The Syndicate

On the other hand, rainbow lists can paint a target on the heads of those who are deemed most Civ.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:i don't understand this motel room vote. He's has posted drunk most of the time and he didn't come back after a question. That's it! (better than nothing I suppose, and I don't know him anyway so....urgh)

Yeah it's definitely not winning "Case of the Year", but I don't think that makes it a bad vote. What about the MP vote entices you?

his Buddying up, his last minute motel vote that seemed to come from nowhere, and..I dunno....a feeling.

The motel vote didn't really come from anywhere from my perspective; I had been talking about it in thread for a while, he was townreading me, Golden vetted it, not like he had strong feelings elsewhere.

As for the buddying point, my rebuttal for that is mostly personal but it'd be a shame if he got lynched for making me feel.welcome!

It wasn't just you. He did it to others too.

If I'm mafia and "buddying" you all to try to gain your trust, then I sure am doing a real shitty job, aren't I?

It would have worked too, if it weren't for you meddling kids!

If you hadn't been called out on it, then it would have been a top-quality job. It just so happens that I'm very sensitive to it.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Golden wrote:

Epignosis wrote:It wasn't an analysis. It was an observation.

I find your observation somewhat compelling.

Question - is it one you just researched now, or have you been sitting on it waiting for a time it applied?

What is compelling about it, even remotely? I don't get it. I cannot fathom anything even remotely compelling about it. I've already debunked it.

I disagree, I didn't find that your rebuttal functioned to slam-dunk a debunk. I felt your points were more useful as some factors to consider were Epi to move forward with a seriously in-depth MP-rainbow-list-analysis, like classifying the context more, or cross-referencing existing post-count or time from the game's start. Epi noticed a loose correlation between two elements: your alignment, and the number of colours in your rainbow lists. It doesn't take a lot of mental acrobatics to look at that evidence and think that just maybe, MP07's REAL (Civ) rainbow lists are more detailed due to a true and admirable attempt to really analyze every player honestly... and that MP07's FAKE (baddie) rainbow lists are broader-strokes analyses designed to advance his baddie agenda while doing something that MP usually does as Civ.

That makes a lot of sense to me, and I'm sure that the fact that I'm already accusing you of buddying works against you when I see a rainbow list that is so heavily Civ-weighted.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Seeing that I already had 1 vote from LC, that votes were likely to be missed, and knowing that both Epi and sig expressed suspicions of me, my vote was cast somewhat out of self-preservation. I also realize I haven't updated my rainbow formally but Soneji's response put my ease and given my lack of available time I had a bunch of null reads from which to choose to place my vote upon. Only Blooper and motel room had 2 votes, I know I had 1, so I chose between those options and even though I felt equally about MR and Blooper I percolated on Nacho's arguments and felt it the more compelling vote and subsequently I decided to go with motel room.

So would you say that you would like to put all responsibility on Nacho?

No, why would I ever say that? I take full responsibility for my vote. That goes without saying.

No, totally, you would never say that. That question was 99% 'limited time availability' curveball question to see your response. BUT, that other 1%, I have to be honest, is that voice in my head that sees your post like this: "I was exactly, perfectly equal in my opinion on whether motel or Blooper got lynched. Since I think my buddy Nacho is a Civ *point and wink in Nacho's direction in a friendly fashion*, I went along with his argument."

I guess my question didn't convey that, but I'd say that's the reason I felt compelled to just shine some light on your use of Nacho's opinions in your explanation.

Scotty wrote:I swear to dog I'm This close to changing my autocorrect so every time I post dog it's sig instead

This post is just blowing my mind.

Golden wrote:

Long Con wrote:Are there some forms I have to fill out in triplicate before accusing you now?

Yes. But trust me, no-one will tell you where to find them, and you will have to deliver them to a town in Wyoming by hand.

Fuck, forget it then. I'll just vote Metalmarsh.
I realize now that some of the above stuff is rehashing stuff that was discussed when I wasn't here, but I'll still post it. I'm sorry to see that you seem to be getting upset, MP, but I cannot let that affect my opinion because I have seen you fake it as a baddie. Imagine how much more upsetting it is for motel room.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Lol LC have you not played with me before? I used to make gigantic posts all the time and sometimes still do. If you don't like the fact that I posted many small times instead one gigantic one I don't know what to tell you, it's a lot of content either way and over the years I've had people complain about both and not read my posts. I don't need a lecture on that. How about you talk about some of the content within them instead?

Buddying? That's weaksauce my friend. Show me the mafia motivation behind my posts.

As I said, "either way works". My point was that I don't want to see any alignment attached to large or small post counts, because they can be artificially inflated.

You call my Day 1 vote "weaksauce" as though Day 1 votes are usually supersolid. I don't have time to explain the obvious Mafia motivation behind buddying.

Do you feel like anyone so far has been tying anyone's alignment to large or small post counts?

Not yet. Not in this game.

I wasn't asking for any general mafia motivation for buddying, even though I think that motivation is largely unconvincing. I'm asking what specifically you've seen in my behavior that displays a mafia motivation.

