The Syndicate

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:
Quin wrote:
S~V~S wrote:Quin missed my original point and misinterpreted my question. Hence we are talking in circles.

Placeholder vote on Quin. I don't think my original point was that obscure.
You had the chance to reiterate your point. Why didn't you take it, and instead choose to believe that I'm (assumedly purposefully) misinterpreting your question?
Quin, aren't you known for having several page long arguments over nuances of language aka talking in circles?

I don't fault S-V-S for this at all. That said, I don't think it's necessarily a scumtell for you so.

And that's all I have to say about that.

While we're on the subject of Quin, who wants to talk about this doozy of a post from jack?

He acknowledges the case on Quin, but equivocates nicely.

Linki: I voted LC because he was rude to Floyd, so just a placeholder really.

Long Con, how do you feel about having 1.0925 votes?

G-Man wrote:Since speculation over vote weight has occurred, I'd like to clear things up for you. At the end of Night 3, all living player's post counts were recorded. Here are the percentages for the 10 of you:

Epignosis = 22.93%
Marmot = 12.61%
Long Con = 12.24%
DrWilgy = 11.88%
Llama = 11.64%
Quin = 11.16%
MacDougall = 8.88%
notsawyer540 = 5.88%
Dfaraday = 2.04%
Floyd = 0.72%
There are 10 votes between you all, so those 10 votes were broken up proportionally according to the percentages above and reallocated in reverse order. (i.e. Floyd's vote is worth Epi's post-count percentages multiplied by 10, and so on)

Epignosis = 0.0720 votes
Marmot = 0.2041 votes
Long Con = 0.5882 votes
DrWilgy = 0.8884 votes
Llama = 1.1164 votes
Quin = 1.1645 votes
MacDougall = 1.1885 votes
notsawyer540 = 1.2245 votes
Dfaraday = 1.2605 votes
Floyd = 2.2929 votes

I gather that it doesn't matter how much we've posted today, only what we've posted before the end of Night 3?

notsawyer540 wrote:Hey guys. I was pretty busy yesterday, so I apologize for not getting a chance to reply to everything. I had three votes when I checked in briefly yesterday and now I have four (two of those weighted heavily against me), so I want to do my best to help out before I'm lynched. It's gonna take me some time to gather all my responses together, so bear with me. I didn't ignore things yesterday, I just didn't have time to respond adequately and was checking in as a courtesy.

While I was on my long, boring commute home yesterday I was doing some thinking about how nobody has supported me in the case of notsawyer vs.Epi, so I'll be casting my tunnel vision aside while I gather my thoughts on everyone. Don't be surprised if I end up voting for someone else today.

You didn't support me either.

DrWilgy wrote:
Marmot wrote:It's March 7, and Epignosis is the only player on this site to win a game as mafia this year.

Let's keep it that way!!! Go team!
Didn't Zebra win Vocaroo as well?

Apparently not.

It's March 7, and Epignosis is the only player on this site to win a game as mafia this year.

Let's keep it that way!!! Go team!

Epignosis wrote:DrWilgy has been following people's votes like a lost puppy.

What does DrWilgy have to gain by doing this if he's mafia?

Epignosis wrote:
Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:He wants me dead, that's why. Does he want anybody else dead?
What do you think about the second part of this question?
He isn't going for anybody else.
It appears as if he has just one suspect, that's my point.
You've lost me. He has one suspect. Nobody is disputing that.

I don't understand why you're defending a player who has one single suspect: you, while also asserting that you're the only player who should want him dead.

Epignosis wrote:
Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:He wants me dead, that's why. Does he want anybody else dead?
What do you think about the second part of this question?
He isn't going for anybody else.

It appears as if he has just one suspect, that's my point.

Epignosis wrote:He wants me dead, that's why. Does he want anybody else dead?

What do you think about the second part of this question?

My suspect pool in every game would be large enough to swim laps in if I played by that logic.

I don't like Long Con's rainbow for various reasons.

Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:notsawyer now has five votes. If anyone has motive to lynch him, it's me.

I am not worried about defending him in this way and he comes up bad anyway. I think I've demonstrated I'm not bad and his actions against me show we're not on a team on top of that.

I want to know why he's guilty for gunning so hard for me.
Why are you crediting your vote for no particular reason?

Why should you have motive to lynch him, and no one else?

Epignosis wrote:notsawyer now has five votes. If anyone has motive to lynch him, it's me.

I am not worried about defending him in this way and he comes up bad anyway. I think I've demonstrated I'm not bad and his actions against me show we're not on a team on top of that.

