The Syndicate

Looking for an opportunist? Look no further than fingersplints!

splints' vote record (the fractions are when she voted out of numbers of voters):
Day 1 - misses vote
Day 2 - Bass (2/2)
Day 3 - sig (9/11)
Day 4 - G-Man (5/6) --> LC vote
Day 5 - G-Man (7/13)
Day 6 - misses vote
Day 7 - Black Rock (5/7)
Day 8 - misses vote
Day 9 - nijuu (2/5)

splints is an opportunist extraordinaire. Some of these points may have been already pointed out, but this is also for my benefit to organize my own thoughts. Here we go:

She has gunned for Bass since the beginning of the game, citing his asking too many questions for her taste and not answering her fast enough. Bass is an easy target (as I can attest to participating in such in the last lynch ) because of his playstyle and periodic absences. He doesn't answer every question. It's, of course, easy to say this now that we know his alignment, but it does play a role in looking at people who suspected him. I digress.

She guns for Bass but only votes him once on Day 2, when it wasn't catching on. This is the least opportunistic thing she does all game, but the suspicion itself is easy to hold on to for the majority of the game, which she does. Next day, she leaves herself open to vote for Bubbles, Bass, or sig. Bubbles, because she feels her frustration is "genuine," but doesn't necessarily thinks she's good because of it. This is a trend. Bass, because she's been "suspicious" of him for reasons she stated, seeing if it'll catch on. But, realizing it's not, she says

fingersplints wrote:

Golden wrote:I think it's really because we are in a bit of a holding pattern. We need a lynch or two to get some info and get us moving again.

This. I will leave my bass suspicion until tomorrow. I'm voting sig.

and votes 9th out of 11 for sig. Ooh, how lucky! A baddie! FZ mentioned this point on Day 4 too:

fingersplints wrote:

FZ. wrote:Great result!

If I had to choose a voter for Sig from his own team, it would be Splints. I read back through the last hours before the post, and she seemed the one leaving the options open. She talked about 3 potential candidates for a vote: Bass, Bubbles and Sig, threw in some few thoughts why Sig would be a good option, but kept her vote until it was basically a done deal. In my eyes, she was leaving open options and was even talking more about Bass, maybe to get people on board, and when nothing changed, she placed the vote on Sig. This to me, was a classic baddie move. Just wanted to get it out there.

The thing about this being a "classic baddie move" is that it is also what civvies do. Discuss their top suspects in the thread and decide who to vote.
I agree the lynch was basically a done deal, but not quite as the day wasn't finished when I voted and it was still fairly close (plus changeable votes).
I don't expect to be in the clear with my vote by any means, but I don't see why FZ finds it so suspicious. She is correct about one thing though. I absolutely would have liked people to get on board with a bass vote because I think he is a baddie. I think his lynch would also have given us a baddie. I'm fairly confident I will be voting either him or Gman today.

The vote wasn't close at all - the person with the second highest number of votes was Bubbles with FOUR. She was 21st to vote, as well. And what happens to FZ? NK'ed.

Next day, she votes G-Man, with no prior mention of why she suspects him (only that she suspects him along with Bass), but takes time to say "I don't think Bubbles is bad" several times. This is how she defends a G-Man vote over LC:

fingersplints wrote:I'm not convinced LC is a civvie, but I can't see Gman being one at all. I don't have a lot of time tonight and am not sure I will be around much more before the lynch

This isn't even an explanation, but it's a great way to not vote for a teammate by jumping on the next best thing without being noticed. Next day is easy - vote G-Man again. Oh, how lucky! Another baddie!

And now, this, THIS is opportunistic as fuck:

fingersplints wrote:I think Timmers makes a pretty good case on BR. Her response doesn't really make me feel better. I don't think deflecting by accusing Timmer of deflecting is a great defense
I also agree with the points being made on TinyBubbles, and I think the possible connections there are easy to see. I don't see this as the same civvie game I have seen from her before.
I need to reread Dfaraday and MetalMarsh. I felt like MM was a bit aggressive when questioning me earlier about the tie/Epi comment, which struck me as odd at the time, but not enough to be suspicious of.
Dfaraday always sounds a bit suspicious to me, and i am also curious to hear a bit more about his suspicion of me.
I have been reevaluating my suspicion of bass. a lot of my suspicion was based of him being careful about his mentioning LC, but since that team seemed to try and kill him last night I feel a bit better about him. I second (or third or what not) the questioning if he knows how he survived.

She has been defending Bubbles all game. She has been defending BR all game. But suddenly she sees timmer's case as valid? And suddenly Bubbles isn't playing her civvie game? Your game-long Bass suspicion needs "re-evaluation"? And none of these other "suspicions" are committal whatsoever - they're all easy ways to say, "I was suspicious!" if they flip bad or "I wasn't that suspicious!" if they flip civ. They're all fabulous ways to vote wherever the tide takes you and hide in the crowd, whatever happens.

And this is exactly what she does. Votes Bubbles. Votes BR. And gets away with lynching a civilian, while oh! How lucky! Lynching a corrupted civ. Lookin' good, splints!

And let's talk about jumping on me. No prior pings of me. No suspicion. No comment on Sloonei's case or anyone's comments about me while they happen. But boy, when she's directly asked about me:

fingersplints wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

fingersplints wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

fingersplints wrote:@ SVS - I am looking into your ninja points. I think her responses sounded good, but as has been pointed out, they usually do.

what is your stance on ninja right now?

Leaning mafia atm

Why?

Rereading some of her posts, she calls sloonei's case on her nonsensical, but I think that it made sense. It seemed very dismissive. She also mentioned having more time and coming back later, but only has really added to the cobalt train.

The Cobalt train that you didn't bother to vote in. How convenient. And how convenient of you to jump on the first nijuu train a few hours before the poll ends with no prior mention or interaction with me. And what can she do in either case with this lynch? When Bass flips civ, she can say, "Well, I stopped suspecting him " and when I flip any alignment she can say

fingersplints wrote: She is very articulate, and can easily sway others with her words. And I think she plays a very good baddie game

Looking for an opportunist? Go for splints.

Canucklehead wrote:I actually think that was a pretty great defense by Ninjigglypuff.
But now I don't know who to vote for.

IM SO CONFLICTED

Canucklehead wrote: Also, re: nimblebobo, I was definitely one of the people who thought her defense post was "good", but that doesn't mean I'm willing to remove her from suspicion. Like you said, she is a player who perhaps more than any other is fully capable of dressing up an otherwise so-so defense in a "so calm and reasonable and light-hearted that I couldn't possibly be bad!"- tone in a way that can be very convincing. So, while I *did* find her post reasonable and balanced (generally qualities that I associate more with civ than with mafia) she is not entirely exonerated. For instance, I still think the (relatively minor) point that Golden raised a loooong time ago about baddies wanting to make sure they have members in each of the night poll options was very very astute, and that is one major mark against Ninja that she can't sweet-talk her way out of; it just is what it is and I need to make up my mind about whether that piece of evidence is significant or not.

Canucklehead wrote:

nutella wrote:God damn it


@Scotty: Can you explain why this makes you think either I or splints is bad? I don't understand the reasoning there. Suspecting Bass doesn't make me bad, it makes me a civ who misguidedly wanted to lynch someone who was acting suspicious as hell. But if you have legitimate reason to suspect Splints I'd be happy to pursue her further.

I am also happy with a Niju lynch tomorrow. I think it is likely that her teammates piled onto the Bass vote.

How many teammates do we think are left to be accomplishing these "pile ons" and "bandwagons"?
I mean, I agree the ninja is a good suspect for tomorrow and I will likely be voting there (if I can remember to actually fucking vote for once), but I'm not sure I buy the rationale that Bass was lynched in a Ninja save attempt.

nutella wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:I actually think that was a pretty great defense by Ninjigglypuff.
But now I don't know who to vote for.

IM SO CONFLICTED

Same yo. Niju's defense is definitely giving me pause, but I don't know who I even suspect anymore :\

Sounds to me like Epig is an indie with his own win condition. o_O

nutella wrote:God damn it


@Scotty: Can you explain why this makes you think either I or splints is bad? I don't understand the reasoning there. Suspecting Bass doesn't make me bad, it makes me a civ who misguidedly wanted to lynch someone who was acting suspicious as hell. But if you have legitimate reason to suspect Splints I'd be happy to pursue her further.

I am also happy with a Niju lynch tomorrow. I think it is likely that her teammates piled onto the Bass vote.

Do you not see this? Doesn't anyone else see this? This is the kind of BS that's been happening for DAYS. I could go through and pull so many quotes of people either totally disregarding any defense I have made, or actually agreeing with my defense but then backtracking and saying "but that totally doesn't make her good." What does that even mean? So you agree that I did a good job proving I was civ, but I'm not civ? That you came in at the last minute and tried to bandwagon on me? I didn't use "pretty words" to attempt to fool my audience - I used both logic and articulation to prove that I am a civ the best way that I could. (BTW this isn't directed only or necessarily at the people quoted above given missed votes, etc. but it applies to many.)

