The Syndicate

Zombarella wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Dom wrote: Zomba. If Zomba is civ, I doubt that SVS is a baddie. But the inverse is far more likely.
I'm confused about this inverse thing. Are you saying that if you lynch SVS and she is civ then you doubt that I am a baddie? This is exactly what I was talking about earlier re the buddying up to me. SVS has had BTSC with me before and she knows this is something that makes me crazy. In fact, I think it's what got me NKd (as a civ) in Death Note. SVS, LC, Bea, Golden, I hope that you guys are civs and that you will listen when I tell you to STOP DEFENDING ME!!!! I will be looking at all three of you during the day tomorrow and if any of you flip bad before I die - so help me - hell hath no fury!

As for MM and Rabbit - all this speculation is just speculation. What if....millionaire...BF lying....SVS lying....you are missing the main point of my posts (on purpose?? ) My whole problem with what BF said was how it was going to affect my role. Let's just say that I am the Millionaire, wouldn't I be wanting votes to make me stronger? How does what he said ruin that role at all? I'll tell you - it doesn't. Your logic is lazy and lazy logic leads to lynched civs.

In Roger Rabbit - the only game where I played a baddie - half our team laid low the whole game and didn't get killed until the very end. I'd bet real money that this is happening again in this game. Where is A Person or BWT, one little post here and there, just enough to get credit for posting without committing to anything?

@LC - I'm going to use my stock certificate to start a fire tonight. Your suggestion intrigued me, it's not doing me any good, and I don't want Rabbit or MM or SVS or to get anything more than a pile of ashes if they decide that I need to die.

Did I defend you? I don't recall doing so. I won't defend you in the future, no problemo.

It'll be cool if you can start a fire, but I wouldn't be surprised if Llama just said that as a way of saying you can't do anything with your item, at least right now.

Golden wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Golden wrote:
rabbit8 wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:It was not very subtle of me at all, but that doesn't make it untrue. You seem very talkative at nighttime for someone who didn't show up until 48 hours after the game started though, and very insistent that I behave the same.
It's not very civvie like to keep ideas out of the thread.......
Rabbit, how many times do I have to tell you there is no such thing as civvie behaviour?
Is there such a thing as baddie behaviour?
Did you read day one, by chance?

Yes!

rabbit8 wrote:
Golden wrote:
rabbit8 wrote:I'm trying to see the game as you and BF, Golden. How am I doing?
Pretty good, actually. But, now you have to pick a best mafia bud...

LC.

Nice!

Golden wrote:
rabbit8 wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:It was not very subtle of me at all, but that doesn't make it untrue. You seem very talkative at nighttime for someone who didn't show up until 48 hours after the game started though, and very insistent that I behave the same.
It's not very civvie like to keep ideas out of the thread.......
Rabbit, how many times do I have to tell you there is no such thing as civvie behaviour?

Is there such a thing as baddie behaviour?

Turnip Head wrote:I understand where you're going with this Epi, and I would like to hear LC's answer to the question.

Your turn.

Golden wrote:
Long Con wrote:He wants me to play Epig's mindgame first.
I want you to play epi's mindgame, please...

I shouldn't have to be the only one whose played.

Here is something for you, though, LC. I said, on day one, that we should be very wary of voting for self-voters, because they might be the millionaire and fishing for votes to make them more powerful. Why didn't you take that into account?

Fine, because you said 'please', and in the interest of finding out where he's going: I have voted for metalmarsh before for repeatedly self-voting. Epig knows this already because it happened in the game he hosted. In that game, I posted my opinion about the repeated self-voting practice, quoting from the Film Director's game which was, I believe, my original statement on the subject on The Syndicate. The basis of this opinion was formed long ago on Lostpedia, when a player there self-voted every time on Day One.

Epig knows all this already, and lied about not recalling me doing it before. I don't know what his angle is, or why he'd lie about it, but the fact that he lied about it makes me wary of responding the way he obviously wants me to.

I didn't take that into account, Golden, when I voted. It's a fine theory, but it didn't cross my mind during the time I voted. Perhaps we should all pile on the votes to the lynch leader as a general rule in order to minimize the Millionaire's advantage.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I don't know if baddies can transfer items around between teamies, but my guess is that the vault keeps papers safe from thieves.

I don't think so:

thellama73 wrote:How Items Work

Some items can be used to confer benefits, some cannot. Some items will be consumed when used, some will not. Most items can be stolen. When someone is lynched, all of the items they possess go to the people who voted for them, in order. So the first vote gets the first item, etc. When someone is NKed, whoever performed the kill gets the item. Items may not be voluntarily traded between players.

