The Syndicate

Scotty wrote:Actually I take back what I said.
Doc, save TH tonite. I think he is more important to the civvie cause this game than I have been. And j tend to agree with his most recent post.

Glorf, I have said early on that I am inherently suspicious of nice posters, and you have exuded niceties all game. You're very expressive in your language.
But your general ideas seem fringing on actual theories and illogical paths. I don't mean to discourage you if you're completely genuine. Hell, my first few games here were just throwing out theories and hoping any stuck.
But most of your defenses have been reading as "I don't understand why you suspect me because I'm good" or "I'm not bad, because I'm good".

I don't buy the theory that you are TwoFace. I think Matt is stretching there, nor would I see a point in leaving breadcrumbs for that role. I thought maybe you could be neutral for a long time, and mayhaps you are, but I think you are not civ. Based on your arguments and counter arguments.

I've made no secret of the fact from Day 1 that I'm struggling a little with the complexities of this game but I am (within the constraints of time that we all have) to contribute to the best of my ability. A number of people now have voiced their suspicion of my posts in that they are polite and respectful. If that's what you believe is sufficient to eliminate me from this game then lynch away because I'm not going to change that. Yes, you are right too Scotty - I have been saying that I'm not bad because I'm good. There's a reason for that (it's true...) but you are wrong to assert that I don't understand why people would be suspicious of me because of that because I do. You and others believe that trust has no place in games of Mafia. I don't agree, I think it is actually the key to winning these games - it's trying to find that one or two people to trust...

And I'm sorry - as much as I do respect your ability and that of other players (like Matt for example) you are wrong. I am 100% true blue Town. I am not Mafia and I am not third party. For what it's worth, I very much appreciate the sincerity of your post

Typhoony wrote:I see we should've stuck with a Mac lynch.

MovingPictures07 wrote:
Typhoony wrote:Between Glorfindel and Mp, I'd rather vote Glorfindel.
Why?

You voted for me before. Why not now?
Because you sounded genuine in your frustration and I think that's more a civ MP thing to do.

And you think I'm not frustrated with this game? I've listened to those night time clues like a hundred times and I get nothing. I try to genuinely contribute to solving this game and receive no acknowledgement other than accusations of manipulative behaviour. I'm accused of not trying to solve the game and only defend myself when many of you continue to line up with your accusations of me that have no basis in fact and are sheer fantasy.

I don't have the historical knowledge that many of you do about each other's playstyles (to which you refer frequently) and that doesn't help. And TH - damn straight I'm not going around making accusations against everyone. It's not that I don't want to tread on any toes (my interactions with Sig put the lie to that statement) - it's just that I don't want to fall into the temptation of making groundless, false and malicious accusations about others of the nature that continue to be made about me.

Bullzeye wrote:
Matt wrote:
Bullzeye wrote:Actually I just realised you spent a significant portion of day 2 repeating the word knock twice in every post. Matt = Two Face confirmed.
That's not at all the same thing I found from Glor's posts and you know it.
I just don't understand why someone would put so much effort into dropping a ton of hints that they're a role who wins with the baddies 50% of the time. Nor do I see why someone would go to that much effort to role hint full stop. It's just ridiculous. If Glorfindel really is Two-Face and really did decide to drop a ton of 'two' related hints then I wish I had his amount of motivation, dedication, and spare time.

I find great comfort in this evidence that logic and commonsense are not yet a casualty in this game...

Matt wrote:
Enrique wrote:
juliets wrote:Can someone bullet point the Glorfindel case for me or point me back to someone who has already made the case? I iso'd him but didn't see anything but a nice polite person so the reasons he's bad have gone right over my head.
Some stuff I remember:

1. sig thought he read as being "fake-nice" early in the game but later went back on that.
2. Matt thinks he's been claiming Two Face throughout the game for mentioning coinflips and the number two.
3. He made sure to reply to sig right before he got killed and the whole thing got buried.
4. MP reads him as an inmate for not matching either his civvie or baddie metas.

I don't know if I'm missing something.
That's not a fair representation, I don't think. He used several phrases that correlated with the number two, actually said the word "two" in his first post, and at one point even quoted someone's post and simply said "Seconded!".

C'mon now.

I'm sorry but that is NOT a case, it's a work of fiction. With respect, I don't recall anyone coming up with a motive as to why I would do such a thing as to do so (based on the conjecture that I'd read) defies logic. I can promise you that anyone that lyncher me on that basis is going to feel exceptionally foolish.

juliets wrote:I iso'd him but didn't see anything but a nice polite person so the reasons he's bad have gone right over my head.

This is without any doubt the kindest observation that has been made about me all game. Thank you Juliets. In whatever time I have left here, I will treasure your words and be encouraged by them in the face of whatever comes

All in all a good result - we go into Night 4 not having lost a Townie - if nothing else, it's bought us some valuable time.

Enrique wrote:I'm saying there was no "decision to lynch you" lol.

Thank you, Enrique.

Enrique wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:@Enrique: I'll confess that I had you pegged as high likelihood of Town after your Day 2 performance. MP accuses you of being opportunistic and you voted for me this phase without any justification that I can see when MP (a player you have suspected on many occasions throughout this game is a highly eligible candidate). Before I reassess my opinion of you, could you please explain on what grounds you considered me a better lynch choice than MP?
I didn't.

You're saying that you had no grounds upon which you based your decision to lynch me?

@Enrique: I'll confess that I had you pegged as high likelihood of Town after your Day 2 performance. MP accuses you of being opportunistic and you voted for me this phase without any justification that I can see when MP (a player you have suspected on many occasions throughout this game is a highly eligible candidate). Before I reassess my opinion of you, could you please explain on what grounds you considered me a better lynch choice than MP?

Keeping with my Night 2 theory that the Maroni family didn't NK due to their absence from the thread, I note that the Day 2 result (Magnus/Nerolunar's pinching) was announced at 2:36 pm Monday, 22 February* and the night ended some 24 hours later at 12:24 pm Tuesday, 23 February. User ekeknat who has just voted (and who has had a total of 14 posts so far this entire game) last post before the end of Day 2 was at 10:18 am Sunday, 21 February* and their next post was at 3:08 pm Tuesday, 23 February*. I wonder if that 3:08 post might have been a consequence of inadvertently having missed the deadline for the Maroni's NK

It fits with the theory and seeing they've only been on line an hour or two ago it will be interesting to see if we have a NK tonight.

