The Syndicate

Nice!

I did a search of LizKeen's posts, and I can't find where she mentioned 'Juliet's Coffee' anywhere. Maybe I'm guilty of skimming too much and not understanding, but isn't there an accusation that states LizKeen used the name 'Juliet's Coffee' somewhere recently, and that she heard it in BTSC?

Can someone point me to the post? I tried and failed to find it.

Just read Bullzeye's LizKeen post, and it looks like a pretty good case to me. Now that Bullz mentions it, I felt the same way when I read Liz' post about a possible recruit. I think it would be worthwhile to look through all her posts with a quick search for "coffee" and see if she has called her that before.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:I think I'm going to go with Epig this time though. Him bringing up the whole "info" thing before LC ever mentioned it in his case still seems really fishy to me.

Yeah, he should have at least waited until I mentioned it in my case.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Long Con wrote:I'm really surprised anyone wants to hear anything from me about Turnip Head tbh. I don't really know how to put my thoughts on him, S~V~S, and others out there in any sort of complex fashion because I'll likely get accused of infodropping and 99% ignored by the thread. Unless that's just special treatment that only Epig gets.

I'm going to try and switch up my playstyle going forward, hopefully it will frustrate me less.

MM, no comment at all about the way Epig was gunning for you 1.0 even though he definitely knew that you killing BR night 1 was extremely unlikely at this point?

Correct. I know that you had already addressed it, and I find the whole subject to be quite sensitive anyway.

Sensitive? I'm sorry, I didn't realize it was a sensitive subject.

Turnip Head wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Long Con wrote:I'm really surprised anyone wants to hear anything from me about Turnip Head tbh. I don't really know how to put my thoughts on him, S~V~S, and others out there in any sort of complex fashion because I'll likely get accused of infodropping and 99% ignored by the thread. Unless that's just special treatment that only Epig gets.

LC, you do not have info on me, because I'm not bad. Whatever you're working with, an error must have been made somehow. People have thought they've had info on me before and they were wrong. Is this about the bottle still?

TH, LC said that he did not have info, and that he was trying to figure out how to convince people you're bad without hinting as such. I don't know why you think he could...

What do you mean? Why can't he convince people I'm bad without hinting he has info? What am I supposed to do when the guy who accuses me says he can't build a case on me without seeming like he has info? How am I supposed to react to that?

If LC wants to accuse me of something, I'll be here.

Oh, you'll be here. And you got the wrong idea entirely, maybe I should have used sarcastic orange.

Epignosis wrote:

Long Con wrote:Ok, maybe I can hold on to a shred of my sanity. Rabbit, you have always been on top of things, thanks for keeping it real.

Yes, I was expressing frustration at the way that all Epig had to do was invent one post about non-existent info and almost everyone just eats the crap right out of his hand. You'll see on his last post that he's still trying to push that angle. And the thing is, 75 - 80% of the people reading that post will just believe it. I can make ten posts calling it crap and the next ten posts will be speculating on what my info is and where I got it. It's like playing Mafia in Bizarro World. So don't tell me it's a silly thing to worry about, TH. I know it's silly thing. And yet, here we are.

A seasoned witch could call you from the depths of your disgrace
And rearrange your liver to the solid mental grace

... do you mean S~V~S?

Ok, maybe I can hold on to a shred of my sanity. Rabbit, you have always been on top of things, thanks for keeping it real.

Yes, I was expressing frustration at the way that all Epig had to do was invent one post about non-existent info and almost everyone just eats the crap right out of his hand. You'll see on his last post that he's still trying to push that angle. And the thing is, 75 - 80% of the people reading that post will just believe it. I can make ten posts calling it crap and the next ten posts will be speculating on what my info is and where I got it. It's like playing Mafia in Bizarro World. So don't tell me it's a silly thing to worry about, TH. I know it's silly thing. And yet, here we are.

Finally we're on the same page.

Turnip Head wrote:

Long Con wrote:I'm really surprised anyone wants to hear anything from me about Turnip Head tbh. I don't really know how to put my thoughts on him, S~V~S, and others out there in any sort of complex fashion because I'll likely get accused of infodropping and 99% ignored by the thread. Unless that's just special treatment that only Epig gets.

LC, you do not have info on me, because I'm not bad. Whatever you're working with, an error must have been made somehow. People have thought they've had info on me before and they were wrong. Is this about the bottle still?

Is there anyone here who speaks English that can translate my posts into Syndicatese so that people can understand them?

