The Syndicate

I guess if I get mislynched because of this you'll have no one to blame but me.

DharmaHelper wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:And if you think the purpose of that post was to highlight my civvieness then you missed the point of my post. I believe civilians lynch each other all the time simply because they can't understand one another's behavior.

Oh so NOW its "they".

Oh damn you got me.

And if you think the purpose of that post was to highlight my civvieness then you missed the point of my post. I believe civilians lynch each other all the time simply because they can't understand one another's behavior.

MacDougall wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Civvie behavior is hard to define because we pretty much always act irrationally.

You went out of your way to write "we" here.

No I didn't.

I believe that you did. I think you went out of your way to call yourself a civ when the natural way to phrase that sentence would be to refer to civs as "they" but you were worried that someone would find it scummy for you to refer to civilians as that and didn't want to defend from a dumb comment. It's an irksome sentence. At best case scenario it's fluff content that you've created for the purpose of telling us you're a civilian.

Actually I wrote it exactly the way that I posted it, briefly considered that someone like you might give me shit for it, and then when out of my way to not change it because I don't care and it's true. I act irrationally as a civ even when I'm trying hard not to.

MacDougall wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Civvie behavior is hard to define because we pretty much always act irrationally.

You went out of your way to write "we" here.

No I didn't.

You don't seem to understand Zebra's behavior, so you're associating it with her being bad. To me, that's irrational. I don't really understand why Zebra made the "alarming" comment or why she voted for the Docks, but I'm reading her tone as genuine.

Civvie behavior is hard to define because we pretty much always act irrationally.

I guess that's my point. Why are you associating that with baddie behavior?

Matt wrote:Frankly, I think Zebra is bad. She accuses people without really accusing them.

Is this something you think Zeebs usually does when she's bad?

If Zebra wanted to call the Arkham voters suspicious, don't you think she would have done so? I don't get how she's suspicious in your eyes for not following up on that. If anything it makes me think her thought process is genuine because she's not trying to cook up bullsuit suspicions.

Matt seems genuinely upset, which isn't something I've seen from him in the short time we've played together. It's weird how he's handling this.

juliets what are you thinking at the moment?

Golden wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

sig wrote:I was saying I also found it scummy that Enrique said Golden was a baddie for wanting to hunt mafia and not just the Inmates.

Upon my third read of it and you disputing the point, I got that.

Does this impact your opinion of sig?

I felt like his throughline on me and Enrique was consistent. He saw things the same way as me from the start.

Of course it does. I thought it was ridiculous that he could suspect you both. It was a big part of my case.

sig wrote:I was saying I also found it scummy that Enrique said Golden was a baddie for wanting to hunt mafia and not just the Inmates.

Upon my third read of it and you disputing the point, I got that.

Well I'm sorry that you don't like my opinions Mac.

Sig I was referring to this:

sig wrote:Enrique's focus on the inmates is pingy to me and I see no reason to be saying we should focus on them and that Golden is pingy for not wanting to focus on them.

Though now I'm thinking I misunderstood what you meant to say here.

Yeah I played Dune, sig was on my team although I didn't know it I will say I don't see any connections between how sig played in Dune and how he's playing here. And that was another game where sig was lynched early. I do believe sig that he doesnt want to be lynched early, but I don't know if that makes him good or bad.

sig wrote:linki: TH your suspicion is based around me not responding to Bass post where he quoted me joking, so yes your initial suspicious comes from my joking post.

That is not the basis of my case at all. You should read my case again. My initial question about your post was just that, a question. My suspicion comes from how you've behaved since then.

My point about you mentioning Enrique and Golden is not a contradiction. I am pointing out YOUR contradiction in suspecting both of them and commenting on the fact that your only suspects were the only two people being talked about by others, and you suspected them for opposite reasons. It didn't feel genuine to me.

I'm not trying to get you lynched for making a jokey post. I was very clear about that.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:As for Sig when I made that post about what you said I was just joking. I thought you knew that and that's why you never said anything about it. You bringing it up way later makes me wonder about you.

