The Syndicate

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:53 am**

I took a quick glance at Strawhenge's posts because it's exciting to be in a game with Strawhenge again and I'll give him a small town read.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:54 am**

This is the most legible assembling of Nacho's reads available, that I can find. He worked off of my POE and eliminated further:

Spoiler: show

Quin
Long Con
JOH
DrWilgy
Sorsha/Sloonei
Scotty
Elohcin
DFaraday
Dyslexicon

This is the list reduced to his recommendations. It is important to state that I don't think Nacho's reads were God's Gift to Our Mafia Game and all perfect, but given my belief that there might be discernible kill motive, it's a decent way to explore that.

I've taken my prior assertions and removed some more names. Quin's color is "fading" given the "maaaaybe", and I remove him yet per my spilled brain matter. Scotty and Long Con too. I dropped Elohcin and DFaraday because if they're bad I Then given my sig vote checks, I highlight the overlapping potential problem area (orange). I'd call those two prominent suspects right now when I coalesce all of my brain goop into one bubbling soup.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:54 am**

Sloonei wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Well crap, now there's 5 mafia alive and I have 0 scumreads.
I get this reference. How do you know WIlgy wasn't scum?
I don't know if Wilgy was scum.

Why do you imply that he wasn't?
Because you say there's the same number of scum players remaining as there were supposed to be on Day 1.

I think you missed the cut of my gib.

Linki:

Spoiler: show

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:55 am**

Actually it would appear Nacho included Marmot in his POE as well.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:56 am**

Golden pings:

Golden wrote:
Strawhenge wrote:
Golden wrote:A map sounds useful. It's my kind of item.
Well we better see some trustworthy behavior then.
Meh. Trustworthy behaviour is overrated. I tend to be at my most trustworthy when I'm bad

I do think there is benefit in talking about and trying to come to a sort of consensus, because surely the baddies can all pick and vote for a single one of themselves?

Playfully comforts all our doubts about his scum meta, then talks about mechanics and strategy stuff.

Golden wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:I'm not calling it a slip-up, but it is as Golden said, a series of unfortunate events. I'm just open to the possibility of it being a fictional one.
I think you have a tendency to suspect me, but here is a golden rule you can trust me to live by.

Even when bad, I lie very very rarely. I don't create fictional stories. I heavily discourage teammates from doing it as well. Why? Because all it can do is lead to you getting caught in the lie. It's just a really poor strategy. There's a reason my baddie game is relatively successful, and it's because I leave as few threads to tug on as I possibly can.

Lies are reserved for things that can create a significant game advantage (and even then, you need to feel like its a safe lie), or for fake reads.

Having said that, I do see the advantage in lying to protect others from nks, as a civilian.

The WIFOM is palpable in this post. This broke my sirengif.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:57 am**

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Well crap, now there's 5 mafia alive and I have 0 scumreads.
I get this reference. How do you know WIlgy wasn't scum?
I don't know if Wilgy was scum.

Why do you imply that he wasn't?
Because you say there's the same number of scum players remaining as there were supposed to be on Day 1.
I think you missed the cut of my gib.

Linki:
Spoiler: show

What was the cut of your gib?

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:01 am**

Sloonei wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Well crap, now there's 5 mafia alive and I have 0 scumreads.
I get this reference. How do you know WIlgy wasn't scum?
I don't know if Wilgy was scum.

Why do you imply that he wasn't?
Because you say there's the same number of scum players remaining as there were supposed to be on Day 1.
I think you missed the cut of my gib.

Linki:
Spoiler: show
What was the cut of your gib?

It involves a Day 1 fakeslip.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:03 am**

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Well crap, now there's 5 mafia alive and I have 0 scumreads.
I get this reference. How do you know WIlgy wasn't scum?
I don't know if Wilgy was scum.

Why do you imply that he wasn't?
Because you say there's the same number of scum players remaining as there were supposed to be on Day 1.
I think you missed the cut of my gib.

Linki:
Spoiler: show
What was the cut of your gib?
It involves a Day 1 fakeslip.

