The Syndicate

Vompatti wrote:

Lizzy wrote:8 (thirteen)

... guess that's why I ended up dealing with humanities.

Well, well, well... what do we have here? Firstly, thank you kindly for the nice words and for your appreciation of my past performance. Secondly, thank you for giving me a short benefit of the doubt because of my current state of mind and not only. While my being f****d in the head (a type of falling-from-the-moon-and-landing-on-my-head thingy) is completely true, it has nothing to do with the above; therefore, there is no corelation between my posting style in this game and feeling like crap.

I have to admit that reading all the theories is extremely entertaining, so thanks for that. Snowy's paranoia in particular deserves a mention. You're second guessing again. Remember what happened last time(s). So while all of them are interesting and might have a point, they're a tad off as far as my case is concerned, with the exception of one remark.

nutella wrote:I feel like Lizzy has been sort of a back-burner, perpetually-runner-up lynch candidate so far because several suspect her but every day something more major somehow comes up... interesting isn't it?? One of these days we should actually lynch her imo...

warm

Come on, guys! Do I have to do everything around here?

8 (thirteen)

DharmaHelper wrote:Oh of course now that I mention Hedge pulled a throwaway vote onto Lizzy everyone starts voting for Lizzy.

Yeah, thanks DharmaObamaHelper! I have to admit though, this is quite exciting!
Also, finally a decent random.bullshit.analysis! You should do this more often, k.

Vompatti wrote:

Lizzy wrote:

Vompatti wrote:

Lizzy wrote:So because I cannot vote for three people , I decided to use a very nice online randomiser thingy that is spelt with a 'z', and from a list that included myself, Nev and Bea, it told me to go with the latter. :O

NOOOOOOOOOO ITZ A TRAP !!11111

are you suggesting that the randomiser is in a baddie team q.m.

no but they might have been controlling it with black magick.

omgwtf why haven't you told me before?

Vompatti wrote:

Lizzy wrote:So because I cannot vote for three people , I decided to use a very nice online randomiser thingy that is spelt with a 'z', and from a list that included myself, Nev and Bea, it told me to go with the latter. :O

NOOOOOOOOOO ITZ A TRAP !!11111

are you suggesting that the randomiser is in a baddie team q.m.

So because I cannot vote for three people , I decided to use a very nice online randomiser thingy that is spelt with a 'z', and from a list that included myself, Nev and Bea, it told me to go with the latter. :O

thellama73 wrote:

Lizzy wrote: In case you might miss a certain thread, I want to officially congratulate you on your exquisite choice of top 2favourite bands .

Thanks! You have very good taste as well. I made that list a while ago. I think it would be different now. There are too many great bands to fit into just ten slots! Still, numbers one and two would remain the same.

Indeed, mine have been changing constantly, with the exception of the first two. We need some sort of Badger May smiley.

Snow Dog wrote: Lizzy, you are wicked.

You're mistaking me for a llama with a top hat, but other than that you are right.

thellama73 wrote:

Mongoose wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Hedgeowl wrote: Sorry to hear you are feeling crappy. I could say "Feel better!", but some people hate that when it's obviously not possible.

Not possible? What nonsense. When I get sick, I stop being sick and be awesome instead.

I don't really believe you have ever been sick, llama. Too many optimistic antibodies or something.

It does happen on occasion, but it's rare and doesn't last long.

In case you might miss a certain thread, I want to officially congratulate you on your exquisite choice of top 2favourite bands .

Mongoose wrote: However, I do really hope that the Real Life Lizzy feels better ASAP.

but I can't handle another A Person mis-lynch situation.
*votes Lizzy*

... and what if it happens again?

Hedgeowl wrote:
Sorry to hear you are feeling crappy. I could say "Feel better!", but some people hate that when it's obviously not possible.

It was the absence that made our hearts grow fonder, and then finally abandoned and bitter, when it's been days and you haven't called...

I think the difference is you were here, but others have consistently not been, which could be a reason like being sick, new, busy, forgetful, etc. So it is not necessarily suspicious, until it is. Thank you for popping in to say hello and I will consider my vote again. Vomps voting for Zany is making me wonder.

I know I won't be voting for Vomps, because you've heard the man, it was destiny. I won't be voting for Mr. Zany either because I love his brutal honesty. In fact , if there's ever a Snowy bandwagon and I'm still alive, I'll be joining in without blinking, with or without giving a pseudo-educated reason because I might have developed a sick pleasure in messing with him. Still wuv you, Snowy!

Sorry I haven't been around much these past couple of days, but I've been feeling like crap on all possible levels and it just gets worse after my swimming sessions.

That being said, funny how my short absence raises eyebrows and makes people question my standpoint, while others are missing polls after polls and hardly ever post, and the consensus is that they shan't be judged/voted based on that. Anyway, I'm still very suspicious looking, I agree. I might vote for myself again, although there's something about Bea and Nev that makes me want to vote for all three of us. I'll be thinking... or coin tossing...

Snow Dog wrote:
Fair enough. Then I will trust my own feelings.

