The Syndicate 2014 Game of Champions [ENDGAME]

[Roxy]

Timmer comes off the Apollo Doctrine list! That leaves:
Mongoose
Lorab
and Hedgebaddie.

And Mongoose has posted in other places.

She will probably get mad at me for saying this, but she told me she is avoiding logging onto the site because she doesn't want to be asked to do Socky Award related business.

LOL Non one is forcing her to do Socky Award related business. She doesn't have to do it if she does not want to. Please tell her she can unvolunteer anytime. I really wish she would have told me or splints I feel horrible about this. I do not want to upset Mongoose in any way.

[juliets]

Roxy, I would be happy to volunteer to help you and splints with the Socky Awards if you need me.

[Dom]

Excellent, game on. The Day 0 poll really doesn't give us much to go on compared to previous games, but those who failed to check in are certainly the outliers here.

Does being an outlier make them bad?

My reasoning is that, if the majority of players are civvies, then the majority/average action taken is most likely to be civvie. It's not perfect, but it's playing the odds.

I think I will be voting you...

That makes zero sense. By the same logic, you can assume that most non-actions are civilian because most players are civilian. Your logic has several flaws in it. You are assuming civilians and baddies act in the same way. They do not. Civvies are far more likely to be inactive because they do not have BTSC members to prod them to participate.

I think the people voting for the people who voted for no reason have less reason to their vote than the people they are voting for.

I don't think this is true. Why do you say that?

Logically speaking, you ate correct. I had zero reason for my vote, meaning that Sawyer's vote has a value of say -1, and LC is somewhere between that and negative infinity.

Every time someone uses maths to make it "seem" like what they are saying is fact it makes me want to vote for them. idk why.
But this maths seems like you are stretching a bit.

Roxy, to be fair, I read his math stuff as a joke-- did you not?

Wow, the game has really begun now!

I personally don't find Long Con suspicious for finding reywaS suspicious, because I also didn't interpret DH's original post as being at him. From what I've seen of reywaS before, though, defensiveness isn't unusual. (No offense.)

Then, what do you make of the clarification that it was, indeed, about rey?



I also found LC's rush to vote a bit out of character, but nothing that made my stomach lurch.

[Made]

Again I should say nothing I find overly suspicious at this moment in time, but I just thought the coincidence was funny. The same sort of scenario coming up in the game that I won to get to this game, now coming up in this game. Cosmically improbable, yet here we are.

As it stands I'm mulling over a vote for LC.

DH can you expand a little on why you are mulling over a vote for LC? What are you seeing?

huh...asking a lot of questions this game are we...

Just a thought-- do players conform to their own play style benefit themselves further when they are mafia or just because of predisposition?
Not directed at you in particular Juliet, but also Llama and MP, 3 players who have very unique and recognizable play styles.

This is the first real question I've asked unless you consider this:

I just looked back at 2013's Game of Champions, and note that nobody voted for the game I hosted in the Day 0 poll, just as nobody has voted for any of the games I hosted in this Day 0 poll. Why are you people not giving good performances (your best performances!) in games I host?

I voted for your nomination for best host for side games, does that count?

My question for dh is because I haven't seen anything that pinged me and wondered if i had missed something.

I'm just poking fun :P

[thellama73]

Timmer comes off the Apollo Doctrine list! That leaves:
Mongoose
Lorab
and Hedgebaddie.

And Mongoose has posted in other places.

She will probably get mad at me for saying this, but she told me she is avoiding logging onto the site because she doesn't want to be asked to do Socky Award related business.

LOL Non one is forcing her to do Socky Award related business. She doesn't have to do it if she does not want to. Please tell her she can unvolunteer anytime. I really wish she would have told me or splints I feel horrible about this. I do not want to upset Mongoose in any way.

We could always lynch her. Just sayin'.

[Roxy]

No I wont lynch her - this is not funny or anything to make light of.

[Roxy]

Would it help if I backed out of the game?

[DharmaHelper]

Would it help if I backed out of the game?

No.

[thellama73]

No I wont lynch her - this is not funny or anything to make light of.

It's extremely funny. As you yourself said, "lol."

[Mongoose]

Timmer comes off the Apollo Doctrine list! That leaves:
Mongoose
Lorab
and Hedgebaddie.

And Mongoose has posted in other places.

She will probably get mad at me for saying this, but she told me she is avoiding logging onto the site because she doesn't want to be asked to do Socky Award related business.

