The Syndicate

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

S~V~S wrote:My only worry re Eloh is that it would be easy to set her up as a fall guy with an Epi NK. Super easy.

I brought this up earlier. JJJ and MP were the ones to point out that she would benefit from Epi being dead Night 1, and I think that's worth noting.

Worth noting how so? I mean, how does it influence your perceptions?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I don't suspect motel room for moving his vote around.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

MacDougall wrote:This is turning into Captain America Civil War I think lol.

I would like you to ask yourself to what end does Ricochet's post such as the below serve from a civilian perspective?

Ricochet wrote:Did I say I am?

You've got nothing to fret about anymore, you can kill whomever you like now, nobody gives a damn.

What a hollow finger-waggy statement to make, right after the very post in which I clearly stated I would

Further to that, Ricochet proceeded to read two players I have a Mafia read of and appeared to give them a Mafia read. Spirityo and Glorfindel.

All thought process that Ricochet has made outside of anything to do with me on day 2 are almost concurrence with my own, aside from his OMGUS reaction to Zebra. So why is he clinging to a Mafia read of me. His logical progression should be rendering a civilian read of me. But he is clinging to it. I consider this reflective of an extreme level of insincerity.

It would not surprise me to find that he has made those two reads of wilgy, lorab, spirityo and glorfindel as legacy in case of his death because one of them, or both, are on his team. In fact it makes a lot of sense that he seemingly randomly chose some players to do that with. I would say he has done that rather intentionally.

I also have mafia reads of sprityo and Glorfindel though, and I know I'm not the only one. And why would Rico's congruence with you naturally indicate that he should evaluate you as a civilian? I think it's possible to agree with someone on suspects and yet still find that person a suspect, as a civilian, right?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:My face when sanmateo and BWT are both bad.

insertnamehere wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:Goddammit INH

It's like we finish each others sandwiches.

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

S~V~S wrote:My only worry re Eloh is that it would be easy to set her up as a fall guy with an Epi NK. Super easy.

I brought this up earlier. JJJ and MP were the ones to point out that she would benefit from Epi being dead Night 1, and I think that's worth noting.

Worth noting how so? I mean, how does it influence your perceptions?

Well like just now when I mentioned pointing it out earlier that you two were pointing that out earlier, both you and him distanced yourself from pointing it out by saying that you didn't include it in your cases against her. This is true, it's just funny that you seem like you need to disown your statement of her benefiting from Epi being dead Night 1.

S~V~S wrote:A tie is a no lynch, right? So we are one vote from that now.

Linki @MP, with all due respect, my opinion is still my opinion. You knowing him better does not make it invalid.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

S~V~S wrote:My only worry re Eloh is that it would be easy to set her up as a fall guy with an Epi NK. Super easy.

I brought this up earlier. JJJ and MP were the ones to point out that she would benefit from Epi being dead Night 1, and I think that's worth noting.

Worth noting how so? I mean, how does it influence your perceptions?

Well like just now when I mentioned pointing it out earlier that you two were pointing that out earlier, both you and him distanced yourself from pointing it out by saying that you didn't include it in your cases against her. This is true, it's just funny that you seem like you need to disown your statement of her benefiting from Epi being dead Night 1.

I'm not disowning it at all; I'm emphasizing that it is not even remotely close to the reason I am mafia reading her, because it is not. It was merely conjecture, which is how it should be treated, primarily spoken because others were already conjecturing (such as Mac) that others (such as Jay) had the most reason to kill Elo. I disagreed, so I said so.

G-Man wrote:Since you all gave me no chance to pre-write, the lynch post will take a few minutes to whip up.

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

S~V~S wrote:My only worry re Eloh is that it would be easy to set her up as a fall guy with an Epi NK. Super easy.

I brought this up earlier. JJJ and MP were the ones to point out that she would benefit from Epi being dead Night 1, and I think that's worth noting.

Worth noting how so? I mean, how does it influence your perceptions?

Well like just now when I mentioned pointing it out earlier that you two were pointing that out earlier, both you and him distanced yourself from pointing it out by saying that you didn't include it in your cases against her. This is true, it's just funny that you seem like you need to disown your statement of her benefiting from Epi being dead Night 1.

