The Syndicate

boo 2 wrote:

Golden 2 wrote:

Sig 2 wrote:You waited util the end, you easily could have asked the hosts in PM if a "blown" vote could be changed in thread. You EASILY could have known Roxy would say no before doing it.

A seemer is RANDOMLY assigned a different role upon death. The level of coincidence here is astounding.

I mean, go ahead and make your case to the others, but I'm not buying it.

I voted at the end of the period in which I managed to do reads on players and decide on a vote. It's clear on paper. The only question I addressed the Hosts was in the open, right after I blew the vote, you're the one easily adding "coulda/woulda" to what happened. I wanted to correct my vote on "BR", if possible, as soon as possible, I didn't act like slipping Jimmy.

How do you know seemers are randomly assigned in this setup? Did you clarify this with the Hosts first?

Here, I'll be even more suicidal:

HOSTS how are seemers designed? Do they get assigned different random roles upon flip?

No more questions. We have Rosemary.

Keep inserting Metal Gear quotes ad infinitum, as if I was clueless the first time you did it.

Sig 2 wrote:You waited util the end, you easily could have asked the hosts in PM if a "blown" vote could be changed in thread. You EASILY could have known Roxy would say no before doing it.

A seemer is RANDOMLY assigned a different role upon death. The level of coincidence here is astounding.

I mean, go ahead and make your case to the others, but I'm not buying it.

I voted at the end of the period in which I managed to do reads on players and decide on a vote. It's clear on paper. The only question I addressed the Hosts was in the open, right after I blew the vote, you're the one easily adding "coulda/woulda" to what happened. I wanted to correct my vote on "BR", if possible, as soon as possible, I didn't act like slipping Jimmy.

How do you know seemers are randomly assigned in this setup? Did you clarify this with the Hosts first?

Here, I'll be even more suicidal:

HOSTS how are seemers designed? Do they get assigned different random roles upon flip?

Interpret the version in which I would have properly voted "BR" instead of pushing a button above, "sig". Interpret the version in which my vote would have been added to "BR"'s lynch and tell me how that would sound like a seemer wanting to dodge the bullet.

I've done everything to lynch "BR" except fucking up the button press. Tell me who that's anything but idiotic, if I'm the seemer, aware of "BR" being genuine.

Sig 2 wrote:

Golden 2 wrote:what the what

RIP though, "BR"/jules. I technically voted you, so sorry.

linki - yeah dog, I slipped. "Bass" is literally one place above.

And care to comment on how both of you are listed as trackers? Hmm? And how it's a pretty big coincidence that you "goofed" on voting for BR2, who maybe you were the only person to realize who she was before she was lynched? I mean, come on, man. Own up.

My flip said I'm "your civvie tracker". Her flip says she's "a civvie tracker". You tell me which one sounds genuine. The most handy answer is, indeed, that one of us is a seemer. I know I'm solid, so I'm calling wolf on her. This doesn't mean, given the closed setup, that other transformations might not be at hand.

You're making my "slip" sound like a coincidence, I told it as it was right away and literally asked the Hosts if I can fix it, seconds after. Again, for your claim that I'm the seemer and became aware of BR's counter-claim in time, for me to push a BR lynch would be fairly suicidal, no?

I'm owning up to what I am, which is what I've flipped. You'll get just that the second time.

Sig 2 wrote:

Epignosis 2 wrote:Okay so she must have tracked someone and gotten something then?

She means her asking Golden if he's civ, I think. He clearly guessed she was the real tracker and "slipped", voting for the name above hers, LOL. Juliets has handed us a baddie rather handily, I think.

Did I also slip by making an actual case to lynch her? Why would I do that?

I'm the tracker, I'm the civ. Lynch me and you'll get just that (all over again, since I already flipped).

what the what

RIP though, "BR"/jules. I technically voted you, so sorry.

linki - yeah dog, I slipped. "Bass" is literally one place above.

Roxy wrote:

Golden 2 wrote:

Black Rock 2 wrote:And Sig 2, Golden voted for me not Bass and I think since he said me in the thread they will give him the vote for me making this a tie - several of us are tied.

Remains to be seen. Vote blunders, depending on the Hosts, can be "punished" to remain as such.

Hadn't thought of punishment but I could

Black Rock 2 wrote:And Sig 2, Golden voted for me not Bass and I think since he said me in the thread they will give him the vote for me making this a tie - several of us are tied.

