The Syndicate

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:I also don't want to make this game NOT fun or less fun for everyone else. Hence, if the majority of players in this game are lynching and suspecting based on a totally different understanding than I am, and I am impeding those players' fun by going on about my nonsense, then due to reason 1) above, I don't see why I should continue playing.

But I'm a SEVERE mafia addict, so I always incredibly resist lynching myself, especially when it so insanely directly contradicts my win condition.

There's a solution - you adapt to the game you are playing and formulate a strategy to win within those conditions. Can you adapt, MP? BR and I adapted in the Monopoly game, we had many long discussions on how to go about winning, and it was not at all the kind of game we were used to playing.

Fuck yes. If you're in, vote Soneji.

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Either way, thanks for hosting, MR. I am glad I got to play after all, if I do die now. I really need to listen to my self-discipline portion of my brain instead of the masochistic portion, so I'll just check in later after I KNOW the result is over to see if I've died.

I'm voting FZ. I trust her the least right now by far.

I also don't trust LC.

I don't really trust anyone, it's okay. :P

Must. Leave. Mafia.

I also don't want to make this game NOT fun or less fun for everyone else. Hence, if the majority of players in this game are lynching and suspecting based on a totally different understanding than I am, and I am impeding those players' fun by going on about my nonsense, then due to reason 1) above, I don't see why I should continue playing.

But I'm a SEVERE mafia addict, so I always incredibly resist lynching myself, especially when it so insanely directly contradicts my win condition.

Long Con wrote:
DO you really want out MP? Is number 4 true?

Yes and no.

I really want out because:

1) I'm severely procrastinating hours upon hours of coding. I started my SAS two-week crash course today and honestly my life is about to get even busier than it has been already. I also have a wedding happening in less than 3 months. I frankly shouldn't be playing ANY mafia, let alone multiple games. But my addiction and MR's desperate need for a replacement got the better of me.

2) I'm pretty fucked in terms of my win condition, I really can't see winning at this point, nor do I think I probably deserve it. Any time I sink into the game will be diminishing marginal utility and wasted opportunity cost that I could have sunk into more productive endeavors (see 1).

However, I really don't want out because I love this game.

Frankly, the only player I would consider switching my vote to is Soneji, and only if I'm 100% sure that timmer and I would not be lynched. I'm done with so-called baddie hunting. I want to eliminate people who don't deserve to win, of which I am one.

Long Con wrote:
Linki: Blacksmith, of the New Rogues, searches each night to find and gain BTSC with her teammates!

Ah, yes, fair enough.

FZ. wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:timmer doesn't deserve to get lynched right now just because he's the "alternative" to me. He could be any alignment for all I know, but I don't see why he should be lynched over practically most everyone else right now. Hence, I need to die.

Apparently, I failed spectacularly at my win condition. I've accepted my fate. It's OK.

FZ., just ignore me then. I clearly said I don't trust you at all. And keep denying it. Repeat after me. "Civilians exist. Civilians exist..."

Stop it, come on
Let's say you're right, but I'm still an old rouge, what do you expect me to do other than what I am already. That's what I still don't understand. My only option at winning is if I find all the new rouges and eliminate them.
Say I'm a new Rogue, my only chance at winning is if I find the old rogues and the detectives and kill them.
I've never played a Last man standing game, so I have no idea how I'm supposed to convince others to lynch everyone else but me.

1. You're very likely not an Old Rogue.

2. If you are an Old Rogue, I wouldn't blatantly advertise that fact, since you will be promptly eliminated.

3. I don't expect anything from you; you can play the game how you want. I just don't understand why we are all still beating around the bush with this civilian nonsense which such a designation clearly isn't relevant.

4. What you describe of the New Rogue win condition is definitely a faction win condition. Each faction has a specific objective they must fulfill. It's more complex than "civilians must eliminate mafia" and "mafia must eliminate civilians" because no faction has majority.

5. Convince others to lynch you by acting the EXACT OPPOSITE of me. But seriously, it seems as though a surefire way to avoid lynching in this game is to convince others that you are not a threat to them OR that you are a (potential) powerful ally OR both (preferably both). We are all currently hunting under the guise of civilians and mafia, but at endgame, you better bet that the players who have the better alliance or aligned win conditions will lynch the weakest link.

