The Syndicate

Elohcin 2 wrote:I don't understand why my previous vote would worry you - it makes perfect sense to me why I would not vote for someone because I thought the case on them was bad. And if I recall correctly, when I voted, it was not a tie, but I'll give you that is was certainly close. It doesn't show non-commitment: it shows that I don't vote for who I think is civilian, and that I don't vote for people simply because they have a large number of votes. That's called bandwagoning, and that's not good civ behavior in my book.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but you are not recalling correctly. Long Con was ahead of votes by one, but he had specifically stated previous that his own vote would be to save himself, making it a tie. You are more focused on civ behavior than what a civ should do. In a situation as this, a civ should most definitely try to lunch the player that has even a slightly higher percent chance to be a baddie.

Had you actually been paying attention to players outside of your own circle you should've known that it was a tie. It feels as if you are playing "like" you are paying attention, while not willing to step outside a comfort zone. What member of the mafia would feel good about being the tie breaker? From what I've noticed, mafia avoid that due to placing them in the hot seat.

Elohcin 2 wrote:Caught up and popping in! Interesting turn of events with the no-lynch, and some hostility, I see. I have to go work out and eat, but I do plan to be back later to discuss what's happened in more detail and respond to some things.

Only afew hours until I vote for Elohcin. I recommend those who don't want to vote for Syn or LC vote for Elohcin as well. We have a player here that will read enough and quote someone so that they look as if they are playing but busy, who also is not opinionated enough to break a tie. It's a case of "civs needing to call out BS".

What does everyone think about Elohcin's vote yesterday?

If Elohcin does not respond soon, I may lock on her. I do still think Sig is bad, but I will reserve my vote on Sig until more information is gained. I can't see Sig and Long Con on the same team, so my suspicions will be resolved when LC flips. If I have to vote Sig to save both LC and Syn, I will though.

Baddie priority: Elohcin = Sig > Synonym > Long Con

boo 2 wrote:

Gamer Guy 2 wrote:
I have a question for everyone, what roles do we think are in this game? I'll start.
Vote Manipulator - Possibly a mayor like role, something that makes your vote worth +1 or +2
Medic - LOL @ no NK last night ...Or maybe they forgot to submit a kill?
UC - I can't imagine there not being one in this game
Pardoner - Based off of Synonym (I wonder if it is actually one time use)
Blocker - Role blocks are a basic Mafia necessity, and this was one of the survey roles
Curser - Based on the hosts survey
Seemer - Based on hosts survey
Jester or Fool - Based on Llama's play

I would like to state that I find this post to be very un-civilian. From my past experience playing these games, the only people that should be concerned with what roles are in the game, are the mafia team because they need to know what they are fighting against. This could also be seen as a baiting tactic. In the event that somebody proposes a certain role in addition to this list, that mafia may be able to role hunt them for it, essentially killing roles they did not predict existed.

While it can be true that knowing what mafia roles are in the game can be beneficial to a civilian, it is not required. As long as civs hit mafia when the lynch comes around, everything will eventually fall into place regardless of what mafia roles there are. Civs dont need to know the other civ roles in order to win. It is nothing more than a pleasantry.

I understand the concern, but here is my stance. I don't even know how many friendly players I have. The amount of information that I do have is that there are 27 players, and that we've already seen at least 2 role powers. Info dumping is against the rules, so I was not looking to obtain information about anyone, rather I would like to see what everyone's mindset is. How chaotic do we actually think this game is?

Elohcin 2 wrote:Sorry guys, busy with lots of things and popping in while I can! I don't want to vote for Synonym 2 or LC 2, so I won't. I think Synonym was being satirical and his frustration with people taking it too seriously seems genuine. I think LC's suspicion is wrong, but genuine. And this:

Cookie 2 wrote:
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.

