The Syndicate

DharmaHelper wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Step forward! Be a leader. Be your own Game of Champions hero and MVP.

Make the case of all cases to nab that baddie (if that's what you're going for).

Linki: west side, baby.
Would it not be fun to do another 4-Way Tie? Didn't the first one grab a baddie? Don't you think the odds of finding a baddie in that pool of players is worth the coordination of a tie? How am I supposed to build a case on players who have blended so far into the background it is difficult to tell when or if they are playing?

Has something happened to you? I notice something different about you today don't you?

Why Dom? Didn't he have enough heat on him for being bad?

Where did that skeletony thing go? I need it.

Rico I buy your point on not voting 1 or 5. Though I see these hosts as tricksy enough to take a mix them up view, it's enough of a dilemma for us to figure out if they are reversed or not. I'm going to still vote position 4 because it might be the real position 4.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
FZ. wrote:
Dom wrote:FZ. of the LC voters, who do you think looks the worst? Who looks worse to you: Boom, MM, or Draco? Does MM's last minute vote for LC read as neutral to you?
MM's vote is something I don't get. If I judge by my standards, if I were an indie, I would try and help the town, so if that's the case, it's what he might have done. But MM isn't me, so I don't know. What I do know is, unless Drac is bad, what reason did he have, as a baddie, to shift his vote to LC? Knowing LC is good would have just ended up in him looking the worst. I can't see the logic in this, so if someone can shed some light on this, it will be appreciated.

As for Boomslang, I don't know what the hell he was thinking. Again, he'd have to know we would look at him, but maybe he's brave enough and thought he could make it work. That said, I don't even know why he felt he had to do that, as a baddie, instead of watching in what direction the wind was blowing (in terms of who was getting votes), and only using that if a baddie was being strongly considered. I don't think that was the case when he came out with it.

Bottom line, none of them really make sense as baddies, but MM is the more unpredictable to me, so maybe him.

Lastly, I have no reason to believe Drac is a civvie, but that crazy voting before deadline felt genuine. I don't really know much about his play. If he's bad, that was some major acting on his part. Do you think it's something he's capable of doing?

linki: hey Bea. I get it, not your fault. Just me ventilating frustration
Contrary to my attitude on Day 3, I don't like ties. Draco has self-voted in a situation like this before, and been civ. I had a slight baddie read on LC. I felt more comfortable voting for LC than Draco.

The guy also never picked me for BTSC, so

Metalmarsh you were around earlier than you voted. Why did you wait so late to vote LC if you thought he was bad? Did something happen in the last few minutes that caused you to vote for him? If not, why didn't you vote earlier - even earlier in the day? When did you make your final decision to vote for him?

I had not been contacted by LC but I have played with him a lot over the years and felt the strongest I'd ever felt about him being good. Then, when Mac and bea started carrying on I knew he was an important civ role as opposed to just a civ which in turn persuaded me to vote another possibly civ player instead of someone else who didn't have as many votes. And I'm not buddying Mac and bea, it could have been almost anyone who acted like they did.

FZ. wrote:
juliets wrote:
FZ. wrote:As for what happened, Boomslang, that was a very silly thing to do. I don't know if you're bad or not, but

The only way I see MM doing what he did as a baddie is if Drac is bad himself. Otherwise, what would MM have to gain by voting LC and influencing the lynch like that?

I'm starting to believe there is only one baddie team.

If that's the case, the baddies knew both Drac and LC were good. I think their votes can be found on both trains.
Out of the Drac voters, Juliets looks the worst to me.
Out of the LC voters, everyone looks pretty bad...
And I think there's a baddie in the other non voters and Dom voters as well.
Why do I look worst to you? I admittedly jumped onto a vote that I hoped would help save LC. Others who voted for Draco did the same. So why me the worst?
Again, this is only assuming Drac is a civ. If he isn't, the entire analysis isn't worth anything.
It felt like Bea and Mac were genuinely trying to save LC, whereas you could have been playing the torn player part who didn't know who to vote for among the two, while in fact, knew both were civvies. It's not impossible that they were planning a mastermind scheme and you are the naive casualty, but looking back at that exchange, they felt more genuine to me. You could all be civvies, but I doubt the baddies put all the eggs in one basket.

When it came to saving LC I wasn't torn. I wasn't sure that could happen until bea voted and I saw the chance. If I really wanted LC to die (because I was bad) why wouldnt I vote wilgy whom I had mentioned in the run up to the vote? I understand that is wifomy but think about it anyway. I also think there were no baddies hiding in the Draco vote because it was a vote that drew a lot of attention. Besides, why would they want to vote against the person they wanted to get rid of, LC. I think some baddies were in the LC vote and others hid in the one off votes.

