The Syndicate

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Scotty wrote:I find it kind of silly that even our own Don doesn't know who the police are. I mean, they got badges and blue costumes and such. Why is this so hard?

Because the Rookie Cop is actually a Wookie Cop in hiding.

Bullzeye wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Scotty wrote:I find it kind of silly that even our own Don doesn't know who the police are. I mean, they got badges and blue costumes and such. Why is this so hard?

Because the Rookie Cop is actually a Wookie Cop in hiding.

How many cookies could a Rookie Cookie Wookie Cop cook if a Rookie Wookie cookie cop could cook cookies?

Seven and a half.

DrWilgy wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Scotty wrote:I find it kind of silly that even our own Don doesn't know who the police are. I mean, they got badges and blue costumes and such. Why is this so hard?

Because the Rookie Cop is actually a Wookie Cop in hiding.

How many cookies could a Rookie Cookie Wookie Cop cook if a Rookie Wookie cookie cop could cook cookies?

Ok, hear me out Scotty,

The year is 20XX.

Formerly used strictly by military, the police are now being outfitted with H.I.P.S.T.R. suits or, Hide in Plain Sight Technical Recon Suits.

These "Hipster Suits", as people call them, deploy camouflage so advanced that the police can even hide just about anywhere. The camouflage makes them look like anyone they want. Me, you, even Marmot or SVS, we could go on all day. There is one flaw though in the hipster suits. If used for a prolonged period of time, the user will gain a dangerous attraction to edgey music, stupid haircuts, and skinny jeans.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I bake my cookies in dozens. I could see a number other than a dozen, but cookies are not measure in halves. Whole numbers please!

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:So I'm suppose to assume if both hitmen go down, cops lose the game automatically?

EASIEST GAME EVUR

Tranq wrote:

Scotty wrote:I will bet my [hopefully] unborn child that the 30 person coordinated vote will not work out. There will be too many no-shows. There always is in these games.

No-shows could get replaced. I see no harm in trying Wilgy's plan. For science!

Tranq wrote:

Scotty wrote:I will bet my [hopefully] unborn child that the 30 person coordinated vote will not work out. There will be too many no-shows. There always is in these games.

No-shows could get replaced. I see no harm in trying Wilgy's plan. For science!

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

Scotty wrote:Wow. Everyone checked in. I'm impressed.

Everyone except Chaindeath.

He is lurking, but no posts yet.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Scotty always votes automatically for the most inactive player on day 1.

Sloonei wrote:Fair deal, and I understand the thought process behind this strategy.

If I forced you to name a suspect from the pool of active players, who would you choose?

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I was wondering if Scotty would come up with an excuse not to vote for Chaindeath if I pointed it out, but he didn't take the bait.

Also I see the point on Gleam. He has posted a lot but hasn't actually said anything. His most "scumhunt-y" post was asking llama why he voted for the marmot.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Public utility: List of people who didn't vote:

RadicalFuzz
Serge
Spirityo
Turnip Head

I was curious about it and decided to check it so I may as well post it for everyone.

ika wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

ika wrote:

Golden wrote:

ika wrote:Ok im home i will be reading shorty.

Can someone tell me if we are allowed to talk game or not? im not used to being able to talk at night

The general rule here is that you can talk game at night. Unless the rules specify otherwise.

Sweet!

Im gonna try to do some isoing does anyone have anyone spcific thatthey want em to see

ISO me Ika.

mkay one min

Tranq wrote:I voted Bullzeye. I feel he got replaced way too fast after his vote. He took the time to catch up, vote for me, said he'll ask to be replaced, and got replaced 4 minutes after that. Feels like the arrangements to get him replaced were already set in motion before he posted and voted.

Scotty wrote:Wow. Everyone checked in. I'm impressed.

Tranq wrote:

Scotty wrote:I will bet my [hopefully] unborn child that the 30 person coordinated vote will not work out. There will be too many no-shows. There always is in these games.

No-shows could get replaced. I see no harm in trying Wilgy's plan. For science!

Of the low posters, Tranq's only post here seems very bright-eyed and bushy-tailed. Will continue to scan the thread but he's going to get my vote right now.