LOL Non one is forcing her to do Socky Award related business. She doesn't have to do it if she does not want to. Please tell her she can unvolunteer anytime. I really wish she would have told me or splints I feel horrible about this. I do not want to upset Mongoose in any way.

Logan is full of lies, stirring up trouble as normal. If I actually said that, do yall really think he'd say it in public? Nice troll, 9/10.

I told him I love doing Socky things, ha.

I'm just busy with hearings, which is why I've been on intermittently and I didnt even realize this game started.

[thellama73]

Oh good, now I can take you off my Apollo Doctrine list. Mission accomplished. Lorab and Hedgebaddie remain.

[insertnamehere]

Excellent, game on. The Day 0 poll really doesn't give us much to go on compared to previous games, but those who failed to check in are certainly the outliers here.

Does being an outlier make them bad?

My reasoning is that, if the majority of players are civvies, then the majority/average action taken is most likely to be civvie. It's not perfect, but it's playing the odds.

So, the majority of players are civvies, right? And the majority of the people playing this game are men, right? So, therefore, all women are evil and we must lynch all of them.

But really, this is a pretty stupid thing to say. It makes me a little bit nervous about Boomslang, and sounds like a pre-emptive defense for when someone accuses him of being too "blendy" and not coming up with original ideas.

Another player who's caught my eye is DH. He's been fucking hilarious this game, and is almost a parody of how some people play mafia. I'm pretty sure this is intentional, but it reminds me a lot of my very special performance in the first Champions game. It's enough to get both an eye-brow raise and a salute from me.

[DharmaHelper]

Llama stirring up trouble and spreading lies? Are you sure we're talking about the same guy?

[DharmaHelper]

Excellent, game on. The Day 0 poll really doesn't give us much to go on compared to previous games, but those who failed to check in are certainly the outliers here.

Does being an outlier make them bad?

My reasoning is that, if the majority of players are civvies, then the majority/average action taken is most likely to be civvie. It's not perfect, but it's playing the odds.

So, the majority of players are civvies, right? And the majority of the people playing this game are men, right? So, therefore, all women are evil and we must lynch all of them.

But really, this is a pretty stupid thing to say. It makes me a little bit nervous about Boomslang, and sounds like a pre-emptive defense for when someone accuses him of being too "blendy" and not coming up with original ideas.

Another player who's caught my eye is DH. He's been fucking hilarious this game, and is almost a parody of how some people play mafia. I'm pretty sure this is intentional, but it reminds me a lot of my very special performance in the first Champions game. It's enough to get both an eye-brow raise and a salute from me.

Thank you and fuck you in equal measure, I guess

[thellama73]

Llama stirring up trouble and spreading lies? Are you sure we're talking about the same guy?

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I never do that.

[Mongoose]

Llama stirring up trouble and spreading lies? Are you sure we're talking about the same guy?

I know right. I am pretty upset honestly because I'm worried Roxy will think it's true. I think he's just mad he didn't get asked. Always the bridesmaid, that llama.

[Mongoose]

"make a federal case" out of something is a common idiom in American English. I do not think two people using it is suspicious.

I'm not familiar with it. It's a term I've not seen in a mafia game I've played yet and now it appears written by two people.

But I neither believe or disbeleive the notion. I merely observe

Do you have Federal Courts in Wales? A Federal Case would be a bigger deal than a local case. Not sure why, maybe the feds have stiffer penalties? Its a common phrase where I grew up.

Turning a case over to federal court is a big headache and involves lots of prosaic pleadings. I'll stay at the nice cuddly state level. This is a fun path of discourse!

[Long Con]

Again I should say nothing I find overly suspicious at this moment in time, but I just thought the coincidence was funny. The same sort of scenario coming up in the game that I won to get to this game, now coming up in this game. Cosmically improbable, yet here we are.

As it stands I'm mulling over a vote for LC.

DH can you expand a little on why you are mulling over a vote for LC? What are you seeing?

I don't like his exchange with Rey. I'll let you go back and read it for yourself, but it just did not ring true to me. LC is a good enough player not to want to rush into things with such slapdash and paper-thin logic

Which logic exactly was paper-thin? I don't think it makes me not a good player to have cast that vote.

And re: reywaS' point about your S~V~S post... I didn't actually read the whole comparison word-for-word, because it was to block-of-texty, but I thought the gist of it was that you were drawing a deliberate connection to suggest that S~V~S was a baddie. I think you're playing a cavalier kind of game, this isn't the first time this game you've had to do several posts of explanation how you're not really accusing anyone with your "observations".

