The Syndicate

Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Dec 11, 2018 7:19 pm
Epignosis wrote: ↑Tue Dec 11, 2018 7:12 pm Fucking superfluous comma up there mocking me.
Nutella’s dead

Oh.

Fucking superfluous comma up there mocking me.

I like to read everything before I post, but hot damn people must have a lot on their minds.

Here is where I stand as of page 24:

My initial view of Sloonei has waned, even though I don't agree with him about juliets (yet). Sorsha, despite what Sloonei claimed, my opinion of him wasn't fake. Exaggerated is a more appropriate adjective. Had I been awake and not passed out after football and beer, I would have (probably) changed my vote somewhere (probably) to fuck with people.

I see DharmaHelper has two votes as of now. I don't know why yet, but I do not suspect him at this time.

If I had to shoot someone in the heart right now, it would be G-Man. I quoted a post of his earlier, that I want to talk about when I get a chance.

I think MacDougall is good.

I would like to take a chance and say I think nutella is good, but we all know how that works out.

That is where I is.

Now I is having margaritas and making steak fajitas.

I just got through page 24.

wolbre got lynched because he said "Do it bitch."

Well okay then.

G-Man wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 11:07 pm KA-POW! We watched Incredibles 2 tonight. I wasn’t all that impressed.

Anywho, the top five talkers by post count when I snagged it were Sloonei, DH, juliets, timmer, and Epi.

Sloonei was quite talkative for someone with a paper to write. From my skim, he started out throwing poo everywhere to fetch reactions. Standard issue stuff. He tried to shut down Epi’s ‘gotcha’ sequence and became less poo-flingy as the day went on. By the end of the ISO he felt more accommodating and interactive rather than just “WHAM with the poo and tell me how you feel about that.” More dialogue and less shooting from the hip. It’s been a long time since I played with full-bore Sloonei.

DH was a pretty good read but I know he’s wiley as all get out after seeing his charm offensive in Outpost 31. Thing of beauty, that one. He talks about a number of people without going too far in interpreting their actions. No seed-planting as far as I can detect. Nothing out of place there, but Outpost 31.

Juliets spends most of her time responding to people’s thoughts and stances on other people without offering many of her own thoughts on anyone. I feel like this is normal but it’s also easy to fake. Her post count is high but it is, as she admits, all over the place. Is she being a sponge or just feigning a somewhat active appearance?

Timmer feels like Timmer. Some general discussion the first half of Day 1 but he doesn’t just ride the phase out in neutral. He’s warming up, gradually engaging in discussion about specific people and offering his own insight. Progression doesn’t always mean anything but it felt good to see it from a Top 5 Talker.

Epi seemed to Epi along but then hit Sloonei with a try-hard sledgehammer with extra stank on it. He’s a force to be reckoned with regardless of alignment, and no one can accuse him of dialing it in early here. It’s a bold play for a baddie to try to demolish a civvie like this early but there are also two baddie teams, so baddies are hunting too. Fairly standard stuff but the presence of multiple baddie teams gives me pause.

If I had to put these five in order of most likely to be faking it to least likely, my gut puts it like this:

Juliets
Epi
Sloonei
DH
Timmer

I'm through page 17 and posting this as a bookmark. I want to revisit this assessment.

Speaking of assessment, I'm off to give one after a two-hour delay due to ice on the road (which looks like it's still there

).

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 10:41 pm
Quin wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 9:34 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 9:19 pm
Quin wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 8:24 pm
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 8:16 pm
Turnip Head wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 10:59 am
Lunalee wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 8:30 pm My valid suspicion of Colin shows that day one can contain valid suspicions.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 amI have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin
My question is for Epignosis, is the first quote suss?
No.

Double-standards, and what not, but I don't care.

Women write differently than men.
Epi is bad for not checking the context behind why Luna was using the word valid.
Or Turnip is bad for posing the question without checking the context behind why Luna was using the word valid.

got em
I don't follow pls explain
Sloonei and Luna's qualifiers are different. One could argue Sloonei was qualifying his post - "I have a genuine suspicion..." but Luna's use of valid is a reference to her earlier rebuttal where Mac said Day 1 cases are based on nothing and a direct quote using the term valid from SVS. The fact that she repeats the word valid in the same post should make this obvious.

Epi made a blanket statement about how women post which means he didn't check context. If he did he'd have realised the difference between the two. I don't expect this from town.

