The Syndicate

sig wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Quin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:sig, I've provided more reads on players than almost everyone else in the game. If you can't remember my content that's on you, not me.

I suspect sig for this. There's another post later on I'll get to eventually, but I could easily interpret this as a bad sig not even reading the thread, hence 'not remembering' a whole 17 (... )meaty posts in a row from MP.

I would say that if anyone suspecting me right now is mafia, it's most believable to be sig, but I'm a bit hesitant to pursue that train of thought aggressively for multiple reasons:

1) I have not yet had the opportunity to engage directly with sig and he has not yet seen these recent responses of mine, so perhaps he has not had enough information to come to a more informed assessment of me.

2) sig not thoroughly examining the thread, or even reading it, and then making gut-based interpretations of my behavior is just as compatible with a town sig that increasingly is becoming bothered with aspects of my behavior in the game as it is with a mafia sig that is trying to push me as mislynch because everyone on this site knows that I'm a relatively easy mislynch to push. Do you have reason to believe that it is more compatible with the latter explanation? I haven't seen anything compelling personally.

3) Although I do still firmly believe it is on sig that he does not recall my content, his accusation is still potentially legitimate if he believes I am a mafia member manufacturing my suspicions and trying to flood the thread with posts but my substance in those posts is lacking. Now the point I was raised in my quoted post above was that I was contributing more than nearly everyone else, and while that is likely unarguable, mulling over it I think I missed sig's point and that was that he believes, in comparison to his perception of what he believes town MP would be posting, my content is lacking. I did not adequately address that concern.

sig, let me know if you want to engage on any of this.

Yeah MP hit the nail on the head, also it isn't that he isn't posting content it's that he is posting content in an MP mafia sort of way. Maybe i'm just paranoid after seeing him destroy town in Scrimmage, since in that game he flooded the thread amd it was meaty, but it was lacking content since he wasn't attempting to actually solve the game, but distract people. That is what I was seeing from day 1 MP, so of course I sounded off and pointed it out.

I still have a mafia lean on MP, but less so after his latest batch of posts.

sig, can you expand on this? What do you mean by "in an MP mafia sort of way"?

You say in the Scrimmage I was trying to distract people and not solve the game. Does my behavior in this game mirror that? If so, can you possibly provide any specific examples of my posts containing what you perceive to be "distracting"?

Whats specifically made you feel better about me comparatively after those posts?

I'm here. Going to play catch up now, then I'll do some analysis and junk.

RIP Golden.

Seriously, who the hell would kill Golden in his comeback game? Heartless bastards, that's who.

I haven't caught up, and still won't until I've finished all my preparations for Parks and Recreation Mafia hosting. Sorry. I should be around at some point today though and I'll be ISOing you folks. So be prepared.

So I might actually be around briefly today after all (as evidenced by popping in here and making a liar of myself once again), but still doubtful that I'll be here any real solid amount of time until tomorrow morning, since if I do have free time between now and being occupied with tabletop games with friends tonight, that free time will go towards starting my Parks and Recreation game I'm about to host. Can't keep those sockpuppets waiting. So this will be my last post until I get that game running.

Meanwhile, just wanted to pop in and say I've skimmed the thread to stay current, and I apologize for not answering your other questions, Snowy. I was in a huge rush and got caught up on explaining my motivations and why I love rainbow lists. Lol.

To answer your question as to how often I post them, I don't really have a systematic timing approach to them, which is precisely why Epi was able to find such a discrepancy. These days though, especially when I'm truly engaged in a game, I try to post at least one per cycle. Really, I just update or post a new one if I feel like my opinions on players has substantially changed enough to warrant a new one. Hope that helps.

And just quickly regarding LC's input, that ("painting targets on townie backs") is an argument against rainbow lists, yeah, but I don't even see that as a downside. While I agree with Quin that mafia have a huge asset with their votes, they are severely outnumbered in votes, and their biggest asset that townies don't have is their nightkill. If a few players, or even just one player, can clear a player as likely town and thus force the mafia to use their NK to take that player out, then the mafia forego the strategic advantage of their NK. Instead their kills are being dictated by the thread (and town, specifically), and I think that's great.

To answer your concern, MM, it's really because you and Wilgy are two unreadable motherfuckers. Seriously, you both are ridiculously hard for me to read. I think it's the reliance (especially in early game) on WIFOM. It's a blindspot for me; WIFOM just makes me back away and I never know how to assess it; usually ends up being null. Anyway, you two have strong potential to be slight town reads but I just can't put you there quite yet because I can't immediately recall any reason to call you town. I need to ISO you both pronto to make that determination since (and this is on me) I cannot really recall your post histories enough to make a fair judgment. So... TL;DR: You're both null but got knocked down to the slight mafias with the rest of the other nulls who have posted less.

Oh and Quin, I'll still address your thing re: sig. I need to dig into his ISO to properly give you an answer, and I'd like to examine his posts anyway. And yes, after your impeccable performance in Mad Max, you scare me a bit now.

Anyway, I have other thoughts, but gotta go.

Sorry to hear it, Elo! Hope the busyness is a good thing though.

Snow Dog wrote:

Elohcin wrote:I apologize for not being involved. It has been a hell of a week. And it doesn't look like it's slowing down anytime soon. There are some awesome people playing this game and I want to play, but I just don't see the time to do it. I will be asking for a replacement.

