The Syndicate

MacDougall wrote:I had a look at Zebra's interactions earlier and of everybody juliets look the most likely to be teammate interactions to me, but as you will have seen we had HamburgerBoy unusually leap to the defense of someone who he had a meta based scum read on on day 1 which gives me pause and makes me consider that he knows she isn't actually Zebra's teammate. Upon asking juliets and sig their opinions I was given the indication that the three of them think I am wrong about the various theories I postulated, so I'm happy to report that it's business as usual for me.

Others I think are worth looking at are sig, metalmarsh and Matt. Sig looks a likely teammate. Metalmarsh could really go either way and Matt had some pingy interactions. Golden I read as non teammate but there is a lot of interaction and reference to one another so you might think differently. There's also plenty of Zebra/Mac stuff to trawl through if you're so inclined.

So why have you looked straight past a bunch of stuff that is on the very topic you are using to base your hunt? That seems strange. Don't you think the best place to start would have been where there's already content rather than arbitrarily starting at "a"?

How would I know she isn't Zebra's teammate? If you're assuming juliets and Zebra were scumbuddies, my defense should therefore imply that I too am their scumbuddy, right? Therefore I would know. If you're saying that I'm scum but on a different team from juliets and Zebra, then I would have no way of knowing juliets is Zebra's partner unless I got info on her last night. And if that's the case, why in the hell wouldn't I push for her lynch just as I did during A World Reborn where you (indy) fed me (Circle of Death) info on her (Witherdeath) being scum?

You've reverted to ignoring me when I say I'm hardly "defending" her, I don't have any reason to believe she is town, I just don't think the link between her and Zebra is as strong as you do. If somehow it ends up a close lynch and my actual suspects aren't there, I'd still be down to lynch her over my other neutrals.

I actually like the point Jimmy made about the Black Rock-zebra case, and Black Rock has a number of other waffly and suspicious aspects as I had previously stated. I'll leave my vote on Jimmy and when I wake up and see how things have developed, I will probably move my vote to Black Rock, also contingent on her own defense, as well as what Dom has to say.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:That makes no sense. First of all, if that's the strategy then the person being emoji'd has no viable method to pursue that framejob. I couldn't bloody talk! Second, Zebra made no effort herself to pursue that end, and she even pooh-poohed the notion that llama was responsible. Now we know that's because she was responsible. There's no value in trying to frame somebody if it can't actually turn into a case constructed of legible words. People did end up voting for llama, but many of them didn't actually give a reason why. They just did it.

Well that's obviously not true since you managed to convey your distrust of llama quite easily (Mac and zebra being your first help, interestingly enough, so "no effort" isn't quite true either). Not everyone gave a reason for voting or suspecting llama, but I'd imagine the people voting llama had weighed it in. I had, at least.

Changing gears slightly, going back to that made me find this...

Dom wrote:I'll vote Rico or Llama. Exhausted from this catch up.

That was spoken night 0. While people were getting pretty anti-Rico by that point, I think the inclusion of Llama in there is noteworthy when you hadn't even been cursed yet, and llama hadn't really done much aside from calling sig fluffy and attacking Mac/defending Rico in the big argument. Based on my last game with Dom, I remember him actually jumping the gun a little bit after Chatzy discussion (near the end of the game trying to win over fingersplints), and him throwing llama's name out there in an either-or for two of the eventual poll leaders is a red flag for me. I'll bump him down to orange in my rainbow as well.

*"at least TWO steps"

MacDougall wrote:How is that scummy? Jesus HB you are a good player. If I am trying to deduce the reasoning from someone and struggling and then they make a post where all of a sudden things make sense I will happily say so.

There are at least steps in an argument. First you have to understand what the other person is saying, then you can say why you think they're wrong. Apparently you just reached the comprehension stage, and I'll admit that people often say my arguments are confusing and need to be re-clarified so that's not a diss on you, but now that you're at a position to actually tell me I'm wrong and why, you suddenly don't care anymore. Not to mention that you didn't even say previously that I was being confusing or unclear or whatever, you just said that I was arguing for the sake of arguing, and that I'm defending juliets. Together, that implies to me that you don't really care about what I'm saying about your arguments, you just care that I look like a teammate of juliets' as a result. Same thing zebra did to me just yesterday, only replace juliets with Rico.

MacDougall wrote:More? Where were the first ones?

