

Only bit that isn't completely explained by the reboot is Sarah Jane's role I'd say. But even then you can get the gist.

Boogs wrote:Im sorry but i dont think MP trying to look for suspicion makes him bad when 95% if the time we randomize anyway the first lynch. At least hes trying.

Even though he went after me, I agree with this.

juliets wrote:I'm also wondering if now people will be reluctant to share details that may be important about the tv show.

Well it's certainly made me think twice, but I will help if I can.

MovingPictures07 wrote:I can't help but think all the casual defending of zeek makes me wonder if I'm actually onto something, but it's probably much more likely that I'm just insane and my probability of being right with my observation of zeek's intentions is essentially equivalent to my "being right" that I was going to hit a "baddie" on the dart board when it was really just random chance. That said, I believe what I believe, and if others don't find my content worth considering, that's fine, but I will express what I think because I want to find baddies.

Nonetheless! As Rox observed, it is true that if I don't find absolutely anything else of note between now and the end of D1 that I'm incredibly likely to vote zeek, even if my read on him is extremely slight, but somehow I highly doubt that's going to happen. There is plenty of time for others.

Well that's awesome. Because people don't agree with you that's potentially corroboration of your theory. Which is certainly insane. Vote for you all you want but repeating your point over and over again does not make it right. All it does is make me (and potentially every other civ) feel like helping discussion is going to get them lynched.


If anyone wants to know my mafia record, I'll provide it. I've had a lot of success hunting baddies in my limited experience which, given your hall of fame, does not appear to be the norm on this site. This situation feels like it might be typical of this site. I'm not criticising you all, I'm saying we need to be smarter than this.

For the record, MP pricked my ears up with his take on my post but I don't know if he's just misguided. He's certainly not helping find the real baddies by banging on about this again and again.

I've noticed the Face of Boe can fact check every night, so... I am a civ.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Bit of an overreaction? "Helping discussion is going to get them lynched"? Last I checked, nearly everyone in the universe agreed that I am way off mark, and even I have been very specific in saying that it's only an interpretation, only a ping, and that this is my first game with you ever, so I'm not crusading you as bad.

Smarter than what? I know you probably didn't mean that insultingly, but what are you trying to say here?

So do you think I'm bad or not? You keep insinuating things about me without really saying it.

You think I'm not playing intelligently by starting discussion? How else are we supposed to root out baddies than to get people talking and gauge their reactions?

And I think you're "I'm a civ" here thing seems really over the top, considering practically no one has said they want you lynched. I'm sorry, but the "I'm a civ" shenanigans always ping the crap out of me inevitably because I think it's something that, if you're really a civvie, you don't really need to say, especially since LD roles can't check statements like that typically since they would break the game. So...

My initial ping may be viewed as insane or ridiculous, but some of what you're saying just doesn't sit right.

I'm saying we have to be smarter than repeating the same thing over and over. I feel as though there is no point even responding you at this point because you're not questioning anybody else and you're making both of us prime lynch targets.

I said I don't know about you. I was not even remotely ambigious about that. I just don't get your game. What is the point of this? You say you're not after me but you are. Anything and everything I say or related to me only increases your suspicion. You've made your mind up it seems and let's not pretend otherwise. It's one thing getting people talking, it's another to hone in on one player and use everything said as backing up your nonsense. If people agreed, there'd be a consensus I was bad and if they didn't, they defending me.

Point in case, my civ statement. Every game I've ever played with an LD, every single person has said this. And because I'm on this site and say it suddenly it's suspicious. Awesome. Really making me want to play here. "If you're really a civvie" is a cop out.

I'm busy defending myself from really forced suspicions cast my way. Can't get a real hunt going until it's over. And it is. I'm pretty much done responded to you because, honestly, this is ridiculous. You've made your mind up already and you're using whatever you can to convince youself I'm bad.

I'm not going to pretend to be an expert, but in my experience the town usually wins.

linki - STV had no such rules, at least not when I was around.

keys56000000000 wrote:Oh god I hated those "HURR 100% CIVVIE DEERRP!" roll call days. I remember once I wrote "100% mafia" just to break the monotony. I figured it would work the same, the LD would check it and it'd come up false, so no harm done, but the rest of the players didn't see things that way, and I was promptly lynched.

I didn't vote for you if I recall correctly. I enjoyed STV, but clearly I'm ignorant of the wider worlds mafia.

