The Syndicate

I think, more than any other game I've played, I earned this victory.

Moral victory.

So it looks like you'll have to put up with a lot more of Ol' Kentucky Llama!

MM told me that if I have the highest post count before the host post, I won't actually die.

Sorsha wrote:Looks like we're all having llama for dinner tonight.

Unnecessarily mean.

But never give your llama a ciggy. Bad for his lungs.

sig wrote:Mrs.DrWilgette did a really last minute vote there.

linki: Maybe Siggy wants a llama?

A wise choice. We make excellent pets.

sig wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:*Wilgy slams Sig's cage!*

Bad Sig! Bad! you sit! you stay! you behave and you'll get your treats!
*Sig bites Wilgy's finger off*

Siggy wants a finger. SIGGY WANTS A FINGER.

You're next, Tin Man.

Mother of mercy, is this the end of Rico?

linki: sorsha. Lame.

What does DF have to do with any of this?

Last minute vote switch for self-save!

Do it, Sorsha. Ties are fun.

Not going to vote, Wilgette?

G-Man wrote:I'd like to point out
I'm only posting haiku
Yet fourth in post count

You'd be tied for third if I didn't post this. Is that why you're voting for me?

G-Man wrote:I'm no fan of ties
If still tied near the poll's end
I just might break it

For whom are you inclined to break it, oh haiku-one?

Scotty, you don't think I'm bad, do you?

Matt wrote:Llama, we've been caught.

I'ma join you and vote for our other partner, sig, but I'd still like Long Con to clarify what he meant by his comments on sig earlier.

Matt, I suggest an alliance to defend ourselves from these vultures. Who do you like?

Well, I guess I have to move my vote if I want to survive, don't I? That is a pity, because I am really not reading Matt as bad. Anyone else we can agree on?

DrWilgy wrote:Matt and Llama are baddies. Matt has mentioned the Llama once and it was jokingly, Llama hasn't mentioned Matt without also having another player mentioned at the same time, making us not focus on him.

Thank you for your contribution's G-Man, you have ponged my ping. Wanna help me lynch LC?

This would be interesting if true. Sadly, it's not either.

S~V~S wrote: And I am finding this hard to accept when you are piling a vote on someone for no reason. If you find him untrustworthy, tell us why & maybe we will agree. I would expect you to try to be winning people over to your point of view, as you usually do, but that is totally absent from your game.

Linki @ sig, he is doing reads on everyone first, i think.

My libertarian philosophy forces me to accept your vote choices as valid, even if a disagree with them. In all seriousness though, I have no interest in trying to convince people thta Wilgy is bad because I am not convinced he is bad. I just preferred him to the other options at the time. That is no longer the case.

What you are forgetting is that votes are changeable. Who I place my vote on early is not necessarily who I intend to finally vote for. For example, I am about to change mine to sig.

sig wrote:I've done nothing worth getting lynched over, Matt is being crazy and the fact LC is entertaining my lynch based around a day zero jokey post speaks for itself.

See, this reads false to me. It sounds like baddie's I've seen who are mad at being caught for the wrong reasons.

Elohcin wrote:We are back home from our mini vacation. I'm exhausted and injured, but had a wonderful time . I will catch up now.

Looking forward to your input, Eloh. What do you think of Wilgy, Long Con, Matt, Sloonei, and Soreji in particular?

S~V~S wrote:I mean, you are posting alot, which I like. And I am trying to work with you, and you refuse to work with me. I am looking for reasons to trust *you* and you are just blowing me off like an annoying puppy.

I am more than happy to work with you, SVS! You know that. I just don't know how to answer the questions you're asking me. I trust WIlgy less than Long Con and Matt. I just do. I can't explain why.

S~V~S wrote:*Pulls Teeth*

I mean WHY do you trust Wilgy leasy? You did not mention him at all, except for the chaos thing, before voting for him.

Trust has to be earned. He has not earned mine.

S~V~S wrote:Why Wilgy?

Because I trusted him least out of him, Matt and LC, who were leading candidates at the time I voted. As I said, now that that is no longer the case, I may change again.

S~V~S wrote:Llama, I see you moved to Wilgy, for his accusation of chaos on LC, I assume, since that was your last mention of him?

How is accusing LC of "chaos" different than accusing him of being "tricksy"?

Tricksy was not a criticism of his behavior this game, it was a description of his personality in general. My second reference where I singled out one of his posts was just a joke. I am not voting Wilgy purely for his LC suspicion, but because I prefer a Wilgy lynch to the other major candidates. Now that the votes seem to be spreading out, though, I may change as well.