Mmmmm ok I see. Don't think I agree though. I have other issues with Epi's gender-based statement but I think he is town. I think the point is a little stronger against TH though.

In my American literature course in college back in the day, the professor would assign weekly quizzes in class. The quizzes would consist of various passages, and my task was to identify the author of each one. The first thing I could decipher with each passage was whether a dude or gal wrote it.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 10:37 pm Taking a closer look at Luna to see how I feel about her contributions as a whole:
Cites a rule that could be broken if we're not careful. This can be seen in the same vein as DDL's mechanics-talk which got him into trouble. I'm not sure I want to treat it that way, but it's there.

Lunalee wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 3:23 pm @Sorsha Hi! I don't think I've played with you before. Also you're voting the same as me, and I thought that was cool.
Just sayin' hello. This post doesn't really do anything at all. Friendliness is forbidden in these parts. This would be a bit of evidence against a sorsha/luna baddie pairing if we ever get that far.

No it wouldn't.

Quin wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 9:34 pm
nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 9:19 pm
Quin wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 8:24 pm
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 8:16 pm
Turnip Head wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 10:59 am
Lunalee wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 8:30 pm My valid suspicion of Colin shows that day one can contain valid suspicions.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 amI have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin
My question is for Epignosis, is the first quote suss?
No.

Double-standards, and what not, but I don't care.

Women write differently than men.
Epi is bad for not checking the context behind why Luna was using the word valid.
Or Turnip is bad for posing the question without checking the context behind why Luna was using the word valid.

got em
I don't follow pls explain
Sloonei and Luna's qualifiers are different. One could argue Sloonei was qualifying his post - "I have a genuine suspicion..." but Luna's use of valid is a reference to her earlier rebuttal where Mac said Day 1 cases are based on nothing and a direct quote using the term valid from SVS. The fact that she repeats the word valid in the same post should make this obvious.

Epi made a blanket statement about how women post which means he didn't check context. If he did he'd have realised the difference between the two. I don't expect this from town.

I didn't need to check context because I understood the post the first time I read it. And I read it as being deliberately snarky. I smiled when I read it.

Dear God. A guy goes to work and comes home sixteen pages behind. What the hell?

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 11:08 am
colonialbob wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 9:33 am Jackofhearts2005-bydoobydoo, where are you? We have much to discuss
It's my daughter's fourth birthday today so I'm not going to be super active for the rest of the phase.

Would love to be atmentioned with cases and questions though.

Didn't know you had a kid.

Turnip Head wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 10:59 am
Lunalee wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 8:30 pm My valid suspicion of Colin shows that day one can contain valid suspicions.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 amI have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin
My question is for Epignosis, is the first quote suss?

No.

Double-standards, and what not, but I don't care.

Women write differently than men.

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 4:36 am #StopSuspectingPeopleForThinkingInShadesOfGrey2k19

It sounds like you have a personal stake in this movement.

Spoiler: show

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 4:38 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:22 am
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:05 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:01 am
timmer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:56 am Just reread it. You say you have a case but then the next sentences are all qualifiers and concerns about side angles which serve to weaken it. You spend more time on the side stuff that concern you about it than your actual suspicion. I don't know how else to explain your post to you, lol. I'm heading to bed, g'night. Hopefully you will see things clearly soon.
I said I have a suspicion, but that I also have reservations about the way Colin is being treated in the thread. If it’s messy, it’s because my thought process is unsettled. Because it’s Day 1. You’ve lamented yourself how difficult Day 1 often is. I wasn’t distracted from my suspicion on Colin. I was simply discussing it within the context of the game. I then laid out my case in another post shortly after, but you’re not looking at that because it’s not included in Epi’s (intentionally) bullshit case.
To what end do you think Epignosis has fabricated this case against you?
He does things like this often. I don't care to speculate on why I think he's doing this or what his motivations could be, but I've seen him employ fake reads as a civilian too many times to be upset by it. It's upsetting that you guys are listening to him though.

I can give evidence in support of my belief that he's full of bologna though. First, let's establish that Epignosis is not a frivolous mafia player. He is calculated and clever, and puts real, honest, sincere thought into the things that he does regardless of his alignment. Now let's look at the case that he made. It starts here:
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:18 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:14 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:10 am What mafia member says, "You know what? I'm going to plop a lazy third vote down on DDL early on in the day and draw attention to myself! That's a great idea!"