[Mongoose]

I consider Felt my greatest achievement out of these options. I ended up being the last civilian to die so I basically made it to the end of the game. Even though I didn't win I was still proud of myself since it was my first.

I am super stoked you feel that way, and you did indeed perform spectacularly! Glad it was a good enough experience that you kept coming back!

[DharmaHelper]

Again I should say nothing I find overly suspicious at this moment in time, but I just thought the coincidence was funny. The same sort of scenario coming up in the game that I won to get to this game, now coming up in this game. Cosmically improbable, yet here we are.

As it stands I'm mulling over a vote for LC.

DH can you expand a little on why you are mulling over a vote for LC? What are you seeing?

I don't like his exchange with Rey. I'll let you go back and read it for yourself, but it just did not ring true to me. LC is a good enough player not to want to rush into things with such slapdash and paper-thin logic

Which logic exactly was paper-thin? I don't think it makes me not a good player to have cast that vote.

And re: reywaS' point about your S~V~S post... I didn't actually read the whole comparison word-for-word, because it was to block-of-texty, but I thought the gist of it was that you were drawing a deliberate connection to suggest that S~V~S was a baddie. I think you're playing a cavalier kind of game, this isn't the first time this game you've had to do several posts of explanation how you're not really accusing anyone with your "observations".

"You got a little defensive here in this one post" Is a wobbly, weak reason for such an early vote. I don't necessarily care if it is Day 1 or Day 8, a vote is a vote. And you can't honestly tell me it is a civvie thing to do or in the civvies best interest to vote that early for that reason.

[Mongoose]

Voting thellama73 for his distracting gambit. Good troll though.

[Long Con]

Again I should say nothing I find overly suspicious at this moment in time, but I just thought the coincidence was funny. The same sort of scenario coming up in the game that I won to get to this game, now coming up in this game. Cosmically improbable, yet here we are.

As it stands I'm mulling over a vote for LC.

DH can you expand a little on why you are mulling over a vote for LC? What are you seeing?

I don't like his exchange with Rey. I'll let you go back and read it for yourself, but it just did not ring true to me. LC is a good enough player not to want to rush into things with such slapdash and paper-thin logic

Which logic exactly was paper-thin? I don't think it makes me not a good player to have cast that vote.

And re: reywaS' point about your S~V~S post... I didn't actually read the whole comparison word-for-word, because it was to block-of-texty, but I thought the gist of it was that you were drawing a deliberate connection to suggest that S~V~S was a baddie. I think you're playing a cavalier kind of game, this isn't the first time this game you've had to do several posts of explanation how you're not really accusing anyone with your "observations".

"You got a little defensive here in this one post" Is a wobbly, weak reason for such an early vote. I don't necessarily care if it is Day 1 or Day 8, a vote is a vote. And you can't honestly tell me it is a civvie thing to do or in the civvies best interest to vote that early for that reason.

Why not? Are you against generating discussion, and gauging reactions? You'd prefer if everyone voted low posters or random or for no reason?

[timmer]

Voted Bass, first name on the list. I can't really follow until I get home.

[DharmaHelper]

Again I should say nothing I find overly suspicious at this moment in time, but I just thought the coincidence was funny. The same sort of scenario coming up in the game that I won to get to this game, now coming up in this game. Cosmically improbable, yet here we are.

As it stands I'm mulling over a vote for LC.

DH can you expand a little on why you are mulling over a vote for LC? What are you seeing?

I don't like his exchange with Rey. I'll let you go back and read it for yourself, but it just did not ring true to me. LC is a good enough player not to want to rush into things with such slapdash and paper-thin logic

Which logic exactly was paper-thin? I don't think it makes me not a good player to have cast that vote.

And re: reywaS' point about your S~V~S post... I didn't actually read the whole comparison word-for-word, because it was to block-of-texty, but I thought the gist of it was that you were drawing a deliberate connection to suggest that S~V~S was a baddie. I think you're playing a cavalier kind of game, this isn't the first time this game you've had to do several posts of explanation how you're not really accusing anyone with your "observations".

"You got a little defensive here in this one post" Is a wobbly, weak reason for such an early vote. I don't necessarily care if it is Day 1 or Day 8, a vote is a vote. And you can't honestly tell me it is a civvie thing to do or in the civvies best interest to vote that early for that reason.

Why not? Are you against generating discussion, and gauging reactions? You'd prefer if everyone voted low posters or random or for no reason?

