The Syndicate

But, you could just be collateral in his no u, it's possible.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:15 pmSo now Dom and Nut could both be bad individually? That's a quick jump from Dom being scum because he's defending Nutella to just Nutella being bad to just Dom being bad.

And that's a big jump from me voting for dom BEFORE he defended nutella to trying to imply that I suddenly wouldn't think dom was bad if I didn't think nutella was.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:39 pm

Golden wrote: ↑Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:21 pm

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:15 pmSo now Dom and Nut could both be bad individually? That's a quick jump from Dom being scum because he's defending Nutella to just Nutella being bad to just Dom being bad.

And that's a big jump from me voting for dom BEFORE he defended nutella to trying to imply that I suddenly wouldn't think dom was bad if I didn't think nutella was.

I asked you why you thought Dom was bad and you said because he defended Nutella.

You gonna walk me through your case or not?

I've answered your questions so far, which have set out a complete and accurate picture of why I suspect Dom (not limited to, as you represent, him being nutella's teammate). There's not really much to walk through.

I'd rather have lynched Nutella if she was going to die. I also don't really understand the thinking, although I'm not really complaining about baddies taking out people who I suspect.

But I do really enjoy playing with nutella so, sorry to see you go this way so early nutella!

Epignosis wrote: ↑Wed Jul 19, 2017 10:42 pm Question:

If TonyStarkPrime got a bad role, how am I going to get people to lynch him if people want to baby him because they think I think he's weak?

I don't even know what to do there. He's not a little kid.

Your opinion of Tony's character has no bearing on my own (although your opinion of his alignment could).

More importantly, though, I don't think Tony is looking too much like he drew a bad role at this point. But I'm convinceable.

I'm looking mostly at Dom and Jack right now.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Wed Jul 19, 2017 11:00 pm TonyStarkPrime voted last minute on somebody who wasn't getting lynched.

He is Marcus Vanston.

Decent theory. I approve.

I thought Marcus was nutella for similar reasons and this was clearly incorrect, but I still think the overall philosophy that Marcus would be careful in a tight vote isn't flawed.

Long Con, I'm happy to make any kind of statement that people would ask me to make. There is no statement I could make which would ever point a lie detector to me being mafia.

But I also think I've made plenty of statements which are lie detectable. I think I put out a statement earlier on who I thought could fit into each team... this ought to be appreciably false if I was in either one of them.

DF gives me the heebies.

Here's one:

"I had no hand in deciding that Nutella should die, nor do I know her affiliation"

And for the record, I don't think that's what Dom was doing, LC. If he was, he would have said so.

DFaraday wrote: ↑Wed Jul 19, 2017 11:52 pm

Golden wrote: ↑Wed Jul 19, 2017 11:27 pm DF gives me the heebies.

Why?

You're acting like Dom isn't worth a look just because my post connecting him to nutella might now be incorrect (or might not). This not only falls into the same fallacy of Jack's posts suggesting my suspicion of dom is much less than it actually is, but it also provides potential rationale for a nutella kill.

Dom wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 12:48 am I don't think we've ever had a Golden vs. Dom lynch battle. This should be interesting.

Get me lynched and I'll do my best to make sure it's you the day after.

If it's a lynch battle, it's a lynch battle. I think it's in your best interests not to turn it into that.

TonyStarkPrime wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 1:13 am

Dom wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 1:03 am

TonyStarkPrime wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 12:58 am @Dom's kinda question

1. I noted that I thought that you were acting kinda suspicious.
2. Of a consensus from players who know your meta was saying something was off, of course I'd take that into consideration. If everyone is suspicious of someone and could provide reasons why, I'd probably be suspicious too.

Do you have any reason to trust any of these reads?
Did you plan on following up on those reads?

At the time Golden was accusing you, you were MIA and I leaned town on Golden. So I trusted those reads a bit.

You started talking and the reasons behind those reads dissipated. And then you and Golden started your giant lynch battle and some new ones potentially arose. I'll have to read over your guys' interactions with Nut and each other after I get some much deserved sleep.


A question for now: Dom, what do you think points most to Golden being bad? Golden, what points most to Dom being bad?

His entire contribution to the game is one big no u. Dom is trying to shield his lack of actual content behind a single case that he's only picked up because I voted for him.

I've been on a scum team with Dom a lot. I've seen his brain from the inside. Nothing about this Dom looks remotely town to me.

Ricochet wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 1:27 am P O P P Y I'm Poppy!
P O P P Y I'm Poppy!
P O P P Y I'm Poppy!
P O P P Y That's me!

Golden wrote: ↑Wed Jul 19, 2017 11:05 pm I thought Marcus was nutella for similar reasons and this was clearly incorrect, but I still think the overall philosophy that Marcus would be careful in a tight vote isn't flawed.

"Incorrect, clear-lyyyy"??
Golden's bad, clear-lyyyy
Team knowledge, clear-lyyyy
Lynching you's now easy

Well, I suppose it's possible she was killed by herself, but unlikely I would say.

