The Syndicate

TH, I didn't want to throw my vote away, I wanted to give my vote to the only person I feel confident isn't mafia to use. She didnt want it, so I threw it away to avoid missing the vote since, unless I continue having bouts of insomnia, I won't be around.

Okely dokely. I will go ahead and vote Vomps.
Sorry, all.

I can't be accountable with my own vote because I haven't read the thread closely enough to have an opinion on anyone except you and will not do so before tomorrow evening.
I am willing to follow your vote because, as you frequently note, you've been pretty obvious with hint dropping, and someone was kind enough to requote those, and I'm choosing to believe those hints. If you'd prefer I use my own brain randomize, cool. My randomometer will probably land on Vompatti. But that's actually surprising to me that you are averse to people following your lead, when you've been so diligent in making sure people know your alignment. Why role hint if you don't want to use your hints to gain influence in the thread?
If you want to vote for me, totally fine. I get it, I really do. Like I've repeatedly said, I'm not really playing and am only useful to the civs as a number. If you honestly don't want my vote to go where you suggest/want to put your vote on me, fine. But let me know now so that I can vote and not worry about checking into the thread tomorrow.

(I get it if you're just trying to spur me into more participation......but that's really a dead end. Sorry. )

I will vote today for whomever SVS votes for.

Guys, I'm not bad. I admit I'm not really playing and am completely useless, but I'm not bad.
My sole usefulness right now is that I am a civ number. If you're feeling confident about numbers, than voting me would be fine and I would understand, but if you're worried about numbers, you should keep me around. I am a civ. I haven't asked to be replaced b/c I honestly haven't gotten around to it and I felt bad that there were so many replacements already.

And Bullz, it's not "exam season" I'm dealing with. It is my qualifying comprehensive exams, which is the last step in my PhD program before I begin writing my dissertation. I have two twelve hour written exams and a two hour oral exam in the next 13 days. I apologize if I didn't make that clear earlier, but this game is honestly at the bottom of my priority list right now. Sorry, llama. Sorry, players. But thems the facts.

I think I've mentioned this before, but my prelims start in 6 days. The fact that I am posting at all is ridiculous, tbqh.
My posting rate will not increase. I will keep voting, and keep posting when I have a moment, but that's really all you should expect from me. I'm utterly useless other than as a civ number, but I'm definitely not a baddie.

I think there's a doctor on the baddie team that does vaguely worded baddie things.....which I would be very willing to interpret as poisoning and the like, given recent events.

I am voting for LizKeen.
I think she's the millionaire.

S~V~S wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:Also, fwiw, if Epi flips bad I would be very unsurprised to find that LizKen is the millionaire and that anyone dropping votes on her late is a teammate looking to mitigate the loss of Epi by increasing her power.
Just a thought.

Do you have anyone in mind? Since, you know, I said I was voting late and probably voting for Liz?

I was mostly alluding to those who were already voting for her (DF, Bullz), but if you want to be paranoid about it and include yourself in my hypothesis, you are welcome to do so.

Also, fwiw, if Epi flips bad I would be very unsurprised to find that LizKen is the millionaire and that anyone dropping votes on her late is a teammate looking to mitigate the loss of Epi by increasing her power.
Just a thought.

Vompatti wrote:In this moment I am voting for Turnip Head.

Me too, except that I'm voting for Epi.

There are too many posting curses in this game. Blech.

Dom wrote:But thank you to Canuck for being hilarious.

I hope it was hilarious, and not jerky....that's what I was aiming for, but sometimes I worry that I've been contaminated by all the pompous and humourless asses that populate my department/institution/profession and have lost my ability to tell the difference between "funny" and "dickish". Please feel free to tell me when I get it wrong. I emphatically do NOT want to become one of the annoying pendantic dipshits who roam the halls here and exemplify all the worst qualities of academia (and humanity in general)....

Epignosis wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:From our friends at the OED

Not everyone here is attending Duke.

Ah, shit. Is it behind a login wall? Sorry.

Long Con wrote:

Epignosis wrote:Equivocate is an intransitive verb meaning "to use ambiguous language to conceal the truth or avoid committing oneself."

And Dom is saying that TH is drawing a similarity between his reasons to vote Dom and his reasons to vote DP. What is the word he meant to use?

Equate.

Epignosis wrote:Equivocate is an intransitive verb meaning "to use ambiguous language to conceal the truth or avoid committing oneself."

Dammit, Epi! Beat me to it whie I tried to figure out the damn Youtube tags.

Dom wrote: how do you not see how hypocritical you're being?
You have equivocated (falsely, in my opinion) reason to vote me and reason to vote DP.
Then you say there's no reason to suspect DP, but there IS reason to suspect me. However you have EQUIVOCATED the two.
That makes zero sense.

