The Syndicate

Golden wrote:@Sig - I agree that people tend to oversee bussing. I think bussing only happens when a player sees a demonstrable benefit.

For the record, I agree with this too.

Dyslexicon wrote:Furthermore on Zebra - She's saying the problem with lynching a lurker is that there little info to be gain from it (fair comment, I agree), but then follows up by voting MM who's lurkish at this point, and basically what happens is MP sifting through lurkers to lynch (which I don't have a problem with really on his part), but it's like Zebra is getting others to find a case she can jump on while she plays the hero defending people.

So the not wanting lurkers lynched, then why 1. self vote when she was a lurker and 2. vote another lurker?

But see, I'm okay with lynching lurkers as long as they're not being lynched simply for being lurkers. This is why I'm comfortable with some of the options MP has mentioned. I went over my self-vote extensively and I'm not going to again just because you want to pretend that you don't understand it.

ika wrote:i like how zebra complains about inconsistency when she is self admitted to make things up

What does inconsistency have to do with making things up?

Golden wrote: We'd do better to do more lynching of lurkers here, I think.

I cannot stress enough how much I disagree with this view.

Dyslexicon wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Wait, Dizzy, I'm confused. In your first catchup post you say your first instinct says you should buy it, but then mostly in your second catchup post you start scum reading her behavior. Can you walk me through this? You lost me.

I guess it was my first instinct (and would probably generally be to such a play), but it's like she's playing it up too much. Too much emphasis that she is being sacrificial and don't want you lynched cause she is such a good town, and oh, how hard it is to find other people to suspect, who would ever do this as mafia, must be town right, or else she'd just bandwagon, and oh she is probably getting lynched (way too many hours before day ends to say that) - and what happens? Votes are off her like that. I see a lot of people not seeming interested in her lynch. Sig, among others (who I suspect).

It just doesn't read town play to me at all. I don't know why it seems to fly with people. Is this normal for her town meta or something? It's not the self vote in itself, it's how it's played off afterwards. She is clearly invested in her surviving.

Okay that's it you're just making shit up. Playing it up too much? Not one time did I imply that I was "such a good town" for self-voting. Quite the opposite, actually. I self-voted because I found MP more valuable even as a potential baddie then my role as town. How is that patting myself on the back? In fact, how is it not the opposite? Then you just go on to paraphrase my actions and color them as if they are disingenuous while giving absolutely no reason to perceive them as disingenuous to begin with.

Of course I'm invested in my surviving. WHY WOULDN'T I BE?! I have said multiple times both when I initially self-voted and in my response to you, that the only reason I self-voted was because I felt that my mislynching was inevitable in the first place.

Silverwolf wrote: I'm gonna give you the same consideration you've been giving me all game and tell you I don't give a fuck what you think. I've given plenty of thought on this so laugh at me all you want.

I don't care and I'm ignoring you for the rest of the day.

That's not an accurate impression of how much consideration that I've given you, because I do give a fuck what you think. That's why I find it worth pointing out that your read of IAWY seems extremely inconsistent, and that your response to me pointing that out only made it more clear.

MovingPictures07 wrote:zebra, re: your post on Sloonei that I requested, I am largely in agreement with your observations. I'd say what looks worst in that batch of posts to me easily is Sloonei's vote post for zebra.

Thanks for substantiating some of the stuff you found when you ISOed him.

You're welcome.

Dyslexicon wrote: Zebra and the self vote and then immediately being very committed to the game. Gurl. I see it as pretending to sacrifice, and then pretending to be unable to find a good scum case (towny right? Not wanting to just bandwagon. No.) ISO people to slightly defend them, like with Sloonie (makes Sloonie probs town if Zebra is mafia). Me no likey.

This isn't an unreasonable suspicion, but you still don't get that it wasn't really a sacrifice in my view since I figured that I would be mislynched anyway. I still think that to an extent, although there are a lot more people town-reading me now then there were before.

Golden wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:just that I'm not automatically mafia for being quiet.

Oh, no, I never thought you were playing specifically to a mafia meta. But, I do think that a lack of reads and connections (no matter how many posts you've got) is somewhat of a mafia meta on you, at least thats how I feel.

