The Syndicate

Ricochet wrote:

Golden wrote:Meh, I really can't be bothered pointing you to things that a) have already been said in the thread several times and that you are well aware of and b) that you only want to attack as 'not being objective' to try to prove your point and 'win the argument'. I've got enough to do with my time. You can take whatever view you want, I'm not going to change your mind through a whole lot of work.

Golden wrote:I agree with Jay's PoE. I think the remainder of the baddies are probably in that pool of 5. I strongly think Quin is one.

Golden wrote: the crux of this is about why you continue to find Jay suspicious for something that you've had several people tell you is a normal town viewpoint.

Ahuh.

Sloonei wrote:@ Quin, I did vote for Scotty after you. I voted for yu, went to work, came home and changed my vote for Scotty. Then when I woke up in the morning INH had cast a vote for Scotty and tried to 100% of the responsibility for his vote on me and set me up to be a baddie if Scotty flipped town. That set off every alarm in my head, so I made a last-second push against him.

But the part of your former suspicion against me that I don't understand is why you think I would have been trying to set you up for a lynch as a scum tactic. That would require me to look at the thread as a bad guy and say "I need to focus all my energy on Quin." That's not a viable scim strategy. When I'm scum I want to leave myself open to all sorts of options. This means doing the opposite of what I did in this game.

I don't know what you would do when you're scum, because we haven't played together in a game where you were scum in a very long time. What I'm getting at here, is that obviously someone was going to get lynched come EoD, and from everything that I'd surmised up to that point that your strategy was:

1) Use Scotty's response to your goading as a trigger to vote for me
2) Fall back onto someone else when I opposed it

You say that you have preferences in your scum strategy, but it's not always going to work out that way, so it doesn't really mean a lot to me.

If you voted for Scotty, my points in favor of you being bad still apply (whether you understand them or not), but as I said, there is a very low chance of you two being teammates.

Out of curiousity, can you give me the post where you think he's trying to put blame on you prematurely? What does it mean for INH now knowing Scotty was bad?

This reminds me, I need to elaborate on my read for INH. I'll put that on the agenda.

---

I'm catching up, as you can see.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Quin's suspicion of me is still something I'd like explained. It seemed to me like he was all over the place there, and it still makes very little sense to me.

I'll wait until he has expanded. At this point it looks like he suspects you because you suspected a townie, which would not be an inspiring thing.

His suspicion of a townie had nothing to do with it. It was how he approached his suspicion that I found hollow.

3J, remember when you said that our perspectives tend to resonate? I'm not feeling that here, and I don't trust you.

Sloonei wrote:Quin's suspicion of me is still something I'd like explained. It seemed to me like he was all over the place there, and it still makes very little sense to me.

apologies for not providing any substance right now, i am distracted.

I'm not-so-inclined to see you as bad now, because Scotty wouldn't likely have been lynched without your goading to set up the case against him. But like I said before, there's a caveat to that: which is in that the last time I remember playing with you on the other forum, you bussed your own team so you could supertown until the end. I forget what the end result of that was, but I imagine you'll understand what I'm talking about. Do I think that's what you're doing here? No. I think the Syndicate is a lot more attuned to that sort of play which would make it more difficult for you to do so.

While those are my current thoughts, I do agree that I was coming across kind of incomprehensible before Scotty's baddie flip (one of the many benefits of phone posting), so I'll do my best to explain my thought process back then. I cannot be any clearer about anything prior to my vote though. I don't understand why you don't understand.

I scum-read you stronger than I did Scotty, but I was also of the opinion that only one of you were bad. When you initially did your run with Scotty goading him into voting for me, you left your vote on me well past the actual event, and only was it when I pushed back that you actually moved your vote. That's why I thought you were trying to set me up, and why I thought you were trying to backpedal when I wasn't having any of it. What I either missed or what you didn't post in the thread at the time is that you never voted Scotty. That's my fault, and it digs quite a hole out of my case against you, because INH was a bit more obscure of a lynch choice than Scotty was.

