The Syndicate

You could always join #TeamLynchGlorfindel. We'd be happy to have you.

S~V~S wrote:Lini @ TH, I will leave again.

Is this what you think I want?

sprityo wrote:
Turnip Head wrote: I think it means he has nothing left to do except try to fuck with us
~or maybe no one has questioned if i really have won or not~

sprityo wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Have you already won the game?
well of course not, but then again, maybe im just being lazy again

Well I did question you, though I note that you denied it :P

SVS I don't think you're bad, but trying to justify a self vote as civ behavior is a fool's errand IMO. It's not baddie behavior and it's not civvie behavior, it just means that you're not trying

Bullzeye wrote:
S~V~S wrote:
juliets wrote:
sprityo wrote:just for the simple fact that the floyd lynch will more than likely go through, (which i do support, dont get me wrong) ill be saving my vote for later, and if it's not needed, ill drop it on myself
sprityo, why would you drop a vote on yourself if youre not bad and not an inmate? i just don't understand.
Why do you think only baddies vote for themselves? Sprit may be bad, but a self vote can be from frustration,and in my experience that is the usual reason for it.
Sprit's comment in general looks super shifty (almost as shifty as TH). Like he's okay with a Floyd lynch - but if he doesn't have to save himself he'll vote himself? What does that even mean?

I think it means he has nothing left to do except try to fuck with us

Unfortunately I have already voted

Lmao Bullz

Enrique wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:
Enrique wrote:Got the ball rolling for you, juliets. Let's lynch sprityo.
You don't think he's Freeze?
I think he's bluffing, pulling every trick to avoid being lynched. He tried the emotional appeal with Dom, didn't work, now "ok whatever i dont need to be playing" and people bought it without much of an issue.

Plus, Epi confirmed that Freeze doesn't learn when he's won. (he did right?... he said that about Ra's, not 100% sure on Freeze but I asked)

I remember you asking but I don't think Epi answered. Fair enough. I'd prefer a Glorfindel or Floyd lynch myself.

Bullzeye wrote:I could definitely get behind a lynch of a no-show. For instance, TH's 532 posts account for just 8% of the entire game. What even is that?

I still think Glorfindel is bad and would be a good lynch, but idk how many people support that.

I'm down for a Floyd lynch. I've convinced myself that Epi gave him an inmate role for everyone else's benefit.

juliets wrote:Oh wait - it was because he hinted that he's fulfilled his win conditions right?

That's pretty much all there is to it.

Enrique wrote:Got the ball rolling for you, juliets. Let's lynch sprityo.

You don't think he's Freeze?

Lol this is shaping up to be a dumb day

Matt wrote:Turnips, what do you think of MP?

I think Wilgy is much more likely to have been "lying" about being Robin than MP is. Wilgy came out after the lynch stop and vouched for Scotty: this is exactly what I'd expect a non-Robin Wilgy would do, because the implication is that it discourages anyone from trying to lynch him. If you remember in GoC, when LC pulled Wilgy into the chatroom, Wilgy claimed he had a lynch pardon when of course he didn't. I can see the same principle applying here.

MP read genuine to me before he ever survived a lynch and he still reads genuine to me now.

Lastly, one of our hosts is not a fan of giving the mafia the ability to survive lynches, a sentiment he has also expressed to me in other conversations we've had. There is no lynch survival stated in the roles of the mafia and I see no reason to assume that one would be included.

Dom wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:We could always lynch Matt.
Why?

Joking :P

Dom wrote:Also, TH, were you serious the other night about making a case on Mac?

No. The case I had in mind was against Glorfy, but rather than making a bullet point case I tried to just have a discussion about him.

Sorsha wrote:So last I checked there was some cross referencing of sabies night locations to other players. Anything come of that?

Yeah we figured out you were bad

We could always lynch Matt.

Maybe.

Pretty sure I marked him down as Good though. Why do you think you GTH read him as bad?

MacDougall wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:
MacDougall wrote:Let's lynch DharmaHelper.
Lets not.
Nah let's.

Why do you want to lynch Derpa Helper?

Epignosis wrote:
Enrique wrote:@Hosts: Does Mr. Freeze have to be alive to win? (before he goes postal)
No.

I think a case could be made that sprityo is Mr. Freeze and has already won the game. Correct me if I'm wrong but we've only seen one player silenced by Montoya and no kills from Freeze. Maybe he blocked her early and now he's twiddling his thumbs

Enrique wrote:sprityo "doesn't need to be in the game anymore," am I the only one curious to confirm he's not bullshitting?

I figured we could save him for a rainy day. It's not like he's taking up much space

Golden wrote:TH, my perspective of you going after me boils down to this. "Oy, golden. I'm hitting you with the blue shell. Snap out of it. SVS is good."

And I'm beginning to think maybe you know what you are talking about.

I don't know what I'm talking about, if you're implying that I have info. I just disagree with your findings and I'm trying to communicate to you why.

Golden wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:
Golden wrote:I feel like you and TH have both missed parts of the thread and are accusing me of something without actually having read all of the context.