I'm not disowning it at all; I'm emphasizing that it is not even remotely close to the reason I am mafia reading her, because it is not. It was merely conjecture, which is how it should be treated, primarily spoken because others were already conjecturing (such as Mac) that others (such as Jay) had the most reason to kill Elo. I disagreed, so I said so.

I'm just saying what it looks like to me. Time will tell what's closer to the truth.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:A tie is a no lynch, right? So we are one vote from that now.

Linki @MP, with all due respect, my opinion is still my opinion. You knowing him better does not make it invalid.

That's all well and good, but it just appeared to me like you didn't even read what I said, especially given I sort of emotionally opened myself up there, so it bugged me a bit. Sorry.

S~V~S wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:A tie is a no lynch, right? So we are one vote from that now.

Linki @MP, with all due respect, my opinion is still my opinion. You knowing him better does not make it invalid.

That's all well and good, but it just appeared to me like you didn't even read what I said, especially given I sort of emotionally opened myself up there, so it bugged me a bit. Sorry.

I tend/try to blow off emotional content. I found that based on the person making it, it either makes me trust them OR (and this is more likely) makes me think they are being manipulative. So it was not my intent to dismiss your opening up. It is just how I tend to read things.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

S~V~S wrote:My only worry re Eloh is that it would be easy to set her up as a fall guy with an Epi NK. Super easy.

I brought this up earlier. JJJ and MP were the ones to point out that she would benefit from Epi being dead Night 1, and I think that's worth noting.

Worth noting how so? I mean, how does it influence your perceptions?

Well like just now when I mentioned pointing it out earlier that you two were pointing that out earlier, both you and him distanced yourself from pointing it out by saying that you didn't include it in your cases against her. This is true, it's just funny that you seem like you need to disown your statement of her benefiting from Epi being dead Night 1.

I'm not disowning it at all; I'm emphasizing that it is not even remotely close to the reason I am mafia reading her, because it is not. It was merely conjecture, which is how it should be treated, primarily spoken because others were already conjecturing (such as Mac) that others (such as Jay) had the most reason to kill Elo. I disagreed, so I said so.

I'm just saying what it looks like to me. Time will tell what's closer to the truth.

Oh yeah, and that's why I asked. I know you're not me so you have to judge what I say within the confines of the game, that's what you should do. I just wanted to make my thoughts on the matter clear, that's all, especially since it is the mafia's job to misrepresent civilians to make them easier to lynch.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Oops, I forgot about showing you a few Elo quotes, zebra. Let me try to do that quickly here.

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:
Oh yeah, and that's why I asked. I know you're not me so you have to judge what I say within the confines of the game, that's what you should do. I just wanted to make my thoughts on the matter clear, that's all, especially since it is the mafia's job to misrepresent civilians to make them easier to lynch.

Holy shit, seeing that creeped me out.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Oops, I forgot about showing you a few Elo quotes, zebra. Let me try to do that quickly here.

Lol, I'm having trouble just picking a few because my perspective runs throughout nearly her entire ISO. I guess our difference in perspective will be proven accurate or inaccurate based on a flip at this point, unless you want me to continue to try to elaborate. I just don't think it'll be a worthwhile use of time at this point.

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Oops, I forgot about showing you a few Elo quotes, zebra. Let me try to do that quickly here.

Lol, I'm having trouble just picking a few because my perspective runs throughout nearly her entire ISO. I guess our difference in perspective will be proven accurate or inaccurate based on a flip at this point, unless you want me to continue to try to elaborate. I just don't think it'll be a worthwhile use of time at this point.

It's your call, I won't push you to do it.

MacDougall wrote:MP I'm not sure why you are even considering whether his policy lynch attempt on me is alignment indicative when he made it obvious he was planning to do it before he rolled his alignment.

I am not voting for him because of that. I am voting for him for all the reasons I have already said repeatedly.

MacDougall wrote:MP I'm not sure why you are even considering whether his policy lynch attempt on me is alignment indicative when he made it obvious he was planning to do it before he rolled his alignment.

I am not voting for him because of that. I am voting for him for all the reasons I have already said repeatedly.

a2thezebra wrote:

MacDougall wrote:MP I'm not sure why you are even considering whether his policy lynch attempt on me is alignment indicative when he made it obvious he was planning to do it before he rolled his alignment.