*All times AEST

@Hosts: Can we please have the list of the end of phase results that are listed on the first page linked to the relevant post where the results of that phase was announced? It'd make things a damn sight easier for anyone trying to analyze this information.

MacDougall wrote:So you are either anti-civ or a civ that doesn't care that your behaviour is setting a precedent of civs behaving like mafia. Cool. You okay with us lynching you tomorrow Marmot?

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you are saying here my friend

I am Town and I am refusing to Lynch either a Town or potentially Town/Town leaning player (based on the fact that there is nothing anywhere near a conclusive case for their lynching) and you are accusing me of 'anti-Town' behaviour?

MacDougall wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:
MacDougall wrote:
Sorsha wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
Sorsha wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Un MP lynch is unleekely tu yeeeld a meffeea fleep in my oopeeniun boot I cun see-a he's gueeng tu be-a a pueent ooff deescoossiun es lung es he's in zee geme-a. I'll gledly iet my het iff he-a fleeps meffeea boot I'm tune-a reedeeng heem es genooeene-a. Glurffeendel is mure-a leekely tu be-a meffeea. I theenk Scutty mede-a a greet oobserfeshun ebuoot heem. Vhee esked vhu he-a soospects he-a curcled eruoond sume-a nemes insteed ooff cummeetting tu unytheeng. Zee ceefiliun Glurffeendel I reed in Peekmin is noohere-a tu be-a fuoond. Bork bork bork!

I'm futeeng fur Glurffeendel.
I agree with this about MP so I've changed my mind about voting him today. I'm guessing he's an inmate, I don't see him asking for lynch and letting either civ or mafia teammates down like that. Of course that could be what he wants us to think
What changed your mind? I've been asking for my lynch since before you changed it, so it can't be that.
I don't think you're bad and now that you are apparently cured you're more likely to help out/participate. I'd rather vote a low poster than you at this point. Bubbles has been lurking in the thread since I've been around today but not posting.
Sure if you want to put a vote on someone who's not getting lynched go right ahead.
Perhaps not my friend but given the choice of voting for players that I believe to be Mafia and those that I know aren't (my assumption on MP that I'd stated previously) I'll go for players that I think are Mafia EVERY time.
That's all well and good but sorsha has given no indication that she thinks bubbles is mafia so what's your point?

"The Duke of Norfolk: Damn it... Why can't you do as I did and come with us, for fellowship?
Thomas More: And when we die, and you are sent to heaven for doing your conscience and I am sent to hell for not doing mine, will you come with me, for fellowship?"

A Man for All Seasons - Robert Bolt

MacDougall wrote:
Sorsha wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
Sorsha wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Un MP lynch is unleekely tu yeeeld a meffeea fleep in my oopeeniun boot I cun see-a he's gueeng tu be-a a pueent ooff deescoossiun es lung es he's in zee geme-a. I'll gledly iet my het iff he-a fleeps meffeea boot I'm tune-a reedeeng heem es genooeene-a. Glurffeendel is mure-a leekely tu be-a meffeea. I theenk Scutty mede-a a greet oobserfeshun ebuoot heem. Vhee esked vhu he-a soospects he-a curcled eruoond sume-a nemes insteed ooff cummeetting tu unytheeng. Zee ceefiliun Glurffeendel I reed in Peekmin is noohere-a tu be-a fuoond. Bork bork bork!

I'm futeeng fur Glurffeendel.
I agree with this about MP so I've changed my mind about voting him today. I'm guessing he's an inmate, I don't see him asking for lynch and letting either civ or mafia teammates down like that. Of course that could be what he wants us to think
What changed your mind? I've been asking for my lynch since before you changed it, so it can't be that.
I don't think you're bad and now that you are apparently cured you're more likely to help out/participate. I'd rather vote a low poster than you at this point. Bubbles has been lurking in the thread since I've been around today but not posting.
Sure if you want to put a vote on someone who's not getting lynched go right ahead.

Perhaps not my friend but given the choice of voting for players that I believe to be Mafia and those that I know aren't (my assumption on MP that I'd stated previously) I'll go for players that I think are Mafia EVERY time.

OK Guys, before ths gets out of hand - let me assure you that I am NOT Two Face (I thought I'd denied this previously although it may have merely been my reaction to Matt's post). I think it was bea that asked why (were I Two Face) would I drop hints like that of which I was accused by Matt. Clearly, bea has a good head on their shoulders. I'll admit I was pretty astounded by that accusation but from my experience, I shouldn't have been so surprised. It's truly is amazing how when you're looking for something, the truth becomes a mirage. I've been there many times myself in previous games where I've been so utterly convinced of the truth only to find I was wrong - as is anyone who really thinks I am this Two Face guy.

I'll admit my performance in this game so far may not reflect my being one of Gotham City's finest but that IS the truth. If you want to lynch me out of malice or because you are simply distrustful or confused, I can't stop you. If you're Town, don't bother coming back on seven hours time bemoaning the fact that you've lost one of your own - I've told you the truth, let it be on your heads.

As for me, I'm still confused about the Night 2 result. Given that I can't recall seeing anyone who wasn't around over that Night 2 period post since, I'm inclined to think it might be worthwhile to start there. I'd expect we'll see if I'm correct at the end of the next Night phase - I should think that were there not to be a NK by the Maroni family it would add some weight to the argument that the remaining Maroni family members are no posters which may help us a lot.

Matt wrote:Lulz at Glorfy. I started an ISO of him and in the first five or so posts of his this is what I've found...Keep in mind I was going to search everyone but started with Glor, to see if anyone said "two" in their first post to be cute...

First post...

Glorfindel wrote:Greetings, All It's wonderful to be back here with you all old friends and some new friends to be made, I'm sure Sadly, I only accidentally found that this game had started (I'd have thought Sig might have let me know...) so I'll do some reviewing and come back to you hopefully with something constructive to contribute. I must confess, I've read two and a half pages and am already confused as to how this all fits together...
Second post...