I am frustrated. I have actually never been so frustrated in a game before because I'm usually quite calm and roll with the punches. But I feel like I have done everything an accused civ should do, and it's not working. I have defended my own ass "admirably." I have remained calm. I have joked. I have avoided "NO U." I have done a little "NO U." I have made a case and gone after someone to get the heat off of me (y'know, because I kinda want the civs to win), and unfortunately, that turned sour. And then another vote turned sour. And now I'm doing the angry thing. You know what the baddies were doing last night? Laughing, because the only two people to receive votes were civs, and they have another easy day tomorrow if you let them. You're going to steamroll another civ, despite the LOGICAL LOGICAL LOGICAL evidence that you're ignoring in favor of "catching" me at something I'm not unless you turn off your tunnel vision. And what will happen afterwards? They'll say shit like this:

fingersplints wrote: She is very articulate, and can easily sway others with her words. And I think she plays a very good baddie game

They'll brush off the vote like I was the obvious choice, then move on to the next easy target.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:There was no "save attempt" of anyone except Bass, and it failed. Bass would have been lynched quietly if there hadn't been a streak of late ninja votes. I don't think that implicates ninja -- but her earlier Bass vote might. He was an easy target and it seems quite likely to me someone capitalized. It could have been ninja, it could have been someone else.

I think everyone needs to take a step back and reevaluate the last couple day phases. Find the opportunists.

Please for the love of god do this. I'm gonna, and I'll show my work. I'm going to do everything, everything I can to save my ass without losing another civ, but someone who doesn't have tunnel vision on me (although I don't know who that would even be anymore) needs to look at the opportunists and the sneaks, too. You wanna find a baddie or two? Look at both voting camps. Look at the not-so-obvious, the not-so-easy.

I'm done coming up with my own defenses because it's not working. It won't even be satisfying to say "I told you so" if you lynch me at this point. Ask me anything if you actually want to listen to an answer.

I hate everything. I hate the baddies. I'm so irritated I need to leave.

At least I probably won't die tonight

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'm willing to switch back to Bass. i would love a response from ninja though to my question. sorry about the hot sugar. :P

As for your question, my post was originally for bass that day but then I was multitasking (haha a theme) in looking at cobalt's vote record. I got so excited at my "discovery" that I didn't even notice I left the post like that.

it's all good!

Epignosis wrote:My vote stays on blooper because I don't care about sweets, and I am not going to live in that bag.

No more coffee cake for you, sir.

Epignosis wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote:Oh look, a save attempt! You guys are so funny

But seriously, you're so wrong about me.

Why Bass over you?

And make it funny.

I'll seriously switch my vote if you make me laugh once. Go.

Ever notice how men always leave the toilet seat up?

Oh look, a save attempt! You guys are so funny

But seriously, you're so wrong about me.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote:

fingersplints wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

fingersplints wrote:@ SVS - I am looking into your ninja points. I think her responses sounded good, but as has been pointed out, they usually do.

what is your stance on ninja right now?

Leaning mafia atm

Would it help if I weren't staring at you menacingly through my avatar? :P

you don't seem perturbed. you should probably be perturbed. explain your comfort level to me.

I am perturbed, actually, but my reaction one way or another doesn't really garner me any favors. I defended myself (rather admirably, as some people are keen to point out) and yet several continue to disregard that and throw suspicion at me. I could freak out if that would help people see the truth, but I pride myself on keeping calm and collected, no matter what I know my alignment and I've made that clear. Frankly, as no-u'y as it might sound, I'm actually slightly concerned, as the Bass vote grows, that my name is being thrown around again as an "alternative" in the last hours for some of the most tenuous reasons I've ever seen. It makes me both want to look more closely at those suspecting me no matter what I say, and it makes me think, "Oh hey, voting Bass IS the good choice!" despite a small concern of mine that this lynch looks so easy.

I'm going to vote now. I'm going to go eat and spend time with family on vacation but I may return before the poll ends. Bass was my second choice after Cobalt last lynch, and, well, I already said my spiel above.

fingersplints wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

fingersplints wrote:@ SVS - I am looking into your ninja points. I think her responses sounded good, but as has been pointed out, they usually do.

what is your stance on ninja right now?

Leaning mafia atm

Would it help if I weren't staring at you menacingly through my avatar? :P

Epignosis wrote:I have already explained why I think nijuu is bad. Now I will show why I think Golden is her teammate.

Your "explanation" of why I am bad is nothing more than nitpicky semantics and the whole Day 0 subject line caused by Sloonei's original post; it completely disregards (no, doesn't even address) vote record. You want so badly to catch me being bad, but this isn't the game, sir. Seriously, what team are you trying to pin me on? The one where I threw two teammates under the bus, or the one where I nearly lynched a teammate Day 1 for fun and later voted him out? I've explained this. I don't know what's hard to understand, or why logic is being thrown out the window in favor of trying to "catch" me at something that's not there.

Epignosis wrote:I have already explained why I think nijuu is bad. Now I will show why I think Golden is her teammate.

Golden wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote:I have a killer headache

An admission!

Little posts like this is one reason. It's playful distancing. These two have NOT interacted the entire game. Not one time. Golden has 469 posts. This is is the only one where he directly interacts with nijuu.

This is blatantly false. Look back at my posts - I'm actually surprised at how much interaction I've had with Golden, playful and non-playful, even if it's rather one-sided (my commenting and mostly agreeing with his analyses). And considering how much little interaction I have with a variety of individual players in the thread (as in, back and forth), this is no evidence. There is no evidence. You are wasting time and deduction on a civ.

Haha whoops. Sorry, guys! Hooray, beer! Let's try that again:

nijuukyugou wrote:

Epignosis wrote: What you need to question is how I figured out you and nijuu are teammates.

Yes, do tell how you came to this conclusion. You are so wrong about me it hurts.

Epignosis wrote:

Golden wrote: What you need to question is how I figured out you and nijuu are teammates.

Yes, do tell how you came to this conclusion. You are so wrong about me it hurts.

Well son of a bitch. I really did feel sure about that one, too. Sorry, Cobalt

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Between Bass and Cobalt i'd vote Bass. i honestly don't understand why Cobalt is being regarded with such suspicion.

I agree with this, looking back at the case on Bass, his posts, and his voting record.

I looked back at Cobalt, too. One of the major reasons I've been after him is not simply the abrasive manner, but for what I believed to be a lie about his Day 1 vote. For some reason I was having a change of heart about him today until I looked back at his voting record:

Day 1 - Votes SVS (indy), claims he would've switched back to vote LC ten minutes after the poll ended but was too busy.
Day 2 - Votes LC, survives lynch
Day 3 - Votes LC on the day sig (Baddie Team Webber) was lynched
Day 4 - Votes LC (Baddie Team Wildhorn)
Day 5 - Votes MM (the only vote) on the day G-Man (Baddie Team Webber) was lynched
Day 6 - Votes Black Rock, TinyBubbles is lynched
Day 7 - Votes Black Rock (corrupted, likely Team Wildhorn according to night book puzzle)

I thought it was the Day 1 vote fiasco that pinned him as bad for me, but he did eventually vote LC out several times. However, the dude has avoided voting Team Webber completely and I don't even know how I didn't notice it before (maybe it was the abrasive manner as a distraction!). You sly devil I will be voting for you now.

Canucklehead wrote:Ninjigglypuff.

Epignosis wrote:

Scotty wrote:Linki- why, Epi? Of all the MIAs, why Devin?

I think I need Devin dead to win. I don't KNOW that. But I think it.

What is this even

Epignosis wrote:I have an observation about nijuu's post above.

The subject line reads "Day 0."

That means she quoted something on Day 0 original, but deleted whatever it said.

I was wondering why it said that, but I figured out the mystery - Sloonei's original post in the link I provided was listed as Day 0 for some reason. I had it quoted, but decided I didn't want to re-format everything. Didn't even notice the subject line

I don't want to quote Sloonei's entire case again because it was a real pain in the ass to format and re-format, but I will respond to points he brought up about me. For your convenience, his case can be re-read here for those of you who keep claiming you're going to "look up the case on Blooper again."

Reading through this case, I'm not even sure what team Sloonei is trying to peg me on, because neither team makes any sense. He said my interactions with G-Man and sig "do not paint me in a favorable light." So if he's making the claim that I'm on Team Webber, then he's also asserting that I threw not one, but TWO teammates under the bus without even trying to defend them. I don't count giving G-Man, a player who just subbed in, one day's grace as a defense. Even the host gave that to him. I also don't count not mentioning sig except later in an unfavorable way as a defense. And I sure as shit don't count VOTING FOR TWO PEOPLE ON MY "SUPPOSED TEAM" as a good way to play mafia. It doesn't matter if they were later votes. It would still be two supposed teammates. That's poor, lazy, and cruel team playing, and I'm not any one of those things.