Ricochet wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:
Ricochet wrote:lol DH voted position 1
Pretty sure thats a 5.
Again, pretty sure position 5 is the name of position 1. The Hosts are doing it for funsies.

Notice the poll title doesn't say Choose a position. It says nothing except This is your poll for tonight. The options are called...

The positions behind the options can still be 1 to 5.

This is true. The positions can also be what they say they are or some mixed up version of the order. It could be anything so what's the best method for determining how to vote?

FZ. wrote:As for what happened, Boomslang, that was a very silly thing to do. I don't know if you're bad or not, but

The only way I see MM doing what he did as a baddie is if Drac is bad himself. Otherwise, what would MM have to gain by voting LC and influencing the lynch like that?

I'm starting to believe there is only one baddie team.

If that's the case, the baddies knew both Drac and LC were good. I think their votes can be found on both trains.
Out of the Drac voters, Juliets looks the worst to me.
Out of the LC voters, everyone looks pretty bad...
And I think there's a baddie in the other non voters and Dom voters as well.

Why do I look worst to you? I admittedly jumped onto a vote that I hoped would help save LC. Others who voted for Draco did the same. So why me the worst?

Draconus wrote:
MacDougall wrote:
Draconus wrote:I'm sorry to LC and everyone who wanted to save him. I wasn't ready to go out like that. I will not be a sacrifice
Dude that's fair enough. I don't think that was the expectation. I didn't expect to get so close to saving him at all tbh.
That seems fair to me, as well. It was just a shitty situation to be in at the end of the Day.

Draconus I think it's fair to say I think now that all three of you are civ (well LC we know for sure). I'm sorry I felt I just had to save LC and a vote for you was the only way. I know that didn't seem fair and I will tell you it was a hard choice to make.

RIP LC. For once my thinking you were good and you being good meshed and I was right. We will miss you in this game, see you in the next one.

Draconus wrote:So why am I the sacrifice? Do I get an explanation beyond "LC must be good" ??

Linki: Well then... go civs... this is dumb.

Why are you voting yourself if you are civ???

ok, to help save long con - and if you are bad lc I'll never forgive you - I will put a vote on Draconus.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:These hosts do an amazing job at making sure the lynch ends at the exact same time every day (7:23).

Is there a significance to that time?

I think they just know how to do it. I've hosted with SVS before and we did the same but there was no significance to the time.

bea wrote:
Sorsha wrote:
juliets wrote:
FZ. wrote:
juliets wrote:
FZ. wrote:I'm voting LC. I think he's smarter than this, sorry.

Next up are either Dom or Juliets
Why do you believe that I am bad? I'm not, I'm 100% civ.
Some of it has to do with u related to thread stuff, which is why I don't fully trust it. Other reasons relate to the fact I don't feel like I usually do about you, and I've never played with bad julliets. For examp,e, I've never seen you ISO people
Actually, I iso'd BR and some of Lorab because Mac said that was something I could do to prove to him I wasn't bad.

In the case of motel room you can see I did more of a summary of his posts rather than the long form iso with quotes because I didn't feel there was really anything worth quoting unless people want me to. I iso'd he and soon I will do Wilgy because I have (had in motel room's case) vibes that they are bad but nothing to point to.

I'm trying to find baddies because I'm getting to the point where I'm not seeing what i consider to be baddie behaviors.

I was bad in AWR which I know you didn't play and one of the problems I'm having is people who played that game where I was bad are seeing me as the same in this game. Note however I did not do iso's there and I have been told that it's hard to tell the difference between me as bad and me as good. I'm not sure what to do about that.

@LC thanks for your opinion
It is very hard to distinguish bad Juliets from good Juliets. It took me a while to come around to you being bad in AWR but what finally made me realize you were bad was when you changed your vote to prove you were civ/make someone stop suspecting you (I think it was Mac) and now you say that you've been doing iso's to prove to Mac that you're not bad. So just based on that I'd say you don't look civ.
Agreed bad JC and good JC are spookily similar. I didn't play AWR so that's handy info to have.

Sorsha, there was another game - can't remember which - where SVS thought i was bad and I asked her what I could do to change her mind. She said "vote so-and-so right now" so I did. I was a civ in that game. Asking that question of people is not indicative of my alignment.

I do not think LC or Dom is bad but I don't have a good enough baddie read on anyone else either. I was not able to do my iso on Wilgy but I could vote him as a spur to bring more content to the table. Whats the deal with Draconus? He puts words in front of words in a way you don't like Mac? Is there anything else? Long Con if you are around anything from your end?