LC, that's assuming that New Rogues establish BTSC. I firmly believe they can only do so via the map, otherwise would be OP. But fair enough.

And stubborn is my middle name. :P

timmer doesn't deserve to get lynched right now just because he's the "alternative" to me. He could be any alignment for all I know, but I don't see why he should be lynched over practically most everyone else right now. Hence, I need to die.

Apparently, I failed spectacularly at my win condition. I've accepted my fate. It's OK.

FZ., just ignore me then. I clearly said I don't trust you at all. And keep denying it. Repeat after me. "Civilians exist. Civilians exist..."

In the end, everyone will do what they can to win the game. Occam's razor suggests, especially with the way the game has progressed, that the win conditions will not align at endgame.

I am NOT mind controlled and I am not drunk (though that made me laugh). These are all genuine thoughts. FZ., I'm really sorry I made the game less fun for you and all of this is exactly why I started saying last night that if no one agreed with me that you should all just vote me out, but I don't regret it because I'm calling a spade a spade. There is no civilian faction in this game, and the closest one that even exists, only starts with 6 max, and some of them have already died. I figured we are at the point in the game now where the Old Rogues have very likely already lost and I didn't see a point in beating around the bush and acting like "Look how civilian I am!" It's boring.

LC, you make a lot of really good points. I'm sorry I got particularly heated. I realize this game isn't black and white completely, and also realize that many win conditions have the potential to align, but just because they have the potential to align doesn't mean they will. The problem comes in the increasingly LMS nature of the game, assuming random numbers of various factions are killed, because at some point players will resort to anything possible to ensure their own survival and their own win condition. Such is the nature of a faction game. The only way that wouldn't work is if every single one of the New Rogues (7) and hostile Arch-Villains (3) were eliminated completely super early on in the game. Since that hardly seems to have had happened, I firmly believe that the game has progressed to a stage already where a very communal win is out of the question. I admire your faith that it is possible, but I can't see it happening. The end of this game will very likely end in an LMS-style fashion, even if not completely LMS. That's what I've been trying to convey.

That said, I want to die. I've already blown my hand, there's no way I'm making it past either this or next lynch. I was incredibly honest in my approach, but I realize I was also combative and blunt. It backfired. It's OK. I realized I was taking a risk in coming out so strongly with my assertive statements at how unconventional this game is, even at times exaggerating. But I really wanted to shake the game up and make people realize that the game's setup has already made it near impossible for Old Rogues to win under a traditional-style baddie hunting model, let alone with all of the mislynches that have occurred and approaches that people have taken so far in this game.

Just let me die already. Move your vote back, MM.

I love you too man. Haha. All of you guys. You all have been great. I wanted to have fun this game and I certainly have accomplished that. Hope you've enjoyed it too.

Yes, I have lost my sanity, for anyone wondering. Just keep voting for me!

I'm just having fun at this point.

See you folks at the great reveal of my baddieness!

LMS, more like LSS. Last Sock Standing, bitch.

Or, in this case, Lynch (the) Motherfucking Sock.

I work for one man: The Almighty Sock.

Are you serious? I'm more transparent than all of the rest of you, tiptoeing around the true nature of this game and acting as though you're so super civilian-friendly.

Guess what? Civilians don't exist.

MovingPictures07 wrote:DO NOT TRUST LIST:
1. FZ.
2. Turnip Head
3. Long Con
4. Other non-participating bastards

Lynch them please.

Actually, I lied. Lynch ALL of the players. Every single one. Except for Llama, since he's The Flash and shit.

DO NOT TRUST LIST:
1. FZ.
2. Turnip Head
3. Long Con
4. Other non-participating bastards

Lynch them please.

And TH, my intentions have never indicated that I am anything other than neutral. To say that is otherwise is a misrepresentation of my actions, especially in the same post where you said that every player should publicly side with the Old Rogues (or lie about it) over any other faction.

At least I can die happy knowing I shook this game up like it was meant to be shaken.

Civilians do not have a majority. Stop lying to yourselves.

