The Syndicate

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:One benefit to lynching Jack today is to remove the WIFOM factor from his posts. Since he became confirmed he's only interacted with Epi. I refuse to read into that but I can see it being argued one way or another.

I realise we shouldn't be arguing about Jack right now, but that needed to be said

The more he talks, the more I like him. Talking mafia is what I like to see.

thellama73 wrote:Well, I just spent a long time looking at Quin. The thing I noticed about him was how short his posts have been. More than half of them are under 10 words. I wanted to see if this was typical or some sort of tell, so I looked at some previous games. Quin was a little chattier in Felt 2, where he was civ, but in A Mafia of Unfortunate Events, he was quite short, and an Indy. I thought I might be on to something, but then I looked at Lost 2, where he was a civvie, and his posting style is very similar to what I'm seeing here.

So I'm back to square one on Quin.

Epignosis wrote:

DFaraday wrote:I won't be able to catch up on the thread until tonight, so I randomized Sawyer. I hate randomizing, but I haven't read since page 3 and literally have no suspicions yet.

This was Mon Feb 27, 2017 3:13 pm EST. I note that there were only seven pages, which means DF was only four pages behind. Surely he could have skimmed and made a more informed decision in that time, could he not?

DFaraday wrote:Finally caught up. Good result, all! RIP Elo.

I agree that there's no rush to lynch Jack, we just need to be careful about how close lynches are or he could tip the scales. Then again, I doubt he'd use that to save a teammate, but rather frame a civ.

To Sawyer: I have no suspicion of you. I randomized from everybody besides myself and it was you. That's all.

This next post is Wed Mar 01, 2017 3:15 am EST, over 36 hours later. In it, DF did nothing but talk about Jack- no mention of suspects, whom he would have voted had he been caught up, no ideas on who is a civilian- nada.

I'm voting DFaraday.

Epignosis wrote:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

Scotty wrote:This might be cliche but I'm not thrilled with any of Marmot's 7 posts so far. Granted, that was Day 0. But he could probably shave the fluff, that naked rat

What's a townie Marmot look like?

I cut out the naked mammal even though Eloh is dead.

We know this is a fabricated question, because either Jack knows MM is a civilian or he doesn't care for the answer because MM isn't.

Given that Scotty had already implied his reason for not liking MM's posts (they're devoid of game-related purpose), this by itself looks suspicious to me. However, subsequent MM interactions make me less inclined to believe they are working together.

I do believe, on the other hand, that Jack's exchange with Scotty about other people opened the door for this pointless question:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:Tell me more about DF's meta. He made it like 3 posts before getting replaced in the only game we've played together.

Scotty never got back to answer about DF. For the same reason outlined above, Jack obviously wasn't interested in learning anything about DF (notice that he never got an answer and never asked anybody else about DF). Given what was already said about DF's tendency toward being a low poster (what Scotty said and Jack's mention of DF getting replaced), and given that Jack only asked this specific question about MM and DF, I believe one of them is on his team.

Between the two of them, I'd say it's DF.

thellama73 wrote:I'm increasingly inclined to distrust Wilgy. He was jokey jokey jokester until Jack got outed, and then all of a sudden he became serious business. Plus his interactions with Jack feel a bit too friendly. This is consistent with a cocky baddie being humbled by an unexpected reveal. Now he seems very eager to agree with Epignosis, even when Epignosis is plainly wrong..

DrWilgy wrote:

Quin wrote:What's a civilian ninja?

Civilian that can nk.

notsawyer540 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:How would you have an extra Day and Night? You're going to have the same number of Days and Nights whether you lynch Jack now or lynch him later. Does the number of mafia change depending upon when you lynch them? No. It doesn't.

There are (probably) three Mafia. You know one of them. You lynch him. He's out. Someone is killed. Then you go about Day 3. How does that make you more informed than the alternative below?

