The Syndicate

I'm going to go hide now

Enrique wrote:Turnip Head are you... okay? This has been a really weird day for you.

I'm shooting from the hip because I have no idea what to do.

LoRab-rabby-do, where are you...

DrumBeats wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Chinese Fire Drill ---> LoRab anybody?
Yes I am down. Switching vote there now, will move off and onto another sus if we don't have enough.

I joined you.

Sorsha isn't online and never voted, which tells me that she gives zero fucks. I'd expect a baddie Sorsha to fight a little harder in a tight lynch like this.

Chinese Fire Drill ---> LoRab anybody?

insertnamehere wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:I'm down to swing this lynch onto INH. No grand unifying reason, I just don't get great vibes from his participation and I don't like the current top three candidates.
Quick Question for you TH: If someone says they want to lynch you because they get bad vibes off of you, is there any possible adequate response to that? Or do you just have to shrug and say "Sorry that you feel that way," and move on?

The second thing mostly.

LoRab hasn't posted at all this phase, so that's unsettling. Whatchyu thinking, LoRab?

IMO Sorsha only busts out the "Wait til I prove you guys wrong" thing when she's civ. I know that by saying that I'm allowing her to use that against me in future games but I think it's true here.

Despite my early vote for timmer I'm not swayed by the case there either, and I think all the Serge votes are easy, his frustration felt genuine to me.

I'm down to swing this lynch onto INH. No grand unifying reason, I just don't get great vibes from his participation and I don't like the current top three candidates.

DrumBeats wrote:@ TH's new philosphy - I like Enrique too, but even civs can be way wrong about their suspicions (lol @ me and matt). Vote for yourself, because in the end you are responsible for it. Sheeping is the worst.

I'm fine with claiming responsibility for my vote today.

I will vote for whoever Enrique thinks we should lynch.

Scotty wrote:I only played with Enrique during Arkham and I didn't really take notes. Is he usually more off the wall in games?

Everyone who played Arkham should have been committed tbh, we all went crazy. Don't think I've ever seen Enrique this level-headed though.

Enrique wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:I don't think it's hypocritical at all. I was trying to get my top suspect lynched and he flipped civ. I told you to put the low poster thing on pause because I thought you were redirecting from Matt. That has been shown to be false. What's the problem
I don't get it either. Matt was your suspect, and supposedly Scotty's too, of course you'd prioritize him over any low poster. I didn't read your second post as saying "oh ya imma kill me some low posters!", but rather, it frustrates you to have little to work with... and that's perfectly normal. I don't like being put in that category, but come on, no one likes low posters. There's nothing hypocritical about telling Scotty to focus on what's in front of him instead of deflecting with non-existent players.

He joked about it, and while I do still find Sorsha sus, this is Epignosis harping on an inconsistency. He doesn't have to be bad, but do watch out for this sort of nitpicky manipulative behavior. It's not a great look.

You are way too reasonable this game. It's freaking me out

Scotty wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:I don't think it's hypocritical at all. I was trying to get my top suspect lynched and he flipped civ. I told you to put the low poster thing on pause because I thought you were redirecting from Matt. That has been shown to be false. What's the problem
Do me a favor and help me get my new top suspect lynched and we'll [almost] call it even.

Timmer, answer this man!

I don't think it's hypocritical at all. I was trying to get my top suspect lynched and he flipped civ. I told you to put the low poster thing on pause because I thought you were redirecting from Matt. That has been shown to be false. What's the problem

Well it's not really an inconsistency, I was trying to bully Scotty into voting for his baddie bro. It... almost worked.

Epignosis wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:I'm also starting to grow worried about our under the radar players. DF, Enrique, INH, Daisy, timmer... these are all people I don't lean one way or the other on, and haven't looked closely at. Everyone is on the table as a suspect right now.

Turnip Head wrote:Scotty, if you really truly suspect Matt I think you should put your money where your mouth is, put your low poster crusade on pause and vote for him. Let's see what kind of support it generates.
Mmm hmm.