That's sad.

MP it looks like you made that new rainbow list to appear more in line with your civ rainbows of yore. I don't know anything about these though as they are a new phenomena to me. Do you update them daily and were the examples Epi showed all day 1 examples?

Lucky for you I obsessively check this game, and thus I often "lie" about "leaving" the thread even when I have every intention to do so, and I have like 15 minutes before I need to head down to my classroom. :P

Yes, these are new to you, so I should have explained earlier. Let me elaborate and then hopefully my behavior will make more sense.

I discovered rainbow lists when I started playing over on the now defunct (RIP) RYM OT message boards and JaggedJimmyJay, Sloonei, etc. employed them to what I witnessed as great success for organizing one's own thoughts and for mobilizing town into cooperation.

Specifically, my personal motivation for creating rainbow lists is threefold as a member of the town.

1. Creating a rainbow list forces me to consider and assess every player which assists in my baddie hunting in that it helps keep me on task: (i) I know which players warrant further examination due to being a mafia read, (ii) I know which players warrant further examination because despite their placement I felt less confident in placing them there (whether it is due to a lack of content on their part and thus it was difficult for me to make an assessment, whether my gut and my head are disagreeing, whether I am torn overall because they have seemed town and mafia about equally, etc.), and (iii) I know which players warrant tinfoil scrutiny if it becomes clear that I am trusting them for perhaps too dubious of reasons. This is all significant because I found in previous games (many that you played with me, for example) that it was difficult to track my own thoughts on players, that I wasn't critically assessing too many players and folks were slipping through the cracks, that I felt directionless and unsure how to proceed with trying to figure out who was bad and how, etc., and upon discovery of this method I found it much easier to structure and organize my own thoughts and feelings on everyone else for my benefit. So they serve not only as a helpful framework for me to organize my thoughts, but also force me to make assessments I probably wouldn't have otherwise, AND they provide a road map for me to tell myself "OK, these are the things you need to focus on". If there are players I'm feeling unsure of and/or cannot recall much of their content, after forcing myself to place them on the rainbow list (likely with a gut-based assessment), I can thereafter dig into that player's posts in isolation (by clicking the "In Topic" deal below their screenname on any post) and conduct an analysis (called an ISO, you'll see at least one of these from me later for sure) and try to get a better idea of how I feel about someone's content.

(2) Further, a rainbow list assists other players in developing an assessment of me (or at least, that's the theory) because it displays all of my thoughts about everyone transparently. Such a list provides detailed feedback as to how I am currently feeling about every other player in the game. The level of detail in each list depends on the explanations within, I have not yet had the opportunity and/or seen the motivation to provide thoroughly detailed accompanying explanations for all of my rainbow reads just yet as it is still early and I've been preoccupied.

(3) Lastly, rainbow lists also invite question and discussion among other thread participants about sources of agreement or disagreement. I like to 'compare rainbows' with other players, especially those I am town reading, because I crave feedback and work better when other people are continuously assessing my reads (because I feel I am not the best at baddie hunting frankly) and I think town as a general unit benefits when everyone is critically assessing everyone else's reads. Anything to help facilitate that process is a good thing in my mind.

My motivation for creating rainbow lists is simple as a member of the mafia: Seem like I'm doing all of those things for the benefit of the town.

Hopefully all of that makes my motivation for using this method clearer. Others on the site have heavily criticized rainbow lists as 'pointless', etc., so not everyone finds them useful. You can get someone else's perspective on that matter as to why they do not find them worth undertaking.

Now I have to depart, but I can answer whatever other questions or concerns you have for me later. Probably 24 hours or so.

My schedule changed a bit and that's why I'm here now (the other reason is that I'm procrastinating reading and assessing recent accounting research to come up with my dissertation topic because fuck that noise). Annie and I have company coming over tonight (DFaraday in fact!), and I have an additional meeting I wasn't planning for after teaching my Excel training class, so at this point it is unlikely I will return until Sunday (Central time), and of course assuming I survive the night (but what kind of mafia team in their right mind would kill me right now?).

Consequently, I do feel a bit compelled to throw out an additional rainbow here before I leave for the day despite only developing more nuanced reads on a handful of players, since the rest aren't talking.

Monkey Island -- Night 1 -- MP Rainbow #2

Epignosis
Golden
Long Con
Nachomamma8
Snow Dog

Boomslang
Macdougall
Quin
Scotty
Soneji

a2thezebra
Black Rock
DFaraday
DrWilgy
Elohcin
Metalmarsh89
nijuukyugou
sig
Vompatti

Note that players are still not yet ranked within groups (they are alphabetical).

I have forcibly removed null reads. Any players that I currently have no reason to assess as town are placed in slight mafia by default.

The players whose placements I feel least comfortable are:
(1) Soneji: I initially felt better about his response to me, but I need to re-assess that response because I have not given it increased attention other than that initial gut reaction. He is the most likely player in the slight town area to fall down if he doesn't give me reason to keep him there.
(2) DrWilgy and Metalmarsh89: These are the two most likely players in the slight mafia area to climb up because I feel like they have a semblance of contribution to this game beyond most of their neighbors.
(3) sig: I need to assess him more carefully and determine whether I believe his thoughts are genuine or not, particularly given his high propensity to be misunderstood and subsequently mislynched.
(4) Quin: The most likely player to rise from slight town to moderate town, but I need more, especially after he just blindsided me 100% in Mad Max.

