The Syndicate

sig wrote:First!

Even the first poll gives me an epic feeling about this game.

And reminds me that a month is still a really long time ago in a galaxy far far away.

A quick run down.

Tatooine. Desert planet. Very little water. Never will you find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. Someone might try to cut your arm off. Other than that, it's a pretty neat place. Pretty important to the Star Wars universe.

Hoth. Ice planet. Don't go outside or you will either freeze to death or need to be insulated by animal guts. Also, the empire will probably attack you here.

Alderaan. A lovely place. Very peaceful. The people don't have weapons. But if you want to go there, it better be fast. It gets blown up within the first half of the first movie, and everyone there dies.

Death Star. Need I go beyond the name?

Dagobah. This is a swamp planet, mostly inhabited by things that want to eat you. Yoda is also there, though, so there is that. But I'm pretty sure he is the only person/muppet on the entire planet to talk to, except talk to you like this, he will.

Cloud City. A paradise city run by Lando Calrissian. A perfect place for you to escape to if you are being pursued by the Empire. Unless the Empire gets there first. Then Lando will betray you and just hand you over.

Endor. A forest moon filled with Ewoks, who will likely try to stab you with their primitive spears. If you do somehow befriend them, they will either a) speak childish gibberish to you or b) revere your droid servant as a god. Also, the Empire use endor as a shield generator for the Death Star, which is literally right above the moon. Basically, the vast bulk of the power of the empires fleet are here.

Yavin is a gas giant. Yavin IV is an innovative name of one of its moons. It was a key rebel base and a target of destruction for the first Death Star. Because the rebels blew up the death star, Yavin IV was saved. Depressingly, I can think of no down side to going here. However, all things considered I think I'd prefer to choose one of the less boring options.

Also, if you are Beru Lars, you may be pleased to remember you once looked like this:



Young Beru Lars may be one of the best things to come out of the prequel trilogy.

Although it should also be noted you ended up like this:

I'm considering a vote for Alderaan. If I want to go there at all, it might need to be early, before the Empire carry out a 'demonstration'.

Matt F wrote:A bunch of innocents are obliterated on Alderaan, and we are currently leading the town there?

I'm just assuming we will get to pick another planet each day and I feel like Alderaan is going to be safest now... it made it through the First Act of Star Wars... just not much further.

I just noticed this:

Grand Moff Tarkin
Grand Moff Tarkin has selected a location to destroy. The last person to vote in the lynch during that Day will explode with the planet.

So, this probably means that (in future polls??) one of the planets has been selected by the Moff to be destroyed at the end of the next day, and it could be any of them.

Glorfindel wrote:I guess I should've warned you guys - there is something you don't know about me yet that you probably should. It's something that has unfortunately impacted EVERY game of Mafia I have ever played (to a greater or lesser extent)...

Yes, I am Australian!

If this is a consular ship, where is the ambassador?

MovingPictures07 wrote:Dragon D. Luffy and JaggedJimmyJay has been promoted to the position of Ambassador.

Oh wait. There he is.

The number next to you includes non players who vote in the non player option...

Plus, I think it only matters if you are last on the LYNCH poll, if I read the role correctly. So I don't think being last today matters.

Hey, Marmot...

MovingPictures07 wrote:Also, I think Dom and DFaraday are on the same line, just so you know.

Epi would tell us two lynches are more in the towns interest than one, so I guess we should vote for DomDfaraday

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote: I will "Fully alphabetize" the next one. I ran the players list through an online alphabetizer and it goofed I guess so whatever you guys know who is who.

If it's easier for you, you can just alphabetize the letter of my name instead of my full name.

89aaehlmmrst?

Logically sound, sure!

But DH went and gave them each their own entry on the poll, so

a2thezebra wrote:Consider me slightly pinged that you are slightly pinged.

Consider me slightly pinged that you are slightly pinged that he is slightly pinged.

Oh, who am I kidding. I'm just slightly pinged because you are zebra

My experience of DDL is that he always seems suspicious early on. I thought he was bad day one in economics and he wasn't.

a2thezebra wrote:I've never played with him before (either that or it's been far too long) so does he normally make a suggestion and then proceed to shoot down that very suggestion in the same post?