Ah I gotcha. Yeah, you're not wrong. My mafia meta tends to have narrower focus than my town meta.

ika wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

Silverwolf wrote: IAWY-MP's points are a very superficial and amount to playstyle and I have him back at null

Silverwolf wrote: IAWY I would vote for and lynch in a heartbeat

Silverwolf wrote:VOTE INAWORDYES

Hahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahhahaha what the fuck.

whata bout it? if MP is scum voting scum its win-win

the thing is that most if not all setups have some protetive where numbers for sucms are the key so they can jsut go bussing willy nilly. if MP is bussing hes jsut gonna shoot himself in the foot long term

You completely missed the point. I'm not saying that MP could be bussing IAWY, and I'm not saying that Silverwolf was saying that either. I'm saying that her read of IAWY is hilariously inconsistent.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Dyslexicon wrote:Wait, how the hell did all the votes move from Zebra? I'm not currently thinking that is a good idea. Fishy self vote I want to sacrifice but I want to live is fishy.

Wait, Dizzy, I'm confused. In your first catchup post you say your first instinct says you should buy it, but then mostly in your second catchup post you start scum reading her behavior. Can you walk me through this? You lost me.

No, he voiced suspicion of me in both of his catch-up posts. He only said that his first instinct told him to buy it before immediately going on to see it as disingenuous.

Silverwolf wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

Silverwolf wrote: IAWY-MP's points are a very superficial and amount to playstyle and I have him back at null

Silverwolf wrote: IAWY I would vote for and lynch in a heartbeat

Silverwolf wrote:VOTE INAWORDYES

Hahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahhahaha what the fuck.

Yes, hilarious. If you look at my earlier posts I had a scumread on him. He's better than the other people up for lynch, even as a null.

Thank You for laughing at me when I'm in a shit mood. That totally helps.

Helps what?

Is it not sensible to laugh when someone says that the case against a certain player is superficial and amounts to playstyle, then immediately says they would lynch that same player in a heart beat before switching their vote for him? Your earlier posts don't help this, they make it worse actually. Here's the timeline as I understand it:

1. You scumread IAWY.
2. You say that the case against him is superficial and amounts to playstyle, and that IAWY is "back at null" for you.
3. You say that you would vote for him and lynch him in a heartbeat.
4. You vote for him.

I'm sorry, why am I not supposed to laugh again?

sig wrote:I was agaisnt the CFD last game and look what that got me, so I need to think it over a bit. However, as of right now I'm agaisnt it. He doesn't really seem scummy at all. What is the case on him?

After reading him over I'm just seeing a culture clash.

I agree with all of this. MP provided the main case on him with his ISO.

Golden wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:Both sig and Golden have used the "you should know better" shtick before on me specifically, so I think it's fair. Sorry if it irks you though.

it is fair. But, I don't think I should have known quiet zebra was civ zebra, because zebra has been playing this quiet meta on both sides recently. You've been mixing it up.

I like you now, though.

I don't expect you to think that I'm civ for being quiet, just that I'm not automatically mafia for being quiet.

In any case, I'm glad that you like me now. :P

Silverwolf wrote: IAWY-MP's points are a very superficial and amount to playstyle and I have him back at null

Silverwolf wrote: IAWY I would vote for and lynch in a heartbeat

Silverwolf wrote:VOTE INAWORDYES

Hahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahhahaha what the fuck.

Dyslexicon wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:Exactly, it is a stupid idea. Therefore, no one would see it coming!

I don't like this, though I'm pretty sure I'd make this post as any alignment cause I'm a troll.

a2thezebra wrote:Right, and I totally understand your frustration because I've been a major lynch candidate before because of ika as well. I know I'm the last one with a right to say this, but we need to decide on someone to lynch that isn't me or you.

So you do want to be saved. Why do you want others to decide who that is for you? This is just scummy. Rawr.

Again I think this is just you either misunderstanding or misrepresenting what my self-vote meant in the first place. It's not heroic, it's not a breakdown, it was simply a statement that I would prefer to die sooner rather than later if it means saving MP. Of course I'd rather we lynch someone who is neither me nor MP, but at the time that wasn't looking likely. If you would make the former post as any alignment, how are you remotely justified in not liking it because I posted it when you have no idea how much of a troll I can be?

Dyslexicon wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:I'm town and I'd like to keep playing, but keeping MP alive takes the top priority right now.

VOTE A2THEZEBRA

- What is this play? Sacrificial. Should I buy it? First instinct says yes. Then it's all "unlike when I'm scum I will not make things up, so I'm totes town being heroic". Meh. Why the "I have no scum reads" when you, Zebra, clearly have disagreements with players. I.e saying Golden should know better. Why not at least vote another lurker?
- Speaking of, I kind of don't want to see "you should know better" or "you're misrepping me!", I don't know it just irks me lol.