I don't want to rain on your parade (again :P) but last time(s) you did that, well... it didn't turn out exactly as it should have. Although, maybe this is a lucky break. Also, thanks for the nice compliments. Being called a clever and convincing liar is a compliment, right? Right?

Vompatti wrote:I think Lizzy is probably innocent and I will defend her to my last breath.

omgomgogngh I will defend you with my life as well k innocent or guilty

Much obliged!

nutella wrote:
Honestly I would be up to vote for Lizzy. She's been on my list but she keeps falling off the radar, which worries me even more. I took note of her when she voted for herself and the point was brought up that there are baddie roles who start off with null votes. And she had the sort of anti-establishment attitude toward the game as well. I don't remember seeing her post much at all since day 1 so she may be trying to keep a low profile. So my vote is either going to her or bwt.

How is being defiant and anti-establishment trying to keep a low profile?
On the contrary, m'dear! Some people can be in desperate need of attention. That might be my case now. Or maybe just a strategy. I haven't decided on that yet.

super linki... hi Lizzy, the tone of that post is not helping you any in my book

It was not meant to either.

Good. Use your aggressive feelings, boys. Let the hate flow through you.

Now then, now then, I shan't go with neither Dex, whose justification on why he had voted for Llama I very much enjoyed and appreciated as sincere; bravo, sir! nor Ace, whose dry and straight-forward 'Nope' I found extremely daring and entertaining, almost avant. I'm not too fond of his attempts to defend himself when cornered, but I suppose that is understandable. Of course, at this point, I see myself as one of the most suspicious looking players, and I'd almost have voted for myself a second time, if it weren't for my good buddy, Snowy here, whom I've been dying to vote for for quite some time for his manner of immediately pointing fingers in every direction so long as the eyes are not on him. Here's to you, Snowy, and not because you voted for me! Like I said, I almost agree with you. But for now you seem a bit more of a baddie than me. Sure, you can be one from the other baddie team, or from my own team and we're voting for each other to confuse people, or we can be on the same civvie team and have no idea about it, or from different civvie teams, and might have to brutally kill each other either for fun or for survival, or something something Sander Cohen's team. The possibilities are endless (not literally). Isn't that wonderful? Discuss!

Well, enough game deconstruction for today. :P Back to analysing other affairs.

Snow Dog wrote:

Lizzy wrote:

nutella wrote:

I haven't forgotten about your self-vote. You are also on my list.

Although, something tells me people might not have the chance to vote for me again.

Meaning?

I WILL KILL YOU ALL before we get to the next lynching. Or is it the other way around...?

nutella wrote:

I haven't forgotten about your self-vote. You are also on my list.

Although, something tells me people might not have the chance to vote for me again.

thellama73 wrote:Lizzy, you are welcome to play in whatever style you want, but you must understand that it looks suspicious not to talk, because baddies have the most to lose from loose tongues.

This is not an "establishment," it is just a perception of various activities. I consider myself an experimental player and I am not interested in following the "rules" per se, as I demonstrated with the Llama Gambit, but it's unfair to complain when people quite naturally respond to what appear to be illogical or contrary actions. The risk of trying new things is that they may not work. You shouldn't be given a free pass to do whatever you want without scrutiny just because you choose to play in a radical style.

Absolutely. but I find it very interesting how those who choose this way of playing are immediately targeted and are for some reason under more scrutiny than others, just because they don't follow the norm. I'm also intrigued as to why people jumped on the Matt bandwagon last night, when I also voted for myself. I think that type action can go both ways: I'm either a baddie hiding in plain sight and playing you all with nothing to lose because I have team mates to carry on with this, or just your average civ with again, nothing to lose.

AceofSpaces wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

AceofSpaces wrote:I voted for boo

Care to explain why?

Nope.

You. I like you.

So this just goes to show that there actually is an 'establishment'. People's reactions to Kev's (agealmfkf - what's with that name dude, anyway? :P) approach to the game which is not the norm (everyone more or less pretending to be a civ and going for 'educated' guesses and analysis when you basically have zilch. I mean come on, regardless how inexperienced you are, no-one is idiotic enough to make such slips,I would imagine people and especially baddies checking, double checking, triple checking what they've written before posting). I did my share of playing the baddie in civ clothes last time, yeah it was fun for a while, we won, but flying below the radar, or not giving an 'educated' opinion, is just another technique of playing this. Maybe it's a shred thing.

thellama73 wrote:Bullz, a gambit is a tactical move with a concrete objective. Not a random act of senseless madness. I'm waiting to see which Lizzy's falls under (but I have a hunch)

Shoot! I'm rather curious myself.

juliets wrote:This ^^. I've played a lot of mafia and I have never been in a game where two people voted for themselves. It's just usually not done for the reason llama pointed out above. I just don't understand the logic that is being used to arrive at the conclusion that voting for yourself is a civv move. Lizzy, are you by chance new to mafia (by new i mean under 5 games)?