Sloonei wrote:Also why would you say it doesn't seem worth your time? You just admitted that I pointed out a legitimate inconsistency in your posts, and you brushed it off as not being worth your time, implying it is inconsequential that you stated an inconsistency in the thread. But then you proceeded to respond to it anyway.

I just don't feel like this conversation with you is productive. You claim you weren't being defensive, fine, but to me it seems like you were. It's a matter of opinion and we're not going to agree on it. I feel like you are not actually listening to my posts, but just using them to attack me, so I'm not getting much out of that. I know you're going to vote for me anyway, so I would rather spend my time talking to some of the other players now, particularly the quieter ones who I have yet to hear much from.

Sloonei wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:What are you hoping to achieve with this exchange, Gollama?
Which exchange, the one with Long Con?
Yes. Calling him tricksy just seems to be planting seeds of doubt for no real purpose, and I am not sensing any sort of attempt to scum hunt or actually read him. Is it just banter for the sake of banter?
He is tricksy. He has tricked me before. It is a fact. I am hoping I am reading him correctly this game, but there are no guarantees of that.

You seem to have a problem with pretty much everything I'm posting. Would you prefer I post less? I happen to think there are many things that can be achieved by conversation in the thread.
Thank you for reminding us that Day 1 reads are not guarantees of anything. Care to address my mini case on you a few posts above us?

It doesn't really seem worth my time, but it does appear that I misspoke. When I mentioned your defensiveness, I was referring to your reaction to me saying you were "a little off", not based on No Lynch Discussion. I think I was confusing ou with Soneji. So yes, in that respect I was wrong.

Sloonei wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:What are you hoping to achieve with this exchange, Gollama?
Which exchange, the one with Long Con?
Yes. Calling him tricksy just seems to be planting seeds of doubt for no real purpose, and I am not sensing any sort of attempt to scum hunt or actually read him. Is it just banter for the sake of banter?

He is tricksy. He has tricked me before. It is a fact. I am hoping I am reading him correctly this game, but there are no guarantees of that.

You seem to have a problem with pretty much everything I'm posting. Would you prefer I post less? I happen to think there are many things that can be achieved by conversation in the thread.

Sloonei wrote:What are you hoping to achieve with this exchange, Gollama?

Which exchange, the one with Long Con?

Long Con wrote: If this is the tricksiest thing I've ever done, then the complete absence of trickery employed by me in this game surely exonerates me of any previous trickery.

Well played, sir.

Long Con wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Long Con wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Long Con wrote:Quin is a bit suspicious to me. Looks a little like he jumped on Wilgy when the temperature started to heat up a tiny bit.
I didn't like his reactions to some things during my catchup read.
What do you think of Scotty?

What do you think of Long Con?
I think Scotty is Civ. I think Long Con is a dangerous man to mess with. And also, Long Con is a Civ, so stop trying to lynch him please.
Long Con, you are always so tricksy. I hope you are not tricking me today.
I haven't even done anything, I have no tricks to play. And I'm not really that tricksy, I don't know why people like to spread that rumour. Don't let the name fool you, it was invented for different reasons before I started playing Mafia.

Denying you are triscky is the tricksiest think you have done. No one more consistently fools me in this game than you, except maybe DharmaHelper.

S~V~S wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:So all of his subsequent posts have had no impression on you>?
Not especially, no.
Good to know.

Voting *Llama* for not. May change, may not. His subsequent posts may sway my opinion.

I look forward to working with you in the future.

Long Con wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Long Con wrote:Quin is a bit suspicious to me. Looks a little like he jumped on Wilgy when the temperature started to heat up a tiny bit.
I didn't like his reactions to some things during my catchup read.
What do you think of Scotty?

What do you think of Long Con?
I think Scotty is Civ. I think Long Con is a dangerous man to mess with. And also, Long Con is a Civ, so stop trying to lynch him please.

Long Con, you are always so tricksy. I hope you are not tricking me today.

S~V~S wrote:So all of his subsequent posts have had no impression on you>?

Not especially, no.

S~V~S wrote:ebwop, I mean other than your initial thought about him, how he reacted to you. He has had a lot of content since then; has that content increased your suspision, and if so, why? Or has it had no effect on your suspicion?

Nothing really new other than the continued reaction to the No-Lynch discussion, which I refuse to continue at this point.

