The Syndicate

Golden wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 1:56 pm

Insertnamehere has died. He was:

39: Tina Wesson (Survivor). Each night, you will choose one player to inject with an innoculation to a particular virus. Any player who is given the innoculation will be unable to catch the virus and will be cured if they already have it. You may not target the same player twice.

Carry on.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:55 pm

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:11 pm Look, you can go through my posts I posted a whole thing linking to his ISOs from games where he was bad, good and even one 3P game. So I have already given my thoughts on this, I don't have time to repeat myself. Clearly I do think he is playing to his Baddie meta.

As to the first point, you don't get what I'm saying. My point is my previous suspicion is negated by the fact I feel he pretty much flipped a civ role. And I have nothing since then that leads me to suspect him for being bad. So why would I vote for him? Just because he is in a second role? Is that what you are suggesting? If so I disagree. To borrow a sentiment from 3J, I am not playing against the hosts, I am playing against the mafia. I will cast my vote against those I suspect, not against those that I think the theories on setup could possibly make bad. That is not a solid reason to do anything IMO. I am not voting for Scotty because I don't suspect Scotty's play like I do Marmot's. In fact, I have for the most part felt like Scotty was giving me civ vibes.

Do you think Juliets and Golden are making alignments clear based on the first role only?

Isn't Scotty's first role bad?

If you're going to say that INH is good because of his first role, then you have to say Scott is bad because of his first role.

You're the one playing against the mods. You're basically saying "I don't think Golden and Juliets would give this power to a baddie."

I'm playing against INH and Scotty. I'm ignoring their powers and voting based on what they're saying.

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:40 pm

Golden wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 1:56 pm

Insertnamehere has died. He was:

39: Tina Wesson (Survivor). Each night, you will choose one player to inject with an innoculation to a particular virus. Any player who is given the innoculation will be unable to catch the virus and will be cured if they already have it. You may not target the same player twice.

Carry on.

Jackofhearts2005 Could it be mafia, possibly. But it doesn't make sense to me if they did. It is the job of the mafia to decrease the opponents numbers to where they can control the lynch. So, if you gave this role to a mafia role they would essentially be only able to use it on themselves and that is it. Otherwise it's counter productive to their win con. So yeah, I see this as a civ role.

Now, that does not mean I trust INH now. It means I don't base my vote on what I thought previously about him because I feel like I was most likely wrong. So I dimiss entirely the suspicion I felt of INH 1.0 and INH 2.0 has not done something I find suspicious. In fact I find his frustration both understandable and seemingly sincere. This has nothing to do with his previous role. I don't give a shit about his previous role except the impact it has on how I felt about him while he was in it. Those suspicions seem to be unfounded. They therefore have no bearing. And you have yet to present a good reason for me to vote for him. I don't find him suspicious at the moment, nor do I find him trustworthy. I am not going to vote to lynch him just so we can kill someone which seems to be all your case is based upon.

I avoid getting closely involved in the early days because I'm not comfortable with it specifically because I know that early game reads are my dump stat. I stand back and judge others thoughts and cases when they happen but I don't move things on my own. When I do, "fiddler on the roof" happens and I lose focus.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:30 pm @Scotty

More and more antsy about INH. Why?

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:55 pm

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:11 pm Look, you can go through my posts I posted a whole thing linking to his ISOs from games where he was bad, good and even one 3P game. So I have already given my thoughts on this, I don't have time to repeat myself. Clearly I do think he is playing to his Baddie meta.

As to the first point, you don't get what I'm saying. My point is my previous suspicion is negated by the fact I feel he pretty much flipped a civ role. And I have nothing since then that leads me to suspect him for being bad. So why would I vote for him? Just because he is in a second role? Is that what you are suggesting? If so I disagree. To borrow a sentiment from 3J, I am not playing against the hosts, I am playing against the mafia. I will cast my vote against those I suspect, not against those that I think the theories on setup could possibly make bad. That is not a solid reason to do anything IMO. I am not voting for Scotty because I don't suspect Scotty's play like I do Marmot's. In fact, I have for the most part felt like Scotty was giving me civ vibes.

Do you think Juliets and Golden are making alignments clear based on the first role only?