Umm, I'm not sure I can speak to his precise tendencies. Just that I have found he picks up suspicion early in every game, no matter his affiliation. Kind of like sig in this way.

I don't think anyone should go getting free passes.

@savage - voting in the poll is sufficient.

Bold/underline is often used as a courtesy when votes are changeable, so that there is a record of who voted for who, or to tell people WHEN you voted, but it is not a requirement - especially when votes are not changeable.

It's still good to say you voted when you do, though.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Btw MP, any rainbow lists yet?

Not yet, still trying to make sense of the thread, but I'm sure I'll force myself to make one before Day 1 ends.

He will force himself. Get it??

@MP - if its worth anything, I don't share your suspicion on russti. It's consistent with the way I think to express a ping on someone when I see behaviour that I find odd, even if I feel like 'I'm not sure if it is civ or bad'. For me, the most accurate definition of what I would say I mean by 'ping' is 'I found something you did odd and so now I'm paying attention to you'.

When I see behaviour that I don't think is civ (ie I feel like 'that must be bad') I'm not nearly as likely to describe it as a ping. I only really use ping when I can also see the potential civilian perspective.

Canucklehead wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:Regarding Mac's case on MP, I think while it may have some substance to it most of it is just pointing out differences between Mac's and MP's play style. I haven't seen MP do anything yet that has struck me as opportunistic or disingenuous, and I think Mac's case against Enrique is much more convincing.

This is interesting to me, for a few reasons.
1) re: Mac's playstyle. Have you played with Mac a lot before? I've only played with him in World Reborn, and I was not super attentive in that game, but the Mac that I encountered there was NOTHING like this Mac so far (who is reading to me as calm, reasoned, and analytical). Which of these two Jekyll/Hyde sides of Mac is the "real" style, in your opinion? In what way do you see his playstyle as differing form MP's?
2) I didn't read Mac's case on MP (which I thought was good, since I almost always accuse MP of being too hedgey/non-committal, usually on Day 1 ) as accusing him of being "opportunistic" or "disingenuous", but of being overly cautious, non-committal, and wibbly-wobbly (technical term). If you don't agree with Mac's case on "opportunistic and disingenuous" grounds, do you agree with it on "wibbly-wobbly and over-cautious" grounds?

My take on Mac so far is that he is Jekyll and Hyde, but that it's not like 'Jekyll is civvie'. I think he is like some other players you and I have played with a lot (the rabbits and dutchies of this world) who take joy in mixing up their calm and chaos, even when civ, to preserve their game better when they do roll bad.

Canucklehead wrote:wibbly-wobbly

timey-wimey?

MovingPictures07 wrote:If he had managed to explain a thought process behind this switch, that'd be one thing, but the kicker is that he has failed to address your suspicion whatsoever.

I'm not sold, but I'm listening. I'd like to hear Enrique address your thoughts.

What do you think this was (from before your post):

Enrique wrote:thats like the biggest nonstory ive seen presented as a case on mafia

tbh i had no idea what "Yavin" was until i read the descriptions, at which point it was a bit of a no-brainer. like really? the place is literally the civvie base where the civvies do cool things in the movies. i DID consider my options (tattooine, endor) up until i found out about yavin. but then when it looked so good, surely i was missing something that kept people away from it? nobody gave it any consideration so i just put it down to lack of familiarity and went ahead and voted.

like i dont even understand what the baddie logic behind anything there would be.

Whether the truth or not, it definitely is a 'thought process behind the switch'.

a2thezebra wrote:Also has everyone forgotten that MM has already voted? Am I the only one that is extremely bothered by that? Even Mac doesn't seem to care.

It's hard to be bothered by MM's normal civilian behaviour.

MacDougall wrote:Golden I expect better from you. This is a textbook example of taking something completely out of context.

MP was referencing enrique's initial reactions to my initial suspicions and his lack of response to them, anything that enrique said subsequent was not on the table.