Remains to be seen. Vote blunders, depending on the Hosts, can be "punished" to remain as such.

Oh fuck me, I pressed on "Bass"!

I noticed "BR"'s plea for lynch, but I'm wondering if it's not disenchantment at the end of conducting a big ISO travail on Cookie and finding herself up in the tally.

This appeal notwithstanding, I'm feeling both her and "Eloh" can fit a certain baddie profile in relation to "LC" , but that "BR" might have weaved her stances and interactions regarding "LC" and "Syn" a little more carefully, a little more attentive with the overall swing of the phases. I'm not excluding that "Eloh" might be the low-post distancing type, but right now I'm leaning on "BR".

Golden 2 wrote:

Ricochet 2 wrote:

Golden 2 wrote:Jesus Christ all you "Syn" voters.

Why do you find the case for him being civilian so compelling?

Take away the thick layers of panda rage and his actual defense/rebuttal posts tend to check out (factually) and sound genuine, in my opinion at least. Plus, of the "Scum Con" bunch, I still feel he was more reasonable at first in his rebuttals to "LC", then got fed up and judged "LC" as pushing it (which, turns out, was true).

But my point was moreover: of the four votes for him right now, one was unreasoned, one was "because meta", you are locking your vote on him and the fourth "because I'll tell you later". How am I suppose to feel good about this vote train, in addition to feeling "Syn" reads civ?

Ricochet 2 wrote:

Golden 2 wrote:Jesus Christ all you "Syn" voters.

Why do you find the case for him being civilian so compelling?

Take away the thick layers of panda rage and his actual defense/rebuttal posts tend to check out (factually) and sound genuine, in my opinion at least. Plus, of the "Scum Con" bunch, I still feel he was more reasonable at first in his rebuttals to "LC", then got fed up and judged "LC" as pushing it (which, turns out, was true).

Jesus Christ all you "Syn" voters.

Okay, here are my reflections for today:

1) Nope on voting "Syn".

2) I've said my share already about the players who might have meta bussed "LC" as an act all along. I personally feel this concerns "Cobalt" and "Sig" more than it does "Syn", but sure, him as well. My "10% credence" to this theory is nowhere near appropriate to push for any lynch on them right now. I'll look for other clues regarding where they stand, after more flips.

3) On some of the other players that voted "LC" on Day 3:

a] "Black Rock" the First gave us nothing to work with, "Black Rock" the Second joined on Day 2 and got in the game properly starting Night 2. Her first feel of the situation is that both "LC" and "Syn" could be civs pressured by events. She somehow leans more on "Syn" than "LC" with her analysis at that point. Tin foil version of this would be a nuanced way to show that she's studying both, but try to move the center of attention on "Syn". Day 3 she questions my flip, chats with "LC" on "Blooper" although that post by "LC" was also a defensive one and "BR" never questions or addresses that part. Only after all this does she go back to being "torn" on "LC", whilst her "Syn" vibes die down. She finally votes "LC" because she's uncomfortable with his "die-hard" claims.

The juggling between "LC" and "Syn" that I pointed out gives me pause and, I'd say, fair baddie read. She might have tested the waters, whilst the "LC"-"Syn" vote trains were balanced, then corrected her stances when the weight dropped on "LC" for good. I believe this is pretty much what "Lipsticklacey" also brought up (although I don't get behind some other points of hers: "BR" the First's Day/Night 1 absence is, indeed, not indicative of the mafia failing to kill; plus, I don't follow her "behavior quote" angle too well).

b] Elohcin. Day 1, dismisses both leads on "LC" and "Syn", votes "MM" for unreasoned vote on "Syn". Day 2, continues on this path, elaboates on "LC" sounding like a easy lynch to hop on. I like, however, her rebuttal to "TGG" on not breaking their tie on Day 1, it is consistent with her dismissing both those vote trains. Votes "MM" again, which frankly reads to me a bit convenient tunnelling. Day 3, her opinion on "LC" is completely changed due to the lynch switch, "LC"'s explanations on it and such.

Yeah, the tin foil version of this can be very bad for "Eloh": staying away from all the "LC" hounding, staying away from "Syn" too, turning on "LC" when it was inevitable. However, this could also be some unfortunate distancing and undecided tone, if "Eloh" is not a mafia member. It's not very substantial, based on less than 9 posts of material (not all of them are on topic), but I'm going to say a slight baddie read, because she might fit the low-poster distancing baddie member profile.

c] Scotty hasn't made any progress with his activity rhythm. He got my eye for joining the "Syn" lynch on Day 1 - for a case that seemed a bit "faux", built so late. Day 3 he joins the "LC" side, just as late, but without any words. Eye still locked on him, tbh.

d] All the others I didn't address I feel either good ("SVS"), neutral ("Epig", "rey") or see "Timmer" below.