Turnip Head wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Also be wary of players trying too hard to act as though they are neutral yet their intentions indicate a contradiction. Hopefully that will help you determine those people who are lying.

LOL, but MP... that's you!

You know what? You're right.

Votes MP

Turnip Head wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:I want it to be known. Why is everyone voting for me? At least timmer added the clause that it seems unlikely I'm a Detective or Old Rogue. That's fair enough. But I don't trust FZ. as far as I can throw her.

I demonstrated yesterday that your original post about this, and all your subsequent posts thereafter, did not come from an Old Rogue or even Old Rogue-aligned perspective. You wanted to challenge the idea that there were civvies and baddies, which, fine, but you said the New Rogues could just as easily be considered "civvies", and that the Independent Rogues could work with the New Rogues now that the Old Rogues seem to be dwindling in number. If you were more inclined to work with the Old Rogues and Detectives, there would have been no reason for you to have rocked the boat like this, because the game was already moving in that direction.

All of this tells me that you have New Rogue-aligned ideals, or at best, that you have no problem siding with the New Rogues at this point. And to me, that means you cannot be trusted.

And what's this about FZ? I don't think you've even mentioned her before this post.


linki: Reading

Don't trust TH either.

The only reason "siding" with the Old Rogues makes sense is all about politics. "Oh, I seem so civvie, even though there are less civvies than there are every other faction, and MR even said there are no civvies, but whatever! I'm a civvie, don't hurt me!"

Don't worry about it, Devin. I sunk the time into this game and expressed thoughts that I knew challenged the convention of this game. I don't want you defending me because I'm poison at this point. I only want people defending me if they honestly believe a lynch of me makes no sense, but even then it's obvious that I'm poison.

People contest that this game has LMS elements, but just LOOK at how every lynch has gone down, including this one. Is this the mindset of a civilian majority game? No.

I am super swamped RL right now, so not having this game on my mafia stress plate would be a relief to me, after I get over the initial sadness of having died. Hence my wishywashiness on whether I actually want to die. Consequently, I pulled a gambit. You know how much easier it is to pull gambits when they are based in feelings and thoughts that you have genuinely felt? Much more easily.

I'm not changing my vote to timmer because I stand by my assessment that FZ. is least trustworthy based on how Day 5 has progressed. I also do not think timmer deserves to die just because he is the alternative to voting me. I think people jumping onto him for that reason are equally suspect in their motives. timmer should be evaluated on his actions and his actions ALONE.

I honestly don't really care who wins this game, but I hope that this lynch period has been illuminating to all of you, because that's what I truly intended with all of this.

I just ask that you please note the following after my death:

1) I never called Llama suspicious. I am stating TRUTHS. Doesn't matter what Llama says about hunting New Rogues exclusively, even if he has that intention. Detectives can jail Old Rogues too. It clearly says it. Don't ever just trust someone, even if their role is confirmed, if their win condition leaves any opportunity open for betrayal. I've been burned by it way too many times.

2) MR specifically designed this game to NOT be a civ v. baddie affair, considering he even says "the closest to civilian" as the game is going to get with the Old Rogues. Whether or not you wanted to play this type of game or whether you think his game is balanced is irrelevant. There is no such thing as civilians and baddies this game. Yes, the New Rogues are basically a mafia team since they're hostile to everyone else except the Independent Rogues, but that doesn't mean that hunting for people based on traditional tells will actually help net them, especially since they outnumber EVERY OTHER FACTION. Stop deluding yourselves.

3) Independent Rogues only want to survive. And there are 6 of them.

4) FZ. said that she thought I looked "bad" based on my insistence and that I didn't offer up alternatives, yet I clearly came up with two off the top of my head, and she failed to address them completely. I even stated multiple times that I'm not insulting any of you, but she OMGUS'd me saying that if I didn't want to play with a bunch of illogical people that I should never have replaced in.

5) Both S~V~S and timmer have claimed "civilian" roles. Remember that. Although they seem alright by me, I caution that you be wary of anyone who tries to claim such a thing. Also be wary of players trying too hard to act as though they are neutral yet their intentions indicate a contradiction. Hopefully that will help you determine those people who are lying.

