The Syndicate

S~V~S wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Yeah! Just like the impassioned arguments I made against my own lynch- oh wait that never happened because I was lynched while I was at work

DrWilgy wrote:Ho boi. I'm dead in the GoC again. What did I miss?

thellama73 wrote:

Quin wrote:list them*.

You know what they are.

thellama73 wrote:

Quin wrote: I recall Long Con be the only one who wasn't also on the chopping block to express any degree of suspicion towards me. Would you not agree that it's unlikely that I'd be a 'frustrated baddie' at this point?

No I don't agree with that at all. I see lots of reasons for you to be frustrated.

thellama73 wrote:

Quin wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Quin wrote: And, both. This is civilian Quin though. I'd be unanimously town-read if I was bad.

Oh wait a minute! Just when I was about ready to plant Quin firmly in my Civ column, he lets loose with this howler.

"I'm playing exactly like a civvie. Nothing I'm doing indicates in the slightest that I am bad." The universal emotions of a frustrated baddie who feels he's played a great game but is losing anyway (I've been there many times.)

I really, really distrust this post.

It's amazing how much you can take out of a post which says literally none of that

It says all of that and more, Mr. Subtext. Clap while you can.

thellama73 wrote:

Quin wrote: And, both. This is civilian Quin though. I'd be unanimously town-read if I was bad.

Oh wait a minute! Just when I was about ready to plant Quin firmly in my Civ column, he lets loose with this howler.

"I'm playing exactly like a civvie. Nothing I'm doing indicates in the slightest that I am bad." The universal emotions of a frustrated baddie who feels he's played a great game but is losing anyway (I've been there many times.)

I really, really distrust this post.

Long Con 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.

On my original read, I was comparing his and S~V~S' posts, and I thought Quin was making more sense than her, in comparison. Now when I look at it, I see Quin's accusation of notsawyer as a stretch. Reading notsawyer's post that Quin is criticizing, I just don't see it that way. I feel more like Quin needed an angle on someone, and put this one together to have something.

Quin wrote:

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

I'm not.

Not much to say here, don't know if Civ Quin or baddie Quin is more likely to dismiss and avoid.

... and this is as far as I have gotten on the Quin ISO. Going to work now.

MacDougall wrote:

Quin wrote:We know what happens when we let people who oppose killing their partners play mafia, don't we?

I know you are making a joke but your impression here interests me. I know exactly what you mean but because I am a civ I haven't really felt it as a potential problem in this game, though you seem to have a carry over opinion from the GoC.

You would only be scared if you were Mafia aligned right?

Long Con wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:Good catch, Epi.

Want to know something weird? Maybe this will help MM with his case against me that bad memory = bad.

I went to cook supper and had the sudden epiphany that thellama73 was bad because he was feigning ignorance. He had posted something that I didn't think thellama73 would really think. I was stirring my cabbage and onions and recalling that he confused Jack and notsawyer earlier. I was hot on his trail.

With my bierocks in the oven, I came up here to find the post I thought he had made and guess what?

No such post exists.

Such post definitely does exist. I remember him mentioning it twice.

No, there was something else I was recalling, but I must've imagined it.

Try to reconstruct it from your imagination.

thellama73 wrote:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

thellama73 wrote:In answer to Epi's question, my vote for Quin is based on a Day 0 ping, odd, uncharacteristic behavior, which I tend to associate with baddies. I am also perturbed by Quin's unwillingness to take my vote seriously. I never really intended to leave my vote there, though. I haven't decided where to move it yet, but Notsawyer, for being wishy-washy, might get it. And JackofHearts, for being annoying and not answering questions seriously, might get it.

Can you be more specific?

I don't think there's a real question I've been asked that I didn't take seriously.

Convince me you aren't just being opportunistic by saying you might vote for one of the players who already has two votes for no real reason.

This post is pretty flippant, but in fairness to you, I think I keep confusing you with Notsawyer, since I don't know either of you. I can't tell you apart. Please try to be more distinctive.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

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

Well I don't like that your avatar is what you'd get if Diablo fucked a sharptooth.

But I don't vote for stupid reason.

thellama73 wrote:I don't think I'v played with Jack of Hearts before, but I'm finding him annoying. He apologized for not being "entertaining" enough. Entertainment is not the goal of the game, boyo. Finding baddies is. Take the snark down a notch, why don't you, and answer me this:

Who are looking at voting today and why?

thellama73 wrote:Oh, wait a minute. Notsawyer is the one who apologized for not being entertaining. Same question to you, Notsawyer. Who do you suspect and why?