You know one of the mafia. You keep him around. Someone else is lynched, good or bad. Someone is killed. Then you go about Day 3.

More time = more posts. More posts = more information. More information = better decision. Right? Am I missing something?

I know I'm not as experienced as a lot of other players, but in this case my logic just makes more sense to me.

DrWilgy wrote:

Quin wrote:Because I didn't want to.

Well here's the thing. Jack only mentioned you once in a comment that lead nowhere and you didn't mention Jack until 24 houra after his reveal. I'm pretty sure your his teammate.

DrWilgy wrote:

Quin wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Quin wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Quin wrote:I don't see a problem with his voting for me. Jack is outted but that doesn't mean we absolutely have to lynch him today (though we should)

Why did it take you so long to mention Jack?

I didn't want to until now.

Why?

No reason. I just didn't.

But there was a want. If there was no reason wouldn't you have stated "I just didn't" originally.

DrWilgy wrote:

Quin wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Quin wrote:I don't see a problem with his voting for me. Jack is outted but that doesn't mean we absolutely have to lynch him today (though we should)

Why did it take you so long to mention Jack?

I didn't want to until now.

Why?

DrWilgy wrote:

Quin wrote:I don't see a problem with his voting for me. Jack is outted but that doesn't mean we absolutely have to lynch him today (though we should)

Why did it take you so long to mention Jack?

DrWilgy wrote:

Quin wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Quin wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Quin wrote:Hey Wilgy, is marmot your teammate again? I notice you brought up your buddy-burger from RoT3K. What was the cue for that?

SVS was curious about my interactions with teammates. I thought RoTK was a good reference for her.

Is me bringing up RoTK an indicator that Marmot and I are on a team?

Maybe. It felt like it came out of nowhere so I'm entertaining the idea. Who would you have voted yesterday if you were in time to do so?

Well going "hey you brought up X does this mean you and marmot are teammates?" is definitely not the way to go about hunting for answers if you think theres a chance on that. If I were to be bad I'd have all the tools I need to counter your thoughts regarding the subject now.

Probably just would've voted Epi. Only because of my "hey epi is bad" thing, otherwise there would've veen no rhyme or reason. Wasn't paying too much attention to the thread then

Liki - wot

Your answer didn't really matter to me much. It's the kind of observation I pocket for later in the event one of you flip bad. I asked you just so I could get it out in the thread, having you respond was just a bonus.

I look forward to you using that observation Quin.

DrWilgy wrote:

Quin wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Quin wrote:Hey Wilgy, is marmot your teammate again? I notice you brought up your buddy-burger from RoT3K. What was the cue for that?

SVS was curious about my interactions with teammates. I thought RoTK was a good reference for her.

Is me bringing up RoTK an indicator that Marmot and I are on a team?

Maybe. It felt like it came out of nowhere so I'm entertaining the idea. Who would you have voted yesterday if you were in time to do so?

Well going "hey you brought up X does this mean you and marmot are teammates?" is definitely not the way to go about hunting for answers if you think theres a chance on that. If I were to be bad I'd have all the tools I need to counter your thoughts regarding the subject now.

Probably just would've voted Epi. Only because of my "hey epi is bad" thing, otherwise there would've veen no rhyme or reason. Wasn't paying too much attention to the thread then

Liki - wot

DrWilgy wrote:

Quin wrote:Hey Wilgy, is marmot your teammate again? I notice you brought up your buddy-burger from RoT3K. What was the cue for that?

SVS was curious about my interactions with teammates. I thought RoTK was a good reference for her.

Is me bringing up RoTK an indicator that Marmot and I are on a team?

notsawyer540 wrote:

Quin wrote:What do you think about things that are not me? Or even me in a different context.

As I previously mentioned, our exchange rubbed me the wrong way, and I think that there was an attempted bus on me (to save Jack) before Scotty got lynched. It would make sense that at least one of the four people who voted for me are bad. Llama agreed with you about me, Dfaraday claimed to have randomized me, and Mac (unless I missed his explanation) appeared to have voted for me just for shits and giggles when it didn't matter any more.