Bright-eyed and bushy-tailed? I haven't heard that one before. What do you mean by that?

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I love how some people who are basically claiming Team Sockface.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:The people who are happy with the lynch.

agleaminranks wrote:

Golden wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Agreeing with what you are saying doesn't equal reading you as a civ.

SVS and Sloonei pointed out something I hadn't yet noticed. I then read your posts and concluded that indeed, you were saying a lot without actually getting yourself involved in the actual game (hunting baddies).

When we're this early in the game and far more likely (statistically) to lynch a good guy, I'm more focused on minimizing civilian deaths than actively trying to suss out the police. That's just my strategy. You can agree with it or not, but that's what makes the most sense to me. Granted, once a day or two goes by and we have some patterns to examine, then the baddie hunt needs to become the main focus. If I'm still being noncommittal at that point, you can criticize me of not getting involved all you want. But I've certainly been participating in the discussion. Going all gung-ho and throwing accusations left and right isn't the only way to get involved.

Gleam - what is the difference between sussing out the police and minimising civilians deaths? How do you propose to minimise civilian deaths?

That's a good question. It's really hard to do because someone has to be lynched the first day. Mongoose has attempted to do so by spreading the votes thinner, that's certainly at least one way to abstain personally. I think the best thing to do is to really try not to fly off the handle with suspicions so early. That's the most common way that civs end up getting lynched.

Golden wrote:At this point I'm heading off and hoping to be back before poll ends, but no guarantees (in fact I'm thinking I probably won't be, unfortunately, as I've just been told my meeting is off site).

I'm tossing up between Wilgy and gleam, but the tie breaker for now is I don't know gleam, although I find his behaviour more than just dodgy. The stuff about not scum hunting, while connecting his voters as though they are on a team out to get him, doesn't sit well with me. Actually I've talked myself in to changing to gleam. So I'll go there.

[quote="agleaminranks"=You know what big, bold, brazen, and unbacked claims result in? Good guys getting lynched.

Dragon, you were seemingly on board with what I was saying and then all of a sudden decided to flip a vote on me. Am I sensing some camaraderie between you and S~V~S? How's that for a bold claim?

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Sorry, the opposite of what I just said. I meant "it could have been someone from Team Socky".

DrWilgy wrote:

Scotty wrote:

ika wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

ika wrote:

Golden wrote:

ika wrote:Ok im home i will be reading shorty.

Can someone tell me if we are allowed to talk game or not? im not used to being able to talk at night

The general rule here is that you can talk game at night. Unless the rules specify otherwise.

Sweet!

Im gonna try to do some isoing does anyone have anyone spcific thatthey want em to see

ISO me Ika.

mkay one min

This is like a girlfriend "I'm just gonna put on my makeup" minute.

Also, @Wilgy, you seem overeager to have someone ISO you like you are cocky that you have nothing to hide. It's Day 1 shenanigans, and you almost got lynched for said shenanigans, so, like, everyone should be ISOing you anyway.

I didn't find what you were saying as inherently bad in day 1 and didn't understand the traction on your lynch. But I don't like the invitation to read into you more thoroughly. You seem like you are proud that you don't *look* guilty.

Nah, I just read people better when I'm directly interacting with them and I'm the subject. It's easier to discuss and formulate opinions. I don't know Ika very well so if I can get what they think of ke it will help my reads. I ask for ISO's of myself frequently regardless of alignment. It shouldn't be indicative as such. Scotty, if any, what voters on my wagon stood out the most to you? Whatd do you think of my votes?

thellama73 wrote:So my main conclusion from catching up is that Dragon is most definitely a cop. He gave himself away early by complaining that it is too hard for the cops to win.

I'm comin' for you, Dragon. Prepare yourself.

When did this happen Llama? I'll double check when I'm less busy, but if you site the source that would be helpful.

Sloonei wrote:

Scotty wrote:I agree with this post by SVS:

Spoiler: show

S~V~S wrote:

Sloonei wrote:If anyone wants an explanation for my vote, I was at work and didn't have time to read or really do anything, but I checked the poll just before the deadline and saw a four way tie between Diiny, Golden, Gleam, and Wilgy. I had town reads on the first three, so I elected to try and save all three by putting a vote on the one null read of the bunch, Wilgy. He was not my first choice, but among the four who had votes he was my favorite option.