I'm not bitter if I die. C'est la vie. I honestly asked for it.

I only hope that whatever faction can best take advantage of the information gained from these lynches be crowned the winner.

Either way, thanks for hosting, MR. I am glad I got to play after all, if I do die now. I really need to listen to my self-discipline portion of my brain instead of the masochistic portion, so I'll just check in later after I KNOW the result is over to see if I've died.

I'm voting FZ. I trust her the least right now by far.

I also don't trust LC.

I need to obviously go away. Sorry for spewing everywhere.

Thanks for the support, Devin, but it's clear that no one shares my viewpoint regarding this game being unconventional. I knew it was a gamble. I should have just stayed not giving a shit, it would have ensured my survival better.

Anyway, I'm pretty mixed on whether I get lynched at this point, I honestly just want to be put out of my misery, but I really wanted to play this game.

I want it to be known. Why is everyone voting for me? At least timmer added the clause that it seems unlikely I'm a Detective or Old Rogue. That's fair enough. But I don't trust FZ. as far as I can throw her.

I know I've asked to be lynched and that I'm tilting, but I can't believe that anyone actually thinks I'm a New Rogue with all of this.

Let the cycle of people getting lynched because no one else understands their point of view continue.

Whatever. I don't care anymore. Waste your time.

This is a colossal waste of my time when I have plenty of coding to finish.

LC, I am not trying to make you mad or insult you or anyone else. You're one of the greatest mafia players I've ever seen. But clearly we aren't approaching this game with the same mindset and I don't think we ever will. All that this discussion has told me is that you're very likely NOT an Independent Rogue or that if you are that you're lying to keep up a "friendly" front.

To clarify, I'm not arguing to say "let's all play like baddies lol", I'm saying it makes no sense to analyze and categorize behavior as "civ" and "bad" using traditional baddie hunting because that's not going to get the Old Rogues a win in this game. It's practically impossible from even a random statistical standpoint.

I'm leaving now and doubt I'll be back in time. I'm leaving my vote on Soneji. You guys lynch whomever you want. If you decide it's me, great, then I don't have to waste my time posting thoughts that most people don't agree with anyway. But I'm not actively campaigning to die because I really wanted to play this game from the beginning and only didn't from the get go because I was too busy.

I am just becoming increasingly convinced that people at The Syndicate don't truly understand how neutral independents work. I saw it in full form in Death Note and I'm seeing it again here.

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:I have been reading your posts, LC, and clearly acknowledged them when I addressed that I haven't been mind controlled. I don't know why you think that and I don't know why you think Old Rogues and Independent Rogues are "essentially the same". They are not.

Actually, you DO know why I think Old Rogues and Indy Rogues are essentially the same, because you read my post.

It doesn't compute though.

You're assuming Independent Rogues not only have the incentive to accomplish the same win condition as the Old Rogues but that they have the means to do so.

Facts:
1) Independent Rogues do not know who Old Rogues and New Rogues are.
2) New Rogues outnumber Old Rogues by 1 and Independent Rogues = Old Rogues in number.

If your win condition was survive until the end, what incentives or means do you have to help the Old Rogues win the game? None.

You're neglecting the fact that the Indy Rogues want to end the game. As quickly as possible. They have two basic routes to choose: Eliminate the New Rogues and Grodd, or eliminate all the factions that oppose the New Rogues, whoever they might be.

PLUS, the Indy Rogues know who Llama is, which gives them an anchor of sorts in following the Old Rogue/Detective Win Condition.

Your view on the way this game works is illogical, and I don't see how it helps anyone achieve their win condition. I don't even understand how you are picturing playing this out going forward, if we decide to forget the concept of Civvie and baddie.

The MAJORITY is not the incentive that Indy players have to side with the Civs. The incentive is to be able to publicly work with a good group to eliminate an evil group. The alternative is to act baddie, and that only increases the chance that you'll be lynched as the game moves along. It applies to this game the same as most others.

No, they don't, they just want to survive until endgame. You're assuming that an Independent Rogue thinks ending the game = surviving until endgame, but that doesn't help if the game can't possibly end until at least N9 and the Independent Rogue gets NKed now, does it?