Sorsha I havent forgotten about you - I need to get my vote sorted out first.

Dom wrote:Juliets, you can add her to my list of people of unsubstantiated claims against me.

Ok thanks Dom

Ricochet wrote:
juliets wrote:What is everyone thinking about ninju? She has been so quiet, so under the radar. It makes me nervous about her. She has less posts than Tranq, in fact less than anyone.
I doubt ninju is in any way close to a lynch subject toDay, so why bring it up?

I don't have any suspicions of who I see as the top vote getters today so I'm looking around at other people on the players list.

What is everyone thinking about ninju? She has been so quiet, so under the radar. It makes me nervous about her. She has less posts than Tranq, in fact less than anyone.

FZ. wrote:I'm wondering if this is just me being paranoid, but way before Tranq was lynched, when we were all debating whether Tranq's behaviour is a baddie indication, Mac said he is going to play like that in future games and skate through the game. Is it possible he's trying that as a baddie now?

Linki: Okay, it makes some sense. That said, I thought that if he was forced, the one post was enough to make it clear it wasn't his own choice, but when he came back with more, it made me doubt that. Can someone make him keep posting to convince us? Usually, when you're forced to vote for someone else, it's not like that.

FZ., one thing that Mac said earlier was that he was working on a seven figure project that was more important than mafia. If that's true it might be why he's not in the thread during the day. I don't know this to be true but it is something he brought up a little while back.

DharmaHelper wrote:Having actually read what Boomslang said now I have to admit I am intrigued. He's not above flat out infodumping (Amirite Face of Hoe)?

As annoying as that would be, I have to consider this Day a toss up between either LC or Boom now.

What do you think of the idea that Boomslang was forced to try to make a case and then vote LC?

Long Con wrote:
Boomslang wrote:Why would I make such an unprecedented move on LC? What could I have possibly learned between Day 5 and Day 6? You're all smart people, you can figure it out.
Yeah, this. Has anyone figured it out and shown that they are smart? Is Boomslang roleclaiming an info role?

I could posit that he's a Civ with an info role that has gotten bad info, but why would an info-getting Civ just blurt and out themselves like that? He didn't even try to make a case on me and indicate agreement with others who suspect me.

Plus, this would be an info dump, completely against the rules, which I don't think Boomslang would do. Thats one of the reasons I like the idea that he was forced.

Long Con wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
Long Con wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Taking a glance at the poll I don't like it at all, Long Con should not have any votes IMO. He's not inexperienced enough to Night Kill JJJ after going through so much effort to try and get him lynched.
I feel like I should get some leeway for being an HBoy Trusted Player after a few nights of him surviving.
Well then, you have to lynch Boom as a bullsuiter. If he doesnt flip bullsuiter, you are toast.

Case closed. Place votes, everyone. Boom or LC.
Objection!

Matt's idea that Boomslang is being forced to do this is the most believable one to me.

juliets and FZ.: I don't know why a baddie Boomslang would come out like that, because I am a Civvie. He's given a vague reason that we should be able to figure it out due to something about the last day, I think?

ok thanks LC. I agree Matt's idea makes the most sense.

Ricochet wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Taking a glance at the poll I don't like it at all, Long Con should not have any votes IMO. He's not inexperienced enough to Night Kill JJJ after going through so much effort to try and get him lynched.
What about what Boom said? BS or not?

Also, wife-ohm.

LC can you speak to what Boomslang has said? He wants us to believe he knows you are bad.

thnx MM for your reply

FZ. wrote:
juliets wrote:
FZ. wrote:I'm voting LC. I think he's smarter than this, sorry.

Next up are either Dom or Juliets
Why do you believe that I am bad? I'm not, I'm 100% civ.
Some of it has to do with u related to thread stuff, which is why I don't fully trust it. Other reasons relate to the fact I don't feel like I usually do about you, and I've never played with bad julliets. For examp,e, I've never seen you ISO people

Actually, I iso'd BR and some of Lorab because Mac said that was something I could do to prove to him I wasn't bad.

In the case of motel room you can see I did more of a summary of his posts rather than the long form iso with quotes because I didn't feel there was really anything worth quoting unless people want me to. I iso'd he and soon I will do Wilgy because I have (had in motel room's case) vibes that they are bad but nothing to point to.

I'm trying to find baddies because I'm getting to the point where I'm not seeing what i consider to be baddie behaviors.