Bullzeye wrote:

Long Con wrote:I'm really surprised anyone wants to hear anything from me about Turnip Head tbh. I don't really know how to put my thoughts on him, S~V~S, and others out there in any sort of complex fashion because I'll likely get accused of infodropping and 99% ignored by the thread. Unless that's just special treatment that only Epig gets.

Try? It's only infodumping if you do it with the subtlety of a sledgehammer.

Actually no... it's only infodumping if you have info. No amount or lack of subtlety can create an infodump without that important factor.

Bullzeye, TH seeming "reasonably good" most of the game is hardly an indicator of Civvieness. He's a very good player, I expect him to be able to do something that simple. It's the players that go out on a limb and take risks that I trust more, not the ones that seem good.

I'm really surprised anyone wants to hear anything from me about Turnip Head tbh. I don't really know how to put my thoughts on him, S~V~S, and others out there in any sort of complex fashion because I'll likely get accused of infodropping and 99% ignored by the thread. Unless that's just special treatment that only Epig gets.

I'm going to try and switch up my playstyle going forward, hopefully it will frustrate me less.

MM, no comment at all about the way Epig was gunning for you 1.0 even though he definitely knew that you killing BR night 1 was extremely unlikely at this point?

And S~V~S, you referenced my theory from way back closer to the beginning of the game than now. Theories change. I've been watching TH for a while now, and though I want to see how the Epig lynch turns out first, I've got some more fine theories to share with you about your trusted Turnip Head. Your reactions this very day have been very interesting as well, to be honest.

You guys are hilarious. Again, I don't have any info. I have a case, nothing more. At this point, I'm pretty sure I'm right. I don't have an official rolecheck, or special abilities that helped me foster this suspicion of Epig... I had facts instead. And I had Epig's actions. That was the original. Then Epig reacts by saying I must have info and furthermore it could be wrong in one of three ways. I don't really understand how that actually makes him looks less guilty to S~V~S, it has the opposite effect on me.

Then Epig puts forth a suggestion that simultaneously smells like a role hint and tastes like a Zomba save in the biggest kind of way.

Then Epig votes Vomps to tie the vote with Zombarella.

And someone suggested that Epig's baddie team might be trying to protect him by cursing him. Well, you don't have to actually have a curse used on you to hide behind a language limitation. (Although I realize it's real this time )

The only "info" involved there was put forth by Epignosis, and it seems like whatever he intended to do with that, has worked. There's no core element that can be erroneous in one of three ways, it's just baddie behaviour. I called him out on it during the MM lynch, and his reactions since then have only made me more confident.

Black Rock wrote:

Long Con wrote:It should probably come as no surprise that I'm *voting Epig*.

You didn't though.

Oops, there, now I have actually voted. Sorry!

It should probably come as no surprise that I'm *voting Epig*.

S~V~S wrote:

Long Con wrote:

juliets wrote:I have to do some back reading today before I can answer your question LC. Who is standing out for you beyond Epi?

I'm a bit suspicious of Turnip Head - I was thinking that if he has the Bottle, and the Bottle was in Epig's safe... there's not that many ways he could have gotten it. I don't think he's the Safe Cracker... so maybe he killed the Safe Cracker for it?

For a variety of reasons, I don't think DP or Golden was the safe cracker.

Well, we all have different opinions.

juliets wrote:I have to do some back reading today before I can answer your question LC. Who is standing out for you beyond Epi?

I'm a bit suspicious of Turnip Head - I was thinking that if he has the Bottle, and the Bottle was in Epig's safe... there's not that many ways he could have gotten it. I don't think he's the Safe Cracker... so maybe he killed the Safe Cracker for it?

Dom, juliets, who are your top lynch prospects for today?

Epignosis wrote:Pgnss thnks Glrck trgtd smn t gv hs wll t. Th prsn h trgtd ws th Blnd Bst, Crl vn Trsslr.

*rl chck*

f Pgnss s rght, ppl shld lk fr sddn cs md gnst smn.

Epignosis thinks Gilrick targeted someone to give his will to. The person he targeted was the Blond Beast, Carl Von Tressler.

*role check*

If Epignosis is right, people should look for a sudden case made against someone.

So Epig, what was up with this post? Now that we know the will was a fake by the baddies... I don't knwo, something about using the Smiley there seems to imply that you know something. Maybe that's not the way everyone reads it, but that's the way I read it.

