The Syndicate

Epignosis wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Question for Mr. Con and Mme. JC:

Both of you voted for MM after he voted himself and after bf had five votes. Correct me if I am wrong about this, but I can't recall anytime you two have ever voted someone because of chronic self-voting. I understand the reasoning, sure, but why now? Why today?
You are lying about what you can recall. Why?
Nah, not lying. You're being evasive.

How about you go ahead and answer the implied question: Have you ever voted someone because of chronic self-voting?
We both know that you already know the answer to this, so saying you can't recall it is a lie. Why don't you just get to the point you're trying to make, I'm not playing an Epig mind-game.
If I already knew the answer, I wouldn't be asking. But thanks all the same.

rabbit8 wrote:Violence is never the answer.

I have a vote that says otherwise.

rabbit8 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
rabbit8 wrote:Why the accusations on LC then in your posts?
Loaded questions are for children who hit their siblings and need something stronger than a yes/no question to be tricked.

If you don't get my meaning, then please point me to these accusations in my posts.

Why do you hit your siblings? Offhanded accusations are easy to make and pointless. Take a stand, be a man.

Me? I hit my siblings to take their keys so they don't drink and drive.

rabbit8 wrote:Why the accusations on LC then in your posts?

Loaded questions are for children who hit their siblings and need something stronger than a yes/no question to be tricked.

If you don't get my meaning, then please point me to these accusations in my posts.

Long Con wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Question for Mr. Con and Mme. JC:

Both of you voted for MM after he voted himself and after bf had five votes. Correct me if I am wrong about this, but I can't recall anytime you two have ever voted someone because of chronic self-voting. I understand the reasoning, sure, but why now? Why today?
You are lying about what you can recall. Why?
Nah, not lying. You're being evasive.

How about you go ahead and answer the implied question: Have you ever voted someone because of chronic self-voting?
We both know that you already know the answer to this, so saying you can't recall it is a lie. Why don't you just get to the point you're trying to make, I'm not playing an Epig mind-game.

If I already knew the answer, I wouldn't be asking. But thanks all the same.

Long Con wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Question for Mr. Con and Mme. JC:

Both of you voted for MM after he voted himself and after bf had five votes. Correct me if I am wrong about this, but I can't recall anytime you two have ever voted someone because of chronic self-voting. I understand the reasoning, sure, but why now? Why today?
You are lying about what you can recall. Why?

Nah, not lying. You're being evasive.

How about you go ahead and answer the implied question: Have you ever voted someone because of chronic self-voting?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Question for Mr. Con and Mme. JC:

Both of you voted for MM after he voted himself and after bf had five votes. Correct me if I am wrong about this, but I can't recall anytime you two have ever voted someone because of chronic self-voting. I understand the reasoning, sure, but why now? Why today?
I believe the exact same thing happened in Roger Rabbit.

Epig, do you think bf was lying in his original revelation about the will, or telling the truth?
Mmm, no. "The exact same thing" did not happen in Roger Rabbit. Thank you for answering for them.

As for blindfaeth, I don't think he was lying. He had no reason to. I do, however, believe he was inflating an assumption, passing it off as truth, and shouting down anyone who disagreed with him.
Another question. Do you think SVS is lying?

No.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Question for Mr. Con and Mme. JC:

Both of you voted for MM after he voted himself and after bf had five votes. Correct me if I am wrong about this, but I can't recall anytime you two have ever voted someone because of chronic self-voting. I understand the reasoning, sure, but why now? Why today?
I believe the exact same thing happened in Roger Rabbit.

Epig, do you think bf was lying in his original revelation about the will, or telling the truth?

Mmm, no. "The exact same thing" did not happen in Roger Rabbit. Thank you for answering for them.

As for blindfaeth, I don't think he was lying. He had no reason to. I do, however, believe he was inflating an assumption, passing it off as truth, and shouting down anyone who disagreed with him.