Glorfindel wrote:I voted City Hall for a couple of reasons. Firstly, I've no idea at all what the hell I'm doing in this game and being the 'outsider' I always seem to be, it seems appropriate for me to select such a location. At 13 pages, this game has gotten so far away from me now... I just can't...
Strangely enough, he doesn't give his second reason.

Fifth post...

Glorfindel wrote:>snip< In Pikmin, I saw Zebra as a very transparent Townie who was picked off early by the twin forces of evil and ignorance. >snip<
Seventh post...this is getting a little ridiculous...

Glorfindel wrote:>snip< Like the King of Siam in the King and I, I find myself second guessing myself a lot more these days. >snip<
Tenth post...

Glorfindel wrote:>snip< I regards to the map discussion again, I'm in two minds. >snip<
Coincidence?

I haven't gone further then post ten, I'll check it out now though.

Matt wrote:A few notes...

Glorfindel wrote:All I can say is that I've been on both sides of the coin in the two games I've played here at The Syndicate before this one.
Was this a coincidence or was this a Two Face hint/claim? Not a bad one, considering you're sussed of being Mafia and claiming Two-Face would make you half civ.

That's a mighty fine theory there Matt except - on this site where the performances of players in previous games is so frequently referenced, I thought prudent to make reference to y own. And lo and behold, there have only been two. My comment was not a claim at all, I have already told you where I stand. I'd have expected more of you than this...

Scotty wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:
Scotty wrote:
Scotty wrote:RIP sig. I honestly think you were good, or at least town-centric.

So glorf. You have used the argument "I don't know why anyone would view me as bad because I'm obviously good" twice now. That's like walking into McDonalds, standing in the line for 10 minutes without saying anything, tapping your foot and going, "Well? Why is my food not out yet?"

What makes you so obviously civ, Glorf?
This is a rhetorical question, btw Glorf. Because you're no more obviously civ than I am.

I just cringe when I hear that as an argument, and it doesn't make you seem any more civ than I you make yourself out to be.
Now that sig is gone and out of your hair, any better suspicions?
Yes, Scotty - I understand that it was a rhetorical question - hence why you didn't get an answer And with reference to your analogy, yes - and may I have fries with that?

And yeah, I know - you've got absolutely no reason to believe a word I say - I completely understand that too. All I can say is that I've been on both sides of the coin in the two games I've played here at The Syndicate before this one. Now I don't know how it looked to anyone else, but I certainly felt the difference from this side. I don't know how that presents to you but I have to think that it must surely be very obvious
Thanks for patently ignoring my last question there, Glorf.

The next post... the VERY NEXT POST!!! Just what are you playing at here my friend?

MacDougall wrote:Glorfindel was mafia in the Star Wars game he replaced out of and he was coming off inconsistent and nervy just like he is here. I get the feeling Glorfy is Mafia again and he might just not be suited to it.

I can assure you my friend if I'm 'coming off' here as inconsistent it's due to lack of competence and not alignment

I'm also nor ever been 'nervy' in this game. If you can't see the difference (given your degree of experience in these games) then I'd consider THAT grounds for suspicion.

MacDougall wrote:
Dom wrote:Why would the baddies NK someone they suspect is baddie? Why wouldn't they lynch them?
Yeah and you're talking about a baddie team at probable full power vs. one that isn't. They aren't a threat to be wasting night kills on.

That being said, Glorfindel... You suspected sig was bad, and now you matter of factly stated that the kill last night didn't kill a baddie. Why, while considering the possibility that the baddies blocked the night 2 kill discovering the bad guy, did you immediately rule out that they did in fact kill said bad guy, when the death happened to be a guy you had a major scum read on?

I am tempted as fek to vote for Glorfindel. So much inconsistent opining.

Read my lips: I believe I was wrong about Sig.

Didn't the write-up describe the death in terms of "Officer down"? I took that as meaning that Sig was a cop. Although, I hadn't until now considered the possibility that he may have indeed been the Maroni family's crooked cop... That could potentially explain his reaction to Enrique's 180 on Matt Day 2 which led to Magnus/Nerolunar's lynching...

MacDougall wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:Forgive me if I'm stating the obvious here but I've just had a thought... So far, we've had three Night phases - two odd (the Falcone family) and one even (the Maroni family). On both odd nights, we've lost two players (i.e. Dr Wilgy and Sig) yet on our single even night there was no kill by the Falcone family. The conditions as I understand them are that Tony Zucco (Magnus/Nerolunar) was to submit the night kill on Night 2 only he went and got himself lynched Day 2. In his absence, the night kill was to fall to the cop the Maroni family bought off on Night 1.

Would it not be reasonable then to assume that because there was no night kill on Night 2 that the Maroni family may have inadvertently bought off one of our absent members (or at least someone that wasn't around that much at least the latter half of Day 2 to early Day 3 ) I know we had that debate earlier about lynching the low posters but I think this sheds a new light on things for me...
Epi clarified that he would allow teammates to send orders in on the behalf of other teammates. If they bought off an absentee they'd still be able to send in the kill on behalf of said absentee.

But what if they're both absent?

I suppose that's potentially possible... although perhaps bordering on the improbable. So if we are to discount the theory of mine above, where does that leave us? The Maroni family's bought cop (that would've submitted the Night Kill) was blocked by the Falcone family? That would suggest to me that the Maroni family's bought cop is a relatively high profile player and that the Falcone family now know who he/she is and presumably are awaiting their chance to eliminate them. But then why didn't they do that last Night? That no/low poster theory is starting to sound marginally more plausible...

Glorfindel wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:Forgive me if I'm stating the obvious here but I've just had a thought... So far, we've had three Night phases - two odd (the Falcone family) and one even (the Maroni family). On both odd nights, we've lost two players (i.e. Dr Wilgy and Sig) yet on our single even night there was no kill by the Falcone family. The conditions as I understand them are that Tony Zucco (Magnus/Nerolunar) was to submit the night kill on Night 2 only he went and got himself lynched Day 2. In his absence, the night kill was to fall to the cop the Maroni family bought off on Night 1.