I thought you were considering a vote for Gleam earlier in the day? When did this change into a town read?

11:12AM (us eastern time)

Sloonei wrote:

S~V~S wrote:
I am going to drop a vote on Gleam for now, he made a lot of assumptions based on incorrect role reads, then backtracked them, and if you cancel all that out, he made a lot of posts comparative to others at this early stage, but did not say much.

I am also considering putting a vote on Gleam for similar reasons.

(1 PM)

Sloonei wrote:Right now I think gleam is most likely to receive my vote unless something changes. We've still got four hours, but I've only got two until I have to leave for work.

(2;34)

Sloonei wrote:@ gleam, Sorry but I fundamentally disagree with the thought that lynching no one is a better option than lynching someone. If no one is lynched, town gains no information. Town can only win by gaining information.
Epi explains it well:

Epignosis wrote:No lynches are terrible. Civilians control the lynches. By forfeiting a lynch, you forfeit the civilians' attempt to bag Mafia. I would never vote such a thing if it existed.

(granted he was scum in this game, but)

(2:57, Your Vote)

Sloonei wrote:

Nerolunar wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Nerolunar wrote:Who is Gleam? I dont see anyone with that name.

agleaminranks

Thanks. I read it completely different.

@ Sig To me its not "highly pingy" to call out lurking.

I am going to change my vote. Losing Ika now will eradicate all meta reads that he can give us on Silverwolf. I don´t like that uncertainty.

Im going to check up un Gleam and see if thats whgere my vote will be.

I guess we're trading places on the poll. I'm voting for Ika and going to work. I'll check in if I can but I definitely won't be able to make any big contributions or read everything while I'm there.

What changed here? When did Gleam become a town read? He did not post between your 2:34 post (he had been posting fairly regularly up to that point, but his last post was right before yours) and when you voted. I change my mind all the time, especially on Day One, but someone you had mentioned as being suspicious sometime before, why wouldn't you make note of it when you started seeing him as a toen read? Since he was taking votes. I read through your posts, and could not find that point, and I would like to know what it was since I still find him suspect, and if there is a reason I should reconsider, I wouldlike toknow what it is.

Sloonei's excuse to snipe the vote less than a minute before EoD is sketch as hell, especially for a player he had no previous suspicions of. Wanting to be a part of the right lynch is legit, but not only was he part of the wrong lynch (possibly) but now it just looks like he's protecting teammates.

Yes, I was protecting my scum partner Diiny, you nailed me.

Sloonei wrote:@scotty: can Wilgy and I both be good?

Sloonei wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:@scotty: can Wilgy and I both be good?

Yes.
So can haggis. Just because I had some good haggis once when I was really hungry doesn't mean that it's universally good.

But yea.

Who is your top suspect after Day 1's events?

RadicalFuzz wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

RadicalFuzz wrote:I'm writing this as I'm reading, so if some points have already been addressed then ignore me.

Spoiler: show

Quin the assumption that anybody acting strange, presumably to perform a task, should be a town read is something I find odd.

Luffy are you concerned about getting heat for unfamiliarity, is that why you're calling Soneji to the stand to testify to your behavior?

Quin Wilgy does as Wilgy is. While I don't know what he's doing, in my experience that's somewhat the norm for him. I feel like the amount of conjecture we could do regarding the tasks is nearly infinite, so I'd rather not focus on that line.

Sloonei I like your point regarding Mongoose.

Enrique others might not share this sentiment but it irks me when votes are explained away with "it was a joke" statements. I also attain an irked state when defenses consist of "I'm town" and nothing else. Statements like those showcase both zero credibility and zero effort.

Ika usually having a working knowledge of the roles in a given game can help you determine motivations and possible underlying intentions behind certain statements or actions. A game without any night protections whatsoever would have to be played differently than one with several. And this could just be me again, but I have personally never seen anything remotely fruitful come of asking the question "are you town" and I doubt I ever will. The only answer that question provides is that the one asking it is attempting to appear inquisitive.

