The Syndicate

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 12:39 pm**

Epignosis wrote:I don't like Talking Heads.

I don't like Yes.

(Okay fine, except Relayer)

Epignosis wrote:Like all themes, I will experience the experience. I will listen to a Talking Heads album this weekend.

Same as it ever was!

Can't wait to see you try Godspeed You! Black Emperor, then.

Even the placement of that exclamation mark should drive you nuts.

Matt F wrote:Checking out some profiles from the RYM side, and bcornett has four total posts on the entire board, with only two of those posts being visible to me. Therefore, I'm assuming the RYM side also has their own private thread (which I suspected anyway).

Again, the least amount of ties as possible. I'm guessing the group that has the least amount of ties actually gets to follow through with the top three options they pick, assuming MP is playing the same game on their side.

As if the Syn Host would actually side with us and only make a private room for the Syndicateers.

The latter is not a bad guess at all. I can see our Host challenge both sides in such a way.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 12:46 pm**

It's not perfect, but I'm going to vote option 5 and push it out of the tie, and also options 3 and 6, even if they're pushed into a tie. I'm gonna give the problem to you.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 1:16 pm**

Checking in! Yay game!

First:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Thankfully for him, the elevator's speed was swift, as he was particularly impatient this morning.[/i]

He anxiously watched as the numbers ascended. When he reached the 90th floor, MP rushed out of the elevator, and headed down the corridor until he reached the large conference room.

MP opened the door with force

When are you not impatient?
Also, the "opened the door with force" comment made me think that you should have included a revolving door, and how it looks like a turbine after you've gone through it, in your post.

Anyways, Right now option 5 stands out to me the most. It will be nice to have some block rocks in play. I will vote there now and consider the other options.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 1:20 pm**

Went with 2 and 3. They seem like the safest choices of the other options.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 1:21 pm**

Sorry for the triple post. Back to work now. Be back later.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 1:35 pm**

Devin the Omniscient wrote:Checking in! Yay game!

First:
MovingPictures07 wrote:Thankfully for him, the elevator's speed was swift, as he was particularly impatient this morning.[/i]

He anxiously watched as the numbers ascended. When he reached the 90th floor, MP rushed out of the elevator, and headed down the corridor until he reached the large conference room.

MP opened the door with force

When are you not impatient?
Also, the "opened the door with force" comment made me think that you should have included a revolving door, and how it looks like a turbine after you've gone through it, in your post.

Anyways, Right now option 5 stands out to me the most. It will be nice to have some block rocks in play. I will vote there now and consider the other options.

Ah, you're right! I totally should have. :P

And... yeah, I'm always impatient.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 1:48 pm**

Roxy wrote: Idk about llama lets ask: lllama are you supabad?

I'm not, as it turns out.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 1:56 pm**

Ricochet wrote:It's not perfect, but I'm going to vote option 5 and push it out of the tie, and also options 3 and 6, even if they're pushed into a tie. I'm gonna give the problem to you.

What's your motive behind intentionally voting for option 6 when it has no chance of winning unless several players switch their votes around, as well as the fact that it puts that option into a tie with option 8?

Then saying "I'm gonna give the problem to you." doesn't inspire confidence that you're a civ.

Hopefully you change your mind about option 6, or bea changes hers about option 8, and instead we try to avoid as many ties as possible.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 2:05 pm**

Matt F wrote:
Ricochet wrote:It's not perfect, but I'm going to vote option 5 and push it out of the tie, and also options 3 and 6, even if they're pushed into a tie. I'm gonna give the problem to you.
What's your motive behind intentionally voting for option 6 when it has no chance of winning unless several players switch their votes around, as well as the fact that it puts that option into a tie with option 8?

Then saying "I'm gonna give the problem to you." doesn't inspire confidence that you're a civ.

Hopefully you change your mind about option 6, or bea changes hers about option 8, and instead we try to avoid as many ties as possible.

Absolute trust keeps me going in the right direction.

My vote for option 6 is preferential. I also voted it having in mind that it could (or should) develop with a few more votes, not just that it'd get stuck in a 1-vote tie with option 8. Who said anything about "chances of winning", we have to pick our 3 choices and work around avoiding ties, as much as possible. Besides, I did in fact vote for a potentially winning option, and pushed it out of a tie zone (option 5), didn't I? I can't do that for every option I choose.