Then I do unserstand it. I was remarking on the same fake slip.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:03 am**

*alleged fake slip

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:05 am**

I think Wilgy being snatched bears the appearance of independent work, maybe some manner of serial kidnapper. We'll see in later phases. I say so because he's the stereotypical untraceable target suitable for a solo/LMS player, and someone "going missing" doesn't strike me as being a civilian-associated ability.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:06 am**

@ Jay: all of your analysis right now seems to be pointing right at Jackofhearts. Would you say he is a top suspect? How did his Day 1 contributions look and feel?

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:11 am**

Sloonei wrote:
Silver Lantern wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Silver Lantern wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Silver Lantern wrote:Spirityo, can I take a screen shot of the polls and post it to the game?
Hello Silver Lantern, it's nice to see you over here! Now explain to me why you didn't cast a vote in the final tally yesterday.
I didn't feel the need to cast a vote.

I don't like this question at all. Makes it feel like you're trying to be helpful by questioning someone who didn't vote to lynch when in fact I had no reason to vote in the final tally.

Why do you feel I needed to "cast a vote in the final tally?"
Because you are a player in this game and as such your voice matters. Withholding your vote is equivocal to withholding your voice, and/or chickening out. Who would you have voted for if it mattered?
I don't understand your hypothetical. Explain why and how it would matter?

BTW I am leaving a game night and driving home. I should be back in in about 20-30 mins.
Votes are a way to declare your suspicions and tell the thread what you are thinking. Even if it's not going to end up mattering in the final tally, leaving an inconsequential vote in the poll at the end of the day is a purposeful statement, and you opted not to make one.

Who would you have voted for if it mattered?

Again, you have not put into context what "if it mattered" means. "If it matters" is a pretty vague statement. How would it matter? Why would it matter? Your hypothetical needs to be more concrete.

I disagree that leaving an inconsequential vote is a purposeful statement. It sounds like a complete oxymoron to me. I voted for two people yesterday and gave plenty of reasons for doing so. You know I'm not from here and it seems counterproductive to me for you to hold me to the usual standards of this place.

I have an answer to your question but I'm not going to give it to you until you put it in the context I've now requested twice. I didn't like Sorchas character and as a result I don't like you either (in game of course) so I don't feel compelled to answer your questions until you can make me feel better about you. You can start by making your vague flimsy hypothetical more specific.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:12 am**

Sloonei wrote:@ Jay: all of your analysis right now seems to be pointing right at Jackofhearts. Would you say he is a top suspect? How did his Day 1 contributions look and feel?

He's a suspect, and with Wilgy off in ???? land I could call him my top suspect for the moment. I grant the speculative nature of the work I've done tonight, so I also hope to do more conventional digging as time permits to see what else I might come upon. On Day 1 I described JOH as being admirably involved, but without any posts that gave me a particularly good feeling. I oranged him in my rainbow.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:13 am**

@ Silver Lantern, do you think there is harm in answering my questions?

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:23 am**

And since you admittedly love questions so much Sloonei, Here is a fun exercise for you.

If I were Sorcha and posted exactly as she did yesterday and then asked to be replaced at the 11th hour when it seemed like heat might be coming my way, what are the top 3 questions that you would be asking me today (if I was Sorcha and you were not)?

Now please go ahead and answer those 3 questions you've come up with from the Sorcha perspective that you actually have.

Please make sure that each question is made from the perspective of you being suspicious of the Sorcha replacement player.

I basically want you to switch roles and perspectives for the questions and answers.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:26 am**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I've taken my prior assertions and removed some more names. Quin's color is "fading" given the "maaaaybe", and I remove him yet per my spilled brain matter. Scotty and Long Con too. I dropped Elohcin and DFaraday because if they're bad I Then given my sig vote checks, I highlight the overlapping potential problem area (orange). I'd call those two prominent suspects right now when I coalesce all of my brain goop into one bubbling soup.

lol, I just noticed this hanging fragment. I briefly considered dropping Eloh and DFaraday in my exercise because they aren't likely to have prominent BTSC voices, but then I realized that wasn't logical given that it'd leave them viable to agree with the louder voice and changed my mind. So nevermind that.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:27 am**

Sloonei wrote:@ Silver Lantern, do you think there is harm in answering my questions?

No, but I'm stating to believe that you're avoiding giving context to your ambitious hypothetical.

3rd time I have asked now.

Why and how does it matter that I vote at the end of yesterday?