Would it not be reasonable then to assume that because there was no night kill on Night 2 that the Maroni family may have inadvertently bought off one of our absent members (or at least someone that wasn't around that much at least the latter half of Day 2 to early Day 3 ) I know we had that debate earlier about lynching the low posters but I think this sheds a new light on things for me...
Pardon my incoherence there, allow me to fix that:
And another thing... I can't recall for certain when that discussion about lynching the low posters occurred but if it happened after Night 1, I think we need to look very carefully at those who were most vocal in opposing the approach of lynching the no/low posters...

Glorfindel wrote:Forgive me if I'm stating the obvious here but I've just had a thought... So far, we've had three Night phases - two odd (the Falcone family) and one even (the Maroni family). On both odd nights, we've lost two players (i.e. Dr Wilgy and Sig) yet on our single even night there was no kill by the Falcone family. The conditions as I understand them are that Tony Zucco (Magnus/Nerolunar) was to submit the night kill on Night 2 only he went and got himself lynched Day 2. In his absence, the night kill was to fall to the cop the Maroni family bought off on Night 1.

Would it not be reasonable then to assume that because there was no night kill on Night 2 that the Maroni family may have inadvertently bought off one of our absent members (or at least someone that wasn't around that much at least the latter half of Day 2 to early Day 3 ) I know we had that debate earlier about lynching the low posters but I think this sheds a new light on things for me...

And another thing... I can't recall for certain when that discussion about lynching the low posters occurred but if it happened after Night 1, I think we need to look very carefully that were most vocal in opposing the approach of lynching the no/low posters...

Forgive me if I'm stating the obvious here but I've just had a thought... So far, we've had three Night phases - two odd (the Falcone family) and one even (the Maroni family). On both odd nights, we've lost two players (i.e. Dr Wilgy and Sig) yet on our single even night there was no kill by the Falcone family. The conditions as I understand them are that Tony Zucco (Magnus/Nerolunar) was to submit the night kill on Night 2 only he went and got himself lynched Day 2. In his absence, the night kill was to fall to the cop the Maroni family bought off on Night 1.

Would it not be reasonable then to assume that because there was no night kill on Night 2 that the Maroni family may have inadvertently bought off one of our absent members (or at least someone that wasn't around that much at least the latter half of Day 2 to early Day 3

) I know we had that debate earlier about lynching the low posters but I think this sheds a new light on things for me...

bea wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Glorfindel.... any thoughts on which player might have wanted to silence you? You don't have to speculate in the thread, I just want you to think about it.
I've actually been thinking about that a lot and not only who but their possible motives... And no clue yet... I'm actually at work right now which will severely hamper my capacity to post for the next few hours... Sorry!
I'm curious as to whether or not you saw anything from the last phase as a result of being silenced. I'm sorry if someone else already asked you and I've not gotten there yet. It's just sometimes silencing can be a good thing. It's a different experience to read along as things happen but not have to talk. I was curious as to whether or not you saw something the rest of us might have missed.

Hey, bea

I'm very pleased to make your acquaintance

That's a good point, but no. To be honest, I was more relieved than anything when I found out I was silenced. Do we know who is silenced today? Is everyone accounted for so far?

As far as my suspicions right now, I don't have a lot. The whole Sig situation has shaken my confidence to the core. Typhoony seems rather strange to me this game for reasons I can't quite put my finger on but looking back to Pikmin Mafia, he was Captain Charlie and his identity was revealed only to me. The funny thing was, even though he was Town, had I not know he was, I think I could've been forgiven to think he wasn't. MP is kinda interesting - I was Mafia with him in Star Wars and as a consequence, I have the greatest admiration and respect for his ability. From conversations I've had with him, I honestly can't seem him as one of those 'Self-lynching' types - I think he's too proud for that despite what pressure he may feel from his real life circumstances. We've got a long way to go this Day phase but I have to say I can't see myself voting for him at this stage...

Scotty wrote:
Scotty wrote:RIP sig. I honestly think you were good, or at least town-centric.

So glorf. You have used the argument "I don't know why anyone would view me as bad because I'm obviously good" twice now. That's like walking into McDonalds, standing in the line for 10 minutes without saying anything, tapping your foot and going, "Well? Why is my food not out yet?"

What makes you so obviously civ, Glorf?
This is a rhetorical question, btw Glorf. Because you're no more obviously civ than I am.

I just cringe when I hear that as an argument, and it doesn't make you seem any more civ than I you make yourself out to be.
Now that sig is gone and out of your hair, any better suspicions?

Yes, Scotty - I understand that it was a rhetorical question - hence why you didn't get an answer

And with reference to your analogy, yes - and may I have fries with that?

And yeah, I know - you've got absolutely no reason to believe a word I say - I completely understand that too. All I can say is that I've been on both sides of the coin in the two games I've played here at The Syndicate before this one. Now I don't know how it looked to anyone else, but I certainly felt the difference from this side. I don't know how that presents to you but I have to think that it must surely be very obvious

MacDougall wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:Well, clearly I haven't remotely any clue at all I'm sorry Sig (again...)
And why do you think that him being killed by Mafia clears him of being Mafia in a two Mafia game?

Because the write-up specifically said "Officer down"?

Well, clearly I haven't remotely any clue at all

I'm sorry Sig (again...)

Turnip Head wrote:Glorfindel.... any thoughts on which player might have wanted to silence you? You don't have to speculate in the thread, I just want you to think about it.

I've actually been thinking about that a lot and not only who but their possible motives... And no clue yet... I'm actually at work right now which will severely hamper my capacity to post for the next few hours... Sorry!

OK, Guys - before I get silenced or cursed or have some other dire fate befall me next Day phase, there's a few things I'd like to put on the record for now.

I'll admit that I'm struggling with so much about this game but there are some things I AM certain of. Sig has been laying the foundation of my lynch since almost the beginning of this game (if you don't believe me, check yourselves) his suspicions of me have become his mantra. He claims (rightly so) to know my game and yet claims that I'm not Town. The thing is, I actually AM so why would he say otherwise? Could he be mistaken? I don't believe that to be the case. I think his frequently stated accusations of me are a deliberate attempt to have me eliminated from this game.

