The Syndicate

MacDougall wrote:

Golden wrote:voting macdougall.

Hey, MattF, I might try giving you a cogent Long Con sometime TokyoRose macaronic Map actually understand Valentine. OK?

Hey check it out. If everyone follows you today another townie gets lynched just like yesterday.

Whatchu details bout willis?

Not one credibility those who voted for me phr did accentuation to 'follow me'. fonctionnaire a man, every one of them voted for me because they claimed I religieuse reinvestment unshared thought I was scum. osteopathist you trying to prove Dark Leprechaun anaemia who?

You sound like bullzeye, but way more committed to your discredit plan. tillage Check it out, you'll keep my vote until end of tillage.

voting macdougall.

Hey, MattF, I might try giving you a cogent Long Con sometime TokyoRose macaronic Map actually understand Valentine. OK?

enjoy would scum be scared Typhoony lynching premonstration? Especially resurrect epacme concluding all wrong Shouter who scum were. amour track might have thought it could actually benefit them and discredit me?

MacDougall griveous went from greeniest infliction decompound decompound braaiiiinssss... to a officialism suspect sliky anaemia single post.

Mac is in my green reads on my rainbow list, which I should really do one of.

No probs bullz. I know it's annoying when people say you 'ignored' something you just didn't see. Even though I think you are bad, it would not be fair to you (or anyone else in the same situation) if a gambit was used to 'accidentally' lynch you. I would be incredibly suspicious of anyone who claimed to vote you for reasons other than suspecting you and then didn't change their vote.

@MP - for clarification. If people are speculating as to a person's role (correctly or incorrectly) based on things that have happened in the thread in the game, that is completely legitimate, yes?

@floyd - some people suspect you because they think you voting makes you look like you know more than you are letting on. I happen not to agree, though.

Bullzeye wrote:I wonder how many people will 'forget' to remove their votes from me and then blame Golden for my death...

I offered you a solution to that, and specifically asked you how you would feel about it. You have so far ignored it. You seem to want to play martyr, to me.

Ricochet wrote:Wait, I have to catch up on what Golden is trying to make us do.

I'm not trying to make anyone do anything, I want to be very clear about that.

Sorsha wrote:

Golden wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Golden wrote:@JJJ - your view please

What do you think about TS civvies following my vote, and forcing scum to also vote that way or be revealed (while not suggesting people keep their votes on bullz).

Do you see merit?

If following your vote without staying your follower is truly sufficient, then I don't see a reason not to. Votes are changeable, so TSers would only need to click one vote beside you and then move on to their personal suspects (presumably with a bold vote also placed). If I understand you correctly at least.

The highlighted bit is a crucial detail though.

If it was insufficient, it would do no harm.

So all TSers should place a vote for the player you have voted for, even if only temporary.

This would make your seductee (that's not a word) susceptible to night actions directed at you also, right? And vice-versa?

I don't want to get into anything about what my role might or might not be.

But I do think it is worth others thinking about and putting in the thread the reasons why following my vote might be beneficial if you are a civ. You have correctly stated what I am suggesting people do.

I didn't get a skittle Rico, if my blood sugar gets low, it's on you.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Fastest Syndicateer to 2,000? Maybe? Ehhh???

Hmm... I wonder when my 2000th post was... was it three months or more ago?

@Strawhenge, I think 'Syndikittens' is brilliant. I'm in, chief syndikitten.

Strawhenge wrote:Hey Golden, I just noticed something while looking back at posts. You said you invited people to lynch for you. Skirting nervously around infodumping, say, purely hypothetically that you're Uh-Oh. If you were inviting a lynch, does that mean you would have had suspicions of the person you seduced and you wanted an opportunity to get them killed in your place?

Just a weird little snag I just noticed.

I'm not going to go into hypotheticals about a role that I may or may not have.

I will say, though, that I was pretty strongly on record that I had a theory that the baddie team was LC/bea/JJJ/rico just before bea was lynched.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Golden wrote:@JJJ - your view please

What do you think about TS civvies following my vote, and forcing scum to also vote that way or be revealed (while not suggesting people keep their votes on bullz).

