The Syndicate

Marmot wrote:you'really

Fancy!

Floyd is officially dead in a ditch now.

Epignosis wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Epignosis wrote:What is your actual opinion on llama? I think he stinks.
I voted for him the first two days, and I haven't really changed my opinion. What were his opinions on Quin during his lynch?
I'd have to look.

You do understand that I now suspect you as well. Yes, I'm sure you do.

It's fine. I probably have an inflated sense of my own lynch-survivability, which makes things easier for me.

Epignosis wrote:What is your actual opinion on llama? I think he stinks.

I voted for him the first two days, and I haven't really changed my opinion. What were his opinions on Quin during his lynch?

Marmot wrote:
Long Con wrote:At the very least, Metalmarsh and Epi's Llama-based reactions should be analyzable, from the perspective that they thought Llama was Civ-cleared? I don't know, that's one perspective.
When did I say llama was civ-cleared?

You didn't say it. It was generally assumed based on my list and comments.

@Epi: I am actually preparing a nice ISO on MM that should be quite convincing that he is bad.

At the very least, Metalmarsh and Epi's Llama-based reactions should be analyzable, from the perspective that they thought Llama was Civ-cleared? I don't know, that's one perspective.

Also: please don't be mad.

Epignosis wrote:
Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:And MM evidently suspects both LC and thellama73.
What's your point?
You suspect two people I now have a reason to believe are good, and you tried to get me to vote for thellama73 but you only offered "Fair enough" when I said I suspected him but wouldn't vote for him- you didn't make any kind of effort to make that lynch happen (or the lynch of LC for that matter). That makes me suspect you more.
1) I wasn't around after that point, so I was incapable of doing anything.

2) I'm not going to launch a campaign against every person I suspect, that's too much work, and likely wouldn't be fruitful anyway.

3) You suspect him but aren't pushing for his lynch either. Why do you suspect me for doing the same thing?
I did suspect him. The LC comment was always in the back of my mind. What do you make of his appraisal?

Ok, well, that comment, and his placement in my rainbow list, was entirely fabricated. I wanted to make it look like I Lie Detected him, but I didn't. I can't Lie Detect. It was a ruse.

He's a very valid suspect.

Epignosis wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
thellama73 wrote:Sawyer, are you still maintaining your innocence in the wake of that fiasco?
How does the fiasco make him guilty? Break it down for me.
The fiasco doesn't make him guilty, the role given to him by G-Man makes him guilty. His behavior reveals his guilt. And the fiasco teaches me to trust my own instincts and not go along with the cool kids.
"The wake of that fiasco" doesn't have anything to do with the role G-Man gave him either.

You are now citing his behavior that reveals his guilt. Walk me through what he said and did that is so revealing.
Epi, I get that you think Sawyer is a civ. I think you are wrong. I'm tired right now, but if you really don't remember/don't want to look for it, I will dig up my explanation of why I think Sawyer is bad first thing in the morning for you, okay?
No need. I've already found it and dismantled it.

Close call.

thellama73 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
thellama73 wrote:Sawyer, are you still maintaining your innocence in the wake of that fiasco?
How does the fiasco make him guilty? Break it down for me.
The fiasco doesn't make him guilty, the role given to him by G-Man makes him guilty. His behavior reveals his guilt. And the fiasco teaches me to trust my own instincts and not go along with the cool kids.

Maybe it would be better if you were less pedantic about it, and read Epi's question the way you know he intended it - "How does the fiasco behaviour reveal his guilt?" or something like that.

But you see my point.

MacDougall wrote:
Long Con wrote:
MacDougall wrote:Whose idea was this?
Instant blame. New top suspect.
It'd be sweet if you used your head instead of your pooping ass to play Mafia. What in the world kind of shit would my end of game play be as a Mafia player?

If I am a Mafia player, the only possible justification for what I did was to save Notsawyer. Otherwise I as a Mafia player just stay away from the thread for the last 20 minutes.

Seriously mate you havin a fucken lend or whaT?

Having a lend? Sorry Mac, I'm not hip to that slang.

So what you're saying here is that your actions so today should convince us all that you are Civ. And you can't think of a reason why a baddie would do what you did. You can't think of a reason why a baddie would vote for and secure the lynch of a Civ in a way that he can instantly argue a baddie wouldn't do.

MacDougall wrote:Whose idea was this?

Instant blame. New top suspect.

notsawyer540 wrote:
MacDougall wrote:Your top!?
Well not any more.

Ok, I'll place it on Quin for now then. I didn't get the best feeling about him when doing his ISO.

thellama73 wrote:I could be persuaded to vote for Quin or Wilgy if people want to pile their votes there. I am also happy leaving my vote where it is.

Hell yeah - me too! Let's do this!

