The Syndicate

+12 Points: S~V~S
+11 Points: notsawyer540
+10 Points: thellama73
+8 Points: Long Con, Marmot
+6 Points: DrWilgy, Jackofhearts2005, MacDougall
+5.5 Points: Epignosis
+5 Points: DFaraday, Elohcin, FZ., Scotty, TheFloyd73
+1 Point: Quin

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)

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.

THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 23, 2017

Presidential Directive/HRCPDD-03



TO: The Secretary of Defense, United States Special Operations Command
ALSO: The Attorney General, The Secretary of Homeland Security, The Director of National Intelligence, The Director of the Central Intelligence Agency

SUBJECT: Clandestine [INFORMATION REDACTED] Operation

This Presidential Decision Directive supersedes all existing [INFORMATION REDACTED]. [INFORMATION REDACTED] is hereby notified that they will be assigned a top secret mission to intercept [INFORMATION REDACTED]. Temporary detention for the night if possible. Kill if absolutely necessary. On the evening of January 23, 2017, the President of the United States will provide [INFORMATION REDACTED] with the location of [INFORMATION REDACTED]. They are to report their findings immediately upon executing this mission.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

Quin wrote:Good catch, Epi.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

Epignosis wrote:"Good catch." "Another good catch."

Please. If you are a civilian, you would be defending the shit out of me, except, well, you don't know that Eloh is my wife and I wouldn't kill her Night 1. Jack didn't know that. People keep acting like I'm the kind of person that would kill her to fuck with everyone. Am I? People also think I have this huge reputation where I would throw my teammates under the bus at every turn, but I have only done that one intentionally, and only twice because of circumstance. If you think you've caught me because I forgot something or because I don't say what you want to hear, guess what?

"You a damn fool." -Boo

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

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?

MacDougall wrote:

Epignosis wrote:"Good catch." "Another good catch."

Please. If you are a civilian, you would be defending the shit out of me, except, well, you don't know that Eloh is my wife and I wouldn't kill her Night 1. Jack didn't know that. People keep acting like I'm the kind of person that would kill her to fuck with everyone. Am I? People also think I have this huge reputation where I would throw my teammates under the bus at every turn, but I have only done that one intentionally, and only twice because of circumstance. If you think you've caught me because I forgot something or because I don't say what you want to hear, guess what?

"You a damn fool." -Boo

This post is really the first one I've felt conclusively makes you a civ read to me because of the first statement being so difficult to image a mafia player saying. But I do encourage you to stop using a wifom argument to defend yourself. Your best argument for being civ, to me, is your tone and your effort. The fact that you keep defending saying "I wouldn't kill eloh" is hollow because hypothetical scum Epignosis isn't the only one on his team that has that say and I can easily envision a team where someone suggesting killing Eloh, you saying something to the effect of "I'd rather not but it's not just up to me" and then someone familiar to you saying something to the effect of "if we do that you'll be able to use it as a wifom defence" and then arriving exactly where we are in the thread. It is an entirely plausible scenario.

Unless you would have me believe that you would completely deny a potential teammate the opportunity because of a "she's my partner" argument in which case I'd hate to have you as a teammate in a game with Elohcin and I think you are better at this game than to have arbitrary rules as such.

Epignosis wrote:"Good catch." "Another good catch."

Please. If you are a civilian, you would be defending the shit out of me, except, well, you don't know that Eloh is my wife and I wouldn't kill her Night 1. Jack didn't know that. People keep acting like I'm the kind of person that would kill her to fuck with everyone. Am I? People also think I have this huge reputation where I would throw my teammates under the bus at every turn, but I have only done that one intentionally, and only twice because of circumstance. If you think you've caught me because I forgot something or because I don't say what you want to hear, guess what?

"You a damn fool." -Boo

Epignosis wrote:I'm sorry that I had a really good reason to believe llama is bad here. And I lost it. I feel like it still exists. When I was cooking, I was convinced he was bad.

Check your box MM.

notsawyer540 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:"Good catch." "Another good catch."

Please. If you are a civilian, you would be defending the shit out of me, except, well, you don't know that Eloh is my wife and I wouldn't kill her Night 1. Jack didn't know that. People keep acting like I'm the kind of person that would kill her to fuck with everyone. Am I? People also think I have this huge reputation where I would throw my teammates under the bus at every turn, but I have only done that one intentionally, and only twice because of circumstance. If you think you've caught me because I forgot something or because I don't say what you want to hear, guess what?

"You a damn fool." -Boo

Do you honestly believe that there wouldn't be at least one person on an entire baddie team who would know that you and Eloh are married?

I don't think we've caught you because you "forgot" things a couple times. I know we've caught you because of the way you've been controlling the narrative the entire time. You got Scotty. Bravo. But then when we were handed a baddie on a silver platter, you and Wilgy convinced everyone not to lynch him against all reason. You let a baddie live so that he can further influence and poison the voting and the discussion. Then you got SVS lynched, who was civ. Now you think I'm bad because I've had the audacity to name you as one of my top suspects--despite the fact that all of your efforts have been centered around lynching two people who weren't mafia and not lynching the guy who was.

Long Con wrote:Anyone willing to make a lie detector statement? I'm Civ, and I support Hillary Clinton.

notsawyer540 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:"Good catch." "Another good catch."

Please. If you are a civilian, you would be defending the shit out of me, except, well, you don't know that Eloh is my wife and I wouldn't kill her Night 1. Jack didn't know that. People keep acting like I'm the kind of person that would kill her to fuck with everyone. Am I? People also think I have this huge reputation where I would throw my teammates under the bus at every turn, but I have only done that one intentionally, and only twice because of circumstance. If you think you've caught me because I forgot something or because I don't say what you want to hear, guess what?