Likewise, I'm very familiar with his game and I don't like what I see. There is NO WAY he is Town. Someone said earlier that they thought his performance this game was 'thorough' and indeed it is - his game is demonstrably more polished and thorough when he's bad (and if you don't believe me, go look at his rather chaotic performance as a Townie in Pikmin Mafia). I am suspicious of his constant questioning of players as to their opinions of other players. I understand that in itself, this is considered to be an accepted tactic in these games but there is something in the tone of those questions here that doesn't sound genuine to me.

Whilst it appears poor Zebs may not have been a Townie after all, I still believe her loyalty was to us and she seemed very insistent on Sig's lynching - and now she's gone...

I also don't like Sig's reaction Day 2 when he was gunning for Matt, seemed to get agitated with Enrique after Enrique's change of heart on Matt, but eventually capitulated with a vote on Magnus (Nerolunar) and then casually returned to his modus operandi of throwing shade at me.

I honestly don't know what to make of this - whether he's Mafia or perhaps more likely a third party but I can't see him being Town. I do know that I get a bad feeling about him and I'd prefer to see him gone this Day phase.

Am I correct in assuming that we only have another four and three-quarter hours until dawn?

Scotty wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:
Scotty wrote:Putting up the bat signal now- Matt, are you still iambic pantemeter? Glorf? Are you still Ball-gagged?

Linki: it was no Mafia lynch, Dom. Joker died.
I presume not as my silencing restricted me for not commenting during the last Day phase. I feel a little sorry for BR as despite the nature of their role, they sounded (in the end) like their heart was with us and I understand that - I've been there myself. Still, it's unarguably a better thing for us to have that role out of the way.

I have to say, I am more than a little curious why I of all people was silenced. I've had an awful time trying to keep up with this game... I wonder though, whether I may have been seen as some kind of a threat to someone... Mhmmm?
It would sound like Montoya may have suspected you.

On what grounds though, Scotty? And to what end? Renee Montoya is a Town role - I don't see what she had to gain by that at all?

Scotty wrote:Putting up the bat signal now- Matt, are you still iambic pantemeter? Glorf? Are you still Ball-gagged?

Linki: it was no Mafia lynch, Dom. Joker died.

I presume not as my silencing restricted me for not commenting during the last Day phase. I feel a little sorry for BR as despite the nature of their role, they sounded (in the end) like their heart was with us and I understand that - I've been there myself. Still, it's unarguably a better thing for us to have that role out of the way.

I have to say, I am more than a little curious why I of all people was silenced. I've had an awful time trying to keep up with this game... I wonder though, whether I may have been seen as some kind of a threat to someone... Mhmmm?

Well, that's awesome that we got a Mafia - I suppose in a way I feel like I should have known after all that lurking...
I personally really like Magnus a great deal. I am his Team Captain in another competition in which both play off site and he did a magnificent job for our team there today! Please forgive me if I can't muster a whole lot of 'whooping it up' at his departure. He is really smart and I think he shows a great deal of potential and I too hope he comes back and plays here some more.

Hi, Guys. I'm sorry about this but this morning has not turned out at all as I was expecting it would work-wise. I am now more than 10 pages behind and while I don't wish to disrespect our hosts by not voting, I consider placing an uninformed vote in some ways even worse. As per my last post, I do find TheFloyd73's behaviour concerning so I figure that's as good a place as any...

sig wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:
TheFloyd73 wrote:Glorfindel, you appear to have overlooked Sig's speculation around your Day One vote, since you didn't refer to it at all. Do you have anything to say about it?
Hi, Floyd I'm sorry, I have no recollection of Sig's speculation about my Day 1 vote and frankly had I not answered his question about it, I don't doubt for a second that I'd have heard about it. In any case the rationale for my vote on Day 1 was quite clear. I stated very clearly that at the time I voted that I would be unable to return before the EoD due to work commitments and I had to place my vote using my best judgement at the time I made it. At that time despite the relatively small number of votes cast, Zebra was clearly in contention for lynching. I considered her a significant asset to our cause at that time (and still do) and placed my vote accordingly on (from memory) either on the only other (or one of a couple) competing wagons. I hope that satisfactorily explains my motivation Floyd.

Glorfidnel what do you think of Floyd digging this up then not posting anything else?

I did question your Floyd vote, but your response was the same then as it is here.

I know this might sound a little niave but until you mentioned that there, but not a lot... If someone asks me a question, I'll do my best to answer as best as I can and that's what I did there. In isolation, I can see why Floyd asked (assuming she didn't bother to look at the explanation that I made in-thread at the time I voted) me to explain my vote. Looking more broadly however, I agree there is some cause for concern. They've made a total of four posts in what, something like 2K posts? Looking at the nature of those posts gives me cause for suspicion too. Some strange comment about the players on Arkham Night 0 being all bad, a promise to post thoughts around 48 hours ago and nothing of substance to follow - intriguing...

I've had cause to come on and check this game thread a number of times today and I honestly can't recall an occasion where I have and Magnus (Nerolunar) hasn't been on as well and yet (once again) you post so infrequently my friend. I know this is all pretty heavy going and as you're new you are maybe feeling a little overwhelmed (as am I) but isn't there something you'd like to contribute or some observation you'd care to make

MacDougall wrote:Also Epignosis can you please ban the word disingenuous in this game? It's out of control.

Seconded.

Scotty wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:Hey, Scotty. Thanks for your response to my post. Firstly, may I respectfully request that you refrain from posting in that pale yellow font. I'm using an available theme for this site and that colour font is near impossible to read - thanks for your consideration. Secondly, I'm a tart? Thank you kindly for that assessment of my character - I didn't think you knew me that well

Seriously though, yes. I was a third party once (in a Teen Wolf Mafia game) and I enjoyed it immensely. I was a vigilante and I made it my business to hunt Mafia and picked off one that no one suspected Night 1 (sadly it was one of those deals where the role is targeted as an NK, it kills the role that targeted it...). For the same reason that I like being Town (a degree of independence that I don't think Mafia have) I think being independent might be better especially if you have some kind of ability but unfortunately that is not my fate in this game.