Marmot wrote:Long Con, how do you feel about having 1.0925 votes?

Indifferent. I don't think I'm getting lynched, so I'm not worried.

I'm inclined to agree. I'll end up placing my vote somewhere that isn't notsawyer. Whether or not it will carry enough weight remains to be seen. I'll probably vote where others are voting, for the person I suspect most that has votes.

notsawyer540 wrote:Before I get started, I decided to illustrate how much (little) each of our votes count.

To start, I created the unit of measurement we'll call the "Floyd" unit.

7 Floyd posts over 7 Floyd posts gives one Floyd unit.

Dfaraday: .37 Floyds
Dr. Wilgy: .06 Floyds
Epignosis: .03 Floyds
LC: .06 Floyds
Mac: .09 Floyds
Marmot: .05 Floyds
Myself: .13 Floyds
Quin: .07 Floyds
llama: .07 Floyds

Total (excluding Floyd): .93 Floyds.

We couldn't lynch Floyd if all of us agreed to vote for him. Mac's vote against him is irrelevant.

Where do you get your information? I imagined it something like this:

Epignosis - 0.25
Marmot - 0.25
Long Con - 0.5
DrWilgy - 0.5
thellama73 - 1
Quin - 1
MacDougall - 2
notsawyer540 - 2
DFaraday - 3
TheFloyd73 - 3

... where the number is the value of their vote.

Or it could be a hundred other ways.

Right now, DF and Floyd are both voting for notsawyer. Their votes are weighted with the most value, so unless they change their minds, he's going down.

MacDougall wrote:Let's talk more about how I tone read a Mafia player on day 1 again.

You know, this whole thing.

I was thinking about Macdougall's good Day 1 performance.

Long Con
thellama73
MacDougall
Epignosis
notsawyer540
Dfaraday
TheFloyd73
Marmot
DrWilgy
Quin

This is a basic rainbow that I hastily constructed. I don't even know if it's exactly how I feel.

TheFloyd73 wrote:
Long Con wrote:3. Where you stand on Floyd and why.
I stand on Floyd in the gutter, because that's where I assume he is lying, dead drunk or just plain dead. Does he get some sort of points for just signing up for Mafia games? I don't get this guy.
Ow, that hurts.

Hmm... that did come across as pretty harsh. Sorry dude. Funny fail.

I have to give this one to Quin.

Quin wrote:
notsawyer540 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:I'm a redhead- I have no soul
Me too!

I don't really find Quin suspicious. But then again this is only my second game on this site and there are only a couple people I know well enough to make judgments on. Getting a civ read on LC. Not really sure if going after low posters is a good idea here, but I don't really have any better ideas yet, so it may come to that for me.

I'm a civ and I support Hillary Clinton.

Other than that, it usually takes me a few cycles to start putting things together. If Ron Swanson were in this game, I'd say he's guilty as shit for three days before realizing it was Donna right before I'm killed!

Anyway I'm gonna get back to watching TV and nursing this hangover. I'll check back in periodically.
Discrediting your own opinion on an argument while still making a point of giving it never looks good to me.

On my original read, I was comparing his and S~V~S' posts, and I thought Quin was making more sense than her, in comparison. Now when I look at it, I see Quin's accusation of notsawyer as a stretch. Reading notsawyer's post that Quin is criticizing, I just don't see it that way. I feel more like Quin needed an angle on someone, and put this one together to have something.

Quin wrote:
thellama73 wrote:Quin, I feel like you are not taking my efforts to lynch you seriously.
I'm not.

Not much to say here, don't know if Civ Quin or baddie Quin is more likely to dismiss and avoid.

... and this is as far as I have gotten on the Quin ISO. Going to work now.

Marmot wrote:
Long Con wrote:2. Where you stand on Marmot and why.
Leaning scum on Marmot. His latest claim, that he was nightkilled but protected, feels like a) an attempt to look civ, and b) an attempt to draw out information from the baddies. That's why I countered him a little with my own jokey misinformation.
I don't get it Long Con. What's wrong with trying to draw information out from the baddies?

EBWOP: *FOR the baddies

notsawyer540 wrote:I'm going to be out of the house until this evening. I'll catch back up and post my overall thoughts on everyone as soon as I get a chance.

One question I would like answered is: Have I really been forcing evidence to fit my conclusions, or has Epi's Fox-News-style misrepresentation of facts and events fooled too many of you?

Ugh, I went back to refresh myself on the background of the "Fox News" accusation. What I found in the latest exchange was Epi citing evidence that he's a Civ, and you asking for the evidence, and Epi putting together a pretty credible-looking post with his evidence... and you never really responded until your latest post just now.

Explain the Fox News metaphor for me, and let me know which Epi post or posts that I can see it in action.