There is no way you could think Zebra and I are teammates? Surely. That is plucked from your ass scum fakery beyond all compare.

No, I just think you're engaging in the same kind of scummy behavior. You make an argument, I argue back, you accuse me of arguing for the primary purpose of defending an alleged scummate, I try again and emphasize more clearly my problem with your argument, you are suddenly like "Oh OK cool" and drop it.

MacDougall wrote:Okay this is the first post of yours that I haven't had to read with my eyes squinted to engage my brain enough to try to understand what you are saying. Well done.

a2thezebra wrote:I'll admit that's some well-reasoned skepticism towards those interpretations.

More parallels.

MacDougall wrote: Your defense of her is making me think you are know for a fact she is not Zebra's teammate.

Her post to get her vote on Rico included an admission of the validity of the case against him being a lynchable scum, she used what I am reading as verbose language to get her vote onto the wagon of a player bound to be lynched.

That's what zebra said about me for "defending" Rico.

What does verbose language have to do with waffling? What does admitting that a case is valid have to do with waffling? Waffling would be more like "Well, I think there are some valid points but some not so valid, overall I guess I'll vote Rico but I'm really not sure". I agree that Rico was bound to be lynched by the time she voted, but same could be said about many players (including myself), and again, distinct from waffling.

MacDougall wrote:You're just arguing with me for the sake of looking like you are contributing. Zebra put together a day 1 "kill list" in almost all cases a scum will arbitrarily include teammates in such lists. This is common and to suggest that in all cases a scum does it intentionally rather than softly is incorrect. In fact the way that Zebra proceeded to get juliets out of her list is further indicative of them being teammates.

I wasn't talking about the mere presence of her on the list, I was talking about the "soft" dialogue both of them had with each other. I'm saying that your theory that zebra was playing it safe as to not accidentally get juliets lynched seems silly, especially when considering that Ricochet had basically been called before the day even started. Additionally, like you're saying, kill lists are usually used for misdirection, which is why I previously discussed the people zebra had argued with while putting less emphasis on the people on the list. If anything, suddenly distancing her from the list makes her look like she wasn't a teammate, so that people could go back and say "Hey, the only person Zebra dropped from her list was juliets, looks like distancing/a soft bus". Again, wifom, but that's why I don't even like to touch those kinds of lists.

MacDougall wrote:Here you scum read her. Your first mention of her in the game.

Here you have seemingly upgraded her to a yellow skittle. How did you arrive to this? And now you are jumping to her defense. I cannot see any way that your scum read on her would have weakened to the point of now defending her. If anything I would expect civilian HB to have a strengthened scum read in light of the Zebra flip.

My view on her earlier was purely meta, and that's still about all I have. The people in orange are people that I have more of a case on, so I don't think it's fair to automatically kick her there. I don't agree that zebra's history with juliets makes her look worse.

sig wrote:

juliets wrote: I am not Zebra or any other baddies teammate and I am not an indy or an SK.

I actually think this part is more important then the rest of juliets post, if we think there is a lie detector this would be quite a good statement to check. Know there might not be one, but the scum wouldn't know that and I doubt they would say something that could be checked so easily.

Roughly what percentage of Syndicate games have lie detector roles?

MacDougall wrote:This is another post that pings me from juliets. It's too waffly.

Really? That whole second paragraph seems very directed and confident about Rico being scum, I'd say her least waffly case so far this game.

MacDougall wrote:This is the most suspect and nervous looking interaction with Zebra. I'd bet dollars to donuts that Zebra just threw juliets in her scum list as her requisite wifom scum teammate and this interaction is them softly trying to flesh it out without it going down a path serious enough for juliets to get any serious attention on her.

I dunno, considering that Zebra has a habit of arguing a lot of getting night-killed/lynched early in most games, I would think it would just backfire on him if he went hard after juliets. juliets pretty much admits as much that she's a "soft" player that doesn't want to take too tough a stand early on, and based on A World Reborn I'd agree with that. It's also why I'm still cautious of her being scum, but I'm willing to wait things out rather than just go on meta based on a single game.

Besides, I think if people are going to bus each other, they are more likely to intentionally over do it rather than soft bus, unless the person being bussed is actually under significant threat of being lynched. That's wifom of course, but for a day 1 case I'd lean more in that direction.

juliets wrote:Hamburger Boy can you talk a little bit about your suspicion of DH? DH, do you know why you are orange on Ham Boy's scale? I probably just missed the basis of a suspicion.

