The Syndicate

Turnip Head wrote:

Matahari wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Matahari wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:With that said, I am only awaiting 5 votes at the moment. If those votes all arrive early, I will end the day early. But no rush.

Thanks, I'm going to go vote now, and I'll go with MM.

This vote surprised me a little. You hadn't really weighed in on my case against him, and you didn't really give a reason here either... you had just said earlier that MM was acting "wacky" and you lumped him into your gray area with a bunch of players you said you knew nothing about And you put Epi and Llama as the only people on the bad side of your fence, yet you didn't vote for one of them.

I said earlier that I had MM in with players who are off to me. I questioned him earlier in the game, then slacked off because humor charms me. But you, Made, Russ, and MM have been playing off at different times in the game, and that can be bad to ignore. I voted you and Made for the same reason, but have since re-evaluated. That doesn't mean that because some of the off ppl are ppl I now feel wrong about, that all of them will be.

And- I'm not ready to vote Llama or Epig yet, because I want to have something to more to present than 'feels'.

If you are looking for feedback on your posts, I will be happy to oblige, it wasn't meant to be a slight. I just had my own reasons for considering MM, and I didn't go further than that.

It's just that you seemed to have a lot to say about a variety of topics, but not as much to say about the player who earned your vote. You elaborated on many things, including people you feel good about who weren't necessarily even lynch candidates today (myself included), but I didn't feel you elaborated on your suspicion of MM to the same degree. Just has me a little curious, that's all

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Matahari wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Matahari wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:With that said, I am only awaiting 5 votes at the moment. If those votes all arrive early, I will end the day early. But no rush.

Thanks, I'm going to go vote now, and I'll go with MM.

This vote surprised me a little. You hadn't really weighed in on my case against him, and you didn't really give a reason here either... you had just said earlier that MM was acting "wacky" and you lumped him into your gray area with a bunch of players you said you knew nothing about And you put Epi and Llama as the only people on the bad side of your fence, yet you didn't vote for one of them.

I said earlier that I had MM in with players who are off to me. I questioned him earlier in the game, then slacked off because humor charms me. But you, Made, Russ, and MM have been playing off at different times in the game, and that can be bad to ignore. I voted you and Made for the same reason, but have since re-evaluated. That doesn't mean that because some of the off ppl are ppl I now feel wrong about, that all of them will be.

And- I'm not ready to vote Llama or Epig yet, because I want to have something to more to present than 'feels'.

If you are looking for feedback on your posts, I will be happy to oblige, it wasn't meant to be a slight. I just had my own reasons for considering MM, and I didn't go further than that.

What's off about me?

Turnip Head wrote:

Matahari wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:With that said, I am only awaiting 5 votes at the moment. If those votes all arrive early, I will end the day early. But no rush.

Thanks, I'm going to go vote now, and I'll go with MM.

This vote surprised me a little. You hadn't really weighed in on my case against him, and you didn't really give a reason here either... you had just said earlier that MM was acting "wacky" and you lumped him into your gray area with a bunch of players you said you knew nothing about And you put Epi and Llama as the only people on the bad side of your fence, yet you didn't vote for one of them.

MovingPictures07 wrote:With that said, I am only awaiting 5 votes at the moment. If those votes all arrive early, I will end the day early. But no rush.

juliets wrote:I also should have mentioned I don't know what to make of bea. I think it's doubtful she will get lynched today and I'm interested to see what position she takes once she makes it through this lynch. She's just on my watch list for now.

Mata yes I was going to put a sad smiley up because you forgot me! No biggie though.

Epignosis wrote:

Matahari wrote:Reading ppl's defenses have struck me oddly. FZ is defending hard, but somehow, I don't think a civ would go that hard. Made has brought up accusations but its too little, too late. And the part about Russ is making me He has had plenty of time to talk about Bass before now too, I think my vote is going to the greater of 2 evils. voting Made

Fascinating to me that Matahari paid lip service to the FZ. suspicion on Day 6, but voted Made. Once again, Matahari has mentioned FZ. but is backing out of it because I'm going hard after her and (somehow) that's a "traditional baddie tactic."

Something to keep in mind, I think.

Epignosis wrote:

FZ. wrote:I'm going to bed.
For those of you who vote early, if you're really interested in taking Kiras down, voting for me will not achieve that.

What evidence is there to support that? Like it or not, Mafia is a game of evidence. When it becomes a game of "gut" is the day it comes a game of chance.

