The Syndicate

What? I was talking about the part in the post where it said "Wligy was ??? your ???"

I think that since Wilgy 2's role was unrevealed, he was modkilled. The rules say modkills won't be revealed.

Went with American Gods, it was a good book.

Yay! Good job LC voters

And Sig, since a big part of my suspicion of you was based on LC being set up since he really did not seem that nefarious (and being Eloh explains that), I will have to reevaluate that.

I am voting for Sig, as I expected I would do. Nothing I read today was very compelling either way on LC vs. Syn. Just like something other than a lynch save on Day One could have saved Syn, I have seen civ lynch switches, but admittedly far fewer civ than bad. The lynch switch is what has made me really wonder about LC, since I felt he was pushed ino a corner to defend a weak day one ping.

And I felt sig was the first to make a substantial push that way with his third post of the game, which was pretty hyperbole-esque imo. So still sticking with Sig.

I had that problem several days ago, but not since.

I am inclined to keep my vote for sig as I still feel he is bad, but I should be home before the poll ends and I have nowhere else to be tonight, so I will wait until I get home.

This thread reminds me of my parents after they'd been hitting the bourbon just a tad too hard. Hostile, bitter & full of regrets, yet somehow ironically detached.

Good Show.

Black Rock 2 wrote:

Synonym 2 wrote:

Black Rock 2 wrote:Welcome back and congrats on your rezz Golden 2, assuming of course that you are good. I'll be gone to see about the horses part of the day tomorrow but will be back in plenty of time for discussion.

What do you mean "assuming of course that you are good" he is writeup mod-confirmed as town are you serious

BR2 slipping into my scum reads.

What do you mean he is write-up mod-confirmed as town? You mean because his role was revealed as town? Wasn't there conversation earlier in the game about there being a possible seemer in this game because it was in the host survey? Personally, I will have some doubt about any death that is a civ death because of that risk. Something I learned from past mafia playing.

Personally, I agree that nothing is confirmed; I plan to take it on a case by case basis. I think it is rather unlikely, though possible. He seemed pretty civ to me.If we knew how many Mafias there were, we could get a better feel for this. If only one, it is especially unlikely that he is bad. It could be a crazy power ploy to gain a role civ cred, especially if the rezzer was on their team, but it would be a big risk to use up powers that way this early. Plus MOST of the time, the rezzer is a civ power. Someone had said earlier that they usually use the Seemer to throw doubt into a lynch, and I agree, but if a Seemer is NKed, they still use it.

But yeah, unknown roles, anything is possible, so even with Host posts, no one or nothing is confirmed for realz.

I am, as usual,planning to vote for Sig unless Syn melts down & calls me stupid again. I liked that so much!

Yay Golden Welcome Back

And Llama, I hought it was common knowledge that Cookie hated being bad; Epignosis went after her hard in a game specifically for that reason, and I played that game. As I said, I have been watching my alter ego, and have not been alarmed so far. So I think it is a coincidence that I am the affiliation Cookie would have preferred since balance is more than a question of peoples role preferences in a questionnaire, and our hostesses are very experienced.

I do wonder about third party roles, though.

I doubt that the hosts would have the perfect ratio for balance if they made us our socks preference (which is what I think is being implied). Like I know that I am the affiliation that my socks REAL person would like. That led me to keep an eye on my alter ego, but so far so good. I think it would be obvious, and not all that fair.

Wow that's weak. Bye Golden 2

Synonym 2 wrote:

Cookie 2 wrote:I know I have been flogging the "civ/civ" horse pretty hard, but even i am having a hard time thinking either of you are civ at this point, LC & Syn. Especially you, Syn, since you & Sig both seem to know something about the Day One lynch that the rest of us don't.

OMG???? YOU MEAN I KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT THE DAY ONE LYNCH????????? LIKE SOMETHING THAT I DID TO IT??????? LIKE USING MY ABILITY TO PARDON MYSELF IN CASE I GOT LYNCHED?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

UR RIGHT THE REST OF YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT BECAUSE I TOTALLY DIDN'T TELL THE TRUTH ALREADY

Holy fucking shit, just lynch me already. I cannot bear this stupidity. Get me out of this game.