I am not voting for him because of that. I am voting for him for all the reasons I have already said repeatedly.

Both MP and JJJ have seemed a bit eager to me to try and make the Rico lynch about less than what it's about. This is why I kept pushing JJJ about the semantics of whether or not he understood the case against Rico, because it seemed like a potentially teammate-motivated exaggeration.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

MacDougall wrote:MP I'm not sure why you are even considering whether his policy lynch attempt on me is alignment indicative when he made it obvious he was planning to do it before he rolled his alignment.

I am not voting for him because of that. I am voting for him for all the reasons I have already said repeatedly.

Well, I'd agree that it's compatible with either alignment. I'm judging his behavior as town-indicative when I consider everything he has done in the thread as a whole, which does include his d1 treatment of you -- all behavior that is potentially indicative of his alignment since he had rolled it at the game's start. If that makes sense.

MovingPictures07 wrote:And, that said, let me make it clear that despite agreeing with Jay extensively this phase (which I didn't really feel so much during d1), I still disagree with him on the level of confidence in my town read of Rico, among other things. I have him as a slight town read for a reason; he's certainly not my most confident read.

MacDougall wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

MacDougall wrote:MP I'm not sure why you are even considering whether his policy lynch attempt on me is alignment indicative when he made it obvious he was planning to do it before he rolled his alignment.

I am not voting for him because of that. I am voting for him for all the reasons I have already said repeatedly.

Well, I'd agree that it's compatible with either alignment. I'm judging his behavior as town-indicative when I consider everything he has done in the thread as a whole, which does include his d1 treatment of you -- all behavior that is potentially indicative of his alignment since he had rolled it at the game's start. If that makes sense.

So you are saying that it makes sense for a civilian Ricochet to antagonise me after he dropped his policy lynch and continue to infer that I am Mafia without any reasoning for it?

Obviously there is the possibility he was just messing around to troll me, to get a rise out of me, but ultimately I interpret it as nefarious.

MacDougall wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

MacDougall wrote:MP I'm not sure why you are even considering whether his policy lynch attempt on me is alignment indicative when he made it obvious he was planning to do it before he rolled his alignment.

I am not voting for him because of that. I am voting for him for all the reasons I have already said repeatedly.

Well, I'd agree that it's compatible with either alignment. I'm judging his behavior as town-indicative when I consider everything he has done in the thread as a whole, which does include his d1 treatment of you -- all behavior that is potentially indicative of his alignment since he had rolled it at the game's start. If that makes sense.

So you are saying that it makes sense for a civilian Ricochet to antagonise me after he dropped his policy lynch and continue to infer that I am Mafia without any reasoning for it?

Obviously there is the possibility he was just messing around to troll me, to get a rise out of me, but ultimately I interpret it as nefarious.

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:And, that said, let me make it clear that despite agreeing with Jay extensively this phase (which I didn't really feel so much during d1), I still disagree with him on the level of confidence in my town read of Rico, among other things. I have him as a slight town read for a reason; he's certainly not my most confident read.

This looks like you're setting up to not be a primary target after the baddie Rico flip.

MacDougall wrote:Further to that, I find it harder to see a Ricochet who is intending to assist civilians to win the game, would so readily parlay his day 1 silliness into antaganoism and then subsequently into a legitimised read of me. It is easier for me to rationalise it as bad behaviour.

a2thezebra wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

MacDougall wrote:MP I'm not sure why you are even considering whether his policy lynch attempt on me is alignment indicative when he made it obvious he was planning to do it before he rolled his alignment.

I am not voting for him because of that. I am voting for him for all the reasons I have already said repeatedly.

Well, I'd agree that it's compatible with either alignment. I'm judging his behavior as town-indicative when I consider everything he has done in the thread as a whole, which does include his d1 treatment of you -- all behavior that is potentially indicative of his alignment since he had rolled it at the game's start. If that makes sense.

So you are saying that it makes sense for a civilian Ricochet to antagonise me after he dropped his policy lynch and continue to infer that I am Mafia without any reasoning for it?

Obviously there is the possibility he was just messing around to troll me, to get a rise out of me, but ultimately I interpret it as nefarious.