Anyone who actually suspects me, please just vote for me. Let's expose the bullshitters for what they are. There is literally zero chance Dom thinks I'm on my bad game, he knows me far too well for that, and I'm beginning to worry about ricos persostance as well.

Dom wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 1:56 am We also have a decent theory on who Marcus is. So.. like... that's another avenue I'd like to explore.

Golden, why force a false dilemma like that?
What is the civ gain?

Good question. Why did you force a false dilemma?

I wouldn't know, since it wasn't me that did it. I actively told you I don't think it's in your interests to force one. But you seem solely interested in talking about me so far.

If you come after me and succeed, it's not going to look good afterwards. It will look like what I think it is - a defensive no u based on nothing except my vote for you.

Vague platitudes are fine with me.

Dom wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 12:48 amI want you to answer questions that are asked of you because you seem to not want to have any sort of accountability in this game.

Well, you're going to end up sorely disappointed then! I'm not answering questions just cos. I'm not fussed about having no accountability

I have no intention of playing this game the way others would like me to play it.

Your guarantee isn't worth very much, then.

Of course it can't be airtight. If it was, it wouldn't meet the LD rules (like how 'I'm not mafia' doesn't). That's the idea. The other 5% is the part where you look at the edge cases and go 'yeah, I'm satisfied'. For example, knowing me as you do, do you ever believe I would not have input into a kill? A might not (so LD statement works) but in actual fact I would always. It's part of what's required of me when I sign up.

Gah, that didn't come out right. The point is, I left the 5% intentionally to insure it would be LDable and you could bridge the gap with meta.

Thanks for quoting where Dom made this a false dilemma right before accusing me of doing the same

TIMMER!!!!!!

Get in here buddy.

Long Con wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 10:06 amI don't believe that, that sounds like something you made up after the accusation

Well, you're wrong. I never lie about stupid shit like that.

I think everyone should just vote me out at this point.

I am literally never bad when everyone thinks I'm bad in the first couple of days. I don't understand why no-one ever wakes up to this point. When I'm doing dodgy shit, that means I'm town. But I'm kinda bored of being in defensive mode against anyone and everyone

Dom.

If you won't listen to me today, listen to me tomorrow, eh?

Dom is bad
Jack is probably bad
LC is probably bad

I think I hit a few baddie nerves very early in this game and they want to deal with it by getting me lynched. So fine, but I want to expose it for what it is. No-one who knows me well at all would believe me to be bad at this point.

Dom wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 8:59 am Notice that Golden has ignored the posts I make on him, only calling it a no u.

I've said you're wrong, which you are. That's honestly all the response your posts need.

Everyone is tetchy that I'm ignoring them this game, but really I'm just not interested in getting into big defensive arguments against cases. Your case is wrong, I don't care to do a point by point analysis of it.

speedchuck wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 9:58 am

DrWilgy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 9:28 amLD rules?

Yeah, could someone familiar with lie detection explain the rules? I was about to throw crap at Golden for making a terrible waste of a lie-detector statement, considering that his worst post of the game.

linki: yeah it doesn't make much sense for a post limitation to be placed on the only person who already was using a post limitation

Any statement that amounts to "I am town" or "I am not mafia" is not LDable, generally speaking.

speedchuck wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 3:13 pm I just realized why Golden phrased his Lie detect phrase in the particular way he did, by adding on the not knowing Nutella's alignment.

I'm willing to believe he's town, and not on either mafia team.

It's quite literally an ironclad checkable statement for anyone who believes that I would take part in every NK discussion of a team I was part of. I wonder if LC thinks I wouldn't... I honestly don't believe he does, but he skirted around that. The idea of LC's 5% chance I'm being cagey should, to him, absolutely make sense in practice, not be something he 'doesn't believe'.

I'm not sure about Jack, maybe I'm paranoid with him. But Dom and LC look worse and worse to me all the time.

TonyStarkPrime wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 3:38 pm Is JOH the only one who hasn't posted today?

That would explain his early vote.

Sure, LC, except that...

1) I patently made many "I am not bad" statements before our conversation began
2) I WAS around (posting in this thread)

So yes, it really is that hard to imagine if you are paying the blindest bit of attention.

There are no shortage of LD statements I have made. I offered to make any you might want me to make. I pointed out I'd already made a lot. And then I made another one just in case none of mine would work due to the existence of that rule.

If I wanted to 'act cool' about your accusation I was being deliberately cagey, I'd just say 'you're right, I didn't think about how that might not work. How about another'.

But I don't actually care about 'how I look'. Chew on that for a bit.

Here's why I think LC is bad.

Bad LC forgets to play the ball. He gets driven into arguments that look good in semantics, but actually betray a lack of full thought. In this case, the ball is 'golden is avoiding LD statements'.

