The Syndicate

Sloonei wrote:I was silenced if that wasn't obvious. Missed the vote because work ran a little longer than I was anticipating. I would not have made a difference.
I think Golden might be bad.

Not this again.

YOU WOULD HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE! Well, unless you wouldn't vote MM.

Dom wrote:4/13?
Really?

Hedgeowl is dead.

You only got 12 players, 9 active.
You'll get 7 votes, 8 if sloonei is here.

Well, thats that done. Neverwhere it is.

I think Sloonei isn't here

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Golden wrote:But honestly I don't know if either of them will show up, and if neither do then the lynch is already decided.

My money is on Sloonei being here watching this thread right now.

Sloonei, if you are here, please don't wait any longer. Every minute is further risk I'll be pulled into a meeting and have to vote without knowing what you intend to do.

But honestly I don't know if either of them will show up, and if neither do then the lynch is already decided.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Golden wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Let's see it Golden, bring on the votes. Push the lynch. Send the train my way.

I'm not going to be bullied into a quick vote. I want to know what sloonei and SVS will do. A tie is not a good outcome.

Can nobody take action around here? You've just stated that Sloonei was silenced. How in the world are you going to find out what he wants to do.

A vote tends to be a pretty effective way of finding out.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Let's see it Golden, bring on the votes. Push the lynch. Send the train my way.

I'm not going to be bullied into a quick vote. I want to know what sloonei and SVS will do. A tie is not a good outcome.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Golden wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Golden wrote:@MM - yes, I can see the possibility that Jay is bad. I don't think he is, but he could be (eg Webber, jekyll, there are options there). I don't think he is the phantom.

I did not say that I think he is the Phantom. I said I think he controlled the chandelier.

Who do you think killed Epignosis?

You

Ok, you should vote for me then. Why wait?

Don't want a tie.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Golden wrote:@MM - yes, I can see the possibility that Jay is bad. I don't think he is, but he could be (eg Webber, jekyll, there are options there). I don't think he is the phantom.

I did not say that I think he is the Phantom. I said I think he controlled the chandelier.

Who do you think killed Epignosis?

You

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Jay did the math earlier. There are 13 players alive. There are possibly two baddies from Team Webber alive, two baddies from Team Wildhorn alive, and three independents alive. That would mean that 7 out of 13 (more than 50%) of the remaining players are not to be trusted.

That's absolute worst case scenario. It doesn't seem likely that none of the night kills has been non-town.

Not only that, but it completely ignores the subsequent conversation we had about the nature of independents.

@MM - yes, I can see the possibility that Jay is bad. I don't think he is, but he could be (eg Webber, jekyll, there are options there). I don't think he is the phantom.

Ninja, would you be on board with MM?

Spacedaisy wrote:I have read it, I was just quoting and responding to you.

Golden, where do you think you are putting your vote?

Here is the thing, everything MM says and does comes across super premeditated to me. It looks like someone who has set things up in order to create these cases. I Just can't buy what he is selling, I can't. I don't feel confident Neverwhere is bad, but I feel very confident that we are seeing a bad MM performance here.

I've been sitting on my MM suspicion for a couple of days. Couldn't do anything useful about it when silenced. I'd like to put it there, but Neverwhere is ok if it has to be.

Spacedaisy wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I voted for Neverwhere. This thread is dead, maybe someone will care.

I care. I would like to lynch MM, but if the group feels Neverwhere is our best move, I am willing to go along. Quite frankly MM's actions continue to look like abaddie trying too hard to pull the puppet strings and I fail to see why no one else feels as strongly about him as I do. I don't really have any feelings about neverwhere so if those I believe to be civ have strong opinions about needing to lynch her I am willing to listen to that.

Do you have long enough to hold out and see what sloonei does? He is silenced but I assume can still vote.

There is still ninja and SVS after that. We only have an hour. If we can wait and see what others think it will be ideal.