Do you see merit?

If following your vote without staying your follower is truly sufficient, then I don't see a reason not to. Votes are changeable, so TSers would only need to click one vote beside you and then move on to their personal suspects (presumably with a bold vote also placed). If I understand you correctly at least.

The highlighted bit is a crucial detail though.

If it was insufficient, it would do no harm.

@JJJ - your view please

What do you think about TS civvies following my vote, and forcing scum to also vote that way or be revealed (while not suggesting people keep their votes on bullz).

Do you see merit?

Bullzeye wrote:I also don't see how encouraging everyone from TS to follow your vote, which happens to be on me, isn't encouraging everyone to lynch me.

Golden wrote:Then, of course, you can vote somewhere else after... I'm not saying everyone should lynch Bullz.

It's really not difficult to see, bullz. My vote could be literally anywhere right now, I don't care who it is on, it makes no odds to my suggestion. Would you like me to move it somewhere else for the purposes of executing this? Happy to do so. What do you think about what I said if the vote is not on you. My point had nothing to do with following me on to a person because they suspect them. I think even someone who knew, 100%, that you are civ should follow me. I think even you should follow me, I think it is in your interests to do so, although obviously I need to shift my vote elsewhere for you to do so.

Then, people should vote for who they actually want to vote for afterwards.

It's really not that hard.

Devin the Omniscient wrote:Well, I'm certainly feeling better about Golden. Sorry for the previous Day's vote. But you were asking for it Anything I can clear up for you? I see I'm in your top 3

I'm going back to voting for Sorsha. Because, reasons.

I need to look into you a bit more, Devin. But, I'm inclined to think that someone who associated behaviour with their own civ game are less likely to suddenly vote for the person showing that behaviour. It felt like a major turn around for me, that you went from saying my behaviour reminded you of yourself as a civ, to voting for me. Can you explain how your thinking process on me changed to the point that you soured on seeing the behaviour as civ?

Also:

Bullzeye wrote:I'm not even going against you.

How is that in any way relevant to my suspicion of you? I don't just suspect people because they 'go after me'.

I did not say that, literally or figuratively or any other way.

I think that all civilian people from TS should follow me on to a vote. Force the scum TS people to follow on there as well, so as to not stick out.

Just my two cents, you guys can debate and decide if this is the right thing to do or not. I'm not going to push it, but I think as a theory it works well. There are good reasons why I think it works well, but I'll let you guys think about that.

Then, of course, you can vote somewhere else after... I'm not saying everyone should lynch Bullz.

It's completely possible he is part of the scum team, but I won't leave someone new out in the cold in case they are really struggling.

@Floyd - just do the best you can. As far as a first time goes, this game is incredibly intense, but it will ease off as it goes on.

Really, the key thing is that if you are civ you have to see if you can catch which people are baddies. How might you do it? Do peoples motives seem honesT? Do they seem like they were defending other known baddies? It's more an art form than a science, or sort of a mix between the two.

seaside wrote:Why is Rico not on the poll?
Error or game related?

Just a guess/assumption:

Take Me to the River – Takes two players to the river every night, one from each forum, and pushes them in the water. One of them will be blocked for the night; the other will be removed from the subsequent day's lynch poll. The fates of both players are randomly determined.

I think it is hilarious that my reaction to bea being civ is to feel a bit better about rico and JJJ, and then zebra feels the opposite.

Well, I couldn't have pulled the gambit I did in this game with a closed setup.

On the other hand, I pulled a gambit in RYM87 that I couldn't have done with an open setup.

I think each has it's different aspects which make it fun figuring out how to use them best.

Rbzmncaeaei wrote:But now you do understand the point of the post. So what exactly are you trying to learn?

Golden wrote:@zebra - my horse is the perfect height. It's you who keeps claiming I think everything revolves around me, but what is it about that lynch that you see so many explanations for? I didn't see your explanation for that post before my two posts about it, but now that I have - I'd like to know more. Because I agree with you that there is a lot of material around it to analyse, and I think that's a good thing.

I think it's pretty clear?

Lets go back to your original quote...