I probably have more thoughts but I'm running out of time and need to quit here.

I spent way more of all of my in-thread time as of late continuing to defend myself than I wanted, but it is in part due to the continued conversation on me in the thread and feeling as though I had plenty of clarification to do and also in part due to lacking any other relevant content regarding other players by which to judge. I will shift focus to entirely hunting upon my return to the thread, because I feel I have said more than enough in explanation of my own actions. At this point if any of you all don't believe me, so be it. I will answer specific questions if they will be helpful in any of your all's determination of my alignment, but other than that regardless of my future fate I feel my time will be better spent digging into other players because there are too many unknown entities escaping evaluation.

Linki w/ Quin: A good question, but unfortunately I'm out of time as well. I'll get to it ASAP upon my return though, just remind me if I forget or something.

Quin wrote:

sig wrote:

Scotty wrote:

sig wrote:This was a very weak reason I'm espacilly eyeing MP and the people who voted for Zebra.

I also find it odd WIlgy missed the vote, if MP does end up being mafia I'd like to look into lynching Wilgy.

Its day 1. What more convincing articles could you have for day 1?

And "the people who voted zebra" are...just me. Can I help you with your eyes?

Snow also voted for Zebra you don't seem to be reading clearly.

MP didn't mention his vote was self preservation when he did the voting though, that just came up after motel flipped. I'm really being pinged by MP right now.

I also really dislike this post from sig. I feel like the emphasis on this post is being put on the fact that 'MP didn't justify it as self-preservation beforehand' instead of 'I don't believe that MP voted out of self-preservation'. Why did you come to the conclusion you did, sig?

I do agree with your point here, however. sig should answer for this.

Quin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:sig, I've provided more reads on players than almost everyone else in the game. If you can't remember my content that's on you, not me.

I suspect sig for this. There's another post later on I'll get to eventually, but I could easily interpret this as a bad sig not even reading the thread, hence 'not remembering' a whole 17 (... )meaty posts in a row from MP.

I would say that if anyone suspecting me right now is mafia, it's most believable to be sig, but I'm a bit hesitant to pursue that train of thought aggressively for multiple reasons:

1) I have not yet had the opportunity to engage directly with sig and he has not yet seen these recent responses of mine, so perhaps he has not had enough information to come to a more informed assessment of me.

2) sig not thoroughly examining the thread, or even reading it, and then making gut-based interpretations of my behavior is just as compatible with a town sig that increasingly is becoming bothered with aspects of my behavior in the game as it is with a mafia sig that is trying to push me as mislynch because everyone on this site knows that I'm a relatively easy mislynch to push. Do you have reason to believe that it is more compatible with the latter explanation? I haven't seen anything compelling personally.

3) Although I do still firmly believe it is on sig that he does not recall my content, his accusation is still potentially legitimate if he believes I am a mafia member manufacturing my suspicions and trying to flood the thread with posts but my substance in those posts is lacking. Now the point I was raised in my quoted post above was that I was contributing more than nearly everyone else, and while that is likely unarguable, mulling over it I think I missed sig's point and that was that he believes, in comparison to his perception of what he believes town MP would be posting, my content is lacking. I did not adequately address that concern.

sig, let me know if you want to engage on any of this.

As nearly always, Golden knows me better and can express it better than I can myself.

LC, in response to this post, here are a couple of items:

Now I'm wondering what you consider in my post history to be a top quality buddying job, because I feel like if I was mafia right now I'd be blowing it big time, regardless of whether I got called out for it.

The buddying accusation is also a bit raw because Dom relentlessly hounded me for nearly the entirety of Mad Max and that was his initial accusation -- that I was buddying him by placing him as a slight town read on my Day 1 rainbow despite his relative lack of content and not having directly engaged. He was wrong about me.

Your question's intent makes more sense now, thanks. I hope my answers have been helpful in your determination of my alignment.

YES MAD MAX. EXACTLY. Thank you, Quin. Lol. I didn't think to throw that in here either due to being ongoing (but now it's over and fair game).

I feel more comfortable throwing out rainbow lists as town earlier these days, but I don't feel comfortable with multiple tiers until I have compelling reason to do so, and there was not enough content in this thread by which to judge players to that level of specificity at that point in time. I still largely feel that is the case now, though I am starting to sort out a few ranked folks in my mind (Nacho, Epi, LC, and Snow Dog as potential moderate towns instead of slight, for example). It isn't fully sorted yet though. I need more posts from those yellow people.

To elaborate on the whole buddying thing, LC, your perception of me as "buddying" is an accusation that gets hurled my way increasingly frequently because I've found that the way I best operate as town is to try to engage players in the thread to determine whether they are good or bad, and unfortunately I am not a very perceptive player when it comes to determining whether someone is lying to my face behind a computer screen or not, so it sometimes takes a lot of talking for me to get to any sort of semi-confident assessment. Further, I've found over the years that I work horribly as a unit of town when I work solo. My instincts are awful and I get emotionally manipulated. I function much better as a part of town when I can bounce my thoughts off of other players in the thread in real time and constantly get critical feedback of the links I'm attempting to establish. I get excited when I find another active member of town to play the game with not only for because it improves my play but because it's more fun. No member of the town wants to feel alone, yet over half of the game consists of town-aligned players. It also makes it more difficult for mafia to hide if there is a coalition of soundly active town players closing in on them. Of course, one always has to continually assess to make sure one of these active town participants isn't a mafia in disguise, but that's a given.