That's Day 1, anyway.

I was operating since under the assumption that you were voting for Scotty, not INH. That's my fault. Is this the part where we stop understanding eachother? Our dialogue more recently still worries me. It feels like you've been feigning ignorance, but we both know eachother well enough to know that we both know what we're talking about.

I'd like to know exactly what you don't understand, what I've mistaken, what we're miscommunicating, because writing this is giving me a headache and I'm not sure whether anything I've just said to you is even relevant.

I also voted Day 3 because I feel like I'm gonna need it, assuming I live that long.

I'm home. Let me get my shit together and I'll address everything I can.

Pimples on elephants?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Quin wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Well I'm going to need to reprocess everything in light of that.

Mmhm. I feel much better about sloonei now.

I might actually feel worse.

I don't know, I'm going to try to block it all out until I have time to reassess objectively.

Why? I do not think that Sloonei or Scotty could be teammates. There's a caveat tovthat which I've seen him do before, but I want to discuss it via computer.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Well I'm going to need to reprocess everything in light of that.

Mmhm. I feel much better about sloonei now.

I town read INH. I think he comes out looking good in his dialogue with 3j. I need timing and context to give an opinion on his Scotty vote, so ill talk about that when I'm at a computer.


Linki: Well.

Sloonei wrote:Do you have time to read INH now? He only has like 9 posts.

I can give you general observations now and elaborate later.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Quin, what do you believe was Sloonei's intention when he pushed for a CFD against INH?

Can I also put this off until tonight? Im not as caught up as id like to be. That would have happened when I was sleeping.

Linki: marmot.

Sloonei lets pick this up again when I'm not phone posting. Its stressing me out and I just cant understand you right now.

Sloonei wrote:

Quin wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Quin wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Quin wrote:

Sloonei wrote:But why are those strange things suspicious? What would be the benefit in a scum strategy like the one I used? What angle was I trying to work, and what was my motivation?

Uhh.. You wanted to lynch a civ?

I am not the first person to find a civilian suspicious on Day 1. That has happened in every game of mafia ever played.

Thats not what I'm saying.

Then what are you saying?

Baddies (you) knowingly lynch civs. This also happens in every mafia game ever played. That's your motivation. The benefit is that you get a dead civ. I'm not sure what you expected when you asked me this, its pretty straightforward.

So is your suspicion completely arbitrary? I didn't even end up voting for Scotty. 4 other people did. Are they all scum too? You voted for me, ergo you wanted to lynch a civ and are also bad. This is a completely meaningless accusation. You've laid out a more elaborate case about how I came in trying to spin the lynch against either one of you or Scotty and this suspicion made no sense to me. This is what I was getting at with my questions. I want to make sense of it, or determine that it does not make sense.

I don't know for sure who the baddies are Sloonei.

Sloonei wrote:

Quin wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Quin wrote:

Sloonei wrote:But why are those strange things suspicious? What would be the benefit in a scum strategy like the one I used? What angle was I trying to work, and what was my motivation?

Uhh.. You wanted to lynch a civ?

I am not the first person to find a civilian suspicious on Day 1. That has happened in every game of mafia ever played.

Thats not what I'm saying.

Then what are you saying?

Baddies (you) knowingly lynch civs. This also happens in every mafia game ever played. That's your motivation. The benefit is that you get a dead civ. I'm not sure what you expected when you asked me this, its pretty straightforward.

Sloonei wrote:

Quin wrote:

Sloonei wrote:But why are those strange things suspicious? What would be the benefit in a scum strategy like the one I used? What angle was I trying to work, and what was my motivation?

Uhh.. You wanted to lynch a civ?

I am not the first person to find a civilian suspicious on Day 1. That has happened in every game of mafia ever played.

Thats not what I'm saying.