Wilgy I can safely assume it was to gauge reactions, or I can dangerously assume it was to evoke a specific one.

Matt the implications of light green on a rainbow and not voting for someone aren't the same. As I understand it rainbow lists usually only have 5 colors, but a thinking person doesn't have only 5 states of suspicion they put the other players into.

Diiny I like your sense of humor.

Luffy regarding Tranq & spirityo I agree with you. Voicing support for something is fine, but to have the only thing to your name be a "linki- yeah let's do that" isn't a good thing.

Sloonei that cop-out pun was horrible. Thank you.

At the risk of appearing as if I'm defending Golden, I feel like Luffy & Sloonei are both putting words in his mouth after Matt's post. His only non-null read (he said, specifically, color on the rainbow so I might be misinterpreting) was Long Con and then shortly after said he didn't want to vote for 7 players. He didn't say he thinks they're town, necessarily. I can see where they don't like Golden's actions but there is a distinction between town read and "rather not vote X" that is being ignored.

Wilgy, I see that your ping is ponged. Would you mind circulating it my way?

Gleam I disagree with you on the point that pointing out how people are acting in this game as opposed to previous is "literally" all you can do on the first day. It doesn't take a precedent of action Y in previous games to determine that action X in this game doesn't look good.

Matt both Luffy & Sloonei used your points to pressure Golden but you missed it. After having played a game with you I was under the impression you would be on the lookout for anyone supporting you, but that's not the case here.

Gleam the problem of minimizing civilian deaths in this format is that we're "outnumbered" from the beginning. While it's preferable to dispose of scum first, each individual team from the beginning has more enemies than allies. Statistically speaking, trying to save civilians on day 1 when you yourself act as if there's very little information on day 1, is a poor decision.

Wilgy the irony of your avatar combined with "getting the heebee jeebees from [me]" is not lost on me. Also going to reiterate your statement, what are everyone's thoughts on me? And again, I informed you that my presence would be scarce this weekend so if you're in any way surprised that I was missing for a long period of time then that's on you.

Diiny being cautious about one's appearance isn't scum in and of itself.

"People like yourself are a pretty common trope in movie bad guys. They have some ideal that may even be morally sympathetic to the viewer, but you still use the end to justify your means of sacrificing a few innocent lives along the way. I think that is the wrong attitude."
Gleam this isn't some life-or-death survival game where he's sacrificed your crippled sister to better his odds of winning. Mislynches are going to happen, statistically. I guarantee you the number of games won without mislynches is smaller than the number of games won with them. And, again, this game in particular there are three teams and only one can win, so that makes the logic hole in your mission statement even larger.

Wilgy just because I didn't put a question at the end of that statement doesn't mean I wasn't looking for an answer. With what I know of you I assumed you would respond to that statement as is, and sure enough you did. What's the problem? Also I have to thank you for reminding me that Scotty never answered my question. Scotty made a small list of 3 players that hadn't checked in, but didn't include my name when at that point I hadn't said jack. Why or how did he miss me?

Gleam makes a good point. The normal result of players tying for a lynch vote would be both of them dying, no?

That's better.

No, that's better.

Rude.

And Scotty, it's all good, mostly just curious as to if you had missed me or were intentionally avoiding me.

And that must've been JTM. I'm the Day 1 lynch-ee of choice there.

thellama73 wrote:

Matt wrote: Here's a new challenge. We're all up to date. Does anyone else in the game currently have six players they won't vote for? You don't even have to say who, just yes or no.

Llama
Scotty
Chaindeath
Mongoose
Marmot
Epi

Quin wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:@scotty: can Wilgy and I both be good?

Yes.
So can haggis. Just because I had some good haggis once when I was really hungry doesn't mean that it's universally good.

But yea.

Who is your top suspect after Day 1's events?

Tranq I think.

Scotty, what brought you to this conclusion? I find it weird that you didn't justify yourself to either Wilgy or Sloonei who questioned you about it. Ping-pong. That should be a smilie. From my point of view, you are the only one who has a good reason to arrest Tranq.

My vote goes to Scotty for now. It is not the strongest, but I do not agree with a Golden, Matt, Luffy or Sloonei lynch. It's not 6, unfortunately.

