The Syndicate

MovingPictures07 wrote: What's the deal with people saying Russ seems civvie? I haven't seen anything telling of his alignment. Though I did really enjoy his GIANT posts.

Nev: You said something about Russ. Care to elaborate, if you can? I was intrigued by that; I've read through all of this quickly so I didn't pick up on any role hints or anything like that (not that I likely would have even if I had actually read every post at my normal pace).

People asked about the Bullz case... It wasn't even so much a case as my gut reaction and that he bandwagoned gleam on Day 1 and that it read to me as the most opportunistic of the bunch. I read it as insincere. That's about it. However, in reading through quickly I noticed this:

Bullzeye wrote:
There are still 5 people left to vote, so I am note sure how its going to go. I agree with what you're saying. Lizzy isnt coming across as bad the more she posts based on her other game. Snow is sounding more and more sincere in his defenses. I don't love SVS's case on Nev either though. However, she trusts her intuition on this one quite a bit, so I might be willing to give it a go, since i have a complete lack of intuition amd instead try to at least find some bit of logic.

I hadn't noticed the Nev case but SVS is one of the people I tend to trust the most when I think she's a civvie so I'll take a look at that and see how I feel.

How the heck did anyone, let alone a player as astute as Bullz, miss the Nev case? SVS and I bantered about it and everything. Really weird.[/quote]

The comment about Russ was because he consistently voted for giant land, and then talked like a giant she he got there.
I know you gave a different reason for voting giant Russ, but none of us are giving our real reasons here.
It's not a neon "I'm a baddie" sign, but it does concern me.

I have been having the same gut reaction to bullz, but I seem to always think he's bad,
And I've been ignoring it. I am wondering how anyone could have totally missed the "case" on me too though.
Maybe he just meant that he didn't see any substantial case, and assumed there was more he hasn't noticed?
No, bullz, the case is just that flimsy.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Need to catch up on this, sorry, I haven't read anything since my last post. Hopefully will be able to later tonight, but it might have to wait until tomorrow.

MP, please don't vote for both gleam AND snowy, or neither of them gets the grand prize (we think)

birdwithteeth11 wrote:I'm starting to wish I had picked either Snowy or Gleam. Because at this rate, neither of them is going to get coins... :/

Yeah, I wish I'd noticed that too. But I didn't even read the whole thing >.<

SOMEBODY: VOTE FOR SNOWY OR GLEAM BUT NOT BOTH.

Oh wow. Just noticed how the votes were laid out.
Russ had me convinced he was someone particular based on his votes and behavior, but that looks pretty unlikely now.

I kind of think that was intentional on his part, and I'm leaning toward voting for him tomorrow because of it.

And if you vote for yourself, you’re greedy and so you lose four coins instead. Have fun!”

Huh, should have read that more carefully. Oh well :-\

Mongoose wrote:I voted for our 2 dead civs (Gleam & Snowy) and then two players I am pretty sure are civ (Llama and Russti).

I'm voting for gleam and snow also (obviously), and then for Russ because I agree with that assessment.
I don't have that read on llama, so I'm going to fourth vote myself, because I'm confident that I'll need the coins soon.

I'm torn between Bullzeye, based on MP's comment here: http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 685#p27685
and SVS because her relentless pursuit of me (while totally in character) was followed by days of almost total silence (which as far as I can tell is not).

Neither of them can actually get lynched by my vote though, so I'm not going to bother trying to figure out which of them I suspect more.

Voted Lizzy.

There's no way to see through her game-playing to whether she's bad or not,
because she behaves this way regardless..
but I just don't feel a baddie vibe from Snow.

Mongoose wrote:Also, the Giant King has a base lynch vote of 4. If that person also bought a leaf...will dang.

This means that neither Snowy nor Lizzy might get lynched today.

To clarify, the leaf only increases their map vote, not their lynch vote.

Vompatti wrote:

Mongoose wrote:Hey Vompers -

Can you maybe give us a little detail on why you did vote for water today when so many of us civs didn't vote water?

I'm really not giving you a hard time, just curious.

Because I read in the role list that at least two(?) of the baddies will be casting four votes each in the water world, so it seems to me that if we go there later in the game when there are less players left they can easily control the lynch, but if we go there now they won't benefit from it that much.

I find your logic reasonable, and roughly agree with it.

I think that if Vomps were bad, he would have phrased that differently - "at least two of the baddies will be casting four votes" could have been better expressed as "at least two baddies could be casting four votes". That seems subtle enough to not be intentional, and I think he's most likely a civ.