Part of it involves his treatment of RadicalFuzz; he was one of the first to throw suspicion that way (in a fairly joking way admittedly) and then later went the other way, looking at people who had suspected Fuzz. Then he singled out DFaraday for being anti-Fuzz, which I saw as the easy-button target, and of course DFaraday has now flipped town regardless. I also thought his treatment of Rico was silly, especially now in retrospect, being more critical of rainbow lists than anything else, but later referring to Rico's posts as a non-civ gimmick, which doesn't really jive with his initial criticism. Also, that golden apparently even did Rico's exact joke (including Dharma in all layers of the rainbow) and Dharma apparently not remembering that further looks like acting/falling back to a jovial meta.

sig wrote:hello HB how are you doing?

I'm keeping my eye open however, I don't see the reason why everyone thinks Lo Rab is scummy. I will admit I was skimming those areas so I might've missed something, but from what I read she looked null.

What do we think of Elo being replaced? Is she more likely to replace out as mafia or is it unrelated to meta?

You just said that you thought there was a good chance LoRab (or llama) was scum though. Why do you think that?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Burger is no longer Superman. The notion that I am on Zebra's team is beyond tinfoil. It's crackpot.

Why did you call me Superman earlier to begin with?

Hey sig

sig wrote:I don't see the Lorab wagon at all I'd suggest the people on it switch to llama

sig wrote:I think a few mafia members were on the Rico wagon, however I also think there is a good chance that either LoRab or Llama are scum.

sig wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:I find both the LoRab AND the llama wagons fishy as fuck.

Why?

Here's my rainbow so far, people in black don't have enough content for me to judge. Far from definitive though, I expect by tomorrow many of those yellows will be in green or orange, and a couple of oranges in red.

Ricochet (in the clouds strumming his harp)

RadicalFuzz
Draconus
golden

LoRab
Epignosis
Matt
MacDougall
Boomslang
MetalMarsh
sig
Elohcin/FZ
juliets
thellama73
nijuukyugou
Dom
DrWilgy

Long Con
DharmaHelper
Sorsha
JaggedJimmyJay
Black Rock

bcornett24
Bass_the_Clever
Spacedaisy
Timmer
Tranq

Golden wrote:So, I find you suspicious because you didn't find rico's behaviour odd... yesterday... before rico died.

And even though it is now clear that Rico's behaviour was intentionally odd, you still don't find it bad...

Because what should matter is that zebra is dead?

Zebra's death has nothing to do with your defending of rico.

I found his self-voting odd, and I said so. I didn't find his arguments odd, because I didn't have a good reference for what a typical Ricochet argument would look like. I should remind you that Ricochet was arguing with two RYMers, both of which have a history of big arguments that people tend to gloss over, and that my initial post interpreted that as Rico being caught up in their antics.

Golden wrote:Well, you see, the thing about multiple teams is that if you are bad, this cuts both ways.

You can say 'maybe they jumped on the bandwagon to get townie points thinking he was clearly on the other baddie team'
And I can say 'a baddie can defend him believing he was probably not bad to get townie points'.

Ultimately it isn't about the choice of tactic, it's about how genuine it seems.

Sure, not saying that I'm going to just start voting for everyone that voted for Ricochet yesterday, just that it's an angle worth looking at. For me, that's especially the case with the quieter/less argumentative, similar to how on A World Reborn, two of three anti-town players had jumped onto the sig wagon one after the other.

MacDougall wrote:I don't believe as scum you knew he was town. I also didn't scum read him. That isn't why you are reading mafia. You are reading mafia because you went out of your way to invent the concept that he was actually trying and that he posts were of value, when they were not. Arguing that he provoked Zebra into posts as a defense is revisionist and strawman.

It's not revisionist, it's exactly what I said yesterday.

HamburgerBoy wrote:Didn't RYM only pick up the RVS concept after Jimmy and Sloonei made their first pilgrimage to the Syndicate? So why can't Rico's case about you and bcornett24 being scumbuddies because of timing be a case of a silly little day 1 (correction, day 0) theory rather than deliberate evil? Dumb cases at least usually generate content, which is better than just lurking or bandwagoning.

MacDougall wrote:Voting for HamburgerBoy

Cool. Now reply to my earlier post. Argue with me.