Otherwise I'll go along with neverwhere

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Again, define this gaping hole?

Linki: every host I have played with on this site aside from Epignosis allows for teammates' to send each other's night actions in, and even he used to.

So like I said, there could be two teammates who are not both active, and we wouldn't know it.

You are telling me that the norm on this site is that dead teammates could send in night actions for their inactive teammates?

I don't buy that for a second.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Another question about Syndicate norms: When mafia issue a kill, is a specific killer supposed to be given to the mod by the team?

i.e., could Webber simply tell Dom: "[Phantom] kills Player X"?

It's possible, and it's possible it doesn't point to any single player. But with sig and G-Man dead earlier, I still believe that my logic holds even if that is true - it just means that either webber or the phantom is one of those three. Or to be more precise, that team could not have executed a kill on every odd night unless one of those three is on it.

@MM - thats why I said specifically the phantom. Webber himself could be anyone.

The phantom has been around on every odd night. In my view that counts out SVS, neverwhere, daisy, gumshoe, JJ, sloonei, devin. Counting myself and ninja out for other reasons.

And MM, I remain very persuadable. I think it could be DF. I think it could be splints. I think it could be you.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Golden wrote:But given MM went out against JJ, it had me legitimately thinking maybe MM is the real culprit.

I think this possibility can be reduced to a pretty simple question:

Marsh suggested I might have control of the chandelier and thus be the phantom. With this in mind, which is more believable?

1.) Marsh's continued focus on death-post flavor is indicative that he is town and is employing a distinct strategy to explain night kill trends and build theories about them (including the one about me).

2.) Marsh is mafia, thus giving him default knowledge of when his team gets night kills, and took advantage of the JJJ/Epi argument to set up a frame attempt in-line with his proposed death-post flavor theories.

Umm... I think you are reading in more than I am either way.

Everyone around here has default knowledge of when you can expect kills to come in and flavour text to prove it is common. I don't think any of that stuff is particularly useful or relevant one way or the other, I think it's just you being new to flavour text customs and this kind of set up.

What I ask is, whats more likely.

1) MM is civilian, legitimately thought you were the phantom.

2) Marsh is mafia, was trying to set you up.

I think two, because as I say - as a civilian trying to actually solve this game, and someone who has been recording the flavour text (thus who is the baddie) for each kill, I find it difficult to believe MM would miss a gaping hole such as absenteeism in his analysis.

Basic truth. I do not think JJ is on team webber. I don't think bullzeye's activity lines up with JJ being the phantom. My vibe is that JJ is good full stop, but I think there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate he is not the phantom.

I think there are literally only three players left in the game who can be the phantom. DF, splints, MM. I believe I have legitimately logically excluded all other candidates, no other possibilities. I believe it must be one of those three.

DF - there is your answer about why you. But given MM went out against JJ, it had me legitimately thinking maybe MM is the real culprit.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I voted for Neverwhere. This thread is dead, maybe someone will care.

Disappointed that you already voted. Understand why, I was away for a while.

I really wanted to read through all of this and discuss it with you first.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Golden wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:What are you thinking about Golden?

I'm thinking about whether or not JJ is going to turn up and talk about whether he really thinks you could be bad and setting him up or not. I'm very interested in what he has to say about that. I'm also thinking that one thing I did in economics was make a case on TinyBubbles when I was nightkilling her, because that kind of thing can be a decent play for cred. I think the epignosis kill is a very interesting one, and it warrants care (or was it just revenge for his failure to 'die' at the start of the game?) And I'm thinking sloonei is silenced.

I'm thinking that I'm still most likely to vote DF today, and I'm very comfortable with that vote. But I'm still persuadable.

What do you think? Do you think I am being malicious in trying to set him up? Do you think Jay could be bad?

I think either of those things has a chance of being true, and it is worth my time to consider both of those possibilities. I hadn't given much thought to you or JJ being bad before now.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I can't log in to this site on work computers, it's blocked (RYM isn't). I can only post from my phone, which I am not allowed to carry on the work floor.