Nope, I had the context exactly right. MP said he found Enrique suspicious because 'he hadn't given a thought process behind his change in view' when in fact Enrique had. The fact that MP said that in the context of also responding to other posts is not important. It demonstrated to me that MP's suspicion was based on the fact he had missed Enrique's post, and if anything was being swayed by posts from you saying Enrique hadn't responded... even though Enrique subsequently did.

@zebra - nope. Marmot can pretty much get away with anything. He went through a period of being lynched day one over and over and over and basically always flipping civ. So, now we recognise that it isn't alignment-related behaviour. It's just him.

Thanks for your psychoanalysis of MP, Mac. Lets see which of these is most likely to be true. Occam's Razor time.

1) MP claimed Enrique had never said something that he had said, but he only did it because he was putting it 'in context' and so was able to ignore the fact that Enrique said what MP claimed he did not say. MP fully knew that Enrique HAD said what MP claimed he hadn't, but he went ahead and said it anyway, knowing that you, Mac, would understand the so called 'context' of his post didn't include Enrique's actual response, that he claimed didn't exist. Then, when I pointed this out to him, he said 'thank you' to me, rather than him deciding to clarify that he intended that statement only to be read in context. He said thank you because he, the overlord of engaging people in the thread, and whom I have a very good working relationship with, wouldn't want to engage with me. Just because. But he also asked me for a gth read on you. Because he only wants to engage me a little bit.

2) Or... MP stated his (at the time) current thoughts on Enrique but had missed Enrique's post, and when he said 'thanks for pointing it out' he meant it, because I was helping him figure out where he stood on Enrique (whether it changes his mind or not), while at the same time clearly engaging me by asking me questions.

I dunno, take your pick people.

a2thezebra wrote:Is there a third option for who gives a shit? You guys are going back-and-forth about an issue that boils down to insignificant nonsense regardless of which one of you is right.

OK, so now I'll seriously consider a vote on zebra - the so-called champion of throwing stuff out and getting people talking wants to shut down my dispute with Mac. Why?

MacDougall wrote:Golden I expect better from you. This is a textbook example of taking something completely out of context.

That's a statement which I can only call target painting. Accusing someone of 'taking something out of context' is accusing them of having ulterior motives.

You don't think it is worth talking about how ridiculous that is? I do. Mac isn't merely wrong. He's pushing illogical shit. This should have you writing in caps.

I feel ok about Mac about it, but big ping on you!

a2thezebra wrote:If you two were arguing about what MP's actual motivations would be for making any given statement then it would be fine.

linki - Because it's annoying, pointless, and distracting.

Hey, thats how I felt about your endless case on me in Dune

@Mac - I don't think MP is a caught baddie. I think he is a sick guy who isn't keeping up with the thread well. I get your point now, though, but I think you should reread MP's post... he doesn't put it in the context of your post which he quoted, he says 'Enrique HAS failed to address your suspicion whatsoever'. Not just that he did fail to when you asked.

MacDougall wrote:

Golden wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:Is there a third option for who gives a shit? You guys are going back-and-forth about an issue that boils down to insignificant nonsense regardless of which one of you is right.

OK, so now I'll seriously consider a vote on zebra - the so-called champion of throwing stuff out and getting people talking wants to shut down my dispute with Mac. Why?

MacDougall wrote:Golden I expect better from you. This is a textbook example of taking something completely out of context.

That's a statement which I can only call target painting. Accusing someone of 'taking something out of context' is accusing them of having ulterior motives.

You don't think it is worth talking about how ridiculous that is? I do. Mac isn't merely wrong. He's pushing illogical shit. This should have you writing in caps.

I feel ok about Mac about it, but big ping on you!

Okay I don't it's fair to say that it's ridiculous. Firstly, my accusing you of taking it out of context was an accusation of you being at best lazy with your choice of where to start looking into this swathe of content that has been presented since you were last here, yes at worst I am accusing you of having ulterior motives. I'm sorry but I don't see how anything I have said is illogical.

MP quoted and agreed with the point I made that enrique failed to address my suspicions of him on day 0.

