The Syndicate

Bullzeye wrote:I want to be recruited by all four sides so I can play them all against each other as a shadowy mastermind.

Golden wrote:@Bullz - am i wrong in assuming you can only be recruited by one?

G-Man wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I suppose if I want to be recruited, I am going to have to show the leaders what skills I have to offer for their team. Some include:

I can juggle.

I am known for playing table tennis well enough to frustrate my nemeses.

I am a professional at making fun of the music of Creed

Making fun of Creed does not impress me. It was a regular pastime junior year in college. One of our suitemates was a huge Creed fan and we made fun of him dearly for it. That also led us to make fun of his love of Bruce Springsteen too, even though Springsteen doesn't suck.

Golden wrote: I do, however, agree with JJ that begging for a recruit is not at all desperate, obscene or try-hard, so I present for you my own unique skills.

Roger Rabbit
Death and Taxes
Biblical

Unfortunately, I have no link to me juggling, but it wouldn't convince anyone.

Biotch please, you know you had a LOT of help from my ASS in Biblical. Don't try to pass that one off as a solo achievement.

Turnip Head wrote:We should probably lynch Golden first, just to be safe.

Now THIS I can get behind!


Sadly, most of my mafia credentials here on The Syndicate include ass jokes, silly posting gimmicks, and a dirty bet with MP07. I did win a singing contest once though!

reywaS wrote:

Golden wrote:I wish I had played other recruitment games. The dynamics here are interesting. The only one I've played a little like it is rabbit's SK game (in which timmer betrayed me! wisely, because I would have won if he didn't, but I still carry the pain. We were a team!)

I will still probably find myself in a civ mindset because I can't help it, but its very odd knowing there are only 2 baddies out of 36 players right now.

What I'm most interested in is that some people have been already willing to put their hand up and say 'I haven't been recruited yet'. I'm not sure what to make of that. Obviously it turned out to be true in this case (assuming they are not one of the four leaders) but why say it? Are they setting themselves up for a lie later? What has been the general philosophy in saying something like that in the game? I don't really understand why you would do that?

I do, however, agree with JJ that begging for a recruit is not at all desperate, obscene or try-hard, so I present for you my own unique skills.

Roger Rabbit
Death and Taxes
Biblical

Unfortunately, I have no link to me juggling, but it wouldn't convince anyone.

rabbit's Serial Killer game was probably the most fun game I've ever played.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Check out MP's adverb usage before and after my interaction with him, and then check out his adverb usage during my calling him out about being bad for using adverbs. Drastic jump. Got em.

Might be something to it. I don't like to use the whole adverb "thing" (since we can't agree on the difference between "theory" and "concept") as my basis for a case on someone. But it could very well influence it.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

thellama73 wrote:Well, I know who I'm voting for. Anyone want to talk about anything else while we wait?

How about if we should lynch you for already deciding who you're voting for with little explanation?

Also, I completely forgot who you said you're voting for so yeah there's that...

LoRab wrote:How has no one posted this yet?

I was gonna reply to appje's post about adverbs and ask about Conjuntions and post Conjunction Junction but my tablet was being a bitch and I got tired of waiting for it. My bad.

Turnip Head wrote:

Russtifinko wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Tim Drake was the third Robin

Eartha Kitt was the third Catwoman.

Did I ever tell you guys about the time I banged Eartha Kitt?

....anyone?

This is truly the darkest timeline.

Golden wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I tend to judge people as individuals not as reputations. My best game of all time was Rabbits SOT, I was a ... civvie. We had a large civ BTS group, and we worked pretty well together. That team has been my gold standard of what a team should be. Not so much for the individuals (although they all were awesome and people in the Mafia community that I <3 maybe a bit more than most) but for the way we worked together. I would want cohesion more than anything, really. Team players, no Prima Donnas.

What was your theory?

That a good choice for a first lynch might be someone who has a reputation for surviving deep and not getting caught when bad, since a baddie might try to recruit someone that gave them the best shot at winning. Someone like DF or DP, for example, who frequently fly under the radar. Or someone like Typhoony or llama who can often survive deep on their wily skills by not being too civvish to NK nor too baddie-looking to get lynched.