Isn't Scotty's first role bad?

If you're going to say that INH is good because of his first role, then you have to say Scott is bad because of his first role.

You're the one playing against the mods. You're basically saying "I don't think Golden and Juliets would give this power to a baddie."

I'm playing against INH and Scotty. I'm ignoring their powers and voting based on what they're saying.

Scotty wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 7:55 pmKylemii hey buddy.

Where’ve you been? Whatchu been up to?

Can you do me a solid and link me to a game of yours where you’ve been bad and one where you’ve been good?

I’m not coming after you because I do like most of what you’re offering. My qualms with you come from your lack of follow up. The last phase, you asked a lot of questions but I’m not sure what you gained from the answers.

You mentioned twice in the early game that you would do some IsOs of people. Did you? How did those turn our?

How’s your mom? Do you like chocolate shakes or malts? See, that’s not really important, but I thought I’d ask just to appear like I’m interested.

I am keeping this in mind, from something you said a few days ago:

I avoid getting closely involved in the early days because I'm not comfortable with it specifically because I know that early game reads are my dump stat. I stand back and judge others thoughts and cases when they happen but I don't move things on my own. When I do, "fiddler on the roof" happens and I lose focus.

When does the early game stop and the real game begin?

Have you lost focus yet?

Sloonei wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:24 am Alright my phone posted that before I finished.

If we're right thay cbob's death will merge the tribes, then we'll all be one big happy family soon enough.

Kylemii wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 1:17 am

Scotty wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 7:55 pmKylemii hey buddy.

hi

Where’ve you been? Whatchu been up to?

i think you're maybe being facetious but my life is going pretty well right now so I'm gonna tell you. I recently started working again at a job I really like and I also very recently invested in a Zelda game so that's been kind of a big deal for me

Can you do me a solid and link me to a game of yours where you’ve been bad and one where you’ve been good?

yeah I can do that, I guess. The civ part is easy. Um ... I'd suggest the recent phenon game (I was alpha) or fiddler on the roof, or maybe the first half of mortal kombat(with the caveat that technically I was indy, but I was playing towards a civilian victory for most of the game.)

As for mafia Kyle... that's tougher to answer. I haven't had a proper mafia role since like.... 2015. I was a solo mafia in speedchuck's owl train mystery speed mafia game, and I was mafia in a 48 hour long game on sc2 mafia

I’m not coming after you because I do like most of what you’re offering. My qualms with you come from your lack of follow up. The last phase, you asked a lot of questions but I’m not sure what you gained from the answers.

a lot of the time I'll ask questions for my own benefit. If I can better understand why other people believe the things they do then I can do a better job at knowing what people's motivations are.

You mentioned twice in the early game that you would do some IsOs of people. Did you? How did those turn our?

my first iso spree was what led me to question boomslang. iso round 2 didn't happen because of a combination of napping and zelda absorbing the day off that I was going to spend on isos

How’s your mom? Do you like chocolate shakes or malts? See, that’s not really important, but I thought I’d ask just to appear like I’m interested.

she's fine, I don't like shakes or malts.

I am keeping this in mind, from something you said a few days ago:

I avoid getting closely involved in the early days because I'm not comfortable with it specifically because I know that early game reads are my dump stat. I stand back and judge others thoughts and cases when they happen but I don't move things on my own. When I do, "fiddler on the roof" happens and I lose focus.

When does the early game stop and the real game begin?

real game usually starts for me after the first mafia flip or the 2nd-3rd civ flip.

Have you lost focus yet?

what? no, I think you misunderstood my comment. I lost focus in fiddler cus I was put outside my comfort zone early. It skewed several of my viewpoints and led me to a lot of false conclusions early on.

Scotty wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 2:21 amI’ll try and check out a couple of those games (if I can find your old baddie ones. Sounds obscure).

But I like your flouty attitude and forwardness at least. You sound honest and generally care-free. Kinda like sig, except more actively involved. Ya dig?