Sloonei wrote:But why are those strange things suspicious? What would be the benefit in a scum strategy like the one I used? What angle was I trying to work, and what was my motivation?

Uhh.. You wanted to lynch a civ?

Sloonei wrote:

Quin wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Quin wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Quin wrote:I'm leaving my vote where it is. I'm of the opinion that Sloonei was attempting to set me up as the Day 1 lynch with baddie intentions and fell back onto Scotty when I resisted it and he became the center of attention.

Your vote has no utility where it is. Are you content with that?

Yup.

It is uncharacteristic of you to ask that, JumbledJollyJim.

No it isn't.

What do you think of Sloonei right now?

I think he is bad, hence my vote. Scotty flipping civ only makes my read stronger. It is uncharacteristic of you, because typically you are all for alternative lynches. As far as Day 1 goes, I think my case is solid and seeing you say it has 'no utility' tells me you were rejecting it as an alternative wagon.

I still do not understand your suspicion of me. I've done some strange things, sure, but I don't understand how you've reasoned that these things make me the most suspicious player in the game. I had a mild ping on you to start the game, and another ping on Scotty for the way he offered his read on you. I put the two together and came out of it changing my mind on the both of you, but not before spawning a bandwagon against Scotty.
You'll note that I've not expressed any suspicion against you in a while.

I think the strange things that you've done are suspicious things. I didn't trust any part of our dialogue. Its great that you haven't expressed suspicion on me lately, but that doesnt have any impact on my own read.

I'm leaving for uni, but I'll observe the thread so I can stay caught up. Adios.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Quin wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Quin wrote:I'm leaving my vote where it is. I'm of the opinion that Sloonei was attempting to set me up as the Day 1 lynch with baddie intentions and fell back onto Scotty when I resisted it and he became the center of attention.

Your vote has no utility where it is. Are you content with that?

Yup.

It is uncharacteristic of you to ask that, JumbledJollyJim.

No it isn't.

What do you think of Sloonei right now?

I think he is bad, hence my vote. Scotty flipping civ only makes my read stronger. It is uncharacteristic of you, because typically you are all for alternative lynches. As far as Day 1 goes, I think my case is solid and seeing you say it has 'no utility' tells me you were rejecting it as an alternative wagon.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Quin wrote:I'm leaving my vote where it is. I'm of the opinion that Sloonei was attempting to set me up as the Day 1 lynch with baddie intentions and fell back onto Scotty when I resisted it and he became the center of attention.

Your vote has no utility where it is. Are you content with that?

Yup.

It is uncharacteristic of you to ask that, JumbledJollyJim.

Scotty wrote: Quin, I think it was you who said it was suspicious if I change up my day 1 strategies from my norm. Damned if I do, damned if I don't. I don't like giving tone reads on day 1, because I'm generally bad at them, but I figured practice makes perfect. It in this case, practice makes me get lynched day 1. So...cumquats.

I did not! I merely pointed it out as an observation and even argued that it was not suspicious

I think Day 1 is much too early for Scotty to be dishing out scum-reads because they haven't stepped up to the plate, so that's mildly suspicious. Also interesting to note that he's straying from his typical 'voting an inactive on Day 1' strategy, which I find less so, because meta is meta and not evidence.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Scotty's response to Epignosis isn't very persuasive.

He does make a good point to Quin. I said I was changing my Day 1 tactic, and Quin had nothing to say about it. Scotty changes his Day 1 tactics, and gets suspected for it.

NOT! HAPPY! JAN!

Rico gets some townie points because I had the same thought process before I read this:

I'm leaving my vote where it is. I'm of the opinion that Sloonei was attempting to set me up as the Day 1 lynch with baddie intentions and fell back onto Scotty when I resisted it and he became the center of attention.

Golden wrote:I could see either Epi or Scotty as bad, but probably not together.

I think an Epi/Rico team is still well possible.
I think a Scotty/Quin team is also well possible.