Wow. What I was talking about was how the you & Sig both seemed to think LC was also lynched Day One; you both said "again", even though you yourself said that YOU were lynched Day One. Something does not add up. That "oh it was another game" sounds weak to me. Sorry if this gets me another tirade, but so be it.

I know I have been flogging the "civ/civ" horse pretty hard, but even i am having a hard time thinking either of you are civ at this point, LC & Syn. Especially you, Syn, since you & Sig both seem to know something about the Day One lynch that the rest of us don't.

X Men, I hear tell it was a sock game too.

Also that was *Actual Real* Long Con that survived in that other game, right? Not this sock Long Con? So not even really the same person?

Do you think that is what Sig was also referencing when he said LC survived "again" as well?

What do you mean, "survived again"? Synonym said he lynch pardoned himself, not Long Con, on Day One. Unless you are saying you don't believe him?

OMG, that so sucks

RIP Gamer Guy.

Just an fyi, my Uncle just got a very bad diagnosis and is going into hospice this week. Until the hospice placement is set, my family will be tag teaming the hospital to sit with him as musch as possible since the hospital upsets him. So I will be kinda scarce. i will be around, but some of the time I would have spent here will instead be spent with my Uncle. Like today was, for instance. Thanks for understanding.

And is Metalmarsh actially cursed? I thought he was chanelling a curse he had in a different game, the Timmer curse.

Long Con 2 wrote:You are correct, cookie. I was trying to begin discussion, not stifle it. The act that Synonym talked about the skin of his sock account doesn't bother me as much as him saying that there are five baddies among us. How would he know that unless he was one of them.

And for reference,this is the post that has me feeling most town about Long Con. Had it been me in this position, as a Mafia, at this point I would have agreed with Cookie (me) and latched onto her reasons for thinking Syn might be bad, and make my own secondary, thus being able to blame her for the eventual lynch of Synonym. Instead he blew off my thoughts, and reiterated his own. I don't see a baddie doing that, at least not an experienced one, and from his posts I think LC has been around the Mafia block.

I recall feeling this way very clearly since this was right after LC had asked me if *I* had any suspicions, which kind of freaked me out a bit. Why was he singling me out? But this reply made me feel all kinds of better.

For Syn, it is more of an over all tone. He sounds sincere about kidding around, and sincerely pissed, not faux baddie pissed. This post went far for me towards feeling that way:

Synonym 2 wrote:

Gamer Guy 2 wrote:Can we please lynch Sig tomorrow? Synonym, will you help me?

Why?

iirc he was one of the earliest to call Scum Con on his bullshit.

While I disagree with his conclusion (for me, anyone coming out and saying "I will vote/suspect anyone who votes/suspects *X* because of the stoopid ideas of *Y*", as sig did, ESPECIALLY on Day One when we ALL have stoopid ideas to be almost ALWAYS have been said by a Mafia) I can't imagine an actual Mafia Syn saying this about LC. He is coming out and saying that, in his opinion, LCs ideas are actually bullshit, not true. If he knew that Long Con was actually right, and Syn was bad, I don't know that he would have said this so baldly. Like i said, tone. But it reads sincere to me, even If I disagree with him here.

Personally I think we should all vote for Sig. Because now that I am thinking about it, I don't think I have EVER heard a town aligned player say something like: "I will vote/suspect anyone who votes/suspects *X* because of the stoopid ideas of *Y*". Have ANY of you ever said something like this when you are town? On Day One?

In any case, back later.

Sorry I was afk yesterday, it was a beautiful day and I had no other plans... so I spent most or it outside. It is supposed to rain today, but I should be around more, even if by phone.

I am seeing more of a civ/civ thing going on here than anything. Like I said, I suspect the people trying to blame LC for a weak day one ping on Synonym, who has sounded more genuine than not, (even if BOTH of them have said things I find questionable) as a way to set up a bang,bang way of lynching two townies in a row.