But if I look at my own psyche, I'd probably just pick people who I felt I could have fun with too. Or that I really wanted to have btsc with because I hadn't yet, or something.

DFaraday wrote:

bea wrote:

Golden wrote:@Bullz - am i wrong in assuming you can only be recruited by one?

I hate those musketeers.

Those musketeers. Their last-minute swashbuckling antics ruined me.

I see that Golden cited me as an example of someone who often avoids getting lynched, which is very much not the case. Nearly every game I play ends with me getting lynched for being blendy.

me too. Jerks.

DisgruntledPorcupine wrote:

Golden wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I tend to judge people as individuals not as reputations. My best game of all time was Rabbits SOT, I was a ... civvie. We had a large civ BTS group, and we worked pretty well together. That team has been my gold standard of what a team should be. Not so much for the individuals (although they all were awesome and people in the Mafia community that I <3 maybe a bit more than most) but for the way we worked together. I would want cohesion more than anything, really. Team players, no Prima Donnas.

What was your theory?

That a good choice for a first lynch might be someone who has a reputation for surviving deep and not getting caught when bad, since a baddie might try to recruit someone that gave them the best shot at winning. Someone like DF or DP, for example, who frequently fly under the radar. Or someone like Typhoony or llama who can often survive deep on their wily skills by not being too civvish to NK nor too baddie-looking to get lynched.

But if I look at my own psyche, I'd probably just pick people who I felt I could have fun with too. Or that I really wanted to have btsc with because I hadn't yet, or something.

Are you going to try and remove me right off the bat again now?

aapje wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:*gets lynched for asking questions*

Wait is that a thing on this site? I'm screwed

Is there a reason why there is no linkback in quotes btw?

Canucklehead wrote:

Typhoony wrote:Reywas / Roxy / Bea / any other original baddies from other RM games: Do you remember if you played differently than you normally would've when you were baddie leaders in RM 3?

When I was Jelly King Earl, Supreme Lord of Purpleosity (I think that was my role...but maybe I was just an early recruit to the jelly team? My memory is fucked..) my entire game plan was about fun maximization. I recruited solely based on how funny people's posts were. I don't think my in-thread play differed much (I'm always kind of a sarcastic/goofy asshole)...but I think I was definitely more engaged in the thread than was typical for me at the time

nutella wrote:As usual I am overwhelmed by Day One activity and have no idea what to think of anyone. It's nice that there is some actual discussion, but I am still totally clueless as to how to rat out a decent lynch candidate. Sorry if I don't post much -- I'm trying to keep up with this super-fast-paced thread while at work.

Kind of curious about Epi vs. Golden. Those two both scare me a lot but can be extremely useful as civvies (or whatever, in this game). Might re-read their exchange from last night, though it seemed like a lot of it was just Epi being pedantic. Also llama. I never know what to think of him.

As for Bubbles I think she is genuine. Going after her for joking seemed like a ridiculous nitpick at this stage, and after Broadway I want to give her the BOTD.
And Unfurl is reading like her usual self to me.

@BR- could you possibly use a slightly lighter shade of blue for your host color? It's a little painful on the dark forum skin

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Golden wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I tend to judge people as individuals not as reputations. My best game of all time was Rabbits SOT, I was a ... civvie. We had a large civ BTS group, and we worked pretty well together. That team has been my gold standard of what a team should be. Not so much for the individuals (although they all were awesome and people in the Mafia community that I <3 maybe a bit more than most) but for the way we worked together. I would want cohesion more than anything, really. Team players, no Prima Donnas.

What was your theory?

That a good choice for a first lynch might be someone who has a reputation for surviving deep and not getting caught when bad, since a baddie might try to recruit someone that gave them the best shot at winning. Someone like DF or DP, for example, who frequently fly under the radar. Or someone like Typhoony or llama who can often survive deep on their wily skills by not being too civvish to NK nor too baddie-looking to get lynched.

But if I look at my own psyche, I'd probably just pick people who I felt I could have fun with too. Or that I really wanted to have btsc with because I hadn't yet, or something.

I suspect this mindset will be different for everyone, but I do think there could be value in pooling our individual perspectives.