I was bad in AWR which I know you didn't play and one of the problems I'm having is people who played that game where I was bad are seeing me as the same in this game. Note however I did not do iso's there and I have been told that it's hard to tell the difference between me as bad and me as good. I'm not sure what to do about that.

@LC thanks for your opinion

I mentioned earlier that I wanted to iso motel room and Wilgy. I've read through motel room - it wasn't hard - and have to say even though there were times when he was catching up and not participating when he did participate he did ask questions of people and give his opinions. It struck me while I was reading him that he has certainly done more of this than Tranq did. He has also not posted since Jan. 22. I can't see anything that would make me vote for him at this time. Has anyone else taken a look at him and feel any differently?

FZ. wrote:I'm voting LC. I think he's smarter than this, sorry.

Next up are either Dom or Juliets

Why do you believe that I am bad? I'm not, I'm 100% civ.

I don't get it Mac. Why are you suspicious of me? Because I'm verbose and stilted? Or is there some other reason now?

@Boomslang - and why do you find me suspicious? Because I asked about your reasons on LC? I expect people to have reasons for suspicions though I now get the drift of your answer.

Boomslang wrote:Long Con is bad, and you have to trust me on this. I've made some bad calls this game, but this one is different.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I agree with this statement.

MM why do you agree? What do you see in LC that looks bad?

What makes you think he is bad Boom?

FZ. I don't understand why you think Dom is a baddie because he wants people to explain their vote. Usually it's considered the mark of a baddie if you don't explain your vote. Everyone deserves the opportunity to know why someone is voting for them so they can defend themselves. I've never heard anyone say it's the mark of the baddie to ask people to explain votes. Did I misunderstand what you said? If not, why is that a mark of a baddie?

Also I'm going to try to do isos of Wilgy and motel room today - probably there isn't a lot to look at on motel room but that fly by vote yesterday really caught my eye.

JJJ, RIP. I'm going to really miss you in this game. But why did they go after you? Over and over lynches have been launched on you so I would think the baddies would figure enough people saw you as bad that you would eventually be lynched. Was this an attempt to frame someone who pushed for a vote for you? Or maybe not. You see the problem - anything could be true. We'll figure it out I hope. Meanwhile, have a zombie drink on me.

I understood joke
About fruit, which one are you?
I think blueberry

Sorry for the double post, I'm voting David Bowie.

Long Con wrote:Well, that's a sucky result. I feel like Tranq could have fought a lot harder to live. Dropping Golden's name just once in the last day might have made a difference.

RIP Tranq and I'm sorry I voted for you. But, I agree with LC that there are a lot of things you could have done - just one or two things would have probably done it - to signal us you were civ. In fact, you could have just told us the truth "I got bored and [got behind, didn't see anything I wanted to comment on, etc.]." As bea said I know you well but not well enough to read your mind. In any case, I misread you and chose to vote for you so I understand it was me who did wrong.

@bea - I do know him well bea but I would have expected him to do something to try and save himself. I can't differentiate being bored with laying low without any feedback.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I think MM would be a bad lynch and I recommend people move to Tranq. I think a few of them are locked in though due to time constraints, at least Dom and FZ.

I think your forced question was a good one and I guess I have to say I don't think MM is lying about being an indy. That puts me looking for somewhere to vote. I'm unsure about Tranq because I have seen him not talk very much and be a civ. LC I think it was has seen just the opposite - when he's quiet he's bad. I'm basing my thoughts on one game AWR and I'm assuming LC is basing what he said on behavior over several games. So, I'm not super confident about this vote but I lean bad on Tranq and can't leave my vote on Metalmarsh at this point.

lots of linkies

Sorry for the double post but i realized it won't help me to have a civ game because you are claiming indy. If you've been an indy at anytime it would help to know that game but if you haven't thats cool.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Boomslang wrote:MM, any particular reason you omitted me from your GTH reads? Just want to clear that up in case SHTF.
No. I copied and pasted from the front page, and must have missed you.

Boomslang - attentive civ

Linki: No, I don't think that's possible juliets.

Wait MM - I think you may be misunderstanding me. I'm looking for a game where you were a baddie so I can compare your behavior in that game to this one. I'm doing it to make sure I'm giving you a fair chance. I just can't remember a game where you were a baddie which is why I'm asking for your help. But if you don't want to help thats cool.

Metalmarsh can you name any games where you were a baddie and you were a civ? I'd like to take a look.

I am also going to go ahead and vote for Metalmarsh for the reasons I talked about yesterday. My schedule is in and out today so I'm not sure I will be around at lynch time. If something happens to change my mind I will change my vote.

