The Syndicate

MovingPictures07 wrote:I don't like that sprityo 2.0's first handful of posts of any game-related content are all a combination of salt over his 1.0 self dying and discussing his former self rather than attempting to generate reads on anyone. I'd say that's a bad look.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:Posting my intention to vote DDL per Quin's argument and Snow Dog's horrendous defense of himself.

That really surprises me a lot, after the post of yours which I just quoted above... which states that your town read of DDL just got townier.

It wasn't that strong of a town read on DDL.

And yeah, even if DDL and Snow are likely not on a team (my previous thought) and not likely are on a team (where I'm trending to but not 100% sold on), it doesn't mean Snow being mafia makes DDL not mafia. It just makes it more likely.

I'm much more sold on Snow = bad because no defense, not being helpful or scumhunting and the possible connection with DDL than

DDL = bad because of a possible connection with Snow and misrep of LC plus pinging others

But that second one is better than Gloryo = bad cause replacement, Sig = bad cause his case on Gloryo is reaching or LC is bad cause not being committal enough. None of that is even slightly convincing to me.

If most people think DDL + Snow Dog = super unlikely w/w combo, I'll not go that direction. Like I said, struggling with the meta a bit and the argument that this is too obvious of a play for them or too obvious of a solution for Quin is something that I'm having to take everyone's word for as I've never played with any of them before.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Someone convince me whom to vote for. What's out there?

Snow Dog's posts in the last two pages suck.

Epignosis wrote:I don't know that what you just saw about Snow Dog could be considered a defense, but there you are.

Part of my problem with it.

sprityo wrote:It's alright MP I'll replace you if I get lynched two days in a row

:Noble:

DFaraday wrote:Effective immediately, Sprityo is replacing Glorfindel.

And yeah, dead members of factions win too.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:Posting my intention to vote DDL per Quin's argument and Snow Dog's horrendous defense of himself.

That really surprises me a lot, after the post of yours which I just quoted above... which states that your town read of DDL just got townier.

It wasn't that strong of a town read on DDL.

And yeah, even if DDL and Snow are likely not on a team (my previous thought) and not likely are on a team (where I'm trending to but not 100% sold on), it doesn't mean Snow being mafia makes DDL not mafia. It just makes it more likely.

I'm much more sold on Snow = bad because no defense, not being helpful or scumhunting and the possible connection with DDL than

DDL = bad because of a possible connection with Snow and misrep of LC plus pinging others

But that second one is better than Gloryo = bad cause replacement, Sig = bad cause his case on Gloryo is reaching or LC is bad cause not being committal enough. None of that is even slightly convincing to me.

If most people think DDL + Snow Dog = super unlikely w/w combo, I'll not go that direction. Like I said, struggling with the meta a bit and the argument that this is too obvious of a play for them or too obvious of a solution for Quin is something that I'm having to take everyone's word for as I've never played with any of them before.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Someone convince me whom to vote for. What's out there?

Snow Dog's posts in the last two pages suck.

Epignosis wrote:I don't know that what you just saw about Snow Dog could be considered a defense, but there you are.

Part of my problem with it.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

sprityo wrote:It's alright MP I'll replace you if I get lynched two days in a row

:Noble:

Haha, that's the spirit.

I don't want to be replaced. Normally I would when I cannot be totally on top of a game, but I'm going to try to become as engaged as possible. Maybe you can replace someone else though if that does happen.

Why shouldn't you be lynched? Specifically, point me to something in your 2.0 incarnation's batch of posts that should lead me and others to believe you to be town.

Spacedaisy wrote:Epi, can I take this to mean you lean civ on LC? Can you give me an idea why because I really want to believe he is, but I'm having a hard time believing it.

sprityo wrote:From me personally or in Florida posts? Because I'm pretty sure we've established he was just having a bad time. Unless you're dig, and insist on following a meta

MovingPictures07 wrote:OK, I'll be here for a bit longer than I thought. Still won't be too long though. I'll continue digging through ISOs.

Linki w/ sprityo: You. Don't worry about Glorf. Or even just tell me now. Doesn't have to be something you've written already. Show me town spark.

Linki w/ LC: Can you give me a fast and dirty on DDL? I'll look at him next in fact and see what I find.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Of course, I had to fiirst pick the guy that was lynched and then replaced back in.