Golden wrote:On what basis would it be what caused him to be nightkilled? It had NO MEANING. It literally was utterly pointless. What thing in there could have been the thing that got zebra killed? Unless people were just annoyed with the noise, and if so this still doesn't give the content meaning.

I don't know why zebra died, although I do have a theory that it was because he described himself as unkillable.

I don't know why you are placing so much significance into Ricochet's intent when the thing that should matter is that Zebra posted a lot and Zebra is now dead. I'd argue at the very least that Zebra felt threatened, especially before the anti-Ricochet sentiment began to build. Maybe some of the content won't be useful after all, but I'm sure as hell not dismissing it just because it wasn't intended to be.

HamburgerBoy wrote:Especially since now there's apparently a Recruitment mafia thing going on which would hint multiple teams for me.

Adding onto this point, I'll say that if there are multiple teams and if the teams know there are multiple teams (they'd have to right? based on team size), that should invigorate them to push that Ricochet bandwagon, being that they legitimately viewed his posts as suspicious and wanted those sweet townie points before people knew with certainty that there were multiple teams.

Also, maybe worth noting that Zebra actually waffled on the Ricochet vote towards the end. So did Black Rock iirc. I need to get a rainbow started.

Ricochet wrote:Placeholding is frowned upon and what goddamn results do you have to view within an hour of D2 commencing?

Placing a preliminary vote on JaggedJimmyJay for my conspiracy idea before, and because I don't like hitting 'View results' all the time.

Golden wrote:That's because it conflates zebra being a confirmed scum with the idea that it relates to the 'content' created by rico, even though that content is void of meaning and has nothing to do with why zebra died.

Yeah, I definitely disagree that the content had no meaning. What if the argument between Zebra and Rico is part of what caused Zebra to be nightkilled, for example?

Do you know why Zebra died btw?

MacDougall wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:

Golden wrote:I still think HBoys attitude towards Rico deserves a bit of scrutiny today.

Rico's behaviour was notably bizarre, and now we know it was completely intentional. I'm not sure how HB got to the point of it 'not being so bad'... and I wonder if he was trying to get some cred for rico not coming back bad.

I don't see it as bad at all. Ricochet got Zebra, confirmed scum, to generate a ton of posts to sift through. This is why I appreciate all content and arguments, even if I disagree with them.

This is an unusual defense. It doesn't feel authentic.

How do you expect me to defend against the accusation that I sided with Rico because I was scum and "knew" he was town? Especially since now there's apparently a Recruitment mafia thing going on which would hint multiple teams for me. Do you disagree with my point, and if so why? What is inauthentic about it? Zebra would probably have half the posts she ended up having were it not for Rico's "bad"/"no-possible-civ-mindset" posting.

Golden wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:The conspiracy side of me also makes me want to put Jimmy into the longer-wavelength side of the color spectrum. If you're going to curse a teammate to make them look like a victim, it makes sense to do it early, and that Jimmy was able to give his own conspiracy candidate to blame gave it additional power. I don't really buy that llama was so threatened as to silence Jimmy.

This is believable. I wouldn't put a vote there without other evidence, but it is something that I can see as possible, especially given it gives 'apathetic' Jimmy the ability to post less without really taking any heat for it.

Btw - do you understand why Jimmy is calling you superman?

I think so, and that he did actually put him on the townier side for me day 1. Not because he seemingly gave me a good read, buddying makes me paranoid, but Jimmy is usually a big advocate of generating lots of content and testing the waters day 1. Had he indicated somehow that he thought Ricochet was scum, or that I was scum for defending him, I would read that as not the town Jimmy I know.

Golden wrote:I still think HBoys attitude towards Rico deserves a bit of scrutiny today.

Rico's behaviour was notably bizarre, and now we know it was completely intentional. I'm not sure how HB got to the point of it 'not being so bad'... and I wonder if he was trying to get some cred for rico not coming back bad.

I don't see it as bad at all. Ricochet got Zebra, confirmed scum, to generate a ton of posts to sift through. This is why I appreciate all content and arguments, even if I disagree with them.

