The Syndicate

S~V~S wrote: ↑Sun Mar 18, 2018 3:41 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Sun Mar 18, 2018 3:38 pm Here's the case against Sig, for those interested. Not sure I'm a fan of him going after his voters, even for ostensibly gameplay-related reasons.

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:59 pm THE CASE AGAINST SIG

this is gonna have to be multiple posts because ISO’ing someone is fucking impossible on phones

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Sat Mar 03, 2018 1:51 pm Quick non-insanified explanation of my Sig vote yesterday.

I didn't like his statements on the haiku situation, it kinda felt like covering for possible liars.

I sided with Boomslang on the whole 70% comment. Thought it was weird, and didn't like how people jumped to sig's defense and attacked Boomslang simply for pointing it out.

Then there's his flippity floppity treatment of Sloonei which just felt disingenuous. TBH, I might end up voting for him again today.
To elaborate, he went from town reading Sloonei to voting for him to once again to town reading him to calling his posts scummy a couple hours later. All the while, he was accusing Sloonei of “flip-flipping.” He later provided some explanations that were more than a little half-assed, IMO.

Early in the game, he called Sloonei’s case against me weak and thought it reflected poorly on Sloonei.

By Day 4, he’s completely reversed that opinion, and considers me one of his top suspects because he now believes Sloonei’s early case against me was “good.”

He just hasn’t really shown any consistency in his reads and views, seemingly changing them depending on which way the wind blows. He hasn’t contributed much if any substantial content to the thread, and is by far the strongest candidate for today’s lynch, in my opinion.
He's still probably the closest thing to a scumread I have right now, although I'm not opposed to going with the newbies if they feel they have a stronger case.
You seem to be thinking sig not tunnelling is baddie behavior? That is fairly SOP sig iirc.

My baddie read on him was based on one post, but that was a hell of a post, lol. I actually suspect Sloonei for it as well. But given the LC lynch, and the likelihood that sig was likely a wagon to oppose the LC wagon on the Pikachu side (assuming the baddies have cross thread BTSC, which I can't see why they wouldn't), does that come into your thinking at all?

There's a difference between not tunnelling and being utterly inconsistent.

Like Quin said, there's a pretty decent chance that in a game this size that's this convoluted, (I know, I'm one to talk) there are multiple baddie teams. Even if sig's "wagon" was bolstered by an attempt to save LC's bacon, that doesn't discount any of my suspicions of him. Plus, sig had an extra life at that time, and I could see a baddie team not really minding bussing a member with two lives to try and save someone else.

Here's the case against Sig, for those interested. Not sure I'm a fan of him going after his voters, even for ostensibly gameplay-related reasons.

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:59 pm THE CASE AGAINST SIG

this is gonna have to be multiple posts because ISO’ing someone is fucking impossible on phones

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Sat Mar 03, 2018 1:51 pm Quick non-insanified explanation of my Sig vote yesterday.

I didn't like his statements on the haiku situation, it kinda felt like covering for possible liars.

I sided with Boomslang on the whole 70% comment. Thought it was weird, and didn't like how people jumped to sig's defense and attacked Boomslang simply for pointing it out.

Then there's his flippity floppity treatment of Sloonei which just felt disingenuous. TBH, I might end up voting for him again today.
To elaborate, he went from town reading Sloonei to voting for him to once again to town reading him to calling his posts scummy a couple hours later. All the while, he was accusing Sloonei of “flip-flipping.” He later provided some explanations that were more than a little half-assed, IMO.

Early in the game, he called Sloonei’s case against me weak and thought it reflected poorly on Sloonei.

By Day 4, he’s completely reversed that opinion, and considers me one of his top suspects because he now believes Sloonei’s early case against me was “good.”

He just hasn’t really shown any consistency in his reads and views, seemingly changing them depending on which way the wind blows. He hasn’t contributed much if any substantial content to the thread, and is by far the strongest candidate for today’s lynch, in my opinion.

He's still probably the closest thing to a scumread I have right now, although I'm not opposed to going with the newbies if they feel they have a stronger case.

o shit son

Jeez you guys have had a much more exciting time than we've had

Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:02 pm Ok now seriously

I'm on my first life, but second role because Golden goofed with a lynch. My first role was a vote manipulator. Opinions differ on whether that makes me look civ or not. Epi had a big theory proving I'm civ, opinions differ on it too.

Sprityo is 99% confirmed announcer. An announcer in a closed setup game is 95% civ. next.