Who did sprityo replace?

Long Con wrote:

sprityo wrote:From me personally or in Florida posts? Because I'm pretty sure we've established he was just having a bad time. Unless you're dig, and insist on following a meta

Also, *sig

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Jackofhearts2005 wrote:Posting my intention to vote DDL per Quin's argument and Snow Dog's horrendous defense of himself.

That really surprises me a lot, after the post of yours which I just quoted above... which states that your town read of DDL just got townier.

DDL = bad because of a possible connection with Snow and misrep of LC plus pinging others

But that second one is better than Gloryo = bad cause replacement, Sig = bad cause his case on Gloryo is reaching or LC is bad cause not being committal enough. None of that is even slightly convincing to me.

Long Con wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:OK, I'll be here for a bit longer than I thought. Still won't be too long though. I'll continue digging through ISOs.

Linki w/ sprityo: You. Don't worry about Glorf. Or even just tell me now. Doesn't have to be something you've written already. Show me town spark.

Linki w/ LC: Can you give me a fast and dirty on DDL? I'll look at him next in fact and see what I find.

Fine, gimme five mins and I'll tally up my triple-whammy.

Epignosis wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:Epi, can I take this to mean you lean civ on LC? Can you give me an idea why because I really want to believe he is, but I'm having a hard time believing it.

What is giving you a hard time?

Spacedaisy wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:Epi, can I take this to mean you lean civ on LC? Can you give me an idea why because I really want to believe he is, but I'm having a hard time believing it.

What is giving you a hard time?

I couldn't put my finger on it originally, but it's completely a tone thing. His response to weak suspicions read to me like a baddie. If civ I would expect something about wanting to know reasons, maybe a little protesting against a gut suspicion. Instead the response I've seen has been almost like don't make any sudden moves and maybe I'll get through it. I don't know. It's so weak a case, I'm finding myself in this weird place where my gut yells bad, but my brain can't bring myself to vote him because I can't see a good reason to. I'm finding it frustrating.

Argh, this game.

Anyway, I'd appreciate your view on LC, since you are wanting to vote for the people voting him I assume you lean civ and I want to know why. I need some reasons to help me sort this out one way or another.

LC: I want to believe it because I feel like I can't figure out the why of my own suspicion. It is exceedingly frustrating to me.

Long Con wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

sig wrote:Why LC?

He is around, he is paying attention at every big discussion, and he is posting his opinions, but not committing to anything. He spent a long time talking about how he didn't know who to vote for on d1, but then at the end he was okay with pushing the nearest wagon around.

That's not accurate, I wasn't "pushing the nearest wagon". You're straining to phrase things in a way that makes me look guilty of something which I am not. I decided to go with a low/non-poster, and sprityo was in the short list of folks that I was considering for that. Then ONE person voted sprityo, and I decided that was the best "low-poster" way to go... rather than pick a different one and split that slice of the vote up. It wasn't a wagon at that point - that's why your analysis is inaccurate. I would go so far as to say "intentionally inaccurate", but I may get back to that when I have more time to devote.

Long Con wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:And right after that, he was accusing Glorf of voting for bad reasons:

Long Con wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:And there you go... vindicated again!

Damn, yo, what vindication? What if DDL is a baddie? Your vote would have tied them up, and maybe changed EVERYTHING. It's a scotche early to be proclaiming "vindication".

What if I was bad and you had "randomly" voted for me instead of spirit, LC? Wouldn't that have changed everything either?

Once again, you are intentionally shifting away from the real truth. I didn't accuse Glorf of voting for bad reasons. Glorf didn't vote. AND I didn't accuse him. Not in the conventional Mafia sense. I wasn't stating a suspicion of him, I was telling him that it was not cool or accurate to proclaim "vindication".

Long Con wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I just cared that you had enough commitment to the game to judge people but not enough to make more commited votes than the one you made. That came across as rather hipocritical.

You know what, we're coming back to this as well.

If I had been accusing someone else of not having enough suspicions, or not being involved enough to make an informed vote, THAT would be hypocritical.

