Murder, Mayhem, and Mafia
https://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/
Yes, but unless all of my teammates are as misinformed as I am, that won't affect the night kill choices. If I'm bad and all my teammates are misinformed, then I'm going to figure out what's going on, aren't I?Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:17 pmWhich suggests some degree of blindness to events in the thread, no?
Yes, but unless all of my teammates are as misinformed as I am, that won't affect the night kill choices. If I'm bad and all my teammates are misinformed, then I'm going to figure out what's going on, aren't I?Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:17 pmWhich suggests some degree of blindness to events in the thread, no?
Wary. Not opposed. I'm not going to constantly reiterate my suspicion whenever I mention someone.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:19 pmA little bit but not enough. You're still opposed to his lynch in those middle two posts, but in favor of it in the two on opposite ends of the chain. If you continued to be suspicious of llama for his vote, then why did you neglect this in your read of llama in those other two posts?Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:17 pmHis posts didn't give me any reason to read him one way or another. Does that help you?Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:14 pmThe bolded text is where I got the idea that you dropped your suspicion of llama. Where I come from, "I don't really see anything that leads me to read him any way or another" is not a statement of suspicion. Your post trajectory reads like this: Mildly suspicious of llama -[2 days pass]-> Neutral on llama -> opposed to lynching llama -> quietly return to original suspicion of llama an hour later.Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:10 pmI don't know where you got the idea that I dropped it. Where did I say that I dropped it? It was a big reason as to why I suspected llama in the first place. Another thing you've got wrong. I thought the existing cases against llama were good. But with 5 people on the wagon before even halfway through the day and more being added onto it, I was hesitant because it seemed like an obvious runaway.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:04 pm Quin, talk about this succession of posts:First you take note of an odd Llama moment. Then you drop it a few days later, do a quick ISO of llama and come up with nothing conclusive and denounce the wagon that's starting to form against him, but an hour later you're suddenly on that wagon for the initial oddity you had observed two days earlier. You think this computes over here?Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:08 pm Reiterating that llama chose to vote for double voting or something over alignment reveals last night. I remember a baddie doing something along these lines happening in The Office, and I didn't pursue it then. So yeah, gut scum read for that.
A gripe I have with Long Con is that he's been vocalising his suspicion of Epi since Day 1, but it was only on Day 3 that he started to discuss it with people who were not Epi. On top of that, he only did that when Sloonei cued him to do so. I don't get the impression he really believes in his case.
Try me.DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:54 pmI'm kinda wondering how far Speedchuck is going to take the "I do what DH Does" schtick.
What made you just pull this out of nowhere? Playing the "convincingly civ description of my role card" card, four game days after timmer's post but fairly soon after I said it's a major reason I trust him?
Wheewww yeah this series of posts by Quin really stinks to high heavens.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:04 pm Quin, talk about this succession of posts:First you take note of an odd Llama moment. Then you drop it a few days later, do a quick ISO of llama and come up with nothing conclusive and denounce the wagon that's starting to form against him, but an hour later you're suddenly on that wagon for the initial oddity you had observed two days earlier. You think this computes over here?Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:08 pm Reiterating that llama chose to vote for double voting or something over alignment reveals last night. I remember a baddie doing something along these lines happening in The Office, and I didn't pursue it then. So yeah, gut scum read for that.
A gripe I have with Long Con is that he's been vocalising his suspicion of Epi since Day 1, but it was only on Day 3 that he started to discuss it with people who were not Epi. On top of that, he only did that when Sloonei cued him to do so. I don't get the impression he really believes in his case.
I'm trying to let up a bit on the POE and open up to a couple other possibilities of players who could be fooling me, like speedchuck or DH maybe. I could turn my previously rather black-and-white list into a more nuanced rainbow if you like.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:09 pm I'm interested in Nutella as a player right now. Her Process of Elimination magic has whittled the game down to three possible baddies occupying two available spots. There does not seem to be a whole lot of suspicion around her. If I'm not misreading things, she almost seems like a trusted player to some degree. I've seen her as an excellent townie in past games. If she says she is confident that 2 out of 3 players are scum, and I am one of those three players, then that is something I am going to take interest in. Like I said before, if she is right then I have a 100% chance of voting for scum today by following her.
So what do we think of nutella's thought process? And could you provide more elaboration now, nutella?
I don't know the answer to this question, but it seems a little contrived. I don't know much about what you've done in this game period. I just know that, as a replacement, you're one of the less informed players left, along with myself. This means you would fit into DharmaHelper's criteria for suspicion. Note that it's not my criteria for suspicion. I never said I agree with the assessment, just that it's fair to say that either of us are suspicious if one is using DH's thought process.Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:20 pmYes, but unless all of my teammates are as misinformed as I am, that won't affect the night kill choices. If I'm bad and all my teammates are misinformed, then I'm going to figure out what's going on, aren't I?Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:17 pmWhich suggests some degree of blindness to events in the thread, no?