Right now I'm reading zebra's post history on the assumption that she wasn't expecting to be the first nightkill victim, i.e. that there isn't going to be too much intentional misdirection to begin with. After Rico (town), it looks like she also suspected and/or argued with me (towniest town that ever towned), RadicalFuzz (a pretty strong town read for me), and Mac (kinda neutral but rereading at least some of his posts, I have to admit that he's less chaotic this game and a gth town read for now). Her list of six was kind of random and as someone pointed out, some of the names on it were people she had barely/hadn't at all mentioned, like sig.

The conspiracy side of me also makes me want to put Jimmy into the longer-wavelength side of the color spectrum. If you're going to curse a teammate to make them look like a victim, it makes sense to do it early, and that Jimmy was able to give his own conspiracy candidate to blame gave it additional power. I don't really buy that llama was so threatened as to silence Jimmy.

Positions, huh? Can any regulars here give an idea on what kind of game mode this is? I'm imagining something like the circular cardgame setup where each player has a set position, and can have certain interactions with neighboring players depending on their positions.

And RIH Zebra.

Creepiest monkey I've ever seen.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... it2%29.jpg

Sweet, glad you're still with us Rico, you were delicious.

Mac, you said earlier that him being lynched as scum was the least likely outcome, in spite of him having voted for himself earlier as well. Why?

Sweet, poll is closed. I'm very skeptical that Rico has some ability that allows him to discern the scum on his wagon, but here's hoping (assuming he isn't scum).

I see no reason not to vote for Ricochet now.

a2thezebra wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:That idea's worth noting, Mac. HamburgerBoy has replaced juliets on my list of the six to potentially be killed by me. Killed. KILLED.

Why juliets?

Because she defended herself well, and her defense seemed genuine. You on the other hand, are only making me question your posts' authenticity more and more.

OK, I was wondering since she isn't joining the Ricochet bandwagon as you seem to want people to do.

a2thezebra wrote:That idea's worth noting, Mac. HamburgerBoy has replaced juliets on my list of the six to potentially be killed by me. Killed. KILLED.

Why juliets?

MacDougall wrote:The only chaos you see out of me as a civilian is early game to provoke discourse and when I am engaging in a firefight.

I wasn't exclusively talking about your behavior in this game. Golden and zebra asked me what possible pro-town motive exists for Rico playing the way he is this game. You've just given the motive (not that I hadn't already said it but no one was buying it just from me), so danke.

Actually, it's funny that llama seemed to be one of the first to compare Mac and Rico. I don't like how he's contributing to the usual day 1 sig thing though, e.g. taking issue with use of the word "interesting". He didn't address Jay's suspicions back when Jay could still talk, which is what I'd imagine is a factor in Jay's choice today. I'm not upset that Rico is leading, but of the three I'm happy leaving my vote where it's at right now.

Golden wrote:Rico is not making poor arguments.

He isn't making arguments at all.

He is merely spouting nonsense and being a distraction. He says he is trying to catch baddies, but he has put literally zero effort into it. Not one of his cases demonstrates any attempt at any critical thought. The only thing he is putting effort into is being a distraction.

I see no civ motivation for that, and despite all of your defences of rico, and saying you think my question is manipluative or whatever, you (and anyone else) still haven't actually been able to present any sensible objective civ theoretical motivation for that behaviour.

He's definitely made arguments, even if not all of them were committed. I don't really see the difference between Rico's scattershot approach and Mac's (which, as I believe you already admitted, he can do as town or scum). Plus, it has been hinted that Rico would have a role-specific reason for doing as such.

I'll just say that based on A World Reborn, I'm not seeing a different LoRab this game. Her argument with Rico seems reasonable and in line with what I've seen from others, even though I disagree (regarding rainbows and coin flips and other silliness). Epi went hard after her and started that wagon from what I can tell, but it's really based on LoRab having a safer/waffley tone. I'm ambivalent on that case. I also don't like Sorsha's post against LoRab, basically saying LoRab made a confusing post and that LoRab is usually clear. The subject matter (day 0/the poll/old roles) seemed inherently a little confusing and I don't see Sorsha's attack there as reasonable, and that pings me a bit more because during Talking Heads, Sorsha was one of the players I found myself agreeing with more strongly. During A World Reborn, Sorsha also used Matt's predilection towards wild/confusing theories against him; different target, different case, but together I think Sorsha doesn't look good.

I'll read more on LoRab in a bit, but not really liking that as an alternative to Rico.

DrWilgy wrote:HBB's statements about non wagon votes was pingy.