What are your current thoughts on jack’s philosophy of lynching someone for alignment flip’s sake as opposed to some old-fashioned sleuthing?

the dictionary wrote:Definition of flout
transitive verb
: to treat with contemptuous disregard : scorn flouting the rules
intransitive verb
: to indulge in scornful behavior
Ah, you may flout and turn up your faces —Robert Browning
— flouter noun

Marmot wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:30 am Hey everyone, sorry for the absence. I'm heading out of town for the weekend, so I've been getting ahead on work and other things.

Putting a vote on inh now, because frankly I shouldn't be lynched.

Boomslang wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:18 pm

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:55 pm

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:11 pm Look, you can go through my posts I posted a whole thing linking to his ISOs from games where he was bad, good and even one 3P game. So I have already given my thoughts on this, I don't have time to repeat myself. Clearly I do think he is playing to his Baddie meta.

As to the first point, you don't get what I'm saying. My point is my previous suspicion is negated by the fact I feel he pretty much flipped a civ role. And I have nothing since then that leads me to suspect him for being bad. So why would I vote for him? Just because he is in a second role? Is that what you are suggesting? If so I disagree. To borrow a sentiment from 3J, I am not playing against the hosts, I am playing against the mafia. I will cast my vote against those I suspect, not against those that I think the theories on setup could possibly make bad. That is not a solid reason to do anything IMO. I am not voting for Scotty because I don't suspect Scotty's play like I do Marmot's. In fact, I have for the most part felt like Scotty was giving me civ vibes.

Do you think Juliets and Golden are making alignments clear based on the first role only?

Isn't Scotty's first role bad?

If you're going to say that INH is good because of his first role, then you have to say Scott is bad because of his first role.

You're the one playing against the mods. You're basically saying "I don't think Golden and Juliets would give this power to a baddie."

I'm playing against INH and Scotty. I'm ignoring their powers and voting based on what they're saying.

I feel like ignoring revealed information is a dangerous approach. While I don't think the mods are necessarily going to give away alignments based on roles, I agree with Spacedaisy and Scotty that those roles can give valuable information and inform alignment probabilities. I think Daisy's analysis of INH is spot-on, and I won't be putting a vote on him today.

I also feel like discounting the value of first-lynch role reveals is a way for you to bolster your "lynch someone fully to see where it goes" approach, with which I've already expressed my disapproval. It's easy to paint today as a Day One if you don't think those first role flips are valuable.

Scotty wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:35 pm

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:30 pm @Scotty

More and more antsy about INH. Why?

I keep reading into role connotations and find it hard to believe that his first role wasn’t civ. His 2nd role could be anything, sure. It could even be a boat.

Boomslang wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:18 pm

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:55 pm

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:11 pm Look, you can go through my posts I posted a whole thing linking to his ISOs from games where he was bad, good and even one 3P game. So I have already given my thoughts on this, I don't have time to repeat myself. Clearly I do think he is playing to his Baddie meta.

As to the first point, you don't get what I'm saying. My point is my previous suspicion is negated by the fact I feel he pretty much flipped a civ role. And I have nothing since then that leads me to suspect him for being bad. So why would I vote for him? Just because he is in a second role? Is that what you are suggesting? If so I disagree. To borrow a sentiment from 3J, I am not playing against the hosts, I am playing against the mafia. I will cast my vote against those I suspect, not against those that I think the theories on setup could possibly make bad. That is not a solid reason to do anything IMO. I am not voting for Scotty because I don't suspect Scotty's play like I do Marmot's. In fact, I have for the most part felt like Scotty was giving me civ vibes.

Do you think Juliets and Golden are making alignments clear based on the first role only?

Isn't Scotty's first role bad?

If you're going to say that INH is good because of his first role, then you have to say Scott is bad because of his first role.

You're the one playing against the mods. You're basically saying "I don't think Golden and Juliets would give this power to a baddie."

I'm playing against INH and Scotty. I'm ignoring their powers and voting based on what they're saying.

I feel like ignoring revealed information is a dangerous approach. While I don't think the mods are necessarily going to give away alignments based on roles, I agree with Spacedaisy and Scotty that those roles can give valuable information and inform alignment probabilities. I think Daisy's analysis of INH is spot-on, and I won't be putting a vote on him today.