Rbzmncaeaei wrote:This lynch is frustrating me because there's so many ways to interpret what happened.

You see so many ways to interpret [stuff other than bea dying]. I'm interested in hearing your ideas.

@zebra - "I didn't see your explanation for that post before my two posts about it".

You had to explain your post for me to understand you were not talking about me. Now that I understand that, yes my perception of that post has completely reversed. Would you prefer that I tunnel?

Why do you continue with posts like that last one? What are you trying to achieve? Do you actually want me to understand your posts and talk about them? Or are you more interested in just throwing shade around?

Matt F wrote:

Golden wrote:Your behaviour, before and after, was easily the most bothersome to me.

Are you speaking to me or Bullz with this? I'm guessing Bullz, but just wanted to clarify.

Yes, Bullz.

As for Roxy - my gut is good, but I think she would have gotten equally snippy at Diiny early on no matter her alignment. For Roxy, her self-governing rules for how she plays are two things... 1) they are genuinely her doing things the way she thinks is right to play (like looking after newbies, for instance) and 2) They are a great way to remain reasonably consistent regardless of alignment.

@zebra - my horse is the perfect height. It's you who keeps claiming I think everything revolves around me, but what is it about that lynch that you see so many explanations for? I didn't see your explanation for that post before my two posts about it, but now that I have - I'd like to know more. Because I agree with you that there is a lot of material around it to analyse, and I think that's a good thing.

My top 3 scum picks right now, not in any particular order:

Bullz, Choutas, Devin.

Also, bullz, if you do believe I'm civ, then what is the civilian value of your posts towards me post-lynch?

Bullzeye wrote:See, I obviously don't suspect you.

Oh, I do think it is true that you don't suspect me. But only because I think you are scum. It doesn't stop you posting over and over about what a terrible person I am, and how I should never be trusted.

OH, really. You think I'm a civ, but I should never be trusted again because I convinced people to lynch a civilian. Has that never happened before? To you? To anyone? Has it never happened that I've also led lynches on a whole lot of baddies, in games you've played?

"Lets never trust golden, who is clearly a civilian, because of one lynch"...

You have a whole lot of posts to that effect, including before the lynch.

Bullz, I played yesterday the way I did because I absolutely do believe it was the way to break the game open. The way people responded to me and my gambit has created a huge amount of content. The scum had a massive advantage yesterday - they had seven people who knew I wasn't bad and my guess is that they had probably more or less figured out what the outcome of yesterday was going to be, and I'm sure it parlayed into specific behaviours around that lynch.

linki @Matt F - My view on Sorsha is legitimately what I said yesterday. I think the evidence is good - in terms of Dr Wilgy's analysis of her voting patterns etc. I think thread Sorsha sounds civilian. She wouldn't be my first choice to pursue, and there is a reason I had her as 'town' in my gun to head read (my gut says good) but I also can't begrudge tunnelling on her because, as I say, the voting evidence is strong. But voting evidence isn't always necessarily the best evidence...

As proven by Wilgy putting every person through his massive formula, and giving me the most scum points.

I think scum are wise to not getting too many scum points (ie visible tells of being teammates), and if you were to look at Wilgy's formula I am willing to bet the bulk of the scum are in the middle somewhere.
Your behaviour, before and after, was easily the most bothersome to me.

[quote="Bullzeye:]I didn't mean to imply that that had been his intention, but it was undeniably the outcome.[/quote]


You have absolutely intended to imply that several times now.

Matt F wrote:If Golden is not able to defend his position because of infodumping rules, fine, but I would seriously like to hear everyone's thoughts on my reservations about the role claim.

I have not role claimed or infodumped and I don't intend to.

I will, however, happily help discredit any scum explanations for beas death.

@Matt F - get a load of Bullzeye's posts on me, and ask yourself 'does Bullzeye suspect golden, or is he more interested in discrediting him'.

I'm also looking at someone like Zebra who seems to understand completely, but then wavers about like there are so many explanations... after one possible scum explanation is raised and more or less immediately discredited.

I'm also looking at Devin who said my behaviour reminds me of him when he played a patricular game and was civ... but then continues to want to vote me.