In addition, I have been trying to have more fun with these games lately especially in the early stages in which I have had the unfortunate tendency to get stressed out and bothered by accusations, so in Mad Max I tried to develop a more goofy / carefree approach to start the game and then gradually warm into my serious analytic shoes. I inevitably ended up getting pushed into those shoes more quickly than I wanted in that game and here. My attempts at "buddying" wherein I was talking to Nacho, Mac, etc. about being my town buddy and such I thought are so obviously light-hearted that for them to be a mafia strategy to get players on my side is a ridiculous assertion due to their high transparency. All the more reason I wanted to know which post(s) specifically you perceived to have mafia motivation as buddying.

I suppose I'm just saying that accusing me of "buddying" is like accusing of JJJ for being analytical. It's a hallmark of my playstyle.

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Lol LC have you not played with me before? I used to make gigantic posts all the time and sometimes still do. If you don't like the fact that I posted many small times instead one gigantic one I don't know what to tell you, it's a lot of content either way and over the years I've had people complain about both and not read my posts. I don't need a lecture on that. How about you talk about some of the content within them instead?

Buddying? That's weaksauce my friend. Show me the mafia motivation behind my posts.

As I said, "either way works". My point was that I don't want to see any alignment attached to large or small post counts, because they can be artificially inflated.

You call my Day 1 vote "weaksauce" as though Day 1 votes are usually supersolid. I don't have time to explain the obvious Mafia motivation behind buddying.

Do you feel like anyone so far has been tying anyone's alignment to large or small post counts?

Not yet. Not in this game.

I wasn't asking for any general mafia motivation for buddying, even though I think that motivation is largely unconvincing. I'm asking what specifically you've seen in my behavior that displays a mafia motivation.

An odd question. I don't think it's a reasonable one. I have seen buddying being a Mafia tell - an unforeseen flaw in a baddie's otherwise innocent-seeming game. It's pedantic to require me to find a meta-behaviour to validate my suspicion of your behaviour. Are there some forms I have to fill out in triplicate before accusing you now? If I gave you an answer regarding which behaviour indicates a Mafia motivation behind your buddying behaviour, would you require me to further validate that with a third behaviour pattern?

Fuck it, I'll answer it without being contrary as well. The Mafia motivation that is displayed by your excessive buddying is the motivation make Civs feel comfortable with you, like "Me and MP07 are on the same page, I'm Civ so he's feeling Civ to me, because, though on the outside, different faces, but on the inside, same-same. Same-same." You feel me?

I accidentally posted that previous post when I was supposed to copy-paste it below this one, and move on with a catchup, accumulating more posts. Instead I submitted it, so I'll just lay this one down now and start fresh.

LC, thanks for this response. Let me explain my perspective because I feel like we're on different pages here. I just cannot respond to your interpretation of my behavior (you perceive my behavior as buddying and a potential scum tell, but I know that isn't true in this game) if you don't give me an opportunity to, and thus we cannot engage in a conversation in a manner in which you can begin to understand where I'm coming from and vice versa, so that's why I asked for you to give me a specific example (or examples) of mafia motivation in my behavior. That way maybe I could begin to understand where your mindset is coming from so that not only can you hopefully continue to engage me to assess whether your interpretation is correct (I am being manipulative or fake) but also I can attempt to get a feel for whether you are being sincere or not as well.

It has worked to a degree at least from my end; I currently feel your pursuit of suspicion is honest.

Snow Dog wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Scotty wrote:I swear to dog I'm This close to changing my autocorrect so every time I post dog it's sig instead

I GIVE UP GOODNIGHT

Now you are just copying me.

Damn, you got me! It's my new mafia strategy!

Sorry, I've decided some time ago to ditch the gigantic MP catch up posts and to make posts in real time as I catch up. I feel it better gives players a chance to feel out my responses as if I was responding in real time, at least as much as it can be simulated when I actually am not catching up in real time, and someone also criticized my gigantic catch up posts to be hard to read and difficult to respond to, so that's another reason.

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Lol LC have you not played with me before? I used to make gigantic posts all the time and sometimes still do. If you don't like the fact that I posted many small times instead one gigantic one I don't know what to tell you, it's a lot of content either way and over the years I've had people complain about both and not read my posts. I don't need a lecture on that. How about you talk about some of the content within them instead?

Buddying? That's weaksauce my friend. Show me the mafia motivation behind my posts.

As I said, "either way works". My point was that I don't want to see any alignment attached to large or small post counts, because they can be artificially inflated.

You call my Day 1 vote "weaksauce" as though Day 1 votes are usually supersolid. I don't have time to explain the obvious Mafia motivation behind buddying.

I don't really buy into buddying as a tell; I have the tendency to be friendly as both alignments and I get frustrated by "buddying" or "pocketing" accusations often enough where I never use them as town.

QFT

Yeah, that's one opinion. My experience tells me differently.

Well, I suppose that's fair. My apologies, LC, if you feel like I haven't been giving your accusations of me fair responses. I felt very much like the victim (whether intended or not) yesterday; I don't feel that way anymore.

Epignosis wrote:

Golden wrote:Epi, what do you make of MPs reaction? Or are you not willing to say?