I'd like your elaboration on this. I definitely remember spectating during the Talking Heads, seeing one of your large analyses on bandwagon jumping and assigning various values to determine who looked best and worst, thinking at first "Wow I love that post", then moving to "Wait a sec, I disagree with his logic here on at least one major point". I forgot what that point was (iirc it had to do with early voters rather than tie-breakers), and in any case I had you as a town read that game up until Mac told us his teammates, but I'd love for you to to tell me specifically why you don't agree.

Golden wrote:Why did you call me out for apparently 'not answering a question', while not answering the question I asked you? What is your civ motivation for rico's behaviour?

Because I felt it was a loaded question; I'd have to find Rico's behavior disagreeable to begin with to answer it, beyond what I already told Zebra regarding day 0/1 content being a good thing in general. I'm not that familiar with Rico and he was one of the people I most most ambiguous on during Talking Heads, especially early game.

Golden wrote:Where is your mindset, in which you defend rico over several posts, but also appear to set me up in this post as his teammate bussing him?

a2thezebra wrote:Everything HBoy has said regarding Rico is leading me to believe he's desperately trying to save his teammate.

Am I really defending him so strongly? The lynch looks like it was already set before I even started playing. My first post in the game was just to say that the Mac/Zebra/Ricochet lovefest looked meaningless to me. I don't think he looks better than those other two, nor do I think he looks worse. After that, I just asked for a reference to Rico's scum game because I admitted I wasn't convinced like others, and realize that my ignorance of his playstyle (in contrast to Mac and Zebra both of whom I know from RYM) may be a contributing factor.

Also, golden, one of your points involving Fuzz and his towniness...

3) The way you have added your own content even when it is going against popular opinion without any reason to do so.

What do I have to gain by defending Rico?

sig, let's eat llama today.

Going to break this one up quickly...

Golden regarding Rico's behavior wrote:Unfathomable as a civilian. Fathomable as indy. Fathomable as scum.

What I was looking for was more the specific instances of his behavior. I did see your early day 0 poll post concerning his dismissal-yet-concern over the results, so I'll acknowledge that as a reasonable point, especially since I'm not in a position to discuss previous roles on the Syndicate (except Xander I guess). That one aside, and that he's now apparently given up, what is so unfathomable? So he cherry-picked some stuff involving Zebra's day 0 meta, not great, but arguments with Zebra always end up long and impassioned. I don't see it as unfathomable that he might get caught up in some silly argument as a town player.

Golden wrote:What does this have to do with searching MY post history?

I was searching your history just for posts containing the term 'Rico' to get a better grasp on your case against him. Didn't mean to give an impression that I gave your entire history a thorough ISO.

Golden wrote:Is this you setting up the end point of your post? I'm unclear, but are you saying that 'if rico flips scum, golden is his teammate'? Because thats how this post is reading to me.

Feel free to interpret it this way; for a lynch like this, I'm not going to award many townie points simply for having the right vote. That you were the very first person means you'll still get some points, but since nearly everyone at least acknowledges that he is playing weird this game, and has been since before day 1, it gives scum plenty of incentive to bus early.

Golden wrote:I gave Fuzz four numbered reasons why I specifically found him so townie, so this is blatantly incorrect and demonstrates that you haven't read my iso very carefully at all.

Just checked through your post history again quickly and saw that you quoted the reasons; I'll have to give everything a much more thorough re-read later, but right now it looks like I was mistaken regarding you and Fuzz.

I'll continue later.

I'll be spotty on and off probably up to the deadline, just replying as I go.

a2thezebra wrote:So you seem to be hesitant to vote for Rico because of the great uncertainty that surrounds them. I can understand that.

What I can't understand is how you would interpret some of his ideas such as me and b24 being teammates by posting near each other as a genuine case. Am I misreading here? You really think that it's possible that Rico has been genuine with all of their opinions and volume so far and that they're just having an off day regarding winning others over with their logic? Tell me I'm misreading that you're really suggesting that.

linki - You lost me.

Not just an off day, I was saying that even being deliberately misleading can have its purposes as long as it isn't done for too long. I agree that the bcornett/zebra connection is weak and disagree with his case; I don't agree that it makes him bad. A lot of people commented that this game's day 0 had a lot more activity than usual, and that was largely thanks to him (and you, and Mac). His vote is still on himself so it looks like he's given up, so at the same time I can't give him credit for going after real cases anymore, but at least he seemed to be trying different stuff.