4) Of those who didn't vote "LC" on Day 3 (and, it so happens, on any other Day!), I only have the strength left to focus on "Cookie", since she also has been brought up. I remember well her post where she barked at the "Scum Con"ers, but didn't think much of it at that time. For one, it was also a rebuttal/defensive post towards "Cobalt" calling her scum. I think Dom called her defending of LC "mama bear" like and I agree it can happen - I even have a real player in mind for that, although I can't say I have "Cookie" locked on as that player.

Overall she went from "LC" giving her the "heebie jeebies" early on to finding him "wrong on a case that he can be later framed on if/when his case flops". Keeps that mindset on Day 2, alongside her voting for "Sig". Day 3, her "both are civ" stance on "LC" & "Syn" is starting to shake, but she's leaning on "Syn" with the suspicions. She ends voting "Sig" again and calling the "LC"/"Syn" deal still inconclusive for her.

So there's possible distancing and possible defending to incriminate her with. I agree she looks a bit suspicious, but there's also a part of me doubting if she'd do all this, as a mafia, without any self-awareness that the blowback will be tremendous, once "LC" flips. Torn on her.

5) "Timmer" has not returned yet with some reasoning, in fact he seems to have voted as soon as he made the "lynch 'Syn'" post. Of all the players flying low, he's making me the most uneasy right now.

I'm gonna spend an extra 10 minutes on deciding where to vote today, otherwise there you have it.

Llama 2 wrote:

Golden 2 wrote:"Rico" and "Llama" complementing each other? In what freaking universe?

Golden 2 wrote:Sorry, that should be complimenting, doh.

I think we complement each other nicely. He does the extensive reads on people, I just find the baddies.
Thanks for the compliment

Ok, I lol'd. Have one on me.

"Rico" and "Llama" complementing each other? In what freaking universe?

Llama 2 wrote: I'm enjoying your Golden take. Do you have the most posts yet? :P

Llama 2 wrote:

Golden 2 wrote:Yeah, this below as well. What the hell dude. How did you go from this

Llama 2 wrote:
Syn, this does not completely absolve you. But it does you credit for the civ cause. Glad to hear you're ready to appear civ again. Welcome back on board!

to this

Llama 2 wrote: Supatown alert!

Syn 2 is bad, assuming he is the puppet of Cobalt.

Or are you people just intent on poking Synbalt just to get more flipping out panda posts from him?

Note how I didn't say he was civ, but was ready to appear civ? His attitude towards Long Con was niggling in my mind, and I went and looked through past mafia chats and found him explaining his philosophy of throwing his teammate under the bus in a virulent fashion. His explosion never felt civ to me, and his switch to "I told you all so!" when Long Con flipped is another tactic of distancing he is wont to do.

Your meta rationale still leaves out several other players, like "Cobalt" or "Sig", who went for "LC"'s throat, right away. I'm seeing a more natural flow in "Syn" push, by comparison. He included "LC" in his now infamous mafia-guess post (but he has labelled that as satire since), he defended first against "LC" ping on that and then started thinking that "LC" is pushing it hard.

His "I told you so" reads to me more like catharsis, after a three-Day polarizing confrontation. Three Days, man. You're in Llama's socks, he'd probably feel just as vindicated - or just plain smug - after such a flip.

What do you think about the others I mentioned, in this equation? Could "Cobalt", for instance, not have researched the same thing you did and headdive into the "Scum Con" tunnel right away, for instance?

Yeah, this below as well. What the hell dude. How did you go from this

Llama 2 wrote:
Syn, this does not completely absolve you. But it does you credit for the civ cause. Glad to hear you're ready to appear civ again. Welcome back on board!

to this

Llama 2 wrote: Supatown alert!

Syn 2 is bad, assuming he is the puppet of Cobalt.

Or are you people just intent on poking Synbalt just to get more flipping out panda posts from him?

Wow, so much ISO'ing. I'll be there with you, trying to reach some conclusions, in around an hour, hour-and-a-half, guys.

Dom 2 wrote:On an unrelated note, the four players to die so far this game are both renditions of Gamerguy and both renditions of Long Con.