MP gets angry and storms off often when he gets suspected for any reason he feels is stupid, which doesn't mean anything to me. I never know when it's an act.

He says he thinks I'm good, but everything he says about my contributions regarding him indicates that he thinks they are contrived. That I don't understand.

On the one hand, he seems to think I'm just doing this to get a reaction out of him, but if he knows this, then why be pissed and angry and say I'm taking it too far? How far is too far? On the other hand, if I genuinely suspect him, then he should know I'm not going to back down because he calls the observation I raised a waste of his time, bullshit, etc.

Lol, now this is true. Sorry, I can't help it.

Regarding your second point, I don't really know anymore. I'm not necessarily willing to double down on the interpretation that you are to any degree manufacturing your case but it's becoming increasingly clear to me that, if you are town, you sincerely believe that you've potentially uncovered something meaningful. I know that it isn't, and I suppose that's what is frustrating to me because I feel like this time could be better spent on something else, but that doesn't mean it's meaningless to you all who have to make some sort of assessment regarding my alignment. Sometimes it's difficult for me to keep that in perspective when I'm under the line of fire.

Regarding your third point, do you not remember bean dip? Lol. That was too far. I felt like you were doing the same thing to me here. I no longer believe that to be true, having calmed down and walked away from the situation and seen your subsequent posts. It appears to me you genuinely believe in your case.

You shouldn't back down if you genuinely believe in something.

Scotty wrote:

Scotty wrote:I swear to dog I'm This close to changing my autocorrect so every time I post dog it's sig instead

I GIVE UP GOODNIGHT

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:I'm trusting my process and voting MovingPictures07.

Your process is BS and I think you know it.

Is that a formal accusation?

I call baloney on this post (the MP response). MP said he "thinks" Epignosis knows his process is BS. Choice of words point to MP not being very convincing.

I used the word "think" for a reason. I can't ever know for sure what Epi (of all people) is thinking. The only explanation that made sense to me in the line of fire after Epi tossed away my additional points was that he was being purposefully cavalier, but now that others have come out and expressed interest in the case I realize that there must be something to it and I'm being colored by it being baseless due to the fact that it's me in the hot seat.

Golden wrote:I believe you, mp.

Actually, mostly I wanted to test whether I believed epi was genuine. I do. So I have both of you as town reads.

But you shouldn't confuse wrong with meritless. If you extract yourself from being the one accused, I think you would see the need to test.

I do, you're right. It's just frustrating because I know I'm town and I know my own intentions in this game, so it fuels my perspective, but I cannot use any of that as evidence because none of you know my alignment. I can't sit here and say i recall all of the minute details that caused past-MP to craft his first in-game rainbow lists in those games with various levels of tiers and at what time he felt comfortable doing so, but I threw out multiple other considerations that should be not taken lightly, and I think those are still valid.

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Economics Mafia. I was town. Made multiple rainbow lists on Day 1.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 64#p142864
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 87#p143187

I don't think you understand what I observed. It isn't that you make rainbows on Day 1.

That's my bad, I should have been clearer. I was throwing those out for Golden based on his interpretation of "town MP doesn't make rainbow lists on Day 1". I knew this didn't have any relevance to the argument you specifically were making.

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Whatever, it's a bullshit pattern,

.

It isn't bullshit, and it isn't really a pattern. It's a tendency.

MovingPictures07 wrote: If you can't see why Epi's observation is absolutely myopic and a waste of time, I don't know what to say. If you all are going to mislynch me, just save me the trouble. I'm done talking about this nonsense.

I can only wonder if you would be this passionate about how much I'm wasting my time if I were discussing someone else.

You're right, I'm sorry, this is all fair game. Part of this is that I can never figure out what your intentions really are -- in past situations in which you've grilled me on something that seemed minute in early game often times I always took you 100% seriously and then you thereafter indicated that you were applying pressure to some degree.

I should be assessed. It's part of the game after all.

I apologize for my demeanor last night; I had an emotionally tumultuous day to begin with so I was already riled up. I also, despite my best efforts to keep calm, cannot help but slip into panic mode early in these games when I get hit with a ton of suspicion in Days 1 and 2, regardless of alignment. For baddie MP, it's: "oh shit, now the spotlight is on me, don't fuck this up... if you do feel your lynch is inevitable, just create chaotic links in your demise (it's how your team won WWE after all). For town MP, it's perhaps even more frustrating, which is what I'm really struggling with in this game, particularly last night: "oh here we fucking go again, another Day 1/2 where I attract suspicion to me like some supercharged supermagnet... there are XX other players in this game that aren't being assessed and meanwhile everyone is wasting their time with me, dammit, what did I do wrong again?"

Either way, the frustration is entirely real, but beyond a certain point it has no place in the thread. I'll try to temper myself as much as possible.

Now I'll be back tomorrow to actually hunt for baddies. This is a waste of my time and thread space. I will not continue it.

Golden wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Golden wrote:

Epignosis wrote:It wasn't an analysis. It was an observation.

I find your observation somewhat compelling.

Question - is it one you just researched now, or have you been sitting on it waiting for a time it applied?

What is compelling about it, even remotely? I don't get it. I cannot fathom anything even remotely compelling about it. I've already debunked it.

You haven't debunked it. You've provided an alternate hypothesis. If I could put Epi's theory another way, a way in which your 'debunk' doesn't debunk - it would be that you don't make rainbow lists as town on day one. Debunking it would be proving that wrong by showing that you do, and that epi has cherry picked.