Lock civilian.
a careless one

this is not my primary concern about colin anyway.
You're the one who is bad.
Short, impulsive declaration of the read. Okay. Nothing too strong yet, but this isn't the most severe introduction to a case I've ever seen from him.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:23 am Sloonei is so bad.
This is where he starts to get a bit loosey goosey (read: not serious, frivolous). This type of post is more at home in Macdougall's ISO, not Epi's. He's just stirring a pot.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:23 am I am about to dismantle you in front of your peers. Are you ready?
Colorful and playful banter. Yeah, this is not serious business Epi.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:28 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 am I've added another town read to my list.

I have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin, but am I little anxious about the ease with which his case gained momentum. His post about bandwagonining DDL is patented shady-nasty business, but I don't know how to feel about the seemingly exaggerated scrutiny it's received. Then again, there's also the fact that we have two scum teams. It's entirely possible for scum to pile on an easy bandwagon that ends up being correct. I'd like for Colin to say things. I'll lay out my own gripes against them so he has more variety to respond to. I was voting for Colin before it was cool, after all.
You qualified your suspicion of Colin as "genuine." If you are a civilian, what else could it be? Why is the adjective necessary?

I know people will roll their eyes, but someone literally did this in the Mafia Universe game I was in, and I backed off on it, and the mafia won.

Fuck that. Fuck adverbs and adjectives and adjuncts.

The bottom line is that you started out with telling us your suspicion of Colin is genuine, but then you talked about how anxious you feel about other people agreeing that he's bad.

After that you have to talk about two bad teams. Who the fuck cares?

Voting Sloonei.
This is the case. This is a very narrow-minded case from Epignosis. Yes, he picks at linguistic oddities from time to time, but that's the only typical Epignosis characteristic in this post. I believe he knows exactly what I meant when I qualified my Colin read. I also don't believe he's suspicious of a person for expressing reservations about a Day 1 read. Epignosis, serious Epignosis, understands that Day 1 reads are fluid, unsettled, and changing. He might have a little bit of suspicion against me. He does not have "Sloonei is so bad, I'm going to dismantle him" level of suspicion. Certainly not 24 hours into a game.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:38 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:33 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:28 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 am I've added another town read to my list.

I have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin, but am I little anxious about the ease with which his case gained momentum. His post about bandwagonining DDL is patented shady-nasty business, but I don't know how to feel about the seemingly exaggerated scrutiny it's received. Then again, there's also the fact that we have two scum teams. It's entirely possible for scum to pile on an easy bandwagon that ends up being correct. I'd like for Colin to say things. I'll lay out my own gripes against them so he has more variety to respond to. I was voting for Colin before it was cool, after all.
You qualified your suspicion of Colin as "genuine." If you are a civilian, what else could it be? Why is the adjective necessary?

I know people will roll their eyes, but someone literally did this in the Mafia Universe game I was in, and I backed off on it, and the mafia won.

Fuck that. Fuck adverbs and adjectives and adjuncts.

The bottom line is that you started out with telling us your suspicion of Colin is genuine, but then you talked about how anxious you feel about other people agreeing that he's bad.

After that you have to talk about two bad teams. Who the fuck cares?

Voting Sloonei.
"Genuine" because the first play in the Day 1 Sloonei playbook is to throw crap at the wall and see what sticks. Case in point: My Tranq vote which I just talked about in my previous post. Or, you know, any other game I've ever played on the Syndicate. I clarified that my Colin suspicion is genuine to iterate that this is more than just pot-stirring. My vote is on him because I actually find things he's said to be suspicious, not solely because I want to make people respond to my vote being on him.
If your suspicion of Colin was true, none of the red shit I highlighted would logically follow. If you truly believe Colin is bad you wouldn't care if other people think so too (in fact, you should welcome it), you wouldn't care how many teams there are (who gives a shit?) and you wouldn't care if bad guys lynch other bad guys.

You are bad. This is obvious to me.
The bullshit alarms are sounding all over this post, but I don't care. This post presents my read as if all Day 1 reads should be black and white. "If you believe Colin is bad you wouldn't care if other people think so too, as if everything that is happening here is in its own little vacuum and my read should be concretely settled because I believe in it. He then reaffirms how "obvious" it is that I am bad as if any of this stuff holds weight, or as if he'd really be so sure this early in a game. This is not a sincere case from Epginosis.