FZ. wrote:I have no idea what Epi's role is and whether it's deliberate or not, but I do know he's wrong. I am not a baddie.

Yeah, everybody says that. Suppose you are bad. Would you say, "Hey, I don't know Epi's role, but I am a baddie!"

FZ. wrote:Since I'm sick of defending myself, I will likely stop doing it. If you have any specific question, I'll answer. If not, I'm just going to ignore posts asking you to lynch me or saying how this is something that has to be done, because it's a lie

I called you out Day 1 as bad. Do you remember why?

++++

I can't be assed to format this, so I'm going to respond 1 2 3.

FZ. wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

FZ. wrote:Don't forget that if he did role check me out of everyone (why not do Made if he was relatively trusting me?), he had 50% chance of getting something else, so this "facts" you seem to be using to make me look bad, are rubbish.

"Rubbish" eh?

I anticipated this reply from you, but not such strong terminology. Let me ask you this: If you were Mogi, and you checked someone, would you dismiss it as "rubbish" because it was a 50% check? Would you refrain from using your ability and effectively be a vanilla civilian instead?I would use it, but I would be very hesitant in drawing conclusions that could lead to very bad actions. And my terminology is harsh, because I'm sick of defending myself. There's just so much fun a person can have in the game, when all they do is defend themselves. Don't worry,it's what you're supposed to do if you think I'm bad, but since I'm not, I don't have to like it.

FZ. wrote:And if your gut tells you something, you should obviously ignore it, because god forbid we use facts. You're such and incredible baddie hunter that you don't need facts. You've got the whole game pinned down

Yeah, about things we have pinned down...

FZ. wrote:Honestly, I'm not even sure llama and Epi are really working for the good side. I think they're not even trying to look at things from all sides. When I'm a baddie, I often stick to my suspicions to not look like I'm flip flopping and to not get called out for "contradicting" back-pedalling" and all that.

I read your Star Trek game. You were a fish on hot pier. See? Here is how you "use" facts. You ignore the word "often" and then twist it so it fits your theory. You have to remember that on K-site, people are a lot more familiar with me in both alignments, so I have to get out of my comfort zone and try and switch it and do things that people don't recognize as my baddie behaviour. The game you read is my last game as a baddie there. But of course, whatever fits your "facts"

FZ. wrote:

Epignosis wrote:The first thing that popped out at me was that you are too easily dissuaded, which matches your behavior here, I think.

You also threw out a lot of names early on, which is what you also did here. Again, did you compare this to my civvie game? Do I not throw a lot of names out there?

Was Laura bad??? Was she my team mate? Sure, I go after civvies, and I back off. These are things I do both when a civ and a baddie. It's how we all play the game, isn't it?

You don't even have your story pinned down about your game as a villain, so it discredits your commentary regarding it. I think we already established that what people believe about themselves is not always what they really do. But won't you enlighten me here. Do you have your game as a villain pinned down?

A fish on a hot pier, yes sir.

And like a fish on a hot pier, you are slippery, don't smell right, and should be filleted.

At least I'm not taking the whole civvies down, which is what you're doing by keeping twisting things the way you're doing. I'd rather be inconsistent, contradictory and what not instead of being narrow minded, and wrong

1. I would use it, but I would be very hesitant in drawing conclusions that could lead to very bad actions. And my terminology is harsh, because I'm sick of defending myself. There's just so much fun a person can have in the game, when all they do is defend themselves. Don't worry,it's what you're supposed to do if you think I'm bad, but since I'm not, I don't have to like it.

This is why I know you aren't a detective. You know why I know that? You drew conclusions about Snowman. He was bad, and you defended him hard. Yet given a role that could inform you of someone's role, you cite caution. This is important- you weren't wishy-washy about Snowman. You were adamant. According to your answer above, you would be hesitant (not adamant) trusting your role power, but when Snowman was up for lynch, you were adamant he was good.

By the way, everyone watching: If you are a detective and given a 50% chance of knowing someone's role, you should initially assume that information is true and act accordingly. I'm serious. Read the Monty Hall Paradox if you don't believe me on this. It's not the same problem, but it's the same principle. And hell, even if your info is bad, you will generate more info in the form of reactions, so there's even more of an incentive.