I'll have things to say when I am able. This comes to you from a toilet stall.

Wasn't trying to push you in to being fast, JJ. Prefer to get something where you can evidence your thinking.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:What are you thinking about Golden?

I'm thinking about whether or not JJ is going to turn up and talk about whether he really thinks you could be bad and setting him up or not. I'm very interested in what he has to say about that. I'm also thinking that one thing I did in economics was make a case on TinyBubbles when I was nightkilling her, because that kind of thing can be a decent play for cred. I think the epignosis kill is a very interesting one, and it warrants care (or was it just revenge for his failure to 'die' at the start of the game?) And I'm thinking sloonei is silenced.

I'm thinking that I'm still most likely to vote DF today, and I'm very comfortable with that vote. But I'm still persuadable.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:6.5 hours until the deadline. Don't all vote at once now.

That would be a pretty impressive feat.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Golden wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Oh look, Phantom of the Opera is back in action.

I'm not Phantom of the Opera, or any other baddie. I am civ.

You are patently not Phantom of the Opera.

I'm not sure MMs comment was aimed at you, but I also don't understand it. There's never been any point at which phantom was inactive?

It certainly was not directed at Spacedaisy. I was making an observation because Epignosis was a victim of the chandelier.

I voted Jay. I think has some control over the chandelier.

This is interesting. Why?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I've suspected DF as long as I've been in this game, so I've no major beef with that notion. He's posted maybe twice since I last spoke with him here so my feelings haven't changed.

I'm also willing to entertain other names. It's just my personal suggestion.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Would you be able to produce a rainbow or some other sort of reads list at the moment, Golden?

I would normally acquiesce to that request. But then, there have been golden moments like epi being NKed which might not have happened if we all rainbowed, and I currently have other good reasons for not wanting to frame my suspicions in quite that way like I normally would. I'm not ruling it out forever. I'm just not doing it right now.

I would, however, really advocate that we consider lynching people who are actively putting in kills over someone like Neverwhere, however bad we think she may be. For that reason, I'd like to try and figure out the phantom today given we know its someone who has been permanently active. That rules out a lot of people. I think it could be DF.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Golden wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Sloonei, I want you to read the flavor text in Dom's post with the Epi kill and then report back how it has affected your perspective of the game.

Just sloonei?

The thing I have in mind is specific to Sloonei yes, but if you have any commentary then by all means share it.

I shall wait until after sloonei to share my commentary, then, in case my response should for any reason risk changing the direction of his answer.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Sloonei, I want you to read the flavor text in Dom's post with the Epi kill and then report back how it has affected your perspective of the game.

Just sloonei?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Golden wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:General question for Syndicate regulars: roles with the ability to resurrect others, are they typically civilian? associated with a more exotic independent role? or anything else?

You might want to think of other potential explanations... like what happened in the thread not so long before Sloonei was rezzed.

I'm pretty sure I know what you mean, and I am considering that. I just don't want to throw all my marbles in that basket without educating myself better about standards on The Syndicate.

Because on RYM, resurrection is so extremely rare that nobody ever even thinks about it.

Fair enough. I'll give you my experience of rezzes.

1) It can be inherent to a role. I'd say that I've seen it be civilian 100% of the time I've played with such a role, but I hosted a game in which a civilian had three rezzes but one of the three was guaranteed to be bad (as it happened, that person brought back two, decided in their gut they both were good correctly, and never rezzed a baddie). Although I've never seen this role be bad, someone else here may have?

2) It can be a prize. Prizes can work in many ways. Sometimes its just a rez. Sometimes its a rez and recruit. If it's a mafia who uses it, they could rezz a civilian and turn them bad (hence epi asking about corruption I'm guessing). If it's a civ who uses it, a rezz and recruit would be a rezz and btsc (it wouldn't convert a mafia person to being a civ if they rezzed one).