Epi is my strongest town read in the game.
This post deserves a gold fucking medal

Also, some heads are fixing to roll around here.

Spoiler: show

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:38 am together. one civ. they were one person all along

That explains why I smell.

I don't understand how I can be anybody's "strongest town read."

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:22 am
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:05 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:01 am
timmer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:56 am Just reread it. You say you have a case but then the next sentences are all qualifiers and concerns about side angles which serve to weaken it. You spend more time on the side stuff that concern you about it than your actual suspicion. I don't know how else to explain your post to you, lol. I'm heading to bed, g'night. Hopefully you will see things clearly soon.
I said I have a suspicion, but that I also have reservations about the way Colin is being treated in the thread. If it’s messy, it’s because my thought process is unsettled. Because it’s Day 1. You’ve lamented yourself how difficult Day 1 often is. I wasn’t distracted from my suspicion on Colin. I was simply discussing it within the context of the game. I then laid out my case in another post shortly after, but you’re not looking at that because it’s not included in Epi’s (intentionally) bullshit case.
To what end do you think Epignosis has fabricated this case against you?
He does things like this often. I don't care to speculate on why I think he's doing this or what his motivations could be, but I've seen him employ fake reads as a civilian too many times to be upset by it. It's upsetting that you guys are listening to him though.

I can give evidence in support of my belief that he's full of bologna though. First, let's establish that Epignosis is not a frivolous mafia player. He is calculated and clever, and puts real, honest, sincere thought into the things that he does regardless of his alignment. Now let's look at the case that he made. It starts here:
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:18 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:14 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:10 am What mafia member says, "You know what? I'm going to plop a lazy third vote down on DDL early on in the day and draw attention to myself! That's a great idea!"

Lock civilian.
a careless one

this is not my primary concern about colin anyway.
You're the one who is bad.
Short, impulsive declaration of the read. Okay. Nothing too strong yet, but this isn't the most severe introduction to a case I've ever seen from him.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:23 am Sloonei is so bad.
This is where he starts to get a bit loosey goosey (read: not serious, frivolous). This type of post is more at home in Macdougall's ISO, not Epi's. He's just stirring a pot.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:23 am I am about to dismantle you in front of your peers. Are you ready?
Colorful and playful banter. Yeah, this is not serious business Epi.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:28 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 am I've added another town read to my list.

I have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin, but am I little anxious about the ease with which his case gained momentum. His post about bandwagonining DDL is patented shady-nasty business, but I don't know how to feel about the seemingly exaggerated scrutiny it's received. Then again, there's also the fact that we have two scum teams. It's entirely possible for scum to pile on an easy bandwagon that ends up being correct. I'd like for Colin to say things. I'll lay out my own gripes against them so he has more variety to respond to. I was voting for Colin before it was cool, after all.
You qualified your suspicion of Colin as "genuine." If you are a civilian, what else could it be? Why is the adjective necessary?

I know people will roll their eyes, but someone literally did this in the Mafia Universe game I was in, and I backed off on it, and the mafia won.

Fuck that. Fuck adverbs and adjectives and adjuncts.

The bottom line is that you started out with telling us your suspicion of Colin is genuine, but then you talked about how anxious you feel about other people agreeing that he's bad.

After that you have to talk about two bad teams. Who the fuck cares?

Voting Sloonei.
This is the case. This is a very narrow-minded case from Epignosis. Yes, he picks at linguistic oddities from time to time, but that's the only typical Epignosis characteristic in this post. I believe he knows exactly what I meant when I qualified my Colin read. I also don't believe he's suspicious of a person for expressing reservations about a Day 1 read. Epignosis, serious Epignosis, understands that Day 1 reads are fluid, unsettled, and changing. He might have a little bit of suspicion against me. He does not have "Sloonei is so bad, I'm going to dismantle him" level of suspicion. Certainly not 24 hours into a game.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:38 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:33 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:28 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 am I've added another town read to my list.