So once again, VOTING FOR SIG

Wow, what a silly pointless curse.

I am sure we have all of those and more. We have those in every game, I am thinking there will be some really innovative roles in this game.

Also, we tend to have civ blockers as well as bad blockers. Possibly power redirectors/switchers. Probably a civ rezzer. Or maybe a civ rezzer and a baddie recruiter.

I think alot depends on whether they have one big mafia, or two small ones. A case could be made for either. I also think there might be at least 2 or 3 third party roles. I skimmed some games Roxy hosted, and I think if you can dream it she might have it.

Yay for no death

Sine I missed the turtle pics, I will post one now anyhow. Since no turtle can compare with the one the hostess posted, I will post a faux turtle.

Cobalt 2 wrote:Cookie is a Scum Con teammate. She keeps going on about the possibility that Synonym is scum that can't be lynched. How would civilians win if scum can't be lynched? There are no role powers listed here. So how does Cookie suppose that? Is there a townie killer to take out the person who can't be lynched?

Cookie and Long Con are scum.

Wow it's pretty neat that several of you are all calling Long Con "Scum Con". So clever, I see what you did there

And um, no, sorry. Wherever it is that you play musy have a very limited repertoire of roles. I have played LOTS of games where one of the baddie teams had a member, generally the Don, who could not be lynched until all other members of the team were dead. And I am not pushing it; I am presenting it as one possible alternative to Syns "Hey, I stopped the lynch on myself! Am I civ or what, because the only possible possibility for me surviving a lynch is a civ possibility. And you must be bad if you don't believe me" schtick.

He could be right; I was by no means convinced he was bad. But I really hate the way he is throwing it down as proof in game with no known roles which means it is no such thing.

And I am by no means convinced that Long Con is bad either. Remember this post, which I don't recall you or Syn or sig commenting on?

Cookie 2 wrote:

Dom 2 wrote:

Long Con 2 wrote:When I read Synonym's post in which he listed the five names, my thoughts were "five mafia? Did I miss something?" I then looked on page 1 where Roxy said the roles would be listed eventually and still saw no such roles. I thought, "how did he come up with this number of five? Maybe he knows there are five and so he listed five people subconsciously." I then put my theory out there for discussion. I believe it is a common mafia strategy to call out names in the beginning of the game to gauge reactions. These two things put together cause me pause. Also, please note that Synonym has yet to give reason for calling out the five players that he did even though I have asked him to explain why he thought those five players specifically were mafia.

Linki: Welcome Dr Wilgy. Good to have you Sir.

I don't believe it is a common strategy at all.

Well, maybe he's just doing a poor job of "being" Long Con, and that is how they do things is nis neck of the woods

I cannot count all the games I have played where people vote for really weak, dumb reasons on day one. And one thing I HAVE seen as a common baddie tactic is to make someone have to overdefend their weak day one suspicion, and soon no one is talking about anything else, so the ping gets lynched. And when that weak day one ping flips civ, they turn on the person whom they forced to defend his weak day one suspicion and attack then THEM for their "better than random" day one ping. It's a pretty good day one strategy for a Mafia.

So, to parapharase Metalmarsh, I am not going to vote for Long Con OR Synonym. Since I have to go to work now, and may or may not be back before the poll ends, I AM going to vote for Sig. His post, the only on topic one I believe him to have made so far, felt EXACTLY like that kind of thing to me. Self righteous indignation over a day one ping seems a bit overdone, no?

VOTES FOR SIG

Linki w/TGG, this is the last thing he said, the post I am voting him for:

Sig 2 wrote:I looked back, and Syn 2 listed five names, he never said "are the five baddies" or anything that would be a true ping. I will be eyeing people who push that as a slip.

I hope he answers you, too.

That is what yesterday looked like to me, the bold italicized part. You have never seen that before? I will vote for Sig tomorrow, too, and will probably keep doing so until he or I are dead. Or maybe for you. To be honest, I am not 100% sure you are not buddying up to Syn, strong possibility.