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:Good catch, Epi.

Want to know something weird? Maybe this will help MM with his case against me that bad memory = bad.

I went to cook supper and had the sudden epiphany that thellama73 was bad because he was feigning ignorance. He had posted something that I didn't think thellama73 would really think. I was stirring my cabbage and onions and recalling that he confused Jack and notsawyer earlier. I was hot on his trail.

With my bierocks in the oven, I came up here to find the post I thought he had made and guess what?

No such post exists.

notsawyer540 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:No it doesn't. You don't get a bonus Day phase because you lynch Jack. You merely postpone actually having to do work. Lynching Jack Day 2 would also not preclude lynching S~V~S Day 3.

You're either not getting this or you're refusing to. I'm not saying that a whole new day is created. I'm saying that generally we would have more to go off of on day 3 than we would on day 2, and a smaller pool of civilians as well. Thus lowering the chance for mislynch.

Marmot wrote:Given that you said this, then absolutely yes!

Good catch.

Epignosis wrote:Oh wait, I did have a reason. I was just taking my vote off DrWilgy to give him some room so he wouldn't end up feeling like he had to vote Jack. You were just a bystander. I do not know if you are an innocent one.

Pedaling backwards doesn't slow you down.

Marmot wrote:How did you forget Quin was in this game, you had a lengthy back-and-forth with him about whether or not you would murder FZ, and also called him a civilian.

Another good catch.

Epignosis wrote:I feel like there is zero rational thought taking place in this thread right now. Zero.

Like when SVS was lynched over Jack?

thellama73 wrote:I quite like that you're moving you vote a lot. If nothing else, it has increased discussion. Sawyer is bad and just looking for flimsy things to pin on you.

I find it interesting how you consistently throw my name out as a suspect or a baddie but never have any arguments to make as to why you think that way.

Marmot wrote:I do find this post from notsawyer suspicious.

notsawyer540 wrote:Things are really heating up in here.

Despite notsawyer being suspicious of Epignosis, this is the only thing had to say after I posted my case and while I've been accusing you.

I'd expect him to have more input on this whole thing if he was sincere.

I had a friend show up unannounced at the end of my workout. I checked the thread quickly while I was waiting for the shower to warm up and didn't have time to make a long post because I didn't want to be a bad host. He's smoking with my roommate right now, so I'm taking advantage of the time.

Quin wrote:I don't really care that Epi forgot about me. I'm not surprised because I haven't been around in this game as much as I usually am. I'd rather pay attention to this gross post centered around overconfidence and bad logic.

Spoiler: show

notsawyer540 wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:Rip Eloh.

Everyone lets refrain from voting from Jack immediately.

Is this what you're talking about? If so, there is a difference between it and this:

DrWilgy wrote:

Epignosis wrote:Given that data, I think it is reasonable to assume the entire mafia is powerless beyond a kill.

I don't mind lynching Jackie O, but I would only do so as a last resort. Lynching exposed mafia only keeps his teammates out of discussion and pressure.

This.

Scotty basically hog tied and handed us a hostage.

You go from essentially saying, "let's take our time and discuss things" to "I agree with Epi. We should keep him around."

You see the inconsistency? You waited until someone else floated the idea of keeping him around and jumped right on board. Then a civ got lynched. My facts aren't and weren't wrong.

What's so gross? I don't see any "bad logic" in there. Remember that time SVS got lynched instead of Jack when everyone knew Jack was bad? Where was your logic-o-meter then?

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:Now that Phenon has ended I can say that my accusation of Sawyer for discrediting his own take on an argument is a tried and tested baddie tell. Follow me (tomorrow)

I'm already there.

Didn't see this coming. I hope sanity takes over and I don't become the next SVS. At least one of the two of you is a baddie, and Epi's reaction to what I've said, as well as Marmot's digging has led me to believe that it is Epi. I'll be voting for Epi should I live through the night.

Hopefully this secret mission works out well in our favor. Maybe a civvie win on day 4!

Long Con wrote:

Quin wrote:Now that Phenon has ended I can say that my accusation of Sawyer for discrediting his own take on an argument is a tried and tested baddie tell. Follow me (tomorrow)

OH! Now that Phenon ended and you'r baddie-lynched in Champs, I can tell you that thing in Juliets' ISO of you that I privately suspected you for.

It was the "pressure vote". I said the exact same thing as a baddie in Phenon, and I recognized it as baddie talk that I had used.

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:Now that Phenon has ended I can say that my accusation of Sawyer for discrediting his own take on an argument is a tried and tested baddie tell. Follow me (tomorrow)

I'm already there.