I have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin, but am I little anxious about the ease with which his case gained momentum. His post about bandwagonining DDL is patented shady-nasty business, but I don't know how to feel about the seemingly exaggerated scrutiny it's received. Then again, there's also the fact that we have two scum teams. It's entirely possible for scum to pile on an easy bandwagon that ends up being correct. I'd like for Colin to say things. I'll lay out my own gripes against them so he has more variety to respond to. I was voting for Colin before it was cool, after all.
You qualified your suspicion of Colin as "genuine." If you are a civilian, what else could it be? Why is the adjective necessary?

I know people will roll their eyes, but someone literally did this in the Mafia Universe game I was in, and I backed off on it, and the mafia won.

Fuck that. Fuck adverbs and adjectives and adjuncts.

The bottom line is that you started out with telling us your suspicion of Colin is genuine, but then you talked about how anxious you feel about other people agreeing that he's bad.

After that you have to talk about two bad teams. Who the fuck cares?

Voting Sloonei.
"Genuine" because the first play in the Day 1 Sloonei playbook is to throw crap at the wall and see what sticks. Case in point: My Tranq vote which I just talked about in my previous post. Or, you know, any other game I've ever played on the Syndicate. I clarified that my Colin suspicion is genuine to iterate that this is more than just pot-stirring. My vote is on him because I actually find things he's said to be suspicious, not solely because I want to make people respond to my vote being on him.
If your suspicion of Colin was true, none of the red shit I highlighted would logically follow. If you truly believe Colin is bad you wouldn't care if other people think so too (in fact, you should welcome it), you wouldn't care how many teams there are (who gives a shit?) and you wouldn't care if bad guys lynch other bad guys.

You are bad. This is obvious to me.
The bullshit alarms are sounding all over this post, but I don't care. This post presents my read as if all Day 1 reads should be black and white. "If you believe Colin is bad you wouldn't care if other people think so too, as if everything that is happening here is in its own little vacuum and my read should be concretely settled because I believe in it. He then reaffirms how "obvious" it is that I am bad as if any of this stuff holds weight, or as if he'd really be so sure this early in a game. This is not a sincere case from Epginosis.

Epi is my strongest town read in the game.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:05 am You got a read on lunalee?

Sloonei, I love you, but you're playing the part. You are not hunting. You are acting. And you are obvious. And you are bad.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:58 am I'm not overly concerned with DDL's post speculating about role alignments. It's not wrong to suggest that baddies will talk about mechanics rather than gameplay early on, but I don't necessarily get that vibe from DDL. That's not to say I get definitively town vibes from him, but he's shown himself to be a somewhat idiosyncratic player in the past and I've mistakenly held that against him more than once. Also, he's not shied away from gameplay discussion either.

That said, his posts haven't read as surefire civilian to me. Some things:
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 9:04 am Nutella is fluffing so hard this game I almost think she has a curse.
This is very far off from how I was reading nutella at the moment. Idiosyncrasy and all, I perk up when a player comes out with a stance that is the polar opposite of my own. Doesn't mean he's bad, but it's a thing.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 11:20 am Are people really suspecting me for the role stuff?

I just liked the puzzle and wanted to see if I could figure it out.
I don't love this post and could read its tone as "baddie who's been caught for a dumb reason." But it's certainly frustrating to poke your head in on Day 1 and see that people are swarming around you.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 5:36 pm I hate this argument about ties. It's full of WIFOM and NAI and general inconclusive waste of time.

Someone tieing a poll could mean literally anything, such as... wanting that person to be lynched.
While I agree with the sentiment, the language of this post feels a little too dismissive of the conversation itself. I like that people talked about ties. It gave us content and produced some new areas of discussion.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 5:53 pm Mac is supatowing

Sloonei also feels like supatowning but in a way that's not so hard to fake
Like with nutella before, this stance (on Mac. I have no stance on myself) is totally opposite to mine. DDL is allowed to not agree with me. But I'm taking notice again.

To be clear, I don't scum read DDL at the moment. But Epi named him and I figured I'd share the handful of not-positive reactions I've had to his posts so far. I don't currently foresee myself voting for DDL today, but I'm open to the discussion.

I understand all that. What it means to me is that

Spoiler: show

Dude, you're caught. Give up.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:42 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:41 am I don't have doubts about mine.
Who are some other players you're considering?

DDL.

I don't have doubts about mine.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:33 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:28 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 am I've added another town read to my list.