Hey everyone! Please tell us here in this very thread how you think you would go about choosing recruits in this setup if you were recruiters. What factors would be most important in your decision? Least important? If enough of you help me out with some delicious answers, I might even compile a CHART. Who wants a chart? We love charts, don't we? Seriously, this might be a good way to get a grip of early choices -- and perhaps even influence how future recruitment choices are made. We could in part dictate how the baddies recruit. I think this is appealing.

My answers, most important numbered and least important lettered:

1.) My perception of their skillset -- I would favor someone that I feel has a diverse array of mafia skills that can function cross-alignment and long-term.

2.) Complementary talent within The Syndicate -- I am newer here than most and do not boast a lot of experience in setups as complex as this. Someone who can fill that void would be a big help.

3.) Less inherently likely to attract thread attention -- I wouldn't select myself, essentially. Loud players are a dangerous choice.

///

A.) Fun -- I'd probably be a party pooper in this regard. While I do love fun, I'd also think choosing based on fun would be more transparent to others and less likely to progress me towards a victory.

B.) Reputation on The Syndicate -- I only have a cursory knowledge of this anyway, but I probably wouldn't care much whether someone is perceived by others to be elite or something else.

Sorsha wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

bea wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Check out MP's adverb usage before and after my interaction with him, and then check out his adverb usage during my calling him out about being bad for using adverbs. Drastic jump. Got em.

Might be something to it. I don't like to use the whole adverb "thing" (since we can't agree on the difference between "theory" and "concept") as my basis for a case on someone. But it could very well influence it.

This feels like you want to agree but you want wiggle room out of it. I'm curious as to why this is the day 0 thing you chose to comment on.

I also want to highlight this post because I feel it has some merit.

What do players think of BWT's post? bea's post?

I was really hoping that all the adverb talk was not serious suspicion talk :/ It seemed like silly banter to me so I really just skimmed over it as I would OT. Should I be rereading it?

To everyone:
Sorry for being on the low poster list. I mentioned in the sign up thread that I would be out of town at a funeral through Saturday so please keep that in mind. I was in the middle of bumfuck nowhere Michigan with no service yesterday. I'm not intentionally avoiding the thread!

I'm only caught up to about page 14ish at this point, just taking things in but I don't really have any suspicions yet.

I am so sorry for your loss. I missed that in your first post, and I feel bad for that. Please take care of what you need to take care of. If there is anything I can do, don't hesitate to PM me.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

bea wrote:

DFaraday wrote:

bea wrote:

Golden wrote:@Bullz - am i wrong in assuming you can only be recruited by one?

I hate those musketeers.

Those musketeers. Their last-minute swashbuckling antics ruined me.

I see that Golden cited me as an example of someone who often avoids getting lynched, which is very much not the case. Nearly every game I play ends with me getting lynched for being blendy.

And every game you survive deep into is because 1000 veterans, myself included, say "DF always reads blendy - that's not indicative of alignment." You remember the losses, he remembers the times it worked for you. Both are true.

me too. Jerks.

This is not an anti-town post, I will not vote bea this phase and I will fight anyone who suggests otherwise. That might seem a curious read to some; call it intuition.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:I'm less interested in the same old Day 1 debates surrounding the same old super talkative and aggressive players such as Epi, Golden, and Llama.

Right now, I'm much more interested in these folks:

DFaraday 3
DisgruntledPorcupine 3
Typhoony 3
Bass_the_Clever 2
Spacedaisy 2
Devin the Omniscient 1
DrWilgy 1
Sorsha 1

Hiding to avoid attention?

Llama, won't you join me in a crusade to interrogate low posters to at least get them talking? Possibly lynched?

Hmmmmm....not a bad idea actually.

Makes me want to look at voting for a low poster, as well as getting some to talk more.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

bea wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Check out MP's adverb usage before and after my interaction with him, and then check out his adverb usage during my calling him out about being bad for using adverbs. Drastic jump. Got em.

Might be something to it. I don't like to use the whole adverb "thing" (since we can't agree on the difference between "theory" and "concept") as my basis for a case on someone. But it could very well influence it.