I want to know why he's guilty for gunning so hard for me.

Why are you crediting your vote for no particular reason?

Long Con wrote:
TheFloyd73 wrote:
Long Con wrote:3. Where you stand on Floyd and why.
I stand on Floyd in the gutter, because that's where I assume he is lying, dead drunk or just plain dead. Does he get some sort of points for just signing up for Mafia games? I don't get this guy.
Ow, that hurts.
Hmm... that did come across as pretty harsh. Sorry dude. Funny fail.

You can have my vote.

It's worth jack-shit today anyway.

TheFloyd73 wrote:
notsawyer540 wrote:One question I would like answered is: Have I really been forcing evidence to fit my conclusions, or has Epi's Fox-News-style misrepresentation of facts and events fooled too many of you?
That's Epi's just being Epi. I find it hard to read him as civ or scum, but that's his style of play. To be honest, you also implement forced "false news" as well.

Zing!

DrWilgy wrote:
Marmot wrote:But I do give you three players who have not been around today.

DrWilgy: Hasn't posted since the start of Night 3.
MacDougall: Hasn't posted since the beginning of Day 4.
TheFloyd73: Hasn't posted since Day 3.
Video games homie

Why didn't you tell your teammate that he's got votes?

Epignosis wrote:
Marmot wrote:Some people do have a tendency to fit evidence to a narrative. That's just how they play. I agree that notknowing notsawyer notreally knots my naughty read of him.

But you are not solely responsible for SVS being lynched. I deserve some of the blame for pointing players in that direction, even if I wasn't as vocal or convincing as you were. What I don't understand is why notsawyer has basically ignored my role in that lynch, and followed my suspicion of you. Not only that, but he interacted little with me when I was hounding you. I find that lack of engagement suspicious, especially since you are his top suspect.
So if he's mafia, what's his strategy there?

I believe it's easier to be sincere about one's own thoughts and ideas than it is to discuss those put forth by another person. One can inherently believe everything they say, but they (ideally) have to pick a side when looking at what someone else has to say.

I find my own theories more believable than those of others.

But I suppose this does not make notsawyer bad.

Some people do have a tendency to fit evidence to a narrative. That's just how they play. I agree that notknowing notsawyer notreally knots my naughty read of him.

But you are not solely responsible for SVS being lynched. I deserve some of the blame for pointing players in that direction, even if I wasn't as vocal or convincing as you were. What I don't understand is why notsawyer has basically ignored my role in that lynch, and followed my suspicion of you. Not only that, but he interacted little with me when I was hounding you. I find that lack of engagement suspicious, especially since you are his top suspect.

But I do give you three players who have not been around today.

DrWilgy: Hasn't posted since the start of Night 3.
MacDougall: Hasn't posted since the beginning of Day 4.
TheFloyd73: Hasn't posted since Day 3.

Epignosis wrote:
Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Moreover, notsawyer is taking three votes right from the get-go and his reaction to all this is to double down on his smear campaign:
I don't know if he realizes that he has votes.
Which means no teammate has informed him of this fact.

I don't know if you're defending him or suggesting he has a teammate who hasn't been around today. Both are plausible.

Epignosis wrote:Moreover, notsawyer is taking three votes right from the get-go and his reaction to all this is to double down on his smear campaign:

I don't know if he realizes that he has votes.

Long Con wrote:
Marmot wrote:
Long Con wrote:2. Where you stand on Marmot and why.
Leaning scum on Marmot. His latest claim, that he was nightkilled but protected, feels like a) an attempt to look civ, and b) an attempt to draw out information from the baddies. That's why I countered him a little with my own jokey misinformation.
I don't get it Long Con. What's wrong with trying to draw information out from the baddies?
EBWOP: *FOR the baddies ... because I'm bad.

Fixed

Long Con wrote:2. Where you stand on Marmot and why.
Leaning scum on Marmot. His latest claim, that he was nightkilled but protected, feels like a) an attempt to look civ, and b) an attempt to draw out information from the baddies. That's why I countered him a little with my own jokey misinformation.

I don't get it Long Con. What's wrong with trying to draw information out from the baddies?

Epignosis wrote:thellama73?

This is someone I would lynch. Look at his posts in relation to me. Does he want to accuse me or buddy up to me? Even he doesn't know.

Shit heap. That's where he goes.

Why does everyone go in the shit heap? There's only two mafia left.

I just won $15 playing Texas Hold'em this evening. Take that!

Epignosis wrote:MM's vote is on notsawyer right now. Why?

Wasn't he your big buddy to help take me down?

My goal is to lynch the mafia, not take you down.