We all have habits as town and baddie, some of which we are aware of, some of which we are not. Epi might... and I stress might... have caught you in a habit you were unaware of. If it's a genuine pattern, it's compelling.

Having said that, your reaction to all of this does seem like town MP.

Whatever, it's a bullshit pattern, it is indicative of nothing other than the a unique combination of the game's content, my activity and engagement in those games, whether I felt comfortable expressing my thoughts as a rainbow list, etc. If you can't see why Epi's observation is absolutely myopic and a waste of time, I don't know what to say. If you all are going to mislynch me, just save me the trouble. I'm done talking about this nonsense.

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Golden wrote:

Epignosis wrote:It wasn't an analysis. It was an observation.

I find your observation somewhat compelling.

Question - is it one you just researched now, or have you been sitting on it waiting for a time it applied?

What is compelling about it, even remotely? I don't get it. I cannot fathom anything even remotely compelling about it. I've already debunked it.

I showed things about your previous games. I quoted posts. I did not analyze or evaluate anything beyond giving you my Day 1 vote. What was there to debunk?

That it literally has any indication of my alignment. You fucking voted me for it and so did others, even Golden finds it "somewhat compelling" and he should know me better. Stop being purposefully obtuse.

How do I know that? I like what I found today. I think you're surprised that I found it. You think I'm good (so you say), but I know my process is BS and I'm being purposefully obtuse? What's the point of that?

You think I'm surprised? Why would I be surprised?

What do you mean what's the point of that? It's called putting pressure on people and seeing how they respond. You do that to me and others all the time. I think, like always, you've gone too far.

Economics Mafia. I was town. Made multiple rainbow lists on Day 1.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 64#p142864
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 87#p143187

I'm out of here before I get any more upset and post anything that I shouldn't. Be back tomorrow.

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Golden wrote:

Epignosis wrote:It wasn't an analysis. It was an observation.

I find your observation somewhat compelling.

Question - is it one you just researched now, or have you been sitting on it waiting for a time it applied?

What is compelling about it, even remotely? I don't get it. I cannot fathom anything even remotely compelling about it. I've already debunked it.

I showed things about your previous games. I quoted posts. I did not analyze or evaluate anything beyond giving you my Day 1 vote. What was there to debunk?

That it literally has any indication of my alignment. You fucking voted me for it and so did others, even Golden finds it "somewhat compelling" and he should know me better. Stop being purposefully obtuse.

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:I'm trusting my process and voting MovingPictures07.

Your process is BS and I think you know it.

Is that a formal accusation?

No, I think you're town. I just think you're shaking trees to see what falls out. I don't appreciate being the tree though considering how close I came to death yesterday and how I'm low hanging fruit headed into Day 2.

How many trees did I shake?

What fell out?

I don't know; I apparently should drop the analogies completely.

Nothing but stinky poo from my perspective. Why don't you tell me?

sig wrote:

Scotty wrote:

sig wrote:This was a very weak reason I'm espacilly eyeing MP and the people who voted for Zebra.

I also find it odd WIlgy missed the vote, if MP does end up being mafia I'd like to look into lynching Wilgy.

Its day 1. What more convincing articles could you have for day 1?

And "the people who voted zebra" are...just me. Can I help you with your eyes?

Snow also voted for Zebra you don't seem to be reading clearly.

MP didn't mention his vote was self preservation when he did the voting though, that just came up after motel flipped. I'm really being pinged by MP right now.

No, I didn't mention it, sig, you want to know why? Because I was literally on my phone as I walked out the door to a lunch date with my wife whom I've hardly gotten to spend time with over the last few months between all-nighters and other stuff. So yeah. That's why I didn't mention it. If that's suspicious to you, by all means, you do you. But you're wrong about me and you're not considering any town-compatible perspective for my behavior.

motel room wrote:oh.

Well thats shit. Enjoy the game.

Sorry bud, was looking forward to playing with you again. Hopefully soon.

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Seeing that I already had 1 vote from LC, that votes were likely to be missed, and knowing that both Epi and sig expressed suspicions of me, my vote was cast somewhat out of self-preservation. I also realize I haven't updated my rainbow formally but Soneji's response put my ease and given my lack of available time I had a bunch of null reads from which to choose to place my vote upon. Only Blooper and motel room had 2 votes, I know I had 1, so I chose between those options and even though I felt equally about MR and Blooper I percolated on Nacho's arguments and felt it the more compelling vote and subsequently I decided to go with motel room.

So would you say that you would like to put all responsibility on Nacho?

No, why would I ever say that? I take full responsibility for my vote. That goes without saying.

Golden wrote:

Epignosis wrote:It wasn't an analysis. It was an observation.

I find your observation somewhat compelling.

Question - is it one you just researched now, or have you been sitting on it waiting for a time it applied?

What is compelling about it, even remotely? I don't get it. I cannot fathom anything even remotely compelling about it. I've already debunked it.

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:I'm trusting my process and voting MovingPictures07.

Your process is BS and I think you know it.

Is that a formal accusation?

No, I think you're town. I just think you're shaking trees to see what falls out. I don't appreciate being the tree though considering how close I came to death yesterday and how I'm low hanging fruit headed into Day 2.