What your post here did was give everyone another option to consider that was very different from the first conclusion: that the Will was faked to give Zomba credit after S~V~S was killed. I'm sure it's nothing, but it really seems to me like you were trying to save Zomba, in a way.

What is this silly talk? DP was killed because of the target on his back. And there's more targets out there by my estimation. I hope I'm wrong.

Nice poem, poet role! I know some of you will think I wrote that, but I didn't. If I were the poet, there would have been more poems. Unless it's an awesome and diabolical play by me to throw you off the trail...

Dom wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Dom wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:You have been more quiet this game.

I have 103 posts in this game. This is post #104.
In all 12 days of Doctor Who Mafia I posted 407 times.


??

You were pretty quick with that information.

It took about 90 seconds to look up.

Yeah, pretty quick! *high five begins*

Dom wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:You have been more quiet this game.

I have 103 posts in this game. This is post #104.
In all 12 days of Doctor Who Mafia I posted 407 times.


??

You were pretty quick with that information.

DFaraday wrote:

juliets wrote:

DFaraday wrote:

juliets wrote:

DFaraday wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:So... who are you thinking of voting for, Faraday?

I'm actually looking at Juliets right now. I feel like she's been rather wishy-washy all game (suspecting then backing off from MP, suggesting voting BF then being talked out of it, not knowing whom to vote for on Day 3). If I can figure out the multi-quoting I'll do that later.

And Sophie is sounding even more sincere in her latest posts to me.

There is a difference between being wishy washy and changing your mind because of discussion. It is not at all against my playstyle to not be decisive about a candidate on one day. I evaluate the evidence and the gut pings that I and others have and sometimes it is hard to decided who to vote. I would bet that almost everyone here has had a hard time deciding who to vote at least once during this game.

I get that, and it's not a hugely damning case in my view, but it's just coming off as a noncommittal game to me. I have to go, so I'll just vote Juliet.

I don't think Sophie or DP are bad, so this lynch isn't going to end well, I fear.

Well if you get what i said, and you've played with me before which you have, you should get that I don't deserve a vote. And you are calling my game non-commital? How would you describe your game?

I'd call my game rather lazy and ill-informed. I know that this is fairly typical for you, it just felt a bit stronger than usual in not being memorable, if that makes sense. If I had actually suspected either DP or Sophie, I would have certainly gone them over you.

Voting Wabash because it sounds funny.

Why so lazy and ill-informed? No time for Mafia?

Canucklehead wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:From our friends at the OED

Not everyone here is attending Duke.

Ah, shit. Is it behind a login wall? Sorry.

What would we have seen? OR... give us the Login!

Epignosis wrote:Equivocate is an intransitive verb meaning "to use ambiguous language to conceal the truth or avoid committing oneself."

And Dom is saying that TH is drawing a similarity between his reasons to vote Dom and his reasons to vote DP. What is the word he meant to use?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I still think we should head over to State St.

Sounds good.

Sorry I stopped posting - I'm sick in bed since last night, and just wasn't up for the Kanye thing.

Could have been a chemist, cause I cook smart
Gold bottles, scold models, spillin’ Ace on my sick J’s
So go and grab the reporters

Doubtful about it all
It is said that terror lives behind the wall of privacy
Always knew that one day, they'd try to bring me down
I'd rather argue with you than to be with someone else
My face turned to stone when I heard the news
Real bad news
My face turned to stone when I heard the news
Hey, I'm good

I guess the money should've changed them
Ball so hard

No church in the wild

LizKeen wrote:So, my ear tubes got taken night 1. Juliet says her rare book was stolen night one. And the only other way for DP to have gotten that elephant charm if he's not the Beast is to have stolen them from BR. I only see 2 roles that steal and neither is mafia. The only way mafia get an item is to kill the player that has it. Stealing comes before death. So if I'm understanding correctly either Juliet is lying, which I wouldn't be surprised, or DP is the Beast.

What do you think TH?

And I still don't trust Epi.


LOL, Gonna be a sucky 2 days for SVS and LC.

Thank God I ain't too cool for the safe belt
They tipping the scale for these crackers to win
Lupe steal like Lupin the Third.
Screams from the haters, got a nice ring to it
people talking shit, but when the shit hit the fan

But I ain't even gon act holier than thou
Mummy wrap the kids, have ‘em cryin’ for they mummy back
I wish I could give you this feelin’, I’m planking on a million
So I'll play them these post-Blueprint beats or whatever and then I'll play my shit.
Sophisticated ignorance, write my curses in cursive

Man I promise, I'm so self conscious
That's why you always see me with at least one of my watches
Rollies and Pasha's done drove me crazy
I can't even pronounce nothing, pass that Versace!