Right now, this sounds like some sort of slick, sinister salesmanship. I already don't agree that Epi is bad, and the way you phrased that question just rubbed my ass-hair the wrong way.

1. Where you stand on notsawyer and why.
I'm kind of okay with notsawyer. Epignosis' suspicion of him has some influence on me, but overall I think this interaction is civ/civ. I think his accusations seem genuine enough, even if I don't agree with them.

2. Where you stand on Marmot and why.
Leaning scum on Marmot. His latest claim, that he was nightkilled but protected, feels like a) an attempt to look civ, and b) an attempt to draw out information from the baddies. That's why I countered him a little with my own jokey misinformation.

3. Where you stand on Floyd and why.
I stand on Floyd in the gutter, because that's where I assume he is lying, dead drunk or just plain dead. Does he get some sort of points for just signing up for Mafia games? I don't get this guy.

4. Where you stand on DFaraday and why.
I feel pretty good about DFaraday, but I don't know why right now. ISO 2

5. Where you stand on Quin and why.
Now both you and DF have said you forgot Quin was playing. I'm getting some alarm bells from Quin's direction. ISO 1.

6. Where you stand on thellama73 and why.
I'm cool with Llama now for reasons I won't really get into.

7. Where you stand on Long Con and why.
I don't think Long Con is trying to be out of the limelight. I think I've done some stand-out stuff. My Llama suspicions, my lie detector stuff... that's not blendy.

Epignosis wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Marmot wrote:Thanks for the protection whoever protected me.
I didn't protect you, I protected Epignosis!
Yeah, lie detectable statements really do a lot of good for protectors.

Marmot wrote:Thanks for the protection whoever protected me.

I didn't protect you, I protected Epignosis!

G-Man wrote:
THE WHITE HOUSE

Section 3. Implementation and Coverage Formula Composition. Beginning on Tuesday, January 24, 2017, all speech conducted within The Syndicate from the time the current administration took office will be certified and tallied. All current members of The Syndicate will have their vote values reassessed in a manner that provides for the same total number of votes to be cast but the votes of individuals will be weighted in the inverse order of their current speech volumes.

So, here's the post totals as of now:

Epignosis 191
Marmot 105
Long Con 103
DrWilgy 99
thellama73 97
Quin 93
MacDougall 74
notsawyer540 49
DFaraday 17
TheFloyd73 6

So, Floyd's vote is worth lots, and Epi's is worth very little.

Nice no-death! And may I say I'm happy to be playing in a post-Jack era.

Epignosis wrote:
[size=200]Long Con[/size] wrote:Trust me

Also, I voted Elizabeth Warren, because Hillary Points.

Epignosis wrote:
Long Con wrote:Anyone willing to make a lie detector statement? I'm Civ, and I support Hillary Clinton.
Long Con, this troubles me. I don't recall you ever coming out with a lie detector statement out of the blue like this. What prompted you to state this?

The roles in Red vs. Blue were fairly complex, and there can only be three of them in play due to the limitations of the Heist format. I (correctly) assumed that there would be an independent, so that eats up one power role. I am also assuming there are three vanilla mafia and two civilian power roles. I feel confident that there are two mafia remaining. If I am correct, it would mean there is one more civilian power role out there. Given the complexities of G-Man's power roles in the previous outing, I do not believe there is a lie detector.

Did you have any reason to believe in a Heist there would be a lie detector role?

I doubt that my role has ever appeared in a Heist before. Trust me when I say the lie detector thing will benefit the Civs.

Epignosis wrote:
Quin wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Quin wrote:Good catch, Epi.
Want to know something weird? Maybe this will help MM with his case against me that bad memory = bad.

I went to cook supper and had the sudden epiphany that thellama73 was bad because he was feigning ignorance. He had posted something that I didn't think thellama73 would really think. I was stirring my cabbage and onions and recalling that he confused Jack and notsawyer earlier. I was hot on his trail.

With my bierocks in the oven, I came up here to find the post I thought he had made and guess what?

No such post exists.

Such post definitely does exist. I remember him mentioning it twice.
No, there was something else I was recalling, but I must've imagined it.

Try to reconstruct it from your imagination.

Excellent. Let's hope this mission goes as planned.

Quin wrote:Now that Phenon has ended I can say that my accusation of Sawyer for discrediting his own take on an argument is a tried and tested baddie tell. Follow me (tomorrow)

OH! Now that Phenon ended and you'r baddie-lynched in Champs, I can tell you that thing in Juliets' ISO of you that I privately suspected you for.

It was the "pressure vote". I said the exact same thing as a baddie in Phenon, and I recognized it as baddie talk that I had used.

Ok, switched to Jack.