Yeah exactly. If he had simply responded to you saying it was a joke I wouldn't even be looking at him. But he apparently thought it was suspicious but not worth bringing up until I asked. Makes me think he was talking about it behind the scenes rather than in the thread.

Let's talk sig.

sig wrote:It wouldn't be a new record so no thank you, if you can lynch my day 0 then go ahead otherwise I'd prefer not to get lynched until mid game.

Here's a post about wanting to get lynched midgame that sig claims is a joke. I'm willing to take his word for that.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

sig wrote:It wouldn't be a new record so no thank you, if you can lynch my day 0 then go ahead otherwise I'd prefer not to get lynched until mid game.

Why mid game and not the end? Perhaps it because you are bad...

Bass asks sig why he would say something like this, and postulates that it's because sig is bad. I can't speak for sig, but if this were my own joke post in question I would clarify at this point for Bass's benefit.

These are all of sig's following posts until I engage him. The content isn't really important other than the fact that they're all about choosing a location. I like to categorize these posts as either "being helpful" or "appearing helpful". sig's ISO is only 12 posts so it should be easy enough to follow along, but I'm recording these for the sake of completeness.
One post agreeing with Golden about mechanics of hunting for baddies versus inmates: Back to discussing poll locations: Now back to the good stuff. Here's where I ask sig why he didn't respond to Bass's post:

Turnip Head wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

sig wrote:It wouldn't be a new record so no thank you, if you can lynch my day 0 then go ahead otherwise I'd prefer not to get lynched until mid game.

Why mid game and not the end? Perhaps it because you are bad...

Sig, can you explain why you didn't respond to this post? It did seem like a weird thing for you to say, and to not respond to Bass about it feels like you're trying to sweep it under the rug.

And here's where he responds:

sig wrote:Independents will inventively get lycnhed and NK, two of them don't need to be killed at all. We have 6 (?) mafia we need dead, the mafia only needs 1 inmate each dead. IF we spend eight or more phases hunting inmates and not the mafia we will loose. If we somehow get almost all the mafia dead mid game, we can always stop pursuing them and focus on the independents.

Enrique's focus on the inmates is pingy to me and I see no reason to be saying we should focus on them and that Golden is pingy for not wanting to focus on them.

Bass is taking a jokey post and trying to make it serious. I was making a joke at my own expensive basically. Since last game I was lynched day 1 and I usually get lynched by mid game if not earlier. The fact Bass even called out an obvious joking post is suspicious since the mafia tend to be the only people who do this.

Something I didn't mention earlier but stands out to me is that- well first of all, this is sig's first post discussing his suspicions. He picks the two people who were hogging the thread's attention at the time and finds them both suspicious for completely opposite reasons. That seems convenient to me. He doesn't really engage either of them, just adding fuel to the fire.

More interesting to me is that sig responds to me about Bass's post and calls Bass suspicious for even thinking it ( "call[ing] out an obvious joking post is suspicious" and "the mafia tend to be the only people who do this" ). Sig didn't really answer my question of why he didn't say this earlier, so I asked him again

sig wrote:I didn't mention it since I saw no reason to, his point against me is either an attempt to set me up or is just foolish.

He said he saw no reason to mention a post he thought was suspicious, in a game where the entire point is to post about things we find suspicious.

This is me making that point:

Turnip Head wrote:That's where you lose me. How can you can think something is suspicious and also think it's not worth bringing up? It's not like you've been discussing more important matters instead; all your posts between Bass' post and this post have been discussing the Day 0 poll locations.

And sig's reply:

sig wrote:I need to pick my battles so to speak, me bringing up Bass's post would only draw attention to me and it isn't enough to build a case against him, I also think discussing the day 0 poll is very important.

Having said that I'll be going to Wayne Enterprises.

Sig has apparently "picked his battles" by agreeing with the suspicion on the two most prolific thread suspects, for completely opposite reasons I'll reiterate, and did not choose to bring forth his own suspicion re: Bass for fear it would draw attention to him.

I've only played a few games with sig, as well as observed a few, and I've never known civvie sig to NOT mention something he thought was suspicious, whether it led to a full fledged case or not, whether it brought attention to himself or not.

