The Syndicate

Sadly, notsawyer + Epignosis + Long Con = 1.88 votes.

I would prefer it if notsawyer did not get lynched today.

The good news is that a tie isn't likely to happen.

So notsawyer has 5.83 votes right now, basically.

Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:DrWilgy has been following people's votes like a lost puppy.
What does DrWilgy have to gain by doing this if he's mafia?

I note a number of reasons (provides the appearance of open-mindedness, keeps him from taking any hard stances), but Wilgy is one of those rare individuals where a consideration of strategic advantages probably isn't going to be fruitful.

DrWilgy has been following people's votes like a lost puppy.

Marmot wrote: I don't understand why you're defending a player who has one single suspect: you, while also asserting that you're the only player who should want him dead.

I didn't assert I'm the only player who should want him dead.

I said, "If anyone has motive to lynch him, it's me."

Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:He wants me dead, that's why. Does he want anybody else dead?
What do you think about the second part of this question?
He isn't going for anybody else.
It appears as if he has just one suspect, that's my point.

You've lost me. He has one suspect. Nobody is disputing that.

Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:He wants me dead, that's why. Does he want anybody else dead?
What do you think about the second part of this question?

He isn't going for anybody else.

Marmot wrote:My suspect pool in every game would be large enough to swim laps in if I played by that logic.

He's not in my "suspect pool." That wasn't the question you asked me.

Why LC?

Marmot wrote:
Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:notsawyer now has five votes. If anyone has motive to lynch him, it's me.

I am not worried about defending him in this way and he comes up bad anyway. I think I've demonstrated I'm not bad and his actions against me show we're not on a team on top of that.

I want to know why he's guilty for gunning so hard for me.
Why are you crediting your vote for no particular reason?
Why should you have motive to lynch him, and no one else?

He wants me dead, that's why. Does he want anybody else dead?

Long Con wrote:I was thinking about Macdougall's good Day 1 performance.

Can you explain what was good about it? He just seemed to rattle shit off.

Long Con wrote:Long Con
thellama73
MacDougall
Epignosis
notsawyer540
Dfaraday
TheFloyd73
Marmot
DrWilgy
Quin

This is a basic rainbow that I hastily constructed. I don't even know if it's exactly how I feel.

You called notsawyer a civilian earlier this afternoon. Why is he lower than MacDougall?

And right now my vote is worth chickenshit anyway.

notsawyer literally has five votes:

notsawyer540
5
Quin (3), thellama73 (4), DFaraday (7), TheFloyd73 (10), DrWilgy (12)
33%

I don't understand your question.

I'm about to pull my hair out.

Stop lynching people for doing things that are weird, inconsistent, unhelpful, or that you just don't like.

Tell me what they have to gain by doing what they do IF THEY ARE MAFIA.

If you are voting notsawyer, explain to me why he did what he did as mafia.

notsawyer now has five votes. If anyone has motive to lynch him, it's me.

I am not worried about defending him in this way and he comes up bad anyway. I think I've demonstrated I'm not bad and his actions against me show we're not on a team on top of that.

I want to know why he's guilty for gunning so hard for me.

Why is Floyd bad?

Marmot wrote:Some people do have a tendency to fit evidence to a narrative. That's just how they play. I agree that notknowing notsawyer notreally knots my naughty read of him.

But you are not solely responsible for SVS being lynched. I deserve some of the blame for pointing players in that direction, even if I wasn't as vocal or convincing as you were. What I don't understand is why notsawyer has basically ignored my role in that lynch, and followed my suspicion of you. Not only that, but he interacted little with me when I was hounding you. I find that lack of engagement suspicious, especially since you are his top suspect.

So if he's mafia, what's his strategy there?

Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Moreover, notsawyer is taking three votes right from the get-go and his reaction to all this is to double down on his smear campaign:
I don't know if he realizes that he has votes.
Which means no teammate has informed him of this fact.

I don't know if you're defending him or suggesting he has a teammate who hasn't been around today. Both are plausible.