Speedchuck is confirmed civ by the host. Unless the host is lieing hes a civ.

Nutella has BTSC with one of you guys in her first role.

Bob had a stupid bastard role that lied to use about being fated to lynch day 6. He didn't and instead forced Nutella to solve a bunch of soup can puzzles to avoid exploding.

Epi is in this game.

DH is in this game and he is really fired up about it.

SVS had the flu role from CC123. No, seriously, By miracle she managed not to get voted. She is freaking out about you guys want to lynch her for it, but imo she was acting unconfortable about it so I think she was a civ. Not sure about Role 2.

Quin had some mathy thingy that confirmed him as not mafia as long as no otyher vote manipulator roles existed besides me and LC.

LC went full TMI and got lynched twice.

Dom caught LC. People were divided on whether Dom himself had TMI or just luck. He was in the middle with a shit flinging contest with EPi that thankfully got interrupted.

Did I miss anyone?

About how many Negan gifs has DH already posted?

It's getting harder and harder to resist the urge to switch on my "mafia autopilot" mode the longer the tribe set-up continues.

Nothing sig has done has made me suspect him less, so, may as well throw a vote his direction.

sig aubergine

okay what the fuck

did eight people vote for LC on the other tribe?

Kylemii wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:29 pm please tell me what is the deal is with sig

Srsly dude? This is on the last page.

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:59 pm THE CASE AGAINST SIG

this is gonna have to be multiple posts because ISO’ing someone is fucking impossible on phones

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Sat Mar 03, 2018 1:51 pm Quick non-insanified explanation of my Sig vote yesterday.

I didn't like his statements on the haiku situation, it kinda felt like covering for possible liars.

I sided with Boomslang on the whole 70% comment. Thought it was weird, and didn't like how people jumped to sig's defense and attacked Boomslang simply for pointing it out.

Then there's his flippity floppity treatment of Sloonei which just felt disingenuous. TBH, I might end up voting for him again today.
To elaborate, he went from town reading Sloonei to voting for him to once again to town reading him to calling his posts scummy a couple hours later. All the while, he was accusing Sloonei of “flip-flipping.” He later provided some explanations that were more than a little half-assed, IMO.

Early in the game, he called Sloonei’s case against me weak and thought it reflected poorly on Sloonei.

By Day 4, he’s completely reversed that opinion, and considers me one of his top suspects because he now believes Sloonei’s early case against me was “good.”

He just hasn’t really shown any consistency in his reads and views, seemingly changing them depending on which way the wind blows. He hasn’t contributed much if any substantial content to the thread, and is by far the strongest candidate for today’s lynch, in my opinion.

Screw it, leap of faith.

sig aubergine

@Scotty if I moved my vote to sig, would you follow me?

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 2:16 pm
Kylemii wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 2:10 pm like I 100% agree that a flip would be good and positive but the thing is that's only true if we get a mafia flip, a civ flip gives us nothing. stripping players we suspect of their first lives increases our chance of being able to get a mafia flip in the future.

that's of course assuming we can ever lynch anyone at all
Lynching one civ twice is better than lynching two civs once. At least you know where you stand.

Linki

Cause sometimes I think you are good and sometimes I think you are bad. I can trust my INH radar to a degree. I always think Sig is slightly bad and I think he’s slightly bad now so why is that lynch worthy?

Can you define the parameters of your “INH radar” and why you think this is my scum game? Also, can you please read my points against sig and see how they respond to your “sig radar?”

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 1:58 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 1:49 pm JoH, what do you think about sig?
I think he’s bad the same amount that I always think he’s bad.

I could see him buddied with Sloonei but I think Sloonei is good.

What makes me more likely to be bad than Sig?

JoH, what do you think about sig?

I’m gonna go do some yoga and meditate

Straw man. Nobody has advocated for voting purely to get a flip or that you should vote for someone you don't suspect. You've got my vote until one of us dies.

oh fuck off. Yesterday I got tons of shit for voting for Daisy instead of Wilgy or Boomslang.

Furthermore, your continued attempts to deflect the case against you (which is now "based on nothing" you say) only serve to bolster my suspicions. A townie wouldn't treat this so dishonestly.

oh fuck off. Once again empty over-reactionary bluster. YOU HAVE NO CASE. I’ll say it again and again. YOU HAVE NO CASE. If that’s deflection or whatever, I don’t give a fuck

Furthermore, it is Day 5 and you are advocating additional time to scumhunt without flips. Yet you've put forth basically no case. How many days further do you need to find scum before you want to eliminate a player?