I don't think it's odd that Epi forgot Quin was in. I understand.

notsawyer540 wrote:
Long Con wrote:An audacious move for a baddie to make.
Just like killing their significant other on the first day.

I'm very suspicious of Epi, but like I said, Wilgy seems a bit more scummy and it's a lot more plausible that he's bad.

You're not just saying that to me because my vote is on him right now?

An audacious move for a baddie to make.

Epignosis wrote:
notsawyer540 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:I took my vote off of Wilgy and placed it on MM.

And I forgot Quin was even in this.
I'm busy.

Why'd you put your vote on me. You just asked everyone where they'd vote and why. What's your why?
My vote isn't on you. It's on notsawyer for the horrible theory about me he just posted.
You asked for people to post their ideas not relating to Jack and I answered. Seems a bit petty and insincere to vote against someone because they voiced suspicion against you. Not really a civ move imo.
My perspective of your theory is entirely sincere.

You think that notsawyer is bad and is putting forth a fraudulent theory that he doesn't really believe?

thellama73 wrote:I'm starting to feel left out. I think I'm close to the only person Epi hasn't voted for today.

Aw, I'll vote for you again, if it will make you feel better!

DFaraday wrote:I'm not liking how Wilgy has three votes right now, for what seem to be three different reasons.

You prefer votes on the same individual to be for the same reasons?

What are your opinions of the voters?

Marmot wrote:Have MacDougall and jack played together before?

I believe they have not played together.

DrWilgy wrote:Actually, I guess Mac did bus LC in talking heads, but LC wanted out of that game. It also wasn't right out of the gate.

Linki - 3. So you want me to see the following -
"It's not wierd that Epi is more alive than FZ right now even though he's a 'confirmed' civvie. It's not wierd that Epi wouldn't have been killed after Eloh because a confirmed civvie (SVS) stated that it was a frame (which implies civvynes). It's not wierd that the players voting for Epi now, missed that interaction, which was a decent bit of what the person we lynched yesterday said."

I just needed to be reminded of certain truths.

Epignosis wrote:
Long Con wrote:"Toing"?
going

Thanks... I couldn't lose the 't'. "Toying"? "Towing"? "Toting"? "Totalling"??

MacDougall wrote:Lynch jackofhearts team and we will be sitting pretty.

True. Overconfident.

MacDougall wrote:
Jackofhearts2005 wrote:
thellama73 wrote:I don't think I'v played with Jack of Hearts before, but I'm finding him annoying. He apologized for not being "entertaining" enough. Entertainment is not the goal of the game, boyo. Finding baddies is. Take the snark down a notch, why don't you, and answer me this:

Who are looking at voting today and why?
I know this post was accidentally aimed at me but I'll answer anyway.

We were in Unfortunate Events together but you got lynched on Day 1.

If I had a day kill that I had to use this second, I'd shoot Mac. Three seconds in and he's sure I'm scum? Never played with him before so his certainty is either a bluff or a lie (depending on his alignment and if he's bad, how many scum he thinks exist outside his group). Plenty of townies are jokingly certain of scum on Day 1 but with two posts about it, I get the impression he isn't joking. Some townies can act really certain on Day 1 when they actually just have a hunch. Don't know Mac's meta to know if he plays that type of a townie game or if he's just looking for a mislynch or to look like he's contributing.

I'm not actually planning on voting for Mac, though. I'm planning on voting for whoever pings me enough that I want to lead a lynch or my top suspect that is getting enough votes to make them lynchable. (I don't vote third party very often cause I want my vote to matter.) I don't know who that is, yet, but I'll let you know.
Why you seem so bad then?

If he's good: The coloured parts make sense, because it's a baddie talking about a Civvie. Jack knows Mac is Civ so doesn't want to lead the lynch that way with a big OMGUS vote.

If he's bad: Jack is distancing as much as he can without actually voting Mac to put him in danger.

Mac's response sentence feels more scripted than natural.

MacDougall wrote:Who said I was certain? I am more confident in my little read on you than anyone else seems to be on anything and you aren't gonna lynch yourself so might as well get a wagon cooking on someone. Why not Pingy McStrangepost himself?

A fool would be certain given such little evidence.

If he's good: This looks pretty legit

If he's bad: He accuses while simultaneously suggesting it's foolish to believe it.

"Toing"?

DrWilgy wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:In my head, we've hit a point where you not being bad is harder to believe due to the ammount of "hey look I'm so civvy because of these simple reasons!!"
I don't believe you genuinely believe this.

DrWilgy
I am on board with that. I've been looking back over things, and I get more bad vibes than good from Wilgy's "all the jokes" playstyle.

DrWilgy
Boo! Weeeaaaak!!

We can't all be Brian Shaw.

Search found 184 matches