I have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin, but am I little anxious about the ease with which his case gained momentum. His post about bandwagonining DDL is patented shady-nasty business, but I don't know how to feel about the seemingly exaggerated scrutiny it's received. Then again, there's also the fact that we have two scum teams. It's entirely possible for scum to pile on an easy bandwagon that ends up being correct. I'd like for Colin to say things. I'll lay out my own gripes against them so he has more variety to respond to. I was voting for Colin before it was cool, after all.
You qualified your suspicion of Colin as "genuine." If you are a civilian, what else could it be? Why is the adjective necessary?

I know people will roll their eyes, but someone literally did this in the Mafia Universe game I was in, and I backed off on it, and the mafia won.

Fuck that. Fuck adverbs and adjectives and adjuncts.

The bottom line is that you started out with telling us your suspicion of Colin is genuine, but then you talked about how anxious you feel about other people agreeing that he's bad.

After that you have to talk about two bad teams. Who the fuck cares?

Voting Sloonei.
"Genuine" because the first play in the Day 1 Sloonei playbook is to throw crap at the wall and see what sticks. Case in point: My Tranq vote which I just talked about in my previous post. Or, you know, any other game I've ever played on the Syndicate. I clarified that my Colin suspicion is genuine to iterate that this is more than just pot-stirring. My vote is on him because I actually find things he's said to be suspicious, not solely because I want to make people respond to my vote being on him.

If your suspicion of Colin was true, none of the red shit I highlighted would logically follow. If you truly believe Colin is bad you wouldn't care if other people think so too (in fact, you should welcome it), you wouldn't care how many teams there are (who gives a shit?) and you wouldn't care if bad guys lynch other bad guys.

You are bad. This is obvious to me.

MacDougall wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:34 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:33 am
MacDougall wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:29 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 am I have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin
As opposed to a non genuine one?
Plagiarist.
My friend I have sank one bottle of shiraz and was in catch up. I had not yet seen your post. Rather than a plagiarist, I am merely a fan.

My favorite red. So good.

MacDougall wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:29 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 am I have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin
As opposed to a non genuine one?

Plagiarist.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 am I've added another town read to my list.

I have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin, but am I little anxious about the ease with which his case gained momentum. His post about bandwagonining DDL is patented shady-nasty business, but I don't know how to feel about the seemingly exaggerated scrutiny it's received. Then again, there's also the fact that we have two scum teams. It's entirely possible for scum to pile on an easy bandwagon that ends up being correct. I'd like for Colin to say things. I'll lay out my own gripes against them so he has more variety to respond to. I was voting for Colin before it was cool, after all.

You qualified your suspicion of Colin as "genuine." If you are a civilian, what else could it be? Why is the adjective necessary?

I know people will roll their eyes, but someone literally did this in the Mafia Universe game I was in, and I backed off on it, and the mafia won.

Fuck that. Fuck adverbs and adjectives and adjuncts.

The bottom line is that you started out with telling us your suspicion of Colin is genuine, but then you talked about how anxious you feel about other people agreeing that he's bad.

After that you have to talk about two bad teams. Who the fuck cares?

Voting Sloonei.

Not you Quin- you have no peers. I mean Sloonei.

I am about to dismantle you in front of your peers. Are you ready?

Sloonei is so bad.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:14 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:10 am
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 am I've added another town read to my list.

I have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin, but am I little anxious about the ease with which his case gained momentum. His post about bandwagonining DDL is patented shady-nasty business, but I don't know how to feel about the seemingly exaggerated scrutiny it's received. Then again, there's also the fact that we have two scum teams. It's entirely possible for scum to pile on an easy bandwagon that ends up being correct. I'd like for Colin to say things. I'll lay out my own gripes against them so he has more variety to respond to. I was voting for Colin before it was cool, after all.
What mafia member says, "You know what? I'm going to plop a lazy third vote down on DDL early on in the day and draw attention to myself! That's a great idea!"

Lock civilian.
a careless one

this is not my primary concern about colin anyway.

You're the one who is bad.

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:10 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:06 amFail.
you're a little confusing sometimes,

what do you think of DH (DharmaHelper)

I don't think of him.

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:10 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:06 amFail.
you're a little confusing sometimes,

what do you think of DH (DharmaHelper)

I don't think of him.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:07 am I've added another town read to my list.