I'm open to make improvements later, as to avoid the ties.

If you can't tell what I meant by that statement, I can't help you. Take it easy.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 2:15 pm**

Ricochet wrote:Absolute trust keeps me going in the right direction.

My vote for option 6 is preferential. I also voted it having in mind that it could (or should) develop with a few more votes, not just that it'd get stuck in a 1-vote tie with option 8. Who said anything about "chances of winning", we have to pick our 3 choices and work around avoiding ties, as much as possible. Besides, I did in fact vote for a potentially winning option, and pushed it out of a tie zone (option 5), didn't I? I can't do that for every option I choose.

I'm open to make improvements later, as to avoid the ties.

If you can't tell what I meant by that statement, I can't help you. Take it easy.

Several of your statements are highly questionable.

Obviously just because you voted for 6, that doesn't mean it's going to end in a one on one tie with 8. However, if 6 gets another vote, then it will be tied with option 4, assuming no more votes are attributed to that. If option 6 gets three more votes, then it will be tied with option 1, assuming option 1 gets no more votes. At this stage, with over half of us already voting, it would make more sense to choose options that are already in the lead, maybe the top three or four.

As for "making improvements later", that would be great, except MP already stated the Day Period will end once everyone checks in and votes, so who knows if or when you'll be able to make improvements later? The best strategy is to vote as if you'll be the last player to cast your votes, IMO. See the below quote from MP, re: when day ends.

MovingPictures07 wrote:The period will end once everyone has checked in and voted.

Also, no, I cannot tell what you meant by that statement. From the statement itself, and nothing else, it seems anti-civ to me. Is it a song lyric? An inside joke from another game? You could've easily explained to me what the reference was, however you continue to act baddie-like by saying "then I can't help you". Surely it takes a few seconds to explain the comment?

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 2:31 pm**

I disagree that Ricochets posts are highly questionable.

I have a theory about the poll too.

Obv the other people have a thread and are likely voting options like us though they possibly are not the same options.

I think we are picking options for the other thread while they pick for us.

Thoughts?

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 2:40 pm**

I can answer your questions, if you won't twist what I say.

Have you given others the same treatment?

How 'bout bea voting for option 8, in the first place? Wouldn't that option follow the same sinuous trajectory, constantly being bumped from one tie to another, with other options?

You chose options 1, 2 and 3, whilst options 5 and 7 were in the lead. What was that about "choosing options already in the lead, maybe top three or four". You evaded the top two of that top three or four altogether.

How do you know I can't control what "later" means in what I said about making improvements "later"? Maybe I'm well in control with the knowledge of who has yet to check in or not.

Your "act as if the last player to vote" mentality is very weird, because you were obviously not the last player of the Syndicateers to vote statistics-wise and neither was I. You can't fully control how the poll will shape up past your own vote; if you'd take such responsability and everyone else also would, nobody would make the move and we'd get stuck in a dillema forever.

In fact, your mentality sounds exactly like the "I voted, I didn't create any ties, I was my hands and let's watch other poor folks try not to complicate things". You managed not to create ties, I congratulate you, I was honest about not getting a perfect result out of it.

You didn't ask for any explanation, you called it straight up not-very-civvie. And you may find yourself, you don't know me very well.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 2:42 pm**

Roxy wrote:I disagree that Ricochets posts are highly questionable.

I have a theory about the poll too.

Obv the other people have a thread and are likely voting options like us though they possibly are not the same options.

I think we are picking options for the other thread while they pick for us.

Thoughts?

Possibly, but why would ties matter if we are picking for them?

Also, to be clear, I don't think all of Ricochets posts are highly questionable, but I do think some of the comments he made in his latest post were.

Do you believe it's civ-like to intentionally vote for the only option with zero votes, then tell the thread "I'll leave the problem for you", and then when questioned on it, says "If you don't get it, I can't help you...chillax" ?

Linki

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 2:45 pm**

Roxy wrote:I disagree that Ricochets posts are highly questionable.

I have a theory about the poll too.

Obv the other people have a thread and are likely voting options like us though they possibly are not the same options.

I think we are picking options for the other thread while they pick for us.

Thoughts?