I've never had the chance to be bad. In llama's words, I'm supatown every time. Course, at STV that was an advantage. Still I'm quite proud that after being lynched Day 1 in my first game I went on to endgame three successive wins.

Enrique wrote:"Supatown" has been used twice in this thread... once by Made, as a standard LD statement, and then zeek using it "in llama's words." Zeek, this is your first game here, right? Not even a Side Mission before? Caught on quickly to the lingo. Is this something you learnt from your BTSC partners?

It's something I learnt reading Felt Mafia while I was waiting for this to start. Only started following half way through though. As you'll notice from the poll on that thread, I voted first, so I haven't done that now to cover my back.

So, I understand why Enrique asked but his motives have come under question. I'm on the fence. I expected someone to go for me for using "Supatown" but I didn't expect them to drop it so easily.

Part of me thinks the mafia teams are staying quiet.

Re: MP's ruse.

If every player had agreed with him, I'd be getting lynched and there would be nothing he could have done to change that. It's irresponsible play if he's a townie because I did nothing to deserve a target on my back.

I have a seriously case of man flu going on, so I doubt I'll be able to stay awake from the lynch at 2am. Going to take the next few hours to consider things.

MP - My manic adversary obviously hasn't endeared me to him. I just can't tell whether I believe him and, even if I do, is there anybody I'd vote for over him?

Enrique - The more I think about it, the more undecided I am. I'm leaning civ tho. I'd have liked to answer him myself but he dropped it so quickly it didn't seem as though it was a baddie looking for a quick bandwagon.

SVS - Been getting weird vibes from you. This comment seemed aimed at me when I was under scrutiny from MP. and then your exchange with Made over quote didn't really seem genuine either. I don't know what to think.

They're the three I'm looking at right now. Easily subject to change and I don't know where my vote will go.

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.

So you think I'm paranoid for thinking for what I think, given that this post was directed at me:

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.

Only me and MP speculated on baddie role secrets, and you weren't worried about him.

I'm voting now, because I want to go to bed and sleep off my flu some more.

Weighing up everything that has happened, I'm voting MP.

I don't have much to say about this really. I haven't got enough of a reason to vote for anybody else instead. I don't like being chosen for his ruse, if indeed that's what it was, and I think that is doubtful. I'm new here and probably a bit easier to lynch on day 1 than others. His actions have felt least civ like so far to me. Sure he's stimulated debate but the way he's gone about it is manipulative and unfair. And that's if I believe his story of it being a "gambit."

Just woke up. Thought the lynch was tonight. Presume I can still move my vote about seen as it's tomorrow, right?

MovingPictures07 wrote:

zeek wrote:I have a seriously case of man flu going on, so I doubt I'll be able to stay awake from the lynch at 2am. Going to take the next few hours to consider things.

MP - My manic adversary obviously hasn't endeared me to him. I just can't tell whether I believe him and, even if I do, is there anybody I'd vote for over him?

Enrique - The more I think about it, the more undecided I am. I'm leaning civ tho. I'd have liked to answer him myself but he dropped it so quickly it didn't seem as though it was a baddie looking for a quick bandwagon.

SVS - Been getting weird vibes from you. This comment seemed aimed at me when I was under scrutiny from MP. and then your exchange with Made over quote didn't really seem genuine either. I don't know what to think.

They're the three I'm looking at right now. Easily subject to change and I don't know where my vote will go.

I'm confused, zeek, if these are the three people you're looking at, how the hell can you be "leaning civ" on Epig? Doesn't that mean you're leaning even more civ on literally every other single person in the game other than me and S~V~S? Am I missing something here?

I'm not leaning any way on Epig. I'm leaning civ on Enrique. I haven't seen much from him other than a couple of one liners and his vote on Enrique, which seemed out of the blue but chalked it up to me not knowing him.

Unless I hear a more compelling argument to vote for somebody else, I'll leave my vote on MP. And I don't think he can complain about that.

MovingPictures07 wrote:And thanks for the explanation, zeek, I misread your post, my bad. I thought you said Epig not Enri. And I can complain about that because you'd be wrong, but at least I understand why you're doing it. It doesn't make it any less frustrating, but I suppose I get it. I should have probably approached things differently, but whatever, I just play to have fun and I still stand by creating discussion to get emotional tells on players. It's just disheartening because not only do I suffer this but I've seen it happen to SO many players -- in mafia, more people get lynched over people not understanding where they're coming from than they do from truly being "suspicious".