I don't get it.

I'm also starting to grow worried about our under the radar players. DF, Enrique, INH, Daisy, timmer... these are all people I don't lean one way or the other on, and haven't looked closely at. Everyone is on the table as a suspect right now.

RIP indiglo.

Serge, I know you've mentioned Epi once or twice, but looking at your post history, 90% of your posts are about game mechanics and roles. This is my warning to you that when I see that sort of ratio, I assume the player is less willing to talk about players and suspicions. So... if you're a civ, you should stop doing that :P

I need to review my opinion on Scotty in light of Matt's flip and I want to look at Sorsha and Epignosis. On first read through it did seem like Sorsha was being inconsistent re: her thoughts on me and how they related to SVS, and then she stuck to that inconsistency when Epi called her on it, as if unwilling to say her thought process was wrong... but I also got the feeling that Epi was harping on that inconsistency a little too much, so I need to wrap my head around that whole situation.

Damnit. Sorry Matt.

Voting for espers as promised, but I like where this lynch is heading.

Matt wrote:Turnip, have you ever hosted me in a game outside of GoC? I could be wrong, but I was a baddie in that game and as a baddie with teammates, I don't often PM my hosts all that much, so earlier when you said "In my experience hosting him, he would usually PM the host with such a question", I wanted to know where you came up wit dat.

But it's true, tho, I usually do PM my hosts lots and lots, but I want to know what other game(s) Turnips has hosted me in where he came up with such a conclusion.

Umm, there is no other game(s), my experience hosting you is the GoC where you PM'ed me and SVS a bunch of questions.

Nice to see I've suddenly made your suspicion list though

Matt wrote:Also, Drummy, you were wrong on BWT. You were...potentially...wrong on SVS. I know you're wrong on me. Sooo since you suss Scotty, that leaves me inclined to lean civ on him.

lolololol

DrumBeats wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:
DrumBeats wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:
Scotty wrote:And yet you're holding your vote.
Why don't you put your money where your mouth is?
Because I plan to vote for espers.
Case please.
I mean, where do I even start?
Why do you suspect espers?

Maybe because every one of his 6 posts has the words "I AM SCUM" written in big red letters across it? Wake up sheeple.

Here's a link to his post history, take a look for yourself.

DrumBeats wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:
Scotty wrote:And yet you're holding your vote.
Why don't you put your money where your mouth is?
Because I plan to vote for espers.
Case please.

I mean, where do I even start?

Scotty wrote:And yet you're holding your vote.
Why don't you put your money where your mouth is?

Because I plan to vote for espers.

The responses to bea seem unnecessarily hostile... which is odd because it's sweet thang bea.

Scotty wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:
Scotty wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:[snip]
Ok so let's say hypothetically speaking someone had vehemently defended SVS and went head to head with anyone that opposed her. She gets NK'd. Now is your instinct to go after that person for defending SVS? If they were bad, they would have known she was good.
Why are you asking me this?
It's really a question for anyone. But since you're responding to me, im asking you.

Well, you quoted me, so

It's not a question I'm interested in answering, because it's a loaded question. I see what you're doing.

Scotty wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:[snip]
Ok so let's say hypothetically speaking someone had vehemently defended SVS and went head to head with anyone that opposed her. She gets NK'd. Now is your instinct to go after that person for defending SVS? If they were bad, they would have known she was good.

Why are you asking me this?

Matt wrote:Caught up. Goin' to work soon but if you have any questions for me let me know and I'll get back to you tonight.

RIP SVS.

Lol @ Drumbeats

@ Scumbuddy Scotty

Yup, let's lynch this mofo.

Scotty wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Scotty, if you really truly suspect Matt I think you should put your money where your mouth is, put your low poster crusade on pause and vote for him. Let's see what kind of support it generates.
Fine.

vote Matt

Have you read what I wrote about Drumbeats and motivations of baddies to gun for someone only to have them find their demise?