I'm only defending him in the sense that I am considering his motivations for posting what he has been posting (something he refuses to do for me, but oh well). Do you agree or disagree with what I've said about him above?

Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Moreover, notsawyer is taking three votes right from the get-go and his reaction to all this is to double down on his smear campaign:
I don't know if he realizes that he has votes.

Which means no teammate has informed him of this fact.

Llama, you used a curious word in describing notsawyer: "Equivocating." How does this adjective apply to notsawyer? "Resolute" or "stubborn" is the word I would have used.

DFaraday wrote:
Epignosis wrote:I want to know the following from everybody:

1. Where you stand on notsawyer and why.
I'm leaning bad on Notsawyer because he is tunneling Epi, forcing the facts to fit his suspicion (ie., blaming Epi alone for SVS's lynch), and cites Epi's lack of caught baddies despite the fact that Notsawyer is hardly looking at anyone but Epi, and so has also caught no baddies.

thellama73 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:I want to know the following from everybody:

1. Where you stand on notsawyer and why.
I think Sawyer has looked bad from Day 1. His equivocating, his dismissiveness, and his case on you seems forced. He is getting my vote today.

Long Con wrote:1. Where you stand on notsawyer and why.
I'm kind of okay with notsawyer. Epignosis' suspicion of him has some influence on me, but overall I think this interaction is civ/civ. I think his accusations seem genuine enough, even if I don't agree with them.

I am of two minds on notsawyer. If he were a Syndicate regular, someone with whom I had experience interacting with, I might have a clearer opinion of him, because a stubborn insistence is a trait I am more likely to believe comes from a civilian. Consider: If he's mafia, then he knows I'm not bad, so what's his exit strategy should he prove successful? I call that short-term gain, long-term loss.

Moreover, notsawyer is taking three votes right from the get-go and his reaction to all this is to double down on his smear campaign:

notsawyer540 wrote:I'm going to be out of the house until this evening. I'll catch back up and post my overall thoughts on everyone as soon as I get a chance.

One question I would like answered is: Have I really been forcing evidence to fit my conclusions, or has Epi's Fox-News-style misrepresentation of facts and events fooled too many of you?

In his first post since the Day began, he asks a loaded question and uses the phrase "misrepresentation of facts" without mentioning a single fact I misrepresented. And he asked me for evidence, and when I gave him plenty, he had nothing to say about it. That's not encouraging.

Still, if notsawyer is mafia, then he has accomplished nothing more than setting himself for the lynch today without even the consolation prize of getting me lynched first- and he doesn't seem fazed by that.

DFaraday wrote:
Epignosis wrote:DF is back in the naughty pile. Speak. Help civilians win.
I'm working on responding to your lengthy request right now.

Good. I'm going to bed.

I will not suffer a Day phase of Anti-Epi. I want mafia destroyed. Talk ye Democrats.

DF is back in the naughty pile. Speak. Help civilians win.

thellama73?

This is someone I would lynch. Look at his posts in relation to me. Does he want to accuse me or buddy up to me? Even he doesn't know.

Shit heap. That's where he goes.

Long Con goes in the naughty pile for being Long Con and asking me to trust him. Fuck that.

I don't understand MM this game. Mr. "I Would Never Kill Epignosis" A) Hasn't killed me and B) Tried to lynch me knowing I wouldn't kill Eloh.

He goes in the naughty pile.

MM's vote is on notsawyer right now. Why?

Wasn't he your big buddy to help take me down?

I want to know the following from everybody:

1. Where you stand on notsawyer and why.

2. Where you stand on Marmot and why.

3. Where you stand on Floyd and why.

4. Where you stand on DFaraday and why.

5. Where you stand on Quin and why.

6. Where you stand on thellama73 and why.

7. Where you stand on Long Con and why.

You get the idea. If I left you out, it wasn't personal.

Start talking. Tell me why you're good. Tell me why others are bad. Go.

Don't feel like talking?