Quin wrote:

Silverwolf wrote:

Quin wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:Do you see me calling out the other two people who are voting for me? Or the person who voted for me and then changed? No, because we spent all of last day period arguing. MetalMarsh notwithstanding, he has yet to give a good reason, but he at least said he would formulate his argument. It's probably a ridiculous argument knowing Marshie, but I'll hold him to his word. They at least have some logic behind their actions. You have none.

If I had voted for someone with whom I had had zero contact with for the whole game and then refused to elaborate as to why, I would be absolutely skewered by everyone around me. This is absolute ridiculousness.

While I don't have anything but a neutral read for you, I do agree that Silver's vote is ridiculous. I am sure the class would be interested in hearing her justification, since all I've seen is 'Your tone is suspicious' and it doesn't quite cut it for me.


Where is Scotty from? When can I expect to have a conversation with him about his post?

linki: What did your reaction vote tell you, Silver? What made you think that gleam would be a good candidate for your test in the first place?

I wasn't talking about Gleam here.

I already said tone, defensiveness, OMGUS type behavior, hesitancy to vote me even though I moved to the top of his list.

What you think is ridiculous, I find vote worthy. To each their own I guess.

What does OMGUS stand for?

When I posed the question all I knew about was the tone. I just added a linki when I saw your post adding the rest of your thoughts. I didn't bother deleting my original paragraph, since that's what I thought the point of the linki was in the first place...I don't know.

Either way, I don't find your vote as ridiculous as I did now knowing the other reasons. Though it hasn't influenced my read of him in any way.

Quin wrote:

Scotty wrote:Why on earth did Tranq get killed? Guess I really can't read people.

Quin wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:@scotty: can Wilgy and I both be good?

Yes.
So can haggis. Just because I had some good haggis once when I was really hungry doesn't mean that it's universally good.

But yea.

Who is your top suspect after Day 1's events?

Tranq I think.

Scotty, what brought you to this conclusion? I find it weird that you didn't justify yourself to either Wilgy or Sloonei who questioned you about it. Ping-pong. That should be a smilie. From my point of view, you are the only one who has a good reason to arrest Tranq.

My vote goes to Scotty for now. It is not the strongest, but I do not agree with a Golden, Matt, Luffy or Sloonei lynch. It's not 6, unfortunately.

Tone and quality. I saw some pings from the active players, but not enough that I was looking too harshly at them.
From low-posters, however, I honestly just felt Tranq's 2 posts to be lacking. He was like a paraplegic cheerleader- wanting to be part of the game, but had a hard time dancing with the others. (Oh god I'm going to hell for that one)

But yeah I was wrong.

Didn't justify myself? Perhaps you missed this post I made prior:

Spoiler: show

Scotty wrote:

Tranq wrote:I voted Bullzeye. I feel he got replaced way too fast after his vote. He took the time to catch up, vote for me, said he'll ask to be replaced, and got replaced 4 minutes after that. Feels like the arrangements to get him replaced were already set in motion before he posted and voted.

Scotty wrote:Wow. Everyone checked in. I'm impressed.

Tranq wrote:

Scotty wrote:I will bet my [hopefully] unborn child that the 30 person coordinated vote will not work out. There will be too many no-shows. There always is in these games.

No-shows could get replaced. I see no harm in trying Wilgy's plan. For science!

Of the low posters, Tranq's only post here seems very bright-eyed and bushy-tailed. Will continue to scan the thread but he's going to get my vote right now.

Bright-eyed and bushy-tailed? I haven't heard that one before. What do you mean by that?

You are a big . Come on, why is it suspicious to be asked to be replaced? There were a bunch of pages after he voted for you, and I'll admit I was thinking the same thing: "holy camoley Batman, how am I gonna keep up with this" so this seems legitimate to me and says nothing about his alignment. He, like me, found you suspicious.

And by bright-eyed and bushy tailed, I of course mean Bambi- if Bambi were actually a 300 pound tattoo-covered Hispanic man named Carlos. I found your one post in day 1 to be naive and uninformed. Like you found the bullet point of the thread and tried to offer your opinion without actually adding anything.