I am looking for a scenario that would have made my vote significant other then "cause syndicate 101 mentality brah." And I am looking for you to give context to what would have made it significant.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:28 am**

I spy a culture clash.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:29 am**

Silver Lantern wrote:
Sloonei wrote:@ Silver Lantern, do you think there is harm in answering my questions?
No, but I'm stating to believe that you're avoiding giving context to your ambiguous hypothetical.

3rd time I have asked now.

Why and how does it matter that I vote at the end of yesterday?

I am looking for a scenario that would have made my vote significant other then "cause syndicate 101 mentality brah." And I am looking for you to give context to what would have made it significant.

I hate auto correct...

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:32 am**

Silver Lantern wrote:And since you admittedly love questions so much Sloonei, Here is a fun exercise for you.

If I were Sorcha and posted exactly as she did yesterday and then asked to be replaced at the 11th hour when it seemed like heat might be coming my way, what are the top 3 questions that you would be asking me today (if I was Sorcha and you were not)?

Now please go ahead and answer those 3 questions you've come up with from the Sorcha perspective that you actually have.

Please make sure that each question is made from the perspective of you being suspicious of the Sorcha replacement player.

I basically want you to switch roles and perspectives for the questions and answers.

So you want me to tell you which questions I'd ask myself?
I'd ask how I'm planning to approach the day. I've already done that above.
I'd then ask myself for some reads. Those are in progress. So far I've given you various shads of town reads on Jay, Quin, Strawhenge, and Fredwood. I listed a couple of pings I had against Golden. There is surely more to come later. Stay tuned.
I'd then ask myself follow up questions to thosr reads.

Who would you have voted for yesterday if it mattered, ie if there was a 20-way tie in the poll and only your vote could break the tie, who would you have voted for?
Do you think there is harm in answering my questions?

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:33 am**

Silver Lantern wrote:
Sloonei wrote:@ Silver Lantern, do you think there is harm in answering my questions?
No, but I'm stating to believe that you're avoiding giving context to your ambitious hypothetical.

3rd time I have asked now.

Why and how does it matter that I vote at the end of yesterday?

I am looking for a scenario that would have made my vote significant other then "cause syndicate 101 mentality brah." And I am looking for you to give context to what would have made it significant.

I want to know who you are suspicious of because I want to talk about your suspicions.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:34 am**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I spy a culture clash.

Heh I'm not trying to clash. I think Sloonei is fine (in general, not in the game), and I get that he asks 1000 questions and how annoying it seemed to me on the HCRealms game you all played cause it just reeks to me of trying to get attention off himself, and right now I don't trust him/Sorcha.

Is it common here for people to give in to the demands of those they find scummy?

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:37 am**

Silver Lantern wrote:Is it common here for people to give in to the demands of those they find scummy?

When it's characterized that way I'd say no. Sometimes it's also common for people to not answer questions period. As with the "kill meta", it depends upon the person. Personally, I think questions are usually worth answering when they directly pertain to the game. Any interactive content has value.

You may legitimately believe Sloonei is scum, but that doesn't mean he is. If you believe there are universes out there where his questions are honestly motivated, then they warrant an answer. That's my philosophy at least.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:39 am**

Sloonei wrote:
Silver Lantern wrote:
Sloonei wrote:@ Silver Lantern, do you think there is harm in answering my questions?
No, but I'm stating to believe that you're avoiding giving context to your ambitious hypothetical.

3rd time I have asked now.

Why and how does it matter that I vote at the end of yesterday?

I am looking for a scenario that would have made my vote significant other then "cause syndicate 101 mentality brah." And I am looking for you to give context to what would have made it significant.
I want to know who you are suspicious of because I want to talk about your suspicions.

No, you don't get to switch up the questions just yet. Please answer why and how my vote would have been significant and I will tell you how I would have voted. FOURTH REQUEST. Then we can move on to your next question.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:42 am**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Silver Lantern wrote:Is it common here for people to give in to the demands of those they find scummy?
When it's characterized that way I'd say no. Sometimes it's also common for people to not answer questions period. As with the "kill meta", it depends upon the person. Personally, I think questions are usually worth answering when they directly pertain to the game. Any interactive content has value.