I'm not sure where you got that "unlike when I'm scum I will not make things up". I totally make shit up when I'm town, all the time. Where did I say or even imply otherwise? I also don't know where you got "I'm totes town being heroic." Granted, my self-vote was not a breakdown or anything, but I wouldn't call it heroic either. I figured that my mislynch was inevitable so I might as well get it over with and save MP in the process who I strongly believe is town. It's not that complicated and it's certainly not heroic. I also find it very hard to believe that you legitimately take issue with me having no scum reads simply because I'm constantly having disagreements with people. Are you seriously implying that I should read people as scummy just for disagreeing with them? For shame. I also find it laughable that you ask me to vote for another lurker when I've made it abundantly clear that I am against going for lurkers in general, not just because I was among them at the time of Frog's crusade.

Both sig and Golden have used the "you should know better" shtick before on me specifically, so I think it's fair. Sorry if it irks you though.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Golden wrote:What MM fails to account for in his case on sloonei is the extent to which sloonei already town read or trusted ika vs frog. If I came on asking people who I should vote for and a person I didn't have any reason to trust gave me one answer and a person I'm reading as town gave me another, I know I'd dismiss one and focus on the other.

I fail to see how Frog being Sloonei's top suspect only a few hours beforehand supports this statement.

A lot can change in a few hours regarding reads, you know this just as well as I do.

Golden wrote:What MM fails to account for in his case on sloonei is the extent to which sloonei already town read or trusted ika vs frog. If I came on asking people who I should vote for and a person I didn't have any reason to trust gave me one answer and a person I'm reading as town gave me another, I know I'd dismiss one and focus on the other.

This also sums up my thoughts on that particular part of MM's case on Sloonei quite nicely.

Sloonei wrote:Sig came in and tried to drag as much content out of things as he could. I'd like that if it didn't feel like such an effort to distance oneself from the label of low participation or scumminess.
Let's VOTE SIG

While not his first post, this seems like an honest entrance into hunting baddies for this game. I'm not sure I agree but it feels genuine.

After some quick back-and-forth regarding that sig vote, Sloonei switches to Frog here.

Sloonei wrote:Frog for introducing himself by telling us all he's town and then posing a question that isn't related to anything going on right now.

I mentioned after reading his ISO initially that Sloonei could stand to widen his focus a bit, and the reason I said that is because much of Sloonei's ISO concerns Frog. The same was true for me until not that long ago, so it would be hypocritical to criticize him for this, but I do think it's worth pointing out in case anyone thinks that a Sloonei with narrow focus is a baddie Sloonei, or the opposite. If it's aligment-indicative either way then it's worth mentioning.

Sloonei wrote:

Frog wrote:RVS - is "Random Voting Stage" - it's the part of the beginning of the game where votes are almost entirely random, and the first 50-100 posts are jokes, gifs, and mostly devoid of content. I don't like that method of gameplay when my win con requires that I solve the game. Which is why I brought up a strategy discussion instead.

I know what RVS refers to, but I've seen a lot of people have a lot of different definitions and interpretations of it. You seem to be opposed to it. I come from a community that thrives on it. But your concern about joke posts does not need to apply here. We are very serious about our random nonsense voting. I believe throwing things against the wall and seeing what sticks is a good way to start the game, so that's always what I will do. It's how I start solving the game.
I also like strategy discussion. But I don't necessarily think talking strategy is a town-tell. So I'll need more content out of you if I'm going to start reading you as town.

I like this post for a number of biased reasons. When I was demonstrating what I take issue with about Frog's proposal of going after the lower posters, a number of people took issue with my spam-influenced demonstration by pointing out that Frog was judging the potential alignments of players not by post number quantity but their content quantity. The reason that I didn't feel that that was a relevant clarification was partly because of what Sloonei says here. Content is not objective. Even off-topic posts and pure fluff can serve to develop alignments and opinions, so Frog's notion that content can be measure objectively, and that he's the one for the job, is ludicrous to me. Frog values strategy and does not value RVS. Sloonei values both. I actually value RVS over strategic approaches, because in my experience players that focus on strategy either use a lot of it to convince people that they are town when they are not (initially Frog struck me as this) or they simply use it as a genuine method of going after baddies when in the long run it is rarely if ever useful (this is how I see Frog at this point). The reason I emphasize this post is because I am biased towards it for helping me illustrate my view on these things, and I don't want to be swayed to town read Sloonei simply because of this.

Sloonei wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:What's good? I ate some brownies last night that still haven't completely worn off.

My phone died ;__;

You have any leftovers? I could use some.