Epignosis wrote:

Marmot wrote:

Epignosis wrote:I took my vote off of Wilgy and placed it on MM.

And I forgot Quin was even in this.

How did you forget Quin was in this game, you had a lengthy back-and-forth with him about whether or not you would murder FZ, and also called him a civilian.

Because I'm getting old and forget things, and Quin hasn't posted recently.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Voting for Faraday who is bad

Me too.

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote: Not even once I've put on my big boy pants?

You need a better avatar. Look at mine.

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:

Epignosis wrote:Quin raised the idea that I was partners with FZ. for defending her. I don't think Quin would do that and then kill FZ. For that and other reasons, I think Quin is a civilian.

But would Epignosis kill the potential teammate I pointed out to get me off his back?

Would he?

He would. Did he though?

I would? What evidence do you have to suggest I would ever recommend murdering my own teammate?

Not your actual teammate

My point is, FZ. was town, and if you're bad, I don't think it's unrealistic that you'd kill her to put me at ease after I considered you two might have BTSC.

Oh.

I would have killed FZ. except for the fact that I was the one vouching for her. Nobody else was, so I might've left her alone and tried to get her lynched (tough to do, by the way, but I like the challenge). But yeah, I would've killed her, sure.

But none of that would be to try to put you at ease. I fear you not.

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:

Epignosis wrote:Quin raised the idea that I was partners with FZ. for defending her. I don't think Quin would do that and then kill FZ. For that and other reasons, I think Quin is a civilian.

But would Epignosis kill the potential teammate I pointed out to get me off his back?

Would he?

He would. Did he though?

I would? What evidence do you have to suggest I would ever recommend murdering my own teammate?

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:

Epignosis wrote:Quin raised the idea that I was partners with FZ. for defending her. I don't think Quin would do that and then kill FZ. For that and other reasons, I think Quin is a civilian.

But would Epignosis kill the potential teammate I pointed out to get me off his back?

Would he?

DrWilgy wrote:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:Also, my team is Epi, LC, Marmot and Quin.

One of these 4 are bad.

Epignosis wrote:Quin raised the idea that I was partners with FZ. for defending her. I don't think Quin would do that and then kill FZ. For that and other reasons, I think Quin is a civilian.

G-Man wrote:The Polls thread has been updated.

Also, Hillary Clinton still appreciates those who exercise their right to vote, even if they vote out a member of the Democratic Party. +1 Hillary Points to everyone who voted during Day 2. An additional +1 Hillary Point to Jackofhearts2005 for making me laugh with his Ted Cruz posts.

Hillary Points Standings:

+7 Points: S~V~S
+6 Points: notsawyer540, thellama73
+5 Points: Elohcin, Long Con, Marmot
+4 Points: FZ., Jackofhearts2005, MacDougall
+3.5 Points: Epignosis
+3 Points: Dfaraday, DrWilgy, Scotty, TheFloyd73
-2 Points: Quin

Long Con wrote:

Quin wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I wasn't talking about 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?".

Oh.

No, I don't. But I do find the act of discrediting one's own opinion to be innately suspicious. There's a difference between that and just not being sure.

Quin: "No, you don't" what?

S~V~S 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

He's probably interacting with Epi since Epi is in charge of saving him.

Let's make a deal; if we lynch anyone other than Jack, and they are not bad, we lynch Jack next, no arguments, no questions. I have played whole games as an outed baddie and the longer you let it go on, the harder it is to get rid of the outed one. If we lynch someone who IS a baddie, I will shut up and tow the party line re lynching Jack.

Although, again, I would much rather lynch Jack.

Epignosis wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Marmot wrote:I don't understand your point, and I'm not going to wait around for FZ to answer to hear your point.

Epignosis and FZ were talking about Scotty, so what teammate could you mean?

I could mean anyone who was taking votes or being talked about. My point is that if FZ is a civilian, she had no reason to be stressed out at that moment. But the larger point than that was that I wanted to see how she would answer my question, a point which you have now ruined.

No reason? No reason at all?

She went the extra step to question my view on Scotty. A Mafia member had no reason to do that. She raised a point in Scotty's favor, which I rejected, and she ultimately did too.

FZ. is a civilian in this game.

Epignosis wrote:

Quin wrote:

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.

Did you ever read into my interaction with SVS? You said you would but I haven't seen a conclusive something from you.

If I'm honest, and I hope you don't take offense, I'm not really interested in it. If you really want me to, I will.

Do you think S~V~S should be lynched?