0. I think sig is scum and that people should vote for him. Did you miss my post?

At this point, I’m considering just ignoring JoH’s posts. If it gets me lynched, so be it.

Maybe not a multiple-post case, as I erroneously stated in my last post. more like a summary of my read through of his posts. I ain’t going through and quoting each individual post on my phone, though I may later.

THE CASE AGAINST SIG

this is gonna have to be multiple posts because ISO’ing someone is fucking impossible on phones

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Sat Mar 03, 2018 1:51 pm Quick non-insanified explanation of my Sig vote yesterday.

I didn't like his statements on the haiku situation, it kinda felt like covering for possible liars.

I sided with Boomslang on the whole 70% comment. Thought it was weird, and didn't like how people jumped to sig's defense and attacked Boomslang simply for pointing it out.

Then there's his flippity floppity treatment of Sloonei which just felt disingenuous. TBH, I might end up voting for him again today.

To elaborate, he went from town reading Sloonei to voting for him to once again to town reading him to calling his posts scummy a couple hours later. All the while, he was accusing Sloonei of “flip-flipping.” He later provided some explanations that were more than a little half-assed, IMO.

Early in the game, he called Sloonei’s case against me weak and thought it reflected poorly on Sloonei.

By Day 4, he’s completely reversed that opinion, and considers me one of his top suspects because he now believes Sloonei’s early case against me was “good.”

He just hasn’t really shown any consistency in his reads and views, seemingly changing them depending on which way the wind blows. He hasn’t contributed much if any substantial content to the thread, and is by far the strongest candidate for today’s lynch, in my opinion.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:52 am
Kylemii wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:54 am
Scotty wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 2:21 amI’ll try and check out a couple of those games (if I can find your old baddie ones. Sounds obscure).
this is the sc2 game: link I'm the user Aardvarks Bark. Plz keep in mind that this game took place over the course of 3 days and was my first experience playing with any of these people

If you want to dig deeper there's probably some games on this website where I was bad but I don't actually remember any of them

But I like your flouty attitude and forwardness at least. You sound honest and generally care-free. Kinda like sig, except more actively involved. Ya dig?
"flouty"

What are your current thoughts on jack’s philosophy of lynching someone for alignment flip’s sake as opposed to some old-fashioned sleuthing?
I don't know.... I don't think I'd want to lynch someone purely for the sake of getting a flip out of it unless I was significantly inclined to believe they we're mafia for additional other reasons

this games format changes things a bit. everyone basically having 2 lives adds a whole new strategic layer, technically speaking we're not going to learn anything from most of the lynches we do. a lot depends on whether or not roles are curated by alignment or if they're just purely random.
What is up with these constant straw man arguments?

From all this pushback, I’m assuming none of you ever vote in regular games until someone is copped, right?

We lynch players just to get flips and because we think they may be mafia every single day of every single game.

I’m proposing we do that here, too.

The alternative (which I guess a lot of people really like) is to lynch first lives, get no flips and eliminate no scum. Also, then the mafia kills off the one life townies.

Can someone please explain to me the advantage to never lynching anyone for real in this game?

Starting now, I will vote for anyone who implies I have said that lynching one life players is the only option. What I said was we should lynch a one life player or lynch the same two life player two days in a row. Town can’t eliminate scum if they’re too chicken shit to eliminate anybody at all.

I’m not diametrically opposed to ever lynching anyone “for real.” I just think that the extra lives give us more time to decide on worthy targets for elimination. And, y’know, build real cases. I want to vote for people who have cases against them I agree with. I’m not voting for someone I’m not convinced is bad, just to eliminate someone.

You keep using game mechanics as a distraction to cover up the fact that your lynch train against me is based on nothing.

I’m stuck phoneposting, so this is gonna be rough.

Scotty wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:57 am Want to look at INH for a sec:

On day 4, he posts this helpful rainbow list after throwing a vote on SpaceDaisy- nothing suspect there:

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 6:01 pm Screw it, I'll make my own super-cool rainbow list. What it lacks in visual flair, it makes up for in readability.

JoH
Marmot
Ninja
Boomslang
Sloonei
Lorab
DrWilgy
Kylemii
Scotty
Sig
Spacedaisy
Then after being killed mid-day:
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:16 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:52 pm @insertnamehere @Marmot whatcha gonna do with them votes?
Nothin', as I think both Boomslang and Wilgy are civilians. I ain't choosing to be complicit in this shit.
Oh, I didn’t realize Wilgy changed from solid yellow to civilian.