Dfaraday has only 3 posts, last I checked. He voted at random, saying he had no idea who to vote for.

Mac voted for me in the 11th hour when it was irrelevant. Then he was all proud when Jack was outed, because he "called it."

Regardless of whether or not I'm correct about it being an attempted bus, I would like for someone to explain to me why both of those votes don't look shady as shit.

notsawyer540 wrote:I'm going to assume you meant to say "were," because otherwise you'd be agreeing with me. If that's the case, it brings us back to the misunderstanding bit. You simply didn't understand what I was saying. Perhaps I could've worded it better, but that hangover I mentioned was really fucking with my focus.

Or are you just mad at me for being a redhead?

notsawyer540 wrote:

Quin wrote:I think you're ignoring what my beef actually is. It's not just me that holds the opinion I do, so it's not for no reason.

I've addressed it multiple times now. I don't see what you're talking about. From my perspective you misunderstood what I wrote, either unintentionally or otherwise. I sure as shit wouldn't keep bringing it up if I had made any sort of mistake. Did I violate some sort of unwritten rule of mafia etiquette that I'm not aware of?

notsawyer540 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I'm a redhead- I have no soul

Me too!

I don't really find Quin suspicious. But then again this is only my second game on this site and there are only a couple people I know well enough to make judgments on. Getting a civ read on LC. Not really sure if going after low posters is a good idea here, but I don't really have any better ideas yet, so it may come to that for me.

I'm a civ and I support Hillary Clinton.

Other than that, it usually takes me a few cycles to start putting things together. If Ron Swanson were in this game, I'd say he's guilty as shit for three days before realizing it was Donna right before I'm killed!

Anyway I'm gonna get back to watching TV and nursing this hangover. I'll check back in periodically.

notsawyer540 wrote:RIP Eloh. Judging by what SVS said, it would've been nice to have you around late-game.

I'm gonna go ahead and vote for Jack now, but I'll still participate in the discussion. As far as Quin is concerned, I already mentioned that I found it super shady the way he attacked me for no reason. After the way the voting went down, it seems pretty obvious from my perspective that I was the intended victim of a bus. I don't know how many of the people who voted for me are mafia, but I'd be willing to bet it was at least one.

S~V~S wrote:

G-Man wrote:Polls have been added as a separate topic. Sorry for the delay. I was fighting with my router for a while there. Now I must review Day 1 for any more Hillary Points.

Thanks!

I just figured you were kicking it old school and not doing a poll thread. That thread is great but it spoils people. I remember games where people spent hours in thread reconstructing polls. Don't want to do that again, lol.

@Epi, is that something Wilgy does, goof around with teammates in thread? I don't recall him really much interacting in thread with his team in last years GOC but otherwise I don't have much basis of comparison. Because unless he does that seems like a rather null action to me.

Also in your read back of Jack what were your thoughts on his posts regarding the discussion Quin and I had, and Jacks interpretation of it.

Same question for Quin, actually.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

Quin wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Quin missed my original point and misinterpreted my question. Hence we are talking in circles.

Placeholder vote on Quin. I don't think my original point was that obscure.

You had the chance to reiterate your point. Why didn't you take it, and instead choose to believe that I'm (assumedly purposefully) misinterpreting your question?

Quin, aren't you known for having several page long arguments over nuances of language aka talking in circles?

I don't fault S-V-S for this at all. That said, I don't think it's necessarily a scumtell for you so.

And that's all I have to say about that.

thellama73 wrote:

Quin wrote:I can't believe you guys haven't realised negative Hillary points are the way to go.

Hey llama, am I still bad?

I don't know. Were you ever bad?

MacDougall wrote:Let's talk more about how I tone read a Mafia player on day 1 again.

