The Syndicate

G-Man wrote:

NIGHT PROWLER

The tensile yield strength of stainless steel is 31,200 pounds per square inch. At this point, the pressure being applied causes permanent deformation of the metal. The tensile ultimate strength of stainless steel is a whopping 73,200 pounds per square inch. At this point, the metal will fracture or shatter, depending on thickness and form.

In contrast, human skin will tear when 100 pounds of force per square inch (give or take) is applied to it. But that's just the epidermis. The dermal layer is thicker and fuller, requiring more force, pressure, or torque to puncture. Not a whole lot more but enough to make a difference. Subcutaneous tissue is dense, adipose tissue in particular, and varies in thickness. Adipose tissue becomes firmer where more and more of it gathers. Depending on the individual, this layer could be as soft as room temperature butter or or as stiff as canvas. Muscle fibers are stronger yet, though the amount of resistance they provide depends on the quantity present, the fitness of the area being penetrated, and any tension exerted to that muscle group at the time.

Bones are another thing entirely. At the weakest point on small bones like fingers and toes, only 25 pounds of pressure is required to cause a fracture. The larger and denser the bone, the more force it takes to break. The average human femur requires 1,700 pounds per square inch to generate a clean, all-the-way-through break.

While this all may sound like the human body is no match for stainless steel, consider that all of these pressure ratings are per square inch. The smaller the puncturing object, the more magnified the pressure becomes on the tip. The sharper the knife and the finer the point, the more susceptible it is to breaking.

Breaking a knife inside a human body depends on a number of factors. Some we've already discussed- body mass, density of adipose tissue in relation to the puncture point, fitness and tension of the muscle fibers, the presence of any bones in the path of the blade. Other factors includes the movement of the body being stabbed, the size and form of the blade being used, and the experience of the attacker with stabbing people.

Bubba Zanetti was better with a pistol than he was with a knife but it was a useful exercise nonetheless (no need to draw attention to yourself with a gunshot after all). Insertnamehere was lean, fit, and struggled mightily. Bubba managed ten successful strikes in the side and back before his victim's twisting cause the knife to break across one of his ribs. By that point, however, the damage was done.

He suffered but not for too long.

--------------------------------------------

INSERTNAMEHERE has been killed.

It is now Day 11.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Hey INH: you were on the money with your Glorfindel read earlier than the rest of us. Is there anyone you feel is particularly likely to be his team mate?

LoRab wrote:And even I have to admit that INH is almost certainly civ at this point.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Cool, thanks guys. Now it'd be ideal for the three of us to state which of those names we struggled the most with to provide a town case that feels meaningful to ourselves. For me it's these players:

Dom
Scotty
Glorfindel
LoRab

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:In no more than one sentence, tell me why these players are town:

Glorfindel: Reasonable kind chap who defends his beliefs no matter what.

insertnamehere: {REDACTED}

JaggedJimmyJay: He survived a nightkill.

LoRab: Sticks to his guns.

motel room: Chill dude who brings new methods to the game, to the civilian's benefit

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:In no more than one sentence, tell my why these players are town:

Sloonei

Scotty

Quin

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Anyone have 10-20 minutes to go through a quick exercise with me? I have a little idea that might help sort this out. It's not GTH reads. Just one person would be cool; more than that would be preferable.

I am here, but you might be sick of hearing my thoughts by now.

No that's fine. Any thoughts beyond mine are better than just mine.

In no more than one sentence, tell me why the following players are town. Try to do it quickly.

Dom

DrWilgy

Epignosis

linki: you too INH.

Sloonei wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:The issue is we are chasing our tails. The more you respond to me the more I have to go back to the main issue.

I can see why you see inconsistency in my posts. I was not clear between defining "I would vote for you" and "gth you are bad" since day 2 I've gth'd you bad and that never changed. I was considering voting for you that day, but voting Rico or LoRab was more pressing.

Backtracking, however, or claiming things didn't happen I will refute. Not being out of my good graces was true as I still had you gth bad. You weren't someone I'd vote for, but not someone I'd vote with (as explained earlier). Pointing out that baddiedar and not being in good graces was not backtracking, rather explaining my perspective.