I didn’t like Daisy’s case against him, and the whole split “smart Wilgy = bad/silly Wilgy = good” dichotomy that was being pushed. It was enough for me to go from not really having an opinion to thinking that the case against him was weak sauce and not worth voting for.

‘Ain’t choosing to be complicit with this shit’ is a negative statement because it casts blame on everyone on a train and in the case of a mislynch, he would be taking no responsibility. But I see it as an egregious cop out. He could have voted Wilgy and would look none the wiser should Wilgy have been mislynched.

But he stuck to himself knowing we needed as many people piled on one person to potentially get a lynch across that day.

alright, this is just “INH has a different opinion on game mechanics than me, and didn’t go along with my plan, ergo SUSPICIOUS.” I’m willing to debate the merits of getting a lynch across versus not getting one across. Unfortunately, it seems like the people who really really want to get one across are inclined towards trying to lynch those (me, Boomslang) who disagree.

And what has he done today? Act frustrated and defensive, like he did on day 1. That entire deal on D1 is what made me suspicious of him initially in this game. And here he’s using the frustrated gambit and his assumed civilian affiliation with his past role.
Frustration could be from a mafia or civ perspective since- yes, we don’t have the strongest of proofs against him, and that’s unfair for anyone to have to defend against. But that doesn’t mean we’re on the wrong path here..

these two paragraphs are downright meaningless. Yes, I’m fuxking frustrated with this game, because I don’t have much time for mafia right now, and the time I do have is 70% going towards the game I’m hosting. Meanwhile, people are going against me with shitty nonsense meaningless cases that you yourself admit aren’t very strong, and none of my responses are seemingly getting through.

If it looks like I’m salty, it’s because I am.

Marmot wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:30 am Hey everyone, sorry for the absence. I'm heading out of town for the weekend, so I've been getting ahead on work and other things.

Putting a vote on inh now, because frankly I shouldn't be lynched.

Turnabout is fair play.

Marmot aubergine

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:
Is your frustration because it's Day 5 and we have nothing? Like if you got lynched Day 1, would it be this frustrating? Cause this is essentially still Day 1 as far as town information goes.

Did your vote get me to show up? Looks like what it did was lynch me except Quin had more votes.

Re: The first paragraph. No, I’m frustrated at people deciding that random, emotion-based reads are more valid and more lynch-worthy than other reads.

Deciding that “this is essentially Day 1” is a toxic cop-out. We’ve been posting and interacting for 13 or so days. Disregarding all that content is downright ignorant. Pushing and pushing towards a “kill” for “information” and telling people to fall in line behind you if they know what’s best for the thread, is downright idiotic at best and anti-civ at worst.

I don’t understand the merits of making sure that a civilian is really “dead.” I’d rather take time, gather as much info from interactions as possible, and lynch someone that I’m reasonably sure is bad, instead of pursuing a half-assed case out of empty, pointless bloodlust.

Re: The second paragraph. As you yourself are aware, we have two lives in this game, so I wasn’t killing you “for real.” Plus, me and a lot of members view the game of champions as a big mafia “event,” and not showing up for Day 1 was an annoying enough action for me to not mind having you lose one of your lives as penalty, especially when there was no one else I was reading as bad. It was a shot in the dark directed at someone behaving, IMO, against the spirit of “championship” by not showing up.

Do you have other reasons for suspecting me, or are you just gonna keep harping on this?

I’m quickly approaching “Chicka Chicka 1, 2, 3” levels of frustration and pissed off-ness with this game.

So, apparently JoH and Scotty want to lynch me so I can become, I guess, a death patsy, and “gain information.” Unfortunately, the only information they’ll gain is that they lynched a civilian for dumbass reasons.

According to JoH, my Day 1 vote for him was some calculated burst of opportunism, when, as I’ve stated multiple times, I didn’t feel strongly about anyone during that day, and my vote for JoH was to get him to show the fuck up.

It seems like there’s no way to defend myself against people attacking me, not because their logic is ironclad, but because there is no logic. It’s just emotional reads, all of which seem to be hostile towards me. I don’t know if I need to get my chakras fixed or what, in order to get rid of this negative aura people apparently feel when reading my posts.