Again, why would he not have reason to talk about this suspicion in the thread? If his suspicion of Bass is genuine, it only makes me think sig has other ways of handling his Bass problem. If he's going to poison Bass, or blackmail Bass, or kill Bass, then it would make sense that he had no reason to talk about him. But I simply don't know civvie sig to be the kind of guy who doesn't discuss his own suspicions, even if it's based on something small or amounts to a NO U or goes against the popular opinion of the thread. And yet the sig I'm observing seems comfortable sitting back and letting the thread take its own direction, as long as that direction doesn't lead to him.


Now to read the million linkis between me writing this and posting it.

Dom wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Dom wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Dom wrote:MP, who do you think, gut instinct, is looking the worst on this Day 0?


Same question to you TH.

For me it's sig.

is that total gut?

Partially. It's also some things I've pointed out in the thread, and other things that I haven't pointed out yet but will when I get a chance to elaborate.

I look forward to it

Cool. Was that "yikes" directed at me? :P

Dom wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Dom wrote:MP, who do you think, gut instinct, is looking the worst on this Day 0?


Same question to you TH.

For me it's sig.

is that total gut?

Partially. It's also some things I've pointed out in the thread, and other things that I haven't pointed out yet but will when I get a chance to elaborate.

Dom wrote:MP, who do you think, gut instinct, is looking the worst on this Day 0?


Same question to you TH.

For me it's sig.

juliets wrote:What do you mean Turnip Head by "an entirely different thing"?

Golden said he thinks Enrique is one of two things. I don't think Enrique is either of those things.

MacDougall wrote:Checking in to say that Turnip Head is bad.

Thanks for checking in

Golden wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:I agree that Enrique's paranoia isn't alignment-indicative, but it's not his paranoia that bothers me.

Elaborate if you don't mind.

It's what he has focused on the most. The things that he has emphasized and advocated throughout the day. It reeks of ulterior motives to me. Now they could be civ-serving ulterior motives but regardless I think he's worth keeping an eye on just in case they are not so civ-serving. I don't have a strong read on anyone yet.

Thats the thing, right? They could be self-serving.

I think there are two possible things Enrique could be.

1) Crime family
2) Cop

I think his perspective has been entirely self-serving, whereas mine has frankly not been but rather been what is in the best interests of a civilian win. The question is, what role does Enrique have that self-serves, and those are pretty much the two that work for him.

Ultimately (after recruitments) that means Enrique should have a 6/14 chance of being crime and an 8/14 chance of being civ.

See I think Enrique is an entirely different thing.

Dom wrote:I can potentially get that, but I don't like that you are framing it this way and he isn't. He has yet to make this point himself despite me asking multiple times.

Sorry Dom, I just got the feeling he was having trouble expressing himself and I feel pretty good about him, so I understand that it would mean more coming from him, I'll try to let him speak for himself.

I think it's fair of Enrique to say you accused him, Dom. You essentially accused him of lying by not being genuine about the number thing. Maybe your intention was to simply question him on it rather than accuse him or build a case, but I can see how he perceived it as an accusation. I don't think it speaks badly of either of you, though.

Enrique wrote:Dom I'm sorry, I will never take that post seriously. It came out of nowhere and it's one of the dumbest things I've ever been accused of. I'll ask again, how many here read that post and thought oooh Lost?

I did, but only because I know SVS and Golden.

I think you need to chill out a bit Enri, you're whipping yourself into a panic :P

Like I said I think Enri and Golden have different views on how to achieve similar outcomes. The fact that I don't understand Enrique's suspicion of Golden doesn't make me suspect him, it just makes me think he's wrong.

Golden wrote:

Enrique wrote:There's all the proof I need that you're not reading my posts, Golden, but I'll gladly go over every single one of those points again. Just let me find a comfy spot in the library from where I can type this.

What about them do you think I haven't read. Is it the bit where you are still trying to push that the Arkham escapees are 'baddies'?

I don't think you've even thought through my rolecard comment at all, and I think it's because you didn't have to have the same epiphany I did. You are trying to push it as being bad, but if you were in any way trying to think of it from my perspective, instead of just push it as a slip without thought, I think you'd have a very different view.