As I've said, I'd expecting anything from our Host. The zanier, the more likely, so to speak. Same as it every was!

Only thing is, if we probably won't collectively get a sense of what the options' effects are (as in some might get info or powers, the rest of the field won't), what would be the point of a design in not getting a sense of what options we would receive from the other party, that we wouldn't even know of?

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 2:47 pm**

I said before I'd make improvements when the poll develops further. Gee, I wonder if I just intentionally contradicted myself there or if the problem sentence was all flavour.

I don't have to prove... that I am creative.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 2:51 pm**

Roxy wrote:I disagree that Ricochets posts are highly questionable.

I have a theory about the poll too.

Obv the other people have a thread and are likely voting options like us though they possibly are not the same options.

I think we are picking options for the other thread while they pick for us.

Thoughts?

I agree with everything you've said.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 2:59 pm**

MF - when I voted I created a tie but you did not call me out. Why only Ricochet?

Ricochet - why would we need to get a sense of what was voted for? ofc the Hosts will not make the results of a Day 0 poll easy to figure out - that would be poor hosting. I think not knowing the other options the other side is choosing is exactly why the hostssplit us up. when you host your upcoming game you will understand what I am saying here.

Linky - llama that is scary lol

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 3:00 pm**

Ricochet wrote:I can answer your questions, if you won't twist what I say.

Have I twisted something you've said already? I don't think I have, if so, please let me know.

Ricochet wrote:Have you given others the same treatment?

How 'bout bea voting for option 8, in the first place? Wouldn't that option follow the same sinuous trajectory, constantly being bumped from one tie to another, with other options?

I'm not sure what the poll looked like when Bea voted, but when I saw the poll with Bea's vote for option 8, it was the only option with 1 vote, so it did not concern me.

Ricochet wrote:You chose options 1, 2 and 3, whilst options 5 and 7 were in the lead. What was that about "choosing options already in the lead, maybe top three or four". You evaded the top two of that top three or four altogether.

You are very correct, I did not vote for the top three or four. That's because the poll benefited from lack of ties by the way I voted. In my vote post, I said this.

Ricochet wrote:How do you know I can't control what "later" means in what I said about making improvements "later"? Maybe I'm well in control with the knowledge of who has yet to check in or not.

If you believe you can psychically predict when the thread is going to end, and you know %100 that you have time to change your votes, then my apologies, I must've been mistaken.

Ricochet wrote:Your "act as if the last player to vote" mentality is very weird, because you were obviously not the last player of the Syndicateers to vote statistics-wise and neither was I. You can't fully control how the poll will shape up past your own vote; if you'd take such responsability and everyone else also would, nobody would make the move and we'd get stuck in a dillema forever.

I don't get this. There's no reason every player in this game cannot both a) vote for some of their favorite options while b) also ensuring there are no ties. If that means one of the options you like, you decide you can't vote for because of a tie, then so be it, but it's possible. No, I cannot fully control how the poll will shape up, that's why I've been encouraging discussion on making sure the poll stays tie-free.

Ricochet wrote:In fact, your mentality sounds exactly like the "I voted, I didn't create any ties, I was my hands and let's watch other poor folks try not to complicate things". You managed not to create ties, I congratulate you, I was honest about not getting a perfect result out of it.

You didn't ask for any explanation, you called it straight up not-very-civvie. And you may find yourself, you don't know me very well.

This is so false. The first thing I said to you, was "What is your motivation for doing this?", therefore, I did ask for an explanation.

You are right, though, I don't know you at all. Pleased to meet you, I'm Matt F, formerly known as the artist known as MR F.

Linki

Linki again

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 3:07 pm**

Roxy wrote:I disagree that Ricochets posts are highly questionable.

I have a theory about the poll too.

Obv the other people have a thread and are likely voting options like us though they possibly are not the same options.

I think we are picking options for the other thread while they pick for us.

Thoughts?

This is interesting. I was wondering what was going on because I tried to look at the thread on my phone but was not logged in and it didn't appear. On a side note...these site mechanics are so awesome, wish we had the power to do things like this on K-Site.
I hope the threads merge soon. We want FZ!