This feels like you want to agree but you want wiggle room out of it. I'm curious as to why this is the day 0 thing you chose to comment on.

I also want to highlight this post because I feel it has some merit.

What do players think of BWT's post? bea's post?

Bea's post is astute. Leaving wiggle room is a baddie hallmark.

I wouldn't disagree.

However, a couple of follow-up questions:
1) Do you feel BWT's post is typical behavior for him regardless of alignment?
2) Do you think that a recruiter would have incentive to make the post that BWT made?

I also want to note that it seems that BWT didn't notice that DH was being tongue in cheek.

At the time, I didn't realize that about DH. Mostly because I was half-awake the entire time I was trying to catch up yesterday.

Scotty wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Ok so I have a crazy theory. I think MP or llama could be recruiters. I think they have made good points about low posters not getting recruited and then are left unaffiliated and therefor there is no reason to lynch the low posters. It also makes sense that the recruiters would want to take heat away from the more vocal players because they want to recruit those players. I also dont think BR or LC would give an important role like a recruiter to a super low posters or someone who flakes during games. This might sound crazy but I think its possible.

A few questions spring from this post, Bass:

1.) Do you think BR and LC would be willing to forego the true randomness of role selection that is generally necessary for the game of Mafia to even make sense?

2.) How is your theory affected by the fact that MP did not actually state low posters wouldn't get recruited and instead that they might be more likely candidates (as well as being potential recruiters)?

What is the purpose of sign-ups with people that a) Have been leaders before and b) have not been followers? I feel like they would purposely give people that have been leaders before the reigns. I think Bass may be on to something.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:While I do think there's value in discussing potential recruiting strategies, that discussion is probably not going to be the eventual motive for my vote on Day 1. I still intend to push for the lynch of a player who I view as suspicious. Recruitment theories are way too speculative to serve as the basis for a lynch choice in my opinion. The insight there might help people to find people to focus on though in such a large roster of players.

Ricochet wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:While I do think there's value in discussing potential recruiting strategies, that discussion is probably not going to be the eventual motive for my vote on Day 1. I still intend to push for the lynch of a player who I view as suspicious. Recruitment theories are way too speculative to serve as the basis for a lynch choice in my opinion. The insight there might help people to find people to focus on though in such a large roster of players.

I agree, the recruitement talk (encompassing meta, mechanics, tactics) sounds like something that would happen during D0 mechanics debates and banter, except that in this case it will seep through the game, because it's an essential part of it. Nevertheless, right now, we still have a window of four mafia players to hunt down. It's not really different from starting an average sized regular full (or even speed) game with a four-player mafia team, except that it's perhaps slightly more daunting that it's 4 out of 36.

Typhoony wrote:I'd pick people that would enrich my game experience.

For me that would mean enjoyable BTSC as a top requirement honestly. You can be shit at the game for all I care, if you're fun in BTSC and you're trying to be good at the game, you're more than welcome.
A shortlist of three would probably be aapje/SVS/Tranq. Which is weird looking at Tranqs list. Nub Tranq.

Of your list JJJ, I don't care at all about reputation, WIFOM or UTR.

aapje wrote:

Tranq wrote:My three recruits would be aapje, Typhoony and SVS. Regardless of alignment.

Typhoony wrote:I'd pick people that would enrich my game experience.

For me that would mean enjoyable BTSC as a top requirement honestly. You can be shit at the game for all I care, if you're fun in BTSC and you're trying to be good at the game, you're more than welcome.
A shortlist of three would probably be aapje/SVS/Tranq. Which is weird looking at Tranqs list. Nub Tranq.

So why have neither of you nubs recruited me yet? I remember having fun blatantly defending each other that one time we did end up on the same team

Tranq wrote:So to answer JaggedJimmyJay specifically: these are three players i've played before with, i know they have the skill and experience, and i know we usually have fun together. Although i wouldn't call aapje likable

Canucklehead wrote:I feel unreasonably sad that I am not hypothetically invited to be on the imaginary Tranq/Typh/TH/apples/SVS superteam.