Long Con wrote:He wants me to play Epig's mindgame first.

That was about TH.

He wants me to play Epig's mindgame first.

Epignosis wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Question for Mr. Con and Mme. JC:

Both of you voted for MM after he voted himself and after bf had five votes. Correct me if I am wrong about this, but I can't recall anytime you two have ever voted someone because of chronic self-voting. I understand the reasoning, sure, but why now? Why today?
You are lying about what you can recall. Why?
Nah, not lying. You're being evasive.

How about you go ahead and answer the implied question: Have you ever voted someone because of chronic self-voting?

We both know that you already know the answer to this, so saying you can't recall it is a lie. Why don't you just get to the point you're trying to make, I'm not playing an Epig mind-game.

Epignosis wrote:Question for Mr. Con and Mme. JC:

Both of you voted for MM after he voted himself and after bf had five votes. Correct me if I am wrong about this, but I can't recall anytime you two have ever voted someone because of chronic self-voting. I understand the reasoning, sure, but why now? Why today?

You are lying about what you can recall. Why?

I voted Archer Ave because maybe my Ivory Arrow will become cool.

Dom, I think that you have explained yourself sufficiently, and there is still a ping on you from it.

For all I know, I could have been absolutely right about your intentions with the "us" comment, and you're a baddie, and you came up with a very reasonable explanation for the whole exchange. It's not like that's not within your mental capabilities. The explanation was sound, but that doesn't make the original ping get deleted.

I find that the earliest thing people say on a subject is the most useful, because after it happens, explanations and excuses swirl and form that could be fake or real. You can talk your way out of anything, and that's something important to remember.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Long Con wrote:My other likely vote then, is Metalmarsh, for his self-vote. Still deciding between him and BF right now.
Go pick on someone else.
Stop self-voting Day One then. Sorry, but it's always going to be suspicious to me, and I'm always going to consider a vote for you for it. Vompatti always acts suspicious as well, and his self-vote is totally suspicious too, but you are moreso because I have definite proof that you do this as a baddie. And MP is not as suspicious for the vote because he was having trouble controlling his emotions when he self-voted.

I think it's reasonably likely that you are bad this time, and trying to hide behind your self-vote. Especially the WAY you did it, like it was the new cool thing after Vomps and MP did it. That makes it MORE suspicious to me.

*votes MM*
But you didn't address vomps' self-vote until I brought it up to you.

Same with MP's self-vote. You didn't address it until I brought it up to you.

My point is that you are clearly more interested in figuring out "my" pattern than to look at someone else's "bizarre" move. Voting for me because I've done it before shows an interest in your own personal agenda regarding all of mafia, rather than the specific setting of this single game of mafia. This leads me to believe that your motives, whether good or bad, are not founded on the civilian interest for this game.
Quite the contrary - YOU are the one who we know has voted for themselves as a baddie before. I I'm not talking about Death Note, if you have a problem with any of MY facts, then you'll have to specify which ones, because I'm sure I have them straight.
And you know I have done it as a civilian before. So what I want to know is why either possibility from previous games has any indication on my alignment this game. For some reason, you believe it proves I'm bad, or you just want to lynch me to find out.

I believe you do it as a Civvie just so that you can get off easy when you do it as a baddie. In neither way does it ever help the Civvies, and when you do it as a baddie, you are helping the baddies. So I see it as overall baddie behaviour.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Long Con wrote:My other likely vote then, is Metalmarsh, for his self-vote. Still deciding between him and BF right now.
Go pick on someone else.
Stop self-voting Day One then. Sorry, but it's always going to be suspicious to me, and I'm always going to consider a vote for you for it. Vompatti always acts suspicious as well, and his self-vote is totally suspicious too, but you are moreso because I have definite proof that you do this as a baddie. And MP is not as suspicious for the vote because he was having trouble controlling his emotions when he self-voted.

I think it's reasonably likely that you are bad this time, and trying to hide behind your self-vote. Especially the WAY you did it, like it was the new cool thing after Vomps and MP did it. That makes it MORE suspicious to me.

*votes MM*
But you didn't address vomps' self-vote until I brought it up to you.

Same with MP's self-vote. You didn't address it until I brought it up to you.

My point is that you are clearly more interested in figuring out "my" pattern than to look at someone else's "bizarre" move. Voting for me because I've done it before shows an interest in your own personal agenda regarding all of mafia, rather than the specific setting of this single game of mafia. This leads me to believe that your motives, whether good or bad, are not founded on the civilian interest for this game.