But the Old Rogue win condition doesn't even align with the Detectives! Who's to keep Llama or someone else from jailing Old Rogues? Doesn't matter to them. Less preference than New Rogues? Sure. But does it matter? No.

Are you kidding?

Of course, it's the majority that incentivices a neutral independent to side with the civilians. If you craft a game with 31 players, 15 civilians and 15 mafia and 1 neutral independent, and the mafia have not BTSC but each faction has a kill (I know this is an unrealistic example, but roll with me), how do you think the independent would play? Entirely with the civilians because he's playing "with a good group"? Come on.

NO ONE "acts baddie", that's absurd.

With all due respect, LC, this is precisely why I asked to be lynched yesterday and I believe the way you and many others view this game is highly illogical.

In the end, an Independent Rogue wants to end the game as quickly as possible, yes, but they don't really know how to achieve that and don't really care when the game ends, as long as they survive.

In a traditional game, neutral independents can help "baddie hunt" alongside the civilians because the civilians have the majority and the means to determine who is an NKing mafia member. They have the incentive to do so, as well, since the civilians have MAJORITY.

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:I have been reading your posts, LC, and clearly acknowledged them when I addressed that I haven't been mind controlled. I don't know why you think that and I don't know why you think Old Rogues and Independent Rogues are "essentially the same". They are not.

Actually, you DO know why I think Old Rogues and Indy Rogues are essentially the same, because you read my post.

It doesn't compute though.

You're assuming Independent Rogues not only have the incentive to accomplish the same win condition as the Old Rogues but that they have the means to do so.

Facts:
1) Independent Rogues do not know who Old Rogues and New Rogues are.
2) New Rogues outnumber Old Rogues by 1 and Independent Rogues = Old Rogues in number.

If your win condition was survive until the end, what incentives or means do you have to help the Old Rogues win the game? None.

I have been reading your posts, LC, and clearly acknowledged them when I addressed that I haven't been mind controlled. I don't know why you think that and I don't know why you think Old Rogues and Independent Rogues are "essentially the same". They are not.

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:I am definitely considering a vote for timmer, because it's odd to me that he claimed Old Rogue, that he's behaved the way he has with the Aces/Roxy situation, etc. That said, he's consistently come across as incredibly genuine to me, so if he is a Serial Killer or Top or something, he almost deserves to win...

I feel the same about Timmer seeming genuine, but it's only Day 5, and it's too early to say anyone deserves it yet.

Long Con wrote:I think S~V~S and MP07 are definitely New Rogues.

What is the basis of your accusation?

Wait, you can see my posts?

To the first quote, I wasn't intending to say we should leave him alone because he deserves to win. I was merely exaggerating for effect, to display just how shocked I would be if timmer was a SK lying his way through everything, because he's come across more genuine to me than practically everyone else.

To the second quote, I don't understand.

FZ. wrote:MP, I still don't get the difference. Calling someone civvie or baddie is just another way to say you trust them or you don't. I'd understand the point in all your discussion if you actually had a plan or something by which you think people should play, but since you keep saying the same things, it's just making me think you're bad...or not to be trusted, if you'd rather I phrase it that way :P

By the way, at the risk of sounding really clueless, what is LMS?

Timmer, there are a few people who think you should be voted, yet you don't think any of them is bad. you're only looking at the low posters who are mostly not here to defend themselves. While I tend to do that myself sometimes when I'm out of options, the fact that you don't find any of those suspicious of you suspicious makes me wonder whether you're just trying to stay on everyone's good side, not to mention you keep apologizing for your game. What exactly is there to apologize for? You're the one who got Double down, so I don't get the apologizing. While my gut is telling me you're genuine and sincere, my brain is telling me you are hiding something. Not sure which one I should trust.

How is that the same? OK, assuming it even is the same, which I would contend it's not, it doesn't compute to me to use traditional baddie hunting to vote out players in this game.

What does make more sense? Fine, I'll admit I haven't been great with answers. That's because the game isn't quite LMS (Last Man Standing) or traditional, but it's somewhere in between.