An odd question. I don't think it's a reasonable one. I have seen buddying being a Mafia tell - an unforeseen flaw in a baddie's otherwise innocent-seeming game. It's pedantic to require me to find a meta-behaviour to validate my suspicion of your behaviour. Are there some forms I have to fill out in triplicate before accusing you now? If I gave you an answer regarding which behaviour indicates a Mafia motivation behind your buddying behaviour, would you require me to further validate that with a third behaviour pattern?

Fuck it, I'll answer it without being contrary as well. The Mafia motivation that is displayed by your excessive buddying is the motivation make Civs feel comfortable with you, like "Me and MP07 are on the same page, I'm Civ so he's feeling Civ to me, because, though on the outside, different faces, but on the inside, same-same. Same-same." You feel me?

I accidentally posted that previous post when I was supposed to copy-paste it below this one, and move on with a catchup, accumulating more posts. Instead I submitted it, so I'll just lay this one down now and start fresh.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Lol LC have you not played with me before? I used to make gigantic posts all the time and sometimes still do. If you don't like the fact that I posted many small times instead one gigantic one I don't know what to tell you, it's a lot of content either way and over the years I've had people complain about both and not read my posts. I don't need a lecture on that. How about you talk about some of the content within them instead?

Buddying? That's weaksauce my friend. Show me the mafia motivation behind my posts.

As I said, "either way works". My point was that I don't want to see any alignment attached to large or small post counts, because they can be artificially inflated.

You call my Day 1 vote "weaksauce" as though Day 1 votes are usually supersolid. I don't have time to explain the obvious Mafia motivation behind buddying.

I don't really buy into buddying as a tell; I have the tendency to be friendly as both alignments and I get frustrated by "buddying" or "pocketing" accusations often enough where I never use them as town.

QFT

Yeah, that's one opinion. My experience tells me differently.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Seeing that I already had 1 vote from LC, that votes were likely to be missed, and knowing that both Epi and sig expressed suspicions of me, my vote was cast somewhat out of self-preservation. I also realize I haven't updated my rainbow formally but Soneji's response put my ease and given my lack of available time I had a bunch of null reads from which to choose to place my vote upon. Only Blooper and motel room had 2 votes, I know I had 1, so I chose between those options and even though I felt equally about MR and Blooper I percolated on Nacho's arguments and felt it the more compelling vote and subsequently I decided to go with motel room.

So would you say that you would like to put all responsibility on Nacho?

I asked the Salty Sea Dog about LOOM™. RIP motel room.

Did Quin mention who he would have voted for?

MovingPictures07 wrote:Lol LC have you not played with me before? I used to make gigantic posts all the time and sometimes still do. If you don't like the fact that I posted many small times instead one gigantic one I don't know what to tell you, it's a lot of content either way and over the years I've had people complain about both and not read my posts. I don't need a lecture on that. How about you talk about some of the content within them instead?

Buddying? That's weaksauce my friend. Show me the mafia motivation behind my posts.

As I said, "either way works". My point was that I don't want to see any alignment attached to large or small post counts, because they can be artificially inflated.

You call my Day 1 vote "weaksauce" as though Day 1 votes are usually supersolid. I don't have time to explain the obvious Mafia motivation behind buddying.

MovingPictures07 wrote:LC, what did you gain from your role analysis?

Better knowledge of the game, and thoughts about Po8 and how to deal with them.

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Long Con wrote:Hello, I did check my role PM before I came here.

Scotty wrote:Man, I would hate to be on your team if I were bad.

Yeah, Wilgy is already suspicious to me.

DrWilgy wrote:Yeah, I've decided that being blind will be my meme play this game.

Indeed.

Golden wrote:Voted melee island - that's always where the adventure starts. You can't cut right to the third act.

Good point. Same-same.

Found it!
Long Con, why is Wigly suspicious for not checking their role PM?
I don't think actions get more neutral than "not checking role PM" unless somehow you think that he's scum trying to buy himself a free pass by saying he's not checking his role PM which seems just a touch conspiracy theory to me.

I just think he's not being honest, because deliberately not looking at your role makes no sense at all to me. As Scotty points out, it would really screw the scum team if Wilgy were one of them.

Also, I think he is trying to drop a vague role-hint, which I am not buying at all.

Nachomamma8 wrote:This is reassuring; I did like LC's questions and thoughts about baddie roles in particular but wasn't sure how comfortable he was mimicking his role speculation as scum.

For the record: quite comfortable.

Scotty wrote:

Long Con wrote:Ok, Items... specifically the ones which can be bought, Bananas and Grog. Can more than one be bought at once? If Stan gets the Shovel, then he'll have 30 Po8 (Pieces of Eight). Can he immediately spend 28 Po8 and buy fourteen Grog (at half price) and slam them down on a player, ensuring their lynch? Maybe even better, he could buy a bunch of Bananas, and save them for a rainy day, and never get lynched. It doesn't look like there's any lynch shenanigans among the baddies, so it's all Bananas and Grog.