Quite the contrary - YOU are the one who we know has voted for themselves as a baddie before. I I'm not talking about Death Note, if you have a problem with any of MY facts, then you'll have to specify which ones, because I'm sure I have them straight.

Zomberella12 wrote:I am now going to go with Spacedaisy to her wedding dress fitting and then I have a girl scout meeting at my house and then my son's 13th birthday party. So I won't be around today so that I can respond to every possible suspicion against me so that probably makes me bad too.

Here's what I think. I think that BF might be bad and is trying to get a civ lynched or he's a civ that came in playing this game all wrong (re. Golden), got some heat, and then decided to switch the heat to me by lying or telling the truth or both. Huge question, why didn't he vote for me so that he could get the money he claims he gets when I die???

Killing someone for their money is an inherently bad thing to do. I don't think most players would want to appear that cut-throat. Perhaps it could have been done if BF had not told us about the will situation... he could have come after you, even if he's a Civvie, with secret greed motivations.

Either way, I'm going to vote for him.

My game strategy going forward: I want to look at people who don't read the thread. As I baddie I knew who the civs were so I didn't have to read the thread to try to figure out who was who. On Day 2 I'm going to have an eye out for players who obviously don't know what has been said or claim to be too busy or drunk or whatever to catch up. I'm busy, and I've read all 18 pages of this damn thing! So there!

Zomba out.

+1 I like this, that sounds like a smart way to play.

This is my official "buddying up to Zomba" post, just to make it easier for later when someone accuses me of it.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Long Con wrote:My other likely vote then, is Metalmarsh, for his self-vote. Still deciding between him and BF right now.
Go pick on someone else.

Stop self-voting Day One then. Sorry, but it's always going to be suspicious to me, and I'm always going to consider a vote for you for it. Vompatti always acts suspicious as well, and his self-vote is totally suspicious too, but you are moreso because I have definite proof that you do this as a baddie. And MP is not as suspicious for the vote because he was having trouble controlling his emotions when he self-voted.

I think it's reasonably likely that you are bad this time, and trying to hide behind your self-vote. Especially the WAY you did it, like it was the new cool thing after Vomps and MP did it. That makes it MORE suspicious to me.

*votes MM*

juliets wrote:I really don't want to bring this up but I want to get some reaction to a thought I had while falling asleep last night (when most of my ideas occur). Regardless of whether BF is civ or bad shouldn't we vote for him to keep the will out of the mafia's hands?

But then the will would be in S~V~S' hands, and it's just as easy for the Mafia to kill her for it as it is for them to kill BF for it.

This reminds me of Monopoly Mafia, where S~V~S bid on and won the first lynched player's property, and was promptly kill on Night 1 for it.

Ok, so I had a plan here. My plan was to try and bolster the BF suspicion a little in order to make it seem like a BF lynch is a possibility. The next step was to watch and see who voted FIRST for BF, my logic being that IF BF has an item that could identify a baddie, the baddies would want to get a hold of it. Even if it's not pointing to The Millionaire, the baddies might want to grab it just because they aren't sure.

So S~V~S has voted for BF now, and she has been one of BF's biggest detractors all along. I'm not so sure if this plan of mine is credible, but I wanted to share it anyways.

In the beginning, I was "after" BF just for the plan, but now I'm actually suspicious of him. And if he's a baddie, then S~V~S deserves no suspicion for being the first voter.

I was feeling the Dom vote, but actually his explanation (that he saw juliets as buddying up to Civs with the "us" comment) makes sense to me.

My other likely vote then, is Metalmarsh, for his self-vote. Still deciding between him and BF right now.

Ideally, yes.

juliets wrote:
Dom wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Dom wrote:
Black Rock wrote:I'm going to start slapping these early self voters.
I might vote one of them tbh.
Oh yeah! MM also has my eye for his opportunistic self-vote.
Do you think this might indicate that he is bad? Does your experience with Metalmarsh point to this?

juliets wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Dom wrote:
Black Rock wrote:I'm going to start slapping these early self voters.
I might vote one of them tbh.
Oh yeah! MM also has my eye for his opportunistic self-vote.
Me too. I can't abide people voting for themselves early and expecting us to take them seriously as civs.
"us"?
us = others playing the game that feel the same way I do.

Dom, I'm going to make an assumption here. You're looking to suggest that juliets meant "her baddies teammates" maybe?

Golden wrote:I understand that SVS, and on a straight reading I'd agree...

