The Syndicate

By the way: Elo, please keep playing with your more aggressive playstyle. at least try it once as a civvie. I think if you do that, you'll be more aware of your tells that some people picked up on in this game. I liked your style this game! Even if I heavily suspected that you were a baddie

I'd like to take this time to point out that I never expressed suspicion of SVS due to how she was treating Andrew. Llama did, but I have a feeling he did that mainly to see how SVS would react to it.

My suspicion of SVS was for all the right reasons. But I bet you guys were very frustrated with how we were pursuing her! That was the idea

I would have never gone after SVS the way I did, if I felt it was a 50/50 shot like you say bea. I felt very strongly she was a baddie and I was right.

Yeah but if the civs had played a little better maybe more of us would have survived long enough to win. :P

It's tough because it really is a group effort to win as civilians, but the ones who work the hardest usually don't make it to the end, unless they had some protection/useful role powers.

If we had been successful in getting SVS lynched on Day 1 or 2 like we wanted to, I have a feeling both llama and I would have been able to survive a lot longer. I knew I was a dead man as soon as llama was lynched though.

Congrats FZ and INH! You guys were epic heroes this game, and definitely both deserved the win.

The rest of the civvies... well, I guess we got what was coming to us, huh? :P

I'm glad FZ/Burglekutt decided to help the civvies (even though you helped get a lot of civs killed in the process, lol!) I like to think that llama and I helping you get SVS lynched had a little bit to do with that decision

Epignosis wrote:

Night 2: The Crossroads

It was bizarrely quiet during the early morning trek.

The party did not realize why until the afternoon. Turnip Head was not among them.

Some speculated that he got scared and went back to the village, but others said that was impossible.

What they had not seen while they slept was someone cut Turnip Head’s throat and place his body in a gibbet, well-disguised among the rest of the condemned.

DH seems to be playing with a clear head. I don't have a read on him but I appreciate how he's approaching the game so far. I like INH's perspective in the game as well and I think he's working towards a civ victory.

I haven't played much with Marshy. I don't think she has been manipulative at all, and I've found her perspective to be genuine.

The players I'm watching the closest are (in order) SVS, Kate, Elohcin, Sorsha, Andrew. Sorry for putting the 8 year old on that list but I'm not giving him a free pass, and if placed on a team with SVS and Kate they would be truly dangerous, so I wish we could get more of his perspective. Elo in particular I'm worried about conning me. She is so nice and always seems genuine to me, but I know she's learned a thing or two about being a baddie They can't all be bad but they're the ones I'm watching the closest right now.

I'm also not sure about bea but I hope she's civvie and so far I'm thinking she is. Most of her participation so far has come when she's been Irish lol.

My thoughts on other players are extremely fluid, and I get a better grasp on players the more I talk with them and not just about them.

Yes FZ, I forgot to make mention of it in my previous post, but you are one player I feel has considered the content of my posts and not just my intentions behind posting them. It's one of the reasons I've been feeling good about you so far.

I understand your hesitation to vote yesterday. And I agree that some things can only become clearer with the passing of time.

I'm unsure about Sorsha so far. It seems to me she's playing her own game, which has me leaning civ for her. Sorsha and I almost never see eye to eye in mafia, so I'm not surprised that she's voted for me twice now.

First of all, I have to admit that I've made some mistakes this game. My strong and focused suspicion of SVS has made me look like I have a one track mind, like I'm on some sort of mission. In a way, I am.

I assumed that my suspicions would be given a certain benefit of the doubt, that players would at least believe that I myself believed firmly in my suspicions. I assumed that players would look at what I was saying and decide for themselves whether or not they agreed with the things I was pointing at, with the behavior I've observed. This is not at all how people reacted to my posts about SVS: people only wanted to look at whether my intentions were pure or not, and did not focus on the actual points I was trying to raise.

I tried to open a dialogue with SVS so that others would see the same things I was seeing. I was hoping players would read between the lines as I have done.

I'm also not very good at sounding convincing, it seems. I like to play a clean game: I don't get into shouting arguments with players I'm playing against, I don't take cheap shots. Mafia should be fun, and in my opinion it gets too harsh sometimes, especially in the heat of the moment. I try to always be cool and collected when making my points against other players: perhaps this causes people to not trust me, or to doubt my intentions, or to think that my suspicions are not genuine.