The main issue you have with me Sloonei is that you don't know how to define "blank 1 and blank 2". I can tell you all day how these are defined, but if you don't want to believe them it's upto you.

You read the exchange as "wilgy says him claiming I wasn't bad never happened" and "wilgy says being bad isn't being bad"

The way I said it was supposed to translate to "wilgy never said I was gth good" and "wilgy says gth bad isn't the same as vote worthy"

This is waaaay too reminiscent of how I felt when Sloonei was accusing me for me to even think for a second that Wilgy's scum.

I was wrong about you, therefore I am wrong about Wilgy?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Anyone have 10-20 minutes to go through a quick exercise with me? I have a little idea that might help sort this out. It's not GTH reads. Just one person would be cool; more than that would be preferable.

Sloonei wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:maybe sloonei should be trying to find baddies instead of defending himself.

oh wait, considering how he's now suspecting anyone who says anything bad about him, and bending over backwards to discredit any legitimate suspicion coming in his direction, I guess he considers them both the same thing.

I'd like to go on the record saying that I'd be flabbergasted if Wilgy is bad. I'd be nonplussed if Sloonei is.

I'm still confused on why Glorfindel was a complete and utter non-starter today.

Things I'd like to do in the future if I can find the time:
Figure out who exactly distracted everyone from Glorfindel today.
ISO Sloonei, which will be an ordeal.
ISO Dom, so I can back up my gut read of him.

Sure.

DrWilgy wrote:The issue is we are chasing our tails. The more you respond to me the more I have to go back to the main issue.

I can see why you see inconsistency in my posts. I was not clear between defining "I would vote for you" and "gth you are bad" since day 2 I've gth'd you bad and that never changed. I was considering voting for you that day, but voting Rico or LoRab was more pressing.

Backtracking, however, or claiming things didn't happen I will refute. Not being out of my good graces was true as I still had you gth bad. You weren't someone I'd vote for, but not someone I'd vote with (as explained earlier). Pointing out that baddiedar and not being in good graces was not backtracking, rather explaining my perspective.

The main issue you have with me Sloonei is that you don't know how to define "blank 1 and blank 2". I can tell you all day how these are defined, but if you don't want to believe them it's upto you.

You read the exchange as "wilgy says him claiming I wasn't bad never happened" and "wilgy says being bad isn't being bad"

The way I said it was supposed to translate to "wilgy never said I was gth good" and "wilgy says gth bad isn't the same as vote worthy"

Sloonei wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:Sloonei, you really like asking people questions, so I'll ask you a couple.

What's the biggest thing you've done to benefit the civilian cause?

What's the biggest thing you've done to unintentionally hurt the civilian cause?

Ask questions to stoke the ongoing conversation.

Push mislynches of town players.

What value do these questions serve?

Scotty wrote:Yikes. Sorry indi. Back to the drawing board for me. I'm not sure this makes Sloonei look better, but it doesn't make him seem worse.

insertnamehere wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:at this point, I'm just sitting in the balcony, feeling salty, detached, impotent, and utterly indifferent to this game.

I'm like Statler & Waldorf, combined into one physical body.

#avengeindi #mpdidnothingwrong #boldplay

Who do you think is bad?

Glorfindel.

Honorable mentions to Dom and Lorab. Those are my three biggest suspicions, in that order.

Why Dom and LoRab? I'm not versed in either of them this game but I'm open to hearing possibilities.

LoRab choosing to vote you because you "neenered" her sticks out to me. It wasn't even clarified that she thought you bad, but because she was neener peeved.

Sloonei wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:at this point, I'm just sitting in the balcony, feeling salty, detached, impotent, and utterly indifferent to this game.

I'm like Statler & Waldorf, combined into one physical body.

#avengeindi #mpdidnothingwrong #boldplay

Who do you think is bad?

Glorfindel wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:

Glorfindel wrote: I don't believe that anyone really defended you strongly in the thread, my friend. My point was however, that given that a person who may have pardoned you wouldn't have known for certain that they were right about you and perhaps didn't wish to be implicated were they later be proved to have been wrong, it is actually pretty unlikely that they would've come to your defence at the time (and especially if they were not online at the time of your last posting). It is a moot point now and purely speculation, but to my mind (and I have done things like that in the past myself) I find cynicism that players in this game can act selflessly to be really disappointing.