About Ricochet, it was not a smart decision to vote for the only option with 0 votes (if I have understood), but I am not sure what it means for his alignment. Would a member of the mafia really make a decision that makes ties more likely when the whole thread is trying to avoid those?

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 3:15 pm**

Matt F wrote:
Ricochet wrote:Have you given others the same treatment?

How 'bout bea voting for option 8, in the first place? Wouldn't that option follow the same sinuous trajectory, constantly being bumped from one tie to another, with other options?
I'm not sure what the poll looked like when Bea voted, but when I saw the poll with Bea's vote for option 8, it was the only option with 1 vote, so it did not concern me.

Yes, but just like me she voted for a leading option, a mid-tally option and an option with no votes. If you have a problem with my non-leading choices, why did you not express concern with hers?

Matt F wrote:
Ricochet wrote:You chose options 1, 2 and 3, whilst options 5 and 7 were in the lead. What was that about "choosing options already in the lead, maybe top three or four". You evaded the top two of that top three or four altogether.
You are very correct, I did not vote for the top three or four. That's because the poll benefited from lack of ties by the way I voted. In my vote post, I said this.

Cool beans. The poll didn't benefit from lack of ties when I voted. I literally acknowledged this.

Matt F wrote:
Ricochet wrote:How do you know I can't control what "later" means in what I said about making improvements "later"? Maybe I'm well in control with the knowledge of who has yet to check in or not.
If you believe you can psychically predict when the thread is going to end, and you know %100 that you have time to change your votes, then my apologies, I must've been mistaken.

I believe I can count who was checked in and voted and who hasn't, if the standards for Day 0 ending refer to that, yes. I am Count Spreadsheet-ula, after all. Same as I ever was!

Matt F wrote:
Ricochet wrote:Your "act as if the last player to vote" mentality is very weird, because you were obviously not the last player of the Syndicateers to vote statistics-wise and neither was I. You can't fully control how the poll will shape up past your own vote; if you'd take such responsability and everyone else also would, nobody would make the move and we'd get stuck in a dillema forever.
I don't get this. There's no reason every player in this game cannot both a) vote for some of their favorite options while b) also ensuring there are no ties. If that means one of the options you like, you decide you can't vote for because of a tie, then so be it, but it's possible. No, I cannot fully control how the poll will shape up, that's why I've been encouraging discussion on making sure the poll stays tie-free.

This doesn't change what I said. At the time of my voting, I had only one single option to vote and not create ties. That still left two more options that would have created ties, no matter what. Anyone, not just me, wanting to satisfy both a) and b) would have faced this dillema. How would the poll have progressed, in that case? You are setting the bar to high for everyone to not make tie mistakes, considering people did create ties in the past and will create ties, until we can get close to a final shape and look to improve it. It feels like you're locking on to me for your moral lesson, that cannot truly work for the entire group (except if you're eager to create double standards).

Matt F wrote:
Ricochet wrote:In fact, your mentality sounds exactly like the "I voted, I didn't create any ties, I was my hands and let's watch other poor folks try not to complicate things". You managed not to create ties, I congratulate you, I was honest about not getting a perfect result out of it.

You didn't ask for any explanation, you called it straight up not-very-civvie. And you may find yourself, you don't know me very well.
This is so false. The first thing I said to you, was "What is your motivation for doing this?", therefore, I did ask for an explanation.

I was referring to my problem sentence. You didn't ask my motivation for every choice and statement, you asked my motivation for option 6 and I have given you an answer to that, straight away.

Matt F wrote: You are right, though, I don't know you at all. Pleased to meet you, I'm Matt F, formerly known as the artist known as MR F.

Nice to meet you, too.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 3:18 pm**

Hi, K4J. You speak of the "whole thread trying to avoid" ties. Does that mean, that if I pull a list on everyone who create ties when they voted, we have our mafia members on this side of the fence? Doesn't seem to make much logic. Some had it easier, others didn't. I was clear that I didn't get an easy tally to work with. That's all. Don't want to hurt nobody.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 3:25 pm**

Option 1: A player of your choice may ask the host whether a certain player is a certain role. That player will be told yes or no.

If this choice is public, it paints a target on the "winner." If the choice is private, this is good stuff for the spreadsheeters.

Option 2: All female players gain temporary BTSC for one cycle. Info-dumping and role outing is not permitted.