What is the first thing a person might do if they genuinely thought another player was avoiding LD statements? I would iso that player to see if it's accurate. I'd actually go look at how many LD statements they've made. I invite anyone to do that now.

You will see that my post history is full of 100% ironclad LD statements. My guess is that most of them amount to someone saying 'golden is bad' and me replying by saying 'you're wrong'. Because anyone who says I am bad is wrong. But I'm sure I've also given any number of other things that amount to 'I am civilian' or 'I am not bad'.

Instead, LC decides to fixate on the one statement I made that I knew could have the same effect even if all of those other statements were not allowed. He ignores the fact that I said 'I've made plenty' before making that one. He doesn't check to see if that's correct. He just fixates on the new ones I'm trying to think of that might enable me to beat any particular rule that could be in place. He wants to hang me because 'I don't know what rule might be in place', but if I actually were bad, don't you think I'd have asked what rule was in place?

I give him one that ought to be tailored right to his wheelhouse. LC has seen me in action both as a teammate and host. He knows that I do not bail on taking part of a team for any phase unless I really have to. What's his comeback? He agrees that I wouldn't fail to take part if I could, but I might have been too busy. A person who has a real suspicion, and was playing the ball, would go and look to see if that made sense in context, not just throw it out as a hypothetical. In fact, looking at the thread, it is very clear that I was entirely here and could have taken part.

LC is playing me, the player, he isn't actually looking to see whether I'm making LD statements.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Btw, I'd also like to point out, in terms of 'towniness meter', that while I've thrown out reads on nearly everyone in the game without problem (and been happy to adapt those reads), this has been generally criticised by the same people who see me as bad. In the mean time, I think a quick iso of Dom and LC would show you a distinct lack of reads. They are getting by, mostly focusing on me.

Dom and LC, want to prove you aren't bad? Start engaging with more than your cases on me.

At this point, if I had my vote back, I'd probably lean a vote on LC before Dom. Dom tunnels do happen from town Dom, and I can see how me voting him could get under his skin in a way. But LCs tunnels are usually well reasoned - even if the theories are out there, they fit with a thoughtful analysis of the facts. This is completely lacking here... he isn't taking a step back to consider what I'm saying, it's just discredit discredit discredit. This is my experience of bad LC. I remember another game... Bullets over Broadway maybe? Where the same thing happened.

TonyStarkPrime wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 4:17 pm

speedchuck wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 3:56 pm Let it be known that Golden made 40 posts on night 1

Is this a good thing?

It is when LC's only reason for my LD statement being flawed is 'I might not have been around to participate in the NK'

I was thinking in the shower, on what townie behaviour looks like. One of the fundamental things in my mind was a willingness to create opinions on a range of people without fear of being wrong or having to backtrack. On this front, I think I feel a bit better about Jack now. But worse about Dom and LC.

Centre is a bitch.

It isn't a bad argument in theory, but it's a very bad argument from anyone who knows me as well as lc does. I tailored that particular statement right at him and his experience of me.

2010 more like.

LCs sense of humour, although not necessarily exclusively.

I wouldn't have a clue if its INHs sense of humour, I don't understand his brain at all, but it certainly isn't mine. I'd be using a curse effectively, not creating more nonsense out of nonsense.

I look forward to Rico and Wilgy eating their words

Here's a question

Wilgy
Rico
LC
Dom

None of you have ever indicated even the slightest possibility that I might not be bad. You have all been determined to read me as bad no matter what I say and do.

Jack already voted for me.

So why don't y'all just vote for me and lynch me already? What's holding you back? You probably have the numbers...

I almost wonder if rico's vote is forced.

I approve of the use of bullsuit.

Dom, I have not ignored why I think you're bad. Ive avoided repeating the things I've said just because I'm asked to. Those are different things. I have no intent of engaging in a q and a, but the reasons I am voting for you have been stated in the thread.

Let me say it plainly, again. Your sole contribution to the game is no u. You're doing literally nothing but.

I don't know why you keep asking me to answer questions I'm not going to answer thinking you'll get a different response. I'm not sure why you keep talking about accountability. Neither of these things is indicative of me on my baddie game, which you know.

Ps I don't care about being better than Donald trump

I'm not here to play the game the way others want me to play it. I wonder how many times I need to say the same thing for it to be understood.

Dom wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 7:39 pm

Golden wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2017 7:37 pm I don't know why you keep asking me to answer questions I'm not going to answer thinking you'll get a different response. I'm not sure why you keep talking about accountability. Neither of these things is indicative of me on my baddie game, which you know.

People who revel in their own meta are bad.

I was open about why I voted for you on day one too. Different reasons today.

I'm not people, I'm golden. Stop acting like you haven't met me.

If you think I'm bad, vote for me. But be ready for my legacy post.

It should bother people how much people are willing to talk about how bad I am with such certainty and lack of nuance and without indicating any other candidate they think is bad but without actually pulling the trigger.