Look at the amount of discussion I've generated without casting my vote and ask that question again :P As for your second question, I've always said that I prefer to vote with a solid reason, even on Day 1's.

[Long Con]

Look at the amount of discussion I've generated without casting my vote and ask that question again :P As for your second question, I've always said that I prefer to vote with a solid reason, even on Day 1's.

True, you are quite the discussion-generator. And if you actually believe that I didn't think that rey's response was unusual, then it's a better reason to vote than the people voting for basically no reason.

I don't think a Day 1 vote has very much in common at all with a Day 8 vote. Most Day 1 votes are cast with pretty weak reasons, and I'd wager that a Day 8 vote cast for Day 1 reasons would cause all sorts of eyeballing. Don't you agree?

[DharmaHelper]

I don't think a Day 1 vote has very much in common at all with a Day 8 vote. Most Day 1 votes are cast with pretty weak reasons, and I'd wager that a Day 8 vote cast for Day 1 reasons would cause all sorts of eyeballing. Don't you agree?

A vote is a vote. And in particular if you're playing in a championship game, you better make damn sure you treat your votes like they matter. If I've said it once I've said it a million times, Day 1 votes get far too much disrespect. The game starts on Day 1. Throwaway votes, votes for no reason, etc, are inexcusable and especially so during a championship caliber game.

To continue your line of thought: A Day 8 vote for Day 1 reasons would indeed be weak. A Day 1 vote for a Day 8 reason on the other hand would be something I'd consider Championship worthy.

[Long Con]

I don't think a Day 1 vote has very much in common at all with a Day 8 vote. Most Day 1 votes are cast with pretty weak reasons, and I'd wager that a Day 8 vote cast for Day 1 reasons would cause all sorts of eyeballing. Don't you agree?

A vote is a vote. And in particular if you're playing in a championship game, you better make damn sure you treat your votes like they matter. If I've said it once I've said it a million times, Day 1 votes get far too much disrespect. The game starts on Day 1. Throwaway votes, votes for no reason, etc, are inexcusable and especially so during a championship caliber game.

To continue your line of thought: A Day 8 vote for Day 1 reasons would indeed be weak. A Day 1 vote for a Day 8 reason on the other hand would be something I'd consider Championship worthy.

Indeed it would be. I just think it's strange that you would suspect me for voting with a reason, but not those who voted with no real reason.

[DharmaHelper]

I don't think a Day 1 vote has very much in common at all with a Day 8 vote. Most Day 1 votes are cast with pretty weak reasons, and I'd wager that a Day 8 vote cast for Day 1 reasons would cause all sorts of eyeballing. Don't you agree?

A vote is a vote. And in particular if you're playing in a championship game, you better make damn sure you treat your votes like they matter. If I've said it once I've said it a million times, Day 1 votes get far too much disrespect. The game starts on Day 1. Throwaway votes, votes for no reason, etc, are inexcusable and especially so during a championship caliber game.

To continue your line of thought: A Day 8 vote for Day 1 reasons would indeed be weak. A Day 1 vote for a Day 8 reason on the other hand would be something I'd consider Championship worthy.

Indeed it would be. I just think it's strange that you would suspect me for voting with a reason, but not those who voted with no real reason.

Well, for one, your reason sucked.

[zeek]

I don't know who I'll vote for today but I agree Dharmahelper has been very funny... perhaps too funny

MP hasn't accused anyone yet. I know his access is limited but he's post a couple of times, that should be enough for him to accuse someone :P

[S~V~S]

I think the people voting for the people who voted for no reason have less reason to their vote than the people they are voting for.

I don't think this is true. Why do you say that?

I don't think it's true, either. I hope TH comes back and answers you.

Because it's Day 1, so I'm not suspicious of MM or Rey voting early. I think that overreacting to early joke votes/posts on Day 1 has historically bad results. I also feel that MM and Rey are both known for their zaniness. If Vompatti suddenly joins the game and subsequently votes for himself, will that be suspicious too?

They are about equal in my eyes, actually. And I believe Rey voted for MM for HIS vote. I thought you were referring to LC here for his Rey vote as well as Rey for his MM vote. Rey worded it pretty much the same as MM iirc. So you are saying that someone voting for someone for a weak vote is actually more suspicious than the weak voter?

You are being uncharacteristically quiet, I hope to hear more from you.

We had an explosion of talk last night yay shower, coffee, bbl to read before work.

[S~V~S]

I think the people voting for the people who voted for no reason have less reason to their vote than the people they are voting for.

I don't think this is true. Why do you say that?