Nope, there were fourteen to start with and between four people sharing them I ate five. None remain.

Sloonei wrote:I am lacking energy

I think the failure to take in the implications and importance of this post, in addition to Sloonei referring to himself in third person earlier among other hints, has clouded MM's judgment (as well as anyone else who genuinely suspects Sloonei) because all of Sloonei's posts after this one could be read as inconsistent due to being baddie-motivated as opposed to being inconsistent due to Sloonei being exhausted with the game in general, particularly thanks to a number of back-and-forth conflicts with Frog. This inconsistency being...

Sloonei wrote:

ika wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Somebody tell me who I should vote for. I am not going to be able to read this thread tonight. Or tomorrow. Or the next day. I probably should have stayed on the sidelines.

moving picutre

Why?

Sloonei wrote:

Frog wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Somebody tell me who I should vote for. I am not going to be able to read this thread tonight. Or tomorrow. Or the next day. I probably should have stayed on the sidelines.

I already gave you 4 names, let me lead
[*]Marshmellow
[*]Pilfirmous
[*]Dr Wigly
[*]A2Zebra

I won't vote metalmarsh because being flaky and elusive early on is his MO. I won't vote Pligifudhdjd because they're a stranger and I don't want to vote a stranger on Day 1 without substance to back me up. Zebra is sometimes quiet and sometimes aggressive early on. Her quietness, in my experience, has been either because she's scum or is busy. I could vote for her.
Wilgy is normally a vocal player but Imm pretty sure he's currently in a tense late-game situation in Spirited Away so his semi-absence here would be explainable.

Zebra is my top choice of these names, I guess. I'll have a look.

...these two posts. I believe this was MM's main point against Sloonei. The reason I don't share MM's suspicion for it is because I feel that Sloonei's exhaustion has been overlooked, and I also think that Sloonei's differing responses to those who answered his question of who to vote for can be explained by the responses being different, rather that Sloonei being opportunistic or disingenuous. ika provides Sloonei with a name and no explanation. Simply, "moving picutre". I don't think it's out of the question for Sloonei to ask for some elaboration on that answer, given that the entire post is a name and nothing more. Frog is different, because not only has Frog has established exactly what his approach to this game is going to be, he has emphasized this approach to Sloonei in particular over the course of the game so far. Therefore, even if Frog provided no explanation to his lynch options just as ika did, it wouldn't be inconsistent for Sloonei not to ask for more elaboration because Sloonei is already well-aware of why Frog wants to go after that particular group of people. But on top of that, Frog did restate his reasons for going after this group in the response to Sloonei's initial question anyway, so no elaboration was required even if Frog hadn't already made his modus operandi quite clear.

I also don't think MM's suspicion of this supposed inconsistency is justified when looking at how exactly Sloonei responded to Frog here. Yes, he didn't ask for elaboration, but he didn't jump on board either. He simply said that he'll "have a look" regarding the selection that Frog gave him.

Sloonei wrote:VOTE A2THEZEBRA, happy!?

...but then this happened. I ain't mad, but I can see why MM and others would find it a little baffling. My ultimate point with Sloonei's more recent posts is that I honestly feel that what he said and his action here can be chalked up to his lack of energy rather than any baddie-motivated reason.

Let me know what you guys think.

I'll make a post showing what sticks out to me.

Or Long Con?

MovingPictures07 wrote:Or maybe zebra, since she already ISOed him, can provide some tangible details for all of us to discuss.

Regarding Sloonei?

MM, how do you feel about Long Con's vote for Sloonei?

It's funny that Sloonei's current reputation involves being town much more than mafia, but when he was building his legacy on RYM in his first few games he was almost always mafia.

While I disagree with MM's case on Sloonei, it does seem like a genuine case. I'm inclined to switch to Long Con now but I don't want MP lynched.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:I read through your IAWY ISO analysis MP, and I honestly agree with very little of it. Admittedly I've never played with him before, but most of what you're seeing as indicative that he is bad, I'm seeing as indicative that his playing style is rather unorthodox.

That's fair enough. I was mafia reading ika for similar reasons (not providing substantively-backed reads), but at least ika was throwing out something.

What did you think of his constant meta cover?

I think its nervousness of being new here combined with probably being suspected for meta-related reasons a lot, so for him I imagine that it is fairly instinctive to use meta as a defense. I'm not sure about him, but none of what you pointed out as suspicious really gripped me in the same way.

I read through your IAWY ISO analysis MP, and I honestly agree with very little of it. Admittedly I've never played with him before, but most of what you're seeing as indicative that he is bad, I'm seeing as indicative that his playing style is rather unorthodox.