Shots fired.
I still think they are both civilian, but I really don't understand what they are accusing me of. TH says it isn't taking into account all sides, but to me analysis of whether arguments for and against are flawed is a critical part of taking into account all sides. Enrique is just accusing me of... not having a case, I guess? I honestly don't know.

For a player who has admitted he doesn't read SVS's tone well, you are hinging an awful lot of your thoughts re: her on a single vote that she made. That's all I'm saying. Change the counterwagon from "Mac" to "sprityo", take away your early DH vote, and you could be in the same position she's in.

Golden wrote:If I hadn't gotten pissy at DH for all his sarcasm, I'd probably be using my own vote on Sprityo.

And we'd all be sitting here talking about how in hindsight your sprityo vote doesn't look genuine. Just something worth thinking about.

I just feel like you're not giving the other side of this any consideration. The side where SVS is civ and voted for Mac because she suspected him and it had nothing to do with sabie. You yourself said you did not suspect or engage with sabie. You could just as easily be in the same position as SVS right now.

Here's a thought: if SVS is bad and is killing active players, why didn't she just kill Mac?

Golden wrote:Do you think it is good logic to say "SVS is not bad because no inactives have died, and SVS would have killed inactives by now" when I can point to an example of why this is demonstrably false?

No, I don't, but I also don't see a single person arguing this point.

Golden wrote:It's not like it makes SVS bad. But some of the theories for why she is not bad don't really check out, in my opinion.

What does this mean? Is she guilty until proven innocent? Why does it seem like you want her to be bad?

Upon further consideration I think Floyd might be an inmate. I don't know to what extent the hosts tweaked the roles, but I know Epignosis did not appreciate Floyd's lack of effort in previous games he's hosted. I could see him handing Floyd an indy role here so no one would have to be unfairly affected by his absence.

Golden wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:To be clear I think sprityo is either a cop who's already nabbed his inmate or an inmate who's already won the game and now he's just chillin.
How would a cop know if they have nabbed their inmate? Unless they are cop number one, I guess.

Yeah I was thinking Joker...

To be clear I think sprityo is either a cop who's already nabbed his inmate or an inmate who's already won the game and now he's just chillin.

MacDougall wrote:sprityo
S~V~S
TheFloyd73
Turnip Head
Typhoony

Good/Indy/lazy schmuck
Good
Good
Good
Bad

MacDougall wrote:MetalMarsh89
MovingPictures07
Sorsha

Good
Good
Indy

MacDougall wrote:Lorab
MacDougall
Matt

Bad
Good
Good

Sorry I'm still at work and had to help a guest figure out how to turn their fucking TV on

MacDougall wrote:Moving on, he can catch up

ekeknat
Enrique
Equivocate

Good
Good
Lol

Bad
Good
idk good I guess

MacDougall wrote:Moving on then

DharmaHelper
DFaraday
Dom

Good
Indy
Good

MacDougall wrote:Golden
Glorfindel
juliets

Good
Bad
Good

Good
Bad
Good

Bass Indy
Bubbles Good
Bullzeye Good

Is "Indy" allowed in GTH reads?

Go for it, I'll play. I just can't facilitate it.

I'm not only considering SVS's meta when I make a read of her, I'm factoring in my perception of her tone as well. That's a much harder thing to quantify and it's easier to argue the meta factors that coincide with my overall read. I tried to do the same thing when I defended MP earlier but at the end of the day people went with their own judgments.

Suspect her if you want, Mac, I'm not saying that you can't. I simply don't agree and think she's a bad choice to lynch today.

MacDougall wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Let me poke into SVS's headspace and see if I can sort out what she's doing.

I think what SVS wants to do at this point is stop playing a game she's not enjoying while also proving people wrong about her. Voting for herself and having her role revealed, if she's bad, only proves that people are right about her. This is not something I see SVS doing lightly, she's a competitive player, even moreso as a baddie.

Voting for herself and having her role revealed, if she's good, gets her out of the game and proves that people are wrong about her. This works to her benefit in future games where people can't use the same arguments against her, she can just point back to this game.

That's how I'm seeing it.
I came very close to doing that when she voted for me but instead I dumped my role hint and voted for sabie. Because I am a civ, and allowing myself to be lynched is letting down a whole bunch of people. Especially when there are alternatives. I think SVS wants you to think of it the way you are.

I never said she acted rationally :P Civs make selfish decisions sometimes. But I doubt she'd leave it up to WIFOM, specifically I doubt she'd rely on me making that argument on her behalf, if she were bad.

Golden wrote:
Enrique wrote:
Enrique wrote:I actually don't think that's a terrible idea... I mean, at least it's more sensible than arbitrarily choosing what to share. They both went to Arkham and GCPD, so all Mafia know those. I'd be willing to share Arkham if it's fine by everyone.
Opinions on this, btw?
If Epi stated in the rules 'it was not in our best interests to share' and then he allowed all the mafia teams to share them amongst themselves and so have an advantage, I'd be disappointed, because it would obviously have been in the civilians best interests to share.

So, for now, I'm going with Epi wasn't trying to disadvantage the civs.

Hosts - can mafia share their findings from night polls amongst themselves?