Elohcin wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

Long Con wrote:Anyway, I just want to reiterate to the Celestials, to Ichabod: please steal from me tonight. I promise that you will be glad you did. If you don't, then a great opportunity for you will be lost.

I will as again. Why do you want this? Do you have no items?

No, I have an item that they will want. This is not a trick.

Why do you want them to have it?

Because it will help them find the baddies and secure a Civvie win. And a btsc team of five can work with it. Or, they can just ignore me and let the baddies kill me and take it.

Elohcin wrote:

Long Con wrote:Anyway, I just want to reiterate to the Celestials, to Ichabod: please steal from me tonight. I promise that you will be glad you did. If you don't, then a great opportunity for you will be lost.

I will as again. Why do you want this? Do you have no items?

No, I have an item that they will want. This is not a trick.

Anyway, I just want to reiterate to the Celestials, to Ichabod: please steal from me tonight. I promise that you will be glad you did. If you don't, then a great opportunity for you will be lost.

juliets wrote:

Long Con wrote:

juliets wrote:Long Con, maybe this is a stupid question but if you knew the bottle caused Epi's Yes responses why did you think in that recent post that Epi had just made that up? Or did I misread your post. Let me see if I can find the part I'm talking about -

Long Con wrote: And look at you, trying to beg sympathy from everyone because you "haven't been able to speak normally since Day 1". So you couldn't manage to express anything you needed to express during Day Two, when it was known to everyone that you had the jokey influence of having to answer questions with a "yes"? Are you joking? Why do you NEED to make plays like this, it's just not honest. You supposedly couldn't post vowels between Night 2 and Night 3. Has there been ANY other curses this game? Are we going to see more like that? I'll be very interested to see.

The dishonesty I spoke of was him saying that he "hasn't been able to speak normally since Day 1". He could speak perfectly well on Day 2, just with the added caveat that he had to respond with a 'yes' to questions. Even that wasn't in effect on Night 2; Epig was posting very normally all Night. Do YOU think it's an honest representation of his game to claim he hasn't been able to speak normally since Day 1?

I see - you weren't talking about that specific issue you were talking about his wide claim. I can see why he thought his game was affected for Day 2 and Day 3 though i agree the "yes" curse didn't affect everything about how he communicates. The nights if he was free from curse (I haven't checked) would have also been a time to communicate freely. If I had been affected two days in a row at the beginning of the game though, I would have had some strong feelings about that situation. None of this is to say Epi is good or evil or neutral. I haven't made up my mind about that. I just ask a lot of questions to process information.

Ok, so you don't think there's anything dishonest about saying he's been UNABLE to speak normally since Day 1. Thank you for giving me your point of view.

juliets wrote:Long Con, maybe this is a stupid question but if you knew the bottle caused Epi's Yes responses why did you think in that recent post that Epi had just made that up? Or did I misread your post. Let me see if I can find the part I'm talking about -

Long Con wrote: And look at you, trying to beg sympathy from everyone because you "haven't been able to speak normally since Day 1". So you couldn't manage to express anything you needed to express during Day Two, when it was known to everyone that you had the jokey influence of having to answer questions with a "yes"? Are you joking? Why do you NEED to make plays like this, it's just not honest. You supposedly couldn't post vowels between Night 2 and Night 3. Has there been ANY other curses this game? Are we going to see more like that? I'll be very interested to see.

The dishonesty I spoke of was him saying that he "hasn't been able to speak normally since Day 1". He could speak perfectly well on Day 2, just with the added caveat that he had to respond with a 'yes' to questions. Even that wasn't in effect on Night 2; Epig was posting very normally all Night. Do YOU think it's an honest representation of his game to claim he hasn't been able to speak normally since Day 1?

Dom wrote:I don't like seeing both sides of this LC/Epig debate. :/

Open-mindedness can be a bitch.

juliets wrote:I didn't think [Metalmarsh] was telling the truth when he said [he used the Bottle on Epig and caused the Affirmative Curse] but since he was good I guess he was. I'm not sure why you are saying I didn't. This post was to close out our discussion on the rare book.