I don't think it's true, either. I hope TH comes back and answers you.

DH, I know I am a fool for this, but I am going to ask you to elaborate here. You don't take time to search forums for no reason. I am seeing a tenuous connection between my behavior in Misfits (where I was a baddie & Boogs a civ, though Keterman was bad) and yours in this game. But I am sure you did not go to all that effort to pull a quote where you are behaving as I did when I was a baddie. So stop with the vague and make your point, eh?

I don't think I was being vague at all. I noticed the discussion in *this* game about the phrase "making a federal case" and remembered the discussion in Misfits about "scum tell". As I said, I found the coincidence funny. I'm not pointing any fingers at anyone over it, I just thought that it was something sort-of-kind-of poetic, having that happen in two games.

This really makes me nervous about you to be honest. You say you just pointed this out because it was "kind of poetic"...and I guess the assumption in this is that you wanted everyone else to share your little chuckle. Maybe that's true, but I know that you are a really smart guy and certainly capable of being subtle with your motives. But when it comes down to it, what you actually did there was draw a connection in people's minds to SVS being a baddie.

Going back over this, my initial reaction to him posting that was paranoia. But reading it again, it seems to me that he was trying to head me off at the pass. "Look, you did the same thing too". Maybe he forgot that I was a baddie that game?

The thing that gets me, looking back, is timing. MM was starting to get some flack, and then the whole "OMG, 2 people said Federal Case" thing came up. Maybe I am still paranoid, or maybe I try too hard to make connections. I know sometimes I am way off base that way. But it felt to me that when MM poking me with a stick did not bring in any real results, and indeed, started turning on MM, DH came in and poked me (and Rey, the only person as defensive as me ha ha) with an even bigger stick. And nothing gets people lynched on day one as fast or as hard as defensiveness, amirite?? And this is after DH spending a chunk of his Day One time poking Rey with a stick?

But I have been poked with a stick so many times over the years playing Mafia, that I am beginning to think I am developing an immunity to sticks. Maybe.

But in any case, then MM comes around last night and tries to bring us back to low posters when people are starting to give DH the eye, even stirring up suspicion against one of them:

Timmer comes off the Apollo Doctrine list! That leaves:
Mongoose
Lorab
and Hedgebaddie.

And Mongoose has posted in other places.

I am not sure I will have time to post/play today with work, sometimes I can, sometimes I can't, and the poll ends about 45 mins after I get home, but just in case, gonna vote now (I like changeable votes, it means developing suspicions can be taken into account). I am voting for MM. Not so much for his vote for me initially, although I don't see how he can describe a vote for no reason as being on task, as for his response to me when I brought it up. Like Made, this pinged the crap out of me:

I tend to ignore Llamas humor though ( ) and pay attention to his suspicions.

So we should pay attention. If you are NK'd it will probably be llama's doing?

Biggest ping so far. What are exactly are you trying to say here MM

I am not sure how he extrapolated that from that. I have been involved in way more civ Llama lynches than bad ones. This post just seemed like a really good way to set me up to be NKed & get llama blamed for it.

[Spacedaisy]

I am going to have to vote this morning since I will likely be driving across country when the vote ends. You all have certainly provided some interesting stuff to go off of however. Here are my thoughts:

I don't find the use of that phrase all that odd. I have made the case before for BTSC showing in similar verbiage but it usually is used closer together than that and more than just one phrase, frequently when discussing the same topic. I don't really think using what I would also consider a common phrase to be a BTSC slip up.

I don't see what the big deal about LC's vote is either. Rey does seem a bit defensive, nothing I would cast a vote for though, but I don't find it odd that LC did especially in a game where if something big happened he could change his vote. Additionally because LC has been known to do things that seem odd just to shake the tree and see what falls out. I don't think that is what he was doing here either, but given all this I don't find anything out of place with his vote or reason, especially on Day 1.

I do find DH to be slinging strange cases around though. It is not what I would expect from him and is why my Day 1 vote is going to be there. I don't know how I will feel on Day 2, but it is the best I have at this point on Day 1.

*votes DH*

[thellama73]

I think Dom is right. Boomslang is the kind of player I've been looking for. Not too prominent, not too absent, and saying things that don't quite make sense. I'm very happy to vote for Boomslang today.

[Snow Dog]

Just a thought-- do players conform to their own play style benefit themselves further when they are mafia or just because of predisposition?
Not directed at you in particular Juliet, but also Llama and MP, 3 players who have very unique and recognizable play styles.