And lol. If I were a cop, why on earth would I arrest Tranq? I was probably his main detractor! This kill seems totally random, or switched via Daisy power.

I did miss your justification. Sorry about that.

But I still have my reservations about Tranq's arrest. I wonder how feasible it is to arrest one of the most inactive players over the 20 or so other players who have likely got a firm grip on at least one police by now. If I was scum there is no way Tranq would be my first choice. I see nobody else who benefits from his arrest than you, Scotty. Being wrong about your suspicion of a player who was killed would, in most cases, come across as a town tell. You were able to express your suspicion of a player, while preventing Tranq from following it up and making your suspicion into a bigger deal than it was. Or that daisy thing, yeah.

Also, could you explain your day 1 vote? I understand that you voted based on inactivity, which I personally agree with, but why did you not change your vote from chaindeath to Tranq since you decided that he was the most suspicious?

Scotty wrote:Putting a vote on Gleam for now. Because.

Sloonei wrote:@ Quirinius: I don't agree with your vote on Scotty. I don't see a clear connection between him suspecting Tranq and Tranq getting thrown in the slammer last night. It doesn't add up for that to be the Police strategy. Also, and take this for what it's worth, I just nabbed Scotty as scum on Day 1 in Rocky & Bullsinkle, and I'm not getting the same vibes from him in this game. He hasn't done anything to earn himself a town read, but he's not a scum read either. Not to toot my own horn or anything, but uh, toot toot.

Silverwolf wrote:OK, ika stop buddying me now.

Quin wrote:

Long Con wrote:

ika wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Silverwolf wrote:Also, if ika doesn't do anything D2, he should be lynched.

----

Scotty wrote:And lol. If I were a cop, why on earth would I arrest Tranq? I was probably his main detractor! This kill seems totally random, or switched via Daisy power.

Agreed. The Tranq kill actually elevates Scotty's Civvishness to me.

This was exactly the point I was trying to make. Under normal circumstances people would take Tranq's arrest as a civ-tell for Scotty. There is no good reason why Tranq would be the target if it was anybody but Scotty doing the arrest. I don't think we should be relying on daisy's intervention as an excuse because we have no idea as to what it did.

Turnip Head wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

sig wrote:I don't like this huge bandwagon on gleam, espacilly since nobody has ever actually explained their suspicion of him, or if they have I don't remember it.

I've got a slight mafia gut read on Wilgy.

Also I find it odd how quite Zebra/LC seem to be this game.

I agree with this. I am mostly caught up and I really don't understand how Gleam has so many votes so early in the day. I understand votes are changeable but with this level it's making a statement and I don't understand the case.

This is where I'm at. Scotty's vote seems questionable to me, I haven't looked at the other votes in depth yet. Scotty said he was voting for Gleam "Because", and then when asked to elaborate, he said:

Scotty wrote:As for me voting gleam: it's mostly a continuation suspicion of my night 1 eyeing of him for being a floppy pancake. But I'm far too lazy to look it up right now. About to enter a poker tournament.

This isn't just. Throwaway vote on a wagon. It's just gut, and he happens to have a bunch of votes piles on as well, so there's that.

So idk, but putting the sixth vote on a wagon more than 24 hours before the lynch deadline, when it doesn't look like a "pressure vote" or like it's furthering the read, well it looks like it's just there. I feel like I can't judge Scotty's motives until the Day is over and I see what else he does with his vote, but right now I feel like he's just gonna keep it parked there until deadline and that feels weird to me for reasons I can't really articulate.

i placed 18th in the poker tournament. Not bad.

Silverwolf wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Silverwolf wrote:

Scotty wrote: I don't like the love affair that comes with Silverwolf, however. I could see myself voting their way come tomorrow, if not today.

Why do people keep saying this? It's really starting to annoy me to be honest. Is it not this site's culture to interact with people you are friendly with, without being scumread for it. Or is it just policy because you guys don't like the personal nature of it?

Because this is at least the second person to want to lynch me because of what ika is saying to me and I still do not understand what the issue is.

I am not one of the people who has expressed this sentiment, but the way you two have been so strongly focused on one another has been hard not to notice, and unusual behavior like that is always going to attract attention in this game.