Well let's say he was just trolling you. Considering it greatly outweighed his substantive contributions, that's still anti-town behavior at best.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:And, that said, let me make it clear that despite agreeing with Jay extensively this phase (which I didn't really feel so much during d1), I still disagree with him on the level of confidence in my town read of Rico, among other things. I have him as a slight town read for a reason; he's certainly not my most confident read.

This looks like you're setting up to not be a primary target after the baddie Rico flip.

If that was what I am doing, which I am not, then surely I'm not doing a good job of it, precisely due to your post right here. If that's how you interpret my behavior, so be it. I don't know Rico's alignment. I'm defending him for clearly stated reasons and my perspective. I have no knowledge of anyone's alignment but my own.

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:And, that said, let me make it clear that despite agreeing with Jay extensively this phase (which I didn't really feel so much during d1), I still disagree with him on the level of confidence in my town read of Rico, among other things. I have him as a slight town read for a reason; he's certainly not my most confident read.

This looks like you're setting up to not be a primary target after the baddie Rico flip.

If that was what I am doing, which I am not, then surely I'm not doing a good job of it, precisely due to your post right here. If that's how you interpret my behavior, so be it. I don't know Rico's alignment. I'm defending him for clearly stated reasons and my perspective. I have no knowledge of anyone's alignment but my own.

Ah the ol' "I'm not dumb enough to post something I'll get called out for" defense. I need something better than WIFOM if you want to sway me otherwise.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:And, that said, let me make it clear that despite agreeing with Jay extensively this phase (which I didn't really feel so much during d1), I still disagree with him on the level of confidence in my town read of Rico, among other things. I have him as a slight town read for a reason; he's certainly not my most confident read.

This looks like you're setting up to not be a primary target after the baddie Rico flip.

If that was what I am doing, which I am not, then surely I'm not doing a good job of it, precisely due to your post right here. If that's how you interpret my behavior, so be it. I don't know Rico's alignment. I'm defending him for clearly stated reasons and my perspective. I have no knowledge of anyone's alignment but my own.

Ah the ol' "I'm not dumb enough to post something I'll get called out for" defense. I need something better than WIFOM if you want to sway me otherwise.

Your argument is WIFOM. There's no other way to defend it than with WIFOM. I've been transparent in my thoughts. If you still need clarification as to something specifically, I'd be more than happy to try to assist in explaining my perspective. Otherwise, we're just talking in circles.

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote: Ah the ol' "I'm not dumb enough to post something I'll get called out for" defense. I need something better than WIFOM if you want to sway me otherwise.

Your argument is WIFOM. There's no other way to defend it than with WIFOM. I've been transparent in my thoughts. If you still need clarification as to something specifically, I'd be more than happy to try to assist in explaining my perspective. Otherwise, we're just talking in circles.

I'm just trying to get a feel for the details of your position before the flip. What you've said is helpful regardless of which of us is right.

linki - It's more the timing of the post then the post itself mate.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

a2thezebra wrote: Ah the ol' "I'm not dumb enough to post something I'll get called out for" defense. I need something better than WIFOM if you want to sway me otherwise.

Your argument is WIFOM. There's no other way to defend it than with WIFOM. I've been transparent in my thoughts. If you still need clarification as to something specifically, I'd be more than happy to try to assist in explaining my perspective. Otherwise, we're just talking in circles.

I'm just trying to get a feel for the details of your position before the flip. What you've said is helpful regardless of which of us is right.

linki - It's more the timing of the post then the post itself mate.

That's entirely understandable, and you should. I welcome you all grilling me on things. That's what townie, who don't know my alignment, should be doing. I hope what I'm saying makes sense. If it doesn't, let me know. And I feel likewise about what you've said. The thread has seen a lot of potentially insightful conversations throughout this day period.

How do you mean the timing?

G-Man wrote: GREASE RAT: He looks out for #1 in both business and life. If he is visited (checked/targeted) by a member of the MFP at night, he will be told about it in the morning. If multiple people target him at night, he will be given a list of all their names and he will be told if a member of the MFP is among them but won't know who. If Toecutter's Gang tries to NK the Grease Rat, all of his accumulated information will be shared with them in exchange for his life. He can win with either side but he must be alive at the end of the game to win.