The natural response would be to baddiehunt, and find a an actual scummeister. But, of course, all of my reads are seemingly diametrically opposed to the (Sloonei, Scotty) braintrust taking the thread by storm, so all I can do there is just put my vote on someone and watch as no one even acknowledges my suspicions or my townreads.

The best case scenario for me is to wait until their flighty methodology of suspicion randomly shifts onto another poor sap.

Basically, screw all y’all, and I hope all you sons of bitches get the plague that I could have inoculated you from had I not been killed.

I’m gonna go stand facing a wall like a schizophrenic homeless person, loudly yelling about my Spacedaisy and Sig suspicions while passerbys all attempt to ignore me the best they can.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 5:00 pm Cause it eliminates a player, revealing actual alignment.

Cause he seemingly wasn’t killed by the mafia.

Cause I still think his reason for almost getting me lynched Day 1 was dishonest. I backed off cause he was cursed but that’s not really a good reason.

So, 1/3 random bloodlust, 1/3 suspicion of me dying weirdly (?), and 1/3 resentment over me voting for him when he didn't show up on Day 1 of the Game of friggin' Champions?

Yeah, this is BS.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 4:22 pm I’m caught upish and I apologize to the mods for this post.

Also let’s lynch INH.

how about no

Current status of my relationship with Sloonei:

Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:38 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:33 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:29 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:23 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:21 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:16 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:52 pm @insertnamehere @Marmot whatcha gonna do with them votes?
Nothin', as I think both Boomslang and Wilgy are civilians. I ain't choosing to be complicit in this shit.
Even if it means our tribe fails to lynch yet again?
Especially. Hopefully the people on the other tribe have their shit together more than we do.
They do. They've had a much more productive thread than us. But for the sake of advancing the game, I want us to lynch somebody instead of them. It would provide them with information about the game which I think would be valuable to them.
The only information I feel like you're gonna get is who was willing to jump onto a half-assed bandwagon in order to mislynch a civilian. I don't want my name to be included in that.
I'm talking about the other tribe. They're having more success at reading each other than we are, but their thoughts about the game mechanics are way off base. If we manage to lynch somebody, it will give them information about how the game is structured. I'm looking out for them, they're my buddies. we really bonded last night.

Uh huh. Well, I guess I value not mislynching a civilian over helping the other tribe...what, know that we can lynch people? How exactly would that even influence them? In what way would them knowing that help the civilian cause more than a mislynch?

Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:32 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:30 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:27 pm
Boomslang wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:24 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:21 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:16 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:52 pm @insertnamehere @Marmot whatcha gonna do with them votes?
Nothin', as I think both Boomslang and Wilgy are civilians. I ain't choosing to be complicit in this shit.
Even if it means our tribe fails to lynch yet again?
Why are you so fixated on this? If people haven't achieved reliable consensus, why force their hand, especially when the other tribe seems to be chugging along just fine? If we go into the merge with most of our tribe, we have that entire background of play to inform our choices in later game.
I've been making this exact argument the last two days. But now I am of the opinion that whichever tribe fails to lynch becomes the victim of the nightkill. I'd rather we lynch a player around whom there is suspicion, than have the mafia pick off a player who is generally considered a townie. coughcough.
Even if you're true with your assumptions, this still just goes back to what I was saying about complicity. Seems to me that I can choose to either be an active participant in killing a civilian, or a bystander. I'm choosing the latter.
I disagree with this philosophy wholeheartedly, but I don't suspect you for it.

I'm moving my pointless vote over to Sloonei mainly out of sheer annoyance.

aubergine

Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:29 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:23 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:21 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:16 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:52 pm @insertnamehere @Marmot whatcha gonna do with them votes?
Nothin', as I think both Boomslang and Wilgy are civilians. I ain't choosing to be complicit in this shit.
Even if it means our tribe fails to lynch yet again?
Especially. Hopefully the people on the other tribe have their shit together more than we do.
They do. They've had a much more productive thread than us. But for the sake of advancing the game, I want us to lynch somebody instead of them. It would provide them with information about the game which I think would be valuable to them.

The only information I feel like you're gonna get is who was willing to jump onto a half-assed bandwagon in order to mislynch a civilian. I don't want my name to be included in that.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:27 pm
Boomslang wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:24 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:21 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:16 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:52 pm @insertnamehere @Marmot whatcha gonna do with them votes?
Nothin', as I think both Boomslang and Wilgy are civilians. I ain't choosing to be complicit in this shit.
Even if it means our tribe fails to lynch yet again?
Why are you so fixated on this? If people haven't achieved reliable consensus, why force their hand, especially when the other tribe seems to be chugging along just fine? If we go into the merge with most of our tribe, we have that entire background of play to inform our choices in later game.
I've been making this exact argument the last two days. But now I am of the opinion that whichever tribe fails to lynch becomes the victim of the nightkill. I'd rather we lynch a player around whom there is suspicion, than have the mafia pick off a player who is generally considered a townie. coughcough.