Golden wrote:

Silverwolf wrote:Saying even if MP is scum, he should live because he's active and helpful, is just blowing my mind right now.

I did not say that. I said he should not get your vote because your reasons for suspecting him are NAI. That's all.

I think that was directed at me.

linki - yup

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:Sloonei I don't want to contribute to your lynch if you are good, but that's hardly an explanation for your Sloonei vote.

Hold on then, let me walk you guys through why I think that Sloonei is mafia.

Okay now we're talking.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:Haha I meant to say MM to begin the previous sentence.

That's so noncommittal zebra. Own your vote, dammit.

I know right? I'm just terrible.

Haha I meant to say MM to begin the previous sentence.

Sloonei I don't want to contribute to your lynch if you are good, but that's hardly an explanation for your Sloonei vote.

From what I've read of IAWY (which has not been in isolation), he just seems kind of wacky. In a good way. None of what he's said has come across as alignment-indicative to me.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Holy shit guys, IAWY is scummier than I expected. I'm feeling at least a moderate mafia read here. Stay tuned.

I'm intrigued.

That's yet another reason by the way that I oppose going after lower posters. If town does luck out by picking a lower poster that just happens to flip mafia, they still are at square one in all but numbers because the dead baddie doesn't have enough content to look for teammate connections.

Silverwolf wrote:Saying even if MP is scum, he should live because he's active and helpful, is just blowing my mind right now. If he's scum, he should die. I can see defending him if you have a strong townread on him but saying no matter what is alignment is, you want him alive is just something I can't wrap my head around. I will do this if I need more time to figure someone out and give them another day but he's posted plenty of content. Same thing happened in Turf Wars that is happening here. I was right on some of the scum and I was arrested and no one listened to me and even after I died, I was still accused of being tinfoil. Same thing here, no one likes my playstyle so they get frustrated with it and by extension, ignore what I'm saying. It's beyond frustrating.

An active baddie is a baddie that can easily be connected to their teammates over time. Speaking as someone who is always active as a baddie, I know this for a fact. No one's ignoring what you're saying, I think you're ignoring what most others are saying. I think you're frustrated because deep down you know that this is the case but you are too stubborn to allow yourself to admit it. I've been there.

Normally I'm more cautious about an MM lynch (especially on Day 1) but with the current options being me, MP, and Sloonei, we need radical change.

Then MP can vote for MM and MM will be in the lead.

Golden wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

Golden wrote:If tunnelling ends in a civ read maybe I should do more of it.

lmao

Anyway, could you get behind a Long Con or MM vote?

I could get more behind an MM vote than an LC vote. Although, LC is just beginning to concern me a little in that I'm not sure when we last heard from him.

If you and I vote for MM then it will be a tie between him and MP. Are you willing to do that?

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

Golden wrote:If tunnelling ends in a civ read maybe I should do more of it.

lmao

Anyway, could you get behind a Long Con or MM vote?

I could, considering I at least slightly mafia read them, especially if neither of them provide explanations. That's what I'm waiting on eagerly from them both.

Same here at this point.

Golden wrote:If tunnelling ends in a civ read maybe I should do more of it.

lmao

Anyway, could you get behind a Long Con or MM vote?

I would be willing to move my vote to Long Con or MM (provided MP is no longer a potential leading wagon) if for no other reason that their Sloonei votes are pretty awful-looking in my opinion.

linki - huzzah

MovingPictures07 wrote:Also, thanks zebra, I was just wondering what album to play next anyway. I'm totally going to listen to this now:

Glad I could be of service, it's my favorite Can album.

After going through Sloonei's ISO he seems town to me. Maybe he could stand to widen his focus a bit but nothing he has said or done has pinged me in the slightest. So, I can't honestly advocate anyone switching their votes for him, especially since the two current votes for him are a joke vote from Long Con and a bollocks (joke?) vote from MM.

MovingPictures07 wrote: Perfect! That'd be great.

I actually ISOd LC already myself. What do you (and others) think?

I dig it, and I agree with most of your points. I actually think that his joke vote for Sloonei (which still remains) after a more serious vote for you is more alarming than anything else I've seen yet.

Dyslexicon wrote:Much pages. Such discussion. Very read. Wow.

sig wrote:Yo @Everyone online top three people you'd lynch today?

Mainly this is directed at Ika/Silver/MP/Zebra

Right now I got nothing, but I'll get back to you after I do some ISO's and I should have at least one option before end of day. I don't know about three.