Speaking for myself, I think I conform to my own playstyle more when I civilian, whereas when I am bad I am more careful not to come across as suspicious. Having a team that I don't want to let down makes me a more conscientious, and therefore less freewheeling and prone to random antics, sort of player.

Is this true? And if it was would you freely admit it and endanger future games? Maybe you are just hiding the fact that you are bad now.

[thellama73]

Just a thought-- do players conform to their own play style benefit themselves further when they are mafia or just because of predisposition?
Not directed at you in particular Juliet, but also Llama and MP, 3 players who have very unique and recognizable play styles.

Speaking for myself, I think I conform to my own playstyle more when I civilian, whereas when I am bad I am more careful not to come across as suspicious. Having a team that I don't want to let down makes me a more conscientious, and therefore less freewheeling and prone to random antics, sort of player.

Is this true? And if it was would you freely admit it and endanger future games? Maybe you are just hiding the fact that you are bad now.

Yes, it is true. Yes, I would freely admit it. I can always change up my style later if it causes me a problem. And no, I am not hiding anything.

[Mongoose]

Sometimes I think I'm playing the same playstyle, but then other players will remark that I'm "different this game."

I think it's because I'm just unabashedly myself all the time, so if I'm extra hyper or moody or hilarious or hangry, that will seep into my game.

Then there are others, like our host, who have a Robert Altmann style of playing -- a different genre each time.

[DharmaHelper]

I am going to have to vote this morning since I will likely be driving across country when the vote ends. You all have certainly provided some interesting stuff to go off of however. Here are my thoughts:

I don't find the use of that phrase all that odd. I have made the case before for BTSC showing in similar verbiage but it usually is used closer together than that and more than just one phrase, frequently when discussing the same topic. I don't really think using what I would also consider a common phrase to be a BTSC slip up.

Not to belabor the point, but I've been over this phrase thing for a good long while now.

I don't see what the big deal about LC's vote is either. Rey does seem a bit defensive, nothing I would cast a vote for though, but I don't find it odd that LC did

Difference of oppinion I guess. His vote + the timing of it are enough to warrant serious suspicion IMO. Not just the fact that he voted for Rey or that he did so for the reason he did.

Additionally because LC has been known to do things that seem odd just to shake the tree and see what falls out. I don't think that is what he was doing here either, but given all this I don't find anything out of place with his vote or reason, especially on Day 1.

Wait, walk me through that one more time? You know that LC is known for shaking the tree a bit, so you don't find his vote suspicious, except you don't think he was shaking the tree with his vote? How does that work?

[quote[I do find DH to be slinging strange cases around though. It is not what I would expect from him and is why my Day 1 vote is going to be there. I don't know how I will feel on Day 2, but it is the best I have at this point on Day 1.

*votes DH*[/quote]

That seems kind of backwards. Anyone who knows me knows I do exactly what you just said I don't do.

I dunno. Like I said, maybe its just a difference of opinions. At least you're putting thought into your vote, which I can appreciate.

[DharmaHelper]

I'm gonna start working soon, so I will vote now and explain my vote to the best of my ability.

Early voting is suspicious. We can argue this back and forth all we want but at the end of the day, early voting is suspicious.


I know Rey. I know Rey is a gunslinger of a player. As SVS has said, I know Rey is particularly defensive. So when I made my observations, I figured he'd be a little defensive of them, which I was prepared for and accounted for in my ping. LC knows Rey, this shouldn't really come as so much of a shock to him that Rey acted the way he did towards my comments.

I also know LC, though a bit less. LC does not strike me as the sort of guy to not account for something like Rey's style, or the type of guy to vote so early for such a poor reason with so much left to discuss. That he jumped so ravenously onto his Rey vote with reasoning that wasn't even true (He thought Rey was reacting to a post that was not about him. It was.) It just gives me a bad case of the pings.

Speaking of oddly defensive posts:

Again I should say nothing I find overly suspicious at this moment in time, but I just thought the coincidence was funny. The same sort of scenario coming up in the game that I won to get to this game, now coming up in this game. Cosmically improbable, yet here we are.

As it stands I'm mulling over a vote for LC.

DH can you expand a little on why you are mulling over a vote for LC? What are you seeing?

I don't like his exchange with Rey. I'll let you go back and read it for yourself, but it just did not ring true to me. LC is a good enough player not to want to rush into things with such slapdash and paper-thin logic

Which logic exactly was paper-thin? I don't think it makes me not a good player to have cast that vote.