MacDougall wrote:I don't like the cut of this jackofhearts character's jib. Voting there.

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:

Epignosis wrote:Quin, I feel that you just like getting into arguments to see who is right.

That's not happening here. This is American politics. Being right has no place.

No, but thanks for that. And the stuff about not being able to read.

Jokes, mate, jokes.

I haven't said a single serious thing here and people want to keep taking offense.

Epignosis wrote:Quin, I feel that you just like getting into arguments to see who is right.

That's not happening here. This is American politics. Being right has no place.

notsawyer540 wrote:

Quin wrote:Discrediting your own opinion on an argument while still making a point of giving it never looks good to me.

I'm afraid I don't see what you're getting at. I was saying that I didn't see an argument or any evidence as to why people thought you were bad, but qualifying it with the fact that I don't know many of the people here as well as the rest of you know each other. I've known LC for nearly a decade, which is my basis for the civ read I have on him. But I've also known him long enough to know he can't be trusted. He won the Star Wars mafia I hosted on Lostpedia as an Indy role, so I know what he's capable of.

That said, I definitely have my eye on you now for blowing what I said out of proportion. I'm just trying to be realistic, and your attempt to convince people that I was somehow discrediting my own opinion is SUPER shady in my book.

thellama73 wrote:Notsawyer's equivocating is the kind of posting I generally dislike.

"Well, but on the other hand, but maybe, I'm not too sure." Feels like trying to play all sides. I'll be you, Notsawyer.

I'm sorry it wasn't entertaining enough for you. At least I got people talking, and that's what we need to root out the bad guys.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

Scotty wrote:Everyone's checked in, so...ima thinking one of the low posters is definitely bad.

Jackofhearts, I see you.

Hi, Scotty.

Do you still think that low posters are definitely bad? Specifically me? Any other leads?

Quin wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Quin missed my original point and misinterpreted my question. Hence we are talking in circles.

Placeholder vote on Quin. I don't think my original point was that obscure.

You had the chance to reiterate your point. Why didn't you take it, and instead choose to believe that I'm (assumedly purposefully) misinterpreting your question?

Quin, aren't you known for having several page long arguments over nuances of language aka talking in circles?

I don't fault S-V-S for this at all. That said, I don't think it's necessarily a scumtell for you so.

And that's all I have to say about that.

Epignosis wrote:

I predict a mechanic that stops the person with the most votes from being lynched and the lynch is actually decided based on the location of each voter.

Epignosis wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

Long Con wrote:I don't know, Eloh. I think Quin's response is not suspicious, just quality friendly snark.

That's okay. It's normal for people to think my suspicions are off. I even get lynched for them sometimes.

So I see a lot role-claiming. I thought this was illegal. G-Man...will those who have claimed an alliance have negative consequences?

(Still have a bit of catching up.)

Spoken like a true Democrat.

I don't get it.

Quin wrote:

thellama73 wrote:Quin, I feel like you are not taking my efforts to lynch you seriously.

I'm not.

Epignosis wrote:Nobody gets a fucking "red peek" Day 0. If you do, the game is pointless and we might as well do something else.

What's a red peek?

S~V~S wrote:Quin missed my original point and misinterpreted my question. Hence we are talking in circles.

Placeholder vote on Quin. I don't think my original point was that obscure.

S~V~S wrote:

Quin wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

Quin wrote:

notsawyer540 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I'm a redhead- I have no soul

Me too!

I don't really find Quin suspicious. But then again this is only my second game on this site and there are only a couple people I know well enough to make judgments on. Getting a civ read on LC. Not really sure if going after low posters is a good idea here, but I don't really have any better ideas yet, so it may come to that for me.

I'm a civ and I support Hillary Clinton.

Other than that, it usually takes me a few cycles to start putting things together. If Ron Swanson were in this game, I'd say he's guilty as shit for three days before realizing it was Donna right before I'm killed!