That's fine, then I'd like an explanation about why this makes me scum because it really should not be alignment indicative in the least. Especially considering we have played together a lot and know each other on a personal level. All I'm seeing is people want to lynch us and vote us for it and I'm starting to get annoyed. I do not, and never have, interacted with a scum buddy in this manner. It would be stupid play. I'm not an idiot. Otherwise, it just looks like a policy lynch because we don't play the same way the rest of you do which is also annoying.

Serge wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Serge wrote:Hello everyone, sorry for missing out on the last day. I've read up until page 15, hopefully I'll catch up tomorrow.

I'm quite surprised at the number of new players in this specific game. The thread is going so fast and references on other games flash by here and there. Let us be civil(no pun intended), it seems some sparks are flying.

Who/what is a linki? When I catch up hopefully I'll be able to form a clearer picture. If it doesn't come in that form, I'll make that investigation board instead. No matter what happens, I'll cast a vote this day phase.

Hello again Serge, "linki" refers to when a new post pops up during the time you are typing your own new post.

What would you say is your general strategy on Days 1 & 2 of a Mafia game? Has this game been busier than what you are accustomed to?

Hullo Sloonei, I have just arrived at your post. Thanks to you and that other person that explained linki.

I don't like 0s and 1s as they usually revolve around random guessing and nitpicking the tiniest bits of text that may be construed as scummy. An example would be llama saying that Luffy complaining that the game is hard for cops is scummy is an example.

For Day 2, I generally put who got lynched and nightkilled front and center, using the posts from the previous day to try and find any links as to how both these things transpire.

I'm going to resume reading now, see you when I catch up.

Nerolunar wrote:Thanks. Im doing my best, but sometimes I have trouble coming up with words that fit. Im glad to hear that you understand what Im trying to say.

Quin wrote:

indiglo wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Depending on how SVS responds to my earilier questions, my vote today seems like it will be coming down to her, Epignosis, or ika.

I actually disagree with you on all 3 of these vote prospects. I haven't seen anything from SVS yet that reads scummy, Epi's response to my questions has satisfied me for now, and I won't be voting ika because I think it's mean.



I was actually leaning towards perhaps a Matt vote, but then he posted this:

Matt wrote:'Sides Golden, Quin is reading funny to me. Can't put my finger on it. Perhaps an ISO is in order!

And actually Quin read funny to me too. I just ISO'd (oh man, it feels weird to type that and not say I did a Quin re-read) and something felt funny. He kind of jumped around from suspicion to suspicion, not really holding on to any of them, and deciding to change his vote when his previous suspicion didn't gain any traction. Quin, I'm not sure have a concrete question to ask you, but I'd like to hear anything you can provide as to your thinking or developing of suspicions.

Then as I think about it, I wonder if my weirdness meter is actually tweaked because you changed your vote so many times. And that all goes back to my old school ways - one vote and you're done for the day. And I gather that with changeable votes, it seems to be encouraged to move them as many times as you can, making your first few changes null and void. In that case, my not voting yet may look strange to someone used to changeable votes.


I did notice Quin mentioned Enrique, so I'm happy to check there to see if I see what Quin saw. Ah, there I do have my first concrete question for you - How are you feeling about Enrique now? And what changed/affected your mind?

I also think it's a little strange to see the Tranq NA (Night Arrest) and then immediately assume Scotty did it and is a cop, and try to push that idea. Maybe it seems a little opportunistic? Do you still believe that to be the case Quin? (That Scotty NA'd Tranq, that is.)



Planning to look over Golden's posts now to see if anything feels funny. Also cannot wait to see how much linki there will be...

Yep, tons. Will post then read.

I feel as though all of my votes thus far have been pretty well reasoned. With ika on Day 1, I made it clear that I found the initial vote for Silverwolf was suspicious, given the context of the whole traitor/don situation, but I did take Silverwolfs word for it that it was not atypical behaviour for him. My current vote is all about his tight-lippedness. Withholding information like this isn't a town-move.

I am not entirely sure how I think about Enrique, now. His actions in the thread were very fishy to me, from his vote to his justifications, but the way he responded to me when I questioned him felt good to me. I think if I ran out of options I'd return to him, but there are currently better candidates out there at the moment.