The only thing is, I don't agree with voting sig either. I think he's made good points about civs needing to call out BS, and about looking at people jumping on Synonym's case. I don't really want to vote for anyone who's received votes so far either. I think I'll vote MM 2 today - it seems he's playing the MM meta, but his reason for voting Synonym is nonexistent when the "case" itself already looks bad enough to me. Now if you'll excuse me, I have hungry mouths to feed

Elohcin, I would like to hear more from you. How do you feel about Dom, Scotty and Turnip Head? Did either the Long Con argument or the Synonym argument have more sway in your head? What made Synonym's case bad? was Long Con's also bad?

It worries me that Elohcin left the vote a tie based on Synonym's case being bad. It shows non-commitment and a willingness to allow either player to die, even though previously stating "civs needing to call out BS". A win-win situation on the chance that they are both civilian.

Hosts would a lynch pardoned player receive notification of their pardoning? Also can actions be submitted as conditions? I think we should debunk any ruling speculations.

I like these night results.

Llama 2 wrote:

Golden 2 wrote:

Lipsticklacey 2 wrote:You do all know that Gamer Guy 2 is listed alphabetically, when you take into account that the 'the' in his name was simply dropped, right?

This seems like a weird sticking-point. It was someone playing as llama trying to be llama-y, and whether or not they succeeded being open to interpretation.

Llama is thellama73, yet "Llama" has been placed alphabetically under L.

I guess "Llama" should now vote himself.

Your logic is slightly faulty my good sir. Because even so, my name was still in correct order on the poll. But good try!

Also, voting Gamer Guy again. I just want to point out that lipsticklacey came right out after the failed lynch to put attention back on me.

I think gamer guy and Lacey are baddie mcbaddersons.

I'm at the point were I think we should just ignore Llama. I wasn't going to respond to this nonsense, but we are at the point where some are considering wasting a lynch on him.

I have a question for everyone, what roles do we think are in this game? I'll start.
Vote Manipulator - Possibly a mayor like role, something that makes your vote worth +1 or +2
Medic - LOL @ no NK last night ...Or maybe they forgot to submit a kill?
UC - I can't imagine there not being one in this game
Pardoner - Based off of Synonym (I wonder if it is actually one time use)
Blocker - Role blocks are a basic Mafia necessity, and this was one of the survey roles
Curser - Based on the hosts survey
Seemer - Based on hosts survey
Jester or Fool - Based on Llama's play

Can we please lynch Sig tomorrow? Synonym, will you help me?

Mom, Dad, please stop fighting...

Roxy wrote:

Gamer Guy 2 wrote:Synonym, you are acting like a wounded animal in a corner. I think it's only fair to give you another chance. When Sig posts a word for word version of his win condition, I want you to either vote for him or declare that you won't. Other players shouldn't respond until after this has happened.

This better not happen. No more pushing to out win con's. They are secret for a reason.

Nothing word for word should ever be put into the thread it is like asking them to copy/paste a host PM and could result in a heinous Mod Kill.

It is also a site rule.

Sorry, I will refrain from doing this again.

Synonym, you are acting like a wounded animal in a corner. I think it's only fair to give you another chance. When Sig posts a word for word version of his win condition, I want you to either vote for him or declare that you won't. Other players shouldn't respond until after this has happened.

Current baddie list:
Sig, Synonym, Elohcin

I could care less about everyone else.

Lipsticklacey 2 wrote:I don't agree. By asking the question, getting a poor response, and basing a vote on it, I think the leak has already occurred. But yes; it is worth a shot, even if I don't think the answer will be particularly valuable at this point.

I didn't want to ask the question, but it was just so present and clear, and no one else seemed interested in using what was essentially a freebie, since, A) either two civilians get confirmed; the asker and the responder, or B) the responder fails to deliver and in so doing essentially makes it clear they are not a civilian.

If Synonym 2 is a civilian, and gave a generic answer to avoid the leak, then that was a massive blunder.

Let's just have Sig say it word for word then.