You may legitimately believe Sloonei is scum, but that doesn't mean he is. If you believe there are universes out there where his questions are honestly motivated, then they warrant an answer. That's my philosophy at least.

I dont legitimately believe anything that is speculative in nature regarding this game. I suspect that Sloonei is evil and his avoidance to answer my request, now 4 times in a row, is doing zero to dispel that suspicion.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:44 am**

My immediate perspective of Sloonei is positive for a reason I will share later.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:48 am**

Silver Lantern wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Silver Lantern wrote:
Sloonei wrote:@ Silver Lantern, do you think there is harm in answering my questions?
No, but I'm stating to believe that you're avoiding giving context to your ambitious hypothetical.

3rd time I have asked now.

Why and how does it matter that I vote at the end of yesterday?

I am looking for a scenario that would have made my vote significant other then "cause syndicate 101 mentality brah." And I am looking for you to give context to what would have made it significant.
I want to know who you are suspicious of because I want to talk about your suspicions.
No, you don't get to switch up the questions just yet. Please answer why and how my vote would have been significant and I will tell you how I would have voted. FOURTH REQUEST. Then we can move on to your next question.

That was my attempt to put the question into plain language. I don't think this line of discussion is leading us anywhere and I'd like to start over.
But I've gathered that I am a top suspect based on things that happened prior to my entry into this game. I unfortunately cannot answer to any questions which would have been directed at my spot in the game on Day 1 by virtue of not being Sorsha, so if you hope to get an accurate read on me then I have to ask you to focus your attention on Day 2.

As such I'm a blank slate, wouldn't you say? I know relatively little about this game and your pool of information here is much deeper than my own. So please, could you help me out by naming a few suspects and explaining why they are suspicious? Or maybe you'd prefer to give me town reads, whatever floats your boat.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:49 am**

It occurs to me that this phase will end on Friday. I will be gone nearly the entire day each day from Friday through Monday. It's plausible I'll be back in time for the deadline depending upon wi-fi circumstances. It's graduate program interview hell. Mafia will be my 921st priority.

I'll do my best to make a strong use of tomorrow, but even that will be difficult. I have a lot of preparation to do. Expect me to be less present for a while.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:49 am**

Silver Lantern wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Silver Lantern wrote:Is it common here for people to give in to the demands of those they find scummy?
When it's characterized that way I'd say no. Sometimes it's also common for people to not answer questions period. As with the "kill meta", it depends upon the person. Personally, I think questions are usually worth answering when they directly pertain to the game. Any interactive content has value.

You may legitimately believe Sloonei is scum, but that doesn't mean he is. If you believe there are universes out there where his questions are honestly motivated, then they warrant an answer. That's my philosophy at least.
I dont legitimately believe anything that is speculative in nature regarding this game. I suspect that Sloonei is evil and his avoidance to answer my request, now 4 times in a row, is doing zero to dispel that suspicion.

From my perspective, you are the one avoiding my question.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:50 am**

Silver Lantern is a town read.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:55 am**

I have a feeling Silver is doing a lot of showing and could be putting on a show. I don't read him/her as town right now.

I wanted to suspect Golden or JJJ or something for talking a bunch, since it's always a nightmare of mine in trying to ISO them. I ain't nailing them on anything since I'm rather indisposed in Canada right now with limited wifi, but I feel as though some of the big talkers are circumventing. If my dad talked all the time about his beliefs when I was a child, I'd probably be in Juvie by 13 for doing something dangerous. I wouldn't know better.

Don't worry, my parents got divorced early on so I rarely see him now.

But hey, ya know? I think the most suspicious person here is Elo. reasons easily assumable.

Lynch: Elohcin

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:01 am**

Sloonei wrote:
Silver Lantern wrote:And since you admittedly love questions so much Sloonei, Here is a fun exercise for you.

If I were Sorcha and posted exactly as she did yesterday and then asked to be replaced at the 11th hour when it seemed like heat might be coming my way, what are the top 3 questions that you would be asking me today (if I was Sorcha and you were not)?

Now please go ahead and answer those 3 questions you've come up with from the Sorcha perspective that you actually have.

Please make sure that each question is made from the perspective of you being suspicious of the Sorcha replacement player.