That's me for now.

I don't think you think either of the latter two at all.

I think Day 1 is much too early for Scotty to be dishing out scum-reads because they haven't stepped up to the plate, so that's mildly suspicious. Also interesting to note that he's straying from his typical 'voting an inactive on Day 1' strategy, which I find less so, because meta is meta and not evidence.

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Scotty wrote: Basically. I put those reads in as I thought of them, and after the fact realized I forgot about 4 more peeps. I can't really remember Quin's content this game, hence the scum read.

What's your beef with him?

My beef is the same as yours.

Medium rare?

Meh, ok. vote Quin

Why?

Same as you.

I mean you seemed to trust me enough there to follow along in a vote that you've got no substantial reason to believe in, despite claiming to believe in it. You've also got no substantial reason to trust me, just a minute ago you were complaining that I haven't been active enough, and now I'm here and I'm throwing this bullshit in your face, so why are you listening to me?

I happened to agree with your assessment of JJJ and Rico, doesn't mean I trust you.

Plus, I completely missed the part where you said we were baddie brothers. If I had seen that, I probably would not have even voted for Quin. As it is, I'll probably change it just because I feel like you've been trying to goad me into voting there.

I suspect him just as much as like 4 other people I could be voting for

I think this chain of events is suspicious. On almost the opposite spectrum for my reason to suspect Sloonei, Scotty here is taking back his vote for me based on Sloonei's actions. Most notably, when Scotty realised Sloonei had tried to establish us as teammates, he immediately withdrew his vote. What pings me hard here is that I would imagine this reaction coming from someone who themselves were pinged by Sloonei's actions. But there's an absence of that in his post history. He does have some inferred suspicion for Sloonei, but it's not in this specific context.

OMGUS to the max, but I could see one of Scotty or Sloonei being bad, but they're not teammates.

linki: As for this, see Scotty:

Scotty wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I think I like Scotty's attempt to get reads, even when he is uncertain of how to go about it. He's trying to expand his Day 1 repertoire and it appears mostly genuine to me. I also don't get the wrong vibes from Sloonei's interrogation tactic. He observed a specific thing (Scotty's read of Quin) that he found interested, and then harnessed that into a an exchange that stands a chance of producing a more complete read.

Sloonei came in saying he read Quin as bad "same as me" but then quoted examples after the fact, as if he stole cookies from the cookie jar and then replaced them with some pieces of cardboard he found in the garage so no one would know he ate the cookies preemptively.

What is your opinion of Quin, JJJ?

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Scotty wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I think I like Scotty's attempt to get reads, even when he is uncertain of how to go about it. He's trying to expand his Day 1 repertoire and it appears mostly genuine to me. I also don't get the wrong vibes from Sloonei's interrogation tactic. He observed a specific thing (Scotty's read of Quin) that he found interested, and then harnessed that into a an exchange that stands a chance of producing a more complete read.

Sloonei came in saying he read Quin as bad "same as me" but then quoted examples after the fact, as if he stole cookies from the cookie jar and then replaced them with some pieces of cardboard he found in the garage so no one would know he ate the cookies preemptively.

What is your opinion of Quin, JJJ?

I do not get this analogy. Also you never said a word about why you might suspect Quin, just that you did. Why should it be a mark against me that I am able to substantiate this read we supposedly share?

By answering with "same as you" you are affirming that I am reading him bad because 'I can't remember what he said'. But then you come in backing it up after the fact, like you had a reason initially, you just lied about it.
It's Like me saying now that I'm suspicious of Quin because he killed my cat...I just chose not to mention that in my initial read.

But yes, I'll entertain you with a read on Scotty. Give me a little bit of time.

Sloonei wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Sloonei wrote:I'd like him to explain why it makes me bad. I'd also like to hear what he thinks of scotty.

So you're not satisfied with the reason he already provided?