This was my mistake. I've been making this mistake from pretty much the minute I set foot onto The Syndicate, after a mafia hiatus of a few years. People do not play mafia the same way they used to. People do not play mafia the same way that I do.

I was able to play a good baddie game in Harry Potter because I was able to figure out what indicators people look for in a civilian.

I have yet to figure out what people look for in baddies.

It is much easier to FAKE being a civilian than it is to actually be one. It is much more difficult to be a civvie these days than it used to be. Baddie games have gotten slicker and harder to pin down with "evidence". And as a civvie, you have your own team working against you, doubting your every word as you try to pursue your suspicions and catch baddies. Paranoia floods the civvie mindset. Some civvies sit back and do not contribute toward their team's efforts. Baddies sit back and avoid suspicion altogether. In a speed game setting especially, where there is not much time to discuss what's happening, it's difficult for the civilians to make the right moves. The baddies hold all the cards.

In the time since I joined The Syndicate, the civilians have not won a single game.


________________________________________________________________
You know what bothers me the most about your behavior the past 24 hours, SVS? You have not even tried to look like you were hunting for baddies. I know that if you were a civilian, you would not have let the lynch get to the point where it was between you and 2 people you believed were civvies. At the very least, I think you would have been more upset about how we let it get to that point. This is a game where we can change our votes; you had plenty of opportunity to help find a baddie yesterday, to swing the lynch in another direction, away from me, you and Llama. In all of your posts towards the tail end of the lynch, there is not one single mention of a player that you find suspicious. Your posts are just explanations and justifications; no pondering the motives of other players, no questioning their intentions or their tone. You're not interested in finding baddies to lynch; you're content to lynch civilians, as long as you're able to come out of it looking blameless. You don't want to accuse your teammates, because duh, and you don't want to accuse civilians either because you want to keep them on your side.

Your only suspicions this game, SVS, have been half-hearted at best. "I did not love INH's vote for Sorsha"; "I thought bea and MM's self-votes on Day 1 were unnecessary". Those are, to my knowledge, the ONLY suspicions you've voiced all game. I know you've been under fire since the start, but I also know that as a civvie you are capable of so much more. Even if your name is being bandied around as a lynch prospect, you would want to be voicing your suspicions, you would have gut instincts that you simply wouldn't be able to ignore. And you would want to prove your civvieness by helping lynch a baddie. You would want to help your fellow civilians win.

I asked you to further develop your case against INH, when there was still plenty of time to swing the lynch against someone you thought was a baddie. But you dropped that suspicion completely and focused only on defending yourself while trying to make my suspicion of you look misplaced.

I enjoy playing with you as a civvie (at least when I'm a civvie too), I trust your gut and your intuition, I value your reading of other players.

But I hate playing against you when you're a baddie. I do not enjoy having to make arguments against you, or trying to convince others that I might be right about you; I'm not a masochist.

That said, this is why I play mafia. The battles of wits. The struggle. The need to be proven right. The desire to win and to be an important part of that victory.

________________________________________________________________
I have not forgotten about Burglekutt, who likely had a hand in yesterday's lynch. Unless his victims missed the vote (a possibility, and I'm not sure what the punishment would be), Burglekutt either made DH and Sorsha vote for me, or he made Kate and Metalmarsh vote for Llama.

THIS IS ALL SPECULATION, OBVS: It is my current belief that Kate might be SVS's teammate, and if Kate had not been successful in helping to lynch llama yesterday, perhaps SVS's team would have lost access to one of their powers... potentially tonight's kill. That's why I think SVS voted for Llama yesterday and not me. Llama's suspicion of SVS was much different than mine, and his points against her were easier to refute. I think she'd much rather have me dead and gone, tbqh. Perhaps she'll get her wish tonight. The baddies can't afford to keep me around much longer.

Between the time that Day 2 started and when it ended, Kate made exactly one post:

Kate wrote:I spent the day in court and just read though kinda fast. I would not and did not try to save svs. I'm a better player than that even my head is half in a game. I think bea alluded to this earlier. Not me specifically but anyone. And I don't think svs would let or encourage her team to do so.