I basically want you to switch roles and perspectives for the questions and answers.
So you want me to tell you which questions I'd ask myself?
I'd ask how I'm planning to approach the day. I've already done that above.
I'd then ask myself for some reads. Those are in progress. So far I've given you various shads of town reads on Jay, Quin, Strawhenge, and Fredwood. I listed a couple of pings I had against Golden. There is surely more to come later. Stay tuned.
I'd then ask myself follow up questions to thosr reads.

Who would you have voted for yesterday if it mattered, ie if there was a 20-way tie in the poll and only your vote could break the tie, who would you have voted for?
Do you think there is harm in answering my questions?

My bad Sloonei, I thought your last paragraph was one of the 3 questions I asked you to ask yourself. Now I see that is you trying to put into context why my vote would matter. It would help if you enumerate things like that and makes them easier to read.

I.e.:
1)
2.
3-

Okay so if there was. 20 way vote and only my vote mattered (a kingmaker game essentially), I would have voted for either Sorcha, or Wigly, or Sig, cause those are the 3 that had been discussed most and would produce the most info the following day when we would be analyzing in hindsight.

I honestly didn't feel a huge compelling Reason to vote for Sig, but frankly I was so caught up I my own personal feuds that I glossed over many of the posts particularly the JJJ stuff. I do realize that's not a good quality in the game, but there is just a many posts and discussions that it's hard to focus on some of the advanced lingo and sirengif discussions.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:05 am**

I remember getting into similar stalemate with Silver Lantern in our one game of prior experience together over at HCRelams. We come from different mafia backgrounds but (I think) we both take a similar approach of sticking our noses right into whatever we can in the thread, so it makes sense that we'd clash like this. I don't feel like his approach is dishonest right now.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:06 am**

What were your personal feuds, SL? Who were you feuding with and how do you read those people?

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:07 am**

Scotty wrote:I have a feeling Silver is doing a lot of showing and could be putting on a show. I don't read him/her as town right now.

Why? Why is it a show? Why don't you read me as town if I'm "showing?" You don't get to just drop an accusatory post like that and not explain it.

I assure you this is how I play the game as town. There is no show. Ask JoH and Fred who have played dozens of games with me.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:19 am**

Sloonei wrote:What were your personal feuds, SL? Who were you feuding with and how do you read those people?

The 2 people i voted for. Namely Soneji (just a pissing contest between us really) and Dyslexicon because I didn't like how he answered my purple question and then blew it off as irrelevant when it wasn't.

I got fairly reasonable responses from both in follow up the more I pushed, though Nacho did make a few accuasatory posts at Soneji (+ 1 positive one towards the tail end), and we should be weary of that.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:20 am**

Silver Lantern wrote:
Sloonei wrote:What were your personal feuds, SL? Who were you feuding with and how do you read those people?
The 2 people i voted for. Namely Soneji (just a pissing contest between us really) and Dyslexicon because I didn't like how he answered my purple question and then blew it off as irrelevant when it wasn't.

I got fairly reasonable responses from both in follow up the more I pushed, though Nacho did make a few accuasatory posts at Soneji (+ 1 positive one towards the tail end), and we should be weary of that.

Would you be willing to vote for Soneji right now?

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:21 am**

Heading to bed guys. Good nite.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:24 am**

Sloonei wrote:
Silver Lantern wrote:
Sloonei wrote:What were your personal feuds, SL? Who were you feuding with and how do you read those people?
The 2 people i voted for. Namely Soneji (just a pissing contest between us really) and Dyslexicon because I didn't like how he answered my purple question and then blew it off as irrelevant when it wasn't.

I got fairly reasonable responses from both in follow up the more I pushed, though Nacho did make a few accuasatory posts at Soneji (+ 1 positive one towards the tail end), and we should be weary of that.
Would you be willing to vote for Soneji right now?

Alright last post.

Heh, I'm from HCRealms. I await our info gatherers to provide some info beforehand.

Seriously though I think an analysis of those pushing and voting for Sig is order.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:29 am**

Silver Lantern wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Silver Lantern wrote:
Sloonei wrote:What were your personal feuds, SL? Who were you feuding with and how do you read those people?
The 2 people i voted for. Namely Soneji (just a pissing contest between us really) and Dyslexicon because I didn't like how he answered my purple question and then blew it off as irrelevant when it wasn't.