I can't be doing any more mafiaing today, so I'm going to go ahead and vote for Sophie now.

I agree with splintsy's read on Sophie. I think she's dead on. I see NONE of the righteous indignation and demand for acknowledgement that marked Sophie's civ game in RR, andthis post and this one here, which came after splints called her out, reads very much to me like she's TRYING to manufacture that indignation and fieryness that is her civ game, but just ends up in apology land anyway, which is NOT civ Sophie from my (admitedly limited) experience.

Also, if anyone's interested, some bastard stole my beautiful handkerchief last night. I'm pissed.

rabbit8 wrote:

fingersplints wrote:I forgot to say I'm also eyeing MM and bass because I'm a little confused about that situation. I doubt I would vote either.

My strongest suspect atm is Sophie. A civvie Sophie is generally much more vocal than this. also, I am a little suspicious of how she has twice now asked dfaraday for his opinion. just his. She claimed it was from knowing him from RM but there are several others she knows better or as well that she hasn't interacted with at all.

Linki alright rabbit I'm pretty sure you know I am not bad

How would I know that you have really not done much all game but agree or disagree with people.

OK, Canucklehead.

Is there something else to do in mafia other than agree or disagree with people? what exactly would you like fs to be doing that she is not already?
Do you think fs and I are both Zomba's teammates? Who else do you think is on our team?

rabbit8 wrote:

fingersplints wrote:

Dom wrote:

Long Con wrote: Thank God I ain't too cool for the safe belt
They tipping the scale for these crackers to win
Lupe steal like Lupin the Third.
Screams from the haters, got a nice ring to it
people talking shit, but when the shit hit the fan

Would that require that person to have a safe, though?



I'm finding it hard to not suspect DP for the record.
Also, I'm eyeing MM, I guess? Because he has MP's old role?

What specifically do you find suspicious about DP? I am not suspicious of him at all for the record.

I'm thinking about voting for either Canuck or FS today.

Ok, Rabbit.

rabbit8 wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:

rabbit8 wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:WOT= wall of text

I'm starting to wonder about you.

Why?

Because you have been wishy washy about everything all game and not really invested in finding baddies. Then out of no where you really want to lynch Vomps.

Nah. I was pretty wishy washy on wanting to lynch Vomps, actually.

rabbit8 wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:WOT= wall of text

I'm starting to wonder about you.

Why?

Voting Rudolph again.

WOT= wall of text

S~V~S wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:

Golden wrote:@elo - may as well own up to the truth. I spent the last few hours trying very hard to win hearts and minds to voting vomps to save zombs.

Frankly, I'm ok with being lynched tomorrow because of it, if thats how it goes down.

Fwiw, I changed my mind about Zombs because of SVS, not you

Actually, I changed my mind becasue of him :pout.

I literally do not think I have said anything to/about SVS this game that she hasn't immediately contradicted....even innocuous non-accusatory stuff like this
Do I smell bad, SVS? Why won't you let me be your friend?

Golden wrote:@elo - may as well own up to the truth. I spent the last few hours trying very hard to win hearts and minds to voting vomps to save zombs.

Frankly, I'm ok with being lynched tomorrow because of it, if thats how it goes down.

Fwiw, I changed my mind about Zombs because of SVS, not you

Golden wrote:

Elohcin wrote:Anyone know who began the Vomps case without having to go back and look?

Me.

Hey! I helped, too!

Golden wrote:I assume BR and sophie were enthralled and unable to vote, the same way lk and zombs were yesterday...

And I really wish LK had listened when I said we could get this moving in another direction, but oh well. Looks like a tie needs to be resolved.

Wait. If you've known what "enthralled" means all day, why the heck didn't you say anything when I spent all day today hypothesizing various wacky and much less likely interpretations of what "enthralled" could mean??

Golden wrote:@Bass - I think every one of them is a saint.

Oooh! Can I be Catherine of Sienna??! She's the best saint.

I'm going to do (another) 180 and vote for Vomps.
I reread Epi's case on LK, and while I still didn't find it convincing, I can't come up with a scenario where it would be beneficial for baddie Epi to go hard against a player that (until he and Golden mentioned her) didn't seem to be on anyone's radar.
I'm not sure that I'm un-suspicious of Epi, but I'd rather not vote for him today since I can't really ask him to clarify some things about his LK case and LC's comments on the MM lynch while he's cursed.
I'll vote Vomps, though I think it's a 50/50 chance he's a civ.

S~V~S wrote:Dom knows how I feel about distancing.

I don't

Dom wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Why?

The voting consistency reminds me more of BSD Vomps than otherwise.

You backpedaled on this hard.

And I truly believe Zombi is bad bad news.

Interesting.