If he's trying to peg me on Team Wilhorn, that's also nonsensical. I made a crazy tie-up vote Day 1 for LC a) to amuse myself and b) because I (rightly) believed LC was bad. I would never throw a teammate under the bus on Day 1, especially with a vote that close. That's idiotic. AND I VOTED FOR HIM AGAIN because my mind did not change about him.

Sloonei himself admits to making this case with major tunnel vision turned on, and it looks like the logic sensor was turned off. One of his other major points is that I didn't mention enough suspicion of sig at the right time, and that sig's weird posts about me gave him pause. I've already addressed the first point. As for the second point, I will say it again as I said to Sloonei: this is precisely the kind of paranoid suspicion that sig was going for. He attempted to paint me in a bad light by lying about me (he said I switched up a vote when I haven't switched a vote all game, even since he was lynched), then buddy up as he was going down (and then buddy back down again) so I could look bad.

Listen to logic, people. If you've ever played on a team with me before, you know I'm not a lazy player (especially since I have a crapload of free time right now!) and I avoid throwing teammates under the bus as much as possible, at the cost of my own thread reputation. This case is nonsensical, and while Sloonei made it with good intentions for the civs, it's wrong. That's all I hope I have to say on that. I'm gonna have a look at people who are really, suddenly eager to get on this case without actually getting on it. I'll return later with thoughts.

Cobalt wrote:can we lynch Blooper tomorrow pls

Not if you wanna keep lynching baddies :P

nutella wrote:I'm honestly not sure who I suspect most right now. I'm afraid the baddies are hiding in the people who don't stand out as much, like Niju and Hedge, maybe splints. Going to look at them again.

"Don't stand out as much"? Really? Because my name's been thrown around quite a lot for several days. Your attempt to be subtle is a no-go.

Linki - Again, being put on the back burner is not the same as "in the shadows." I have not been hiding, nor has anyone been ignoring me. They've just been going for (some) of the right people instead. I'm here! Hello! Hi!

Epignosis wrote:This won't mean much to most of you, but it's why I think nijuu is bad.

nijuukyugou wrote:

FZ. wrote: Epig is a mystery. I don't think anyone can deny he's posting less than he did on day 1. He wanted LC out, but what I want to check later is, did he continue going after him strongly when he came back. If it was as strong, I think he can't be from his team, though it's possible, but if he subtly backed off without making it too obvious, it's possible. I think I recall he voted for G-man both days, and when I asked him what he would do, he said he doesn't want a tie. That made me feel better about him, because I think I know what his role was before. But the point is he didn't vote for LC but G-man. As for the other team, his exchange with G-man seems genuine, so I doubt he's on that team. Maybe he's an independent who doesn't care as much who wins and is laying low to not get NK again.

^^ This. I felt good about Epi 1.0 (which I suppose I should never feel), but have been feeling less so with 2.0, especially since he stopped gunning for LC so hard and didn't even vote him. Although he's never quite quiet, he's certainly quieter in his second incarnation, quieter than I'm used to (but then again, I'm also used to his hosting, so).

nijuukyugou wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Epignosis wrote:It should be clear that I support a Long Con or Cobalt lynch too, but I have only one vote.

Indeed, sir - I remember this post of yours. However, the point is you chose to vote G-Man in the end.

And what does that indicate to you?

That you were less willing to vote LC the second time around when he was actually up for a lynch (after your first incarnation had died), which was odd, given how hard you went after him Day 1. Could be indicative of a team/alignment change.

I gave her an opportunity to speak one way or the other about me. To say what she thought. Instead, she reiterated possibilities. "Could be indicative of."

That's mincing words.

That's equivocation.

That's what Mafia do.

Well hot damn, you caught me!

I expressed suspicion of you because of your G-Man vote and your change of behavior from first to second incarnation. You quoted yourself, then asked questions about yourself like I was a kid in a classroom. You asked me a specific question about "what it ["it" being your G-Man vote] indicated." I reflected your language and tone because I felt like we were having a damned Socratic seminar. You can pick apart the semantics of my phrasing all you want to, but my message with all of those posts (not just the last one) was clear to anyone with a brain: your behavior 2.0 made me suspicious, and your G-Man vote could (yes, could, because nothing is completely certain about anything in mafia) be indicative of an alignment change. You could be bad in your second incarnation, and apparently I need to spell it out that I think this is the case, bad boy.

Now, with that being said, I will cast my vote for Cobalt today because despite my spiel above, he's still my strongest suspect. However, I am also okay with an Epi or BR vote. I'm not okay with a me vote.

Linki @JJJ - Cobalt had some pretty shady behavior earlier in the game coupled with the attitude. I made a case a while ago when it was real hot and others have added other thoughts, but he's been largely avoided due to a period of inactivity mid-game Cobalt had and the fact that he survived a lynch.
Linki linki - What Golden said, too

Cobalt wrote:Wow, that was abrasive, lmao. All in good fun, Blooper. Just my own brand of dragging, GTF style.

It took me so long to respond to that post because I was laughing so hard. I like you.

Cobalt wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote:Meh, I don't scum-slip (and that sounds super gross ), however subtly. You asked everyone to give an opinion of your sig case. I gave it. I finally see what you're saying - that I didn't state my own personal suspicion of sig at the time that it would have been more prudent to do so. I get it. But at this point, I don't really know how to convince you that I'm telling the truth except that I had that suspicion that I failed to share with the rest of the class, I agreed with your case, and I voted what I believed and agreed with. Turn your tunnel vision off - you've seriously got the wrong gal, and I'd really like to continue baddie-hunting and win as a civ.

I've also stated my suspects. Cobalt is Baddie McBadderson and I've been after that for quite some time. I liked the last case on Black Rock and could see her as a baddie. Epi 2.0 has been giving me some baddie vibes and I've said why in an earlier post. Those are three off the top of my head. See other posts for other suspects I may have forgotten to share here.

Okay first of all you scummy ass fart in the breeze, let me give you a lesson on Playing Mafia 101, mmkay? Trotting around going "I don't scum-slip" from your infallible high horse not only makes you look like an EGREGIOUS snob but it also makes you look that much worse. Acting like you're perfect and looking down on people for merely expressing significant suspicion of you is classic scum slip right out of said Mafia 101 textbook, so FANTASTIC job contradicting yourself.

If you really want the scummiest Baddie McBadderson out of everyone here then look in the damn mirror and behold sis, because if you're gonna try to throw me under a train then BY ALL MEANS, EVERYONE PLEASE LYNCH ME TOMORROW. Because when I flip civ your infallible perfect self will be knocked right on your pancake ass off your high horse at which point you may be crucified to the town's content.

GOODBYE.

Oh?

Cobalt wrote:Changed my vote from Nijuu to Scum Rock because I'm not letting her get away for another phase. After Sloonei died I was all set to go after Blooper but upon further examination it may have been a framejob considering Sloonei's case against her.

Neat!

Sloonei wrote:

nijuukuyou wrote:

Sloonei wrote:The bigger middle paragraph where she runs through her reasoning about all three feels a bit contrived and doesn't seem to fit as well with her previous statement that she's excited to have "decent suspicion" of all three and is "okay with voting any of them". Immediately after saying this, she expresses that she's not actually okay with voting Cobalt, waffles a bit on SVS, and ultimately settles on Long Con because she "likes Epi's case". I feel like a town Ninja would not have been so quick to make a decision here, even with changeable votes.

Town Ninja is quite relaxed with her votes

Sloonei wrote:Her later comments about doing it for the "interesting reactions" also now comes back to me as not particularly fitting with the tone of this post, as it is suggested here that she at least feigned careful reasoning before voting, and was not just doing it to provoke others. Here it is:

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:

sig wrote:@ Sloonei I've played with someone who would always vote for themselves after to many people became suspicious I don't think it is a good mafia method but one person has in the past fooled me bydoing that and I've seen two others do the same, it is a mindgame which always makes me think they are mafia trying to make themselves seem like civilians.


Nijuuk if your wary of SVS why not vote for her? I'm not understanding your vote

Because I wanted to make it interesting. I'm wary of all three of the top candidates and am okay with any and all getting votes. (PS you can call me Nijuu or Blooper if you want)

I am no longer buying this excuse. When I asked her about it, she responded affirmatively:

nijuukyugou wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Also would you say things have been made more interesting by your LC vote, Blooperstranger?

Oh, quite! It's garnered some good reactions.