As for your last remark, I find it belittling and insulting and frankly beneath someone of your stature on this site. You are of course entitled to your opinion and I completely respect your right to not believe anything I say but I find that response unnecessarily personal and unworthy of this site if it truly purports to be a place where these games are meant to be fun and respectful.
First and foremost, know that I'm not attempting to make a row with you or personally attack you. I apologize if it was coming across as such. I realize that sometimes I forget my humor may be a tad crass and may not be viewed as humor at all.

So here's the deal, on a general level: Your presence in the game is actually very welcomed, with the various spats and negativity being thrown around. You are intrinsically a nice person, and I feel like we need more people like you around! Being nice is not necessarily suspicious, but what pinged me was how- I thought- you were using it as a crutch. It appeared to me that it was laid on thicker than I thought it needed to be.

As for your response about indie: it sounds like you're painting your indie experience as closer to that of the town: more independent, fun, your own man. I think you could very well be independent, though I am still getting a weird vibe from you. I'm going to keep an open mind and not vote for you yet because gut reads are only comfortable to me if I can back it up with a little evidence.

Anyway- I'm all for keeping it fun and frothy but just as long as you know that most of the name calling I do from time to time is meant to not be taken seriously. If it upsets you after knowing such, I'll just refrain from going all Willy Wonka on you

Thank you, Scotty. To be completely honest with you, I felt somewhat humiliated by my posts here this afternoon. I think I was being perhaps a little too honest (if that makes sense) saying some of the things I did and in retrospect, I can't expect anyone to take anything much of what I said as incontrovertible truth - although it is. Your previous post had me seriously wondering what the hell I'm doing in this game...

Please don't misunderstand me - I'm not so niave as to not understand that probably every other player in this game is out to win it at any cost but you should know that there are some lines I will never cross.

And yes, from my experience, I think I often find it difficult to persuade my fellow players to a particular course of action. I think I'm reasonably articulate but there is obviously some skill at which I'm lacking. I think as an independent, you have the opportunity to influence the outcome of the game independently and that for the reasons I mentioned above, appeals to me. I can't explain your weird vibe, I'm sorry. I think I'd have enjoyed an independent role in this game although to be frank, for the good of this game, it's probably better that I didn't...

And no, I didn't get your sense of humour my friend but now that I do, knock yourself out...

TheFloyd73 wrote:Glorfindel, you appear to have overlooked Sig's speculation around your Day One vote, since you didn't refer to it at all. Do you have anything to say about it?

Hi, Floyd

I'm sorry, I have no recollection of Sig's speculation about my Day 1 vote and frankly had I not answered his question about it, I don't doubt for a second that I'd have heard about it. In any case the rationale for my vote on Day 1 was quite clear. I stated very clearly that at the time I voted that I would be unable to return before the EoD due to work commitments and I had to place my vote using my best judgement at the time I made it. At that time despite the relatively small number of votes cast, Zebra was clearly in contention for lynching. I considered her a significant asset to our cause at that time (and still do) and placed my vote accordingly on (from memory) either on the only other (or one of a couple) competing wagons. I hope that satisfactorily explains my motivation Floyd.

Scotty wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Glorfindel while you're here if you could explain the obvious differences began your civ and baddie metas I'd appreciate it.
To be honest with you my friend, I'm not sure. For some reason beyond my understanding, I have a lot of trouble at a deep level with being duplicitous. How that presents, I'm not sure (it's kinda like asking someone who's never stepped outside their house what it looks like from the outside...).well, no. That would mean that you've never been Mafia. Which you have. I suspect because I'm part of a team when I'm Mafia and am subject to the pressure of being responsible to them my posts become uncharacteristicly guarded. When I'm Town, I feel a lot more free to say what I think (albeit in a respectful way). In the context of this game, were I Mafia, I'd probably not have been critical of anyone to this point as I'd imagine I wouldn't want to call any attention to myself. I'm not sure if that answers your question...
ive got a question for you: have you ever been independent? Because you're being somewhat forthcoming with your tells as Mafia, but what about the other like 10 roles in the game?

As for this game, I confess I'm completely flummoxed at trying to work out a lot of what is going on. The whole MP thing? I was Mafia with him in Star Wars (for a time) and from what he's posted so far, I'm not getting a Star Wars vibe from him at all. I also don't think his calling Scotty out was necessarily a bad thing (although perhaps it's not that good for Scotty ). thanks for your concern. I was suspicious of Matt early on (and his knock, knock riddles are far beyond the point of driving me crazy). Again, Zebra's influence is key in that situation for me. I'd expect her reaction to him this Day phase to be quite different after Day 1. Yes, I know that she for all intents and purposes was a proponent of the information reveal thing last Day phase but if I have any skill at all in reading people in these games, I'm reading her as non-Mafia and very likely Town. youa tart by saying you don't know what to make of things, then you proceed to make of things.

Someone pointed out earlier how finely balanced this game is between Town and non-Town and I fear it could slip from our grasp very quickly. Having said that, I don't know that we're that far advanced from where we were at the end of the last Day phase. Personally, I keep waiting for an epiphany based on the information I receive from our nocturnal visits but nothing yet... this whole paragraph smells of elderberry. It sounds like a feinting war cry from a little boy in a Viking costume wearing armor that should only be worn by his dad. It looks like a fortune cookie with 2 blank fortunes.
Your WIFOM about what you would do if you were actually Mafia is hollow and honestly I don't even think it warrants an answer to TH.

Hey, Scotty. Thanks for your response to my post. Firstly, may I respectfully request that you refrain from posting in that pale yellow font. I'm using an available theme for this site and that colour font is near impossible to read - thanks for your consideration. Secondly, I'm a tart? Thank you kindly for that assessment of my character - I didn't think you knew me that well

Seriously though, yes. I was a third party once (in a Teen Wolf Mafia game) and I enjoyed it immensely. I was a vigilante and I made it my business to hunt Mafia and picked off one that no one suspected Night 1 (sadly it was one of those deals where the role is targeted as an NK, it kills the role that targeted it...). For the same reason that I like being Town (a degree of independence that I don't think Mafia have) I think being independent might be better especially if you have some kind of ability but unfortunately that is not my fate in this game.