Didn't think so.

Floyd.

Mr. Man.

Say a thing.

Who is getting your vote and dying?

Long Con wrote:
Marmot wrote:Thanks for the protection whoever protected me.
I didn't protect you, I protected Epignosis!

Yeah, lie detectable statements really do a lot of good for protectors.

I like this though.

There can only be three power roles in the game. Two of them are gone.

A smart fellow might reason that I wouldn't place myself in this unfortunate circumstance, especially with people thirsting for my blood.

This places the mafia in a dilemma: Either kill me and leave the remaining power role alive, or hunt for the remaining power role and have to put up with me another phase.

Typical Democrat. Caring the most about those who contribute the least.

notsawyer540 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
notsawyer540 wrote:I don't need to make anything fit, and I don't believe you.
I don't care that you don't believe me. If you are a civilian, your task is to figure out if you should believe me and try to frame my posts in the context of being from a civilian. You've given no time to that and made up your mind despite the real evidence working against your suspicion.
What evidence?

That I would not kill Eloh Night 1 (and probably not at all). That is evidence. I've been bad a lot on this forum, and Eloh has played with me many many many times. You can see how many games I've been bad in that Eloh played, and you can see if I've killed her in any of them.

You can deny it, as you've continued to do, or you can look at the history and realize that I'm telling the truth. And if there's about three years worth of evidence pointing to my innocence, do you think I would burn that credibility to win a little Heist?

But let's say that's not good enough. Let's pretend none of that history exists.

What motive would I have to kill someone who was putting a lot of stock into what I say and following my vote? Does that sound like a good strategy to you?

notsawyer540 wrote:I don't need to make anything fit, and I don't believe you.

I don't care that you don't believe me. If you are a civilian, your task is to figure out if you should believe me and try to frame my posts in the context of being from a civilian. You've given no time to that and made up your mind despite the real evidence working against your suspicion.

If you are a civilian and you lynch me, you will be disappointed. It's a pity that you already have a conclusion formed about me and now you are bent on making everything that happens fit your conclusion.

That's a horrible way to approach this, and pretty ironic coming from a guy talking about "civ moves."

[size=200]Long Con[/size] wrote:Trust me

DFaraday wrote:Why are dead players and MP voting in this poll?

The host implied they could.

Long Con wrote:Anyone willing to make a lie detector statement? I'm Civ, and I support Hillary Clinton.

Long Con, this troubles me. I don't recall you ever coming out with a lie detector statement out of the blue like this. What prompted you to state this?

The roles in Red vs. Blue were fairly complex, and there can only be three of them in play due to the limitations of the Heist format. I (correctly) assumed that there would be an independent, so that eats up one power role. I am also assuming there are three vanilla mafia and two civilian power roles. I feel confident that there are two mafia remaining. If I am correct, it would mean there is one more civilian power role out there. Given the complexities of G-Man's power roles in the previous outing, I do not believe there is a lie detector.

Did you have any reason to believe in a Heist there would be a lie detector role?

notsawyer540 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:"Good catch." "Another good catch."

Please. If you are a civilian, you would be defending the shit out of me, except, well, you don't know that Eloh is my wife and I wouldn't kill her Night 1. Jack didn't know that. People keep acting like I'm the kind of person that would kill her to fuck with everyone. Am I? People also think I have this huge reputation where I would throw my teammates under the bus at every turn, but I have only done that one intentionally, and only twice because of circumstance. If you think you've caught me because I forgot something or because I don't say what you want to hear, guess what?

"You a damn fool." -Boo
Do you honestly believe that there wouldn't be at least one person on an entire baddie team who would know that you and Eloh are married?

I don't think we've caught you because you "forgot" things a couple times. I know we've caught you because of the way you've been controlling the narrative the entire time. You got Scotty. Bravo. But then when we were handed a baddie on a silver platter, you and Wilgy convinced everyone not to lynch him against all reason. You let a baddie live so that he can further influence and poison the voting and the discussion. Then you got SVS lynched, who was civ. Now you think I'm bad because I've had the audacity to name you as one of my top suspects--despite the fact that all of your efforts have been centered around lynching two people who weren't mafia and not lynching the guy who was.