Question for Mr. Con and Mme. JC:

Both of you voted for MM after he voted himself and after bf had five votes. Correct me if I am wrong about this, but I can't recall anytime you two have ever voted someone because of chronic self-voting. I understand the reasoning, sure, but why now? Why today?

Then again, there's Minimalism Mafia, and the civilians hurried that one right up.

I actually have my own theory about that. The more time you give people, the more likely they are to procrastinate and miss out.

This is already reading like a Keeler work. Well done host.

I bet the real killer isn't even playing and won't show up until Day 17.

Zomberella12 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:I voted Dearborn. I am in the middle of rereading The Dark Tower books, and that name figured in the books.

And BR, I know the point you were making. I think it is a 50/50 on Zomba BUT I think if she had the civ role, she would have said more, and said what she did say differently. I could be wrong
Just remember that the "super civ" Zomba that you are used to in Donner and Death Note got NK'd.

I'm bugged that BF said that the will said that killing me would give him lots of money and then jumped to the millionaire conclusion. Maybe my role is okay after all.

Not if you keep talking about it, it won't.

I'll take a stroll with my lady down Archer Avenue and make sure Mr. Con doesn't try funny business.

Epignosis wrote:
Golden wrote:I, for one, am not surprised this site has such a major bias towards mafia wins if this: "I'd rather trust a man who doesn't shout what he's found." is the prevailing attitude.
I've hosted right around 25% of the games on this site. I can tell you why civilians lose a lot.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:That's a lot of people not voting right there.

A Person
Bea
Canucklehead
DFaraday
fingersplints
ShepinWolfsClothing
Sophie/Mongoose

There's one reason.

All right then.

Just seemed like a revelation that would bring more talk between the willer and the willee. Nothing?

Is that all?

Zomberella12 wrote:
blindfaeth wrote:Oh well, if people are interested in lynching me I suppose I'll share what I know. At least if I die, SVS won't be able to lie to you about whose will it is. It is Zomberellas will. The reason I did not come after her in the thread as many of you suggested is because she was literally absent for so long. Which I think is oddly convenient, but whatever. Final thoughts, I think dom is bad, he's only analytical like this when he has a team. I think epi and bills are bad. Think SVS is misguided. Good luck
Well, I think BF ruined my role. Thanks, for that. Civvie or not, you blew it!

Now that's interesting, right there.

I'm voting blindfaeth.

A number of people don't agree with me about civilian behavior not actually existing...fine. We can debate that. But what blindfaeth basically did was wave his will in the air and fearmonger on two fronts. First he insisted (yeah, I don't think "insisted" is too strong a verb) that the author of his will was a certain ROLE. Second, he waved it under a BUNCH of people's noses who disagreed with him about it.

Now that he has three votes, he implies that S~V~S is bad and basically gives up? Nah.

I'll be recording music most of tomorrow morning and prepping for Heroes Unlimited #2 after that. I'm fine voting now.

blindfaeth wrote:Oh well, if people are interested in lynching me I suppose I'll share what I know. At least if I die, SVS won't be able to lie to you about whose will it is. It is Zomberellas will. The reason I did not come after her in the thread as many of you suggested is because she was literally absent for so long. Which I think is oddly convenient, but whatever. Final thoughts, I think dom is bad, he's only analytical like this when he has a team. I think epi and bills are bad. Think SVS is misguided. Good luck

I figured the "author" of the will was a lower poster. That's what I meant when I said, "I also learned something because blindfaeth spilled the beans."

Home now for the weekend. No more fucking work filter.

I remember something else I wrote. BF told Dom (paraphrasing) that he takes what Golden says more objectively, but when Dom pressed him on it, BF said, "show me where I said I trusted Golden." The discussion came down to BF saying that he did not trust Golden, but that he didn't NOT trust Golden either. That's doublespeak. blindfaeth puts more stock in what Golden says than he does anybody else, yet he assures us that isn't him trusting Golden out of the gate.

Never mind. I can't even access the quotes I wanted to pull anymore. Oh well. Don't care. Posting what I think anyway, without links or quotes, quick and dirty.