You said that was disingenous because enrique addressed subsequent suspicions on day 1.

I think you are the one who is being illogical. I know you are headstrong bordering on bullish Golden but if you fail to see my point then it is another poor reflection on you.

Whoah, whoah. What do you mean 'lazy with my choice of where to start'. If I see ANYONE who I think has missed stuff, I will point it out to them. I was giving MP context for HIS suspicion, because someone having a suspicion for reasons that I see are incorrect is not something I will let stand without me mentioning it. Thats the opposite of lazy... I could have just let him think he had read the thread properly. I can't see any reason at all for ulterior motives to what I did. Where are you even coming from on that? I was HELPING mp, and you are making out like I'm misrepresenting him... I wasn't even saying anything about MP. I never made out it was disingenuous. You are reading a hell of a lot in to that.

@zebra - I will talk to whomever I want about whatever I want, and will not look fondly on anyone who tries to shut it down. Conversation is how you figure people out.

Ive been in many civ vs civ fights too. Also many civ vs baddie fights. You don't get to decide whether or not the conversation is 'beneficial to the town'.

Right now, Mac and I both appear to find each others conduct in this affair to be disingenuous. I felt he was target painting on me. It seems he thought I was trying to make MP look bad. These are genuine pings. Why do you not think we should be talking about that?

Elohcin wrote:lots of linki as I was all ready to post this and then Epi came in here to distract me for a little while.

Too much information, Elo!

Oh, this is what I thought you said, Elo...

Talking of quiet, I'm not sure that mishimeals (who is a new player) has checked in at all.

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Looking at the start of the Day 0 conversation again, something just hit me. Did anyone contemplate that players had information on this poll?

Hosts: Did any player have information regarding the Day 0 poll?

Why do I get asked this? Have I ever answered it one way or the other?

Host - are you going to ask rhetorical questions in response to whatever we ask you?

I had no knowledge, and given Grand Moff Tarkin's role I'm not sure I would expect the day 0 poll to have more of an effect than what is publicly available. In that sense, I think the baddies would 'have knowledge'.

I don't know if Matt has any knowledge, but perhaps if he did it is that the death star can't blow up itself.

It's always possible. I didn't have info either way, so I guess it depends if someone wants to come out and say that they did have info.

As far as day one policy lynches go, lynching lurkers would be fine with me.

I've now seen several games here where the entire scum team lurk and play the game of trying to get the higher poster players to take each other out.

I didn't mean to imply you were - let me put it better. The bad vibes one gets from low posters are often based on little evidence, but I have no problem acting on that evidence if I think they are bad. I don't want to see someone who appears to be a scum lurker slip by because there always appears to be higher priorities, which is something I think can happen easily.

Matt F wrote:Golden

Nothing sticks out really, but he seems more playful then usual so far. Typically at around this time, if civ, Golden is picking a fight with another civ. Why hasn't that happened yet Golden?

Thats kind of low. Often by this point I'm picking a fight with a baddie.

But, this is one of the most common and yet untrue accusations that gets levelled at me. If you looked back at the games I've played on this site, you'll see I've been lynched early several times as civ for not having 'picked a fight' yet - most notably in economics where I was lynched day one and then got to sub in as a baddie and clean everyone up. No early fights in Biblical where I was civ. But I did have early fights in Bullets over Broadway where I was Indy.

Since you came back, you have played 4 games early with me. In Dune zebra and I got into a fight, but it was not me that 'picked it'... I said I had a small ping and he overreacted. In Talking Heads I had some dialogue going on with Rico, but it could hardly be called a fight (any more than the posts I exchanged with Mac today). The first time I picked a fight was day 2, and it was with the specific goal of getting people to lynch me. And World Reborn, you didn't see me go straight out and pick fights in that one either (although because it is ongoing, I recognise we can't dialogue on what that means).

Long story short - you are raising a false indicator of my affiliation. (And I think your representation that I am 'more playful' is incorrect too... I always try to be playful. It makes things fun for me.)

Zebra, you've been forgetting to underline your isos.