Me called Glorfindel out on his "vindicated" claim was a self-contained disagreement with one post. There is NOTHING hypocritical about that. Maybe if I had also made a similar post earlier somehow wherein I claimed to be vindicated in my views, and THEN put Glorf down for the same.... THAT would be hypocritical.

However, none of that happened. Your assessment of "that came across as rather hypocritical" is yet another example of DDL intentionally twisting things to make me look bad.

soup wrote:whoa sorry I am late, going to catch up when I get off work

Spacedaisy wrote:Yeah sounds nice, but when you're gut only wants to talk about one person, simply choosing someone else is not so easy. Nice avoidance of my question though. Duly noted.

Elohcin wrote:

DFaraday wrote:Effective immediately, Sprityo is replacing Glorfindel.

And yeah, dead members of factions win too.

I have to wonder why Sprit replaced Glor. Glor was pretty active. I know glor has a hard time being mafia, so maybe it was too much pressure.

This is all I have to go on right now, unfortunately. So, *voting Sprit*

sprityo wrote:

soup wrote:whoa sorry I am late, going to catch up when I get off work

Also,

Epignosis wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:Epi, can I take this to mean you lean civ on LC? Can you give me an idea why because I really want to believe he is, but I'm having a hard time believing it.

What is giving you a hard time?

I couldn't put my finger on it originally, but it's completely a tone thing. His response to weak suspicions read to me like a baddie. If civ I would expect something about wanting to know reasons, maybe a little protesting against a gut suspicion. Instead the response I've seen has been almost like don't make any sudden moves and maybe I'll get through it. I don't know. It's so weak a case, I'm finding myself in this weird place where my gut yells bad, but my brain can't bring myself to vote him because I can't see a good reason to. I'm finding it frustrating.

Argh, this game.

Anyway, I'd appreciate your view on LC, since you are wanting to vote for the people voting him I assume you lean civ and I want to know why. I need some reasons to help me sort this out one way or another.

LC: I want to believe it because I feel like I can't figure out the why of my own suspicion. It is exceedingly frustrating to me.

I think my opinion about LC is less important right now than your opinion on 21 people who are not LC. Even if you are torn on LC, there are eight Mafia. Eight.

Not sure about LC? Pick someone else to lynch. This is Day 2. Not Day 12.

Spacedaisy wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:Epi, can I take this to mean you lean civ on LC? Can you give me an idea why because I really want to believe he is, but I'm having a hard time believing it.

What is giving you a hard time?

I couldn't put my finger on it originally, but it's completely a tone thing. His response to weak suspicions read to me like a baddie.

Quin wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

DFaraday wrote:Effective immediately, Sprityo is replacing Glorfindel.

And yeah, dead members of factions win too.

I have to wonder why Sprit replaced Glor. Glor was pretty active. I know glor has a hard time being mafia, so maybe it was too much pressure.

This is all I have to go on right now, unfortunately. So, *voting Sprit*

I think there are much more significant topics being discussed right now which make for better votes than than voting based on a flimsy hypothesis on why someone might have subbed out.

Epignosis wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:Yeah sounds nice, but when you're gut only wants to talk about one person, simply choosing someone else is not so easy. Nice avoidance of my question though. Duly noted.

I am rescinding my civilian opinion of you after that.

I didn't avoid your question. I gave you an an answer that will help me develop my opinion on you better, and I'd say it did the trick.

sprityo wrote:

Quin wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

DFaraday wrote:Effective immediately, Sprityo is replacing Glorfindel.

And yeah, dead members of factions win too.

I have to wonder why Sprit replaced Glor. Glor was pretty active. I know glor has a hard time being mafia, so maybe it was too much pressure.

This is all I have to go on right now, unfortunately. So, *voting Sprit*

I think there are much more significant topics being discussed right now which make for better votes than than voting based on a flimsy hypothesis on why someone might have subbed out.

Okay I somehow managed to miss eloh saying this and I agree with quin. This is lazy playing, an easy out.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:Epi, can I take this to mean you lean civ on LC? Can you give me an idea why because I really want to believe he is, but I'm having a hard time believing it.

What is giving you a hard time?

