The Syndicate

Long Con wrote:I think that kind of role is not subject to infodumping rules.

So Elizabeth Donner could have said "A, B, C and D are Donners" and that would not be regarded as info dumping?

And for what it's worth, I could have been a baddie from the other team, and him not being on my team, would have meant nothing.

@linki: Which role?

Long Con wrote:
FZ. wrote:Had I just said that the probability of him being a baddie was higher for me because he wasn't a Donner, and then voted for him, would you not know he's not on my team?
But then there's also a possibility of you being a Donner as well. You gave out two juicy tidbits: you're not a Donner, and you're not on Epig's team.

That maybe true, but basically you're asking me not to voice any conclusions I have from the game. Didn't Elizabeth Donner info dump as well by letting everyone know Epi was not a Donner?

thellama73 wrote:
FZ. wrote:Well, you said that my theory made sense, hence there was a logic in voting for Epi, when did that get lost?

thellama73 wrote:Snowman and FZ both make a lot of sense, but I'm not seeing the post where Epig says or implies that everyone is/should be afraid of him. Did Dom just make this up?
And you also said Rico seemed baddie to you (you also said that he always does). But this means you had at least 2 options, yet you decided to "punish" someone you thought was not lying, because you accused him for info-dumping, hence you decided to take out someone you thought was a civ.
When did I say I thought he was not lying? I explicitly raised the possibility that he was lying.

And yes, process of elimination would work if we all said who our BTSC partners are, but that is not the game I want to play.

When you regard something as info dumping, it's usually when you consider it to be the truth. Otherwise, it's just lying and I think that's a great tactic if it works for you, and it surprises me that you don't think that way.
I don't think it was about everyone saying who are BTSC was, but like I've said before, if I was going to vote for him based on my own process of elimination, people would logically assume he's not on my team. There was no process of elimination other than that. Just by saying to me "you raise a good point", I would think he was not on your team as well, or you'd try to convince me my idea was wrong.

Well, you said that my theory made sense, hence there was a logic in voting for Epi, when did that get lost?

thellama73 wrote:Snowman and FZ both make a lot of sense, but I'm not seeing the post where Epig says or implies that everyone is/should be afraid of him. Did Dom just make this up?

And you also said Rico seemed baddie to you (you also said that he always does). But this means you had at least 2 options, yet you decided to "punish" someone you thought was not lying, because you accused him for info-dumping, hence you decided to take out someone you thought was a civ.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
FZ. wrote:I just want to address the info dumping issue. The only thing that I said that could be considered as something of the sort is saying that Epi wasn't on my team. Had I just said that the probability of him being a baddie was higher for me because he wasn't a Donner, and then voted for him, would you not know he's not on my team?
The only way people would vote for someone on their team, is if they were baddies and then they'd probably move that vote before the actual deadline. So I am now convinced I didn't info dump, and I take my apology back.
And people voting for those who allegedly info dumped are not looking very civvie like in my eyes. *eyes* llama
The rules indicate that normal mafia rules apply. Role-outing is always against the rules, but some hosts don't state that infodumping is against the rules (ie. see GoC rules), so it is unclear if that is considered normal mafia rules or not.

So to solve that problem, Roxy, is infodumping permitted?

Be that as it may, the thing is, I'd like to know how in the bottom line, what I said was info dumping when everything I've said could have been realized from my actions?

@linki: LOL SVS. Glad to know I scare someone.
llama, I just think that your vote was an easy excuse to vote for someone and not something civ llama would do when trying to look for a real baddie

I just want to address the info dumping issue. The only thing that I said that could be considered as something of the sort is saying that Epi wasn't on my team. Had I just said that the probability of him being a baddie was higher for me because he wasn't a Donner, and then voted for him, would you not know he's not on my team?
The only way people would vote for someone on their team, is if they were baddies and then they'd probably move that vote before the actual deadline. So I am now convinced I didn't info dump, and I take my apology back.

And people voting for those who allegedly info dumped are not looking very civvie like in my eyes. *eyes* llama

No lynch, ha? What was exactly the state of votes at deadline? Was there a tie before Epi voted himself, or did LC have more votes?

*votes* Epi

I think at this point, the most probable theory is that Epi is Watsach. I also think he's BSing us in case there's a team trying to come up with a game strategy for later, and for the chance that he stays a baddie.

I'll be going in a few minutes, and tomorrow I'll barely be here if any. I see no reason to not vote Epi.

Was I allowed to say that? If not, I apologize. I don't get the rules

Epignosis wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:Well, it appears Epi has voted himself, and clearly isn't baddie hunting. Shame since I was looking forward to playing a game with him and I agreed with his observations re: Russ's points, but I don't envy the situation he's been put in.

I can always move it later, but I see no reason to wait now. Still curious why Snowman voted him nonetheless.

Votes Epi
Oh, I don't mind my situation at all.

After Night 0, some of the mechanics became clear to me. Not all of them, mind you. Interesting stuff if my interpretation is not in error. I'm not going to spoil anything. I'd wager that some of you also know what I'm talking about.

I actually have no idea what you're talking about. Makes me feel stupid

I hate when I don't follow.