DharmaHelper wrote:I'm unnaturally proud of myself right now. I'm eating a granola bar from NatureBox, and I've correctly identified this piece of dried fruit in my mouth as being an apricot. Good day.

Dom wrote:

Epignosis wrote:I think it's lame when people come in and criticize other people's reasoning (especially those they don't understand).

Come in Day 1 with your own thoughts and ideas- not knocking down those already made.

As someone who works in theater sometimes, I hate it when a director, designer, or other person gives a note on a performance but makes it a general note when it clearly is not for everyone. "Some of us need to make sure we project more. Remember the people in the back!" they might say. "Can we make sure we find our light? It's hard to focus the lights properly if you're not trying," is something else they might quip. It's irritating because they obviously mean a few people who need to do a better job. If the entire cast/crew had the problem, it would warrant a response larger than a note at the end of a run. Instead of addressing the actors and crew members, the production staff member will simply make a general note-- which the vast majority of the people receiving notes will ignore-- it's not for them.

Now, I'm not implying you are the director, Epig (I would never give you such an ego boost), but the principle is similar. To make a long story short: Who the hell are you talking about?

Golden wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Golden wrote:.He doesn't want to end it to his own lynch, is the point.... he knows that BOTH outcomes of that lynch outcome are bad for him.

How does Epi know anything?

Oh, I think he knows I am not bad just fine. He's just having fun.

Let's say he's bad and is on Bad Team 1. How does he know you are not on Bad Team 2?

nutella wrote:Alright this is getting ridiculous. I don't see much reason to think either Epi or Golden is bad and yet they are insisting we take the bait and take a side in this duel of theirs. I'm not biting. I see some merit on both of their parts and some folly on both as well. Instinctively I trust Golden slightly more, but at this point I think this is friendly fire that's distracting Day 1 discussion from the other 34 players.

OK, I might be misinterpreting what you're getting at, but are you implying that Epi and Golden manufactured this argument for some ulterior motive?

nutella wrote:Yay, I am marmot-approved! I much prefer to though. Luckily Oregon's got plenty of both. (I recently turned 21 and went around to some winery tasting rooms, it was lovely!

SAME TBH
We're finally old enough for the DT.

crap. I'm pretty sure I drufnkely tried to chase both of you out of the DT at least once. Now I feel old. QUIT GROWING UP DMANIT!!!

Tranq wrote:Still catching up, but i had to pause at this post:

bea wrote:I stayed up an extra hour and a half - to read a page about DH's poop.

I'm caught up. I'll take what JJJ says into concideration Imma vote early tomorrow because friday is my busiest day.

Can't say it'll be well reasoned or thought out or explained.

Everything feels like day 1 bullshit. It always does to me.

Not sure if the last line was intentional or not, but it made me lol. Reminds me of that South Park episode :P

Devin - I think maybe daisy's new title should be "Her Royal Highness." It's one I prefer anyway.

@ LA - so I was listening to the Nerdist podcast with Dr. Demento and I found out something! Dr. Demento is a Reed Alumnus!!! When I heard it, I was all "OMG!!! Gotta tell LA!!!

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

G-Man wrote:Time for me to disappear into RL for the weekend, so I have to vote now.

Of the 16 players who failed to register a positive or negative score on my newfangled setup, I took the 8 who made the fewest posts. From there, I removed the three female players because I am a gentleman. Of those five remaining players, I eliminated the one who hasn't posted yet during Day 1 because I am fair and want all players to have a chance to post during the day before I vote unless I have good reason to do otherwise. Of these final four, I voted for the player who had the least compelling content in their posts.

Voted Tranq.

That's sexist yo. Do you want me to remind everyone what happened in LMS 3 Mafia?

Here's what happened.

Everyboday lynched rabbit on Day 6. Bass was the only male left, along with SVS (his coalition partner), Black Rock, Roxy, Elohcin, and unfurl. SVS was nightkilled that Night. Then the rest of the women turned on Bass, devouring him in neat and orderly fashion. It was dreadful to watch, and Bass didn't stand a chance.

Lesson of that game, don't leave Bass alone in a room with four other women.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Bold assertion:

The original recruiters have not pushed distinct agendas in this thread, at least not yet. They've done everything in their power to keep their names out of everyone else's posts.