Yesterday I thought you were mafia. Today I'm doubting that notion. There's not a chance in hell that you and notsawyer are teammates, and I think he looks worse than you at the moment.

Epignosis wrote:I don't understand MM this game. Mr. "I Would Never Kill Epignosis" A) Hasn't killed me and B) Tried to lynch me knowing I wouldn't kill Eloh.

He goes in the naughty pile.

I already told you I'm ignoring that assertion. How do you know you weren't attempted to be killed last night.

Lay off you fiend.

Epignosis wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Marmot wrote:Thanks for the protection whoever protected me.
I didn't protect you, I protected Epignosis!
Yeah, lie detectable statements really do a lot of good for protectors.

If there's a protector, there's no lie detector, remember?

Thanks for the protection whoever protected me.

I miss jack tbh.

Well I'll just sacrifice my vote to let my voice be heard.

I am Marmot, hear me shriek!!!

Goddamit.

Epignosis wrote:
notsawyer540 wrote:I don't need to make anything fit, and I don't believe you.
I don't care that you don't believe me. If you are a civilian, your task is to figure out if you should believe me and try to frame my posts in the context of being from a civilian. You've given no time to that and made up your mind despite the real evidence working against your suspicion.

Reminds me of that one time you concluded llama was mafia, then went back to look for a post to prove it, only to discover that post didn't exist.

Epignosis wrote:I'm sorry that I had a really good reason to believe llama is bad here. And I lost it. I feel like it still exists. When I was cooking, I was convinced he was bad.

Check your box MM.

Yeah ok.

Epignosis wrote:Nobody's been bloody talking until now.

Better late than never.

I do find this post from notsawyer suspicious.

notsawyer540 wrote:Things are really heating up in here.

Despite notsawyer being suspicious of Epignosis, this is the only thing had to say after I posted my case and while I've been accusing you.

I'd expect him to have more input on this whole thing if he was sincere.

EBWOP: keeping jack around.

If your point is that you didn't post a read there, you're right. You didn't.

My point is, that's the most productive thing I've found that's come from keeping Floyd around.

Epignosis wrote:
Marmot wrote:I do think it's odd that Epignosis wants to keep jack around to find his teammates, but he has only produced one read as a result of it: Floyd.

I'm voting for jack today. The longer he sticks around, the more he becomes a discussion point that would distract from more productive discussions. There has been a ton of chatter about whether to lynch him or not, but the points put out for not lynching him are not being taken advantage of.
And what was my "read" on Floyd, dear MM?

I don't know, I didn't produce a read in that post.

I do think it's odd that Epignosis wants to keep jack around to find his teammates, but he has only produced one read as a result of it: Floyd.

I'm voting for jack today. The longer he sticks around, the more he becomes a discussion point that would distract from more productive discussions. There has been a ton of chatter about whether to lynch him or not, but the points put out for not lynching him are not being taken advantage of.

Epignosis wrote:MM: Do you believe I would have killed Eloh Night 1?

I'm choosing not to factor this into my read.

I'll tell you when I'm in my 30s, have children, teach high school, and have a wife who plays mafia.

Epignosis wrote:
Marmot wrote:Another note.

One of the factors for Epignosis's vote for SVS yesterday stemmed from her vote for Quin on Day 1. Epignosis read through their interactions, and deduced that her vote was based on a pretty minor tiff.

More evidence of Epignosis reading Quin interactions, and that it's unlikely he actually forgot Quin was in the game.
You astound me.

Your response to my case is to write this game off as lacking rational thought and snarky remarks like this one.

I don't like these responses.

Epignosis wrote:
Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:So people think I would kill Eloh Night 1, and now MM thinks that when I'm bad, I'm more likely to forget things.

Mad house up in here.
Hardly.

I've made such comments like that before when I'm mafia, the one where you said "Oh, I forgot Quin was playing".

You were jonesing hard for a mafia game to get going, and you've been a driving force for discussion in this game. I don't believe that you forgot that Quin was in this game. I believe you felt like naming a player without offering a stance on him, a stance you had determined in the previous day phase already.
I have also been reading Phenom, the GoC, and Survivor on top of this. Quin is involved in all of those. The quote you pulled was something I said ages ago. Quin hasn't said anything here for a while. I forgot he was in this until I started looking for some place else to park my vote.

When you get into your 30s, have children, and teach high school, let me know how your memory is.