S~V~S: Two Thursdays out of the month are always very busy for us. Yesterday was one of those.

Trying to decide who is bad between two people when you only have one vote to cast is hardly "waffling."

Regarding blindfaeth: He has named or complied with at least five suspicions on Day 1: Bullzeye, Turnip Head, Long Con, MP, and me. He went from saying Black Rock had a great post (or something like that) about MP, but later said that he would be suspicious of anyone who voted for MP, thus adding to his potential pool of Day 1 suspects. He strikes me as someone trying to get something rolling on just about anyone, but doesn't want to cast the first stone.

I almost always do. Didn't the one time it mattered.

I'm so pissed. I composed a large post with URLs and quotes and got the effing filter page when I hit preview. Got it again hitting back on the browser.

But uh-uh. I'll format this in the damn Death Note thread and copy and paste in the quick reply box if I have to.

Golden wrote:With a 72 hour day there is no need for me to rush. But it's gonna take a change in approach from you or someone else coming up with something compelling for me to look in a different direction.

No rush and you're the first person to vote.

Golden wrote:You know how MP was feeling about MM's self-voting being anti-civilian, and it got him real mad?

That's exactly how I feel about the kind of thing epi is pulling right now. I'd lynch him day one every time until it stopped. It's utterly anti-civilian behaviour. I don't know why anyone would put up with it, honestly..

linki - TH, sorry its not a 'brand', its just a cop out.

Anti-civilian behavior? That's whatever you can do to make people think you're a civilian, right?

blindfaeth wrote:Not to defend Mp but I would caution anyone to reconsider voting him if you are. You will certainly have my eye. He had a very stressful day one in another game recently and I can tell he's frustrated.

Linki with mp

I'm already on your naughty list. Can I vote MP?

MovingPictures07 wrote:I'm voting myself. What a load of crock.

Metalmarsh89 would be so proud of you.

It's like being a classroom teacher:

You end up with students who haven't heard your jokes, so you can make them think you're really hilarious.

This game is already a lot like that.

Golden wrote:Epi, I'm being serious here.

You are choosing to be obstructive, vague, obtuse, and many other words that all mean the same thing.

You make posts about bf that sound like you are suspicious of him, but then you say:

Epignosis wrote:You'll see me take risks as soon as I have something I believe in. Right now I have a useless item and not a lot I'm particular convinced about. I'm sure that will change soon enough. I'm pushing where I see things and seeing what comes back. My first was at bullz, my second at you. Bullz feels civ to me. I'm still not convinced about you. I think your responses have been inconsistent and I'm not convinced your suspicion of bf or me was genuine.
I wasn't suspicious of bf. I just called him foolish. Do you see what you did there?

Whats this. You 'weren't' suspicious of bf... at the time he posted whatever... but now you are suspicious of bf? You made the above post after the linki thing, by the way.

All I want from you is that you are straight up. Don't tie me in knots.[/quote]

I like new people.

Golden wrote:Which is it. Do you suspect me or do you suspect blindfaeth???

I am quite literally tearing my hair out with you!

That's cute.

Golden wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Anybody here believe I once caught a bad guy because he or she lied about "linki?"
Sure...

You know what I'd like? I'd like you to actually tell me what you want me to defend against, instead of doing this vague thing. It's very frustrating having to respond to a case that shifts in front of your eyes.

I didn't make a case on you. If you can make a case on Day 1, you have shitty Mafia.

But I think blindfaeth is a bullshitter. I asked him carefully about linki. I pay attention when people put that in their posts.

Epignosis wrote:Anybody here believe I once caught a bad guy because he or she lied about "linki?"

thellama73 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
thellama73 wrote:Oh, and the pictures you submit will be posted publicly, so do try not to out yourselves.
Nobody knows what my penis looks like, right?
Elohcin is playing this game, remember.

So no.

thellama73 wrote:Oh, and the pictures you submit will be posted publicly, so do try not to out yourselves.

Nobody knows what my penis looks like, right?

Anybody here believe I once caught a bad guy because he or she lied about "linki?"