Even if you're true with your assumptions, this still just goes back to what I was saying about complicity. Seems to me that I can choose to either be an active participant in killing a civilian, or a bystander. I'm choosing the latter.

Boomslang wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:24 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:21 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:16 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:52 pm @insertnamehere @Marmot whatcha gonna do with them votes?
Nothin', as I think both Boomslang and Wilgy are civilians. I ain't choosing to be complicit in this shit.
Even if it means our tribe fails to lynch yet again?
Why are you so fixated on this? If people haven't achieved reliable consensus, why force their hand, especially when the other tribe seems to be chugging along just fine? If we go into the merge with most of our tribe, we have that entire background of play to inform our choices in later game.

Forcing people to rush to a consensus means that they'll think less about their votes.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:21 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:16 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:52 pm @insertnamehere @Marmot whatcha gonna do with them votes?
Nothin', as I think both Boomslang and Wilgy are civilians. I ain't choosing to be complicit in this shit.
Even if it means our tribe fails to lynch yet again?

Especially. Hopefully the people on the other tribe have their shit together more than we do.

Kylemii wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:18 pm
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:16 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:52 pm @insertnamehere @Marmot whatcha gonna do with them votes?
Nothin', as I think both Boomslang and Wilgy are civilians. I ain't choosing to be complicit in this shit.
who would you lynch today, given the opportunity?

The person my vote is on. Her or Sig.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:52 pm @insertnamehere @Marmot whatcha gonna do with them votes?

Nothin', as I think both Boomslang and Wilgy are civilians. I ain't choosing to be complicit in this shit.

Golden wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 1:56 pm
Insertnamehere has died. He was:

39: Tina Wesson (Survivor). Each night, you will choose one player to inject with an innoculation to a particular virus. Any player who is given the innoculation will be unable to catch the virus and will be cured if they already have it. You may not target the same player twice.

Carry on.

I hope y’all get the goddamn plague, you bunch of jerks. Will fully catch up and respond to stuff when I get home in an hour or so.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 6:24 pm Scotty is my top town read because I get a stronger sense from him than anyone else that he's trying to solce the game. He's here, he's engaged and he's not afraid to state his mind. His previous role is the only slight complication.

I'm not concerned with anyone else's stated case against sig right now. My own thoughts on him havd shifted to a town lean. He looks to me like a player who doesn't care about how he is being perceived, which I take as a good thing.

I'm still not inspired by a single word of any case against spacedaisy.

Your reads seem to be solely driven by emotion. And, as you've shown with your suspicion of Boomslang, you seem to be emotionally favorable towards people attempting to work with you and who also agree with your reads, while being judgmental towards those with whom you disagree.

This response just knocked you down a couple of places on my rainbow list.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 4:10 pm Scotty
Jackofhearts
Spacedaisy
Drwilgy
Kylemii
sig
niju
Marmot
INH
LoRab
Boomslang

Still changing my mind left and right and nothing's quite settled, but this is where I'm at right now. Marmot's made a few posts where he looked actively engaged in the thread, but I haven't seen much follow up from him on that. I've calmed down on sig and kyle and can see some earnest thought processes poking through in their posts.
Everyone should be on the table, but I think it's important that we work toward a consensus today. I would like to test my theory about the tribes alternating between lynching and nightkilling. This would require that we actually lynch somebody today. So far we seem to be going toward boomslang and I support that.

Also, why did you "calm down" on Sig?

Has the case against him been countered in any meaningful way?

Screw it, I'll make my own super-cool rainbow list. What it lacks in visual flair, it makes up for in readability.

JoH
Marmot
Ninja
Boomslang
Sloonei
Lorab
DrWilgy
Kylemii
Scotty
Sig
Spacedaisy

Sloonei wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 4:10 pm Scotty
Jackofhearts
Spacedaisy
Drwilgy
Kylemii
sig
niju
Marmot
INH
LoRab
Boomslang

Still changing my mind left and right and nothing's quite settled, but this is where I'm at right now. Marmot's made a few posts where he looked actively engaged in the thread, but I haven't seen much follow up from him on that. I've calmed down on sig and kyle and can see some earnest thought processes poking through in their posts.
Everyone should be on the table, but I think it's important that we work toward a consensus today. I would like to test my theory about the tribes alternating between lynching and nightkilling. This would require that we actually lynch somebody today. So far we seem to be going toward boomslang and I support that.