I got fairly reasonable responses from both in follow up the more I pushed, though Nacho did make a few accuasatory posts at Soneji (+ 1 positive one towards the tail end), and we should be weary of that.
Would you be willing to vote for Soneji right now?
Alright last post.

Heh, I'm from HCRealms. I await our info gatherers to provide some info beforehand.

Seriously though I think an analysis of those pushing and voting for Sig is order.

Alright one more post only cause I realize I didn't directly answer your question. I have no problems voting for Soneji since NM8 basically called for him to die at one point and now is dead. But I think we have bigger fish to fry at the moment along the Sig vote and push train.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:32 am**

Silver Lantern wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Silver Lantern wrote:
Sloonei wrote:What were your personal feuds, SL? Who were you feuding with and how do you read those people?
The 2 people i voted for. Namely Soneji (just a pissing contest between us really) and Dyslexicon because I didn't like how he answered my purple question and then blew it off as irrelevant when it wasn't.

I got fairly reasonable responses from both in follow up the more I pushed, though Nacho did make a few accuasatory posts at Soneji (+ 1 positive one towards the tail end), and we should be weary of that.
Would you be willing to vote for Soneji right now?
Alright last post.

Heh, I'm from HCRealms. I await our info gatherers to provide some info beforehand.

Seriously though I think an analysis of those pushing and voting for Sig is order.

On RYM, we were all about voting first and asking questions later. Or at least I was. I dunno, I picked it up somewhere. Votes are action, and there's no harm in pressure voting when you can change it any time.

But I also agree that sig's voters need to be scrutinized. That's why it was my first question for Jay. It was an easy way to get that information into the thread. But it ignored his vote. Someone ought to look into that on top of everything else.

I'll also be going to sleep shortly. I hope to be able to provide solid reads by tomorrow.

Linki: no fish is more worth frying than the one directly in front of you. Vote for Soneji, come on!

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:57 am**

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Well crap, now there's 5 mafia alive and I have 0 scumreads.

Man this last page or so was painful to read. I'm not liking Silver's attitude/refusal to answer throughout that "clash." When Sloonei first asked why he didn't vote and he responded essentially "why would I" I was like "huh, ok that's another weird culture thing" and had a hard time wrapping my head around his perspective because I'm so used to votes being seen as required (@SL: in the vast majority of games here/that I've played, you can get punished and sometimes even modkilled for missing votes because it is seen as the most important measure of participating in the game)-- and also I just have always felt like it's sort of a moral imperative as well for town players to vote since it's their main tool in the basic mechanics of mafia as a game, and even if your vote is not going to make a difference in the lynch result it's generally expected that you use your vote at least symbolically to show/pressure who you would like to lynch (or even symbolically protest against a bandwagon or something). Deciding to abstain from a lynch vote because it "doesn't matter" is not common and I might dare say generally looked down upon, but I won't necessarily condemn you merely for that cultural difference because as you have said you should have the right to play the way you're accustomed to as long as it's within the rules of this particular game, and not be pressured into other ways of playing just because it's what we're used to.

What I might condemn you for, though, is how you handled the conversation from there on. Sloonei asked you a question, and you deflected it MULTIPLE times when it was really such a simple hypothetical that you could have easily given an answer for (you could have just said you would have voted for [whoever your top suspect was] if you had voted and that would be that). I did not feel good at all about the way you dismissed the question and aggressively kept asking for him to clarify it more when he already had. And I really didn't like when you said that you didn't want to dignify Sloonei with a response because you suspected him, and wouldn't answer him until he proved himself to you somehow. I don't understand why you wouldn't answer a simple question from someone just because you suspect them.

Anyway, I guess I could see this excessive argumentative-ness being your town style, but your assurance that it is your town style (along with your rather overdefensive response to Scotty) didn't entirely sell it to me.

For the record, I have a very good impression of Sloonei so far. I essentially gave him a clean slate because I didn't really think Sorsha was bad -- she never posted enough to get past a null read really; there was a point when she was a bit on the orange side but mostly because I was hoping for her to respond to stuff, and once she asked to be replaced I didn't suspect her for not responding because it was clearly just because she hadn't been able to keep up with the thread and so couldn't respond. Plus I generally tend to think that players who ask to be replaced are much more likely to be civ, so I usually give replacements BOTD. But I also always think Sloonei is town so I'll try to be cautious with my assumptions there and read him critically -- I've just definitely liked what I've seen so far.