I also feel like discounting the value of first-lynch role reveals is a way for you to bolster your "lynch someone fully to see where it goes" approach, with which I've already expressed my disapproval. It's easy to paint today as a Day One if you don't think those first role flips are valuable.

Kylemii wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:54 am

Scotty wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 2:21 amI’ll try and check out a couple of those games (if I can find your old baddie ones. Sounds obscure).

this is the sc2 game: link I'm the user Aardvarks Bark. Plz keep in mind that this game took place over the course of 3 days and was my first experience playing with any of these people

If you want to dig deeper there's probably some games on this website where I was bad but I don't actually remember any of them

But I like your flouty attitude and forwardness at least. You sound honest and generally care-free. Kinda like sig, except more actively involved. Ya dig?

"flouty"

What are your current thoughts on jack’s philosophy of lynching someone for alignment flip’s sake as opposed to some old-fashioned sleuthing?

I don't know.... I don't think I'd want to lynch someone purely for the sake of getting a flip out of it unless I was significantly inclined to believe they we're mafia for additional other reasons

this games format changes things a bit. everyone basically having 2 lives adds a whole new strategic layer, technically speaking we're not going to learn anything from most of the lynches we do. a lot depends on whether or not roles are curated by alignment or if they're just purely random.

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 6:01 pm Screw it, I'll make my own super-cool rainbow list. What it lacks in visual flair, it makes up for in readability.

JoH
Marmot
Ninja
Boomslang
Sloonei
Lorab
DrWilgy
Kylemii
Scotty
Sig
Spacedaisy

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:16 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:52 pm @insertnamehere @Marmot whatcha gonna do with them votes?

Nothin', as I think both Boomslang and Wilgy are civilians. I ain't choosing to be complicit in this shit.

Kylemii wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:57 am

the dictionary wrote:Definition of flout
transitive verb
: to treat with contemptuous disregard : scorn flouting the rules
intransitive verb
: to indulge in scornful behavior
Ah, you may flout and turn up your faces —Robert Browning
— flouter noun

oh. :^(

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:42 am

Scotty wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:35 pm

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:30 pm @Scotty

More and more antsy about INH. Why?

I keep reading into role connotations and find it hard to believe that his first role wasn’t civ. His 2nd role could be anything, sure. It could even be a boat.

So why does this cause you to hesitate in lynching INH?

Scotty wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:57 am Want to look at INH for a sec:

On day 4, he posts this helpful rainbow list after throwing a vote on SpaceDaisy- nothing suspect there:

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 6:01 pm Screw it, I'll make my own super-cool rainbow list. What it lacks in visual flair, it makes up for in readability.

JoH
Marmot
Ninja
Boomslang
Sloonei
Lorab
DrWilgy
Kylemii
Scotty
Sig
Spacedaisy

Then after being killed mid-day:

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:16 pm

Sloonei wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 5:52 pm @insertnamehere @Marmot whatcha gonna do with them votes?

Nothin', as I think both Boomslang and Wilgy are civilians. I ain't choosing to be complicit in this shit.

Oh, I didn’t realize Wilgy changed from solid yellow to civilian.

I didn’t like Daisy’s case against him, and the whole split “smart Wilgy = bad/silly Wilgy = good” dichotomy that was being pushed. It was enough for me to go from not really having an opinion to thinking that the case against him was weak sauce and not worth voting for.

‘Ain’t choosing to be complicit with this shit’ is a negative statement because it casts blame on everyone on a train and in the case of a mislynch, he would be taking no responsibility. But I see it as an egregious cop out. He could have voted Wilgy and would look none the wiser should Wilgy have been mislynched.

But he stuck to himself knowing we needed as many people piled on one person to potentially get a lynch across that day.

alright, this is just “INH has a different opinion on game mechanics than me, and didn’t go along with my plan, ergo SUSPICIOUS.” I’m willing to debate the merits of getting a lynch across versus not getting one across. Unfortunately, it seems like the people who really really want to get one across are inclined towards trying to lynch those (me, Boomslang) who disagree.



And what has he done today? Act frustrated and defensive, like he did on day 1. That entire deal on D1 is what made me suspicious of him initially in this game. And here he’s using the frustrated gambit and his assumed civilian affiliation with his past role.
Frustration could be from a mafia or civ perspective since- yes, we don’t have the strongest of proofs against him, and that’s unfair for anyone to have to defend against. But that doesn’t mean we’re on the wrong path here..