What exactly do the Pirate Leaders know? What is there that Civvies and/or Cannibals do not know? Maybe they get to know when someone buys something, or the details of Stan's dealings or Carla's fight results.

Are the Men of Low Moral Fibre just vanilla baddies (with BTSC)?

Head of the Navigator - What does it mean to be invisible to ghosts? Just that LeChuck can't kill you?

Stan - His role says he can "offer players 2 pieces of eight for an item which they must trade to him." They must. Does that mean he can force the Head of the Navigator to sell his Necklace for 2 Po8? Does Stan have to know they possess the item, asking for a specific one, or is he more like a thief who pays 2 Po8 for whatever they have?

Meathook - Does he get some sort of info every night?

That's all for now. Host questions look like this.

Some of these questions seemed forced. Like 'What exactly do the pirate leaders know?"
Umm, might as well be asking how many licks it takes to get to the center of a tootsie pop. Only that damned owl knows, and that's how it's gonna be.

That was more for the players, the follow-up questions clarify my thoughts at that point. I think a bit of discussion about what probably isn't possible could help narrow down what likely is. Information is a powerful thing, so it behooves us to be aware of what advantages the baddies do or don't have, so that our theories and ideas can take them into account.

"Are the MoLMF just vanilla" - come on man, what are you really hoping to learn from that question?
I don't mind asking questions, and actually think the others aren't bad, but in a game with secrets, those aren't just clarification, those are obviously omitted for a reason. I trust llama would reveal what he wanted to reveal originally.

Ennhh... yeah, you're right about that one, I didn't expect much from it. That was more of a "wrote it down because the question occurred to me" kind of thing.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Would anyone believe me if I told them I've got a town read on myself?

Too early to tell, I think.

This is how I don't post 17 times in a row. Ctrl-click a post's Quote button and write a response, then copy and paste it all at the end of a growing post as I go along. Either way works. Post count becomes more meaningless when a posting blitz like this happens... but on the other hand, how meaningful is it in the first place? I have a bad feeling about MP07 because he seems to be buddying people hard. That makes me suspicious because I have seen and caught baddies a number of times in the past by recognizing this behaviour.

I'm going to bed soon...and when I get up I'm going to parent-teacher interviews, and then directly to work until after the lynch is up. So I gotta vote now. My suspicion of MP feels better than my suspicion of Wilgy (probably due in part to Nacho's repeated viewpoint that no suspicion should arise from Wilgy's "no-role-look"), so I'll vote MP and say good night.

*votes MovingPictures07*

thellama73 wrote:Effectively immediately, birdwithteeth11 is being replaced by Snow Dog. I said bad things would happen to anyone who didn't check in, and look, he's turned into a Welshman!

Classic BWT. Don't give up on Black Rock yet though, she'll be here.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Happy Birthday, Mac!

Long Con wrote:*emerges from the birth canal*

Maybe it's time for me to do some role analysis and then get some votes for it for being "overly helpful".

I promise I will null read you for it like I typically do.

Most neighbourly of you!

Ok, Items... specifically the ones which can be bought, Bananas and Grog. Can more than one be bought at once? If Stan gets the Shovel, then he'll have 30 Po8 (Pieces of Eight). Can he immediately spend 28 Po8 and buy fourteen Grog (at half price) and slam them down on a player, ensuring their lynch? Maybe even better, he could buy a bunch of Bananas, and save them for a rainy day, and never get lynched. It doesn't look like there's any lynch shenanigans among the baddies, so it's all Bananas and Grog.

What exactly do the Pirate Leaders know? What is there that Civvies and/or Cannibals do not know? Maybe they get to know when someone buys something, or the details of Stan's dealings or Carla's fight results.

Are the Men of Low Moral Fibre just vanilla baddies (with BTSC)?

Head of the Navigator - What does it mean to be invisible to ghosts? Just that LeChuck can't kill you?

Stan - His role says he can "offer players 2 pieces of eight for an item which they must trade to him." They must. Does that mean he can force the Head of the Navigator to sell his Necklace for 2 Po8? Does Stan have to know they possess the item, asking for a specific one, or is he more like a thief who pays 2 Po8 for whatever they have?

Meathook - Does he get some sort of info every night?

That's all for now. Host questions look like this.

*emerges from the birth canal*

Maybe it's time for me to do some role analysis and then get some votes for it for being "overly helpful".

Vompatti wrote:Would you believe me if I told you the only Pokemon game I've ever finished and also the best Pokemon game of all time is Pokemon Snap, q.m.

Yes.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

DFaraday wrote:

Also, this is the best way to check in to a game. This man has earned a free Day 1 from me. I won't be voting for him.

Agreed, I can't believe I haven't seen/thought of it before.

MacDougall wrote:You are trying too hard.

You need to try harder.

Hello, I did check my role PM before I came here.

Scotty wrote:Man, I would hate to be on your team if I were bad.

Yeah, Wilgy is already suspicious to me.

DrWilgy wrote:Yeah, I've decided that being blind will be my meme play this game.

Indeed.

Golden wrote:Voted melee island - that's always where the adventure starts. You can't cut right to the third act.

Good point. Same-same.