I don't think this is too bold to consider.

Linki @BWT: well it didn't help that his mother was one of the four, and she created a mafia game that actually did involve eating other players. :P

I just want to know if they seasoned him first. I usually prefer salmon over a garlic butter sauce, but I'm sure it works with other fish too.

Salmon and dill sauce is where it's at. True story. Cliches are cliche FOR A REASON people!

Tranq wrote:

LoRab wrote:I think what SD was trying to get at (or what I took from it and agree with) is the people who seem to be insisting that this is not a Good vs Bad game at all. Commentary on and enjoying the setup is something different. But there could be some nafarious goal in those pushing that there are no baddies and civies (TH comes to mind). Or that there are just factions not teams (Roxy comes to mind).

I'm not sure I want to vote for either of them, because I think that in a complex game, with the added idea of clans, it's not impossible to be confused. I do, however, think that it's possible that a baddie might want to perpetuate the confusion and get people to believe that there aren't baddies.

There could be, aye. Though generally i don't remember baddies in previous RM games laying the focus on there not being enough baddies/civvies yet. Players who were vocal about playing the unrecruited/neutral way usually always ended up being unrecruited. Maybe i should go look through the RM3 thread again.

nutella wrote:linki: ha, mixing up tranq and typh, classic! they love it when people do that!

awe...typh...it's so cute when you get upset. is what I want to post....but then I get worried that typh might get mad. I tend to refer to the lot of them as Those Damn Dutchies and Appje.

DharmaHelper wrote:I think I'll vote Tranq for now.

DrWilgy wrote:I only got 1 response on my question about SVS. Its rather important, even more so than my other questions.

MM89, you me and Unfurl are all on a team now. Ok?

Ricochet wrote:With less than three hours to go (it will probably be less than two when I submit this), I feel like giving a mini-read on some things and call it a day. I'll be the first to admit my D1 has been kinda shitty, but I'll try to shift into a better gear from now onwards (I had hoped that I could keep my summer prolific, hyperactive, carefree mafia playing mojo until at least the first half of September, but RL stuff I should work on are starting to pressure me with every passing day, plus the whole playing two full games on two difference sites at once is throwing me off balance, it seems)

on good vs evil VS LMS factions debate this feels oddly like Death Note all over again, where the premise for a more complex game was offered, but anyone wanting to embrace it was shot down and eyeballed by everyone wanting to keep things simple; as I've said a while ago, any debate of this kind in this game feels like D0 material that leaks into the regular gaming. I think both camps made good arguments, in particular timmer's post and Spacedaisy's reminder of the group's win cons being fair, that don't exclude each other, but only highlight what a mixed format this game actually is. I'm not inclined to treat this as basis for hunting atm: for all the talk that the players pushing the LMS angle might be baddies trying to divert attention, the same could be said that the ones saying this is clearly good vs bad at its core might be blending as "purists".

on BWT, I don't think I have meta on him being mafia from the games I've played with him, but the heat he's getting still is something I'm familiar with; in those previous games he'd normally spook the rest or catch fire with a vote option or reasoning that would seem contradictory or phony or farfetched (and get mislynched), compared to which the onset here is even earlier than that. The problem I'm currently having with BWT stems from this claim about trying to shake off his previous meta, after the hiatus, and improve his style by being more upfront and cutting down on the waffling. The problem is he hasn't so far and his claim is now heavily influencing me in how I'm reading his others posts: ante-claim he was easily drawn in by MP's idea to target low-posters and then post-claim, he's drawn in by JJJ pointing out Golden's wording, he's drawin in by llama's theory that Spacedaisy might be a good recruit candidate and he engages in rebuttals in Golden only to then call it a cautious thing. Maybe I misunderstand what he meant by being more deliberate and less tangled in waffleness, but I'm not seeing it take place so far. His claim is hence often inconsistent with the way he jumps into multiple discussions (with variable stances) and his change of views on Golden; everything can sound like fair assessing, but it feels like the old-style BWT that he claims to want to get past. Not sure I can do a recruiter/recruited profile on any of this, but it's enough to make me suspicious of him.