I am not, but I'm also at work and don't have time to read anything so it's possible I've overlooked something

I think you should look again once you get home, because I don't think it's possible for me to be any clearer.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I wonder if Golden is going to change his vote from the current random one.

I started to read into this and then I realised...you're the marmot.

linki: Let me get back to you. I have to take my brother to an exam.

Sloonei wrote:

Quin wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Quin wrote:

Beck wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Hey Beck, I hereby accuse you of using (trying to use) a fake random vote as a means of comfortably getting your feet into the scary cold water that is this game. I've done it before. What say you?

I say nay!

I voted for MP7 for one post in particular -- would be curios to see if you see what I see.

But let's say I did vote for MP7 to ease myself into the game, what does that make me?

(There's a right answer and a wrong answer, Jimmy.)

I'm looking at all of his four posts pretty intently, but I'm not seeing anything at all. The very most I can come up with is his 'I'll post more strategies later' thing and I'm pretty sure that's a political joke.

Quin wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Everyone else: I don't expect you to read our text walls. Once we've had our chat and I am satisfied with whatever conclusion I come to I'll summarize it.

My suspicion of you has grown, sir. Why wouldn't you expect people to read what you've posted and form their own opinions and instead rely on your summary?

I agree with this. But at the same time, what JJJ said about 'being satisfied with the conclusion' makes me feel good. It tells me he's not just trying to shake off the attention.

I didn't really like these two posts from Quin, for the record. In the top one he makes sure to keep his distance from actually accusing MP of anything, but leaves the door open a crack, and in the second one he manages to take both sides of a case against Jay in consecutive sentences.

1. I didn't accuse MP of being suspicious because I don't think he's suspicious. There was no crack, either. Not sure where you're looking

2. Fair enough.

linki: My reason for the voting is right there. You're basing your vote on me off of Scotty, not me. That's bad.

I do not understand how that would make me bad if it was true.

More specifically, you are using Scotty's actions as a means to vote for me, without any insight as to whether what Scotty is doing is civvie or baddie behaviour. Had he been lynched and flipped bad, you might have a reason to look at him as inspiration to vote me, but as it is, he has not, and therefore you are bad.

Sloonei wrote:

Quin wrote:

Beck wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Hey Beck, I hereby accuse you of using (trying to use) a fake random vote as a means of comfortably getting your feet into the scary cold water that is this game. I've done it before. What say you?

I say nay!

I voted for MP7 for one post in particular -- would be curios to see if you see what I see.

But let's say I did vote for MP7 to ease myself into the game, what does that make me?

(There's a right answer and a wrong answer, Jimmy.)

I'm looking at all of his four posts pretty intently, but I'm not seeing anything at all. The very most I can come up with is his 'I'll post more strategies later' thing and I'm pretty sure that's a political joke.

Quin wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Everyone else: I don't expect you to read our text walls. Once we've had our chat and I am satisfied with whatever conclusion I come to I'll summarize it.

My suspicion of you has grown, sir. Why wouldn't you expect people to read what you've posted and form their own opinions and instead rely on your summary?

I agree with this. But at the same time, what JJJ said about 'being satisfied with the conclusion' makes me feel good. It tells me he's not just trying to shake off the attention.

I didn't really like these two posts from Quin, for the record. In the top one he makes sure to keep his distance from actually accusing MP of anything, but leaves the door open a crack, and in the second one he manages to take both sides of a case against Jay in consecutive sentences.

1. I didn't accuse MP of being suspicious because I don't think he's suspicious. There was no crack, either. Not sure where you're looking

2. Fair enough.

linki: My reason for the voting is right there. You're basing your vote on me off of Scotty, not me. That's bad.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Scotty wrote:Can someone else comment on my interaction with Sloonei? Am I missing something here? I'm getting the heebeejeebies right now

I'm not sure what you'd be missing. You both seem to suspect Quin, which I don't really agree or disagree with. He's had less significant a presence in this game than usual which I suppose isn't ideal. I'm not sure why Sloonei associated you two as team mates, so he could talk about that. Hey! Sloonei!