I'm not sure why llama is so hot on her trail but it seems like a personal vendetta.

I'm voting llama or th (just because you seem bad and I don't think you should have gotten the acorns).

For now at least it's llama.

I think she was forced to vote for Llama. If she had had her own way, I think Kate would have wanted to voted for me yesterday, it certainly seemed like she wanted to in that post. I think she's jealous of my nuts.

We've lynched 2 civs in a row, obviously we're doing something wrong so far. If you are a civilian, you know that we HAVE to get a baddie tomorrow.

I want everyone to be aware of the fact that Burglekutt will probably have a hand in tomorrow's proceedings as well, and we need to be watching out for his influence.

My intention tomorrow, if I'm still alive, is to continue to work through my suspicion of SVS. And despite my speculation about Kate above, I am not currently looking to lead any case against Kate tomorrow. I would have to be successful against - and correct about - SVS before I went chasing after anyone else. So if my thoughts wander in some other direction, hopefully it will be clear why.

Citizens of Nelwyn,

Another tragedy has befallen us today.

Vote for me to receive the freed prisoner's reward, and I will use it to continue the fight against the evil that threatens to consume us.

I look forward to doing battle once more tomorrow.

I will not give up.

Rest in peace llama.

FZ and bea, I am disappointed that neither of you voted.

S~V~S wrote:Also Linki @TH~ no, not becasue you are talking, becasue you are manufacturing a case to fit your belief. Like i said, i have a role in mind for you, but will vote you to save myself.

I manufactured nothing. But that's okay SVS, I know you're bad and I know you have to say these things even if you don't believe it. You win this round

You guys can lynch me if you want, I'm tired of defending the way I play mafia. I'm an active involved player who gets lynched simply for talking. I won't make that mistake anymore.

Turnip Head wrote:If she's not bad, you can lynch me next.

I made this post on Day 1. The offer still stands.

If SVS is a civ, the baddies should have been chomping at the bit to take me up on it.

But if she's bad I'm sure they'd much rather lynch me first, hmmm?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:All I've done this game is express my suspicions. You can disagree with my suspicions, but I don't see how expressing them makes me a baddie. It makes me a civ who is actually trying.

Anything that makes a civ makes a very good baddie.

Well then how am I supposed to play?

Am I just supposed to keep my mouth shut?

To DH, Kate, Sorsha et al. :

Take a step back from your interpretation of my intentions. If I'm a civ who is suspicious of SVS, how would you expect me to play?

What did you want me to say about it?

Why are you planning to vote for me Sorsha? Because I expressed suspicion of SVS?

All I've done this game is express my suspicions. You can disagree with my suspicions, but I don't see how expressing them makes me a baddie. It makes me a civ who is actually trying.

bea wrote:And I'm caught up. That goes much faster when one has their full mental capabilities.

I get that seemed weird things to pull fz, I was trying to comment as I was reading along, but I was fail. I miss the k-site multi-quote. It's ever so handy when catching up.

Reading back through, it does kinda seem like there was a last minute push to save SVS, I'm just not sure what to make of it. I can see a scenario where svs is bad and her team tried to save her. I can also see a scenario where SVS is good, and the "save" is a nice frame for today's vote. Then there's two civs down with little effort.

My suspicion of SVS has very little to do with whether or not she was saved yesterday. I have a gut feeling that she's bad: if I'm right, I'll be looking more closely at people who might have tried to save her. But I'm not pushing that connection, I've tried to keep my thoughts about SVS focused solely on HER behavior this game.

I'm not sure if you're able to read SVS, bea, but I think you might be able to. Do you think we're seeing SVS's civvie game? Do you think we're seeing her baddie game?

DharmaHelper wrote:Out of the ones pushing the SVS agenda TH sticks out most to me.

I'm not pushing any agenda. I'm suspicious of SVS, I've been suspicious of her all game, and I've done the best I can to talk through that suspicion with her. I haven't tried to influence anyone else's opinion. It is not my fault that no one else brought up any of their own suspects today.

I'm not seeing SVS's civvie game. She would be accusing me more, i think, if she were a civvie, or she would at least try to get me to stop derailing the thread with suspicion against her if she was a civvie, because she would want to put the focus on players she thinks are baddies. But I think she knows I'm a civ.