something probably minor in today's context for me, but bea, for all her busy B, pretty active and solid activity, pinged me a bit with this post to JJJ, in which she apparently doesn't like the "suspicious" approach in finding one of the original or recruited baddies (thinking they're too few right now to have a good shot at it or something?), for which she will go with the randomizing option. I think she also misunderstood me in this reply: I specifically said 4 out of 36 are currently baddie-aligned, I didn't talk about the 4 leaders split into 2 civs and 2 baddies, which is what she's referencing. In my post, I said that hunting for 4 baddies right now isn't different from starting any mafia game with a three or four-baddie team, except that in this case the field is larger and the mechanics trickier. Yet why is she pessimistic about this precise angle, making her take the "random" road so easily? Overall, these two posts strangely feel like some sort of detachment coming from her in desiring to hunt any baddies today.

on Llama and/or MP in dialogue with me - I left it at that back then, but overall, I have to say I'm a bit discontent with how it went and it definitely boils down to MP's bias call on me. It's such an odd angle to interpret my case and I have no idea why MP, out of all people, would go out of the blue for sudden meta rather than analysis. I clearly pointed to him there is no real meta on me ever jumping on llama like that, so why would he have in mind that it would be in my habit to hunt llama out of bias, enough to immediately bring it up? Anyway, as I've said, the whole bias discussion took a lot of space afterwards (with further twists in the discussion) and llama himself, as far as my read on it goes, surfed on it as well instead of addressing anything. With him RL-busy until Tuesday (or?), all this will probably be inconsequential by then. So in other, less elegant words, my case has gone to shit thanks to that exchange. I doubt either of them will gain today significant traction (I mean idk the votes are really spread so far, but there are more expected), but I might still vote for llama based on my read; plus, the more I think of it, I'm wary of the way MP approached that.

I don't think I have the strength for an in-depth read about Golden vs Epi, for which I apologise; oddly enough, at some point during the spat, my gut read was feeling that Golden is a bit too defensive and elaborate in rebutting about the whole thing, sort of giving me the vibe that, if he's actually a recruiter and a baddie-aligned one, all of this would make him alarmed, in a sort of "this can't be happening" way. Nonetheless, it's also consistent to affirm that Golden can heavily defend as a civ, too, especially in situations when he's not getting through with his explanations or being stonewalled by his accusers (Watchmen comes to mind). I may come back to analyse this, but for now I don't have a strong opinion.

voting Llama and it'll probably stay that way, unless for some real EoD dramatic twist

Golden wrote:

Boomslang wrote:Argh, I can't even comprehend the amount of posting that's going on here. Two big things stick out to me, and I want to confirm that I share the suspicions previously raised.

Golden wrote: But I certainly think epi and I are not going to be on the same side at any point in this game. Recruiters would be daft to recruit us both on to the same side at this point.

The "certainly" is certainly a key word. Because the only way you'd know that for certain would be to be a recruiter yourself. At this point, the low-level animosity you've already established would be perfect for shedding suspicion of teamwork over time. I think you're being far too rash to discount that possibility.

The second is the continued insistence of some players, most recently Roxy, that this is not a good vs. evil game. It's written right there in the rules: civvie groups 1 and 2, baddie groups 1 and 2. There are lynches by civs and NKs by baddies that happen regardless of position. This is very clear, and I don't see why anyone would deny it except to sow confusion.

Put it this way, boomslang. Epi being on my team will not stop me killing him if I have the chance. Anyone who chose to recruit us both to the same team is making an error.

I loved you Fredo. You broke my heart..

S~V~S wrote:

Linki @Typh, not Tuph.

I'm pretty sure that you are ok with tuph. It wasn't Tranq. That said, Typh is your dutcie so maybe I'm wrong in my understaning about the cranky of a typo vs flat out the wrong one.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Typhoony wrote:I'm not really comfortable voting anyone honestly.
And if the vote stays this close, vote manips will have a field day in fucking up the lynch result... so Caelia's lynch pardon might not be a bad idea.

I'd rather kill a neutral than end the day in a no lynch. We'd learn nothing.