I couldn't put my finger on it originally, but it's completely a tone thing. His response to weak suspicions read to me like a baddie. If civ I would expect something about wanting to know reasons, maybe a little protesting against a gut suspicion. Instead the response I've seen has been almost like don't make any sudden moves and maybe I'll get through it. I don't know. It's so weak a case, I'm finding myself in this weird place where my gut yells bad, but my brain can't bring myself to vote him because I can't see a good reason to. I'm finding it frustrating.

Argh, this game.

Anyway, I'd appreciate your view on LC, since you are wanting to vote for the people voting him I assume you lean civ and I want to know why. I need some reasons to help me sort this out one way or another.

LC: I want to believe it because I feel like I can't figure out the why of my own suspicion. It is exceedingly frustrating to me.

I think my opinion about LC is less important right now than your opinion on 21 people who are not LC. Even if you are torn on LC, there are eight Mafia. Eight.

Not sure about LC? Pick someone else to lynch. This is Day 2. Not Day 12.

One could argue that your post here, Epi, is unnecessarily unhelpful. You could have still said all of this and provided a quick opinion on LC yourself, which Daisy desperately wanted.

Epignosis wrote:Hey Eater of Hats:

Is Spacedaisy good or bad?

Epignosis wrote:

sprityo wrote:

Quin wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

DFaraday wrote:Effective immediately, Sprityo is replacing Glorfindel.

And yeah, dead members of factions win too.

I have to wonder why Sprit replaced Glor. Glor was pretty active. I know glor has a hard time being mafia, so maybe it was too much pressure.

This is all I have to go on right now, unfortunately. So, *voting Sprit*

I think there are much more significant topics being discussed right now which make for better votes than than voting based on a flimsy hypothesis on why someone might have subbed out.

Okay I somehow managed to miss eloh saying this and I agree with quin. This is lazy playing, an easy out.

Homegirl is sick. She voted and went to bed. It's clear she isn't even reading the thread.

None of that tells me whether or not she's good or bad, but I wouldn't lynch her for "lazy playing."

Long Con wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:Epi, can I take this to mean you lean civ on LC? Can you give me an idea why because I really want to believe he is, but I'm having a hard time believing it.

What is giving you a hard time?

I couldn't put my finger on it originally, but it's completely a tone thing. His response to weak suspicions read to me like a baddie.

I'm not responding to weak suspicions; I am responding to willful twisting of the truth.

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:Epi, can I take this to mean you lean civ on LC? Can you give me an idea why because I really want to believe he is, but I'm having a hard time believing it.

What is giving you a hard time?

I couldn't put my finger on it originally, but it's completely a tone thing. His response to weak suspicions read to me like a baddie. If civ I would expect something about wanting to know reasons, maybe a little protesting against a gut suspicion. Instead the response I've seen has been almost like don't make any sudden moves and maybe I'll get through it. I don't know. It's so weak a case, I'm finding myself in this weird place where my gut yells bad, but my brain can't bring myself to vote him because I can't see a good reason to. I'm finding it frustrating.

Argh, this game.

Anyway, I'd appreciate your view on LC, since you are wanting to vote for the people voting him I assume you lean civ and I want to know why. I need some reasons to help me sort this out one way or another.

LC: I want to believe it because I feel like I can't figure out the why of my own suspicion. It is exceedingly frustrating to me.

I think my opinion about LC is less important right now than your opinion on 21 people who are not LC. Even if you are torn on LC, there are eight Mafia. Eight.

Not sure about LC? Pick someone else to lynch. This is Day 2. Not Day 12.

One could argue that your post here, Epi, is unnecessarily unhelpful. You could have still said all of this and provided a quick opinion on LC yourself, which Daisy desperately wanted.

Let Daisy make up her own mind on LC. That's where I find out if she's good or bad. If I tell her what I think, then nothing is gained. She already guessed I don't think LC is bad, so why is she asking for more?

MovingPictures07 wrote:I could get behind an LC vote.

Long Con wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:Epi, can I take this to mean you lean civ on LC? Can you give me an idea why because I really want to believe he is, but I'm having a hard time believing it.

What is giving you a hard time?

I couldn't put my finger on it originally, but it's completely a tone thing. His response to weak suspicions read to me like a baddie.

I'm not responding to weak suspicions; I am responding to willful twisting of the truth.