I would rather you describe your logic when you make your votes though, sir - it might be useful to others if they agree.

Snow Dog wrote: So you think you know what's best for us all? I guess it doesn't matter. If you are the only water voter it makes no difference. But your determination to go against the grain rankles me. I find it irksome and bothersome. Irksome enough to vote for you again.

This read a bit forced to me, like he was looking for a reason to vote for Vomps.
But I can't figure what that reason would *be*, so it probably won't make me vote snow.
Unless someone can think of a good reason for baddies to want to vote for a specific player like that?

I went with pipe world, because it was always my favorite place, and because someone had already voted for it.
I think in general it is better for us to vote on one or two places instead of spreading them out,
because otherwise it becomes obvious to the baddies which player has which kingdom,
and they can gain a lot of efficiency by night-killing those players immediately when their kingdom is visited.

S~V~S wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote: I'm curious about other's opinions on it. Assuming I'm read that correctly, SVS thinks it is odd that, given Nev's logic, he did not vote for MP. But where did SVS make the logical jump from Nev to MP? I feel like I'm missing something here, so I wouldn't mind an explanation from someone else.

I also can understand why MP might be coming off as overly-defensive. I think it was odd that SVS refused to address any suspicions of other suspects that MP had brought up. But that also doesn't surprise me. SVS can be very focused and aggressive when she nails on a certain suspicion and decides to run with it. I think when you're a baddie in that situation (believe me, I've been there), it can be very frustrating and hard to get away from.

All that being said though, I'm still leaning toward both of them being civ. Thoughts?

Linki: Holy shit! Tons of linki!

Nevin said that he agreed with someones logic about baddies voting early. He said early voters were suspicious, so he was voting for Gleam as he was an early voter.

Gleam vote second, MP voted first. Why skip MP if a suspicion of early voters is your voting motivation?

This pinged me enough to vote for Nevin, as it seemed he was selectively applying his voting criteria, which would not be something I would expect a civvie to do. When asked to explain, he said, well, MP has a reason for voting, Gleam did not.

But that is not what he said when he voted for Gleam, he said early voters were suspicious. So why would having a reason make an early vote less suspicious? That does not make sense to me.

So i voting for him again, at the risk of being accused of tunnel vision again (and imo, tunnel vision does not really apply to suspecting the same person 2 days in a row, lol).

I really, really, really believe Nevin is bad based on his vote, and then on his reaction to me. I think he knew i was not Kate, I think someone told him about how I have been known to act.

*Voting Nevinera*

I said that MP had a reason to vote *early*, not a reason for his vote.
Mp posted that he was voting early and why, gleam just voted early.

My reaction to you is called being "irritated".
I am not bad, just pissed off.

S~V~S wrote:Nevin voted for Gleam for a not true reason, then changed his reasoning when confronted with it.

Nevin voted for gleam for an invented reason, and then pointed out that none of the emperors are wearing any clothes when confronted about it.

S~V~S wrote:I have to go to work, I am sure you two will have a blast today painting me as some kind of foaming at the mouth crazy person, but i saw what I saw.

You're being absurdly confident for no reason.
You clearly aren't interested in lynching anyone but me now, and there's nothing I can do about that.
You're not 'foaming at the mouth', you're *invested*.
It's fine.

I'd like everyone to remember that in TwinPeaks, SVS got kate off after her singleminded lynch
by pointing out that it would be terribly dumb for a *baddie* to do something like that.
She has every reason to believe that that same logic would work again this game.

Lynch SVS after me.
I think that her behavior is the best evidence of badness we've gotten so far,
and it will also help to discourage this pretense of utter certainty in the early days of future games.

S~V~S wrote: Actually, usually i do have a reason, and sometimes i am quite effective. i have a good gut that way. I don't make up any of this, it is how i see it. I think i am pretty good at this, sometimes I am horribly wrong, as are we all, but sometimes I am spot on, and it is usually over a little thing. It has nothing to do with you being "Not Me", and everything to do with you saying you voted for one reason, and that was not why you actually voted.

Where did you hear about how i play my game? I don't think you have ever seen my Day One full court press.

Linki @ MP, and you are not hearing me. I said lets see how Nevin comes up.

I can call a coin flip with great accuracy! I'm pretty good at it, I have a great gut that way.
Sometimes I'm horribly wrong, but sometimes I'm spot on.

I actually had crossed you with Kate - you are doing exactly what she did in twin peaks
(and you were kind of a pair there).

MovingPictures07 wrote:What, why would you have been fine with voting me? You never explain this unless I missed it. If so, sorry.