Also, I liked all of JJJ's analysis, and might be interested in pursuing JOH for the reasons he's given. Might look at Jack's ISO later and see how I feel about him.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:58 am**

And there it is, the good ol' stream-of-consciousness wall o' text. A service I'm happy to provide.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 4:15 am**

Trying to keep up here and there when I get a mo, sorry for less posting but it's probably going to last this whole phase and I should hopefully be back to normal posting levels thereafter.

Some quick Notes. Nacho was in his third game here, he was town in monkey island. Not sure if that shifts jays analysis at all, but I still see jay saying things that I don't like. There is a real cognitive dissonance in his posts about nachos kill. On one hand, he reads into the unlikeliness of syndicate regulars to be largely responsible, and is willing to analyse on that level, but then he rejects jacks assertion that there is a pattern to early kills on the syndicate, and says it really depends who the mafia are. I don't see how you can analyse based on a pattern but reject another.

I actually agree with both jay and jack. I think there are patterns of night one kills, and I think they've both articulated things that seem likely and common. I think jacks observation is worthwhile because I'd guess that more of the baddies are people nacho had less interaction or reads on that the opposite, on balance. (Not that I think nk analysis is in any way reliable because, how do you pick from whatever pool you are left with?)

@sloon, self-meta analysis is something I do a lot. I'm not usually great at pointing to examples, but in this case I know I've posted the thing about how I don't lie about stupid stuff completely out of a game - it's in some thread in the drawing board about general mafia strategy. Sorry I can't link from phone but I remember specifically talking to llama about it. It's not an attempt at wifom, it's just a fact. Inh and I haven't got off to a great start in our mafia career at understanding each other - it feels like he always suspects me from the off for things that I will literally never do as any affiliation. It's helpful long term for me to help him understand me.

And frankly, I think if you look you will find tons of games (certainly as civ... I don't know if I also do it as bad) where I do meta self-analysis, because I get suspected and even day one lynched a lot when town for really 'not what golden looks like when bad' reasons.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 4:32 am**

You know, I went looking for that post myself and I can't find it. To the extent that I wonder if it was a pm conversation with llama. Gah!

Whatever, it's just the truth. Yes, it's self serving if I'm bad, but frankly it's self serving full stop. When people accuse me of doing something dumb that I would never do, I like to point it out. In part it was also because i wanted to get from people the mafia motive for what they found suspicious.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 5:06 am**

Silver Lantern wrote:Spirityo, can I take a screen shot of the polls and post it to the game?

Yep, I gotcha.

Also sloonei was instructed to the replacement kill thing btw, if no one figured it out, it's how you opt in after receiving host permissions

I've also reset the polls for where we are going

so vote away

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 5:20 am**

sprityo wrote:
Silver Lantern wrote:Spirityo, can I take a screen shot of the polls and post it to the game?
Yep, I gotcha.

Also sloonei was instructed to the replacement kill thing btw, if no one figured it out, it's how you opt in after receiving host permissions

I've also reset the polls for where we are going so vote away

I put up a screenshot of yesterday's poll for your viewing pleasures

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 6:39 am**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Stuff about the sig votes:

Golden (1st of 10) - First to voice suspicion of sig to my memory and first to vote accordingly. I can't blame him for maintaining his perspective late in the phase when sig's final contribution was essentially to plop a pointless vote on his face. I have no immediate beefs with this vote.

speedchuck (3rd of 10) - I kind of like this post. His comments about sig are more external than personal, but I think they're still meaningful. The approach is rather Slooneian, I think, in a good way. "Are there any good reasons not to lynch sig?" is the premier example of that.

JOH (4th of 10) - In his initial rainbow he had sig in the central yellow sector. Same story in the second rainbow. He questioned Golden for his sig vote when he initially placed it. I don't know why this post exists. He was critical of sig for his late arrival to the map claiming party. He does say there that this "factored in to his sig read already", which wouldn't seem to reflect in the rainbow positions or his brief dialogue with Golden. Compares him to Wilgy when he votes. The transition from "rainbow yellow" to "lynchable" isn't quite clear. The post in which he discusses map claims is the closest representation, which I would still assert results in an unclear transition. So that isn't ideal, and I could see potential for opportunism here.