Well, thats not really my fault now is it? If you are a civ, you scapegoated me on Day 0. How can I trust you?

So, let's get this straight. People most frequently talked about:

Epignosis - Some people are suspicious of him due to his eagerness to vote Enrique based on something similar he did when he was bad. Were as some people don't find this suspicious at all.
Enrique - Some people are suspicious of him due to him questioning my Supatown usage and then not following on with it once it was clear I'd been following the Felt game. Were as some people don't find this suspicious at all.
TurnipHead - Some people are suspicious of him due to his case on MovingPictures07 appearing a little opportunistic. Were as some people don't find this suspicious at all.
MovingPictures07 - The enigma himself. Used me as a scapegoate of sorts to stimulate the hunt. Not fair, but it worked. Has changed his suspicions a couple of times. Some people find this suspicious, some do not all.

It's Day 1 and there aren't many hard suspicions about, but a lot of people are having very different reads. I'm willing to hear thoughts on these lot and SVS, because while I seem to be the only one with a dodgy read on SVS I'd like to know why I'm the only one.

I can edit my posts as well

It's time stamped... and I'm not getting modkilled right?

You never know

How, umm, reassuring

MovingPictures07 wrote:Hey zeek, can you see the edit button now?

No, only the quote button. Good job.

MovingPictures07 wrote:zeek, I have a question for you: Didn't you say something about you suspecting mafia were in the players sitting back? Do you still think that's probably true?

Well there are 30 players (or 31, it's not exactly clear lol) and it's absolutely fair to say that only a handful of us have been all that active. It wouldn't surprise me if most of the mafia are playing a quiet game, letting the chips fall as they will after unique Days 0 and 1.

zeek wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:And thanks for the explanation, zeek, I misread your post, my bad. I thought you said Epig not Enri. And I can complain about that because you'd be wrong, but at least I understand why you're doing it. It doesn't make it any less frustrating, but I suppose I get it. I should have probably approached things differently, but whatever, I just play to have fun and I still stand by creating discussion to get emotional tells on players. It's just disheartening because not only do I suffer this but I've seen it happen to SO many players -- in mafia, more people get lynched over people not understanding where they're coming from than they do from truly being "suspicious".

Well, thats not really my fault now is it? If you are a civ, you scapegoated me on Day 0. How can I trust you?

You may completely disagree with my style, but you can't appreciate that I'm genuinely baddie hunting?

I also don't ask for your unconditional trust, as that would be unreasonable. But I do ask for you to consider all the perspectives.[/quote]
It's very difficult for me to appreciate being your scapegoat to start conversation. Try considering my perspective on that, especially given it is my first game here and you own the bloody site. I'm just not sure about you and thats fair right now. Its mafia and you can't cling to opinions on people or you'll end up trusting the wrong people, so I am totally open to trusting you in the future. But I don't right now.

I was all ready to say I agree with MP on much of his thinking, and Turnip Head just came in and put a decent case out there. Something to consider.

TH, do you have any thoughts on others?

What do you make of epignosis voting enrique then?

Turnip Head wrote:I thought votes were stated to be changeable but I don't see that option

Oh dear, I only voted MP last night because I thought the deadline was then, not today.

Thanks bea

juliets wrote:Epi since you are so good at picking out baddies I've been trying to piece together your suspicion of enrique but it would be more helpful if you could just give a short list of the things that have hit you about enrique. I was sure I wouldn't vote him but I want to make sure I understand why you are.

I also want to understand this. epig seems confident but I don't get it.

Turnip Head wrote:Well Zeek if you were to change your vote who would you be considering?

I don't know, but I'm not sure about MP. I don't know whether I'm being objective about him given our history in this game.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Also, zeek, it appears I can change my vote; if the poll looks like it still has circles to the left of the numbers then you can still change it.

Think thats because you're a mod, I can't change mine.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Okay, I did a re-read skim. Unfortunately, nothing really stuck out to me. A few players that are making me a bit wary but I don't know that I'd vote for them include S~V~S and juliets. S~V~S has had a surprising mix of being in the background and yet posting a lot without really saying much of anything. Definitely ringing bells for me. BUT I can't really read her for crap 90%+ of the time, so... I don't know there. juliets latched pretty quickly onto TH's thoughts against me and then backed off saying there was still much time left in the lynch, but she's been especially latching onto others for opinions and I know she can do that often regardless of alignment, but it strikes me as a bit too much and the timing of her "vote" (but not really a vote) post seemed opportunistic.