I will say from my experience of bubbles that one post sounds town to me.

I'm not exactly doing my own ISOs here zebra, but based on the things you've chosen to post about each person + my own impressions gained during the course of the game, bubbles is (surprisingly, to me) the first one where my gth read differs.

Matt F wrote:Golden - Don't take me so seriously, I wasn't trying to be "low". I just mean, as a civvie, you go after it early and often, and I haven't been seeing that so far from you. Who are your suspicions? Usually by Day 1, you're already all over it but I can't say that about you this game.

Really? Then what do you make of the post where I said this:

Golden wrote:I'm not exactly doing my own ISOs here zebra, but based on the things you've chosen to post about each person + my own impressions gained during the course of the game, bubbles is (surprisingly, to me) the first one where my gth read differs.

I don't have to be loud to generate reads or express my suspicions. I've expressed many in the game so far, when I've felt it's warranted.

GTH, my biggest scum read is you, Matt (if I did a rainbow, you would be at the bottom). I have found a lot of your posts read to me like you are disingenuous. On the other hand, you are at least putting in effort - I'd rather give some time to see where you are going, in case you are civ, and lynch someone I think could be bad but that is also not really contributing

My biggest town read is Canuck.

@zebra - dfaraday is he.

Matt F wrote:

Golden wrote:GTH, my biggest scum read is you, Matt (if I did a rainbow, you would be at the bottom). I have found a lot of your posts read to me like you are disingenuous. On the other hand, you are at least putting in effort - I'd rather give some time to see where you are going, in case you are civ, and lynch someone I think could be bad but that is also not really contributing

Lol okay so I'm your biggest baddie read but you want to let me slide for a few days?

Also, I would like you to cite the posts that read disingenuous to you. Considering none of them have been, this should be a fun exercise.

Besides myself, who else are you reading as scum?

Every single one of your isos has read disingenuous to me, without exception. They feel like false reads for the sake of looking town. Even your town read on me feels like a way for you to pick a fight with me.

I mostly have town reads for now, but you can use the post I JUST quoted you no problems to figure out other scum reads I have. You seem to want to draw me into a fight because I haven't had one yet, force me to repeat information over and over, which is my pet hate in mafia. You give a person an answer, and they immediately ask you to give them another answer to the same question. I'm not interested in it. I have reads all through the thread, and apparently you JUST isoed me, so you ought to know that.

As for the underlined: I did not say 'I want to let you slide for a few days'. I do, however, want to take some time to get a better handle on you. This feels like the fight zebra picked with me in Dune all over again, where he tries to read in a whole lot of stuff that was never said and isn't there. If you really are civ as you claim matt, what are you trying to achieve. Would you prefer me to lynch you? Or do you think, especially given that you have a habit of making yourself look suspicious early, that I should take my time with you.

bcornett24 wrote:

Golden wrote:

Matt F wrote:Golden

Nothing sticks out really, but he seems more playful then usual so far. Typically at around this time, if civ, Golden is picking a fight with another civ. Why hasn't that happened yet Golden?

Thats kind of low. Often by this point I'm picking a fight with a baddie.

But, this is one of the most common and yet untrue accusations that gets levelled at me. If you looked back at the games I've played on this site, you'll see I've been lynched early several times as civ for not having 'picked a fight' yet - most notably in economics where I was lynched day one and then got to sub in as a baddie and clean everyone up. No early fights in Biblical where I was civ. But I did have early fights in Bullets over Broadway where I was Indy.

Since you came back, you have played 4 games early with me. In Dune zebra and I got into a fight, but it was not me that 'picked it'... I said I had a small ping and he overreacted. In Talking Heads I had some dialogue going on with Rico, but it could hardly be called a fight (any more than the posts I exchanged with Mac today). The first time I picked a fight was day 2, and it was with the specific goal of getting people to lynch me. And World Reborn, you didn't see me go straight out and pick fights in that one either (although because it is ongoing, I recognise we can't dialogue on what that means).