But then it took her a few days to follow up on it, and when she did there wasn't really much evidence to back up the claim:

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:In general, after my LC vote Day 1, people seemed to flip out and start changing votes, but that is often the norm here on TS with changeable votes. However, it was specific reactions that got my attention. First, it gave me (and others in their analyses) my first real ping of sig, who was the first to freak out and try to call me bad for mixing things up when I did. He freaked the FUCK OUT (and I laughed so, so hard). Honestly, it also made me look a bit in your direction since you freaked out about a possible tie, but that was a mafia cultural difference that you explained. nutella switched her vote soon after from SVS to Cobalt. Golden changed his vote a few times to break the tie. Hedgeowl and Gumshoe came in last minute and voted. Cobalt tried to say he would've switched yadda yadda yadda (I've already said this twice). Looking at this now several days later, it's not as much of a great analyzing point as I'd like it to be, and the "good reactions" I mentioned were rather more amusing than informative, but there's the raw data of what went down that day.

I'm still itchy about Cobalt, especially since his activity has died down considerably these past few days. His two posts for today were either nonsense about G-Man's supposed threat to being voted or about getting back into the game when his RL stuff dies down. The RL stuff might be true and I hope it's not terrible! but his participation has been little more than "DIE LC" and getting angrily defensive when he has been here, so I'd like to see what he means by getting back in "full force." I am a bit wary of nutella based on behavior (I had mentioned she seemed more serious than what I'd experienced as her civ self in the past) and that vote switch from Day 1, but then I look at her vote record - she has voted for people on both mafia teams. However, for some reason I'd thought she'd voted earlier in the LC and sig lynches, which is what really held me back, but she seems to have voted when they were pretty much a done deal (aside from vote switching mechanics). So I guess what I'm saying is that I need to look back at her again and she could still be a baddie.

I know that's not what you guys are talking about currently in the thread at this hour, but I figured I'd get these thoughts out while they were in my head and to make myself tired enough to go to sleep (and because Guess Who might start tomorrow, which will likely alter my concentration and participation in this game). However, I will at least comment about vote analysis in finding baddies - it freaking works. It caught us BAD in Biblical, as Golden attests so I'm glad to see it being used and discussed here

For the record, I'm still not tired. Maybe I'll try reading myself to sleep.

I especially disagree with her when she says sig's reaction to her vote gave many people their "first real ping" about him. I know I first became suspicious of sig because of the way he handled his own vote that day.

You misunderstand me. I wasn't claiming my vote caused other people to be pinged by him - I said his reaction caused me to be pinged. I ain't that conceited.

Yes, and that is what I am basing this case on. Based on the evidence in your post history, it does not appear that you actually were pinged by sig in that instance, and that you only tacked it on afterwards when I brought it up a few days later. This is the point in the case that I am most concerned about, as it genuinely seems like a place where you very subtly scum-slipped. Based on all the evidence in your post history prior to this instance, you never seemed to pay sig any mind, but then when I asked you for interesting reactions you noted that he pinged you on Day 1 for that specific point. But the way some of your other posts are framed, it does not appear like you took any particular interest in the point.

My god, that was a pain in the ass to respond to (not the accusations themselves, but the formatting and re-formatting). Happy to answer anything I failed to address or needs clarification.

Thank you for your response, I really do appreciate it. I am still not convinced that you are telling the truth, unfortunately. You failed to answer what is my biggest concern, the point highlighted above. If you have any thoughts or things or questions please share.
I am also very curious at this time about your current suspects. Who are they and why?

Meh, I don't scum-slip (and that sounds super gross ), however subtly. You asked everyone to give an opinion of your sig case. I gave it. I finally see what you're saying - that I didn't state my own personal suspicion of sig at the time that it would have been more prudent to do so. I get it. But at this point, I don't really know how to convince you that I'm telling the truth except that I had that suspicion that I failed to share with the rest of the class, I agreed with your case, and I voted what I believed and agreed with. Turn your tunnel vision off - you've seriously got the wrong gal, and I'd really like to continue baddie-hunting and win as a civ.

I've also stated my suspects. Cobalt is Baddie McBadderson and I've been after that for quite some time. I liked the last case on Black Rock and could see her as a baddie. Epi 2.0 has been giving me some baddie vibes and I've said why in an earlier post. Those are three off the top of my head. See other posts for other suspects I may have forgotten to share here.

Sloonei wrote:I'll cats my ballot for you, g-man.

I see what you did there

Response to Sloonei's accusations, as promised.

Sloonei wrote:

Cobalt wrote:

Golden wrote:Sloonei survived a nightkill from team one, man. He isn't on it.

omg wait



that kind of throws a wrench in things.

I already voted Black Rock though, and I still want her gone. Otherwise I'd vote Bubbles today.

If yout theory about me being on team 1 has a wrench in it, can I ask again what you think of my theory about nijuu being partners with sig & g-man? I want to hear everyone's thoughts on this, really. Hey everyone, tell me whether you agree of that ninja blooper coulf be on Mafia Team 1 with sig and g-man!

I disagree :P

Sloonei wrote:new nijuukyugou ISO, this time with tunnel vision turned on.
As I've mentioned in pretty much every post I've made since last night, my new concern is that Ninja's interactions with both G-man and sig (both dead Lloyd Webber team members) do not paint her in a very favorable light. This is a stark contrast to my original read of her, where was an overwhelming town read. I'm discarding my previous read entirely and starting anew. This theory is still in its early stages and I'm not entirely convinced of it myself, but it's something that absolutely warrants a closer look.

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:Oh good god, four pages on Day 0. Already gonna be a lot more talky than in Bible Mafia, I see. And the threat of more technicolor lists. Super :P

Comments on what's been commented on:
Voting newbie players on Day 1? I don't think I have much of an opinion on it. I don't actively avoid it, but I also don't actively go after new people in particular, as I do want them to stay. Hello, new people!
I'd like to see where these buddy-buddy so-called "truces" will end up (or is it just one "truce" between MP and his buddy?), but I personally think it's nothing right now.

That's all I can think of to say at the moment. No strong opinions on anyone just yet.

Gets he feet wet by commenting on a couple of issues in the game, but does not offer any particular reads on anyone, other than to say the "truce" thing between MP and Devin was "nothing", which amounts to, well, nothing.

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:Mmmmk somewhat caught up. I'd say remind me not to leave the thread for too long so I don't have 4 pages to read, but I'll inevitably do it again.

nutella wrote:I don't get the Hedgeowl suspicion at all. She posted while catching up and gave her input on a couple main discussions. None of her posts look particularly bad to me, just kind of average minimal-but-sufficient participation. I guess I understood LC's point (though it was regarding SVS) about commenting on issues rather than players, but Hedgie gave her views on LC/Epi/SVS so that doesn't really apply. I don't know, she could be hiding behind that type of participation (I haven't played many games with her but isn't it kind of her norm?) but I just don't really see the reasons for suspecting her, they seem contrived.

I could see SVS as bad. I mean, SVS is always bad

Agreed (at least the part about Hedgeowl suspicion). I think it was good of TH to search her like he did, but I disagree that it's baddie behavior from her. I don't think his suspicion was contrived.

Epignosis wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Dom wrote:Dragon D. Luffy has been replaced by Cancucklehead. She cannot be lynched today.

what are you so scared of, little puppy?

You didn't witness the maelstrom of deceit that was Canucklehead in Roger Rabbit.

They still whisper about it in Toontown.

(Just kidding, Canuck - I was actually very excited to see your name!)

MovingPictures07 wrote: Consequently, my mafia game, which is often defined by a high volume of posts, will be affected this game. I will be much more likely to pop in less frequently, which will increase my already notoriously long posts probably much more so, and make my style seem more like a cross of Blooper-esque, Epi-esque, and MP-esque, rather than straight-up MP-esque combination of frequency and volume.

I'm an -esque!! I'm so touched

MovingPictures07 wrote:Blooper, you note in this post multiple "truces", but ask the question whether there is just one thereafter. Devin and I never agreed to a truce. Just wanted to clear that up.

You specifically note you have "no strong opinions". If that is the case, do you have weak opinions? If so, what are they?

Fair enough. I just saw a lot of (mostly jokingly it seems) buddy-buddy Day 0 stuff, so I figured I'd comment on it. I'm notoriously bad at getting lost in the first several days of larger games because of the sheer volume of people, so I'm trying a new thing called "comment about SOMETHING, whatever it is" to at least keep a placeholder. So far, not doing so hot. But hey, here I am!

As for my opinions (and the actual contributory points of this post), I have a few opinions. I never trust Epi, but damn I do love actually playing a game with him, and whatever my vibes are right now, I'm feeling all right about him today. This means that I think he's genuinely baddie hunting, and I think both of his suspicions of LC and SVS are fairly sound (I almost said interesting but I know better than to use that now :P). I think LC's response to Epi's going after him looks too defensive to me. I think my general view of SVS is that she gets defensive regardless of alignment, which makes her hard to read, but I agree with others (can't remember exactly who) that suddenly defending the whole "interesting" argument in the manner she did was suspicious. So, there's that.

I don't have a good read of the new people in here, but I'm glad to see some fresh meat (at least to the Syndicate). It certainly makes for some...fascinating gameplay.