Because it's day 1, and we're all basically voting randomly.

S~V~S wrote:But....that isn't what you said when you voted, you said:

Nevinera wrote:Bah. I forgot it's a speed game again.

I have plans for the afternoon and evening, so I'm going to toss my vote out now after all.
I agree that voting early smells a bit, and I think that baddies are more likely to have read the bad roles thoroughly
(though that's hardly a solid logical leap), so I'm going to vote for gleam now.

No mention of MP having a good reason for his vote, just stating that early voting smells a bit. You don't say it smells unless you give a reason for it, or that drive by votes smell a bit.

Don't you think that someone who has read the bad roles thoroughly could potentially make up a reason for a vote? So not sure how having a reason for early voting excludes someone from smelling due to making an early vote.

It's *day one*. I picked gleam almost out of a hat.
I voted him because he voted early, but I could have voted snow for being quiet, or llama for 'squashing discussion'.
The core of the matter is that you don't get to have a good reason for voting on day 1. Often on day 2 either.
So I'm sorry that I don't have a solid reason for voting for gleam.
I didn't have time to make one up like you guys do.

The real reason that I *didn't* vote for MP is not because he had a reason for voting early, it's because I didn't want to attract his fire.
You and he both do this thing where you come out swinging hard - you don't have any more of a clue than the rest of us do on day 1,
but you choose to pretend that you do, so you make up *reams* of complete crap to throw around,
piles of pseudo-logic in a full-court press.
The reason you're going to vote for me, the reason you're going to swing at me constantly until you get me lynched?
It's because I'm *not you*, and you don't want to get lynched early.
You've discovered that a good offense is the best defense at this stage.

But you know what? Vote for me.

Henceforth you can have my vote on Day 1.
I'll give my reason as:

SVS will declare me a baddie today, as is traditional. Have a pre-emptive vote.

S~V~S wrote:

Nevinera wrote:Bah. I forgot it's a speed game again.

I have plans for the afternoon and evening, so I'm going to toss my vote out now after all.
I agree that voting early smells a bit, and I think that baddies are more likely to have read the bad roles thoroughly
(though that's hardly a solid logical leap), so I'm going to vote for gleam now.

So why gleam and not MP who voted first?

This post raises my brow a bit. It makes me want to vote for you, or maybe even MP.

Because mp gave a reason for voting early and gleam didn't, or at least that's what I recall.
I'd have been fine with voting for mp too.
I had to vote and run, and I only had a couple of minutes to look over the state of the game.
It's day 1 anyway, I might as well have randomized.

LittleTiger wrote:Okay, so it seems to me that a bandwagon just started rolling and to me, it looks like Nevinera got it rolling. I really don't see what was wrong with gleam using the term "elaborate ruse" regarding Vomp and Lizzy's obvious friendly banter.

Therefore, since this is a speed game, I am going with a gut vote on Nevinera for opportunistic bandwagon vote.

*vote Nevinera"

How does one join a bandwagon as the first voter for someone?
I can't both be a "bandwagon vote" and "start it rolling".

I did not in any way reference gleams terms about liz and vomps.
Is it possible you have me confused with someone?

Bah. I forgot it's a speed game again.

I have plans for the afternoon and evening, so I'm going to toss my vote out now after all.
I agree that voting early smells a bit, and I think that baddies are more likely to have read the bad roles thoroughly
(though that's hardly a solid logical leap), so I'm going to vote for gleam now.

thellama73 wrote: I don't know. It's probably nothing, but on Day 1, I usually wait as long as possible to vote since there is so little to go on and I want to have maximum evidence before voting. I can't see why someone would vote early like that unless that a) were unable to vote at a later time (a claim MP made, but Gleamio did not) b) a baddie who knows who their enemies are already or c) really sure about someone and are using their vote to try to convince others to bandwagon on board. I don't see how anyone could be really sure about Vomps, so combined with my earlier points about Gleamio seeming overly familiar with baddie mechanics, I will probably put my vote there unless something changes.

He seems like the (slightly) better choice to me also, but I'm going to see how the votes come in.

I voted for Dark World, because I don't see any way that that could be construed as evil behavior.

Epignosis wrote: I've changed my mind. I'll archive the polls. You guys just sit back and have fun!

Woo! Laziness for the win!

Epignosis wrote: I will NOT be archiving polls though. I generally like doing it, but I will not be this time for a few reasons. So keep ya own notes.[/color]

Does that mean that we have to be online to record that information as the poll closes, or will it be available for some period of time?

I'm voting for pipes because it is popular.