I think she's a baddie, so I hope she gets lynched.

Are you suspicious of me because I'm suspicious of SVS? Do you think my suspicion of her is disingenuous?

I'll be at work the rest of the afternoon. I might be able to peep in occasionally before the poll ends, but likely won't be able to make any more posts, so I'm going to place my vote now.

*votes SVS*

My gut tells me she's bad, and my interaction with her today hasn't made me feel any better about her.

S~V~S wrote:I am not in love with INHs vote for Sorsha. INHs whole schtick has been off IMO; some of the things he has said, in light of his Day Zero vote for Andrew seem off to me.

S~V~S wrote:Once again you are misconstruing and misinterpreting. I said NOTHING about his random vote, I read his post. That is why I was just confused. I said in light of his DAY ZERO vote for Andrew, nothing about him randomizing. Which is why I was just confused about him saying he was on vaca and going random, I was like *?*, I never mentioned his random vote? I was saying he seemed to shift his focus, I was surprised to see that he had voted for Andrew on Day Zero in light of some things he has said since then.

SVS, I'm not trying to misconstrue or misinterpret you. You DID mention his random vote for Sorsha, in the first quote above. I didn't pull it out of my butt.

You say you are surprised that INH voted for Andrew on Day 0 given what he has done since then. Can you explain what you mean by that? How does his Andrew vote on Day 0, before the game had really started, not match up with his play afterwards? And how does that connection lead you to suspect him?

You say INH's shtick has been off; you say you would have voted for him on Day 1 if you hadn't needed to vote elsewhere to save yourself; you said you would pull quotes if necessary. Please pull quotes and build your case on INH so that I understand it and I don't "misconstrue and misinterpret" it again.

S~V~S wrote:You ask me to produce detailed suspicions on Day Two about day one, which is pretty much impossible unless you overinflate small issues into large ones, then mock me for them, lol.

I'm not trying to mock you, I'm trying to understand your suspicion. You see, I'm interested in trying to catch baddies. If you're a civvie, then I value your opinion about other players, and want to know what you think about them and why.

It might not be easy to produce suspicions on Day 2, but as civvies, that's the job we have to do. We have to lynch someone, and if you're a civvie I expect you to have some strong ideas even if they're wrong, even if they're built off of something small. I expect you to be actively finding the baddies among us. How else are we civilians going to win?

That second paragraph was still addressed to SVS even though the quote is from/about INH.

You are looking at me becasue you think i am bad for undefined reasons, not becasue i voted for Dom. I had the best reason for voting for Dom, self preservation.

Yes, my suspicion of you is hard to define, but not undefinable altogether. I never said I was looking at you because of your Dom vote. I know that that vote is easily justifiable. I think you want to be able to justify everything you do this game; I think you are playing very carefully.

insertnamehere wrote:I'm on a vacation and have limited internet access. I'm around at night and in the morning. I have to vote early. I may not be on the top of my game. I randomized because it was early in Day 1, and I didn't have any other leads. I'm not sure what part of that you aren't in love with. Apparently, you need some poor sap to shift blame onto, and you think that because I'm on vacation, I'm an easy target.

Indeed, INH set up that he was likely going to have to vote early and randomly in this post, and then he voted early as promised, well before the majority of the Day 1 discussion happened. I don't think you can fault INH too much for that vote. I find it odd that you think it is suspicious. I am interested to see which quotes you planned on pulling from INH, and what you might have to say about them.

DharmaHelper wrote:I'm enjoying not being the one engaged in battle with either Llama or SVS for once.

I hope you're at least taking notes from the sidelines. :P

Rest in piggiedom, BWT.

Of the Dom voters, SVS is still the one I'm looking at for today. I think the pigging of BWT might have been an attempt by the baddies to try and "prove" that the push to vote Dom wasn't the baddies' doing. 5 Dom voters, only 3 baddie roles. Obviously at least a couple of the Dom voters were civs. But BWT was an odd choice to turn into a pig unless the baddies were hoping to make some sort of point by choosing him. I'm surprised they didn't choose someone more random.

SVS, where do you think the baddies might have placed their votes yesterday? You said yesterday that you would read back to see what you had missed. Are you suspicious of anyone based on what you read?