Her response to MP here reads a little bit like backtracking/covering her tracks. She admits to misrepresenting (whether intentionally or not) the truth in regards to her earlier post about the truce discussion and also provides an excuse for herself to get off to a slow start. However, she then starts to provide a few reads. However however, as has been noted a bunch of times throughout this game, with two scum teams, the baddies should be doing about as much scum hunting as the townies in this game, so her observations that Epi 1.0 seemed to be "genuinely baddie hunting" and that "LC's response looks too defensive" could just as likely have been made by a baddie, presumably a non-Wildhorn one. The three names she mentions here (Epi, SVS, Long Con) were the three that everyone had an opinion of on Day 1, so it would have been nice to see Ninja dig a little deeper for reads here. Not feeling as good about this post as I was before, but that's gonna be a common theme right now. The next read she offers is on Cobalt, the other player everyone had an opinion of Day 1:

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote:@Bass I was also a little weirded out by Cobalt implying that because he was super-civ important player in a previous game, then he is totally civ this game, but I forgot to mention it (I knew there was SOMETHING about SOME new person to me that I had seen). But for now I'd just like to keep my eye on him.

Do you believe he was trying to convince he was a civilian, or do you believe what he said about just wanting to let everyone know he's not a new player?

My vibe is that I think he's playing the civ card hard. A little too hard.

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:The bad news is, I've been without internet access since last night due to traveling, power outages, and, y'know, socially interacting with people that I've traveled to see in real life (might need to get my priorities in order). This means I haven't had much of a chance to read through the thread as much as I'd like before the poll ends (I am still socializing after all :P ) or go back and look at something like I promised someone (I can't even remember who I promised this to. Long day).

The good news is, for the first time in my mafia-playing career, I have decent suspicion from what I have been able to gather of all three of the top vote-getters in this thread, and I'm okay with voting any of them, which is...a miracle. The question is, who do I want to pick?

I have been able to read a bit. Cobalt's made me itchy, and I read over the last page and the opportunistic vote switch. I'd still like to analyze him more closely if I get the chance. SVS has been highly, HIGHLY defensive and has weirdly voted for herself, which is something I'm not used to (the self-voting, not the defensiveness), so slightly mixed feelings but very much leaning bad. But tonight, I think I want to make things...interesting. I also like Epi's case and interaction with LC - like it in the way that I think it points to LC as a baddie. Epi's a manipulative bastard, but he's a manipulative bastard giving me good vibes, and I wanna see what happens when I press the big red button that no one should press (and by that I mean make the votes closer right now).

So I'm gonna vote LC.

Linki - Silence broken!

I can't help but now read this post as her leaving the door open on all three lynch possibilities, creating the freedom for herself to vote any one of the three lynch candidates from that day.

You're damn right I gave myself freedom to do so It's been most enjoyable being able to vote for who I want and be right (except the last lynch).

Sloonei wrote:The bigger middle paragraph where she runs through her reasoning about all three feels a bit contrived and doesn't seem to fit as well with her previous statement that she's excited to have "decent suspicion" of all three and is "okay with voting any of them". Immediately after saying this, she expresses that she's not actually okay with voting Cobalt, waffles a bit on SVS, and ultimately settles on Long Con because she "likes Epi's case". I feel like a town Ninja would not have been so quick to make a decision here, even with changeable votes.

Town Ninja is quite relaxed with her votes

Sloonei wrote:Her later comments about doing it for the "interesting reactions" also now comes back to me as not particularly fitting with the tone of this post, as it is suggested here that she at least feigned careful reasoning before voting, and was not just doing it to provoke others. Here it is:

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:

sig wrote:@ Sloonei I've played with someone who would always vote for themselves after to many people became suspicious I don't think it is a good mafia method but one person has in the past fooled me bydoing that and I've seen two others do the same, it is a mindgame which always makes me think they are mafia trying to make themselves seem like civilians.


Nijuuk if your wary of SVS why not vote for her? I'm not understanding your vote

Because I wanted to make it interesting. I'm wary of all three of the top candidates and am okay with any and all getting votes. (PS you can call me Nijuu or Blooper if you want)

I am no longer buying this excuse. When I asked her about it, she responded affirmatively:

nijuukyugou wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Also would you say things have been made more interesting by your LC vote, Blooperstranger?

Oh, quite! It's garnered some good reactions.

But then it took her a few days to follow up on it, and when she did there wasn't really much evidence to back up the claim:

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:In general, after my LC vote Day 1, people seemed to flip out and start changing votes, but that is often the norm here on TS with changeable votes. However, it was specific reactions that got my attention. First, it gave me (and others in their analyses) my first real ping of sig, who was the first to freak out and try to call me bad for mixing things up when I did. He freaked the FUCK OUT (and I laughed so, so hard). Honestly, it also made me look a bit in your direction since you freaked out about a possible tie, but that was a mafia cultural difference that you explained. nutella switched her vote soon after from SVS to Cobalt. Golden changed his vote a few times to break the tie. Hedgeowl and Gumshoe came in last minute and voted. Cobalt tried to say he would've switched yadda yadda yadda (I've already said this twice). Looking at this now several days later, it's not as much of a great analyzing point as I'd like it to be, and the "good reactions" I mentioned were rather more amusing than informative, but there's the raw data of what went down that day.

I'm still itchy about Cobalt, especially since his activity has died down considerably these past few days. His two posts for today were either nonsense about G-Man's supposed threat to being voted or about getting back into the game when his RL stuff dies down. The RL stuff might be true and I hope it's not terrible! but his participation has been little more than "DIE LC" and getting angrily defensive when he has been here, so I'd like to see what he means by getting back in "full force." I am a bit wary of nutella based on behavior (I had mentioned she seemed more serious than what I'd experienced as her civ self in the past) and that vote switch from Day 1, but then I look at her vote record - she has voted for people on both mafia teams. However, for some reason I'd thought she'd voted earlier in the LC and sig lynches, which is what really held me back, but she seems to have voted when they were pretty much a done deal (aside from vote switching mechanics). So I guess what I'm saying is that I need to look back at her again and she could still be a baddie.

I know that's not what you guys are talking about currently in the thread at this hour, but I figured I'd get these thoughts out while they were in my head and to make myself tired enough to go to sleep (and because Guess Who might start tomorrow, which will likely alter my concentration and participation in this game). However, I will at least comment about vote analysis in finding baddies - it freaking works. It caught us BAD in Biblical, as Golden attests so I'm glad to see it being used and discussed here

For the record, I'm still not tired. Maybe I'll try reading myself to sleep.

I especially disagree with her when she says sig's reaction to her vote gave many people their "first real ping" about him. I know I first became suspicious of sig because of the way he handled his own vote that day.

You misunderstand me. I wasn't claiming my vote caused other people to be pinged by him - I said his reaction caused me to be pinged. I ain't that conceited.

Sloonei wrote:I did not even become wary of his response to niju's vote until after he had been lynched and I looked back through his posts, and the only reason it stood out to me was because of how strange he was acting towards niju in particular. I think it's also worth noting that she makes absolutely no mention of that sig ping in her big huge follow up post. She does spend a lot of time telling us why Cobalt is bad, though.

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:Well, I am late for this party, but I am laughing profusely at the thread

I don't plan on changing my mind about what I believe to be Cobalt's alignment, but I suppose it would be prudent to look at...others. I will determine what others I want to focus on at a later time, as I simply want a placeholder/check-back-in post right now and I'm exhausted from moving boxes up three flights of stairs in nearly 100 degree weather, but I digress. Back later to read back and post in more detail.

Linki - Ohhhh man gotta love the picture posts

Still no mention of sig...

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:I gotta stop doing this to myself. But moving takes so. Much. Time. Here we go.

So I've tabbed quotes from people that I agree with and/or find interesting (I'll make it clear what I think about them as I go). Sometimes I'm sad I wasn't there in real time to respond, but thems the breaks. I'll also comment on general things that have been discussed.

timmer wrote:

Dom wrote:
Coablt's discussion has been totally about role descriptions.... you can choose to believe or disbelieve him.

You obviously have the final say on this, Dom, so I'll move along. I'll just say that I don't like his play, and that if he is a civ, his actions have more likely hurt than helped the cause, imo.

I agree so, so much with this and with your longer post from before. I still think Cobalt is baddie bad bad, but in the offchance in my mind that he is civ, he is NOT playing a very civ-friendly game. His insanified posts are rather amusing, though.

I enjoyed the G-Man pictures (might be because I saw a few of them in Economics but wasn't actually in the game). In fact, I seem to enjoy reading G-Man's posts regardless, especially knowing his identity as Balaam (he humored my request for more ass jokes ). I hope you keep some of your pictures! But speaking of G-Man (or another of his former alter-ego players),

Golden wrote:So I went back to look at timing.

Epi dies. Epi replaces in. Epi has (I think) only two posts - one where he says 'I know who killed me' and one where he says 'my suspicions haven't changed'. Then TGG asks to be subbed out.