Russtifinko wrote:Posting from airport...my last weekend traveling before a one week break from it! Haha

I have been mostly following, just haven't had time to post. I only skipped 10 pages, I swear. And apparently they were full of DHs poop anyway.

I think voting low posters on D1 is ludicrous. DF could be really excited for this game and just had one long shift at work and then needed to sleep, and he could've missed basically all of today. I think people are basically giving up on getting a baddie because there are just 2, so they're playing for self preservation and feel least guilty about voting a low poster because they seem less interested in playing. I think that stinks.

I'm voting timmer. He and MP were suggesting we play the game in a way that pretty much guarantees cob defeat IMO. And plenty of baddies have tried to use odd setups as reasons to convince Cubs to work with them. I actually think MP was more militant about it, but I believe that his real life concerns are real, and timmer was all for an "everyone is LMS" game.

OMG STOP. I clicked submit 3 times without even reading the Linki and it won't go thru. *sobs*

Linki. Listen to JJJ. He's not stupid. If we get a baddie with DF, it'll be blind chance. Use actual suspicion. I know some people don't feel hopeful about getting a baddies, but we have to try. Nipping the baddie recruitment in the bud is by far the easiest way to win here.

aapje wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Typhoony wrote:I'm not really comfortable voting anyone honestly.
And if the vote stays this close, vote manips will have a field day in fucking up the lynch result... so Caelia's lynch pardon might not be a bad idea.

I disagree entirely. Carlos should not use her pardon today; that way if someone survives a lynch we'll know it's the baddie recruiter who is immune in Position 1.

I like her new nickname

Carlos has amazing hair and he is the most perfect scientist ever! ammirite?

timmer wrote:

Typhoony wrote:

timmer wrote:@Typh, would there be vote manipulations in this lynch, though? Don't the roles with vote tweaks have to submit actions etc. at night, thus that will all be in play tomorrow? Unless I'm minunderstanding things, I think only two team leaders could be revealed in this lynch, one with a lynch pardon, one with a lynch save?

That definitely wasn't the case in Recruitment III when the Musketeers could submit their vote manip at any time they wanted, during the Day as well.

Hmm, I didn't last long enough to notice that, ok I see your point, them!

timmer wrote:Do all recruitment contests state which leader it is for? Could someone truly only apply to civ teams?

Kadajski wrote:

aapje wrote:

Golden wrote:Oh, would it? That is interesting.

Who was it that said they were reading recruitment 3. Was that scotty or someone else?

People had powers in RM3, in the first 2 editions most started as vanilla though.

This post seems suspicious to me, lynch aapje for being a nubling!

Black Rock wrote:

bea wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

Linki @Typh, not Tuph.

I'm pretty sure that you are ok with tuph. It wasn't Tranq. That said, Typh is your dutcie so maybe I'm wrong in my understaning about the cranky of a typo vs flat out the wrong one.

We're claiming dutchies? I think I already claimed mine and I dare you to try and take them... I mean him

I assume you have monkey man. I mean - he IS your son after all. I saw that post AND called you two out on it. I assume JC just borrows him in IRC when it's convinent. I somehow defaulted into Tranq and I'm ok with that. He and I were perfectly paired in Big Bang Theory mafia - he was lenord and I was penny. Cuz you know - casting the math dumb barternder to be the math dumb bartender was perfect. Aso - still one of my most fav Bts ever!

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Bea, you're ever baddie mcbaddersons. I swear you're always civ or something.

Ricochet wrote:

Black Rock wrote:With patience we'll post a prettier version

A pretty version of the official tally (as in until the Day was ended) would be nice to confirm.

linki: Lol, MM, so this time you want the Day to be restarted. :P

Also, let it be noted that Death Note post record is almost sure to be smashed, the way we've been posting so far. D1 ended around page 24 over there and I thought the D0/D1 banter was brutal there. Clearly Recruitement ranks above all and beyond.

I got home at 8 my time, showered and sarted playing catch up - it's now 12:30 am my time.

I'm all for suggestions as to how to make my catch up of like 11ty billion pages less taxing on eeryone else too. Cuz fuck. That was a long ass read. I hate that I was a page of it as well.... Help me help you peeps.