I don't care that he's not winning people over; a lot of people just seem bothered that he's not playing up to par and/or is being a distraction.

And that's not to say I'm not taking anything Rico is saying seriously either; honestly, compared to some of the stuff a townie rundontwalk (for example) can throw out there, Rico has been a lucid as anyone. A person that makes their townie motivations clear isn't always useful. Since Rico is almost certainly going to be lynched, here's an obvious reason a town player would want to look lynchable: they have a good power role and want mafia to target less lynchable candidates.

Going to bed, will try to check in before the deadline a bit, but I'll still be in the middle of work by the time the poll ends.

See, my problem is the "this". I still don't know what he's doing that badly. Would town make a bad case? Maybe. Some town players may just be total nubs and never make a good case in their life. Rico is evidently a "good player", but that doesn't preclude him from off-days or simply being wrong. Didn't RYM only pick up the RVS concept after Jimmy and Sloonei made their first pilgrimage to the Syndicate? So why can't Rico's case about you and bcornett24 being scumbuddies because of timing be a case of a silly little day 1 (correction, day 0) theory rather than deliberate evil? Dumb cases at least usually generate content, which is better than just lurking or bandwagoning. Mac earlier said something like "Rico isn't even denying that his posts suck, he's obviously doing this on purpose", but posts like that don't allow room for explanation. It's not like someone can create a mess to see what it generates and admit to doing it.

Now, if Rico survives this lynch and keeps holding onto the same day 0/1 cases for the rest of the game, then I'll push him far down the rainbow, but I'm not voting for a guy just because his motivations seem unclear on day 1.

a2thezebra wrote:1. They're trying to shift the focus of the thread on to them, possibly away from other teammates who would otherwise get too much spotlight.

Interesting theory if you know who he might be covering for. If the goal was still to get out of it in one piece, he obviously is failing there. Considering that he's been facing heat since the middle of day 0 (i.e. no lynch risk yet), I find this theory a bit unlikely.

a2thezebra wrote:2. They're hoping by making it look like they're trying to get votes, not enough people will vote for them by the end of the day, or perhaps game.

I could see this working on RYM where a supertown Jay may work town into not settling on a lynch too early, and where lynches are often by narrow margins, but not here where the results often seem called far in advance of the deadline (even when the votes haven't been placed yet). Certainly not for a game-long tactic.

a2thezebra wrote:3. They were feigning supatown to the nth degree in the beginning and have now gone full WIFOM since being called out on it by multiple players.

Was Rico feigning supatown earlier? I saw some crap given over excessive posting of rainbows, others complaining that he's posting too much and it's counter-productive, but not really supatown. In fact, even in Talking Heads, there were many people unaccustomed to JJJ's posting style and complained that it was counter-productive to the game. Since Rico was runner-up for most active that game, it sounds more like another way of saying "It's only day 1 and I already have to put up with this? Bleh, lynch him".

Going to switch off of Eloh and vote DharmaHelper now for reasons above. I know others here suspected him too.

How would you describe his behavior? I searched through your post history and I'll admit that he's being indirect at times, especially more in relatively recent posts than his earliest. I am starting to see the possibility that he's a scum that was caught early, and is now intentionally shooting himself in the foot to distance himself from his scummates and give them townie points when he flips.

Incidentally, searching your history also led me to this (which I see had a couple back-and-forth posts with Fuzz)...

Golden wrote:I don't think the point here is that they 'give information whether they are asked or not'. I think the point is that I do think voting off-wagon is justifiable, but people should provide their justifications.

For instance, lets say right now my top two suspects were Rico and, lets say JJJ for the sake of argument (I'm reading JJJ as civ in actuality, but I choose him because I don't think he is actually going to take any votes, especially given he is cursed). Now, if given the choice between voting one of the two, wouldn't my vote be more impactful on rico, given rico might be lynched, rather than off-wagon on JJ, even though it would be a legitimate suspicion? As a civ, isn't my interest in choosing my suspect that is more likely to be lynched?

For me, a civilian voting off-wagon (at least, after the point at which the wagons have formed) is effectively a civilian saying they don't suspect either of the wagon candidates. Or at least not enough to give them a vote. Otherwise they'd vote on the wagon. I don't think it is a big leap from there to say why.