I've got a presentation coming up that's stressing me out quite a bit, and I've sort of forced myself into this other goings-on on my other forum. Not a lot I can say or do to satiate your concern but that's what it is, unfortunately.

has anybody else notices that I go from having the vocabulary of a linguistics professor to a 5th grader over the course of the day?

Sloonei wrote:The truth is I felt like your post of reads was one of those "substance for the sake of substance" posts, and your read on Quin came off to me as very forced and completely meaningless. So I decided to throw an accusation out there and goad you into acting on your "suspicion" of Quin, which you've done even though you have no reason to distrust Quin or trust me. How bogus is this?

All I'm getting from this is that a significant part of why you are currently voting for me is because of Scotty's actions, and that is not ideal.

vote Sloonei

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Quin wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Everyone else: I don't expect you to read our text walls. Once we've had our chat and I am satisfied with whatever conclusion I come to I'll summarize it.

My suspicion of you has grown, sir. Why wouldn't you expect people to read what you've posted and form their own opinions and instead rely on your summary?

I agree with this. But at the same time, what JJJ said about 'being satisfied with the conclusion' makes me feel good. It tells me he's not just trying to shake off the attention.

I'm uncertain what you mean by this Quin. Could you expand on how yellow leads you to orange?

By the post alone, it suggests that you're more interested in keeping the dialogue going, therefore keeping yourself in the spotlight, rather than trying to defuse what was at the time probably the most worthwhile arguments going on.

Epignosis wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Everyone else: I don't expect you to read our text walls. Once we've had our chat and I am satisfied with whatever conclusion I come to I'll summarize it.

My suspicion of you has grown, sir. Why wouldn't you expect people to read what you've posted and form their own opinions and instead rely on your summary?

I agree with this. But at the same time, what JJJ said about 'being satisfied with the conclusion' makes me feel good. It tells me he's not just trying to shake off the attention.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Quin wrote:I say we let this happen and if he hasn't lynched all the baddies by Day 4 then we coup detat this son of a bitch and put me in charge.

Challenge accepted. I feel like I'm on a roll. Are you going to kill me if I get too close?

No, I'll just build a wall and kick you out.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Beck wrote:i like you, Jay

i need a VP, you in?

I think we're going to get along, Beck.

However, I think my people are going to need to talk to your people. I am just not VP material. I am in charge. I run the show.

I say we let this happen and if he hasn't lynched all the baddies by Day 4 then we coup detat this son of a bitch and put me in charge.

Beck wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Hey Beck, I hereby accuse you of using (trying to use) a fake random vote as a means of comfortably getting your feet into the scary cold water that is this game. I've done it before. What say you?

I say nay!

I voted for MP7 for one post in particular -- would be curios to see if you see what I see.

But let's say I did vote for MP7 to ease myself into the game, what does that make me?

(There's a right answer and a wrong answer, Jimmy.)

I'm looking at all of his four posts pretty intently, but I'm not seeing anything at all. The very most I can come up with is his 'I'll post more strategies later' thing and I'm pretty sure that's a political joke.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Hey look guys, a real post!

I like Rico's roleplay. It might not contain relevant content, but I appreciate that he's willing to have fun with his posts without concern for that accusation. Town lean.

Scotty wrote:But I probably won't vote those people exclusively for not checking in....I....I might go craaazy this game and not just vote a no-show or low poster on day 1.

Now you've gone and done it. I'm going to hold you to that.

I like Quin yelling in caps lock. Town lean.

#Day0reads

I HAVE NOTHING ELSE GOING FOR ME

insertnamehere wrote:how has there not been a Zodiac Mafia yet? Really, all of David Fincher's movies could make for some awesome games.

There was a zodiac mafia. I was the best baddie yall ever saw

TED CRUZ IS THE ZODIAC KILLER