I don't think people are incapable of acting selflessly in this game.

I think believing that I'm innocent strongly enough that you're willing to use a one time lynch stop where if you're wrong you become powerless, but being too afraid of, I guess the Spanish Inquisition, to actually defend me in the thread is moronic, myopic, and utterly selfish.

The more you defend this fallacious thinking, the more you dig yourself deeper for me, I'm afraid.

You are entitled to your opinion my friend and whilst you consider mine to be 'moronic', 'myopic' and 'utterly selfish', I'd have hoped that you'd at least extend the same courtesy of respect to me. I take your point but as far as I'm concerned if someone were to do that and as you put it, become 'powerless', how would anyone know Certainly, it would limit your voting options but who would know? I may very well be off with the pixies with this one but I'd still like to think it were a possibility.

Glorfindel wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:

Glorfindel wrote: I don't believe that anyone really defended you strongly in the thread, my friend. My point was however, that given that a person who may have pardoned you wouldn't have known for certain that they were right about you and perhaps didn't wish to be implicated were they later be proved to have been wrong, it is actually pretty unlikely that they would've come to your defence at the time (and especially if they were not online at the time of your last posting). It is a moot point now and purely speculation, but to my mind (and I have done things like that in the past myself) I find cynicism that players in this game can act selflessly to be really disappointing.

I don't think people are incapable of acting selflessly in this game.

I think believing that I'm innocent strongly enough that you're willing to use a one time lynch stop where if you're wrong you become powerless, but being too afraid of, I guess the Spanish Inquisition, to actually defend me in the thread is moronic, myopic, and utterly selfish.

The more you defend this fallacious thinking, the more you dig yourself deeper for me, I'm afraid.

You are entitled to your opinion my friend and whilst you consider mine to be 'moronic', 'myopic' and 'utterly selfish', I'd have hoped that you'd at least extend the same courtesy of respect to me. I take your point but as far as I'm concerned if someone were to do that and as you put it, become 'powerless', how would anyone know Certainly, it would limit your voting options but who would know?

LoRab wrote:Day 1 Epi is dead. He can't explain himself. Epi 2.0 is someone different entirely. It would be highly unethical and against the rules for him to explain anything.

insertnamehere wrote:

LoRab wrote:While I didn't suspect MP, the tinfoil part of me wonders if mafia took one of their own out to throw off everyone's numbers and leave his identity unknown, lol. But given MP's dead comment, and knowing him to be a player of integrity, I don't think he'd make an on topic post, so that makes me feel better. Yup. I'm clearly in the paranoid portion of the game.

that much is patently obvious.

If INH were silvertongue, why would he bother to save himself if he were going to bail from the game entirely? Why not just let himself die if he was no longer going to play?

neener neener.

Vote: Inh

Was going to go with indigo, but the neener neener tipped the scale in my ongoing thoughts about Inh.

Off to go see rent. Check in later.

Glorfindel wrote: I don't believe that anyone really defended you strongly in the thread, my friend. My point was however, that given that a person who may have pardoned you wouldn't have known for certain that they were right about you and perhaps didn't wish to be implicated were they later be proved to have been wrong, it is actually pretty unlikely that they would've come to your defence at the time (and especially if they were not online at the time of your last posting). It is a moot point now and purely speculation, but to my mind (and I have done things like that in the past myself) I find cynicism that players in this game can act selflessly to be really disappointing.

Epignosis wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:Epi, would you care to explain your Day 1 vote?

No.

MovingPictures07 wrote:At this point a large part of me feels as though there will be absolutely nothing I can do to display my alignment to all of you all, because I feel like I have been putting in 110% effort thus far and been consistently genuine and reasonable. It hasn't gotten me anywhere.

MovingPictures07 wrote:By the way, if you all are going to lynch me, just go ahead and make it Day 5 and get it over with. I've been defending myself extensively, and it's clear that I will be an eventual lynch due to POE. I do not want to be the lynch in LYLO, and my schedule is only going to get busier from now until Nov. 11, so just get it over with. I will still defend whatever you all are interested to hear from me, and it is difficult NOT to elaborate immensely in response to zebra's comments against me the past cycle, but I will not waste any time that I actually do have to play this game and will spend more of my concentration on sorting out other players.