Other options?
1) Low or no posters - They present no help whatsoever. We are statistically more likely to lynch a New Rogue at this point than an Old Rogue, and since traditional ways of sussing players out are likely ineffective, then why not vote them out anyway?
2) SK hunting - There clearly is a Serial Killer, so hunting for a Serial Killer as opposed to a mafia team could help attack players who are not only possible SK candidates but trying to hide something.

I just literally came up with those right now. There are other options I'm sure.

I just don't understand why we're saying "I'm civ!" "he's civ" etc. Civilians don't even have a majority. You can't discern whether you trust someone based on how you would in a normal game.

I switched my vote to Soneji for now, since he's not playing. If I come up with someone more worthy of my vote in the next 5 hours, I'll switch it.

For now, probably against my better judgment, I'm not sure if I want to vote out S~V~S or timmer. It seems odd to me that they're both claiming "civilian" or Old Rogue roles and that now suddenly timmer is sticking up for S~V~S, but timmer is vouching for her really hard. If they are both New Rogues and somehow gained BTSC and that is why timmer is vouching for S~V~S, that's ballsy as hell.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:So answer me this. Who would you be interested in lynching today aside from yourself?

Linki: touche. I still think timmer is the way to go today. Too many people are calling for their own name, and I don't like it.

To be more accurate, I am not actively campaigning to die. I just am playing more than one mafia game at the moment and my SAS class started today, and I have a ridiculous amount of coding to do today (I shouldn't even be here, honestly), and if I'm going to spend the game on a different page than everyone else, why should I bother?

Can you explain to me why you believe timmer is most worthy of a vote?

I am definitely considering a vote for timmer, because it's odd to me that he claimed Old Rogue, that he's behaved the way he has with the Aces/Roxy situation, etc. That said, he's consistently come across as incredibly genuine to me, so if he is a Serial Killer or Top or something, he almost deserves to win, because I just can't see how that is the case.

As to who I want to vote, I really don't know. The nature of this game in addition to the fact that I only last night became fully invested and in the right gear for this game have led me to come to no particular conclusions as to who is most worthy of my vote today.

Long Con wrote:I think S~V~S and MP07 are definitely New Rogues.

What is the basis of your accusation?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I have been emotionally moved by your appeal MP.

I assume this was a joke because it made me laugh, so

If it wasn't, then I don't follow. :P

What are you thinking about today's vote, Marshy? Or a better question might be: What do you think of all of the poll options?

Sorry for the multiple posts, I'm clearly not thinking everything through before finishing them.

I just wanted to add that my pleas for you to vote for me were not emotionally-charged. They were just statements expressing my disbelief that this game fits a conventional mafia format and that, like rabbit, I'm insanely busy. If the game is going to be played with everyone pretending it's a conventional game, I just don't really care to be on a completely different page than every single other player for the entire game, all the while balancing other mafia games and my crazy RL at the moment. So I'm not playing any games when I've said "vote me out". If you really think I'm being counterproductive, then feel free to vote me out. But I'm just trying my best to analyze and play this game in the way that MR has set it up.

I also would appreciate if we stopped talking in "civvies" and "baddies" and analyzing players' behavior as to whether it's there "civ" or "bad" game because I don't see how that's relevant in this game.

I'm not cursed or mind controlled to say any of this. I'm truly not understanding where most of you are coming from. This game is far from a typical mafia game setup. I have been very vocal about this because I've finally had time to get into the game and it strikes me as very strange to continue categorizing behavior as "civilian" and "baddie".

I also apologize if I came across as rude or bossy when I made my posts yesterday regarding the game.

I just can't fathom how this game is being treated as a typical mafia game and that we are seemingly hunting baddies conventionally and surprised when lynches have been really unpredictable wagonfests. It's because there's more than half of the player base (7 New Rogues + 3 Arch-Villains + 6 Independent Rogues) who have potentially selfish intentions.