I honestly think it's very consistent with someone who was part of a team that killed epi, that they killed them for cause, and was upset when he was able to sub back in and express the particular sentiments that he did. I think G-Man and LC are a team. I feel less sure that bubbles is, but she definitely could be.

Does it suck that someone subbing out on a matter of principle could sink a team? Yes. But this is why you should always keep your cool in mafia. I guarantee you, when people complain about things being unfair in this game, it's almost always mafia. Because they perceive it has harmed their chances. I don't think Epi's views necessarily held great weight, and I think the reaction to him subbing back in provides a whole lot more information about how important they believed killing epi to be.

This is a fascinating analysis and, since Epi seems to be silenced and absent, dare I say interesting thought process. I like the ideas posed here (about TGG perhaps getting frustrated and mafia getting frustrated in general). It's a bit of a stretch but entirely possible. However, I'd like to give G-Man the BOTD for today at least since he's a totally different player than TGG. We'll see how it goes.

Scotty wrote:I REALLY want to hear more from row 3. So...calling MM, sig, njuu, nutella, and Turnip! Anything to report??

Roger that. I read and re-read your post about the messages, but my eyesight tends to start going double the more tired I get and, therefore, I get lost in longer analysis posts (this might be why I enjoy the G-Man pics - easier to read!). What information/analysis are you requesting, exactly? I'm happy to help where I can.

As for suspicions beyond Cobalt, I'm still game for LC (it's been a while and I got super distracted by Cobalt, but I liked and agreed with Epi's suspicion and analysis Day 1). TB (I don't really like calling her that, because it looks like tuberculosis so let's go with TBubbles instead) is an enigma but I'm getting some weird vibes. I keep flip-flopping on how I feel about her, TBH. One moment I was just about to post how I felt she was weird for voting LC instead of Cobalt because she thought the "bandwagon was scummy," and then I re-read that and think, "Oh wait, that's actually logical." So maybe it's just a vibe thing (I'm using that word a lot this game, I notice), although my gut is usually pretty good in mafia. I suppose I should say I have mixed feelings about ol' TBubbles - I feel bad if she's civ and she's feeling so frustrated with this game that she's self-voted, but on the other hand she's been saying "I'm civ! I'm civ!" the entire game without giving us any other reason to believe it beyond that. Plus I don't care for self-votes. But TBubbles, I hope you're not too frustrated, and I'm sorry you're not having much fun - I hope you stay and know that suspicion is nothing personal! Also, nutella seems a lot more serious and a little more biting in this game than I remember, and I'm pretty sure she's been civ in the other games I've played. So there's that. I'll probably give her another good look. Hope you had fun with Blooper stream-of-consciousness hour (and by that I mean I apologize for any discomfort it may have caused). Any questions before we move on?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Effective immediately, Metalmarsh89 has replaced Metalmarsh89. As a result, Metalmarsh89 cannot be lynched today.

I laughed out loud at this for real

Golden wrote:I don't recognise myself with that avatar. Where is my golden one!

You and me both, buddy. I keep looking for Blooper to see my last post on a page and it's confusing as fuck.

Lots of suspects, but still none named sig. She does offer support of Golden's G-man/Gamerguy theory, but she also remarks that it's "a bit of a stretch" and that she wants to give G-man a pass for a day. Perhaps setting herself up to begin bussing a teammate later on, but not right away. Because we can lynch Cobalt first (I'm aware I've just done a 180 from my previous stance on her "give G-man BOTD" remark).

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:

Sloonei wrote:I don't expect anyone to read all of my big casing posts, but I would really appreciate if people could take a look at those last two (sig and gamer/g-man) and share their thoughts as well. They're the two players who I'm most seriously considering for a lynch, and I obviously think they're very good suspects right now. If other people feel the same way, that'd be great.

any other thoughts about any of my reads are also welcome, of course

I like your sig case. I tend to get lost in large games with so many people to keep track of, especially near the beginning, and I'd forgotten about him. He's been weirding me out with the wishy-washy votes and posts, too.

Long Con wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:

Golden wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:Can I ask ourHOST why G-Man is able to be voted for? I was off limits for the day I subbed in....

I think it's because you subbed in during the day, and G-Man subbed in at the start of the day, but I'm just guessing.

Thanks, Host! :P

WHO'S G-Man's teammate?

Here she finally mentions sig, after Scotty and I had both posted our cases against him and I specifically asked for people to respond to it a couple of times. As I noted in my previous post about sig/Ninja interactions, I find it a bit inconsistent that she claims to have both "forgotten about" sig and been "weirded out" by him. I now find it even more inconsistent, considering her later post about "getting her first ping" on sig after his reaction to her Day 1 vote.

Sloonei wrote:

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:So...as with others, I'm confused at what happened to Sloonei. It didn't mention death, but he also seemed to exit pretty...not dead?

There are so many long posts that I am loving here. I apparently suck at using the spoiler tag, so I'm going to do what I hate and include the link to the posts until I figure out the spoilers, since they're so, so long:

Sloonei's first post analyzing connections to sig:
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 69#p154469
I like most of this analysis, mainly for the commentary for LC being bad in connection to LC.

The other one also caught my attention for analyzing sig's so-called reads on people:
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 89#p154489

I must comment on the last part for reasons. One is this, because it's driving me absolutely nuts:

sig wrote:0-10 10 highest 1 lowest
, nijuukyugou 5 she was less scum before her switching andthen saying she would just run and lynch

What in the name of god's green earth is this? I have done no vote switching this entire game. You see what happens to liars? :P I do like that sig tries to throw shade at me, calling me suspicious, then "hard civ" when he's on the way down, then wishy-washy'ing his way back to "suspicious." I see what you did there...well, kinda. Nice try.

I also like Epi's Cobalt/LC analysis:
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 93#p154493

It's just beautiful. I don't even know how to put in my own words how much I agree with it. But I guess I just did.

The inconsistency continues. If she was suspicious of sig for his Day 1 behavior, why is she not noticing/commenting on it until after he's been lynched? (I also said this in my other post, but it's worth restating)

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:Woo hoo! Two for two!

I'm going Les Mis. It has less votes, and while I really like the storyline of Les Mis, Russell Crowe's horrid singing in its most recent adaptation cannot be forgotten. Also, I've never seen Miss Saigon, so I have no opinion of it, but since both musicals are apparently sung-through, it would probably annoy me, too :P

I like the theory that one or both of the scum teams would have tried to cover all their bases on the Les Mis/Saigon poll, and only myself, FZ, Scotty, and niju voted Les Mis that night. This also makes me scratch my chin at Scotty, but he's one of the people who's been bringing this theory about, and I'm not terribly suspicious of him otherwise at this moment (Would still really like to hear other opinions on him, btw).

nijuukyugou is no longer a town read. I'd like to hear her response to this, as well as any reads she has about current suspects.

This is where you believe or don't believe me (I suggest believing), but I did forget about sig at the time I made the long post, as I said. I always have trouble holding more than two, maybe three suspects in my head, especially at the beginning of a game, a full game no less. I often end up reading pages of mafia posts at the ends of days and get pings as I read, but if I don't save the quotes that ping me or physically type out names as I go, I won't remember, but I'll remember how I felt when I do go back and look at people. And honestly, as I was writing that big long post I kept thinking, "I KNOW there's someone I'm forgetting, but I want to get something posted and I've already written a lot" and voila! Your case reminded me of him and was (obviously) sound.

As for not actually responding to sig's ridiculous wishy-washy shade throwing at me until it was brought up by others, as a rule I don't respond to what I consider baiting, which is exactly what sig was doing. I ignore it, and only respond to it when others (like what you and others have done) mention it in the thread and try to make something out of it. sig is getting precisely the reaction from you that he wanted, and since he was bad, well, doing his bidding is not exactly the best course of action

My god, that was a pain in the ass to respond to (not the accusations themselves, but the formatting and re-formatting). Happy to answer anything I failed to address or needs clarification.

Linki - They are changeable, Scotty!

Gotta go with "to teach"

Scotty wrote:Ugh. Damn, Tiny really was being genuine.

Now I'm pissed. Thought we could be infallible.

Same Sorry, Bubbles.

Well holy shit, Sloonei. And I thought we were working so well together I will vote and justify first, then address your points about me in a later post.

I still think Cobalt's bad. I like that he's back and participating more, but it doesn't change my mind about what I saw and pointed out from earlier in the game. Those actions speak much louder than sudden more active participation. As for TBubbles, I agree with this summary of her behavior from Canuck:

Canucklehead wrote:Reading up on these last few pages has solidified for me my earlier read on Cobalt (I don't think he's bad), and my mistrust of TB (I think she's bad and drowning. Her most recent post is seemingly just dripping with forced optimism and a fake air of "No worries! Aw shucks, I'm just happy to help the good ol' Civs! Cuz I'm just an innocent wittle civvy-wivvy!" *blink-blink* *doe eyes*. I don't buy it. I agree with Epi's last post that TB is more likely to be on Team LC, but I'm perfectly happy to find her on the other team, too.