I would argue that you haven't tried looking at it from Enrique's perspective either.

sig wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

sig wrote:Bass is taking a jokey post and trying to make it serious. I was making a joke at my own expensive basically. Since last game I was lynched day 1 and I usually get lynched by mid game if not earlier. The fact Bass even called out an obvious joking post is suspicious since the mafia tend to be the only people who do this.

Well you didn't mention this earlier, you ignored it completely... so I ask again, is there a reason you didn't respond to it at the time, especially if this is how you felt?

I didn't mention it since I saw no reason to, his point against me is either an attempt to set me up or is just foolish.

That's where you lose me. How can you can think something is suspicious and also think it's not worth bringing up? It's not like you've been discussing more important matters instead; all your posts between Bass' post and this post have been discussing the Day 0 poll locations.

Golden wrote:Enrique, this is the last time I'll say this. There are literally NO civilian roles for whom independent chasing is the best move. Except the dirty cops who get recruited.

That depends on your definition of civilian.

sig wrote:Bass is taking a jokey post and trying to make it serious. I was making a joke at my own expensive basically. Since last game I was lynched day 1 and I usually get lynched by mid game if not earlier. The fact Bass even called out an obvious joking post is suspicious since the mafia tend to be the only people who do this.

Well you didn't mention this earlier, you ignored it completely... so I ask again, is there a reason you didn't respond to it at the time, especially if this is how you felt?

You're cool in my book Enrique, I just think you're on the wrong track about Golden at the present time. In the interest of discussing other matters...

Bass_the_Clever wrote:

sig wrote:It wouldn't be a new record so no thank you, if you can lynch my day 0 then go ahead otherwise I'd prefer not to get lynched until mid game.

Why mid game and not the end? Perhaps it because you are bad...

Sig, can you explain why you didn't respond to this post? It did seem like a weird thing for you to say, and to not respond to Bass about it feels like you're trying to sweep it under the rug.

Dom wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Dom wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Preliminary reports indicate that Golden is GCPD or independent. Civ Golden loves to argue like it's his day job or something.

If this is anything like X-men (I didn't play Star Wars so I forget how it worked) this poll is simply deciding the order of the locations we visit. There's no grid so I doubt it's a full fledged map like World Reborn.

I don't disagree, but if he's arguing so much, why would he be independent-- according to this line of logic?

Well, Indy Golden loves to argue too, even when he doesn't have to if Star Wars is any indication. But I think his mafia-hunting perspective is genuine and that could line up with some of the inmates' goals. He could also be setting up a supatown persona in the event that he's a cop and gets bought off, but that hasn't happened yet.

Do you think Golden wants/hopes to be bought off?

No, I think he likes playing as a civ, but he wouldn't really have a choice in the matter.

Dom wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Preliminary reports indicate that Golden is GCPD or independent. Civ Golden loves to argue like it's his day job or something.

If this is anything like X-men (I didn't play Star Wars so I forget how it worked) this poll is simply deciding the order of the locations we visit. There's no grid so I doubt it's a full fledged map like World Reborn.

I don't disagree, but if he's arguing so much, why would he be independent-- according to this line of logic?

Well, Indy Golden loves to argue too, even when he doesn't have to if Star Wars is any indication. But I think his mafia-hunting perspective is genuine and that could line up with some of the inmates' goals. He could also be setting up a supatown persona in the event that he's a cop and gets bought off, but that hasn't happened yet.

Preliminary reports indicate that Golden is GCPD or independent. Civ Golden loves to argue like it's his day job or something.

If this is anything like X-men (I didn't play Star Wars so I forget how it worked) this poll is simply deciding the order of the locations we visit. There's no grid so I doubt it's a full fledged map like World Reborn.

Or maybe we are choosing individually?

I don't think it really matters where we go first because we'll probably have to go everywhere eventually. Mooney's and the Docks sound like the likeliest places to find criminals but they could also gain advantages there. I might just chill at the precinct and see if they've got any leads.

sig wrote:It wouldn't be a new record so no thank you, if you can lynch my day 0 then go ahead otherwise I'd prefer not to get lynched until mid game.

Why do we fall, sig?