And if we are to be truly pedantic, we should lynch "Elohcin" today.

Timmer 2 wrote:It's Synonym, you guys. Vote Synonym.

Please elaborate, "Timmer". It's what about "Synonym"? I don't see anything on suspecting "Syn" in your history, in fact you've pushed the "LC" lynch all the way through, at least whenever your were active (you missed a phase, too).

You were active and even quite combative on Day 1, after which you faded out. You voted "LC" on Day 1 fairly late, with no feelings towards the "Syn" train; you missed Day 2 voting; you reappeared and kept a consistent vote on "LC" on Day 3, also fairly late, pushing his lynch into no-return zone, tally-wise.

Such conviction right now, for "Syn" being bad, without explanation, is getting my eye a bit, but I'd like to hear from you first.

Cookie 2 wrote:I usually know who killed me when i get killed. Not for a fact, but i have a good idea. One of the best things about coming back from the dead is that you bring your hindsight back with you.

I don't know how many times I had a facepalm moment after I had been NKed or otherwise done to death, "Of course, that's who killed me".

I was looking for that kind of insight. It was not nefearious or intended to entrap you, Scouts Honor

That's fine, I never implied your question was tricksworthy, I just operate differently (and believe most of the others do, too). If I'll have a good hunch about who might have killed me, I'd probably slip it in my case-making. In other words, my hindsight would turn into a subtle form of pursuing my killers, rather than speaking openly about who whacked me and why. Plus, I can't say I have the same spidey senses as you do, in general, or at least in this case there's really not much to draw from. Again, I believe I was likely put early on mute without any important breadcrumbs to leave behind, rather than being put later on mute for being on to something (except if I was already on to something regarding players such as "MM" or "Llama" ).

I'll just answer this for now

Cookie 2 wrote:No we don't know that, although the way the night went makes me think there might only be one. Unless ther are two and the second is trying to lull us into a sense of complacency.

Eyes on boo & Llama for their mad target painting skills.

I would like to hear from Golden as well on why HE thinks he was NKed. If he said during the picture posts I missed it, it is hard to follow those on phone, and I am on phone more often than not these days, life has been busy.

First of all, you may have noticed that I was quite the targeters' favorite on Night 2 (of course, if I would have remained dead, all the other things and gimmicks would have been void) from both civ and mafia sides; no idea what I did to earn those, but oh well. As for me being killed, I can project only a couple of motivations, such as being an active, popular, high profile etc. player (or even sock) that they regarded as a dangerous civilian (already or potentially, as the game evolves) or my death, at such an early stage, not leading to that many links of interpretation or WIFOMs (except maybe, I suppose, "Llama" or "MM"?).

I have to ask, however, is this line of inquiry, in which victims should project the reasoning of their killers, something regular? Or is it just because I was brought back into the game? Usually we have to interpret the killing targets or attempts of the mafia, not ask civs to explain mafia's actions.

boo 2 wrote:

Golden 2 wrote:

boo 2 wrote:

Golden 2 wrote:
Nice to see that you both would like me to die again.

It's not that I want you to die. It's that I was expecting you to die.

That line kinda reminds me of 007 movies. "You expect me to talk?" "No, Mr.Bond. I expect you to die!"

You do know the villain says that, right?

Yeah I totally forgot that it was a VILLAIN trying to kill Bond in a 007 movie.

Good thing paraphrasing that line doesn't also make you a villain trying to kill me.

I've been out of commission today (RL stuff), sorry about that, I'll catch up later or tomorrow.

boo 2 wrote:

Golden 2 wrote:
Nice to see that you both would like me to die again.

It's not that I want you to die. It's that I was expecting you to die.

That line kinda reminds me of 007 movies. "You expect me to talk?" "No, Mr.Bond. I expect you to die!"

You do know the villain says that, right?

Bass 2 wrote:

Lipsticklacey 2 wrote:@Bass 2, that wasn't what I had in mind when I asked, no. But sure.

I'm glad I made a new friend! Are you going to pursue Synonym 2 even though events seem to indicate he was bussed by Long Con 2?

I don't think I understand any part of this.

"LC" bussed "Syn"? What events indicate this?

Also, "Syn" would be bad despite a (possible?) bussing?

boo 2 wrote:

Ricochet 2 wrote:

boo 2 wrote:What is a "Seemer"? That is not a role I am familiar with.

A seemer is a member of the mafia who seems to be civilian (for example, when lynched or when checked by a cop)

Interesting. Thank you.