2. See? Here is how you "use" facts. You ignore the word "often" and then twist it so it fits your theory. You have to remember that on K-site, people are a lot more familiar with me in both alignments, so I have to get out of my comfort zone and try and switch it and do things that people don't recognize as my baddie behaviour. The game you read is my last game as a baddie there. But of course, whatever fits your "facts"

Hahaha. Want to know something funny? I thought about omitting the word "often" just to see what you would say. So no, I didn't ignore it. I thought long and hard about it. In the end, I chose to be straightforward. What you are doing is telling us this: "I am X Y Z when I am bad" and also saying "I am not X Y Z when I am bad." That's duplicity. You want us to believe you regarding one set of facts, but you want us to ignore the other set of facts.

"Often" doesn't mean anything to me when you say it. It's an out. It's politician speak. It's how you get away with lying without actually lying. It's a fucking adverb.

3. I think we already established that what people believe about themselves is not always what they really do. But won't you enlighten me here. Do you have your game as a villain pinned down?

Yes. It's called "Win." And when I am bad, I rock at it. Look at my signature. Those are just wins here, and all of them save one are evil wins. So yes, I know what I do as a villain. But nobody else will know what that is. Do you want to know why? It's because when I am bad, I don't know what I will do. I do what has to be done to win.

That's why people who come in here yakking about "play style" this and "baddie game" that gain no trust from me. Those things are phantoms. If everybody had a civilian game and a bad game, everything would be obvious. But it ain't obvious, is it?

In your case, I actually read an entire game you were bad in. You know what you said now? Look at #2. You said this:

" You have to remember that on K-site, people are a lot more familiar with me in both alignments, so I have to get out of my comfort zone and try and switch it and do things that people don't recognize as my baddie behaviour. The game you read is my last game as a baddie there. But of course, whatever fits your "facts""

Now my read of you on your evil game isn't valid because I have to remember this and that about K-Site? What do you mean "remember?" I've never been on K-Site to play. You are creating excuses. I did exactly what you said to do. Go to K-Site and look at your "baddie game." I did it. And now there's stipulations?

You, madam, are evil, vile, and some other anagram of those letters, and worthy of a lynch.

thellama73 wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

Epignosis wrote:That's fair enough.

How about FZ. now. Hmm?

I''m more interested in looking at Black Rock, Bass, and DP. I maintain that the current Kira was not paying enough attention to the thread.


I also don't think FZ would tell us all to fuck off if she were bad.

I agree with your assessment thta Kira was not paying that much attention. FZ telegraphed pretty hard that she had not been paying attention to the roles. I am curious as to why you singled out Black Rock, Bass, DP and Spacedaisy as not paying attention, but left out other obvious candidates like Matahari, Zeek, and Juliets.

Matahari wrote:Reading ppl's defenses have struck me oddly. FZ is defending hard, but somehow, I don't think a civ would go that hard. Made has brought up accusations but its too little, too late. And the part about Russ is making me He has had plenty of time to talk about Bass before now too, I think my vote is going to the greater of 2 evils. voting Made

DharmaHelper wrote:I have two deductions I would like to present at this time:

1) Takada had not established BTSC at the time of her death. Why else vote for who she thought was L rather than tell her BTSC mates in private?

2) Light is someone who is not paying attention to the thread, or is Black Rock, or knows who Black Rock really is. Why else kill Zomberella over Black Rock?

thellama73 wrote:

Matahari wrote:Llama, I went back through some of your posts to see what you are noticing about FZ. Sometimes you have agreed with her comments, but more often have questioned them. Do you think she is being inconsistent, and is that a sign that she is bad? Or did I miss something more damning in my read through/skim?

I'll try to pull together my case on FZ today if I have time. I do agree with her frequently, but I would expect to agree with someone who is trying not to look bad, so that doesn't mean anything. Basically my bad feels about her are the sum of a large number of minor pings that add up to major discomfort with her.

Made wrote:Voted Th to save myself. That said, I still think a Th lynch is premature, so :/

Also

bea wrote:I have to start dinner soon. I'm voting made, he feels to me like he's trying to stay under the radar.

This felt like it came out of no where.

Made wrote:Random thought during AP Lit: While I kinda agree with it, isn't it kinda a cough out to vote TH and Russ? gonna check something....

Yeah, what i figured, there's a few ways this could go down. TH and Russ very easily could be any of the 4
L-Town
Kanzo Mogi – One of the most dedicated members of the Japanese Task Force, but also one of the most reserved(Russ? It would fit into the idea of a high poster to have an alternative low poster maybe?). (Secrets)

Hirokazu Ukita – Perhaps the most emotional member of the Japanese Task Force, Ukita is nonetheless absolutely determined to catch Kira, and does not hesitate to demonstrate passionate, admirable bravery.( Th Demonstrating passion by posting every other post?) (Secrets)


Light's Squad
Teru Mikami (X Kira) – As a devoted worshiper of Kira, Mikami has a strong sense of justice and feels evil absolutely must be punished. He adheres to a very strict, daily schedule. (Russ only posting at a certain time each cycle.)