I do still have that suspicion for Scotty. People keep saying they disagree, but nobody is presenting any viable alternatives. I can't agree with things like 'too opportunistic' or 'too convenient'. There is a reason why Tranq was the target over somebody else, y'no? I've changed my vote from him on account of this, but I am still adamant on the fact that I believe him to be a good lynch. If you wonder why I'm voting ika instead of Scotty, I'd answer that it's because I don't support a gleam lynch, and I am sufficiently suspicious of ika to warrant hopping on a bandwagon. Well, since Sloonei jumped off I guess that means I'm leading it?

Silverwolf wrote:If ika flips town, I'm gonna lose a lot of motivation to play. I mean at this point serge coming in here and voting him for no reason is annoying enough, but I feel a lot of the reasoning on ika has to do with his overall playstyle and the fact that he plays differently, and that just looks like policy to me which is not a good way to welcome new players on the site. I'm very demoralized by this.

Quin wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Quin wrote:

indiglo wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Depending on how SVS responds to my earilier questions, my vote today seems like it will be coming down to her, Epignosis, or ika.

I actually disagree with you on all 3 of these vote prospects. I haven't seen anything from SVS yet that reads scummy, Epi's response to my questions has satisfied me for now, and I won't be voting ika because I think it's mean.



I was actually leaning towards perhaps a Matt vote, but then he posted this:

Matt wrote:'Sides Golden, Quin is reading funny to me. Can't put my finger on it. Perhaps an ISO is in order!

And actually Quin read funny to me too. I just ISO'd (oh man, it feels weird to type that and not say I did a Quin re-read) and something felt funny. He kind of jumped around from suspicion to suspicion, not really holding on to any of them, and deciding to change his vote when his previous suspicion didn't gain any traction. Quin, I'm not sure have a concrete question to ask you, but I'd like to hear anything you can provide as to your thinking or developing of suspicions.

Then as I think about it, I wonder if my weirdness meter is actually tweaked because you changed your vote so many times. And that all goes back to my old school ways - one vote and you're done for the day. And I gather that with changeable votes, it seems to be encouraged to move them as many times as you can, making your first few changes null and void. In that case, my not voting yet may look strange to someone used to changeable votes.


I did notice Quin mentioned Enrique, so I'm happy to check there to see if I see what Quin saw. Ah, there I do have my first concrete question for you - How are you feeling about Enrique now? And what changed/affected your mind?

I also think it's a little strange to see the Tranq NA (Night Arrest) and then immediately assume Scotty did it and is a cop, and try to push that idea. Maybe it seems a little opportunistic? Do you still believe that to be the case Quin? (That Scotty NA'd Tranq, that is.)



Planning to look over Golden's posts now to see if anything feels funny. Also cannot wait to see how much linki there will be...

Yep, tons. Will post then read.

I feel as though all of my votes thus far have been pretty well reasoned. With ika on Day 1, I made it clear that I found the initial vote for Silverwolf was suspicious, given the context of the whole traitor/don situation, but I did take Silverwolfs word for it that it was not atypical behaviour for him. My current vote is all about his tight-lippedness. Withholding information like this isn't a town-move.

I am not entirely sure how I think about Enrique, now. His actions in the thread were very fishy to me, from his vote to his justifications, but the way he responded to me when I questioned him felt good to me. I think if I ran out of options I'd return to him, but there are currently better candidates out there at the moment.

I do still have that suspicion for Scotty. People keep saying they disagree, but nobody is presenting any viable alternatives. I can't agree with things like 'too opportunistic' or 'too convenient'. There is a reason why Tranq was the target over somebody else, y'no? I've changed my vote from him on account of this, but I am still adamant on the fact that I believe him to be a good lynch. If you wonder why I'm voting ika instead of Scotty, I'd answer that it's because I don't support a gleam lynch, and I am sufficiently suspicious of ika to warrant hopping on a bandwagon. Well, since Sloonei jumped off I guess that means I'm leading it?

Careful Quin, or I might name you my biggest suspicion heading into the next day.

We all know what happens when I name someone as my biggest suspicion...

You take me out to lunch and we talk about the weather?