Golden wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Golden wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Golden wrote:OK Epi... but in that case... why come after me?
You're the one not taking any risks.
That's actually a fair comment. Especially in that I'm not committing to bf being good.

You'll see me take risks as soon as I have something I believe in. Right now I have a useless item and not a lot I'm particular convinced about. I'm sure that will change soon enough. I'm pushing where I see things and seeing what comes back. My first was at bullz, my second at you. Bullz feels civ to me. I'm still not convinced about you. I think your responses have been inconsistent and I'm not convinced your suspicion of bf or me was genuine.
I wasn't suspicious of bf. I just called him foolish. Do you see what you did there?
If it's me you were suspicious of, I'm not sure why you were framing it all as being about bf. Clearly I was having a very different conversation to the one I thought I was having. But one thing I am not is disingenuous. I didn't turn anything around on you. I admit, you never expressly said you were suspicious of bf, as far as I can see from having a look back. I made an assumption. But I didn't just make it up out of thin air. You chose to lead me there and then turn it around on me.

I said I have my ways.

Boogs wrote:Im just saying hi and the kitty is still alive Things have been busy and it is sad I couldn't join this game because both Bullz and BF asked me to, but work is very stressful right now with me being our branch's team captain for March of Dimes and I don't have the time to put in to play with that and other events each week :/ But maybe soon when it slows down and I can give a game a whirl. Mrow!
Also an extra wave to my favorite host Epignosis
Meow you later peeps!

When I saw you online the other day my heart jumped for joy.

blindfaeth wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
blindfaeth wrote:Well here is another opportunity for you. Who are your baddie teammates? :P

Linki, K.
To whom is this post addressed?
You?

Are you positive? Please double check this time.

LizKeen wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Golden wrote:If BF is bad, saying what he said carries the penalty that he is being hounded by several people who look very likely to vote for him...

How is that no penalty??? And bf certainly isn't dumb enough to think he would get no heat for it.
I have no intention of voting for him. If he's bad, he'll live a while. If he's good, he'll probably die soon. That's the fate of loose lips around here.

And as I said, his actions have revealed something to me. Unfortunately I cannot pursue that at this time.
Why not?

I don't like self-fulfilling prophecies?

Golden wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Golden wrote:OK Epi... but in that case... why come after me?
You're the one not taking any risks.
That's actually a fair comment. Especially in that I'm not committing to bf being good.

You'll see me take risks as soon as I have something I believe in. Right now I have a useless item and not a lot I'm particular convinced about. I'm sure that will change soon enough. I'm pushing where I see things and seeing what comes back. My first was at bullz, my second at you. Bullz feels civ to me. I'm still not convinced about you. I think your responses have been inconsistent and I'm not convinced your suspicion of bf or me was genuine.

I wasn't suspicious of bf. I just called him foolish. Do you see what you did there?

Golden wrote:OK Epi... but in that case... why come after me?

You're the one not taking any risks.

Golden wrote:If BF is bad, saying what he said carries the penalty that he is being hounded by several people who look very likely to vote for him...

How is that no penalty??? And bf certainly isn't dumb enough to think he would get no heat for it.

I have no intention of voting for him. If he's bad, he'll live a while. If he's good, he'll probably die soon. That's the fate of loose lips around here.

And as I said, his actions have revealed something to me. Unfortunately I cannot pursue that at this time.

Golden wrote:It's fair not to trust my words or bfs words about each other, and ignore them as having any value in deciding whether one or both of us is good or bad. I'm not asking you to trust me that bf is good.

However - you were not saying 'I'm not taking it into account'... you were actively discrediting both of us on the basis we are buddying up...

And you are really mixing up your words now...

Epignosis wrote:
Golden wrote:Also, why put such a big target on your back so early if you are bad?
...because you won't get killed if your team controls the kill?