Boomslang wrote:Juliets keeps switching votes off Tranq, accepts a collection of Brangelina pics as content, and agrees with his positions in night polls. Ok with lynching either of them. Agreed with MacDougall in my frustration that we can't get any momentum going. *votes Tranq* for time being.

Have I mentioned that grad school is a writhing hellscape of time commitments from which there is no possible escape but the sweet release of death and/or graduation?

My votes for Tranq were pressure posts and when the pressure didn't work the votes came off. There was also information that made me change my mind and vote someone else.

Also, I thought the Brangelina pictures were a curse - I thought someone suggested that and there was agreement. I may have misunderstood that.

Out of the night posts I have only voted the same option as Tranq ONCE. And that one time was when he logically explained that position 4 was the safest position to vote because we had already lost one baddie who was empowered on position 4. Several people weighed in on this besides me and agreed that his thinking made sense.

I had planned on voting Metalmarsh today unless something conclusive happened to someone else. I don't feel he's added anything to the game and that "which" question still dances in the back of my mind even though Metalmarsh explained his viewpoint. I won't vote today, I like to wait until closer to the end so I can assess everything that's happened in the phase.

Damn. BR you provided a significant opinion about Lorab being bad and we all owe you for that. RIP and I look forward to playing with you again soon. The good news about this NK is there was only one kill, not that one kill is acceptable but at least it wasn't 2 or 3. But why BR?

Long Con wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Ricochet wrote:There isn't a "good/better" position to vote for. Position 1 is the only taboo position so far, if you're civ-minded. There shouldn't be any lobby for voting any other position because it's "better".
I actually agree with Tranq. Yes, it's possible there's another position 4 baddie still out there, but with one confirmed and dead there's a valid reason to be less concerned with that position than the others. There are a lot of possible scenarios and one of them is "only one baddie operating on position 4".
I also agree. There are x-1 baddies who benefit from Position 4, where x is the average number of baddies who started the game with each Position. Or something like that. The rest are x, which is a greater chance of MORE baddies benefiting, right?

That's the way I think about it. So right, as far as I'm concerned.

Ricochet wrote:
bea wrote:You guys probably didn't know this, but my husbands bff is jason momoa. To honor the fact that he is bfff with aquaman I vote dolphin army since the preferred get drunk option is off the table. Stoopid kubrik takin my booze.
Whoa. Nice.

juliets wrote:If I vote for someone and evidence comes to me later that another individual is really the one who is bad I will change my vote. If I vote for someone and the votes are centered on two or three other people I often change my vote to one of the two or three to show what I'm thinking about those two or three. Would you rather I continue to vote the person who is now out of it or move my vote to a place where it counts from the perspective of other people judging it? When you start talking about bandwagoning you have to look at each vote that person made and assess whether it's truly just jumping on to jump on or there is a reason for the vote. I don't think you've looked at my votes in that light.
I soon will.

Good. Just look at them with an open mind.

If I vote for someone and evidence comes to me later that another individual is really the one who is bad I will change my vote. If I vote for someone and the votes are centered on two or three other people I often change my vote to one of the two or three to show what I'm thinking about those two or three. Would you rather I continue to vote the person who is now out of it or move my vote to a place where it counts from the perspective of other people judging it? When you start talking about bandwagoning you have to look at each vote that person made and assess whether it's truly just jumping on to jump on or there is a reason for the vote. I don't think you've looked at my votes in that light.

So Rico are you saying there are two baddies for each position power in the game? And here you go again calling me bad for no reason. Where is your case?

Tranq wrote:Voting #4 makes the most sense as a baddie role who benefits from that position is already dead.

Good point. That's where I'm going to vote.

Other than position 1, is there any other position we should avoid voting for? I don't think so but I want to be sure I haven't missed something.

Ricochet wrote:
juliets wrote:
Ricochet wrote:Sketchy juliet vote #303000
Are you trying to say I am the only one who changes my votes? And how many times have i done it? i remember twice, counting this change to llama.
They just come off like that to me, tbh, regardless of evolution. I commented on your D3.5 contributing to a MM counter-wagon that could have served as third wheel to saving LoRab and your D3.0 was a loner on Tranq - from which you now just switched, because llama has more steam. Soo yeah.

LET ME POST

LET ME POST

You called my post #303000 which insinuated i had changed my votes multiple times. My vote for Metalmarsh was not a changed vote and it WAS NOT meant to start a counter wagon. I did change a vote from Tranq to JJJ and I changed just now from Tranq to llama. That's two votes I've changed. If you want to make a point get your facts right. If you suspect me then do a case on me and quit throwing around innuendo.

Search found 240 matches