Not only is this pointless, it's misandrist.

Option 3: Every player picks a city. Players will live in that city during the subsequent cycle.

I'd like to know where MP is getting the money to cover the moving expenses.

Option 4: A player of your choice is consumed by insanity, the effects of which are unknown.

This doesn't sound unpleasant or unhelpful at all.

Option 5: Five players of your choice receive a rock. These rocks can be thrown at another player to block them.

These "rocks" (if they even are rocks and not bombs) could stop a kill. Rocks are our friends.

Option 6: A player of your choice can use their night power twice during the subsequent Night.

Double trouble! Not really appealing to me though.

Option 7: A player of your choice can track another player. During the subsequent Day, the player tracked may send a message to the tracker.

Same opinion as option 1 here.

Option 8: A fake account can post and cast a vote the subsequent Day.

I don't see the point of a ghost in the game. Pass.

So I like 1, 5, and 7.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 3:33 pm**

Ricochet wrote:Yes, but just like me she voted for a leading option, a mid-tally option and an option with no votes. If you have a problem with my non-leading choices, why did you not express concern with hers?

To address you and Roxy both...

The reason I have not publicly suspected anyone else with their votes (but you can bet your bottom dollar I have in my head) is because no one, and I mean no one, has said "I'll leave the problem to you" after admitting to intentionally pushing a tie. Pushing a tie is one thing, it's almost unavoidable. However, voting for an option with zero votes does not make civvie sense to me. If it does to anyone else, please tell me why.

Ricochet wrote:Cool beans. The poll didn't benefit from lack of ties when I voted. I literally acknowledged this.

Yes, and I continue to ask what your motivation for doing so was.

Ricochet wrote:I believe I can count who was checked in and voted and who hasn't, if the standards for Day 0 ending refer to that, yes. I am Count Spreadsheet-ula, after all. Same as I ever was!

True that. I am not aware of how much time you spend on mafia (myself, an unhealthy amount when in a game), so I didn't know if you'd be leaving after a few posts, not to return until tomorrow. Now I know better.

Ricochet wrote:This doesn't change what I said. At the time of my voting, I had only one single option to vote and not create ties. That still left two more options that would have created ties, no matter what. Anyone, not just me, wanting to satisfy both a) and b) would have faced this dillema. How would the poll have progressed, in that case? You are setting the bar to high for everyone to not make tie mistakes, considering people did create ties in the past and will create ties, until we can get close to a final shape and look to improve it. It feels like you're locking on to me for your moral lesson, that cannot truly work for the entire group (except if you're eager to create double standards).

All I've done is ask your motivation for picking an option with zero votes, while at the same time saying "I'll leave the problem to you." As for the latter, apparently it is some kind of inside joke that has gone over my head, which you have yet to explain.

Ricochet wrote:I was referring to my problem sentence. You didn't ask my motivation for every choice and statement, you asked my motivation for option 6 and I have given you an answer to that, straight away.

Speaking of which, you said preferential choice. But why? Why would you trust any player in this game to be able to use their night power twice in one night so soon?

Ricochet wrote:Nice to meet you, too.

Linki

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 3:36 pm**

Matt F wrote:To address you and Roxy both...

The reason I have not publicly suspected anyone else with their votes (but you can bet your bottom dollar I have in my head) is because no one, and I mean no one...

That's meant to read "no one else" on both.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 3:42 pm**

Ricochet wrote:Hi, K4J. You speak of the "whole thread trying to avoid" ties. Does that mean, that if I pull a list on everyone who create ties when they voted, we have our mafia members on this side of the fence? Doesn't seem to make much logic. Some had it easier, others didn't. I was clear that I didn't get an easy tally to work with. That's all. Don't want to hurt nobody.

I see what you mean, but I don't think what I am saying is that simple?
I was speaking specifically on your decision and what it brought upon you, because had you not voted for option 6, it would be at 0 votes and in no danger of causing a tie. I am saying that - why would you go out on a limb to vote for the already safe (from a tie) option, if you were mafia? Obviously the thread (as a whole) is trying to avoid ties because of what MP said, in the end, even if not with their individual votes - I expect people to work around it, and try to fix it.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 3:52 pm**

Matt F wrote:
Ricochet wrote:Cool beans. The poll didn't benefit from lack of ties when I voted. I literally acknowledged this.
Yes, and I continue to ask what your motivation for doing so was.