MovingPictures07 wrote:It's pretty difficult not to feel entirely dejected right now, to be honest.

LoRab wrote:While I didn't suspect MP, the tinfoil part of me wonders if mafia took one of their own out to throw off everyone's numbers and leave his identity unknown, lol. But given MP's dead comment, and knowing him to be a player of integrity, I don't think he'd make an on topic post, so that makes me feel better. Yup. I'm clearly in the paranoid portion of the game.

If INH were silvertongue, why would he bother to save himself if he were going to bail from the game entirely? Why not just let himself die if he was no longer going to play?

Scotty wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Please remember that I have to judge your alignment too.

What kind of weird comment is that last sentence?

Sometimes I get the impression people don't consider that when I'm being told in some way or another that I'm being a ball hog. When I make a post like the one I entered this thread with just now, the intent isn't to be an authoritarian figure and shut down dissenters, but to incite reactions from people who can be bad. I didn't intend for that reaction to be an emotional/personal one though, so perhaps it's my fault for not considering the appearance of the post before putting it down.

Your intent is to incite bad people, but sometimes you can incite egoistic good people too. Just offering this viewpoint because I can be one of those bullheaded people. I just choose not to be incited these days

Glorfindel wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:

MacDougall wrote:That last paragraph is fairly waffly Glorf. You didn't just make that huge post to make yourself look civvie did you?

My most sincere apologies for my lack of clarity, my friend. Please allow me to clarify; I think motel room is Town, I don't share that view of INH.

How is INH alive if he isn't Silvertongue who saved himself?

What evidence have you that he did? There are 12 other players left in this game and anyone of them (more likely not the five that voted for him) could've made that call. Personally, I'd think his reaction earlier in the Day would suggest that he was not Silvertongue as I cannot see any logical correlation between his role and his reaction. Please don't get me wrong, I am genuinely concerned about the guy but no, I don't think he was Silvertongue. I'd also point out that the use of the pardon ability on himself was not automatic (meaning that he would still have to have notified the host of his intention to apply it) and he wasn't anywhere around for ages before the EoD which again, suggests to me that it was another player who pardoned him.

Why would a player with no confirmation of INH's role save him when his role is a potential lynch pardon of him or herself later. Talk about your all time wastes.

INH also vanishing says to me than he submitted his lynch pardon and bailed.

Because, just maybe, someone out there BELIEVED in him. As I think Jay mentioned earlier, this game is a little too tight for comfort. Who knows if they (Silvertongue) would even be around later to use it? I don't expect you to believe this but there ARE players out there who would sacrifice that ability if they genuinely believed INH to be innocent (in their situation, I'd have done that myself for someone who I felt strongly was being railroaded). It has the added chance (probability-wise) of buying us another day so in answer to your question, yes, I still believe it is the most likely scenario.

Glorfindel wrote: What evidence have you that he did? There are 12 other players left in this game and anyone of them (more likely not the five that voted for him) could've made that call. Personally, I'd think his reaction earlier in the Day would suggest that he was not Silvertongue as I cannot see any logical correlation between his role and his reaction. Please don't get me wrong, I am genuinely concerned about the guy but no, I don't think he was Silvertongue. I'd also point out that the use of the pardon ability on himself was not automatic (meaning that he would still have to have notified the host of his intention to apply it) and he wasn't anywhere around for ages before the EoD which again, suggests to me that it was another player who pardoned him.

Quin wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:If anyone is remotely interested in my thoughts, I might start here:

Sloonei: Looked good from the very beginning to me and is one of the few players with whom I've found myself most in agreement in terms of his analysis of our fellow players for a large part of the game. I haven't at any point found reason to question my judgement in this regard In terms of his performance. Contrary to MP's assessment, I don't find Sloonei manipulative at all and I find his comments so far this game to be genuine attempts at seeking the truth.

Day/Night 1.1 After a couple of innocuous introductory posts, he makes off-handed contributions to the Rico/Mac conflagration that consumed Day 1.
1.2 Raises his concern at comments made by INH in response to a post from Epi1.0 on Rico/Mac here and then places his vote on INH.
1.3 Makes an unsolicited reply to a 3J post praising Sloonei's performance in the game so far.
1.4 In response to a post from INH (referred to above in 1.2) querying his comments, MH justifies his concerns on the basis of 'vibes'.
1.5 In this post, the late MP appraises Motel Room's performance in the game and for what it's worth, I think the assessment was both accurate and insightful.