Synonym 2 wrote:

Gamer Guy 2 wrote:Can we please lynch Sig tomorrow? Synonym, will you help me?

Why?

iirc he was one of the earliest to call Scum Con on his bullshit.

Scum Con again. Can you & Fauxbalt not resort to name calling? Thanks

And isn't proclaiming that Long Con is pretty much a proven baddie (which is what you are trying to do, right?) putting the cart before the horse? Let's find out if he is before we start making value judgments based on proximity to him, eh? Just like I am not damning YOU for sigs fairly bad looking (in my opinion) Day One posts, even though he was defending YOU.

While I DO believe sig is bad, and probably Fauxbalt with him, I am not as sure about you. A lot of Day One felt civ/civ to me, like what I outlined up there. Certainly Long Con felt backed into a corner forced to defend a dopey day one ping. Like 99.5% of day one pings are. I have the stats to prove that...somewhere In any case, if you are civ, you should be careful about the company you keep. First you're hanging with people who think calling people names is an awesome way to make them look bad, then next thing you know, you're hanging on a street corner shooting up.

True story, it happens all the time.

I think this is a good question.

Synonym 2 wrote:

Dom 2 wrote:

Synonym 2 wrote:SEE? GM SAYS TIES ARE RANDOMIZED.

fucking THANK YOU.

The hosts also said that the lynch was not a tie.

Oh. Were the votes equal? Do we have a record of that? Cuz if so someone's got a double whammy power on my train.

I'll post @ Cookie when I get home.

I look forward to it, even though I will be afk shortly. This is because i really did not think that anything Lacey said or did was all that provacative or really all that aggressive, and you got pretty severely in her face. Like in an intimidating way. It felt very much like seeing a hidden monster with their claws out. I came into the night thinking it could be a Mafia play on both you and LC, but your reaction to lacey ...

I did not think she said anything that unreasonable. Then saying things like, "I will only explain this once", doesn't help.

Syn, there could be vote manips, there could be all sorts of things. The blanket insistence you have on laying one scenario on the table and getting pissed that others don't buy it wholesale bothers me. It is true that your outrage seems real, but Mafia can get just as outraged at suspicion as town.

And don't be calling me a dick or whatever for saying it

@Syn, we call each other liars. That is a major feature of Mafia. You don't strike me a a nub (thanks for ignoring my prior post on this point) so you would not have made it far in mafia getting this offended at being accused of lying. Initially i felt that you vs. LC was civ civ, but your fairly hostile reaction here has gotten a raised brow from me.

Linki, but we have to trust you to take your word for it. Obviously that is lacking since you were tied for most votes. There sould be an unlynchable baddie role. that is just as common as a civ with a lynch stop.

I kind of feel the hostility is one sided, and not really personal.

Are you a new player? This is Mafia, we call each other liar all the time. That's sort of the point.

Why? Do you expect us to believe you at face value? Perhaps you are an unlynchable baddie. Perhaps you are a baddie with a lynch save. We don't know the roles; there are a lot of "perhaps".

What happens if Long Con comes in here and say the same thing you said?

And I don't think she is tunneling. She does not seem horrible.

I keep looking at the poll, and seeing what "Real Me 2" voted for and keep thinking, "Wait just a minute there Babalouie, that's not who I voted for", and then I remember.

lulz

I voted for fight club.

That was an unexpected result. Since the hostesses were not saying what led to a "no Lynch" the fact that Syn volunteered that bit about the switch is intriguing. My initial response was, "Well, that seems a pretty civ move". My second response was, "Which is exactly why I would do it myself if I were bad" so . He could be telling the truth; lynch pardon is a very typical civ power. He could also be a non lynchable baddie for all we know BUT that is somewhat risky as Roxy said the roles would be revealed "eventually".

The votes that most got my attention were Elohcin voting for Metalmarsh as voter 23, and reywaS voting for Epig as voter 25. the 24th voter tied the lynch, so either 23 or 25 could have broken the tie, since Long Con, voter 24, was a self preservation voter. Both safe votes, although I cannot criticize as I am not sure I would have voted for either of them myself. So I want to check if either of them had any opinion before they voted.