S~V~S wrote:
thellama73 wrote:Both Matt and Long Con are reading Civ to me, so I find Wilgy's accusation of chaos on LC weird. I guess I could vote for Wilgy today, but Sloonei still has my eye.
Why Sloonei? I see nothing alarming there.

I just thought Sloonei's reaction to my criticism of the no lynch option (which I make in basically every game) was a little defensive and OTT. It's only a slight ping, but I don't have anything much stronger to go on right now.

Also, G-Man has a history of fake, self-imposed curses, so I don't think his haikus are indicative of alignment either way.

Both Matt and Long Con are reading Civ to me, so I find Wilgy's accusation of chaos on LC weird. I guess I could vote for Wilgy today, but Sloonei still has my eye.

S~V~S wrote:Care to share what the focus is on?

Nothing specific. I am watching the thread, trying to see whether anything stands out as pingy. I chose not to make a lot of Dom's questions because I feel like that approach has been overused (by me, admittedly) in recent games, so I'm not going to jump down anyone's throat for they way they answered him.

So far, the only thing that has stood out to me is Sloonei's rather violent reaction to to me expressing mild suspicion of him.

Sloonei wrote:Have you at least taken note of the results privately?

My focus is elsewhere. Given what a big deal I have made of this point in recent games, I think its value as a predictor of baddieness has been diminished.

Sloonei wrote:
thellama73 wrote:Good morning, gents! I'm pleased to see that Dom has adopted my tactic of asking people whether they are bad or not. Very wise.
You were happy to see Dom using your favorite tactic but you made no notice of his results. Why not?

I try not to do the same thing every game. Since he started it, I thought I would let him pursue the results.

Sloonei wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:Stifle stifle.

Do you have any topics related to things that ARE in this game to discuss?
I don't really have any major suspects yet. Sloonei does seem a little off this game, but it's premature to draw any hard conclusions. I'm just trying to get people talking to see if I can spot anything suspicious.

How about you, any suspects?
"A little off" is the vaguest way to state a suspicion ever.
Welcome to Day 1.
It is Day 1 and I do not like either of these posts you've made.

That's fine. You don't have to like my posts. It's a free country.

Sloonei wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:Stifle stifle.

Do you have any topics related to things that ARE in this game to discuss?
I don't really have any major suspects yet. Sloonei does seem a little off this game, but it's premature to draw any hard conclusions. I'm just trying to get people talking to see if I can spot anything suspicious.

How about you, any suspects?
"A little off" is the vaguest way to state a suspicion ever.

Welcome to Day 1.

[quote="S~V~S"]Stifle stifle.

Do you have any topics related to things that ARE in this game to discuss?[/quote
I don't really have any major suspects yet. Sloonei does seem a little off this game, but it's premature to draw any hard conclusions. I'm just trying to get people talking to see if I can spot anything suspicious.

How about you, any suspects?

S~V~S wrote:It is a nice place for non commital baddies to hide. No one learns anything from a no lynch.

But we don't have it in this game, and not sure why anyone is suspecting anyone for it. Looking at Llama for making a non issue an issue.

Don't try to stifle my discussion, SVS.

Soneji wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Soneji wrote:The only things that have me slightly pinged at the moment are Sloonei's preemptive excuse for possible inactivity and Scotty's post about being bad at tying shoes. I like G-Man's haikus so far, need about five to six more to really grade him though.

Quin we are some of the few brave souls that understand that the option of No Lynch isn't some boogeyman waiting to destroy town. It has its merits when used sparingly and alongside normal lynch options.
No merits. Evil.
In my experience, its generally those who try to lynch the No Lynch voters that are evil(mafia)

In my experience, it is the ones who try to paint the ones who try to lynch the ones who push the no lynch option as mafia who are actually mafia.

Soneji wrote:The only things that have me slightly pinged at the moment are Sloonei's preemptive excuse for possible inactivity and Scotty's post about being bad at tying shoes. I like G-Man's haikus so far, need about five to six more to really grade him though.

Quin we are some of the few brave souls that understand that the option of No Lynch isn't some boogeyman waiting to destroy town. It has its merits when used sparingly and alongside normal lynch options.

No merits. Evil.

Haiku quote fail

Quin wrote:
thellama73 wrote:I'm placing my vote on Quin for wanting to abdicate the only tool we have for catching baddies. Thanks for making my decision easy, Quin!
Tut tut tut

tut tut tut..
tut.

...tut tut tut

Tut tut tut tut tut
Tut tut tut tut tut tut tut
Tut tut tut tut tut

tut

Search found 59 matches