I'm not sure what to make of the rest of the Dom voters yet, I feel the situation with them will become clearer based on what happens today. I appreciated FZ changing her mind about me; she had some questions about my gameplay, we talked it out and she changed her opinion. That seemed genuine to me. Flip flopping is not an inherently baddie trait. I'll be keeping an eye on her, but I came out of that conversation feeling better about her.

FZ. wrote:But if you thought all those votes piling up were odd, why didn't you say something about it back then, yet now, you're expecting people to trust you when we know nothing about SVS, and you're saying those who voted for Dom can't be trusted. I see no reason why some of those voters can be less trusted than you

I don't expect people to trust me. I hope people trust me, because I'm a civvie and I have good intentions this game, and I'm actively engaged in trying to find baddies. Whether or not people trust me is up to them.

I also did not say that those who voted for Dom can't be trusted. I simply stated that I don't think those players should be entitled to Dom's acorns. I don't think he would want to give his nutsack to anybody who killed him.

Dom wrote:Th, I was thinking SVS was bad for different reasons. I think she has been way too active in saying who is civvie and not who is baddie.

^ This is Dom's single, solitary ontopic post this game. Seriously, other than some discussion about the Day 0 poll, this is all he said on-topic. Let's see how he ended up quickly receiving 5 votes for it.

FZ. wrote:

Dom wrote:Th, I was thinking SVS was bad for different reasons. I think she has been way too active in saying who is civvie and not who is baddie.

Why does that make her a baddie and not a civ? In the very few games I got to play with her, she's been quite active and voiced her opinions. This just seems like bandwagoning but while trying to appear like you're having your own thoughts

This is FZ's response to Dom's post. FZ accuses Dom of bandwagoning and not having his own thoughts. We now know that Dom was a civvie, and thus his thoughts were completely his own, so FZ was wrong about Dom's intentions.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Dom wrote:Th, I was thinking SVS was bad for different reasons. I think she has been way too active in saying who is civvie and not who is baddie.

From what I've seen, not really. The only person she's really been getting on about is Andrew. Otherwise it seems like she's in defense mode most of the rest of the time.

Maybe you're playing your own mind games with us.

BWT defends SVS's actions, and accuses Dom of playing mind games for voicing his suspicion of SVS.

Elohcin wrote:Not much time left and I needed to vote. I randomized and got Dom. I promise I won't randomize Day 2.

Elo randomizes and votes for Dom.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:I'm half-tempted to go with S~V~S. I could see her being bad and trying to gain some cred by setting Andrew up. But I'm going to go with Dom, because I think what he is attempting to do is more subtle, and at least as unfriendly. Plus Dom is outright lying and S~V~S may very well just be speculating. Also, I like ties for Day 1.

Votes Dom

BWT says he is tempted to vote for SVS, thereby agreeing somewhat with what Dom was saying. Then BWT accuses Dom of "outright lying" , which I would like BWT to clarify what he meant there. Then BWT defends SVS again, saying she "may very well just be speculating". Then he further attempts to justify his vote by saying he likes ties.

Turnip Head wrote:

Turnip Head is pondering this sudden turn of events.

FZ. wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:I'm half-tempted to go with S~V~S. I could see her being bad and trying to gain some cred by setting Andrew up. But I'm going to go with Dom, because I think what he is attempting to do is more subtle, and at least as unfriendly. Plus Dom is outright lying and S~V~S may very well just be speculating. Also, I like ties for Day 1.

Votes Dom

I actually agree with you here. I'm going with Dom too
Votes Dom

FZ agrees with BWT.

Kate wrote:I think good points have been made about dom. I'm sorry I don't have more time to post tonight. I'll be more active soon. Also SVS is reading civ to me thus far in this game and I think he may be trying to sway things her way. And I think he may know better.

Votes dom

Kate says good points have been brought up against Dom. She says SVS is reading civ to her, and that Dom should know better than to accuse SVS. Her vote for Dom is directly linked to her disagreeing with Dom about SVS.

Sorsha wrote:I'm fine with Dom getting the vote but I'm going to place mine on TH. I think he was doing some of the same that Dom is being accused of... Jumping on the (llama) suspicions on SVS.

Votes th

Sorsha is fine with Dom getting votes, but she votes for TH because I "jumped" on suspicion of SVS.