Spoiler: show

Kawanishi-Noseguchi
Kinunobebashi
Takiyama
Uguisunomori
Tsuzumigataki,
Tada
Hirano
Ichinotorii
Uneno
Yamashita
Sasabe
Kofudai
Tokiwadai
Myoukenguchi

boo 2 wrote:"The Silly Person" eh? Is that a reference to a past game perhaps? Or possibly something else?

I was expecting mafia to double down on killing Golden 2 since the medic is already dead. After all Golden has already been outed as the Tracker, which can be a bad time for mafia. He is also a confirmed civ now. Gonna have to think about that one for awhile.

But more importantly, why did the Tracker have a resurrection ability? Those two normally are not in tandem. Something about this has bugged me since I first read it, and the feeling is only getting worse.

I wonder if mafia have some kind of "fake night kill" ability. It certainly wouldnt be the first time I have witnessed such a thing.

Llama 2 wrote: I think the more likely scenario is that the rezzer is a civ and saw that Golden is a good role to have around.

But why he didn't get killed is beyond me. Unless...Gamer Guy 2 really was a seemer and the doc is still out there. The mafia would know this of course...

Since standard rules apply, then I assume the Mafia cannot target me a second Night in a row.

Also, I don't have a rezz, somebody else rezzed me. If you meant something like an auto rezz, that is a rare as hell power and I definitely don't have it.

Nice to see that you both would like me to die again.

In all fairness and on a serious note, right now I'll give around 10% credence to the thought that someone might have meta uber-bussed LC. Let's call it the "Epignosis bussing effect". You just never know. A meta grudge, such as the "Scum Con" one, can, *in pure theory*, be an ideal distancing tactic, in case that player and "LC" have had the misfortune to be paired as mafia.

Cobalt 2 wrote:OH MY GOD

I hand you your first scum on a fucking silver platter and now you're suspecting ME. YOUR WELCOME YOUR MAJESTY.

Just lynch me already. then when I flip town AND I WILL FLIP TOWN you can see how stupid you look in that mirror you're constantly admiring. I've done nothing but TELL THE TRUTH.

I'm so over this. Gonna go eat my feelings.

this guy reminds me of somebody

Voted American Gods, no knowledge of either games, but I understand this one was particularly cool.

Lipsticklacey 2 wrote:That was an in-character post, and then someone asked if it was a slip and I gave a vague answer. That actually tricked people?

I asked, so you didn't trick me.

Dom 2 wrote:

Reywas 2 wrote:

Dom 2 wrote:

Reywas 2 wrote:

Dom 2 wrote:Nicely done. Now I will have to reconsider my read of lacey because I thought she was Elohcin.

That's crazy talk. Why did you think that? Lacey 2 is playing nothing like Elohcin.

Not really something I can discuss as that would reveal my identity (which I may have done already anyway).

Well it sounds made up.

lacey said something about another game that made me think "Oh, she has to be Elohcin or lacey, and she's definitely not lacey". But that was clearly incorrect.

Something about Angry Birds? Myeah, thought so too, but now it's probably nothing, now that Eloh flipped and MM goofed.

And this the end of me posting like that.

Llama 2 wrote: For the record, I'm liking these picture posts, Golden. Will you continue with them after the curse is lifted?

Llama 2 wrote:sig is on my radar because he is probably bad. That's why I voted him.

Metalmarsh 2 wrote:

Golden 2 wrote:

Metalmarsh 2 wrote:why are people being rude

i have, in the past, discussed these things. i have asked questions. i have participated. people have been really rude to me and i'm just not really willing to bend to your will.

in fact, i asked why people find long con suspicious because i am confused abotu that and no one, i think, answered me.

Bass 2 wrote:Something humorous to note: Two or three people have been accused of hiding behind their sock but none of them have been Synonym 2

Black Rock 2 wrote:

Llama 2 wrote:Do I still have time to vote Gamer Guy?

I can't tell whether your tone is in jest or serious. If serious, what would be the reason(s) you would vote for Gamer Guy?

Metalmarsh 2 wrote:why are people being rude

Llama 2 wrote:Do I still have time to vote Gamer Guy?

Metalmarsh 2 wrote:

Llama 2 wrote:

Metalmarsh 2 wrote:why do people suspect long con

why don't people suspect you?

because there is virtually no reaosn to suspect me

the suspicion against me has not been substantiated whatsoever just kind of brough up again and again