In the meantime, ask yourself what purpose a bad Epignosis would have in mentioning that he forgot Quin was even in this. I could have easily not said anything at all about him. Mafia tend to be more careful about what they say in the thread, no? If I already offered a stance on Quin, what have I to gain by acting like I don't have a stance on him (although I don't agree that forgetting Quin was involved equates to not having a stance on him)?

As mafia, you've put a name up for discussion, even if subtly. I agree Quin hasn't been around, and as such no one has talked about him.

Another note.

One of the factors for Epignosis's vote for SVS yesterday stemmed from her vote for Quin on Day 1. Epignosis read through their interactions, and deduced that her vote was based on a pretty minor tiff.

More evidence of Epignosis reading Quin interactions, and that it's unlikely he actually forgot Quin was in the game.

thellama73 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:llama, what do you make of MM naming me his top suspect for forgetting about Quin?
I personally find it hard to believe anyone really suspects you. Of all the people in the game, I think I suspect you least. Doesn't make Metalmarsh89 bad, but I think he's wrong.

Do you find my case hard to believe, or Epignosis being mafia hard to believe?

Linki: noooooo

Epignosis wrote:So people think I would kill Eloh Night 1, and now MM thinks that when I'm bad, I'm more likely to forget things.

Mad house up in here.

Hardly.

I've made such comments like that before when I'm mafia, the one where you said "Oh, I forgot Quin was playing".

You were jonesing hard for a mafia game to get going, and you've been a driving force for discussion in this game. I don't believe that you forgot that Quin was in this game. I believe you felt like naming a player without offering a stance on him, a stance you had determined in the previous day phase already.

Epignosis had a civilian read of Quin here.

Epignosis wrote:Quin raised the idea that I was partners with FZ. for defending her. I don't think Quin would do that and then kill FZ. For that and other reasons, I think Quin is a civilian.

Then had a lengthy interaction with him spoiled below.

Spoiler: show

Epignosis wrote:
Quin wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
Jackofhearts2005 wrote:Also, my team is Epi, LC, Marmot and Quin.
One of these 4 are bad.
This is why we needed to lynch Jack yesterday. People are reading into the WIFOM of the confirmed baddie. Its different to reading into suspects.
All it takes is the presence of mind to

FUCKING IGNORE HIM

Epignosis wrote:
Quin wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Quin wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Quin raised the idea that I was partners with FZ. for defending her. I don't think Quin would do that and then kill FZ. For that and other reasons, I think Quin is a civilian.
But would Epignosis kill the potential teammate I pointed out to get me off his back?
Would he?
He would. Did he though?
I would? What evidence do you have to suggest I would ever recommend murdering my own teammate?

Epignosis wrote:
Quin wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Quin wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Quin wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Quin raised the idea that I was partners with FZ. for defending her. I don't think Quin would do that and then kill FZ. For that and other reasons, I think Quin is a civilian.
But would Epignosis kill the potential teammate I pointed out to get me off his back?
Would he?
He would. Did he though?
I would? What evidence do you have to suggest I would ever recommend murdering my own teammate?
Not your actual teammate

My point is, FZ. was town, and if you're bad, I don't think it's unrealistic that you'd kill her to put me at ease after I considered you two might have BTSC.
Oh.

I would have killed FZ. except for the fact that I was the one vouching for her. Nobody else was, so I might've left her alone and tried to get her lynched (tough to do, by the way, but I like the challenge). But yeah, I would've killed her, sure.

But none of that would be to try to put you at ease. I fear you not.

Epignosis wrote:
Quin wrote: Not even once I've put on my big boy pants?
You need a better avatar. Look at mine.

Epignosis wrote:
Quin wrote:That was a serious question, by the way. I don't think you'd strategise your mafia game around how to appease me. I don't have much influence and I might be the only one who saw what I saw.
So it was a serious question?

And suddenly forgot Quin is in the game.

Epignosis wrote:I took my vote off of Wilgy and placed it on MM.

And I forgot Quin was even in this.

There's only 13 players left in the game, so I find it hard to believe you forgot that Quin was in it, considering your interactions with him.

If you're a civilian, I don't see how you would have forgotten a read or an interaction like that.

You my friend, are my top suspect behind jack right now.

Epignosis wrote:I took my vote off of Wilgy and placed it on MM.

And I forgot Quin was even in this.

How did you forget Quin was in this game, you had a lengthy back-and-forth with him about whether or not you would murder FZ, and also called him a civilian.

Epignosis wrote:
Marmot wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Deal with it mate. Jack has a team. My job is to find them. I don't accomplish that by going, "Okay, voting Jack."
Why did you vote for me?
No reason. Should I have a reason?

Given that you said this, then absolutely yes!

Search found 185 matches