Lipsticklacey 2 wrote:

Gamer Guy 2 wrote:

Lacey wrote:I still don't think this is a very good reason; and it's not why I voted for Synonym. I am curious if you have any thoughts about my reason for voting him.

I'm not sure if you are right in your judgement there Lacey. Did Syn not give you enough?

If this is the kind of game we are going to play, I'd like to know how Sig feels about his win condition.

Nope.

It was a pointed question, and it received a generic response that suggests Synonym did not understand why I was asking. Anyone who has a civilian role should know what answer I was looking for; or at least some form of it. If they do not, they could fix that by reading the role message again.

As a result, it is my view that Synonym is either mafia or one of those not a civilian roles that (I think?) change on a game-to-game basis.

If this is the case that you believe in, I suppose we can use this at least one more time. I think there's a chance Synonym only gave a generic answer to avoid info leak. This will lose relevance as soon as someone publicly gives a clear cut answer. We should have Sig answer this question as well. No one other than Sig should answer this question.

Lacey wrote:I still don't think this is a very good reason; and it's not why I voted for Synonym. I am curious if you have any thoughts about my reason for voting him.

I'm not sure if you are right in your judgement there Lacey. Did Syn not give you enough?

If this is the kind of game we are going to play, I'd like to know how Sig feels about his win condition.

Thanks Sig. I feel most comfortable lynching you.

Sig 2 wrote:

Gamer Guy 2 wrote:

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.

Why, because listing 5 while saying "Mafia is" is not the same? Sig, are you trying to scare people into not looking into something that may end up as revealing?

No civ should have any reason to defend Syn for saying something like that.

I completely disagree! If a case smells like bullshit, it's a player's job to call it out as such, because often, the bullshit cases come from the mafia. This is what civs do. Ignoring the shiftiness of a case because it doesn't involve you is what an indie or a baddie does.

Vote me

if you need to, but I stand by what I said. And I'm unable to post much right now due to work hours, it's unavoidable.

You didn't answer my question reffering to scaring the other players, or at least generating some form of threat. What Synonym posted was bound to draw the eye of some, and you passivly defended him. Was this so that you can claim the credit of not lynching a civ without committing very much? Or was it to help a teammate without throwing your neck out? Regardless, if you were trying to prevent a civ lynch, as a civ, I am pretty sure a non-passive non-threatening type of defence would have been used.

Sig, make a comment about what I said.

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.

Why, because listing 5 while saying "Mafia is" is not the same? Sig, are you trying to scare people into not looking into something that may end up as revealing?

No civ should have any reason to defend Syn for saying something like that.

Synonym 2 wrote:

Synonym 2 wrote:[insert game solving supertown post here]

Mafia is Golden, Long Con, Metalmarsh, Cobalt, and Rico.

Gg everyone.

Satire.

My eyes are rolling so hard right now.

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.

Also, what does the skin of my sock account have to do with anything? I asked a question because the forum looked drastically different and much more boring when I originally logged into this account. You say it doesn't bother you "as much" as me listing five names, but why does that even bother you at all?

I am starting to think that it is possible that you are using your satire specifically so that you don't need to play as civ Synonym, because of how strong Synonym's civ game is. Synonym does a good job of hunting baddies, setting up your character as a satire of Synonym so that you don't need to baddie hunt, would really serve a baddie well. On the chance that you are trying to play as mafia Synonym, you would need to care a lot less, and act apathetic.

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.

Jagged Jimmy Jay 2 wrote:Hey Syndicate, sorry I hadn't checked in yet, I was doing some sort of JTM stuff. Big stuff! I'll catch up in a sec. I love rainbow lists!

Considering JTM has been dead for the past week, I highly doubt this.

Scotty 2 wrote:Sorry I have been busy lately.

I hope to look into the poll more closely later tonight.

Scotty posted way too early in the evening to not be planning something.

I got my eyes on you.

in