Out of all the SVS haters, DrumBeats felt the most genuine to me. If SVS was indeed the mafia's intended target, I think it was because they realized an SVS lynch would be more problematic for them than they originally thought. They would have been forced to give an opinion one way or the other, and after the flip they'd have to own up to those opinions. DrumBeats was already on the record, he didn't have much to gain from SVS being night killed as opposed to following through with his suspicion.

fingersplints wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:
fingersplints wrote:Do you understand where Bea is going? Why am I required to see SVS exactly as she does?
I was thinking bea was concerned that you didn't give your take on SVS one way or the other, but looking back you did talk about it a little bit, and it seems you leaned toward believing SVS. Would you say that's accurate?
Maybe? Do you think she is trying to stir up suspicion of me or genuine?

atm I think her motives are genuine.

Scotty, if you really truly suspect Matt I think you should put your money where your mouth is, put your low poster crusade on pause and vote for him. Let's see what kind of support it generates.

I replaced sig.

Scotty wrote:
Matt wrote:
Scotty wrote:Hey Matt, question for you: you still suspect FS and I for our "defending" of SVS on Day 0. Does that mean you suspect SVS? You never answered this when I asked you like Night 1.
And do you have any other suspicions besides us?
I'm not really sure who I suspect. I've been pretty busy this week.

I'm starting to like you a bit more, but I wonder if that's only because I know you're genuinely frustrated with being linked to me as a baddie partner. Tho that part is genuine, you could still be bad.

So here's the thing Matt. I've been flitting about my suspicion of you for not developing any other noticeable reads besides our little doe-see-doe Day 0. I don't know if that's your normal meta Matt, tunneling on one or two people until they get lynched. Hell, that's been my general quid pro quo in a lot of games, but I got away from "tunneling scotty" because it drove me into insanity (lol sorry @Quin from the Sock Mafia).

I still think you could be bad for your tunneling, because the only Bad Matt I remember was from LOST Again where you went after our scumbuddy Bullz, but here I know I'm civ, so this is a stretch to link that behavior to this game.
But I'm keeping both eyes open in case we're literally 2 civs driving each other into a Romeo and Juliet ending. And that's hardly my favorite ending to a Shakespeare play.

Tomorrow, should I still be alive, I would suggest we both look at other people. I'm a little weirded out by leetic's self vote and I figure I'm not doing enough to look at the low posters hiding in the shade.

This is a pair of scumbuddies if I ever saw one.

Scotty wrote:Hey @Matt! What do you make of SVS dying? Would you join Drumbeats, myself and others in lynching you today?

I was just about to ask where your Matt suspicion went. You just paying lip service to it?

fingersplints wrote:Do you understand where Bea is going? Why am I required to see SVS exactly as she does?

I was thinking bea was concerned that you didn't give your take on SVS one way or the other, but looking back you did talk about it a little bit, and it seems you leaned toward believing SVS. Would you say that's accurate?

fingersplints wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:
bea wrote:kk I'm srrsly honest on thisl.

TH- follow up because I'm sure I can't -

Lorab, indi, Spinltsy were all non voices in the eternal night of svs dying.
I'm not really sure what to make of this. Lorab did chime in, but like DrumBeats said it felt slightly forced; like she wanted to come down on the side of defending SVS so she came up with a reason to do so. I don't know indi well enough to guess how she would react. Splintsy seems a nonvoice altogether, not just in the SVS matter, so not sure what to make of that either. I'd certainly like to hear more from all 3 of them about what they want to do for today's lynch.
Perhaps splintsy would be more of a voice if there was some resolution to her Day 0 suspicion?

What suspicion was that? I'll be honest and say I still haven't read the thread from before I subbed in

bea wrote:kk I'm srrsly honest on thisl.

TH- follow up because I'm sure I can't -

Lorab, indi, Spinltsy were all non voices in the eternal night of svs dying.