There is no motivation behind not managing to stay clear of avoiding ties. I had no choice for two of my three options. That's the point.

Matt F wrote:
Ricochet wrote:I was referring to my problem sentence. You didn't ask my motivation for every choice and statement, you asked my motivation for option 6 and I have given you an answer to that, straight away.
Speaking of which, you said preferential choice. But why? Why would you trust any player in this game to be able to use their night power twice in one night so soon?

I liked the option. It's called preference. The enhancement could land in a civ's hands and work to good effect. I don't have expectations of this option winning, hence getting to be used "so soon", if that will even happen (the Host has made no specification on how will this work, who will "win" what, etc.). If it'll happen later and I'll be made in charge of it, I'll trust my instincts. As I've said, absolute trust keeps me going in the right direction.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 4:06 pm**

kneel4justice wrote:
Ricochet wrote:Hi, K4J. You speak of the "whole thread trying to avoid" ties. Does that mean, that if I pull a list on everyone who create ties when they voted, we have our mafia members on this side of the fence? Doesn't seem to make much logic. Some had it easier, others didn't. I was clear that I didn't get an easy tally to work with. That's all. Don't want to hurt nobody.
I see what you mean, but I don't think what I am saying is that simple?
I was speaking specifically on your decision and what it brought upon you, because had you not voted for option 6, it would be at 0 votes and in no danger of causing a tie. I am saying that - why would you go out on a limb to vote for the already safe (from a tie) option, if you were mafia? Obviously the thread (as a whole) is trying to avoid ties because of what MP said, in the end, even if not with their individual votes - I expect people to work around it, and try to fix it.

I'd say my voting for an option with no votes that created a tie with the only other option with 1 vote is only a problem because of that other option having only 1 vote. bea got to voting for an option that, as you say, would otherwise "be at 0 votes" faster and she's in the clear simply because she created no ties. This low-end tie can easily be corrected by any option gaining more votes, thus leaving the other option behind in the last place again, untied. If both options 6 and 8 will in fact never progress past this 1-vote point, then I might reconsider my vote there and modify it to a better result. So I don't get the damage that's allegedly done, except for having created two ties, which I had no way to avoid.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 4:34 pm**

Unvote 3, Vote 4 to separate vote tallies.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:07 pm**

Checking in now. Sorry it took me so long! I think Options 1 and 7 are both extremely powerful and extremely useful, in that if the right person or people are selected for them, they can be extremely useful to civs. I would even go so far as to suggest that they're the most useful/powerful choices on the list.

And then watch it turn out that MP tallies the votes and randomizes a new order for the choices to appear in. Because he's an evil bast....

You know what? Nevermind. :P

Going to go catch up now though.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:08 pm**

I moved my vote from number 8 to number 6 to clear up that little one/one tie.

I was going to say I was hurting my uncaffinated brainz by trying to figure out how to move one of my votes around to help out the option 1/2/3 clustereff that was going on but looks like matt fixed that one so yay!

also - re: rox's theory we are voting for the other team. I hadn't thought of it till you said it now I'm sad. I want the rocks rox! I WANT THE ROCKS!

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:11 pm**

DrWilgy wrote:Hello everyone! Hello friends! My name is DrWilgy and I am most definitely a doctor!!

Your current avatar, combined with this post, make me think you're a "special doctor" of some kind.

"Oh, excuse me doctor....but it's time for you to......examine me...."

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:16 pm**

I just saw MP say he doesn't want ties.

I'm going to leave a vote on #1 for now and hope it makes someone else pick #1. Because I see a potential role-check as far more useful than about one-fourth of the people playing gaining BTSC.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:28 pm**

Epignosis wrote:Option 1: A player of your choice may ask the host whether a certain player is a certain role. That player will be told yes or no.

If this choice is public, it paints a target on the "winner." If the choice is private, this is good stuff for the spreadsheeters.

Option 5: Five players of your choice receive a rock. These rocks can be thrown at another player to block them.

These "rocks" (if they even are rocks and not bombs) could stop a kill. Rocks are our friends.

I didn't even think of this for some reason.