Epignosis wrote:
Golden wrote:2) Are you trying to tell me bf isn't in the firing line for a lynch today? That's the target I was talking about. He knew he was risking having people come down hard on him... especially if he was on the money, when it would be guaranteed.
I'm trying to tell you he's Night fodder if he's good. When he said what he said, he said, "Kill me please." Terrible judgment on his part.
I asked you why he would put a big target on his back. Your first response was essentially 'he didn't'... your second was 'he did'. Which is it? Frankly, I think he did take a massive risk of being lynched... good or bad... do you agree with that?

No sir. I said what I meant: If BF is bad, saying what he did carries no penalty. This is not a two-Mafia set. It's a one-Mafia set. If BF is good, then he's good as fucked. In the latter case, he "dun goofed."

Just speaking as a game-maker, one who has had several conversations with thellama73, your host (sometimes in person over beers).

Golden wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Golden wrote:@SVS

Would bf buddy up to me if he was civ? Yes. I know he gets confidence and energy from us seeing eye to eye. That part is absolute truth.
Would bf buddy up to me if he is bad? Yes. Bf is constantly aware that I am also the best at ratting out his baddie game, and I think he would be particularly aware of the fact I might be able to call him out.

The thing that makes me feel most comfortable about him? Our heads actually are in a very similar space, with eyes on the same people. This does give me some confidence.

Golden wrote:Although I was hoping the will would be a rezz for you if you died
That's a...thing to say on Day 1.

Golden wrote:Also, why put such a big target on your back so early if you are bad?
...because you won't get killed if your team controls the kill?

Golden wrote:The thing that makes me feel least comfortable about him? I don't like that I feel this drawn in to defending him so vehemently so early.

Golden wrote:Although I was hoping the will would be a rezz for you if you died
^You said that on your own accord.
Epi - 1) I recognise saying something like 'I was hoping it would be a rezz if you died' is kinda sus lol. Stupid, you might say. But you have to know the history bf and I have. We really are mafia best buds. It's not 'I hoped you had it regardless of your alignment', and I don't think it would reasonably be taken that way by people who know the relationship bf and I have well over the course of many games. We are always inclined to start a game from a position of trust.

Tell you a story. Takes place in the future.

In a few days, somebody is going to come around asking my opinion on a little lady named Elohcin. That's somebody who had the bad judgment to marry me once upon a time. That somebody will cite how good I am at reading her and how I've never been wrong or whatever. Even though I said I won't be offering a husbandly analysis of her henceforth, someone will ask. Here's the thing- I used what I was good at, and eventually Elohcin and I were bad together. That time came in the Game of Champions 2013. We lost like drowned rats (due to grave misfortune and no faults of our own), but we were able to exploit nearly a year of history to our advantage for quite a while.

And even though we used that as teammates, I still get asked to analyze her. Do you see where I'm going with this? Previous relationships in previous games mean little to me. Words now mean more.

Golden wrote:2) Are you trying to tell me bf isn't in the firing line for a lynch today? That's the target I was talking about. He knew he was risking having people come down hard on him... especially if he was on the money, when it would be guaranteed.

I'm trying to tell you he's Night fodder if he's good. When he said what he said, he said, "Kill me please." Terrible judgment on his part.

Golden wrote:3) I do defend bf of my own accord. But I also can see myself objectively enough to recognise that bf could rely on me doing so, and could use it as a tactic to take me down with him if he was bad.

Perhaps.

ShēpInWolfsClothing wrote:@LongCon

Long Con wrote:Oh, never mind - BR just reminded me what it stands for! Don't tell anyone, it's a good secret!
Just moments before this, you asked what svs stands for. Then this. What form of communication did BR use to remind you?

Carrier pigeon.

It stopped by my house on the way and shat in my tomatoes.

Am I suddenly invisible?

blindfaeth wrote:Well here is another opportunity for you. Who are your baddie teammates? :P

Linki, K.

To whom is this post addressed?

blindfaeth wrote:
Epignosis wrote:And you best sleep with one eye open.
LOL is that a threat?

A threat?

You know what an idiom is, right?

That would have better with

at the end but looks like I too blew a great opportunity.

Search found 268 matches