This is how I've felt about TBubbles' posting since the first time she claimed she was sooooo civ. Her participation also drops drastically from when she's not in discussion, but I suppose that's normal since it gives you more specific things to talk about. Finally, I like timmer's case on Black Rock. It's sound and has good evidence. I don't really have anything to add to it other than that.

So I'm good with any of those three being voted. This is a tough choice mainly between Cobalt and TBubbles, but I think my vote will be put to better use in voting TBubbles today since that actually seems to be going somewhere.

Linki - Much love to the Bubbles!

Epignosis wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Epignosis wrote:It should be clear that I support a Long Con or Cobalt lynch too, but I have only one vote.

Indeed, sir - I remember this post of yours. However, the point is you chose to vote G-Man in the end.

And what does that indicate to you?

That you were less willing to vote LC the second time around when he was actually up for a lynch (after your first incarnation had died), which was odd, given how hard you went after him Day 1. Could be indicative of a team/alignment change.

Epignosis wrote:

Epignosis wrote:It should be clear that I support a Long Con or Cobalt lynch too, but I have only one vote.

Indeed, sir - I remember this post of yours. However, the point is you chose to vote G-Man in the end.

Sloonei wrote:Any and all thoughts are welcome at any time, thank you niju. What are your thoughts on Cobalt surviving the lynch and his supposed role?

I agree with this:

Golden wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Cobalt's supposed role is really the only reason I have him as a town read, but that could be completely off base. I still don't really have a good feel for the flavor of roles here, so I would have to rely on the thoughts and analysis of some of the community's regular players on that issue. In my experience, a role that can alter a lynch result like that is much more likely to be to be town than scum.

In games here, my view is that you should generally not assume affiliation based on power. There are some exceptions - a mafia doctor would be odd and I can't recall seeing one, for instance. But in my experience baddie teams commonly have lynch switches as a defensive power. I've actually caught a baddie team by using this power against them once when I knew I was safe from a lynch and bluffed one of them into switching the lynch to me.

His survival does not make him look more civ to me because I've seen survival/switch roles in all affiliations. Dunno about his role itself - I'm used to being able to check a role powers list and match it up, but obviously that's not possible this game.

FZ. wrote: Epig is a mystery. I don't think anyone can deny he's posting less than he did on day 1. He wanted LC out, but what I want to check later is, did he continue going after him strongly when he came back. If it was as strong, I think he can't be from his team, though it's possible, but if he subtly backed off without making it too obvious, it's possible. I think I recall he voted for G-man both days, and when I asked him what he would do, he said he doesn't want a tie. That made me feel better about him, because I think I know what his role was before. But the point is he didn't vote for LC but G-man. As for the other team, his exchange with G-man seems genuine, so I doubt he's on that team. Maybe he's an independent who doesn't care as much who wins and is laying low to not get NK again.

^^ This. I felt good about Epi 1.0 (which I suppose I should never feel), but have been feeling less so with 2.0, especially since he stopped gunning for LC so hard and didn't even vote him. Although he's never quite quiet, he's certainly quieter in his second incarnation, quieter than I'm used to (but then again, I'm also used to his hosting, so).

Hooray hooray! Glad G-Man was pulling a Ruth

Sloonei wrote: ninjujaja
I’ve been wanting to call Blooper a suspect pretty much all game but I have not been able to. A lot of her posts have read as fairly safe, but I’m not exactly picking up any hints of dishonest or deceit either, and I remember thinking a few of her observations were pretty solid. Let us see.

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:Mmmmk somewhat caught up. I'd say remind me not to leave the thread for too long so I don't have 4 pages to read, but I'll inevitably do it again.

nutella wrote:I don't get the Hedgeowl suspicion at all. She posted while catching up and gave her input on a couple main discussions. None of her posts look particularly bad to me, just kind of average minimal-but-sufficient participation. I guess I understood LC's point (though it was regarding SVS) about commenting on issues rather than players, but Hedgie gave her views on LC/Epi/SVS so that doesn't really apply. I don't know, she could be hiding behind that type of participation (I haven't played many games with her but isn't it kind of her norm?) but I just don't really see the reasons for suspecting her, they seem contrived.

I could see SVS as bad. I mean, SVS is always bad

Agreed (at least the part about Hedgeowl suspicion). I think it was good of TH to search her like he did, but I disagree that it's baddie behavior from her. I don't think his suspicion was contrived.

Epignosis wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Dom wrote:Dragon D. Luffy has been replaced by Cancucklehead. She cannot be lynched today.

what are you so scared of, little puppy?

You didn't witness the maelstrom of deceit that was Canucklehead in Roger Rabbit.

They still whisper about it in Toontown.

(Just kidding, Canuck - I was actually very excited to see your name!)

MovingPictures07 wrote: Consequently, my mafia game, which is often defined by a high volume of posts, will be affected this game. I will be much more likely to pop in less frequently, which will increase my already notoriously long posts probably much more so, and make my style seem more like a cross of Blooper-esque, Epi-esque, and MP-esque, rather than straight-up MP-esque combination of frequency and volume.

I'm an -esque!! I'm so touched

MovingPictures07 wrote:Blooper, you note in this post multiple "truces", but ask the question whether there is just one thereafter. Devin and I never agreed to a truce. Just wanted to clear that up.

You specifically note you have "no strong opinions". If that is the case, do you have weak opinions? If so, what are they?

Fair enough. I just saw a lot of (mostly jokingly it seems) buddy-buddy Day 0 stuff, so I figured I'd comment on it. I'm notoriously bad at getting lost in the first several days of larger games because of the sheer volume of people, so I'm trying a new thing called "comment about SOMETHING, whatever it is" to at least keep a placeholder. So far, not doing so hot. But hey, here I am!

As for my opinions (and the actual contributory points of this post), I have a few opinions. I never trust Epi, but damn I do love actually playing a game with him, and whatever my vibes are right now, I'm feeling all right about him today. This means that I think he's genuinely baddie hunting, and I think both of his suspicions of LC and SVS are fairly sound (I almost said interesting but I know better than to use that now :P). I think LC's response to Epi's going after him looks too defensive to me. I think my general view of SVS is that she gets defensive regardless of alignment, which makes her hard to read, but I agree with others (can't remember exactly who) that suddenly defending the whole "interesting" argument in the manner she did was suspicious. So, there's that.

I don't have a good read of the new people in here, but I'm glad to see some fresh meat (at least to the Syndicate). It certainly makes for some...fascinating gameplay.

I like this as an early post. She offers a number of definitive reads, a few of which I agreed with at the time and nothing in here feels like she is laboring for content. She seems to be keeping an open mind about the game and is at least trying to keep an eye on a number of people at once. Dig it.

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:The bad news is, I've been without internet access since last night due to traveling, power outages, and, y'know, socially interacting with people that I've traveled to see in real life (might need to get my priorities in order). This means I haven't had much of a chance to read through the thread as much as I'd like before the poll ends (I am still socializing after all :P ) or go back and look at something like I promised someone (I can't even remember who I promised this to. Long day).

The good news is, for the first time in my mafia-playing career, I have decent suspicion from what I have been able to gather of all three of the top vote-getters in this thread, and I'm okay with voting any of them, which is...a miracle. The question is, who do I want to pick?

I have been able to read a bit. Cobalt's made me itchy, and I read over the last page and the opportunistic vote switch. I'd still like to analyze him more closely if I get the chance. SVS has been highly, HIGHLY defensive and has weirdly voted for herself, which is something I'm not used to (the self-voting, not the defensiveness), so slightly mixed feelings but very much leaning bad. But tonight, I think I want to make things...interesting. I also like Epi's case and interaction with LC - like it in the way that I think it points to LC as a baddie. Epi's a manipulative bastard, but he's a manipulative bastard giving me good vibes, and I wanna see what happens when I press the big red button that no one should press (and by that I mean make the votes closer right now).

So I'm gonna vote LC.

Linki - Silence broken!

I continue to be wary of anyone who provides an unprompted excuse for their lack of participation, but other than that I dig this post again from ninja for many of the same reasons as before. Her LC vote does seem contrived in any way and does not look like an attempt to bus a teammate. More townie points for Blooper from this post.

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Also would you say things have been made more interesting by your LC vote, Blooperstranger?

Oh, quite! It's garnered some good reactions.