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:52 am

Kylemii wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:54 am

Scotty wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 2:21 amI’ll try and check out a couple of those games (if I can find your old baddie ones. Sounds obscure).

this is the sc2 game: link I'm the user Aardvarks Bark. Plz keep in mind that this game took place over the course of 3 days and was my first experience playing with any of these people

If you want to dig deeper there's probably some games on this website where I was bad but I don't actually remember any of them

But I like your flouty attitude and forwardness at least. You sound honest and generally care-free. Kinda like sig, except more actively involved. Ya dig?

"flouty"

What are your current thoughts on jack’s philosophy of lynching someone for alignment flip’s sake as opposed to some old-fashioned sleuthing?

I don't know.... I don't think I'd want to lynch someone purely for the sake of getting a flip out of it unless I was significantly inclined to believe they we're mafia for additional other reasons

this games format changes things a bit. everyone basically having 2 lives adds a whole new strategic layer, technically speaking we're not going to learn anything from most of the lynches we do. a lot depends on whether or not roles are curated by alignment or if they're just purely random.

What is up with these constant straw man arguments?

From all this pushback, I’m assuming none of you ever vote in regular games until someone is copped, right?

We lynch players just to get flips and because we think they may be mafia every single day of every single game.

I’m proposing we do that here, too.

The alternative (which I guess a lot of people really like) is to lynch first lives, get no flips and eliminate no scum. Also, then the mafia kills off the one life townies.

Can someone please explain to me the advantage to never lynching anyone for real in this game?

Starting now, I will vote for anyone who implies I have said that lynching one life players is the only option. What I said was we should lynch a one life player or lynch the same two life player two days in a row. Town can’t eliminate scum if they’re too chicken shit to eliminate anybody at all.

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Sat Mar 03, 2018 1:51 pm Quick non-insanified explanation of my Sig vote yesterday.

I didn't like his statements on the haiku situation, it kinda felt like covering for possible liars.

I sided with Boomslang on the whole 70% comment. Thought it was weird, and didn't like how people jumped to sig's defense and attacked Boomslang simply for pointing it out.

Then there's his flippity floppity treatment of Sloonei which just felt disingenuous. TBH, I might end up voting for him again today.

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:30 pm

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:52 am

Kylemii wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:54 am

Scotty wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 2:21 amI’ll try and check out a couple of those games (if I can find your old baddie ones. Sounds obscure).

this is the sc2 game: link I'm the user Aardvarks Bark. Plz keep in mind that this game took place over the course of 3 days and was my first experience playing with any of these people

If you want to dig deeper there's probably some games on this website where I was bad but I don't actually remember any of them

But I like your flouty attitude and forwardness at least. You sound honest and generally care-free. Kinda like sig, except more actively involved. Ya dig?

"flouty"

What are your current thoughts on jack’s philosophy of lynching someone for alignment flip’s sake as opposed to some old-fashioned sleuthing?

I don't know.... I don't think I'd want to lynch someone purely for the sake of getting a flip out of it unless I was significantly inclined to believe they we're mafia for additional other reasons

this games format changes things a bit. everyone basically having 2 lives adds a whole new strategic layer, technically speaking we're not going to learn anything from most of the lynches we do. a lot depends on whether or not roles are curated by alignment or if they're just purely random.

What is up with these constant straw man arguments?

From all this pushback, I’m assuming none of you ever vote in regular games until someone is copped, right?

We lynch players just to get flips and because we think they may be mafia every single day of every single game.

I’m proposing we do that here, too.

The alternative (which I guess a lot of people really like) is to lynch first lives, get no flips and eliminate no scum. Also, then the mafia kills off the one life townies.

Can someone please explain to me the advantage to never lynching anyone for real in this game?

Starting now, I will vote for anyone who implies I have said that lynching one life players is the only option. What I said was we should lynch a one life player or lynch the same two life player two days in a row. Town can’t eliminate scum if they’re too chicken shit to eliminate anybody at all.