3) It can be a host fixing an error where someone should not have died. In this game, Dom has fixed his mistakes by owning them, rather than turning them into rezzes, which I actually far prefer. I prefer when it is at least theoretically possible to account for things that happen by way of player actions.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Is there any reason to assume the holder of the singer role must be civilian?

This is a decent point, except I think the content of the various singer's posts point to civilian. And I haven't seen that kind of role be anything but civilian before.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:General question for Syndicate regulars: roles with the ability to resurrect others, are they typically civilian? associated with a more exotic independent role? or anything else?

You might want to think of other potential explanations... like what happened in the thread not so long before Sloonei was rezzed.

Spacedaisy wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Oh look, Phantom of the Opera is back in action.

I'm not Phantom of the Opera, or any other baddie. I am civ.

You are patently not Phantom of the Opera.

I'm not sure MMs comment was aimed at you, but I also don't understand it. There's never been any point at which phantom was inactive?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Hedgeowl's back in the tally. Has this been a game-long trend (dead players appearing randomly in the poll)?

It's like bass. Sometimes dom has forgetten to eliminate dead people from his list by mistake.

Apologies for not being around. I wrote a post earlier but it was nearly unreadable. So many typos. I need to just be in bed.

Epi dying is a surprise. I can't remember if I answered Sloonei's questions. If not, please ask them again tomorrow.

Happy with Neverwhere as the vote but I'm looking at my list of people and I think we need to be having another look at Dfaraday.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Cobalt's abrasiveness might have been easier to convey as a mafioso if he knew he'd flip town. I read him as town though.

There is no reason at all to see Cobalt as being on Wildhorn, and no reason to explain what happened on day two either. So I agree he was town.

I think Neverwhere is similar in timing to bubbles death in explaining why Jekyll might have vanished around then. One reason I was initially more hesitant to go with Neverwhere is I was thinking that if she flipped bad, she would probably still just look civ. It was only when Sloonei started making a case for her being Webber that I thought lynching her was worthwhile.

@jj - He said he would break the tie. I wanted to see how he would. Honestly, from my perspective they would always have been my two next votes anyway. I didn't buy the defences you and sloonei made of nutella. But I thought it might be able to tell us something about epi. It still might, if we vote neverwhere and she flips bad, eh?

I mean, somehow he timed it to be literally in the last two seconds of the poll. I don't know how he did that. I was trying to do a mental 60 in my head after the poll ticked over to 3.38. I was only up to about 30 when he voted. I was refreshing every two seconds, I voted instantly. So I was surprised my lase-second vote failed.

Sloonei wrote:What do the people who've been paying attention to roles have to say about Jekyll & Hyde? Anything we can say or discern will be largely speculative, but I don't think it will hurt to raise the issue publicly.

I still think it was bubbles.

Sloonei wrote:I had been trusting of Golden the whole time I was in the game prior to my death, but I have been less a fan of the direction his posts have gone since then. A number of his suspicions have been wrong, and that in itself is enough to raise some alarms. What I find more believable about his account of the end of day proceedings is that he expected Epi to vote for Neverwhere. I would, however, like to hear him explain why he was expecting that particular vote from Epignosis.

Sorry if I implied I was expecting Epi to vote for neverwhere. I wasn't. I wasn't expecting any particular vote from epi, I was just ready to vote neverwhere in case he went nutella.

Oh, JJ - for clarity. Pending Neverwhere's flip in this game, she has never been civilian. She has only been mafia before this game.

@sloonei - I think elaborating on my thoughts about ninja wouldn't be kosher. I think I left enough breadcrumbs for you to work it out by yourself. JJ did.

Also, to FZ and Scotty. Sorry. FZ could legitimately be Jekyll & Hyde. Given MM's interpretation of the Night 8 kill, I thought that I couldn't with 100% certainly call Scotty civ either. Sloonei was the person whose alignment I felt most certain of. That was the deciding factor for me. All of you I would have genuinely loved to see back.