I want to reread sigs posts from today after I voted.

Dom 2 wrote:

Long Con 2 wrote:When I read Synonym's post in which he listed the five names, my thoughts were "five mafia? Did I miss something?" I then looked on page 1 where Roxy said the roles would be listed eventually and still saw no such roles. I thought, "how did he come up with this number of five? Maybe he knows there are five and so he listed five people subconsciously." I then put my theory out there for discussion. I believe it is a common mafia strategy to call out names in the beginning of the game to gauge reactions. These two things put together cause me pause. Also, please note that Synonym has yet to give reason for calling out the five players that he did even though I have asked him to explain why he thought those five players specifically were mafia.

Linki: Welcome Dr Wilgy. Good to have you Sir.

I don't believe it is a common strategy at all.

Well, maybe he's just doing a poor job of "being" Long Con, and that is how they do things is nis neck of the woods

I cannot count all the games I have played where people vote for really weak, dumb reasons on day one. And one thing I HAVE seen as a common baddie tactic is to make someone have to overdefend their weak day one suspicion, and soon no one is talking about anything else, so the ping gets lynched. And when that weak day one ping flips civ, they turn on the person whom they forced to defend his weak day one suspicion and attack then THEM for their "better than random" day one ping. It's a pretty good day one strategy for a Mafia.

So, to parapharase Metalmarsh, I am not going to vote for Long Con OR Synonym. Since I have to go to work now, and may or may not be back before the poll ends, I AM going to vote for Sig. His post, the only on topic one I believe him to have made so far, felt EXACTLY like that kind of thing to me. Self righteous indignation over a day one ping seems a bit overdone, no?

VOTES FOR SIG

Linki w/TGG, this is the last thing he said, the post I am voting him for:

Sig 2 wrote:I looked back, and Syn 2 listed five names, he never said "are the five baddies" or anything that would be a true ping. I will be eyeing people who push that as a slip.

I hope he answers you, too.

Sig 2 wrote:I looked back, and Syn 2 listed five names, he never said "are the five baddies" or anything that would be a true ping. I will be eyeing people who push that as a slip.

Also, isn't a "ping" an individual thing? What pings one person might not ping another? Who is to say what a "true" ping is? You?

Maybe I am just reacting to your tone. I hope to hear more from you, other than this you have not really said much.

As I have been reading back, I found myself agreeing with Timmer much of the time, until I got to this:

Timmer 2 wrote:

Llama 2 wrote:

Timmer 2 wrote:I'll be voting for someone who is trying to tell me I can't talk about what I want to talk about.

You should talk about Gamer Guy and why he is a member of the mafia.

Yeah, that's a good point.

Why is it a good point? Llama made a post pointing a finger at someone for no reason, and you think he made a good point? Did you forget the sarcastic color coding?

It made me recall that something else he said caught my eye:

Timmer 2 wrote:

Long Con 2 wrote:

SVS 2 wrote:If it's all truly randomized then I don't see why someone couldn't be their own sock. I don't know if there's any way of knowing though or of gaining anything from wondering about it.

I must have missed the part where Roxy and/or Fingersplints said that the roles were randomized. But I agree, it's not worth worrying about right now. We need to use our time wisely. Cookie, do you have any suspicions yet?

Trying to stifle discussion?

While I did not agree that Long Con appeared to be trying to stifle, this post did remind me that he DID seem to solicit my opinion specifically for no real reason. Like maybe if I brought up a name and he ran with it, and a townie got lynched, it would somehow be my fault.

Syn, I was the one who brought up the forum skin thing. It seemed an odd thing to say. You didn't say "my" socks skin, you said "the forums sock skins" like you knew more than one was the light colour. It really was weird, but I may never have brought it up had I not been directly asked. Which kind of freaked me out a bit.