I had forgotten about her Day 1 “make things interesting” vote comment. It still hasn’t really been explained and I never saw any evidence of her using any of those “good reactions” she garnered from it. If she could give some evidence of this I’d be happy.
There’s nothing that I can point to in Blooper’s post history that I find scummy. This is ridiculous and I’m very frustrated with you, nijfijaijf! I even managed to find reasons to suspect Golden.Ugh.
That said, if there is a reason to suspect her, it’s because of that odd behavior sig had toward her before he was lynched, where he seemed really desperate to put some kind of a read on her but never really expressed anything too clearly. Also, the immaculate status of her posts. They’re too clean. Surely she’s got something to hide. Uh
Thoughts, niju? I’m now in agreement with the others who’ve said you’re difficult to read. If you’re scum then I’m utterly baffled right now. Town read. What just happened?

I told you I was perfect in every way, every game But you are right - I haven't said much about what made that day so...interesting. Allow me to oblige.

In general, after my LC vote Day 1, people seemed to flip out and start changing votes, but that is often the norm here on TS with changeable votes. However, it was specific reactions that got my attention. First, it gave me (and others in their analyses) my first real ping of sig, who was the first to freak out and try to call me bad for mixing things up when I did. He freaked the FUCK OUT (and I laughed so, so hard). Honestly, it also made me look a bit in your direction since you freaked out about a possible tie, but that was a mafia cultural difference that you explained. nutella switched her vote soon after from SVS to Cobalt. Golden changed his vote a few times to break the tie. Hedgeowl and Gumshoe came in last minute and voted. Cobalt tried to say he would've switched yadda yadda yadda (I've already said this twice). Looking at this now several days later, it's not as much of a great analyzing point as I'd like it to be, and the "good reactions" I mentioned were rather more amusing than informative, but there's the raw data of what went down that day.

I'm still itchy about Cobalt, especially since his activity has died down considerably these past few days. His two posts for today were either nonsense about G-Man's supposed threat to being voted or about getting back into the game when his RL stuff dies down. The RL stuff might be true and I hope it's not terrible! but his participation has been little more than "DIE LC" and getting angrily defensive when he has been here, so I'd like to see what he means by getting back in "full force." I am a bit wary of nutella based on behavior (I had mentioned she seemed more serious than what I'd experienced as her civ self in the past) and that vote switch from Day 1, but then I look at her vote record - she has voted for people on both mafia teams. However, for some reason I'd thought she'd voted earlier in the LC and sig lynches, which is what really held me back, but she seems to have voted when they were pretty much a done deal (aside from vote switching mechanics). So I guess what I'm saying is that I need to look back at her again and she could still be a baddie.

I know that's not what you guys are talking about currently in the thread at this hour, but I figured I'd get these thoughts out while they were in my head and to make myself tired enough to go to sleep (and because Guess Who might start tomorrow, which will likely alter my concentration and participation in this game). However, I will at least comment about vote analysis in finding baddies - it freaking works. It caught us BAD in Biblical, as Golden attests so I'm glad to see it being used and discussed here

For the record, I'm still not tired. Maybe I'll try reading myself to sleep.

Trying to pull a Ruth here, G-Man?

Although...your nonchalance is most disconcerting, G-Man

G-Man wrote:

TinyBubbles wrote:

G-Man wrote:Keep those votes coming!

happy to oblige
i knew there'd be a fair few votes on you but i didnt expect an avalanche

any last words gman?

Not yet. One more vote please.

Well, okay then

Woo hoo! Two for two!

I'm going Les Mis. It has less votes, and while I really like the storyline of Les Mis, Russell Crowe's horrid singing in its most recent adaptation cannot be forgotten. Also, I've never seen Miss Saigon, so I have no opinion of it, but since both musicals are apparently sung-through, it would probably annoy me, too :P

Yikes. Last time I checked, LC was way ahead of G-Man in votes, and now it's a tie? I'm not terribly surprised, given the number of people who've expressed suspicion of G-Man in the thread, but I thought we were avoiding this situation? Then again, as Sloonei has said several times, it's been a lot more quiet during this Day period. It's been nice for keeping up!

This is one of the weirdest mafia games I've played in a while, because I've been in agreement with the top cases almost every time. I probably should be more concerned about that than I am, but it does make it easier on me come voting time, and I guess I'll be more concerned if anything goes wrong this time around. I'm going to vote LC, because I've felt his baddiness since Day 1 and I've agreed with many of the cases and points brought up about him regarding this baddiness. I think the cases for G-Man being bad are pretty...er, good and I think voting for either will give us good info, but I gotta vote some way and LC's been on the chopping block for quite some time. I'm definitely still looking at Cobalt, too, especially since he's quieted down like crazy (hiding a bit?), but that vote would go nowhere today. So, voting LC.

Scotty wrote:

TinyBubbles wrote:still got plenty of time so i'm reserving my vote until closer to the deadline, right now i'm thinking to vote long con though
gman has also been suspicious he hasn't seemed like his economics self, but being silenced/insanified makes me reluctant to post a vote there
there are a lot of silent people like sloonei said which makes it hard to get an impression of them either way, i don't like it though.
and epi's has been very quiet compared to earlier in the thread when he had a different role (if i recall correctly?) which is also making me wary

btw could you guys call me Bubbles or Tinybubbles, I don't like the acronym TB for reasons stated by Nijuukyugou!

Hahaha fair enough Bubbles. And i think I'll start calling Nijuu Ninja. (Sloonei's idea, not mine)

There are many who call me Ninja Blooper You may also let a cat walk all over your keyboard and I'll respond to whatever name comes out of that, too.

Well whaddaya know, insanifying G-Man WAS a good idea Nice one, insanifier.

Cobalt wrote:omfg me and LC are not teammates i want him SPIT ROASTED.

lynch him and then lynch me for all I give a negative fuck

Welcome back!

nijuukyugou wrote: Sloonei's first post analyzing connections to sig:
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 69#p154469
I like most of this analysis, mainly for the commentary for LC being bad in connection to LC.

Apparently I suck at proofreading. That should say "LC being bad in connection with sig."

So...as with others, I'm confused at what happened to Sloonei. It didn't mention death, but he also seemed to exit pretty...not dead?

There are so many long posts that I am loving here. I apparently suck at using the spoiler tag, so I'm going to do what I hate and include the link to the posts until I figure out the spoilers, since they're so, so long:

Sloonei's first post analyzing connections to sig:
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 69#p154469
I like most of this analysis, mainly for the commentary for LC being bad in connection to LC.

The other one also caught my attention for analyzing sig's so-called reads on people:
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 89#p154489

I must comment on the last part for reasons. One is this, because it's driving me absolutely nuts:

sig wrote:0-10 10 highest 1 lowest
, nijuukyugou 5 she was less scum before her switching andthen saying she would just run and lynch

What in the name of god's green earth is this? I have done no vote switching this entire game. You see what happens to liars? :P I do like that sig tries to throw shade at me, calling me suspicious, then "hard civ" when he's on the way down, then wishy-washy'ing his way back to "suspicious." I see what you did there...well, kinda. Nice try.

I also like Epi's Cobalt/LC analysis:
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 93#p154493

It's just beautiful. I don't even know how to put in my own words how much I agree with it. But I guess I just did.

Ooooh nice one! Excellent case, Sloonei I keep wanting to say more, but my brain says placeholder post, go to bed, and re-read tomorrow. Second place trivia tonight and free beer! Woo hoo!

Crap. I lost track of time (I've kept up reasonably well today via phone, but I managed to get 3 pages behind in 8 hours. I'm going to trivia soon and I'm multitasking by studying up on The Big Lebowski for our loser pity round . I see many votes are on sig; I will go that way as well, today (I feel better about voting him than TBubbles). I like the cases presented on him from what I last read, and I had some bad feelings come from him, too. Sorry I'm not particularly articulate and for the drive-by vote.

Golden wrote:Blooper, none of us can decode them. Providing the keywords so we can figure out if yours is the same or different is the best I think we can do right now.

You underestimate me and by that I mean you make me feel better about feeling pretty dumb for a few minutes

nijuukyugou wrote:

Scotty wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote:

Scotty wrote:I REALLY want to hear more from row 3. So...calling MM, sig, njuu, nutella, and Turnip! Anything to report??

Roger that. I read and re-read your post about the messages, but my eyesight tends to start going double the more tired I get and, therefore, I get lost in longer analysis posts (this might be why I enjoy the G-Man pics - easier to read!). What information/analysis are you requesting, exactly? I'm happy to help where I can.

Cool! It's all good, I know I can zone out from time to time as well. As was said by someone else, I respect the thought put into Sloonei's casing posts, but I will not fully absorb them all until I can get a better perspective on bad/good in the next few days. Rest assured i'll be referencing his list as we go on.

While I have you, did you receive a PM at the end of Day 0? Something probably titled "Day 0 results"? If so, can you post (without quoting or disregarding Dom's rules) some highlights of your PM? I'm quite anxious and beginning to wonder if that 3rd row even received one.

Indeed. Give me a moment.

Okay. I thought I would decode it, but my eyes are too tired. However, it seems to be a jumble of a protection/role-check role regarding the police. I will try to look into its actual wording and attempt better decoding tomorrow, but that should add something to the list!