I’m not diametrically opposed to ever lynching anyone “for real.” I just think that the extra lives give us more time to decide on worthy targets for elimination. And, y’know, build real cases. I want to vote for people who have cases against them I agree with. I’m not voting for someone I’m not convinced is bad, just to eliminate someone.

You keep using game mechanics as a distraction to cover up the fact that your lynch train against me is based on nothing.

Straw man. Nobody has advocated for voting purely to get a flip or that you should vote for someone you don't suspect. You've got my vote until one of us dies.

oh fuck off. Yesterday I got tons of shit for voting for Daisy instead of Wilgy or Boomslang.

Furthermore, your continued attempts to deflect the case against you (which is now "based on nothing" you say) only serve to bolster my suspicions. A townie wouldn't treat this so dishonestly.

oh fuck off. Once again empty over-reactionary bluster. YOU HAVE NO CASE. I’ll say it again and again. YOU HAVE NO CASE. If that’s deflection or whatever, I don’t give a fuck

Furthermore, it is Day 5 and you are advocating additional time to scumhunt without flips. Yet you've put forth basically no case. How many days further do you need to find scum before you want to eliminate a player?

Scotty wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 1:19 pm

sig wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 10:17 am I can see the case on Wilgy for sure, but I really hate that Slang is pushing that he silenced himself or pretended to be silenced. That's a scummy thing to do and I do have the feeling that the mafia can easily jump on a Wilgy Wagon.

sig wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 4:14 pm About to go into my next class so let I'll be throwing down a vote for wilgy. I'll catch up and hopefully be around to change it if i see fit.

[VOTE: dr.wilgy] aubergine

I'll be more active after Thursday promise

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: Straw man. Nobody has advocated for voting purely to get a flip or that you should vote for someone you don't suspect. You've got my vote until one of us dies.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:54 pm As long as we don’t actually lynch a player all the way dead and learn an alignment, we are not trading lynches for nightkills. We are giving away free nightkills.

That doesn’t mean there are only a few players we can lynch today. We could vote out anyone but if they have two lives now, we should then vote them out again tomorrow.

INH wrote:this is gonna have to be multiple posts because ISO’ing someone is fucking impossible on phones

Scotty wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 1:22 pm

Scotty wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 1:19 pm

the fuck

why

i didnt mean to post that picture.

I do agree that sig has been hanging back in the background tho. We all kinda wrote him off after that one time we almost lynched him, and he's just sitting back in his chair with his hands behind his head whistling.

Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:52 am

Kylemii wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:54 am

Scotty wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 2:21 amI’ll try and check out a couple of those games (if I can find your old baddie ones. Sounds obscure).

this is the sc2 game: link I'm the user Aardvarks Bark. Plz keep in mind that this game took place over the course of 3 days and was my first experience playing with any of these people

If you want to dig deeper there's probably some games on this website where I was bad but I don't actually remember any of them

But I like your flouty attitude and forwardness at least. You sound honest and generally care-free. Kinda like sig, except more actively involved. Ya dig?

"flouty"

What are your current thoughts on jack’s philosophy of lynching someone for alignment flip’s sake as opposed to some old-fashioned sleuthing?

I don't know.... I don't think I'd want to lynch someone purely for the sake of getting a flip out of it unless I was significantly inclined to believe they we're mafia for additional other reasons

this games format changes things a bit. everyone basically having 2 lives adds a whole new strategic layer, technically speaking we're not going to learn anything from most of the lynches we do. a lot depends on whether or not roles are curated by alignment or if they're just purely random.

What is up with these constant straw man arguments?

From all this pushback, I’m assuming none of you ever vote in regular games until someone is copped, right?

We lynch players just to get flips and because we think they may be mafia every single day of every single game.

I’m proposing we do that here, too.

The alternative (which I guess a lot of people really like) is to lynch first lives, get no flips and eliminate no scum. Also, then the mafia kills off the one life townies.

Can someone please explain to me the advantage to never lynching anyone for real in this game?

Starting now, I will vote for anyone who implies I have said that lynching one life players is the only option. What I said was we should lynch a one life player or lynch the same two life player two days in a row. Town can’t eliminate scum if they’re too chicken shit to eliminate anybody at all.