I suppose you could call it new, won 2 out of 3, but last time I pretended and lied so much it now seems boring as hell, strategy wise at least. And I'm actually disappointed that people are not opened to new approaches. I personally find the game more entertaining this way. Alas, you can finish me anytime if it's against the establishment.

thellama73 wrote:I just want to point out that the civs are at a severe information disadvantage at the beginning of the game. Therefore, any info we manage to acquire through the thread posts or votes benefits the civs more than the baddies. Random trolling and voting for yourself or voting with no stated reason is not helpful to the civ cause.

Lizzy Gambit.

A Person wrote:

Vompatti wrote:ho ture, I didn't know it was wedneesaysday alraedy.

Well it is k

would you believe me if i told you i'm coming down with a cold q.m.

:OoOo I r sorrow. drink a lot of lemon with tea k

I made an educated guess. I may be wrong though.

'Educated' guesses are still guesses, regardless of the nice wrapping that gives the impression of substance. And I very much agree with AP, since both civvies and baddies can kill, what's the use of me as a civ, baddie or neutral, protecting people that are not on my team? Sure, there is a risk of going after a team mate if I don't know who they are, but that can happen whether you randomise or have the 'educated' guess. Say, I'm Andrew Ryan, why should I want to protect the other civvie team when a lot of them would want me dead, because they cannot win with my being alive and vice versa?

:O what was that? I'm getting bad vibes from the above paragraph. :O Votes Lizzy.

Russtifinko wrote:
Lizzy, at the top of page 6 you seem to voice support for voting randomly in every lynch poll, which seems suicidal to me. Is that really what you meant? I'm just asking out of curiosity.

Worry not Russti, I'm just employing various techniques see how long I can last, not to mention the fact that it keeps me interested and entertained. ^___^

Also, for those who are not familiar with Vomps and A Person, the wombat is just your average parasitic communistic absurdist genius, while AP is just being his usual cynical self. For now, to me at least, they're just as guilty or innocent as the next person. For now...

Vompatti wrote:How does someone "looking bad" on day 1 when practically nothing has happened in the game make them any more likely to be bad than good?

That's the thing k, it doesn't. Day 1 arguments for argument's sake. :O
Also, your randomising method is just sublime. I almost shed a tear. :oOoOO

thellama73 wrote:I don't think it is the same thing to randomize or to make an educated guess. Of course you may be wrong, but going after something is better than going after nothing. Why not just randomize the entire game? YOu can never really be sure who the baddies are by their posts and votes, can you?

Still a guess, regardless of the attribute.

And that is exactly what's happening when you are civ. Oh I get bad vibes from X, Imma gonna vote for them k. Omgogmgo they're civ, i'm so sorry k.

thellama73 wrote:

A Person wrote: But from what I understand most teams seem to win as long as their not dead. That's a civvy win in my book :P

And how do you propose they stay not dead, if you're randomly lynching civs and not the baddies who kill civs at night?

And how do you know who is a baddie then, unless you are one yourself and know your team mates? Randomising or going after someone based on their posts at this point (but from what I've seen, even during the last phases of the game) is the exact same thing. So I'd rather randomise or find excuses like the OT one and go along with it than act pseudo-suspicious about one's post.

Snow Dog wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Voted Lizzy

Well done!

You've been waiting for this, haven't you?

DharmaHelper wrote:Voted Lizzy

...the things some people do to themselves. (and I'm not talking about me here )

My morbid curiosity makes me want to see how you guys deal with anarchists, so I'll take the bait.

Hedgeowl wrote:

thellama73 wrote:This is the most off-topic mafia game I've yet been in and I love it!

omg you're right! Me too! I blame Lizzy and Vompatti for starting this in sign-ups, k.

For sers, we got to lynch ourselves a baddie though. Maybe if enough of us say it, it'll come true. No, but seriously I've played one game and Lizzy schooled me so badly I don't know who to trust now.

Here goes: DisgruntledPorcupine is neither disgruntled nor a porcupine. Discuss!

In my defense, I did appologise.

Also, I'm not actually a Lizzy. Discuss. Or vote.

Your move, mates.

Vompatti wrote:I'm too shy and I have no friends I can access physically k :'(

I'd join your collective if I were a commie hippie.

Vompatti wrote:wtf ewwwwwwww

Isn't that a tad too much coming from a platonic commie rapscallion ifyyyuok now whati meeena.
Also, I read your essay sum tiem ago and omgogmgo i thought it was nais because you finally used words and other things k :OooOoO

A Person wrote:

Lizzy wrote:

A Person wrote:

Vompatti wrote:I just obtained the game and it looks pretty stunning k :O

Plus I can eat potato chips and drink wine just like in real life.

ur a capitalist

:O tuer i smell crypto-capitalist scum

What would Plato say if he saw one of his disciples supporting the frozen pizza conglomerates? :'(

I think he'd finally concur with Aristotle's supremacy k

A Person wrote:

Vompatti wrote:I just obtained the game and it looks pretty stunning k :O

Plus I can eat potato chips and drink wine just like in real life.

ur a capitalist

:O tuer i smell crypto-capitalist scum

Say 'nay' to becoming slaves to capitalist pigs! Plus, I'm a wuss by nature. :P