Day/Night 2.1 Questions the legitimacy of DrWilgy's Day 1 nomination of Rico with Mac as a team mate being his principal Mafia reads when his voting mirrored that of Mac's.
2.2 Accuses Rico of being Mafia on the basis of his change of approach for wanting to lynch Mac on Day 1.
2.3 Initial reads and states that he's still perplexed by Rico's behaviour and nominates INH, MP and LoRab as likely Mafia candidates. Offers no opinion on Elohcin but given her rise to prominence, states that he needs to consider her.
2.4 Votes INH.
2.5 Here Motel Room (MR) queries Mac on why he so strongly reads INH as Town and indicates that the view doesn't align with his assessment of INH's alignment and subsequently blatantly asserts Mac's description of INH's wagon as a 'savewagon'.

2.6 Here we have another confrontation with INH on the basis of INH demanding justification for MR's stance on him.
2.7 Votes Rico
2.8 Late in the Day MR changes his vote from Rico to Elohcin and then back to INH and then defends again against INH here.

Day/Night 3.1 In this post, he defends his vote the previous day against questioning by Sloonei and Dom. Mac also reads him solid Town in the embedded post.
3.2 Responds to 3J's ISO on him (where 3J concludes that his vote the previous day had "at least some bus potential"). His response is cool and reasoned stating that his opinion of LoRab's Mafia alignment had cooled and that he still held suspicions against INH.
3.3 Exonerates LoRab here
3.4 Defends against light weight suspicions from Zeb's rainbow list and disputes her reasoning for his place on her list.
3.5 Day 3 GTH reads: Good: Quin, Sloonei, Glorfindel, LoRab, Indiglo, 3J, Mac, MP, DrWigley, and bad: Dom, Sprityo, Zebs and INH.

3.6 Prompted by his GTH read, a protracted argument ensues between MR and Zebs in which MR seems to end up convinced of Zebs guilt.
3.7 Indicates in a post directed towards INH that he is not happy with either his language or tone and subsequently places his vote on him.

Day/Night 4.1 Kudos from 3J on his pick-up in this post.
4.2 Contributes to a 3J assessment of Elohcin's comment on a relationship between alignment and host player replacement priority.
4.3 Queries Glorfindel on his posting style (well, what the HELL is new... )
4.4 Queries Scotty on his enquiry about Dr Wilgy's votes.
4.5 Questions Indiglo over her frustration and being perceived as Mafia

4.6 Once again, engages with INH asking whether he has any Mafia suspicions other than Glorfindel
4.7 Indicates interest in voting Indiglo or Scotty 2.0
4.8 Queries INH on his assertion that Indiglo is "spooky/scary" who he identifies as INH never having mentioned previously.
4.9 Discusses with Scotty 2.0 a potential relationship based on similar voting patterns between Elohcin and DrWilgy.
4.10 An apparently delayed 'over the bow' shot at Zebs for a remark she made regarding rainbow posting theory.

4.11 States that he doesn't like DrWilgy, Scotty or Indiglo and raises questions about Scotty not voting for INH or Indiglo
4.12 EoD tie debacle remarks.

My verdict here is a fairly solid Town read on MR based on his posts above. I can't say I necessarily see his perspective in regard to his judgements on a number of players but it appears he was correct about MP when there were accusations being thrown around about him. I still believe his suspicions on INH are justified (even if there is a chance that they're wrong). I think (as I've suggested earlier) there is some foundation for those suspicions and no, I don't agree with the camp that believes INH was Silvertongue. I cannot see his reaction on Day 4 aligning to him being that role.

I notice that the conclusion you've drawn from this ISO is almost entirely specific to INH and a now-dead guy. It's also about your own opinion of INH as opposed to an evaluation of your read on motel room based on his INH related content. I think you wanted to make a point about INH but wanted to feign some sort of context behind it. I am concerned.

Epignosis wrote:I've never known anybody to trust INH.