The point of all this? I agree with Timmer except when I don't. And Long Con has given me the heebie jeebies more than Syn, actually. But still not sure where I plan to vote. Also I agree with Syn that I think TGG sounds pretty civ so far, but I have just skimmed. I need to read again in more depth.

The other thing that got me was Sig saying he would look at anyonje who looked at Syn for what he considered to be a dumb reason. Wat? That was a very gauntlet-y post to make. While it could be genuine town outrage, it could also be a Mafia tactic. I have seen Mafia openly defending someone who turned up town for the cred. That is hard to say though since we don't know if we have one Mafia or two.

The site was broken this morning, so I have not read anything since last night. I need to read and catch up.

Timmer 2 wrote:

Long Con 2 wrote:

SVS 2 wrote:If it's all truly randomized then I don't see why someone couldn't be their own sock. I don't know if there's any way of knowing though or of gaining anything from wondering about it.

I must have missed the part where Roxy and/or Fingersplints said that the roles were randomized. But I agree, it's not worth worrying about right now. We need to use our time wisely. Cookie, do you have any suspicions yet?

Trying to stifle discussion?

Well, perhaps I am mistaken, but I thought he was trying to start discussion. But what do I know?

And one thing did catch my eye, but it is a little thing, and I don't want to molehill<mountain. I did think it odd that Synonym said this:

Synonym 2 wrote:Why is the forum on boring skin in the sock accounts?

Like he knew what was happening in more than one sock account. But he could be assuming the socks are just set up this way if he never played with socks here before. As i said, it's a minor thing, just something I noticed. It has mostly been joking posts, so it is easy to read into minor things, I think. I am not sure I would have even mentioned it, but Long Con specifically asked me.

Why DID you specifically ask me, Long Con?

Lipsticklacey 2 wrote:

Gamer Guy 2 wrote:So, Wilgy and Epi still haven't checked in. If they don't show up soon, I'd be willing to vote for one of them.

Timmer 2 wrote:This is all very entertaining.

I wonder if anyone is actually the player they're pretending to be. That would be a supabluff.

I'm pretty sure that would negate the purlose of this game.

Why? Wouldn't their teammates tell them to come and play if they were bad, making it more likely they aren't? That's what people were saying usually happens in Angry Birds.

I think the negate thing referred more to someone being their own sock; that really would defeat the purpose of the game.

This is how I feel as well regarding no shows; since the host is going to modkill anyhow, i would rather give them a chance to show up. Although I guess whether the baddie BTS is sock only BTS or not matters. Like if the baddies can't tell each other who they really are, or if the host does not tell them, if they do not log into their socks, they may not know they are being pushed to post by baddie teammates..

So if something actually suspicious comes up, I would prefer to vote for that. But I would vote for a no show before random, I guess.

boo 2 wrote:On that note, I would like to call attention to the fact that Black Rock, Wilgy, and Epignosis have yet to check in at all.

But we appear to have plenty of time still. So I will entertain myself while I wait for those 3 to appear

Black Rock did make one post, but I don't think she voted. And Wilgy 2 & Epig 2 seem to be missing the point of role playing. Both of those people have pretty distinctive styles. They are socks that could be a lot of fun.

Question for Roxy & Fingersplints: How long will you wait for Epig & Wilgy?

We did. The Hostess says the Day Zero poll has a point, and that a few people had info, so i think we are playing already. Paying attention to who voted what, and whatnot.

Roxy wrote:

If you have never played a game of ours then know to choose your poll choice wisely!
At least two people have info on the poll.

We just don't know whether they are good or bad, so not really sure how knowing that people have info makes much of a difference.

Synonym 2 wrote:Why is the forum on boring skin in the sock accounts?

Yesterday, I almost posted as my non-sock account. I changed my sock skin to the blue one on purpose to remind me that I am in a different account. If that makes sense? Maybe other people did that too in the past?

Who has not checked in yet?

I haven't played any of those games. I do think, though, that the one which would appeal to me the most would be Grimms Fairy Tales.

I will be spending the rest of the day baking cookies for my coworkers. I will be back after dinner.

Go Town!!!