Yes, I agree that there are common enemies. Obviously the New Rogues are the hardest to get along with and the Independent Rogues are the easiest. But considering this is a faction game, I just don't understand how traditional baddie hunting methods will secure a win for the Old Rogues, and I find it increasingly very odd that people would want to claim an Old Rogue role. I think it very well could be an indication of New Rogues and other more hostile factions falling into common trickery, since baddies instinctively must claim civilians. Therefore, New Rogues would instinctively claim Old Rogues, yes? Why else would you claim an Old Rogue role, especially at this point in the game? I suppose that's what I don't understand. Because if you actually are an Old Rogue and you're not lying, then you're setting yourself up for an NK. If you are lying and you're a hostile faction, would it not make more sense to appear as friendly as possible, which would be an Independent Rogue?

timmer, maybe I've missed it since I haven't read some of the thread, but is there any way you can elaborate on S~V~S and how your thoughts developed regarding her? Not saying I don't believe you, I'm just intrigued.

I agree that rabbit seems to be playing this game very much aligned with an Independent Rogue mindset. Whether that is what he truly is or not is debatable, but I don't see any reason to eliminate rabbit over say, Sophie or Soneji. Llama, what about rabbit's posting (or lack thereof) specifically points the possibility of New Rogue, SK, whatever it is?

S~V~S wrote:MP it honestly wasn't meant to be insulting. People foot a lot. To gauge reactions, etc. I wasn't trying to imply anything about you except that you were not in my win condition friendly group. Honest.

I believe you, don't worry. I apologize that this became a thing. I just was incredibly confused throughout a lot of this.

Even in my biggest FEB moments when I have relied on emotional appeals (most recently, see Roger Rabbit), I don't ever come into the thread with the intent to rile anyone up or piss them off. I just don't play that way; I understand that some people do. It's fine, but it blurs the line between in-game and personal too much for me. So to be totally honest, I was confused and kind of hurt when you seemed to be implying that I was not only purposefully trying to rile you up but that I have done so in other games. I know we don't see eye to eye a lot of the time, but I value your input strongly, and I would never want to make the game specifically unpleasant for anyone, especially you.

I know it's a game built around manipulation and deception, but I really don't ever go into a thread or game thinking that I'm going to make people's blood boil or rile them up. It's not my style and it won't ever be.

I do sincerely apologize if what I said earlier in the game did that to you, because I said what I have said with no such intentions, ever. I even tried to add the little "to me" at the end of the doesn't make sense phrase, I never would have imagined that would have belittled you or made you feel upset because, to me, when I say that it doesn't imply that the person I'm talking to is stupid or doesn't know what they're talking about. It could very well be that something doesn't make sense to me because I don't understand where you're coming from or because I'm in the wrong.

Anyway, if you are still wanting to discuss this, I'll be more than happy to address any concerns about it outside of the thread, as you know. I just thought, since apparently I had upset you, that I didn't see any need to make this an in-thread thing. I'm sorry for my hand in perpetuating this as an in-thread thing. I just was upset as well when the implication was that I came into the game intending to upset someone else. I really, really care for all of you guys. I know it's just a mafia game, but I've built a significant connection with a lot of folks here, particularly you, and I'd never want to intentionally upset you.

Regarding your perception that it means that I have an alignment that isn't friendly to you, I can understand why you may think that, but you are mistaken.

Then clearly I don't understand what's going on.

I don't know what to do with my vote.

I'll check back in before the poll ends, but I have class in a few minutes.

Unless I misunderstand you, S~V~S, you seem to be saying that you dropped that line in thread as a tactic to see how I would respond.

I think that crosses the line into unnecessary emotional manipulation, and it means I'm right to not trust you. I'm keeping my vote where it is.

S~V~S wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:I did not make this game personal. I think that can be made evidently clear. I even handled it well by saying she should take this out of the thread. Why she brought it up AGAIN in thread is beyond me.

I never said anything about personal. This is a tactic. Pushing peoples buttons is part of gameplay.

You heavily insinuated that I said something on purpose to rile you up or upset you, twice. That is insulting to me. That is NOT a tactic. If anyone did this to you, you would also be upset, you would not see it as a tactic.

Duly noted, Llama. Why rabbit, just because he's been quiet? If so, why not Sophie or Soneji or someone else?

I need to seriously check into Mafia Addicts Anonymous now because I still have a lot to complete before tomorrow morning at 8:00AM, so see you folks later.