You, I feel completely happy about. I think you are civ and have for a long time. It's not merely suspecting me thats the problem, I just think people should be looking at those who suspect me with a critical eye because I think some of that suspicion is opportunistic and insincere.

Rbzmncaeaei wrote:This lynch is frustrating me because there's so many ways to interpret what happened.

This is ludicrous.

There is only one way to interpret what happened, you know exactly what it is, and everyone who says they want to vote for me tomorrow should be treated with utmost suspicion.

I feel really pretty good about both Rico and JJJ now.

Sorsha wrote:RIP Bea

Why did you apologize Golden?

Because I invited people to lynch me and they did and bea was lynched and was not bad.

Sorry bea. RIP.

Rbzmncaeaei wrote:

Golden wrote:

Rbzmncaeaei wrote:linki@Golden - Haha, I knew it.

What other solution was there, really!?

We'll see.

Well, I guess there are other solutions. In King Arthur when I called for my lynch, I actually died.

Sorry if people think it was distracting, but if there is one thing about me... I'll do what it takes to try out my theories. If I'm right, I may have just broken the game open. If I'm wrong, sorry.

Rbzmncaeaei wrote:linki@Golden - Haha, I knew it.

What other solution was there, really!?

Hey, I want to be clear rico, I called you, JJJ, bea and LC the scheme team. All four of you.

And one of you is about to be lynched. So lets hope I'm right.

Rico is going to vote for me out of self-preservation. I don't hold it against him. It is how it is. I brought my own lynch on myself anyway.

I just have my fingers crossed that it was the right thing to do.

@Rico - who would YOU lynch, if you got to elect?

Strawhenge wrote:

Golden wrote:Also, JJ, if Rico is lynched today and comes back bad, I'd upgrade you to 'very likely civ'.

I doubt you'd bus two teammates. And despite my antics, I've actually always felt worse about rico than about you.

Now, as someone who has been burned by trusting JJJ before (giving a ಠ_ಠ face to JJJ), I'll preface by saying that no player ever should be 100% trusted. However, what if Rico is lynched and flips town? Does that mean that JJJ looks scummier? What if JJJ is simply wrong?

Inversely, what if Rico flips scum because JJJ is scum and bussed his teammate? In the Mola Mola game I bussed both of my original scummates, gained everyone's trust, and won the game. I'm just saying it's possible.

So my question to you, Golden, is: What other factors, if any, would lead you to trust JJJ if Rico flips bad?

I do not think there is anything which would have called for JJJ to bus a teammate today. I've won a game my bussing all my teammates, but bussing them was also the right thing to do. JJJ would not have merely bussed LC and rico, he would have had an incredibly significant role in the suspicion on both, and the lynch train on both, happening at all. That goes beyond mere bussing.

If Rico comes back civ, it does not make JJJ look scummier. It just doesn't make him look civvier. Either way, I had four people nailed down on my theory of this team as LC/bea/JJJ/rico... which I felt linked together. Either way, I feel like I am more likely than not wrong about that whole foursome being bad. Not necessarily wrong, but much more likely wrong.

Also, JJ, if Rico is lynched today and comes back bad, I'd upgrade you to 'very likely civ'.

I doubt you'd bus two teammates. And despite my antics, I've actually always felt worse about rico than about you.

Looks like there is a legitimate opportunity to lynch someone I think is bad, so I switched to ricochet.

Also, JJJ - you want to judge whether or not I'm really reading you? Fine, here we go.

I think you seem pretty civ-minded today, and you've run the gauntlet well and come out the other side looking pretty ok.

It doesn't mean I'm sure you are good, but I think there is a much higher chance of it right now than I did at the end of last day. Take that however you will.

@rico - there are people in my periphery who I've wavered about back and forth on based on their posts. Sig is one.

BY THE WAY EVERYONE

You should take a really close notice of people who say they don't want to lynch me today, but they want to lynch me, like, next or something.

These are probably scum who are afraid of what I have up my sleeve for today.

Hey, scum... what I'm asking for is going to happen no matter when I get lynched. You better NK me instead if you want to avoid it