Snow Dog wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:I'm not here for long again, sorry, but I wanted to at least come back and elaborate upon my vote. It is unlike me to further explain that at the time of my vote; RL took precedence though, so I'm not going to apologize for that.

Seeing that I already had 1 vote from LC, that votes were likely to be missed, and knowing that both Epi and sig expressed suspicions of me, my vote was cast somewhat out of self-preservation. I also realize I haven't updated my rainbow formally but Soneji's response put my ease and given my lack of available time I had a bunch of null reads from which to choose to place my vote upon. Only Blooper and motel room had 2 votes, I know I had 1, so I chose between those options and even though I felt equally about MR and Blooper I percolated on Nacho's arguments and felt it the more compelling vote and subsequently I decided to go with motel room.

I have to prepare for teaching tomorrow and then spend some time with my wife, so I won't be back until later tonight or potentially even sometime tomorrow afternoon after teaching.

Ok, self preservation. I can understand that. If it wasn't for that factor who would you have voted for?

I don't know. I cannot put my perspective in a vacuum and give you any decent answer since I didn't have any solid reads and still don't. I was sort of okay with voting any of the yellow reads in my rainbow.

sig wrote:This was a very weak reason I'm espacilly eyeing MP and the people who voted for Zebra.

I also find it odd WIlgy missed the vote, if MP does end up being mafia I'd like to look into lynching Wilgy.

Very weak reason? Whose vote was cast during Day 1 with any reason that you would qualify as not "very weak"?

Snow Dog wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:i don't understand this motel room vote. He's has posted drunk most of the time and he didn't come back after a question. That's it! (better than nothing I suppose, and I don't know him anyway so....urgh)

Yeah it's definitely not winning "Case of the Year", but I don't think that makes it a bad vote. What about the MP vote entices you?

his Buddying up, his last minute motel vote that seemed to come from nowhere, and..I dunno....a feeling.

The motel vote didn't really come from anywhere from my perspective; I had been talking about it in thread for a while, he was townreading me, Golden vetted it, not like he had strong feelings elsewhere.

As for the buddying point, my rebuttal for that is mostly personal but it'd be a shame if he got lynched for making me feel.welcome!

It wasn't just you. He did it to others too.

If I'm mafia and "buddying" you all to try to gain your trust, then I sure am doing a real shitty job, aren't I?

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Scotty wrote:Hey @nacho you conveniently skipped my questions to you. Do you have any response at all to what I said?

sig wrote:I don't want to lynch Wilgy all I'm seeing is his normal meta at this point.

Meta is like a Jackson Pollack painting. Easy to imitate with a cat, a can of paint and a few tequilas. Relying on metas, especially on day 1, is hugely unreliable unless that person is predictable to a T. And Wilgy is fully capable of churning out CHRISTMAS in July.

Snow Dog wrote:Well I gotta admit i am not clear at all on who to vote for. It may reluctantly go to a non poster.

I'm not sure what you asked me; as stated before, am working and skimming like a motherfucker so I don't get fired over a mafia game.

I don't understand why moving pictures is getting votes. Epignosis's case is that his tier lists are more nuanced as town but expecting a nuanced reads list in this fluff/lurk fest is equivalent to expecting an ocean in the desert.

Happens too often, especially in these full games. I am a magnet for suspicion. It gets old.

Epignosis wrote:I'm trusting my process and voting MovingPictures07.

Your process is BS and I think you know it.

sig wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

sig wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:sig, I've provided more reads on players than almost everyone else in the game. If you can't remember my content that's on you, not me.

You've provided reads yes, but you've done nothing that sticks out one way or another if that makes sense. So your posting and in my mind I know that you're being active but, from my read over you don't seem to be being helpful.

I find that to be very odd.

How does "very odd" or "helpful" translate to "I believe you have a mafia role card"? I'm missing your link.

If your playing odd or doing strange thing your more likely to be mafia
and town is generally helpful since they want to catch scum. So it translates very nicely.

Um, no. Those are not true.

sig wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Hey Mac, it's clear we are both civilian this game so let's team up.

Why?

MovingPictures07 wrote:Sorry, had to fix some dinner.

Did you break dinner before you fixed it?

After rereading MP post I still have the same feeling lots of post, but not alot said if that makes sense?

Also he responded very defensively to both mine and Epis posts.

One last thing I find odd he defends himself from Epi's observation by saying he usually roles scum so they shouldn't count........He is basically saying he is more likely to be mafia and still not really rebutting Epi's point. It just seems like a really weird way to defend oneself.

I've gotta head over to class but I'll be back in time to vote.
I'm looking at Blooper, Soneji, MP, and motel right now.

Blooper/Soneji for their votes on Wilgy


linki: Very true re meta, but lynching based around the fact Wilgy is being Wilgy is bad, since his early meta is usually the same regardless of alignment.

Yeah the mall and the starbucks down here have been playing Christmas stuff since the beginning of November, wayyyyy to early.

You keep repeating that I've been making lots of posts but they aren't "helpful" or contributing much to you. I've been mislynched over this exact accusation many times before, sorry to inform you, and I'd rather you not contribute to that happening again.

Very defensively? What in my posts has been very defensive? And how does that make me mafia? Don't I have plenty of reason to react defensively to what I perceive to be nonsense reasons for attracting suspicion and nearly dying on Day 1 yet again? Can you not see how that would be frustrating?

sig wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:sig, I've provided more reads on players than almost everyone else in the game. If you can't remember my content that's on you, not me.