As for your last remark, I find it belittling and insulting and frankly beneath someone of your stature on this site. You are of course entitled to your opinion and I completely respect your right to not believe anything I say but I find that response unnecessarily personal and unworthy of this site if it truly purports to be a place where these games are meant to be fun and respectful.

Turnip Head wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Glorfindel while you're here if you could explain the obvious differences began your civ and baddie metas I'd appreciate it.
To be honest with you my friend, I'm not sure. For some reason beyond my understanding, I have a lot of trouble at a deep level with being duplicitous. How that presents, I'm not sure (it's kinda like asking someone who's never stepped outside their house what it looks like from the outside...). I suspect because I'm part of a team when I'm Mafia and am subject to the pressure of being responsible to them my posts become uncharacteristicly guarded. When I'm Town, I feel a lot more free to say what I think (albeit in a respectful way). In the context of this game, were I Mafia, I'd probably not have been critical of anyone to this point as I'd imagine I wouldn't want to call any attention to myself. I'm not sure if that answers your question...
Okay, thanks Glorfy. I only ask because earlier you made it sound like anyone who knew your baddie game should know that we're not seeing it here. But do you feel you've been critical of anyone to this point? I just did a quick skim of your posts here and other than your interaction with sig I didn't see anything I'd describe as critical of anyone.

I mean, part of me doubts you would explain your baddie tell while knowing that it matched your play here... but on the other hand you DID just say that you have trouble lying, so who knows :P

I'm told by others that I have played with since I've been playing Mafia that it's easy to tell when I'm drawn Mafia so I'm not sure. In fact the last major game held on the site where I have played most of my games I was specifically requested not to sign up if I considered that I couldn't/wouldn't openly lie during the game, Apparently this request generated from a discussion between game moderators who I expect had come to see the difficulty I have on a personal level at being Mafia. I understand and accept that it is part of the game, I know and don't expect anyone here to believe me (because really all I'm giving you is my word - despite the evidence that proves it) but it is what it is.

And you're right - Sig has been the recipient of most of my enquiry so far but only because I sense something unusual about the way he's playing. This is my third game here and I'm still trying to become familiar with all your playstyles and the mechanical complexity of this game I find overwhelming. Perhaps 'critical' was a poor choice of words. But certainly I have strong opinions about players like Zebra that I probably would not have voiced in the way I did were I Mafia. Again, I don't know that I'm helping you here...

Turnip Head wrote:Glorfindel while you're here if you could explain the obvious differences began your civ and baddie metas I'd appreciate it.

To be honest with you my friend, I'm not sure. For some reason beyond my understanding, I have a lot of trouble at a deep level with being duplicitous. How that presents, I'm not sure (it's kinda like asking someone who's never stepped outside their house what it looks like from the outside...). I suspect because I'm part of a team when I'm Mafia and am subject to the pressure of being responsible to them my posts become uncharacteristicly guarded. When I'm Town, I feel a lot more free to say what I think (albeit in a respectful way). In the context of this game, were I Mafia, I'd probably not have been critical of anyone to this point as I'd imagine I wouldn't want to call any attention to myself. I'm not sure if that answers your question...

As for this game, I confess I'm completely flummoxed at trying to work out a lot of what is going on. The whole MP thing? I was Mafia with him in Star Wars (for a time) and from what he's posted so far, I'm not getting a Star Wars vibe from him at all. I also don't think his calling Scotty out was necessarily a bad thing (although perhaps it's not that good for Scotty

). I was suspicious of Matt early on (and his knock, knock riddles are far beyond the point of driving me crazy). Again, Zebra's influence is key in that situation for me. I'd expect her reaction to him this Day phase to be quite different after Day 1. Yes, I know that she for all intents and purposes was a proponent of the information reveal thing last Day phase but if I have any skill at all in reading people in these games, I'm reading her as non-Mafia and very likely Town.

Someone pointed out earlier how finely balanced this game is between Town and non-Town and I fear it could slip from our grasp very quickly. Having said that, I don't know that we're that far advanced from where we were at the end of the last Day phase. Personally, I keep waiting for an epiphany based on the information I receive from our nocturnal visits but nothing yet...

sig wrote:Oh I also read over Glorfindel's Star Wars and Pikimon game, he defiantly isn't playing the same as in Pikimon, but not as obviously strange as in Star Wars. You claimed you weren't mafia okay maybe that is true. So tell me which Inmate are you Glorfidnel?

linki: okay thanks for answering.

I am not an inmate Sig.

sig wrote:Okay I spent the last phase talking about it the only reason for why you are regurgitating something that is for all purposes over is to try and get me lynched. My arguments was it would be more beneficial for the civs then hurtful. Mafia would be sharing info amongst themselves anyway. We discussed it in depth last phase and I ceded that I was in the wrong and stopped pushing for it.

Your arguments were that it would be more beneficial for the Town than hurtful DESPITE Rule 14 saying the opposite. You LED the case for divulging that information by your own admission. I accept that you now admit that you were wrong in doing so but only in the face of sufficient support for your cause. I personally find this very suspicious behaviour.

No, I did not lie earlier when I remarked that my initial post was aimed at you but as you subsequently pointed out, you led the discussion which points to the possibility of you having some deliberate motivation for having done so. I'm still trying to find some time to review that discussion and may have some questions for others that were involved in it later. And for what it's worth, I'm NOT trying to get you lynched at all - I'm just trying to fathom your behaviour and your earlier defensiveness at the questions that I posed to you.

sig wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:
sig wrote:What do you think of Zebra with her info sharing, then after getting heat claiming it was a trap?
Why should we look into the map people more?
Also I've never been proven wrong in this context since I've never lead a lynch successfully on a civ before, but there is a first time for everything. I'll ISO and do a quick read over of your past two games and see what I see, but I think I'm right and that you are anti town this game.
I don't think Zebra should have shared her information but on the other hand, how do we know she didn't lie about what she learnt? It's true, she did subsequently claim that it was a trap. Whether it was or not and if it was, what was the point of it? I'd respectfully recommend you ask Zebra. As I've stated before (and it should be blatantly obvious by now) there are many players in this game with experience and skill far superior to mine. I'd count Zebra as one of those. I too would like to know what it is she hoped to have achieved by doing what she did but I wouldn't know