Epignosis wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:Right now, I'm leaning towards an Epi vote. I didn't like his case on LK ("She's using a lot of quotes! She is thus bad! "), and I'm intrigigued by LC's reaction to the MM thing.

Yeah, that was a pretty reductive summary of the tiny fragments that happened to stick to my brain. I should probably go back and read what you actually said again.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Also Zombie voting so AP without really talking about it with anyone else gives me a bad feeling? I wouldn't want to vote AP when he could be the Millionaire.

If AP is the millionaire, he is playing a very odd millionaire strategy.

Golden wrote:I don't think you are obsessed LC. I don't even necessarily think you are wrong. What I do think is I haven't really understood your case, and you do come across as though possibly you have info on epi. That's the way it reads to me...

But in any event, I don't think it's something that will be resolved today. It might be a tomorrow thing. Right now I think you need to decide whether you are anti-zombs or pro-zombs and vote accordingly.

I'm not sure I'm ready to commit to "saving Zombs".....I'm much more comfortable with "giving Zombs the benefit of the doubt for now because there are people I suspect more". Semantics.
I think a Vomps lynch, while potentially satisfying, will give us very little information. Even if he's bad (which I really don't have a clue about).
Right now, I'm leaning towards an Epi vote. I didn't like his case on LK ("She's using a lot of quotes! She is thus bad! "), and I'm intrigigued by LC's reaction to the MM thing.

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Does vomps play the same even if he is bad?

I think so? But I'm not an expert.

Long Con wrote:Vomps' crime is being Vomps, right? Not contributing much, acting weird? Low posting?

Yes. Being Vomps is a serious crime.

Long Con wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:I thought Epi's case on LK was....not convincing, but I'm not sure why a bad Epi would push so hard against a player so early....considering a vote there.
LC is LC and I have no particular reason to think he's bad right now, but I don't know if I've ever read LC correctly. I'm not voting there unless something really compelling comes up.

That's all you have to say about Epig? What about other cases that have been made against him?

Yes, that is all I have to say about Epi right now. None of the cases brought against him have stuck in my mind enough for me to comment on them.

You don't find it suspicious that Epignosis would ignore what he knows about MM and BR and instead go for the easy lynch of Metalmarsh? What he knew should have led him to believe Metalmarsh was being framed, except the thing is, Epig was doing the framing. Not to mention, the italicized portion sounds suspiciously like what LizKeen heard through the ear tubes, AND it sounds like something Epig would say. Cocky and believing people can be easily led.

I want to understand why no one else can see this. Is it that they don't believe that Epig knew that it was VERY unlikely that Metalmarsh would kill BR on Night one for the third or fourth time in recent history? I did quote something in my original case that clearly indicated that Epig was involved - Donner Mafia, Epig tells MM that he killed him for BR. And believe me when I say that I know every detail of this subject due to BR being my wife. I know what happened, what Epig knows, how MM felt about it. This is the truth, I just need enough people to see it and understand what it means.

I didn't say I didn't find it suspicious, I said the case didn't stick in my head. Which is true. Nothing is sticking in me head right now, because my entire brain is utterly saturated with crippling anxiety and fear of failure because I have a career-defining series of examinations beginning in two weeks.

But now that you've very kindly reiterated your points: I mean, I guess what you're seeing as damning isn't quite as evocative to me. I'll take your word for it that the whole MM/BR rivalry is something that Epi is aware of, even acutely so. I guess where I don't quite buy your argument is that knowing that MM would be very unlikely to kill BR does not mean that other people on MM's team might have overruled him. I mean, obviously this WASN'T the case (since MM was good), but prior to that revelation I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility for someone to simultaneously believe that MM would not personally vote to kill BR, but could still be a member of a team that would do so.
I guess maybe because I'm not as intimately involved with the details and intricacies of the BR/MM/Epi triangle that his willingness to vote MM just didn't set off alarms bells like it does for you. But I'm not discounting your assertion here, it's just not one I would have come to on my own. I actually also feel uneasy about Epi, so your insights are interesting.

Mostly, though, I want to lynch Vomps.

Elohcin wrote:

Golden wrote:I think there is real merit to the possibility that the baddies might be laughing at us as all the louder people cut each other down. I would certainly be willing to consider a vote against:

A person, or
Vompatti, or
possibly canuck, or
maybe even Elo, who seems a lot quieter in content here than in RR.

If the criteria is who could be hiding.

If you vote me, you will be voting a civ. It takes me longer to have much of an opinion in full games as opposed to speed games, that's all. As the game gets smaller, I have an easier time wrapping my head around things. I am reading, following along, an absorbing all that is going on though.

This is 100% true for me, too....except for the part about absorbing. I've pretty much reached my brain's maximum saturation/absorption level due to my prelims starting in two weeks, so I'm not really taking much in at this point.
Also, my role is not one tht I've really figured out what to do with yet, so that is also hindering my ability to sink my teeth into this game.