And re: reywaS' point about your S~V~S post... I didn't actually read the whole comparison word-for-word, because it was to block-of-texty, but I thought the gist of it was that you were drawing a deliberate connection to suggest that S~V~S was a baddie. I think you're playing a cavalier kind of game, this isn't the first time this game you've had to do several posts of explanation how you're not really accusing anyone with your "observations".

"You got a little defensive here in this one post" Is a wobbly, weak reason for such an early vote. I don't necessarily care if it is Day 1 or Day 8, a vote is a vote. And you can't honestly tell me it is a civvie thing to do or in the civvies best interest to vote that early for that reason.

Why not? Are you against generating discussion, and gauging reactions? You'd prefer if everyone voted low posters or random or for no reason?

This sort of tactic, answering a suspicion by asking clearly overblown and hyperbolic questions, is something I don't think any civvie would do, let alone LC as a civvie. It's obvious to anyone who reads the thread that I've been doing my fair share of discussion and encouraging discussion. On top of that, even going so far as to refer to low posters as categorically useless.

So, LC gets my vote.

[Boomslang]

Excellent, game on. The Day 0 poll really doesn't give us much to go on compared to previous games, but those who failed to check in are certainly the outliers here.

Does being an outlier make them bad?

My reasoning is that, if the majority of players are civvies, then the majority/average action taken is most likely to be civvie. It's not perfect, but it's playing the odds.

So, the majority of players are civvies, right? And the majority of the people playing this game are men, right? So, therefore, all women are evil and we must lynch all of them.

But really, this is a pretty stupid thing to say. It makes me a little bit nervous about Boomslang, and sounds like a pre-emptive defense for when someone accuses him of being too "blendy" and not coming up with original ideas.

Another player who's caught my eye is DH. He's been fucking hilarious this game, and is almost a parody of how some people play mafia. I'm pretty sure this is intentional, but it reminds me a lot of my very special performance in the first Champions game. It's enough to get both an eye-brow raise and a salute from me.

*facepalm* Yes, INH, that's exactly what I'm saying. Justifying sexism from mathematical reasons... I'm disappointed you took my argument off the slippery slope right off the bat.

[Marmot]

For the record SVS, my only goal with voting you the way I did was to instigate some real Day 1 discussion. I believe I was successful. I had no suspicion of you then, nor do I have any of you now.

Per my comment on Mongoose, I was not distracting. I just wanted to point out that Mongoose has been logging onto the Syndicate and posting in other places, though she never bothered to check in on Day 0 even for this game.

[thellama73]

Excellent, game on. The Day 0 poll really doesn't give us much to go on compared to previous games, but those who failed to check in are certainly the outliers here.

Does being an outlier make them bad?

My reasoning is that, if the majority of players are civvies, then the majority/average action taken is most likely to be civvie. It's not perfect, but it's playing the odds.

So, the majority of players are civvies, right? And the majority of the people playing this game are men, right? So, therefore, all women are evil and we must lynch all of them.

But really, this is a pretty stupid thing to say. It makes me a little bit nervous about Boomslang, and sounds like a pre-emptive defense for when someone accuses him of being too "blendy" and not coming up with original ideas.

Another player who's caught my eye is DH. He's been fucking hilarious this game, and is almost a parody of how some people play mafia. I'm pretty sure this is intentional, but it reminds me a lot of my very special performance in the first Champions game. It's enough to get both an eye-brow raise and a salute from me.

*facepalm* Yes, INH, that's exactly what I'm saying. Justifying sexism from mathematical reasons... I'm disappointed you took my argument off the slippery slope right off the bat.

I think you missed INH's point. He was using reductio ad absurdum to reveal the flaws in your argument (which was indeed flawed) not accusing you of sexism.

[DharmaHelper]

For the record SVS, my only goal with voting you the way I did was to instigate some real Day 1 discussion. I believe I was successful. I had no suspicion of you then, nor do I have any of you now.

Per my comment on Mongoose, I was not distracting. I just wanted to point out that Mongoose has been logging onto the Syndicate and posting in other places, though she never bothered to check in on Day 0 even for this game.

To whom are you planning on changing your vote?

[DharmaHelper]

Excellent, game on. The Day 0 poll really doesn't give us much to go on compared to previous games, but those who failed to check in are certainly the outliers here.

Does being an outlier make them bad?

My reasoning is that, if the majority of players are civvies, then the majority/average action taken is most likely to be civvie. It's not perfect, but it's playing the odds.