I agree with your point on SVS, she's been posting enough to avoid being called quiet but there's not many posts actually saying anything at all. Don't know about juliets, there are a lot of people who play that way and not everyone can be considered opportunistic.

Nikki has voted but given absolutely no reasoning. Not even contributed to the conversation. Her only posts indicated she doesn't know what is happening. That is worrying given she's gone for one of the obvious candidates.

Made wrote:

zeek wrote:Nikki has voted but given absolutely no reasoning. Not even contributed to the conversation. Her only posts indicated she doesn't know what is happening. That is worrying given she's gone for one of the obvious candidates.

It's her first game, she probably doesn't know it's customary to say who you're voting for in chat.

She hasn't post any suspicions, no thoughts, nothing.

I can change my vote now, MP.

Interesting list, Made. Didn't look at it like that before. I don't know how SVS plays, so it's good to hear that her play doesn't seem that normal given you can't see her angle in this game. I thought I was the only one how saw something odd about her posting until MP and now you.

juliets wrote:Neither have bass or eloh. I do know Nikki was looking for some help on the game of mafia.

Can't say anything about them until they show up. Nikki, however, voted. Looking through the signups it appears Dana knows her, so perhaps she might shed some light on how versed Nikki is on how to play mafia.

linki - interesting point, Canuck

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:

Made wrote:

zeek wrote:Nikki has voted but given absolutely no reasoning. Not even contributed to the conversation. Her only posts indicated she doesn't know what is happening. That is worrying given she's gone for one of the obvious candidates.

It's her first game, she probably doesn't know it's customary to say who you're voting for in chat.

I think we're supposed to say who we're voting for in the thread. "Chat" is where you do all your talking about killing civs and ruling the world.

Lol, this is really funny, but I don't think it's a slip or anything.

Agreed.

I need people to show up soon to talk this through cause I'm a sickly Brit and I doubt I can stick around until 2am to see this out. Need to vote soonish.

Looking through that player list there are so many people who simply haven't been around. Starting to really think the baddies are just sitting back but unless they start posting where do you begin to unravel their alignments?

Turnip Head seems like a civ unhappy with your methods.

So what do you think - vote for a quiet player? If so, who?

We need to lynch. It's just a question of who. I'm not comfortable voting MP anymore, so I'm going to move my vote soon.

juliets, do you think the baddies have sat back thus far?

Makes sense. I don't know who to vote for. I might go SVS based on her flying the radar. Being around but no really discussing anything.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

zeek wrote:Makes sense. I don't know who to vote for. I might go SVS based on her flying the radar. Being around but no really discussing anything.

What do you think of Made?

I thought his back and forth with SVS was strange, but he didn't initiate it.

Made wrote:Linki- I guess suspicion isn't the right word. She's playing in a way i've never seen nor that i understand, so i think we should critically view all moves she makes.

I understand what everyone on my list seems to be attempting, whether it's playing to their meta, or otherwise. With those not on my list, I have no idea. We learn nothing killing a quiet mafia, and even less doing the more likely; killing a quiet civvie. If given the choice to randomize or no lynch, no lynch simply makes more sense.

I presume this is about SVS. So you're not suspicious of her, just confused by her play?
I agree you don't learn anything in those situations, but that limits us to lynching someone talkative and thats giving a pass to the people laying low.

MovingPictures07 wrote:I personally am confused by S~V~S's play so far but I'm not sure it makes her bad.

Yeah, the back and forth was strange, but IDK, when people try to argue those type of exchanges make people bad it just doesn't resonate with me because I don't see why baddies would do that.

Trying to appear as though she's on her own, without help from anyone. She should have found that quote quickly. It's not much and I won't pretend it is, but I've had a bad vibe from her for a while. I don't have much else to go on.

What the hell?

MR, care to explain your vote?

Mister Rearranger wrote:I actually thought zeek was the one being opportunistic with his vote for MP. Now I see he has changed it and I don't see anything wrong with an SVS vote.

I mean if it comes down to it, I feel more comfortable voting for Eko than you.

Apologies for the rush. I'm posting during a movie, haha.

How the hell was I being opportunistic when HE scapegoated me just to stimulate conversation. Even he admits a vote from me would be fair given the circumstances.