I get the impression that LC's suspicion of DDL is contrived. I don't see any real conviction behind LC's determination of this conclusion.

insertnamehere wrote: If you don't give your opinions, how are we supposed to know whether you are good or bad?

MovingPictures07 wrote:I could get behind an LC vote.

Long Con wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Spacedaisy wrote:Epi, can I take this to mean you lean civ on LC? Can you give me an idea why because I really want to believe he is, but I'm having a hard time believing it.

What is giving you a hard time?

I couldn't put my finger on it originally, but it's completely a tone thing. His response to weak suspicions read to me like a baddie.

I'm not responding to weak suspicions; I am responding to willful twisting of the truth.

I get the impression that LC's suspicion of DDL is contrived. I don't see any real conviction behind LC's determination of this conclusion.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Spoiler: show

Long Con wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

sig wrote:Why LC?

He is around, he is paying attention at every big discussion, and he is posting his opinions, but not committing to anything. He spent a long time talking about how he didn't know who to vote for on d1, but then at the end he was okay with pushing the nearest wagon around.

That's not accurate, I wasn't "pushing the nearest wagon". You're straining to phrase things in a way that makes me look guilty of something which I am not. I decided to go with a low/non-poster, and sprityo was in the short list of folks that I was considering for that. Then ONE person voted sprityo, and I decided that was the best "low-poster" way to go... rather than pick a different one and split that slice of the vote up. It wasn't a wagon at that point - that's why your analysis is inaccurate. I would go so far as to say "intentionally inaccurate", but I may get back to that when I have more time to devote.

Number 1: Saying I was "pushing the nearest wagon". That makes me sound bad. It is also inaccurate. I was the second vote on a low poster, I had already stated that I wanted to vote a low poster and that I would prefer to pick the same low poster as other like-minded individuals.

Long Con wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:And right after that, he was accusing Glorf of voting for bad reasons:

Long Con wrote:

Glorfindel wrote:And there you go... vindicated again!

Damn, yo, what vindication? What if DDL is a baddie? Your vote would have tied them up, and maybe changed EVERYTHING. It's a scotche early to be proclaiming "vindication".

What if I was bad and you had "randomly" voted for me instead of spirit, LC? Wouldn't that have changed everything either?

Once again, you are intentionally shifting away from the real truth. I didn't accuse Glorf of voting for bad reasons. Glorf didn't vote. AND I didn't accuse him. Not in the conventional Mafia sense. I wasn't stating a suspicion of him, I was telling him that it was not cool or accurate to proclaim "vindication".

Number 2: He said that I was "accusing Glorf of voting for bad reasons". That's completely untrue in every way, and he's using it to try and make me look bad.

Long Con wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I just cared that you had enough commitment to the game to judge people but not enough to make more commited votes than the one you made. That came across as rather hipocritical.

You know what, we're coming back to this as well.

If I had been accusing someone else of not having enough suspicions, or not being involved enough to make an informed vote, THAT would be hypocritical.

Me called Glorfindel out on his "vindicated" claim was a self-contained disagreement with one post. There is NOTHING hypocritical about that. Maybe if I had also made a similar post earlier somehow wherein I claimed to be vindicated in my views, and THEN put Glorf down for the same.... THAT would be hypocritical.

However, none of that happened. Your assessment of "that came across as rather hypocritical" is yet another example of DDL intentionally twisting things to make me look bad.

Number 3: Calling me a hypocrite for invented reasons with, yet again, the intention of making me look bad.

Reason for suspicion: DDL is playing like a baddie who needs to make a case in order to not look bad, but has chosen to contrive and twist reasons because he thinks it will be easy to make people see me as bad. The absolute weakness and dishonesty of his points against me indicate that he is not approaching this from an honest perspective, hence, he is bad.

LC, I'm not inspired. The problem that I have with all of this is that you are the subject of DDL's posts. I'd say it's difficult to fairly assess how genuine a suspicion is when that suspicion is of one's self. I would know; I have a tendency to fall into the OMGUS trap a bit myself when town.

Can you not see a town-compatible reason for DDL's thoughts of you?

Epignosis wrote:

insertnamehere wrote: If you don't give your opinions, how are we supposed to know whether you are good or bad?

I gave my opinions. I didn't give why I hold those opinions.