Hitoshi Demegawa – A very greedy man who feeds off of publicity, Demegawa is director of Sakura TV. If L dies, Demegawa asserts himself as Kira’s spokesman and constantly rallies for Kira supporters to participate in various violent acts of protest.(TH posting often to gain publicity?) (Secrets)

Yeah, ik it's speculation, but if we're considering killing them, then we should have something a little more substantial than "oh he's acting funny"

bea wrote:

Matahari wrote:I'm grateful to the puzzle solvers. If the host has a puzzle as part of his game, and no one works on it, its kind of insulting.

linki

who are you looking at this lynch?

DisgruntledPorcupine wrote:My ears are ringing.

Also, I hate to do something over simplified but Russ' very strict daily schedule is making me increasingly paranoid and unless someone changes my mind between now and tomorrow afternoon I am probably going to vote for him.

Epignosis wrote:Matahari- this astounds me: Why would you read 23 pages of Turnip Head but defer to the opinions of others?

thellama73 wrote:

Matahari wrote:I reread TH today. 23 pages of one-liners (and most of them made me laugh), but at least he was consistent. No change that I could see from day 1 (when he wasn't the first voter) to day 2&3, when he was the first. That doesn't make him bad, and it doesn't lay claim to civvie-ness either. (I believe that word can be found in the mafia dictionary, it replaced townie-ness)

I do think he has been inviting votes though. Its almost like he has either been daring people to vote him, or inviting them. Maybe he can't be lynched, or maybe he achieves something if he gets the majority of votes.

Or maybe he has a new play style, but I doubt it. I'd appreciate some comments on the above graph, though.

Maybe if we vote for him, he will explode and kill the people who voted for him. Maybe he is not really TH at all, but a secret ghost-sock account masquerading as him. Maybe the world will end tomorrow.

Maybe we should spend less time inventing hypothetical reasons not to vote for someone who is acting suspicious.

Zomberella12 wrote:

thellama73 wrote:Story time! Let's read some of Zombrella's posts together, shall we?

First, I find this one extremely interesting. Zomba accuses me of being the role thta Snowman ended up being.

Zomberella12 wrote:This character fits the way Llama is acting. Didn't someone suggest that people might be getting points for being the first to vote? That would also fit.

Hitoshi Demegawa – A very greedy man who feeds off of publicity, Demegawa is director of Sakura TV. If L dies, Demegawa asserts himself as Kira’s spokesman and constantly rallies for Kira supporters to participate in various violent acts of protest. (Secrets)

Not sure what that means, but it's a weird coincidence, isn't it?

Next, Zomba made several posts accusing me of being bad (not quoted here) and justified her vote on the following grounds.

Zomberella12 wrote: I had to skip so many pages that I can't really comment on others' reasons. I did read all of Snowman's posts and many of Llamas. I think Llama's case was made too early and not based on strong evidence. However, Llama's actions against Snowman are what made me vote for Llama.

Remember that. She voted for me because I went after Snowman. This will come back later, so try to keep it in mind.

Zomba then suddenly flips and decides SNowman is bad, chasing after him relentlessly and soliciting my help. She then "hails my deductive powers."

Zomberella12 wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Zomberella12 wrote:Epi probably won't like me saying it, but there is a civ role that cannot be lynched or NK'd (as far as we know right now). It is possible that he is good. Weird, but good. I am still going to vote Snowman.

I thought you said you wanted to talk to me about it first.

Oh yeah. I do want to talk to you! Maybe not first. But I'm sorry that I doubted you. You were right. Hail Llama's deductive powers.

As soon as Snowman is lynched, she flips back to suspecting me, even though her vote for me previously was based on my suspicion of Snowman. (I told you that would come back later.)

Zomberella12 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:Kira kills whenever, so don't be shy about voicing your thoughts. Get them out there before you have a heart attack.

That sounds a little like a threat. But, I agree with you. I am a HUGE target. These names are suspected baddies for me: Zeek, DP, and Llama. No case this time, not even a weak one.

She gives no reason for her new suspicion of me.

Also, why are you a HUGE target? Why more so than anyone else?