I'm not really sure what to make of this. Lorab did chime in, but like DrumBeats said it felt slightly forced; like she wanted to come down on the side of defending SVS so she came up with a reason to do so. I don't know indi well enough to guess how she would react. Splintsy seems a nonvoice altogether, not just in the SVS matter, so not sure what to make of that either. I'd certainly like to hear more from all 3 of them about what they want to do for today's lynch.

This is mainly for Sorsha:

Spoiler: show

DrumBeats wrote:
bea wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Gabe was a corporate employee, and corporate is the most likely group for the baddies. Ryan is the Fire Guy, and he started the fire. Probably a civ, though he did work at corporate for a while.
I'm reading both of these roles as civ unless we learn of a recruiting element. Till then, they are civ in my book.
I was too, but Dom's old and outdated character list had Gabe listed under corporate, so I think that is very likely to be true in the revised setup.

Then again, Toby works for HR which is corporate, so he's not really a part of our family.

Also he's divorced, so he's not really a part of his family.

Sorsha wrote:Also TurnipHead. His constant defense of SVS reminds me of AWR when we had quite a few circumstantial pieces of evidence that SVS was bad and he still refused to believe it. (She was bad, so were TH and I, on the opposite team, ftr). I'll be keeping an eye on him for now, if SVS were lynched and came back civ he would jump up to #1 for me.

I forgot to respond to this. I don't really understand the connection you're drawing. I'm sure I've defended SVS just as often as I've accused her, I'm probably batting .500. I feel okay about your motives though so feel free to keep an eye on me

DrumBeats wrote:@ linki TH - What do you think of Matt's question about whether it would be night 3.2 or 4 on the second night? If he's mafia I would guess he's Jo personally.

I don't know. From my experience hosting him, he had no problem asking those sorts of questions in PM's. Not sure why he asked the thread.

Epignosis wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Matt, Epi, Lorab, Scotty. Them's the suspects. Likely in that order.

In case I die tonight, I'm not Pam and I know nothing.
You're not dying tonight silly. It's DrumBeats.

I still remember the last time you told me that

And if one of them was the Day Ender Person, I bet 5 Stanley Nickels that it was Matt.

Linki: Show me your tits Epi

Matt, Epi, Lorab, Scotty. Them's the suspects. Likely in that order.

In case I die tonight, I'm not Pam and I know nothing.

Epignosis wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:Who is that in your profile pic Turnip?

Spoiler: show
The victim of a pervert.

a2thezebra wrote:Who is that in your profile pic Turnip?

It's Pennsatucky from Orange is the New Black. The actress is Taryn Manning.

I'm looking at Matt mainly. Still waiting to see more from Epignosis.

DrumBeats wrote:The logic is that the absolute worst case scenario for the move is a 3 civilian to one mafia trade-off. The absolute worst case is still not a bad move, it's a mediocre one. Then factor in the likelihood of Jo's role being the one that is revealed. It was relatively unlikely that of all the roles available, hers would be revealed in these two night phases. And even then, they can pull the "there could be another vote forcer." There are so many ways for the SVS to get off clean here that it was relatively likely that we wouldn't lynch her for this, and even if we did, SVS would take down three civilians with her. It is a very logically sound move for the scum.

I could not disagree more. People have been lynched for much less than this. It's literally the first thing everybody thought of when Quin got lynched. "Relatively likely that we wouldn't lynch her for this" doesn't hold water for me.

Mafia could have 3-for-1'd at any point in the game. Why rush to do it on a night where Jo's power isn't active, unraveling SVS's alibi? Why not wait one more day? They knew the Jo role existed and would be revealed eventually... pretending that SVS's vote was forced by the baddies would work a whole lot better on Day 4.

LoRab wrote:Catching up. Headache. But trying to get through and ponder everything.

I think SVS is more than capable of a crazy gambit, but why I don't think she did this in this particular case is that it wouldn't make any sense for her to post about it. It would be far more strategic to just quietly vote without posting before ending day. And then post about it later. It just doesn't seem like SVS to play this out like she's being accused of.

That's... oddly specific. And I'm not sure I agree that it would be any more strategic.

Search found 183 matches