Long story short - you are raising a false indicator of my affiliation. (And I think your representation that I am 'more playful' is incorrect too... I always try to be playful. It makes things fun for me.)

I was wondering about that golden, what's going on normally by this point your are flinging shit around looking for scum. I just took a look at your content, even with 40+ posts there is almost no content. Are you busy being trained in the ways of the dark side? I find this concerning.

I would say that your three latest posts appear to be your only actual content. That being said, you appear to have a read on matt, I will take a look at him next as a lot of people seem to be going on about him right now.

Do you have any other reads or major concerns?

Brian, you just basically ignored the entire content of that post where I already responded to Matt on the exact point you raised.

In Economics, I was lynched with about 100 posts on day one... for having 'no content' in those posts and apparently hedging or not committing to things. Despite having just as many reads as I did in this game. I was civilian. The real reason I was lynched is because people expected my 'content' to be fights and tunneling.

I have a lot of content. It's just that I don't have 30 posts all about how bad one person is.

And I will repeat what I said to Matt.

Your post about me appears like you have just ISOed me. If that is true, you ought to know that I've given reads on about half of the people in the game, which is significantly more than most other people here.

I'll add you to my scum read list, though. I don't like it when people push this agenda about me, that if I don't pick fights I'm not creating content. I've seen it take me down as a civilian too many times, both back in my RM days and since I've arrived at the Syndicate. People use an incorrect perception of my meta against me. It is something I find inherently suspicious, especially when the basic starting point is that I 'don't have content' when that is plainly untrue.

Yeah, I'll invite anyone to look at that, and note the various points I made on Russti, MP, Mac, Zebra.... others too... and the things that weren't specific reads but contributing to solving game mechanics, before those 'last three posts'

I do not believe anyone can possibly read my iso and genuinely call that a 'lack of content'. I guess you are in the zebra camp where if you don't care about the specific thing being talked about, it isn't in any way someone trying to contribute to solving the game. The fact you doubled down on it has you shooting to the top of my suspect list. The golden 'lack of content' case is always bullsuit, it gets rolled out far too often, and it frankly pisses me off. I'm not under any obligation to write 200 posts in the first day phase going at someone aggressively. There is no greater discouragement to trying to help the town than behaving like a good member of the town and being told you don't have content, when about 24/29 of the players have not even had 10% of the reads I have made in this game.

It's taking every ounce of my control not to just vote for you and be done with the vote for today.

I do not think your case on me is truthful. So, people want me to pick a fight? Bcornett has one coming. Read my iso people, go ahead. Look at what bullsuit it is that I have no content.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Golden wrote:As far as day one policy lynches go, lynching lurkers would be fine with me.

I've now seen several games here where the entire scum team lurk and play the game of trying to get the higher poster players to take each other out.

Golden, how do you feel about your vote at this moment? Do you think you would like to lynch a lurker? Or do you have a suspect you'd rather pursue right now? If so, who is it?

I may find the answers to these questions in due time, but I wanted to throw this out there.

I do feel like Bass and Wilgy would be good uses of a vote, mishimeals wouldn't be a terrible one (I've seen far too many non-existent players just hang around because you can't kill them later).

Right now, though, brian is my most likely vote because - as you have said - I don't think anyone can legitimately claim I have a lack of content. It is so contrived.

I see that I'm going to have to fight this 'content' fight whether I want to or not (answer: I have no desire to. I was hoping for a slightly more laid back approach to this game), so...

bring it on brian. I'll rip it to shreds.

And before brian points out my 'lack of content', I would like to REINFORCE these points:

Golden wrote:about 24/29 of the players have not even had 10% of the reads I have made in this game.

I want people to ask themselves, why is brian forcing the 'lack of content' angle when my response to this has consistently been "This is an incorrect scum tell" - It is blatantly not the truth, in any event, that the conduct I'm being accused of is a scum tell for me. I have it thrown at me regularly WHEN I'M CIVILIAN. As I keep saying. I can think of only one time when I've been accused of being bad because I've been quiet, and it has actually been the truth (and it wasn't the truth because I was bad... it was the truth because I was very busy at that time).