But it doesn't seem like llama would want to encourage a scenario where everyone could just vote for themselves to keep their items safe (or make them vanish into the nether if they die)... and I'm not sure he had MM in mind when he wrote the instructions.

I just think it is worth clarity.

I agree, I don't think Llama had self-voting in mind when he set the parameters. It's worth a clarification.

Dom wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Dom wrote:
Black Rock wrote:I'm going to start slapping these early self voters.
I might vote one of them tbh.
Oh yeah! MM also has my eye for his opportunistic self-vote.
Do you think this might indicate that he is bad? Does your experience with Metalmarsh point to this?

Yes, he did it in Film Directors, and he was bad. Then he did it in Roger Rabbit, but his alignment in that is currently unknown. I believe he has done it as a Civvie - the way I see it, the only reason to do it as a Civvie is to get away with it when you're a baddie. It doesn't ever do anything to help the Civs, but it sure helps a baddie escape fire in the early game... unless he gets called on it.

rabbit8 wrote:
Long Con wrote:
rabbit8 wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Dom wrote:
Black Rock wrote:I'm going to start slapping these early self voters.
I might vote one of them tbh.
Oh yeah! MM also has my eye for his opportunistic self-vote.

Behavior modification? Does it work? Ever?
Ongoing experiment.

At least there are a few choices. I hate self votes. I don't think they point to civvie or baddie in anyway. They also don't help in anyway either.

Good luck with the experiment. Are you using the mafiatific method?

Metalmarsh is the subject of this experiment. My only remorse is that no one will get his Item if he gets lynched now.

rabbit8 wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Dom wrote:
Black Rock wrote:I'm going to start slapping these early self voters.
I might vote one of them tbh.
Oh yeah! MM also has my eye for his opportunistic self-vote.

Behavior modification? Does it work? Ever?

Ongoing experiment.

Dom wrote:
Black Rock wrote:I'm going to start slapping these early self voters.
I might vote one of them tbh.

Oh yeah! MM also has my eye for his opportunistic self-vote.

S~V~S is speaking closest to my own thoughts at this time. I am not too interested in the MP situation, I didn't think it was a strong thing to suspect him for, though it was an acceptable reason for a Day One vote.

Zomberella12 wrote:My stock certificate it turns out is a worthless penny stock that is only good for starting fires. Whatever that means.

See if you can start a fire then!

I tried to use my item, and ended up looking sheepish.

Still looking mainly at BF for the lynch.

It's great if he's a baddie who wants the focus on someone else... or if you are the name on the will.

Hey, talkative thread, I am caught up. MY eye is definitely on blindfaeth right now. I'm getting the vibe that he is buddying up to Golden this time ("but it's something we always do!") as a tactical maneuver. I also think that he (possibly he and teammates) concocted this Will thing in order to take hold of things a little, either now or whenever BF decides to get around making a "case" on someone, except this case will be supported by the unspoken assumption that it's more solidly based on this "Will info".

I've voted for Vompatti before due to auto-teaming with Lizzy, because I do not like what the auto-team does in most cases: it gives baddies an advantage. Right now I'm firmly eyeing BF for my vote.

blindfaeth wrote:Well, my item isn't a will for me, it's someone else's will. Like, a specific player, not a role. And if they die, I inherit a large sum of money. That leads me to believe I know the identity of the millionaire. So I wouldn't mind lynching them if other people agree. But for the idea to work, we have to actually lynch them, since he gets stronger from votes that he survives.

I realize I'm probably more quick to take action because I get a benefit regardless, but what does everyone think?

I think that's treading close to info-dropping. I'd like to hear from MP07 and Dom on the subject before you do that. Perhaps it would have been better to not mention it, and start building a case against this Millionaire possibility.

I think my item is a dud.

Oh, never mind - BR just reminded me what it stands for!

Don't tell anyone, it's a good secret!

S~V~S wrote:You know what I meant, Epi. Stop correcting me. I am not one of your students

Yeah, rabbit, beeotch!

What does S~V~S stand for? It's not quite your name.

I was afraid to take the Silver Buddha (my first choice originally), the Green Jade Hand, OR the Two-Headed Elephant Charm, because I thought they all sounded like they were ripe for being Curse items.

I chose the Ivory Arrow because it sounds cool.

The Syndicate

Search found 234 matches

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [NIGHT 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [NIGHT 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [NIGHT 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [NIGHT 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [NIGHT 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [NIGHT 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [NIGHT 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [NIGHT 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [NIGHT 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [NIGHT 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [NIGHT 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 1]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 0]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 0]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 0]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 0]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 0]

Re: Harry Stephen Keeler [DAY 0]