S~V~S wrote:I have not really had time to read back, still at the parents, but don't want to miss the vote. Voting self preservation, sorry Dom.

SVS votes for Dom, not having read any of the discussion surrounding him. She says her vote is simply for self-preservation. At the time of SVS's vote, Dom had 4 and she had 2. Other than her, the only players remaining who hadn't cast a vote were Dom and DH, and neither of them ended up voting in the poll.

Everyone who voted for Dom (except Elo) did so simply because he voiced a suspicion he had of SVS.

FZ. wrote:You came up with that thought all by yourself?

What?

FZ. wrote:This was your reply after Elo and BWT voted for Dom, and I said he was bandwagoning on SVS and it was going to be a close call.

Turnip Head wrote:

You didn't tell us it was wrong to vote for Dom, did you?
I think maybe you didn't really care which one of the two would be lynched as long as it wasn't someone from your group

Why do you expect me to have told you whether or not it was wrong to vote for Dom? I didn't know his role, nor did any other civilians. The only people who knew for sure that it was wrong to vote for Dom were the baddies. I did find it odd that he got piled up on out of nowhere though, hence my pondering.

Dom did not bandwagon on SVS. He did not vote at all in the poll. He simply expressed suspicion of SVS, and got jumped for it.

Andrew
bea
birdwithteeth11
DharmaHelper
Dom
Elohcin
FZ.
insertnamehere
Kate
Metalmarsh89
Sorsha
S~V~S
thellama73
Turnip Head

INH, if you're wary of SVS and Kate, why not vote for your ol' pal Turnip Head? I really want Dom's sack of nuts.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:I'm actually going to consider voting for someone I feel trustworthy about.

Who do you feel is trustworthy so far, BWT?

Citizens of Nelwyn,

I don't think anyone who voted for Dom deserves to have his bag of acorns.

Vote for me to have the acorns, and I will use it as best I can to help us civilians recover from this tragedy.

Rest in peace Dom.

FZ. wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Like I said, if SVS ends up getting lynched and I'm wrong about her, feel free to lynch me next. I'm a civvie with a strong conviction that Ive learned how to read SVS somewhat, and my gut is telling me she is a baddie this game. I think she'd be playing a much different game if she were a civ. I'm going all in on my suspicion of SVS.

What would you expect her to do as a civ that she isn't doing now?

I would be expecting her to find someone to accuse.

And SVS didn't have to be on the defensive the whole time, FZ. I asked her if she had any suspicions, but she only wanted to defend herself or talk about people she thinks are civvies. Those are indicators of baddie behavior in my book.

Like I said, if SVS ends up getting lynched and I'm wrong about her, feel free to lynch me next. I'm a civvie with a strong conviction that Ive learned how to read SVS somewhat, and my gut is telling me she is a baddie this game. I think she'd be playing a much different game if she were a civ. I'm going all in on my suspicion of SVS.

Citizens of Nelwyn,

I think SVS knows young Andrew is a civvie because she's bad.

I believe she is luring him into a false sense of security, and she intends to do the child harm.

We must protect the child at all costs.

*votes SVS*

If she's not bad, you can lynch me next.

I don't want you to be bad, I hope you're not bad SVS. I like your participation when you're a civvie, and do not enjoy when we are on opposing teams. :P

Are you suspicious of anyone yet? There was a lot of discussion for a Day 0 (that opening poll was an excellent way to get discussion rolling in a game, I might add), but I can't say that anything I read the first time through pinged me outright.

I have no idea why I read your post wrong, lol. I find myself suspicious of your tone so far, and thought I had found a way to make a similar jab as one you recently made at me in a different game. :P

S~V~S wrote:Well, that was a weird result.

And I thought (assumed) DH voted Andrew for voting him? If I recall correctly, Andrew got along pretty well with DH in Thomas. But i have no idea if that was actually the case, it was just an assumption on my part.

Why are you explaining young Andrew's motivations?

If you vote for me today, Citizens of Nelwyn, I promise to never impede your freedom of speech, and will never edit any of your posts.

And now you've broken Rule 11 as well

Sorsha, you're allowed to change your vote this game. You can move it around willy nilly as you please

I voted INH. Change we can believe in.