I will say three things:
1) I am a mess - what some of you interpret as newbieness - is really just messiness - also I am forgetful.
2) I said that I am not going to give any reasons for my suspicions of MP, Zeek, and Llama. As a Detective I've been detecting. (I think this is going to bug Mata - sorry).
3) I think I'm a target because I led an attack against a Kira Supporter. If Kira finds out I'm civvie through that investigation thing, I might die. That's all.

zeek wrote:Woah I agree Epi's conclusion came first, but I can understand that because he probably set out to prove a point. DH has been one of his biggest critics. That said, I'm still on the fence with Epi. He's made some good points but it can also be read as the largest NO U in Mafia history. I'm glad he's playing ball a bit more though, even if he's not properly defending himself.

I don't know where it vote today. I'm curious about Zomberella and she could get my vote. Snowman and TH are also up there, with MM in the mix as well.

linki - DH, that's quite dismissive

Zomberella12 wrote:

Matahari wrote:Zomba, I'm not convinced yet. Normally, I would take hubby/wife advising, but normally, there is a better reason or case, so I'm having trouble with this. His statement sounded fair to me, like he was trying to be fair. Sounded like he didn't want to judge you without seeing you in action first. Are you saying that he normally would have judged you without waiting for something to judge on?

No, I'm saying that he wouldn't have judged me, or anyone, ever. That's how he plays. He doesn't build cases. He just hints. It sounds logical and thoughtful but there's no real substance. The fact that he used my name tells me that he wants me dead.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Hey Mata.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Mata, I forgot to ask you for a response to this please. I hope you enjoyed playing outside.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Matahari wrote:I don't think Epig is up to any good either, but I can't really figure out why I feel that way. He's not doing anything that seems remotely helpful

I still feel weird about Metalmarsh voting Epig. His convo with Llama was very confusing, he seemed to disagree with llama, but then he would post something that sounded like he was feeding llama, then back to disagreeing with him. Then he votes epig, kind of out of the blue. Maybe he has bts with llama.

Wait, wait what? You suspect Epi, then you suspect me for voting Epi for the same reason you suspected.

juliets wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

juliets wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

juliets wrote:TH it seems like you would be trying to get us to vote Epi. Have you changed your mind about him?

It would just be nice to have more suspects in case people don't want to vote Epi but don't suspect Snowman either.

Yes, at the moment that is where I am sitting. I'm re-reading Zombrella's suspicion of Snowman but I can't figure out what he has said or done to back her accusations. On to reading him again.

Her suspicion of Snowman seemed to appear out of thin air, didn't it? One minute she was all "I need more, maybe once he does something more bad", and then like the very next post that Snowman makes, she suddenly has her proof.

Yes, that was my reaction. And the post he made was not a post against her - in fact he said she was a straight shooter and couldn't judge if she was bad unless an accusation was leveled at her so I'm just not understanding at this point. But, I will keep reading.

juliets wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

juliets wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

juliets wrote:lol, I'll deny it, which I do, and you will not provide reasoning for me to defend myself. Nice.

If you are Yotsuba, you have no need to defend yourself. Unless you are Kira.

It seems that most people believe the Yotsubas are like independents except for the Kira one and that independents are as bad or almost as bad as being baddies. From that perspective I feel like I need to defend myself. There's nothing to work with yet though so I'll wait.

Who are these "most people" you refer to? I feel like almost everyone has agreed with Epi that lynching them is not a priority. It is only the fact that he keeps repeating it thta makes it seem like people are arguing with him.

Ok, maybe your'e right and my perception is skewed.

Turnip Head wrote:Ima let you finish but Beyoncé deserved that cookie. DharmaHelper should give Beyoncé his cookie.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Mata, I forgot to ask you for a response to this please. I hope you enjoyed playing outside.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Matahari wrote:I don't think Epig is up to any good either, but I can't really figure out why I feel that way. He's not doing anything that seems remotely helpful

I still feel weird about Metalmarsh voting Epig. His convo with Llama was very confusing, he seemed to disagree with llama, but then he would post something that sounded like he was feeding llama, then back to disagreeing with him. Then he votes epig, kind of out of the blue. Maybe he has bts with llama.

Wait, wait what? You suspect Epi, then you suspect me for voting Epi for the same reason you suspected.

zeek wrote:

Matahari wrote:Zeke, no bashing STV here. I cut my mafia teeth there and I'm so grateful Roxy and LaD talked me into playing a game. I got hooked.

I am your mafia grandpa then, I talked Roxy into playing her first game :P