My thoughts during that day generally - I intended to vote nutella for most of the period. This was primarily because I consider Neverwhere cannot be B & C or Phantom, and her most likely role based on her posts was Wildhorn, thus making her Jekyll, so I felt lynching her wouldn't tell us much. I was won over late in the period by Sloonei's convincing case that she could possibly be Webber.

I'm also pretty sure a gunshot (nightkill night 10) would be inflicted by Bonnie & Clyde, the king and queen of the shootout.

I am also of the opinion that B & C/team wildhorn may have forgotten to put in a kill on night 4 and Dom took pity and allowed them to 'catch up' on night 5, and this might explain the apparent bonus NK attempt on night 5.

Sloonei wrote:

Dom wrote: Company – Somebody hold me too close, Somebody hurt me too deep. Bobby has commitment issues. On night 3, Company can establish anonymous BTSC with a player of their choosing.

nutella has had BTSC with a player since night 3. There is no reason to believe that person was civ, or that they're still alive. But it's something.

There is, in fact, pretty good reason to believe that person is not alive, based on that poll result.

Epignosis wrote:

Golden wrote:I will admit played chicken to see how Epi would vote. I had pushed refresh literally two seconds earlier and the poll was open, epi had voted. By the time I clicked submit it was shut. I had tried to shift my vote back to Neverwhere but it failed.

I still would have gone back to voting for Nutella the next day, though, I expect.

My tie-breaking vote was actually predetermined.

Not by any outside factor, mind you, but by something I had already decided.

You wouldn't have needed to make it had I switched back to Neverwhere earlier, though, since it would not have broken a tie. It's why I chose to hold out.

I will admit played chicken to see how Epi would vote. I had pushed refresh literally two seconds earlier and the poll was open, epi had voted. By the time I clicked submit it was shut. I had tried to shift my vote back to Neverwhere but it failed.

I still would have gone back to voting for Nutella the next day, though, I expect.

I agree with epi's post.

I do think the difference between night two and three versus night four might be explaining by way of doctor save vs roleblock. But I also think between epi and MM they've made a decent case for why B & C may be a relative inactive.

Night four kill ought to have been put in by BR anyway, so I'm not sure whats up there.

It will be interesting to see if there is any sign of a wildhorn kill tonight. If not, I'll be looking into Neverwhere, and it will reinforce my feeling that bubbles may well actually be jekyll after all.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I also never received any PM to be decoded, so that portion of this setup is lost on me.

It's probably because your predecessor didn't vote on the polls. We got them depending on how we voted.

However, you don't need to trust only me. You'll see quite a bit of discussion about these things in the early game if you search for it. I'm not suggesting you have to, just that it's there if you choose not to trust but to search for yourself.

Sorry, at first I thought you meant how do we know kills happened by specific people, but I realised you just meant specific teams.

The time we saw 'Bonnie & Clyde' named specifically was interesting, because it otherwise went against the pattern (and also happened on the same night as a webber kill).

Oh, and also, because we have had opportunities to decode certain PMs. Wildhorn had the ability to corrupt on odd nights and kill on even nights. So, logical thinking..

But also, odd night kills have had references to Webber musicals like the Phantom, so it's played out as expected.

That is also a pretty usual kill pattern when there are two mafia teams.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'm finding myself getting a little confused about the night kills -- particularly who perpetrated each. A lot of people are taking it as gospel that specifically Team Wildhorn or specifically Team Webber attempted to kill [Player X]. I only see one phase in which a mafia role is explicitly employed to describe a kill attempt though (Bonnie and Clyde on Night 5). So how do we know when each mafia team is given the night kill?

This is not a statement of suspicion, I seriously don't know. I think people received some behind the scenes information at some point that I never saw or something.

From knowledge of the relevant musicals.