I have a genuine Day 1 suspicion of Colin, but am I little anxious about the ease with which his case gained momentum. His post about bandwagonining DDL is patented shady-nasty business, but I don't know how to feel about the seemingly exaggerated scrutiny it's received. Then again, there's also the fact that we have two scum teams. It's entirely possible for scum to pile on an easy bandwagon that ends up being correct. I'd like for Colin to say things. I'll lay out my own gripes against them so he has more variety to respond to. I was voting for Colin before it was cool, after all.

What mafia member says, "You know what? I'm going to plop a lazy third vote down on DDL early on in the day and draw attention to myself! That's a great idea!"

Lock civilian.

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:04 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 12:53 am
Kylemii wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 12:50 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 12:48 am
nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 12:47 am Luna's cool for now

Probably gonna move my vote to Colin soon unless he steps it up
Nah.

Lock civilian.
is your lock civilian luna or colin? also why
Colin.

Let's play a game.

You guess why I believe Colin is a lock civilian.
that sounds like a fun game except instead of doing that, what if you just told me why you believe colin is good and then afterward i'll tell you if i guessed it correctly

Fail.

I wasn't going to target you anyway.

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:03 am Uhhhh I got nothin

Because he "publicly announced a wagon contribution"?

I was talking to Kylemii.

And if you're right, I won't target you tonight.

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 12:50 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 12:48 am
nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 12:47 am Luna's cool for now

Probably gonna move my vote to Colin soon unless he steps it up
Nah.

Lock civilian.
is your lock civilian luna or colin? also why

Colin.

Let's play a game.

You guess why I believe Colin is a lock civilian.

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 12:47 am Luna's cool for now

Probably gonna move my vote to Colin soon unless he steps it up

Nah.

Lock civilian.

I have a lock civilian already.

Cool.

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 6:03 pm
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:55 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:46 pm I love this whole "trust-team" idea that JOH and CBob are throwing around.

Anyone want to openly team up with me? I'm an honorable, trustworthy person, according to the most trustworthy person I know, who is of course myself.
Sure. Let's be friends.
Hiya new best bud!

On a scale of 1 to 10, how genuinely sus are you of DDL? 1 being "I just randomly said something about him to kickstart discussion, and I don't actually believe any of it," and 10 being "I will stake my entire mafia reputation on DDL being bad."

How about 5 for "Best buds don't ask that question this early?"

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:55 pm That was angry disapproval booing, not spooky ghost booing. To be clear.

Lots of ghosts are angry and disapproving, you know.

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:46 pm I love this whole "trust-team" idea that JOH and CBob are throwing around.

Anyone want to openly team up with me? I'm an honorable, trustworthy person, according to the most trustworthy person I know, who is of course myself.

Sure. Let's be friends.

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:32 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:31 pm
DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:25 pm To me the only reason a person would vote to tie a lynch that they weren't in danger in is because they are on the tribunal or know who is and they want to save the person that is in the lead during the un-tied period.

Significantly more plausible baddie motives RE: Ties.
But what if there's a baddie team with nobody on the tribunal, and hypothetically one of their own is up for a lynch? They'd want to avoid that tie, wouldn't they?
Yeah if someone votes to break ties that's also worth looking at but what I'm saying is if someone votes to cause a tie, and especially if that tie then breaks against whoever they voted for, that's a red flag for me

So...

Your strategy is to examine polls that get made into a tie and polls that do not get made into a tie?

Cool.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 11:20 am Are people really suspecting me for the role stuff?

I just liked the puzzle and wanted to see if I could figure it out.

It's also a trend that whoever takes votes right out of the gate Day 1 isn't the one lynched, so you should be reassured by this.

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 1:14 am Hey Epi have you voted yet

Why do you ask questions to which you already know the answer?

Bitch, I was sleep.

Voting DDL.

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 12:17 am
Epignosis wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 12:15 am I'm going to be voting DDL tomorrow.

The speculation over the roles is an act to get involved.

Now go.
Uh oh bois Epignosis came to play big boi ball

I'm going to be voting DDL tomorrow.

The speculation over the roles is an act to get involved.

Now go.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 6:37 pm

I remember lots of “oh, the cubs should do this” discussions but I’ve never looked back to see if those statements were correct.

This statement is accurate as well.

I am hitting the major third, which I will be doing quite often tonight (

), and after that, when I get home, I'll be hitting a major fifth (

).

Long Con wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 11:30 am Players will start with a movement.

I usually start every day with a movement.

Spoiler: show

Search found 400 matches