@Host: Is Option #1 going to be publicly or privately known?

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:29 pm**

Well that was a fail on my part...

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:30 pm**

Honestly, I'm not that worried about ties yet. Unless...

@Host: How many players have not checked in/voted yet?

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:31 pm**

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Option 1: A player of your choice may ask the host whether a certain player is a certain role. That player will be told yes or no.

If this choice is public, it paints a target on the "winner." If the choice is private, this is good stuff for the spreadsheeters.

Option 5: Five players of your choice receive a rock. These rocks can be thrown at another player to block them.

These "rocks" (if they even are rocks and not bombs) could stop a kill. Rocks are our friends.
I didn't even think of this for some reason.

@Host: Is Option #1 going to be publicly or privately known?

Good question.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:35 pm**

silly David, I'm only on my second cup of coffee and even I knew that was the answer sockfebhost was going to give you.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:36 pm**

birdwithteeth11 wrote:Honestly, I'm not that worried about ties yet. Unless...

@Host: How many players have not checked in/voted yet?

There are 4 players who have yet to vote.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:37 pm**

If you're worried about ties, right now you just need the four people to vote for Option 1 and Bob's your uncle.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:38 pm**

bea wrote:silly David, I'm only on my second cup of coffee and even I knew that was the answer sockfebhost was going to give you.

I did too. But you can't know unless you ask.

And since being in management, I'm not afraid to ask, even if it makes me look foolish or I might piss someone off. I learn more that way. :P

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:39 pm**

MovingPictures07 wrote:
birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Option 1: A player of your choice may ask the host whether a certain player is a certain role. That player will be told yes or no.

If this choice is public, it paints a target on the "winner." If the choice is private, this is good stuff for the spreadsheeters.

Option 5: Five players of your choice receive a rock. These rocks can be thrown at another player to block them.

These "rocks" (if they even are rocks and not bombs) could stop a kill. Rocks are our friends.
I didn't even think of this for some reason.

@Host: Is Option #1 going to be publicly or privately known?
Good question.

No fak u

But I am considering switching my vote for Option 1 to Option 5, but only if I don't feel I can get someone else to hop on Option 1 with me.

I guess I have to weigh the odds of which one is more likely to catch or stop a baddie.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 6:18 pm**

I know most of you are guys and it wouldn't benifit you directly but btsc can be great for civvies and would let us girls gossip about you have some time to get a feel for each other outside the thread. I think it could be valuable

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 6:23 pm**

david - I'm still managing on the "it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission model myself. I just do what I want and wait for someone to tell me I shouldn't have done it. LoL

Sorsha- I know right? it's like a mod sanctioned trip to the restroom.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 7:12 pm**

Sorsha wrote:I know most of you are guys and it wouldn't benifit you directly but btsc can be great for civvies and would let us girls gossip about you have some time to get a feel for each other outside the thread. I think it could be valuable

Don't lie. We all know that it would really turn into a big gossip circle.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 7:37 pm**

Facts are I'm going to bed (even though my bed's on fire) and the poll is currently tie free. No improvement needed at the moment.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 7:42 pm**

birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Sorsha wrote:I know most of you are guys and it wouldn't benifit you directly but btsc can be great for civvies and would let us girls gossip about you have some time to get a feel for each other outside the thread. I think it could be valuable
Don't lie. We all know that it would really turn into a big gossip circle.

TomAto....Tomato.....

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:00 pm**

MP interrupted the meeting.

The following employees have not voiced their opinions:

DrWilgy
Long Con
Russtifinko

So, gents, what do you think? Let's get this show on the road, shall we?

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:07 pm**

No tie lets go

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:10 pm**

If the majority is okay with moving forward, I am as well.

Also just so you all know, I will not be that active from tomorrow until the 11th. I am going to be on vacation flying around the country (to San Antonio to visit MP and Spacedaisy, as well as Tallahassee to visit Mongoose!), and I will be a busy bird on vacation. But I will be around from time to time to check in. Just don't expect a ton of multi-quote posts or anything terribly long during that time.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:12 pm**

I would really prefer not to continue onward until everyone has checked in, but if necessary we will move on if we have waited sufficiently.

The Syndicate

[DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.

Re: [DAY 0] Syndicate Schemes Gaming Co.