Strawhenge (6th of 10) - Strawhenge voiced some confusion and then some suspicion about sig's behavior in the map claiming scenario. He ended up voting sig to help us reach the required 6 votes for soft lynch, but also voiced a preference for a Long Con vote given his previous ISO effort. I don't think this material looks especially good or bad, and I'll read Strawhenge at face value instead (I think he looks okay).

nutella (7th of 10) - She voiced some concern with sig and soon thereafter listed him very low on her rainbow. Starting here and in her next few posts thereafter she supported my suspicion of sig and expanded on her feelings. I don't think any of this looks alarming, and her content in general looks very town to me.

Dyslexicon (8th of 10) - Gave sig a little credit for a different tone to Dizzy's last experience on the site. He gave me a little crap for my reversal on sig. I think it looks authentic. Not a fan of a sig lynch, but prefers it over Wilgy. The perspective seems to worsen here. They voiced some interest, sort of in a CFD against Elohcin. Sub-null in a late rainbow. Agreed with my beef. I think the progression here looks fine, and I appreciate that Dizzy didn't care about holding consistent to their starting read. It should be noted that there may have been some amount of self-preservation here too; I don't recall the exact tally dynamic at this point.

DrWilgy (9th of 10) - I don't know if he's actually dead, so I'll check him too. His vote was participatory but not seemingly invested. "sig gon be pissed lol". This doesn't inspire confidence.

Quin (10th of 10) - He started by prodding his way into the discussion of sig, and soon after admitted he hadn't read the case. "sig is starting to feel like a runaway wagon". He participated in it 10 minutes later. This stuff makes me shrug, which is less good than some others.

~~~

Beyond the specific appearances of each vote relative to prior sig-related content, the positions of the votes within the wagons must also be considered. I tend to hate gigantic wagons like this because they're such a cozy place for scum to nestle their little heads, but I grant that it's a necessary component of a hammer game. I would call the votes that came after #6 essentially meaningless, because the soft lynch was secured. They're comparable in value to votes that weren't placed.

The sig votes that do the least for me are JOH, Wilgy, and Quin. The former two are more of an active problem though, while Quin is, like I said, a shrug.

Initially, my vote could even be argued as me abstaining from the lynch. I hadn't been following the thread in the slightest and I felt bad for pushing Fredwood given the fact. In the end, I chose to vote sig just so people could get on with their life (Dys mentioned wanting to sleep, I wanted to accommodate that). Then, I read what you had to say about it and I agreed. I kept my vote there on the off chance that I could lure someone into triggering the hard lynch, which I thought would be more likely to come from a baddie (as you said, it stifles further information and discourse).

Understandable cause for doubt. I realise I need to get back into the thick of things. Expect the Quin you all know and hate in the morning.

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:37 am**

Quin, you reminded me of something I found interesting at the time. Why did no one put down the hammer on sig?

It would have been easy to justify given dizzy was essentially asking someone to. I feel like this could be noteworthy. Eg, did anyone express suspicion of sig but hold back from the hammer?

A couple of instincts at play. The first is that a civilian would have been more likely willing to drop the hammer from an optics perspective, I think, because a mafia would be more wary of standing out. Does this make sense? People with more hammer experience than I, what seems likely?

Posted: **Thu Feb 16, 2017 8:28 am**

Silver Lantern wrote:And since you admittedly love questions so much Sloonei, Here is a fun exercise for you.

If I were Sorcha and posted exactly as she did yesterday and then asked to be replaced at the 11th hour when it seemed like heat might be coming my way, what are the top 3 questions that you would be asking me today (if I was Sorcha and you were not)?

Now please go ahead and answer those 3 questions you've come up with from the Sorcha perspective that you actually have.

Please make sure that each question is made from the perspective of you being suspicious of the Sorcha replacement player.

I basically want you to switch roles and perspectives for the questions and answers.

The Syndicate

Phenon Mafia: ENDGAME - Snuffed

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 1 - And Into the Fire

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 0 - Out of the Frying Pan

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 1 - And Into the Fire

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage

Re: Phenon Mafia: Day 2 - Of Jugulars and Carnage