But why did you vote for yourself? I kind of feel bad for pointing out something that was obvious, but now I think that Elizabeth's message was probably not fair. Funny thing is, that it was probably your reaction that made me think of it, because she mentioned MP as well, which would put him in the same spot and it didn't make anyone think about him.
But does this mean your Watsach and know that if you get lynched, you don't die and then you'll probably switch roles?

Epignosis wrote:
FZ. wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
FZ. wrote:I'm sorry if what I said was considered as infodumping, but I could be lying, and I could be a baddie in the other group. It doesn't make my case any less compelling. Which is, since Epi let us know he's not a Donner, each and everyone of us can now deduct what are the chances of him being bad.

My vote will most likely go to Epig or Russ
I didn't let you know that. Elizabeth did.
True. Still, too bad for you
Yep. Too bad for me. A real pity.

You might even say it's eating me up inside.

I might. I might also say that you don't seem to be coming up with any alternative option for a lynch, which is something I expect from you. So it's making me trust you even less

Epignosis wrote:
FZ. wrote:I'm sorry if what I said was considered as infodumping, but I could be lying, and I could be a baddie in the other group. It doesn't make my case any less compelling. Which is, since Epi let us know he's not a Donner, each and everyone of us can now deduct what are the chances of him being bad.

My vote will most likely go to Epig or Russ
I didn't let you know that. Elizabeth did.

True. Still, too bad for you

I'm sorry if what I said was considered as infodumping, but I could be lying, and I could be a baddie in the other group. It doesn't make my case any less compelling. Which is, since Epi let us know he's not a Donner, each and everyone of us can now deduct what are the chances of him being bad.

My vote will most likely go to Epig or Russ

I'm at work, so I don't have time to go over everything, but I was thinking that I already know two groups Epig is not a part of (mine and the Donners), since he practically said he wasn't a Donner. This means that to me and my group, the odds of him being a baddie are higher than any other player at this point. As a civ, he can either be Lavina or one out of the fourth group (who has 3 or 4 players). As a baddie, he has 5 options. Which basically brings his odds of being a baddie to at least 50%, which is higher than the rest of the players.

Though I would have gladly gone with the fourth option if I was allowed :P

S~V~S wrote:
FZ. wrote:Can we lunch SVS?

By the way Russ, if your BTSC buddies are civvies at this point, then lynching them means we lose a civ role in the count. But now that I think about it, it's interesting. Are you saying that you're bad right now and if you change roles anyway, there's no point in trying to help the baddies, I'm all for it. We can lynch you.
I do not wish to be lunched, I am a vegetarian and no threat to anyone

And yeah, Russ wanting to lunch his presumably civ teammates makes me wonder if they are indeed not civs.

Thing is, we have no idea who his BTSC are, which leaves us with him. Unless he wants to suggest someone else.

I'm going with one sheet as well.

Can we lunch SVS?

By the way Russ, if your BTSC buddies are civvies at this point, then lynching them means we lose a civ role in the count. But now that I think about it, it's interesting. Are you saying that you're bad right now and if you change roles anyway, there's no point in trying to help the baddies, I'm all for it. We can lynch you.

thellama73 wrote:
Ricochet wrote:I don't know what is more headache-inducing already, the bendy rules or Epig's WoF interpretation of the poll.

My only dillemma is regarding the Forces' deaths. Wasatch cannot be lunched/killed before the other two Forces do, but the other Forces die, in a certain order, after Wasatch does. Is there a contradiction in this or do Great Salt Lake / Fremont die instead of Wasatch, if he is voted for lunch or targeted for a kill on a particular day/night?

I'll choose U. A lot of our names end with U, but, especially in arts, the U in artists' name often got changed to an O, in international (especially French) variants: Enesco, Ionesco... So the U is a more precious vowel. (wtf am I saying)
I interpret this to mean that if we try to kill Wasatch, he doesn't die but one of the other members of his team dies in his place, until they are all gone.

Yeah, that's how I read it. But if it's a lynch, wouldn't it make it easier to know who Wasatch is? Unless after that, he changes his role.

And I just checked and votes are changeable, so I'll leave it with O

Game!

Welcome new players

. I think you chose the wrong game to start your mafia experience. Not sure any of us will be able to help, but ask away

Now, I wonder if the wheel of fortune thing is related to the rotations. Like if we find the right letters, we switch to a new role or something.

I'm going with u

The Syndicate

Search found 122 matches

Re: The Donner Party - Night 1

Re: The Donner Party - Night 1

Re: The Donner Party - Night 1

Re: The Donner Party - Day 1

Re: The Donner Party - Day 1

Re: The Donner Party - Night 1

Re: The Donner Party - Night 1

Re: The Donner Party - Night 1

Re: The Donner Party - Day 1

Re: The Donner Party - Day 1

Re: The Donner Party - Day 1

Re: The Donner Party - Day 1

Re: The Donner Party - Day 1

Re: The Donner Party - Day 1

Re: The Donner Party - Day 1

Re: The Donner Party - Day 1

Re: The Donner Party - Night 0

Re: The Donner Party - Night 0

Re: The Donner Party - Night 0

Re: The Donner Party - A New Beginning

Re: The Donner Party - A New Beginning

Re: The Donner Party - A New Beginning