You've provided reads yes, but you've done nothing that sticks out one way or another if that makes sense. So your posting and in my mind I know that you're being active but, from my read over you don't seem to be being helpful.

I find that to be very odd.

How does "very odd" or "helpful" translate to "I believe you have a mafia role card"? I'm missing your link.

Boomslang wrote:Well, I've got to get to work. I think MP is trying to make Epi's observation something it's not, but I know MP is prone to that sort of analysis and thus it doesn't ping very bad for me. Voting motel room for the aforementioned reasons; to MM, it's because he signaled engagement with the early check in, seems to have artificially boosted his post count when drunk, and then ducked out when asked to provide some content.

What do you mean by making something it's not? His "observation" is dubious at best.

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Lol LC have you not played with me before? I used to make gigantic posts all the time and sometimes still do. If you don't like the fact that I posted many small times instead one gigantic one I don't know what to tell you, it's a lot of content either way and over the years I've had people complain about both and not read my posts. I don't need a lecture on that. How about you talk about some of the content within them instead?

Buddying? That's weaksauce my friend. Show me the mafia motivation behind my posts.

As I said, "either way works". My point was that I don't want to see any alignment attached to large or small post counts, because they can be artificially inflated.

You call my Day 1 vote "weaksauce" as though Day 1 votes are usually supersolid. I don't have time to explain the obvious Mafia motivation behind buddying.

I don't really buy into buddying as a tell; I have the tendency to be friendly as both alignments and I get frustrated by "buddying" or "pocketing" accusations often enough where I never use them as town.

QFT

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Lol LC have you not played with me before? I used to make gigantic posts all the time and sometimes still do. If you don't like the fact that I posted many small times instead one gigantic one I don't know what to tell you, it's a lot of content either way and over the years I've had people complain about both and not read my posts. I don't need a lecture on that. How about you talk about some of the content within them instead?

Buddying? That's weaksauce my friend. Show me the mafia motivation behind my posts.

As I said, "either way works". My point was that I don't want to see any alignment attached to large or small post counts, because they can be artificially inflated.

You call my Day 1 vote "weaksauce" as though Day 1 votes are usually supersolid. I don't have time to explain the obvious Mafia motivation behind buddying.

Do you feel like anyone so far has been tying anyone's alignment to large or small post counts?

I wasn't asking for any general mafia motivation for buddying, even though I think that motivation is largely unconvincing. I'm asking what specifically you've seen in my behavior that displays a mafia motivation.

I'm not here for long again, sorry, but I wanted to at least come back and elaborate upon my vote. It is unlike me to further explain that at the time of my vote; RL took precedence though, so I'm not going to apologize for that.

Seeing that I already had 1 vote from LC, that votes were likely to be missed, and knowing that both Epi and sig expressed suspicions of me, my vote was cast somewhat out of self-preservation. I also realize I haven't updated my rainbow formally but Soneji's response put my ease and given my lack of available time I had a bunch of null reads from which to choose to place my vote upon. Only Blooper and motel room had 2 votes, I know I had 1, so I chose between those options and even though I felt equally about MR and Blooper I percolated on Nacho's arguments and felt it the more compelling vote and subsequently I decided to go with motel room.

I have to prepare for teaching tomorrow and then spend some time with my wife, so I won't be back until later tonight or potentially even sometime tomorrow afternoon after teaching.

Not going to be here for EoD, sorry, just got home, leaving now for lunch with the wife, then errands. Voted motel room.

thellama73 wrote:Links to post histories are now available on the Player List on page 1.

Have fun reading one another.

Crap, I forgot to do these last night, sorry folks. Thanks for doing that, host.

Now I have to go and I'll be occupied until about T minus 1 hour until EoD at the earliest.

Only here between finishing teaching and a meeting, but I wanted to comment on Epi's analysis of my rainbow lists.

Epi, your analysis is intriguing, but it is myopic and fails to make any meaningful inference about my alignment for the following reasons:

1) You do not explain why my alignment would have any impact on my rainbow list behavior. What's the connection? A conclusion that I am bad because I posted my first rainbow with only slight mafia and town tiers is like saying ice cream causes crime because in the summer ice cream sales increase and crime increases. It may be an association but there is no underlying theory detailing a correlation.

2) You neglect the fact that your sample size is skewed by the fact that I roll scum more often than town.

3) You fail to consider the environment of the thread and whether conditions exist at the times you pulled those rainbow lists that warranted me splitting my reads into further categories.

4) Perhaps most importantly, similarly to 3), you do not consider what stages of the game in terms of "Day ____" those lists are from. That is a much more meaningful indication of how tiered my rainbow lists will be. Note that for every example of a good MP you pulled those rainbows are from Days 2 and 3 after we have had at least one flip and more information by which I can sort my reads. Further, the only outlier is the Star Wars game, and the reason that game is an outlier is due to 3) here. That game's Day 1 was way more chock full of back-and-forths and discussion than this one, especially considering I made my list here with still the rest of today to progress.

So your analysis is bupkis.

Mac, why do you declare sig as a town read? His reads are uninspiring to me.

And Soneji, just wanted to say thanks for the response. My natural inclination is to feel better about you as your reasoning seemed logical and genuine, but I'll mull over it as well.

Won't be back until sometime closer to EOD.