You didn't catch anything. You're acting like I attempted to grab a bunch of credit for lynching Scotty with the underlined statement. Then you blame me and Wilgy for people agreeing with my suspicion of S~V~S. If lynching Jack was so important to you, you should have done a better job than me in making a case for that and getting people to agree with you. And I didn't get S~V~S lynched. Over a half a dozen people did. Are they all bad?

What's the narrative going to be when you lynch me and see that I'm not bad?

I'm sorry that I had a really good reason to believe llama is bad here. And I lost it. I feel like it still exists. When I was cooking, I was convinced he was bad.

Check your box MM.

MacDougall wrote:
Epignosis wrote:"Good catch." "Another good catch."

Please. If you are a civilian, you would be defending the shit out of me, except, well, you don't know that Eloh is my wife and I wouldn't kill her Night 1. Jack didn't know that. People keep acting like I'm the kind of person that would kill her to fuck with everyone. Am I? People also think I have this huge reputation where I would throw my teammates under the bus at every turn, but I have only done that one intentionally, and only twice because of circumstance. If you think you've caught me because I forgot something or because I don't say what you want to hear, guess what?

"You a damn fool." -Boo
This post is really the first one I've felt conclusively makes you a civ read to me because of the first statement being so difficult to image a mafia player saying. But I do encourage you to stop using a wifom argument to defend yourself. Your best argument for being civ, to me, is your tone and your effort. The fact that you keep defending saying "I wouldn't kill eloh" is hollow because hypothetical scum Epignosis isn't the only one on his team that has that say and I can easily envision a team where someone suggesting killing Eloh, you saying something to the effect of "I'd rather not but it's not just up to me" and then someone familiar to you saying something to the effect of "if we do that you'll be able to use it as a wifom defence" and then arriving exactly where we are in the thread. It is an entirely plausible scenario.

Unless you would have me believe that you would completely deny a potential teammate the opportunity because of a "she's my partner" argument in which case I'd hate to have you as a teammate in a game with Elohcin and I think you are better at this game than to have arbitrary rules as such.

This is how you know Mac and I have never been on a team before.

Quin wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Quin wrote:Good catch, Epi.
Want to know something weird? Maybe this will help MM with his case against me that bad memory = bad.

I went to cook supper and had the sudden epiphany that thellama73 was bad because he was feigning ignorance. He had posted something that I didn't think thellama73 would really think. I was stirring my cabbage and onions and recalling that he confused Jack and notsawyer earlier. I was hot on his trail.

With my bierocks in the oven, I came up here to find the post I thought he had made and guess what?

No such post exists.

Such post definitely does exist. I remember him mentioning it twice.

No, there was something else I was recalling, but I must've imagined it.

Quin wrote:Good catch, Epi.

Want to know something weird? Maybe this will help MM with his case against me that bad memory = bad.

I went to cook supper and had the sudden epiphany that thellama73 was bad because he was feigning ignorance. He had posted something that I didn't think thellama73 would really think. I was stirring my cabbage and onions and recalling that he confused Jack and notsawyer earlier. I was hot on his trail.

With my bierocks in the oven, I came up here to find the post I thought he had made and guess what?

No such post exists.

"Good catch." "Another good catch."

Please. If you are a civilian, you would be defending the shit out of me, except, well, you don't know that Eloh is my wife and I wouldn't kill her Night 1. Jack didn't know that. People keep acting like I'm the kind of person that would kill her to fuck with everyone. Am I? People also think I have this huge reputation where I would throw my teammates under the bus at every turn, but I have only done that one intentionally, and only twice because of circumstance. If you think you've caught me because I forgot something or because I don't say what you want to hear, guess what?

"You a damn fool." -Boo

Search found 329 matches