That's too bad. If you're not bad, it sounds like DH needs a new criteria.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:26 pmI don't know the answer to this question, but it seems a little contrived. I don't know much about what you've done in this game period. I just know that, as a replacement, you're one of the less informed players left, along with myself. This means you would fit into DharmaHelper's criteria for suspicion. Note that it's not my criteria for suspicion. I never said I agree with the assessment, just that it's fair to say that either of us are suspicious if one is using DH's thought process.Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:20 pmYes, but unless all of my teammates are as misinformed as I am, that won't affect the night kill choices. If I'm bad and all my teammates are misinformed, then I'm going to figure out what's going on, aren't I?Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:17 pmWhich suggests some degree of blindness to events in the thread, no?
Okay, ice cream sandwich.nutella wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:25 pmWhat made you just pull this out of nowhere? Playing the "convincingly civ description of my role card" card, four game days after timmer's post but fairly soon after I said it's a major reason I trust him?
Wheewww yeah this series of posts by Quin really stinks to high heavens.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:04 pm Quin, talk about this succession of posts:First you take note of an odd Llama moment. Then you drop it a few days later, do a quick ISO of llama and come up with nothing conclusive and denounce the wagon that's starting to form against him, but an hour later you're suddenly on that wagon for the initial oddity you had observed two days earlier. You think this computes over here?Quin wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:08 pm Reiterating that llama chose to vote for double voting or something over alignment reveals last night. I remember a baddie doing something along these lines happening in The Office, and I didn't pursue it then. So yeah, gut scum read for that.
A gripe I have with Long Con is that he's been vocalising his suspicion of Epi since Day 1, but it was only on Day 3 that he started to discuss it with people who were not Epi. On top of that, he only did that when Sloonei cued him to do so. I don't get the impression he really believes in his case.
I'm trying to let up a bit on the POE and open up to a couple other possibilities of players who could be fooling me, like speedchuck or DH maybe. I could turn my previously rather black-and-white list into a more nuanced rainbow if you like.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:09 pm I'm interested in Nutella as a player right now. Her Process of Elimination magic has whittled the game down to three possible baddies occupying two available spots. There does not seem to be a whole lot of suspicion around her. If I'm not misreading things, she almost seems like a trusted player to some degree. I've seen her as an excellent townie in past games. If she says she is confident that 2 out of 3 players are scum, and I am one of those three players, then that is something I am going to take interest in. Like I said before, if she is right then I have a 100% chance of voting for scum today by following her.
So what do we think of nutella's thought process? And could you provide more elaboration now, nutella?
BTW, is it just me or has LC completely dropped off the face of the earth? (As has SVS obviously.)
Snipped.
When I asked you why I was your top suspect (or at least the recipient of your vote) earlier, you said it was because you were following DH (who is currently plopped right in the middle of this list). Is that still the case, or do you have a substantial reason to choose me over Quin and SVS?speedchuck wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:27 pm Rainbow without color:
Nutella
Epignosis
Timmer
LC
DH
Quin
SVS
Sloonei
Is that really all the players? wow.
Post 1 - The llama case was only just being formed. I figured it was noteworthy, for the reason I explained in Post 4, so I mentioned it.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:31 pmSnipped.
This still does not address the essence of my point, which is that you seemed to totally ignore your supposed suspicion of llama when composing those middle two posts. If you had a substantial reason to vote for llama, why make two posts in which you directly oppose the lynch? By "oppose" I mean you took a stance which was contrary to the act of voting for him. You can say that you were wary of the bandwagon and this is true. But this does not change the observable fact that you have two posts which are opposed to the idea of lynching llama, sandwiched between two posts in which you support his lynch.
a thing i am currently interested in.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:32 pmWhen I asked you why I was your top suspect (or at least the recipient of your vote) earlier, you said it was because you were following DH (who is currently plopped right in the middle of this list). Is that still the case, or do you have a substantial reason to choose me over Quin and SVS?speedchuck wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:27 pm Rainbow without color:
Nutella
Epignosis
Timmer
LC
DH
Quin
SVS
Sloonei
Is that really all the players? wow.
I am unimpressed by the context in which she first voted for me. For reference, it was that 'look me in the eyes' thing. I agree with Epi's thoughts that she's less likely to be bad since she called Epi out on his lie rather than keeping it to her team, though.