But yeah. I'm a civ.

Vompatti wrote:

fingersplints wrote:Did Vomps give a reason for his TH vote? I'm used to Vomps being kind of out there as a player, but I'm just a little surprised he would vote a silenced player without giving a reason. (Unless I missed the vote. There has been a lot going on)

I didn't know he was silenced because I didn't read the thread. I only voted for him because I had a feeling MM had hard evidence that he's bad.

Cool!

Sophie wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:I was never on board with the LizKeen case, so I'm not voting there.
I had strongly considered voting Z, but I think SVS' assessment of her not likely having BTSC this game is pretty sound, so I won't vote there.
I thought Epi's case on LK was....not convincing, but I'm not sure why a bad Epi would push so hard against a player so early....considering a vote there.
LC is LC and I have no particular reason to think he's bad right now, but I don't know if I've ever read LC correctly. I'm not voting there unless something really compelling comes up.
TH seems like civ TH to me.
I think that MP/Bass is an interesting spot to look. I will reread there and maybe consider a vote.
I would consider a vote for Vomps.

What about dom?

I don't know what to think of Dom. He is reminding me somewhat of his play in Film Directors, in which he was bad but successfully convinced/shamed me into backing off of my suspicons on him. But other people have said he doesn't seem out of the ordinary to them, so I'm thinking that maybe this is just how Dom plays now, and I'm pinged by it only because I have (false?) memories of an older Dom playstyle that doesn't exist anymore. So I dunno what to think.

Long Con wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:I thought Epi's case on LK was....not convincing, but I'm not sure why a bad Epi would push so hard against a player so early....considering a vote there.
LC is LC and I have no particular reason to think he's bad right now, but I don't know if I've ever read LC correctly. I'm not voting there unless something really compelling comes up.

That's all you have to say about Epig? What about other cases that have been made against him?

Yes, that is all I have to say about Epi right now. None of the cases brought against him have stuck in my mind enough for me to comment on them.

I was never on board with the LizKeen case, so I'm not voting there.
I had strongly considered voting Z, but I think SVS' assessment of her not likely having BTSC this game is pretty sound, so I won't vote there.
I thought Epi's case on LK was....not convincing, but I'm not sure why a bad Epi would push so hard against a player so early....considering a vote there.
LC is LC and I have no particular reason to think he's bad right now, but I don't know if I've ever read LC correctly. I'm not voting there unless something really compelling comes up.
TH seems like civ TH to me.
I think that MP/Bass is an interesting spot to look. I will reread there and maybe consider a vote.
I would consider a vote for Vomps.

S~V~S wrote:

rabbit8 wrote:So we are actually going to wait for the info dump now?

Seriously.

I'm confused. What are we laughing/mad about now? I'm having a very slow brain day an need help


Linki: Lulz. My autocorrect is very cheeky.

"Role Check. Host post instead of PM. Creative host!"

S~V~S wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:One thing I wanted to mention about SVS' compelling theory about the newspaper article: much of the action in the recent RR game revolved around messages that were assumed to be from the host but we're actually written by players impersonating the host on both sides of the civ/baddie divide, and as a result much chaos ensued. This makes me consider the possibility that, if SVS' theory is correct, that perhaps at least one of the baddies was someone heavily involved in the RR game, most likely someone who lasted a fair while OR someone who kept involved by following along until quite late.
Zomba definitely fits the bill there.

Obviously this observation is not airtight. Impersonating host messages is hardly a new idea, and non-RR players could certainly have implemented it without being aware of its use in RR.....but I do think it's an interesting connection, and something to keep in mind if SVS is right about the article.

I thought it was meant yo impersonate the reporter role.I doubt llama would make a post using a role name, Gilfrick as the wills writer.

Ok, my bad for mishaps terrifying your theory, but I was just suggesting that impersonating other voices was a feature of RR, and there might be some overlap between people involved in that game, and people who might be likely to attempt something similar here.

One thing I wanted to mention about SVS' compelling theory about the newspaper article: much of the action in the recent RR game revolved around messages that were assumed to be from the host but we're actually written by players impersonating the host on both sides of the civ/baddie divide, and as a result much chaos ensued. This makes me consider the possibility that, if SVS' theory is correct, that perhaps at least one of the baddies was someone heavily involved in the RR game, most likely someone who lasted a fair while OR someone who kept involved by following along until quite late.
Zomba definitely fits the bill there.

Obviously this observation is not airtight. Impersonating host messages is hardly a new idea, and non-RR players could certainly have implemented it without being aware of its use in RR.....but I do think it's an interesting connection, and something to keep in mind if SVS is right about the article.