Why didn't you think Metalmarsh was telling the truth? He explained Epig's weird responses and claimed responsibility for it with his Item, the Bottle. I thought it was pretty cut-and-dry.

juliets wrote:

Long Con wrote:

juliets wrote:You're right LC, I didn't think of it that way. I double checked my spreadsheet and it was stolen night one. I double checked the pm on the item and it was definitely that the receiver has to say yes to every action. But maybe this is relevant - when I asked about it I was told it didn't do anything right now (back then). I don't understand really what that meant, not that I wanted to use it then. Maybe it had to be stolen to activate? Anyway, the fact that it left me night one appears to be a stumbling block to it having been used on Epi. Which I guess means its still out there to be used by someone else.

Juliets, I don't think you're reading the thread closely enough. I just told you that MEtalmarsh claimed responsibility for Epig's Affirmative Curse on Day Two. Your rare book is not directly relevant to Epig's curse, as far as I can see.

I read that he said that and I read that you repeated it. I didn't think he was telling the truth when he said it but since he was good I guess he was. I'm not sure why you are saying I didn't. This post was to close out our discussion on the rare book.

Ok, as long as we're on the same page here. When you said "the fact that it left me night one appears to be a stumbling block to it having been used on Epi" I thought it displayed a lack of understanding of the Metalmarsh-bottle thing.

Long Con wrote:

juliets wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

juliets wrote:LC, I just noticed that one of your issues with Epi is he looks as if he had a curse on him to answer questions with a "yes" which you think is possible he made up. I think I can prove he didn't make it up. I chose a rare book as an item and the book had the power to make people say "yes" to questions asked of them. I really didn't see how that was useful because I thought people would see through it but anyway it got stolen from me. I believe it was used on Epi.

That is very interesting juliets. Your book was stolen from you before Day 2?

Yes it was stolen night 1.

But Epig was affected by the Affirmative Curse on Day 2, so that would mean that YOU would have had to use it on him Night 1, no? Unless Items can be used anytime, in my experience it's a Night Action to "use" an active item.

My point of saying this was that it's weird that you would think it was your book that affected Epig on Day Two, when it was in your possession until the end of Night One. We know that it wasn't you or your book, I'm just confused by how YOU would think that.

juliets wrote:You're right LC, I didn't think of it that way. I double checked my spreadsheet and it was stolen night one. I double checked the pm on the item and it was definitely that the receiver has to say yes to every action. But maybe this is relevant - when I asked about it I was told it didn't do anything right now (back then). I don't understand really what that meant, not that I wanted to use it then. Maybe it had to be stolen to activate? Anyway, the fact that it left me night one appears to be a stumbling block to it having been used on Epi. Which I guess means its still out there to be used by someone else.

Juliets, I don't think you're reading the thread closely enough. I just told you that MEtalmarsh claimed responsibility for Epig's Affirmative Curse on Day Two. Your rare book is not directly relevant to Epig's curse, as far as I can see.

Turnip Head wrote:What if Epi was cursed with something like "You can only use five vowels for the next 48 hours"? That would somehow be even worse.

Yup, that was probably it.

juliets wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

juliets wrote:LC, I just noticed that one of your issues with Epi is he looks as if he had a curse on him to answer questions with a "yes" which you think is possible he made up. I think I can prove he didn't make it up. I chose a rare book as an item and the book had the power to make people say "yes" to questions asked of them. I really didn't see how that was useful because I thought people would see through it but anyway it got stolen from me. I believe it was used on Epi.

That is very interesting juliets. Your book was stolen from you before Day 2?

Yes it was stolen night 1.

But Epig was affected by the Affirmative Curse on Day 2, so that would mean that YOU would have had to use it on him Night 1, no? Unless Items can be used anytime, in my experience it's a Night Action to "use" an active item.

juliets wrote:LC, I just noticed that one of your issues with Epi is he looks as if he had a curse on him to answer questions with a "yes" which you think is possible he made up. I think I can prove he didn't make it up. I chose a rare book as an item and the book had the power to make people say "yes" to questions asked of them. I really didn't see how that was useful because I thought people would see through it but anyway it got stolen from me. I believe it was used on Epi.

Metalmarsh already claimed that his Bottle item is what was used on Epig.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Oh, and my item. I received a bottle that contains a liquid. If I use it on a player at night, that player is forced to respond to questions directed at them in the affirmative the following day. I used it on Epignosis.

Interesting that two Items would have the same effect on a player. I can see the appeal of it, to confuse people.

I was thinking he made up the No Vowels curse on himself to try and deflect suspicion away. I wonder, since he used AT LEAST five vowels, what kind of punishment he supposedly has for disobeying the curse?

Back to Archer Ave for me.