How does bandwagoning impact anything in this hypothetical? You're saying that it is better to vote for a player likely to be lynched because they are likely to be lynched; that is almost contradictory, if a player is going to be lynched then any votes at that point and beyond have zero value. It seems to be built on a pessimistic assumption regardless; any lynch where one person is far in the lead is a sad one unless there's really good evidence. Also, since the topic is indirect answering of questions, what apparently started this:

Golden wrote:1) there are 24 hours to go, so it's hardly time to be talking about where the major wagons in this lynch are... if I think your vote is to be criticised, I'll wait until I see where the wagons actually are and your vote is at the end of the day
2) Just because someone does something scum might do, does not mean that particular thing is the only thing I take into account when making a read. If I felt like you were deliberately skirting creating any opinions on the main candidates by voting off-wagon, then my opinion of you would probably start to fall from 'top town read', but it wouldn't immediately send you to 'worst scum read', either.

You didn't directly answer why you found Fuzz specifically so townie, you just kinda backed off on your praise as if you were buddying a townie to make him uncomfortable. "If I felt like you were deliberately skirting...", you're answering "Why am I town?" with "If I felt you were scum, I wouldn't find you town".

Gun to head, golden is scum.

Can people suspecting Ricochet give an example of a game where he was scum and behaved similarly to this one? I hate it when I see a case that goes like "X is a good player, they're playing weird and their posts suck this game, I don't know why they'd be doing this, they must be scum".

OK, made it through the full thread, voting for Elohcin for reasons aforementioned although I'll be happy to switch later. A few pings for day 1 so far...

DharmaHelper wrote:1. RE: Fuzz, I'm going to have to go back and look at who exactly it was that started to look in his direction, but the Fuzz suspicion seemed opportunistic to me and I am surprised it was considered as seriously as I remember it being.

DharmaHelper wrote:Circling back to Fuzzy, DFaraday called his behaviour "weird" and "unusual". Kind of half-baked if you ask me.

Dharma was one of those that started to look in Fuzz's direction, and I really don't like how he chose DFaraday as the one to single out. Based purely on A World Reborn, DFaraday is a lighter poster and was lynched more for that than anyone thinking he was indie, i.e., an easy target, and I'll just take a leap and Dharma is sizing him up for that this game. Gun to head scum.

juliets wrote:

Ricochet wrote:All I'm reading in juliets' post is I'm following Mac's, Epig's and Sorsha's train of thoughts.

Yes, that is exactly what i am saying. Is there something wrong with that? Sometimes people post their thoughts to persuade others and whether or not that was their intent, I was persuaded to look hard at Lorab as a result of those posts. That's how the game works.

This is exactly the same juliets I saw last game, and it's just as suspicious as ever to me. I know she said that she was playing her usual game back then as well, but I definitely can't ignore this. Gun to head scum.

a2thezebra wrote:I'm fairly certain there are two curse roles, even if Draconus and/or JJJ is faking their curse.

Weird post, trying to see it as a roleclaim/fakeclaim but can't. Best thing I can come up with is that it was bait which Black Rock took. I hounded Sloonei incorrectly recently on RYM #91 along similar lines and that turned out wrong, but just noting it now.

Wew, just made it through 19 pages of day 0 and got almost nothing out of that. I'm going to go back and investigate the merits of Rico's case on Zebra lurking and whatever else as objectively as possible; my gut sees Zebra as typical Zebra and Mac as typical Mac throwing out a lot of bullshit and the whole thing being meaningless, but that a number of Syndicaters find Rico suspicious makes me think I'm just getting lazy, so I'll try there.

The only ping I have that no one commented on was Elohcin's post here. From the few games I've played with her, it seemed a little out of meta. "Confirmed townie" on day 0 is obviously a joke/exaggeration unless it's a free peek, and I see Eloh as more of a reaction-type player (e.g. engages other conversations rather than starting totally new angles of attack). It's mild, but considering that people apparently see Rico as scum, I would gth her as a teammate of his right now.

Oh, I'll also add that I don't like a number of Dharma's posts, but it's the same feeling I had in Frisky Dingo where we were both Xticles so whatever. Ignoring the rainbow list stuff, this was one of the more intentionally misleading posts in the game so far imo. I'd gth him town still but I don't think I gave much opinion on anything during Frisky Dingo so this time I'm saying it.