Why is Scotty your top town read?

Imma gonna go ahead and aubergine Spacedaisy for now.

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 3:46 am I have been doing most of my reading at work, which is why when I post it has more thoughts. I can't post as easily at work. So I know that when I was catching up once Wilgy started talking something he said jumped out at me and immediately made me think, "teammates." But I can't recall off the top of my head. I will need to find it again. I just don't have time tonight.

On another note, I think I was a lot more loud about the fact I didn't like Boomslang jumping on the dumb 70% thing. I get why it doesn't make sense as a statement, but I think Boomslang is a really smart dude. He should have been able to realize, that this statement is not one that logically would say "Baddie." So the fact that he based his vote on that dumb comment is what bothers me. in fact that is what bothers me about Boomslang overall. I have a high amount of respect for his intellect in general. And I struggle to find the logic in his suspicions. This could entirely just be a difference of how we think, that is my only hindrance in this. But I have no qualms about the fact I suspected Boom based on that. I think it's weird no one really talked much about the fact I took this strong stance about it. And even weirder that I don't even remember Kyle having made a big deal of it.

I don't have the immediate feeling of "TOWN" from Kyle that I have in the past, but I haven't had any kind of feel.

At one point in my read through, I had the thought that I believed either Boomslang, Blooper or both were bad but I didn't believe they were both good. I can't recall why now though. Perhaps something to do with how they interacted. I'll have to revisit to figure it out again.

Uh something else, I can't recall. Someone that had listed suspicion of me seemed fake as shit, but now I don't remember which one. Must research to recall.

That's all I can think of tonight. My energy went to researching Wilgy to decide if I was on crack or not regarding my perception of his meta. I decided that I don't think I am. However I will add this caveat. The older games lack this pattern. But I feel like it is present in all the games I checked from 2017 and so far in 2018. I didn't look through all 2016, I noticed the lack of it back in the 2015 games, but we're talking three years ago. I still feel fairly strongly that we are seeing bad Wilgy here. So much so I am willing to toss my vote there right now.

VOTE DrWilgy You asked for an aubergine fiiiiight, and I love you toooo. But I still think you are bad. But I love you, Baddie Badderson.

Coaching weak suspicions in "you're usually better" nonsensical sentiment. Boomslang is usually smarter (which Daisy and Sloonei seem to define as agreeing with their suspicions instead of having their own opinions) and DrWilgy is, I guess, more gimmick-y? The only thing from Wilgy's game-content that I've found disagreeable is his Boomslang vote today. Daisy's highly-subjective entirely-meta case against him just seems like formless finger pointing.

I'd vote for Daisy or Sig today over anyone else. I'm gonna try and ISO Scotty at some point and give my thoughts on him and his glut of content.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 2:05 pm If INH is silenced I'm fairly comfortable saying we have a civilian silencer who is required to target each night.

Not silenced, and not a fan of the Boomslang wagon.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Mar 04, 2018 6:17 pm
Scotty wrote: ↑Sun Mar 04, 2018 6:12 pm
Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Mar 04, 2018 5:12 pm The other tribe also has two roles that were made public at the start of the day:
One that forces a player each day to post in haiku, and another that gets to post a message to the thread at the start of each day.

I also just had the thought that perhaps our button role realigns the tribes.
I like this thought except that what happens when the tribes merge?
The button will have been squandered.

Or the button merges the tribes.

Sloonei wrote: ↑Sun Mar 04, 2018 12:36 am You guys! Prior to me making this post, the other tribe has literally exactly twice as many posts as us.

Told ya so.