"You a damn fool." -Boo

Do you honestly believe that there wouldn't be at least one person on an entire baddie team who would know that you and Eloh are married?

I don't think we've caught you because you "forgot" things a couple times. I know we've caught you because of the way you've been controlling the narrative the entire time. You got Scotty. Bravo. But then when we were handed a baddie on a silver platter, you and Wilgy convinced everyone not to lynch him against all reason. You let a baddie live so that he can further influence and poison the voting and the discussion. Then you got SVS lynched, who was civ. Now you think I'm bad because I've had the audacity to name you as one of my top suspects--despite the fact that all of your efforts have been centered around lynching two people who weren't mafia and not lynching the guy who was.

DFaraday wrote:Why are dead players and MP voting in this poll?

Epignosis wrote:

Long Con wrote:Anyone willing to make a lie detector statement? I'm Civ, and I support Hillary Clinton.

Long Con, this troubles me. I don't recall you ever coming out with a lie detector statement out of the blue like this. What prompted you to state this?

The roles in Red vs. Blue were fairly complex, and there can only be three of them in play due to the limitations of the Heist format. I (correctly) assumed that there would be an independent, so that eats up one power role. I am also assuming there are three vanilla mafia and two civilian power roles. I feel confident that there are two mafia remaining. If I am correct, it would mean there is one more civilian power role out there. Given the complexities of G-Man's power roles in the previous outing, I do not believe there is a lie detector.

Did you have any reason to believe in a Heist there would be a lie detector role?

[size=200]Long Con[/size] wrote:Trust me

Epignosis wrote:

DFaraday wrote:Why are dead players and MP voting in this poll?

The host implied they could.

DFaraday wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

DFaraday wrote:Why are dead players and MP voting in this poll?

The host implied they could.

It doesn't say anything about non-players though, which is what MP is unless I'm missing something.

Epignosis wrote:

[size=200]Long Con[/size] wrote:Trust me

Epignosis wrote:You didn't catch anything. You're acting like I attempted to grab a bunch of credit for lynching Scotty with the underlined statement. Then you blame me and Wilgy for people agreeing with my suspicion of S~V~S. If lynching Jack was so important to you, you should have done a better job than me in making a case for that and getting people to agree with you. And I didn't get S~V~S lynched. Over a half a dozen people did. Are they all bad?

What's the narrative going to be when you lynch me and see that I'm not bad?

DFaraday wrote:Jack wouldn't have poisoned discussion if everyone just ignored him. I find Epi's argument that we could identify teammates of Jack understandable, and am not sure why that makes him bad. Clearly enough people agreed with him to not lynch Jack right away, so this feels like you're trying to shift the blame onto Epi.

I'm voting Julian Castro because he used to be our mayor.

Long Con wrote:Also, I voted Elizabeth Warren, because Hillary Points.

notsawyer540 wrote:I don't need to make anything fit, and I don't believe you.

Epignosis wrote:

notsawyer540 wrote:I don't need to make anything fit, and I don't believe you.

I don't care that you don't believe me. If you are a civilian, your task is to figure out if you should believe me and try to frame my posts in the context of being from a civilian. You've given no time to that and made up your mind despite the real evidence working against your suspicion.

Epignosis wrote:

notsawyer540 wrote:I don't need to make anything fit, and I don't believe you.

I don't care that you don't believe me. If you are a civilian, your task is to figure out if you should believe me and try to frame my posts in the context of being from a civilian. You've given no time to that and made up your mind despite the real evidence working against your suspicion.

notsawyer540 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

notsawyer540 wrote:I don't need to make anything fit, and I don't believe you.

I don't care that you don't believe me. If you are a civilian, your task is to figure out if you should believe me and try to frame my posts in the context of being from a civilian. You've given no time to that and made up your mind despite the real evidence working against your suspicion.

What evidence?

THE WHITE HOUSE

EXECUTIVE ORDER
13765
----

ENSURING VOTE EQUITY FOR ALL CITIZENS

By virtue of the authority vested in me by the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and as President of the United States, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Declaration of Special Provision Territory. The Secretary of State and the Chairman of the Federal Elections Committee shall re-classify The Syndicate as an at-risk voting district subject to new coverage formulas.

Section 2. Establishment of New Coverage Formulas. Due to certain members of The Syndicate dominating communication and potentially diluting the free exchange of ideas, equity must be ensured so that those with limited access to communications tools to exercise their right to free speech have a more equitable share of speech. Establishing coverage formulas to votes cast in The Syndiacte will ensure that the loudest voices are not also the most powerful voices.

Section 3. Implementation and Coverage Formula Composition. Beginning on Tuesday, January 24, 2017, all speech conducted within The Syndicate from the time the current administration took office will be certified and tallied. All current members of The Syndicate will have their vote values reassessed in a manner that provides for the same total number of votes to be cast but the votes of individuals will be weighted in the inverse order of their current speech volumes.

Section 4. Evaluation and Assessment of Coverage Formula Effectiveness. This duration of the processes laid out in this order shall initially extend only through the voting period on Tuesday, January 24, 2017. At that point, the President shall review the effectiveness of the new coverage formula with the Chairman of the Federal Elections Committee. If deemed successful, the President may choose to extend the duration of the application of the new coverage formulas on a daily basis until she deems them no longer necessary.

HILLARY R. CLINTON

THE WHITE HOUSE,
January 23, 2017