So, the majority of players are civvies, right? And the majority of the people playing this game are men, right? So, therefore, all women are evil and we must lynch all of them.

But really, this is a pretty stupid thing to say. It makes me a little bit nervous about Boomslang, and sounds like a pre-emptive defense for when someone accuses him of being too "blendy" and not coming up with original ideas.

Another player who's caught my eye is DH. He's been fucking hilarious this game, and is almost a parody of how some people play mafia. I'm pretty sure this is intentional, but it reminds me a lot of my very special performance in the first Champions game. It's enough to get both an eye-brow raise and a salute from me.

*facepalm* Yes, INH, that's exactly what I'm saying. Justifying sexism from mathematical reasons... I'm disappointed you took my argument off the slippery slope right off the bat.

I think you missed INH's point. He was using reductio ad absurdum to reveal the flaws in your argument (which was indeed flawed) not accusing you of sexism.

Is this Harry Potter mafia?

[Marmot]

Boomslang, I have a more sound counterargument you can address.

Excellent, game on. The Day 0 poll really doesn't give us much to go on compared to previous games, but those who failed to check in are certainly the outliers here.

Does being an outlier make them bad?

My reasoning is that, if the majority of players are civvies, then the majority/average action taken is most likely to be civvie. It's not perfect, but it's playing the odds.

I disagree. If anything, I think baddies are more likely to be conformists than civvies.

[Marmot]

For the record SVS, my only goal with voting you the way I did was to instigate some real Day 1 discussion. I believe I was successful. I had no suspicion of you then, nor do I have any of you now.

Per my comment on Mongoose, I was not distracting. I just wanted to point out that Mongoose has been logging onto the Syndicate and posting in other places, though she never bothered to check in on Day 0 even for this game.

To whom are you planning on changing your vote?

I don't plan on voting you, but I am certainly unappreciative with your approach today. You've maintained that voting early is suspicious, but somehow forget to bring up my name in that discussion. Players are bound to draw connections there. I do not want your vote, but being ignored is worse.

[Marmot]

I think the people voting for the people who voted for no reason have less reason to their vote than the people they are voting for.

I don't think this is true. Why do you say that?

Logically speaking, you are correct. I had zero reason for my vote, meaning that Sawyer's vote has a value of say -1, and LC is somewhere between that and negative infinity.

Every time someone uses maths to make it "seem" like what they are saying is fact it makes me want to vote for them. idk why.
But this maths seems like you are stretching a bit.

Roxy, to be fair, I read his math stuff as a joke-- did you not?

Math is certainly not a joke, but that post was.

[DharmaHelper]

For the record SVS, my only goal with voting you the way I did was to instigate some real Day 1 discussion. I believe I was successful. I had no suspicion of you then, nor do I have any of you now.

Per my comment on Mongoose, I was not distracting. I just wanted to point out that Mongoose has been logging onto the Syndicate and posting in other places, though she never bothered to check in on Day 0 even for this game.

To whom are you planning on changing your vote?

I don't plan on voting you, but I am certainly unappreciative with your approach today. You've maintained that voting early is suspicious, but somehow forget to bring up my name in that discussion. Players are bound to draw connections there. I do not want your vote, but being ignored is worse.

No offense, but I didn't quite find you relevant enough to discuss. Comparatively speaking, I have bigger fish to fry.

[thellama73]

No offense, but I didn't quite find you relevant enough to discuss. Comparatively speaking, I have bigger fish to fry.

Wow. Shots fired.

[Boomslang]

Metalmarsh, I'm not arguing about conformism. I'm arguing that, because there are more civs than mafia in the game, any given group of players is more likely to be composed of more civs than mafia. The largest, i.e., majority, group is thus most likely to contain the most civs.

[Marmot]

For the record SVS, my only goal with voting you the way I did was to instigate some real Day 1 discussion. I believe I was successful. I had no suspicion of you then, nor do I have any of you now.

Per my comment on Mongoose, I was not distracting. I just wanted to point out that Mongoose has been logging onto the Syndicate and posting in other places, though she never bothered to check in on Day 0 even for this game.

To whom are you planning on changing your vote?

I don't plan on voting you, but I am certainly unappreciative with your approach today. You've maintained that voting early is suspicious, but somehow forget to bring up my name in that discussion. Players are bound to draw connections there. I do not want your vote, but being ignored is worse.

No offense, but I didn't quite find you relevant enough to discuss. Comparatively speaking, I have bigger fish to fry.

Haha, my role in my last game was Little Fishes. How convenient.