People I'm looking at today, in no particular order:

Sig - Same reasons as yesterday. May vote for him.
Daisy - Not really done much other than go after Boomslang for kinda flimsy reasons and randomly vote for Wilgy. May vote for her.
Kyle - I suck at reading him, so I'm kinda fighting my instincts on this one, but I really didn't like his overreaction to the perceived overreaction of Boomslang's 70% comment. Not gonna vote for him today due to insanification.
Scotty - The Lorab thing is weak sauce. I myself sometimes struggle with having solid reads, and can be hella reticent to concretely voice my opinions, so Lorab is reading as a town-read to me. Scotty sure is posting a bunch, but I'm not really sure what all he's saying. Plus, he hasn't yet posted a Survivor Mafia 2 in The Drawing Board forum. We should lynch him solely for that. May vote for him.
Wilgy - Good ol' unreadable clusterfuck-y wiggly Wilgy. I appreciate his defense of me against Sloonei's nonsense, but he's still one big question mark to me, way more than perhaps any other player. Probably won't vote for him.
Nijuu - Like his Sig vote, but still a bit of a blank read. I know that this is WIFOM soup, but considering that it appears that mafia remain mafia after losing a life, I can't help but wonder if they'd NK one of their own early on just to muddy up the waters. It's a dumb reason to suspect Nijuu, as I'm well aware, but it's why I can't really loosen up and townread him. Probably won't vote for him.

Quick non-insanified explanation of my Sig vote yesterday.

I didn't like his statements on the haiku situation, it kinda felt like covering for possible liars.

I sided with Boomslang on the whole 70% comment. Thought it was weird, and didn't like how people jumped to sig's defense and attacked Boomslang simply for pointing it out.

Then there's his flippity floppity treatment of Sloonei which just felt disingenuous. TBH, I might end up voting for him again today.

First off, I'd like to direct as many people as possible to what could be my magnum opus in terms of mafia posting, where I took a post explaining my complicated stance on Sloonei, (warily reading as town, but definitely not taking my eyes off of him) ran it through an insanifier, and sang the results into my phone. I then spent twenty minutes in Garageband making whatever the hell this is:

SLOONEI {INH REMIX}

nijuukyugou wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2018 6:35 pm Fuck it. sig's all over the place. I'm re-reading interactions between him and Sloonei, and he's floundering like crazy. He might be weird, but not usually floundery. I want to have more time to look at the Lorab comparison before I make an uninformed vote in her direction. Pulling the trigger and vote sig. (Did I do that right? Friggin' tags.)

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/aubergine

balloonery Moving PIctures look at sig, itemize player who Tribunal of Judgment caught some heat apparently. Don't obstetrics get the Knave of Hearts or Boomslang wagons. Holding off don't Jack Torrence. assistance post_id=414085 time=1519478705 Golden post_id=413995 osmanli user_id=174]
One thing that I'm worried about is the idiot of the day Haiku luteous thing. Trusty John we don't know who did lostaddict12 did not optimates in a haiku, and people fossils an incentive to lie about doing so in order to protect themselves. particulars BTSC scum failed liliputian an even Lucy Saxon lackadaisical Hot Soup pointless harrowing 1 than usual, where not only does everyone not know who contriving hell somnus scum, but we also founder even know who we can actually Mongoose. instanter Achilles Jabberwocky would be chorea dumping to say who bending trocar haiku? While people digenesis lie Titan it Quaro don't think many would so we White Knight antifebrile crier kill we did.
[/quote]

This post machinal pingy to me. My sabulous was that lying about writing a haiku would give mafioso saving Knave of Hearts immunity that wants why wouldn't cirrocumulus digenesis advantage of that? Fried_Frogurt seems Crude Yacht sig was bighead to get people to believe others in case it became under the bus important topic.

About his reaction to Sloonei's case against me, traitor thanks just agreed with all of my points: I do think White Queen it's incredibly block miscompute him to not at least try to state rapparee original reason why he Dodo Pequeninos Sloonei's case, which even Sloonei knew was March Hare. anglicize post_id=414673 time=1519594589 user_id=411]
[VOTE: Sig] aubergine

I'm bored, lets osmanli it.

Plus amour about 70% LaezyDaezy epacme submitted a haiku and it's team track nobody followed Formics whap answered when I King of Town if they did.
[/quote]

I side vlei Blooper over Kyle about supportance post. The whole 70% thing is something that annoyed witworm conjuring when Kate infliction it, NotInOxford Jack Torrence of Sig's flip-floppiness over panoplied haiku anagoge. Plus, the necessitous guinde attitude is sudorific something DooberDoes I like.

After SeptemberValentine he shifts around from civreading Sloonei to scumreading him. Immediately after accusing Sloonei executed flip-flopping too. More than a little fingersplints. Dodo there's enough here, fonctionnaire so phr significative everyone else that irreprovable moresque to vote Sig today.

sig aubergine

I've epacme been more proud roarer anything in my life.

Search found 73 matches