As I said earlier in this post, I don't know specifically why it is not in our best interests not to talk about the map (and presumably information we find there/or don't find there as the case may be) but I'm prepared to take the rule (14) at face value. My question to you, Sig (and yes, any other player supporting the information sharing position) - is why in this instance do you advocate tossing Rule 14 aside with gay abandon? I suppose that to an extent we have Zebra's answer in that she used the debate to set some elaborate trap But what about you, Sig and anyone else who's supported information sharing?
I don't like this you seem like you don't want to criticizes Zebra at all. You say we should take a closer look at map sharing people, but then brush off that Zebra shared stuff by saying maybe she lied. You've also not answered for why we should take a closer look at them. Players having more experience means nothing, you also seem to be excusing her based around the fact you think she is a much better player then you and I don't like that. I've already answered why I thought sharing what we learned was good and I'm not reopening whether or not we should share information. Know I'm talking to you about your post which seemed like a set up for people who advocated for sharing, yes you seem to not count Zebra in that group?

I'm not sure about TH first he tried to get me lynched and that didn't pan out, so he switched to Scotty on flimsy reasons. I'd need to think about him more, but right know I still think Glorfindel is bad.

Glorfindel wrote:
bea wrote:I feel like the thing between sig and glor is more rooted in a history I've not experienced with them. At times I find myself siding with both of them. And then second guessing each time I side with one or the other of them.
It is true bea that Sig and I have played many Mafia games together and believe it or not, outside of Mafia games we're really good friends I genuinely care about the guy a great deal. He's probably the player with whose playstyle I feel most familiar. I've been burnt that many times by him though in these games, I know just what he's capable of...

Having said that, I'm not outright accusing him of anything or threatening him in any way. Again, I just felt uncomfortable with some of the statements he's made and asked for an explanation.

I would say this thing isn't really rooted in history. We are slightly more familiar with each others playstyle and I have tricked him in a few games as mafia. However, my suspicion of him this game has nothing to do with our history I'm simply gut reading his niceness as not genuine. Usually I find it obvious if he is being genuine or not, this game not so much.

@MP why am I so low on your list?

I think I have satisfactorily answered your questions to the best of my ability my friend. If Zebra did in fact deliberately lie about what she knew for the purpose of setting a 'trap' then she hasn't shared anything at all. If she was attempting to trick you into revealing what you knew then that is suspicious and SHE should answer for that, NOT I. As for why I believe that we shouldn't have talked about the map and the associated information, I'll state AGAIN for you - Rule 14.

And now, would you please respond to MY question (given that you are so fastidious about everyone answering yours) - why were you advocating talking about something that Rule 14 CLEARLY stated was not in our best interest? I understand from your posts at the time that you considered it beneficial and my argument isn't so much with that - it's more that you led (by your own admission) the discussion on this topic in full knowledge that it "wasn't in our best interests". Why would anyone Town aligned do such a thing?

S~V~S wrote:I reread some last night before I fell asleep at 8:30 (I think I have the flu, someone at work had it and I feel like someone beatme with a bat

I am genuinely sorry to hear that you aren't feel well my friend. I sincerely hope you are feeling much better very soon. It really sucks being sick...

sig wrote:I'd be up for a Glorfindel lynch today. I will ISO him tomorrow, but my gut is telling me he isn't pro civ at all.

Sir Thomas More: You threaten like a dockside bully.
Cromwell: How should I threaten?
Sir Thomas More: Like a minister of state. With justice.
Cromwell: Oh, justice is what you're threatened with.
Sir Thomas More: Then I am not threatened.

A Man for All Seaasons - Robert Bolt

bea wrote:I feel like the thing between sig and glor is more rooted in a history I've not experienced with them. At times I find myself siding with both of them. And then second guessing each time I side with one or the other of them.

It is true bea that Sig and I have played many Mafia games together and believe it or not, outside of Mafia games we're really good friends

I genuinely care about the guy a great deal. He's probably the player with whose playstyle I feel most familiar. I've been burnt that many times by him though in these games, I know just what he's capable of...

Having said that, I'm not outright accusing him of anything or threatening him in any way. Again, I just felt uncomfortable with some of the statements he's made and asked for an explanation.

sig wrote:What do you think of Zebra with her info sharing, then after getting heat claiming it was a trap?
Why should we look into the map people more?
Also I've never been proven wrong in this context since I've never lead a lynch successfully on a civ before, but there is a first time for everything. I'll ISO and do a quick read over of your past two games and see what I see, but I think I'm right and that you are anti town this game.

OK, as I said previously, I'm not in favour of sharing the information compiled from our journey around the map given Epi's "Rule 14: Talking about the map is allowed but not in your best interest." For someone to then go ahead and advocate talking about it seems silly to me. I don't know the reasons behind Rule 14 anymore than most of us. I'm thinking though that perhaps a certain combination of places on the map might reveal something of significance - perhaps potentially game breaking for the player/s that get the sequence right - it's just speculation. I'm not one to around flaunting rules though - Rule 14 no less than Rule 5...

I don't think Zebra should have shared her information but on the other hand, how do we know she didn't lie about what she learnt? It's true, she did subsequently claim that it was a trap. Whether it was or not and if it was, what was the point of it? I'd respectfully recommend you ask Zebra. As I've stated before (and it should be blatantly obvious by now) there are many players in this game with experience and skill far superior to mine. I'd count Zebra as one of those. I too would like to know what it is she hoped to have achieved by doing what she did but I wouldn't know

As I said earlier in this post, I don't know specifically why it is not in our best interests not to talk about the map (and presumably information we find there/or don't find there as the case may be) but I'm prepared to take the rule (14) at face value. My question to you, Sig (and yes, any other player supporting the information sharing position) - is why in this instance do you advocate tossing Rule 14 aside with gay abandon? I suppose that to an extent we have Zebra's answer in that she used the debate to set some elaborate trap

But what about you, Sig and anyone else who's supported information sharing?

Search found 187 matches