Anyway I'm gonna get back to watching TV and nursing this hangover. I'll check back in periodically.

Discrediting your own opinion on an argument while still making a point of giving it never looks good to me.

Why? Are you always so sure of your own opinion that you can't see the drawbacks in your own argument?

No. But if I find it suspicious I'm going to say so. I want a dialogue.

What are the drawbacks in my argument?

I wasn't talking abour drawbacks in YOUR argument; I was talking about
You saying you found it suspicious that he was qualifying his opinion. It was essentially a rhetorical question. "Are you always so sure of your own opinions that you find someone who can see both sides of a suspicion questionable?".

S~V~S wrote:

Quin wrote:

notsawyer540 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I'm a redhead- I have no soul

Me too!

I don't really find Quin suspicious. But then again this is only my second game on this site and there are only a couple people I know well enough to make judgments on. Getting a civ read on LC. Not really sure if going after low posters is a good idea here, but I don't really have any better ideas yet, so it may come to that for me.

I'm a civ and I support Hillary Clinton.

Other than that, it usually takes me a few cycles to start putting things together. If Ron Swanson were in this game, I'd say he's guilty as shit for three days before realizing it was Donna right before I'm killed!

Anyway I'm gonna get back to watching TV and nursing this hangover. I'll check back in periodically.

Discrediting your own opinion on an argument while still making a point of giving it never looks good to me.

Why? Are you always so sure of your own opinion that you can't see the drawbacks in your own argument?

thellama73 wrote:Quin, I feel like you are not taking my efforts to lynch you seriously.

notsawyer540 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I'm a redhead- I have no soul

Me too!

I don't really find Quin suspicious. But then again this is only my second game on this site and there are only a couple people I know well enough to make judgments on. Getting a civ read on LC. Not really sure if going after low posters is a good idea here, but I don't really have any better ideas yet, so it may come to that for me.

I'm a civ and I support Hillary Clinton.

Other than that, it usually takes me a few cycles to start putting things together. If Ron Swanson were in this game, I'd say he's guilty as shit for three days before realizing it was Donna right before I'm killed!

Anyway I'm gonna get back to watching TV and nursing this hangover. I'll check back in periodically.

Long Con wrote:No, I'm sorry, the correct answer is "Epignosis".

G-Man wrote:Hillary Clinton appreciates those who exercise their right to vote. After all, votes got her elected president. +1 Hillary Points to everyone who voted in the Day 0 poll.

Hillary Points Standings:

+4 Points: S~V~S
+3 Points: thellama73
+1 Point: Dfaraday, DrWilgy, Elohcin, FZ., Long Con, MacDougall, Marmot, notsawyer540, Scotty, TheFloyd73
0 Points: Epignosis, Jackofhearts2005
-5 Points: Quin

DrWilgy wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

MacDougall wrote:I think Wilgy is bad.

Don't you always?

No.

Oh, does that make you bad?

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:Hi everyone! I'm a doctor and Epignosis is bad!

They said I could keep my doctor, but I now see I'm stuck with Wigly.



Sorry guys, that's the best I got, tonight.

Hiii Jaaaaaaack, do you want to conquer the world with me?

Good! We'll need afew things before we can begin.
*Wilgy hands Jack a list of objects*

Spoiler: show

2 Cups of Chicken Broth
2 Latex Dolphin Suits
3 ounces of Uranium 227
Hilary's Pantsuit
A 12 pack of Maruchan brand cup ramen
2 tooth brushes, but they both need to be pink (you may need to buy multiple multi packs to achieve this)
12 ounces of liquid essence of nihilism (just ask around the site for some of this, I'm sure you can find a bit of it here)
A hot Hillary Swank
A not hot Hillary Swank
A PCI Wifi Card
A Hug

thellama73 wrote:And since we're throwing out wild Day 0 accusations, I think Quin is bad.

I agree with this, Quin are you bad?