I think that's a crazy assumption to make. Why wouldn't they be able to talk about it amongst themselves? Having access to more information than the civilians is the raison d'être of the mafia.

Enrique wrote:
Enrique wrote:I actually don't think that's a terrible idea... I mean, at least it's more sensible than arbitrarily choosing what to share. They both went to Arkham and GCPD, so all Mafia know those. I'd be willing to share Arkham if it's fine by everyone.
Opinions on this, btw?

I've already been to both of those places so I'm pretty apathetic about making it public.

Glorfindel wrote:What I am saying is that the more experienced group of players are always going to support the opinions of your fellows over the contributions of those who are new to this site. Don't bother denying it - it is demonstrably true!

Well I will deny it, because it's not true. I support the things I agree with and I don't support the things I disagree with, and I encourage you to view my contributions in that light.

Glorfindel wrote:Look at my post from the last Day phase for example - the ONLY remark or comment that I recall having been made in relation to that was Golden's comment that he'd forgotten that MM was even playing (which incidentally was precisely my point). A night phase and half a day later, there's not been a single reference made to the content of my post other than to use the timing of it as an excuse to suspect me.

Could this be because of the point I made - that you didn't bring up this case until 4 hours before deadline, and you voted on it straightaway? That behavior, IMO, discourages people from discussing the content of your case. If you had brought it forward earlier or waited for input from others before voting, I might have responded to the content rather than the timing. The way you presented it affected how I treated it.

Let me poke into SVS's headspace and see if I can sort out what she's doing.

I think what SVS wants to do at this point is stop playing a game she's not enjoying while also proving people wrong about her. Voting for herself and having her role revealed, if she's bad, only proves that people are right about her. This is not something I see SVS doing lightly, she's a competitive player, even moreso as a baddie.

Voting for herself and having her role revealed, if she's good, gets her out of the game and proves that people are wrong about her. This works to her benefit in future games where people can't use the same arguments against her, she can just point back to this game.

That's how I'm seeing it.

FWIW I don't think SVS is bad here. In World Reborn she fought until the bitter end, even when her goose was all but cooked. I think she's just tired of having her character called into question here. Her voting for herself is frustrating but I don't think it's a baddie tell.

Glorfindel wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:I wanna say a sabie teammate might have thrown in the towel at some point but I feel pretty good about all the sabie votes. What do we think of Glofy's vote for MM? He did that thing again where he brings a case forth and votes for it all in the same breath after spending the rest of the day not talking about his reads.
Unlike some of you, I have a full time job and other commitments that mean I can't spend every waking minute here. I do my best to contribute to this game and again, unlike some of you I am uncomfortable lynching a fellow player without some semblance of a case against them. I'd like to think that especailly as we get deeper into these games I prefer to substantiate my lynch with a case based on at least some kind of loose logic and to do so takes time. You may not have seen this from me because I think this is a personal best for me reaching Day 6 in one of your games but like it or not, it's how I roll.

Well, I have a full time job too, albeit one that allows me to play mafia in my down time :P And many others here have full time jobs as well. I don't think that's a necessary dig; I am not accusing you of having unlimited free time.

Glorfindel wrote:I'm not lashing out at all Dom and I'm sorry if you've interpreted it that way. I was trying to address TH's criticism of my play style this game. I think what I'm trying to say is that I'd like to think my approach to my lynch choices could be considered to be thoughtful, considered and 'deliberate'. I didn't appreciate his criticism as I am trying to do my best for this Town team and for him to consider me 'suspicious' on those grounds is I think imprudent and unreasonable.

What I see is you making 12 on-topic posts yesterday, only one of which discusses who you are suspicious of, and you vote on the basis of post. Do you consider that to be thoughtful, considered and deliberate? I don't. You didn't wait to see other opinions on your case, you didn't wait for a response from your subject. You put the thought out there 4 hours before deadline and you voted on it. As town it behooves us to discuss our cases together and I don't see you partaking in those discussions. So your approach, to me, does not resemble the townie mindset - it looks like someone who wants to have an excuse to vote and who wants to get it over and done with as economically as possible. I don't think it is imprudent or unreasonable for me to find that approach suspicious.

Glorfindel wrote:Let me tell you, your credibility with me (as an individual, unrelated to this game) has taken a serious blow as a consequence of this. Let me tell you what this says to me. It says that like other players here, you're always going to support the more experienced players here over someone newer like me. The fact is, it's easier to dismiss the arguments of a newer player over those to whom you've had a lot of game exposure.

I know this was directed at Golden but you allude to it being directed at other players as well, and it saddens me. I don't think Golden is on a witch-hunt against newer players and I don't think anyone else is either. On Day 3 I led a lynch against a player I've played with on-and-off for 8 years. On Day 4, 16 players voted to lynch the creator and administrator of the site. If people are finding you suspicious, it is not because you are a newer player, and suspicions toward you are not indicative of suspicions against all new players. I hope you don't truly feel this way.

And Matt I didn't mean to accuse you of playing the game wrong or anything. It just seems like you're only interested in these odd tangents. If you've got something to say about MP come out and say it but it's weird to ask everyone if they think he's a certain role and then follow up with "I thought it was common knowledge?"

Search found 592 matches