Civilian. I already said why. Go read.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:52 pmI would like to hear any thoughts you have on SVS. You don't have to acknowledge any of the things I've said about her, I just want your own independent thoughts on her.Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:50 pmFine, but I don't care about your S~V~S-llama interactions either. They're all circumstantial. There is no substance to them. If I need to go through breaking them down, I will, but I would rather not.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:46 pmhuh? No. I'm hardly using that PM to justify my vote. Pay more attention to the post I made highlighting SVS and llama's interactions. That's what I'm actually basing my vote on. I brought the Wilgy PM up now because, like you said, we're getting toward the end of the game. I didn't want to bring it up earlier when I wasn't fully involved in the game because I wouldn't have been able to follow up in any way, and I wasn't sure what would have been going on around me at the time. I'd honestly forgotten the contents of the message anyway. I had to check it after I had made my first couple posts about SVS. At that point I took an additional look at her posts to see what I could find that was relevant to what Wilgy had said to me on Day 1. That is all. It's not a crucial point and I never intended it to be so.Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:39 pmLook, I'm not voting S~V~S based on what Wilgy told you privately days ago. You could have said something to incriminate S~V~S then if you wanted to, but you didn't. You've posted every Day as far as I can see, and Wilgy was lynched ages ago. You could have said something. Now it just looks like you're trying to jumble together a case based on a PM a dead man sent you that nobody else can know if he sent or not. It's all very wild and full of hearsay. No thank you.
Where should I be reading for this why?Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:42 pmCivilian. I already said why. Go read.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:52 pmI would like to hear any thoughts you have on SVS. You don't have to acknowledge any of the things I've said about her, I just want your own independent thoughts on her.Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:50 pmFine, but I don't care about your S~V~S-llama interactions either. They're all circumstantial. There is no substance to them. If I need to go through breaking them down, I will, but I would rather not.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:46 pmhuh? No. I'm hardly using that PM to justify my vote. Pay more attention to the post I made highlighting SVS and llama's interactions. That's what I'm actually basing my vote on. I brought the Wilgy PM up now because, like you said, we're getting toward the end of the game. I didn't want to bring it up earlier when I wasn't fully involved in the game because I wouldn't have been able to follow up in any way, and I wasn't sure what would have been going on around me at the time. I'd honestly forgotten the contents of the message anyway. I had to check it after I had made my first couple posts about SVS. At that point I took an additional look at her posts to see what I could find that was relevant to what Wilgy had said to me on Day 1. That is all. It's not a crucial point and I never intended it to be so.Epignosis wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:39 pmLook, I'm not voting S~V~S based on what Wilgy told you privately days ago. You could have said something to incriminate S~V~S then if you wanted to, but you didn't. You've posted every Day as far as I can see, and Wilgy was lynched ages ago. You could have said something. Now it just looks like you're trying to jumble together a case based on a PM a dead man sent you that nobody else can know if he sent or not. It's all very wild and full of hearsay. No thank you.
She'd also just named as one of her final 3 candidates for lynching (at the time). I think that's a good enough basis for an early-phase vote.Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:41 pmI am unimpressed by the context in which she first voted for me. For reference, it was that 'look me in the eyes' thing. I agree with Epi's thoughts that she's less likely to be bad since she called Epi out on his lie rather than keeping it to her team, though.
That skipped my mind. I just remembered me talking to you and her jumping in with a vote.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:50 pmShe'd also just named as one of her final 3 candidates for lynching (at the time). I think that's a good enough basis for an early-phase vote.Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:41 pmI am unimpressed by the context in which she first voted for me. For reference, it was that 'look me in the eyes' thing. I agree with Epi's thoughts that she's less likely to be bad since she called Epi out on his lie rather than keeping it to her team, though.
Did you have any thoughts on her prior to this vote?Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:53 pmThat skipped my mind. I just remembered me talking to you and her jumping in with a vote.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:50 pmShe'd also just named as one of her final 3 candidates for lynching (at the time). I think that's a good enough basis for an early-phase vote.Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:41 pmI am unimpressed by the context in which she first voted for me. For reference, it was that 'look me in the eyes' thing. I agree with Epi's thoughts that she's less likely to be bad since she called Epi out on his lie rather than keeping it to her team, though.
They're in the middle because I have had reason to think they are civ but it's possible they are fooling me, and I don't want to entirely discount that possibility. And I'm a bit more wary/think the possibility is a little bit higher of speedchuck.
No.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:54 pmDid you have any thoughts on her prior to this vote?Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:53 pmThat skipped my mind. I just remembered me talking to you and her jumping in with a vote.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:50 pmShe'd also just named as one of her final 3 candidates for lynching (at the time). I think that's a good enough basis for an early-phase vote.Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:41 pmI am unimpressed by the context in which she first voted for me. For reference, it was that 'look me in the eyes' thing. I agree with Epi's thoughts that she's less likely to be bad since she called Epi out on his lie rather than keeping it to her team, though.
you ain't ever fooled me that's for sureDharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:57 pm When, during my long mafia career, have I ever fooled anyone?
The main reason I chose to go with Quin in that moment was the recently mentioned catch that llama had voted to protect him(Dys).Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:50 pmShe'd also just named as one of her final 3 candidates for lynching (at the time). I think that's a good enough basis for an early-phase vote.Quin wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:41 pmI am unimpressed by the context in which she first voted for me. For reference, it was that 'look me in the eyes' thing. I agree with Epi's thoughts that she's less likely to be bad since she called Epi out on his lie rather than keeping it to her team, though.
What has speedchuck done that might be scummy?
Laziness.
Cool.speedchuck wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 11:05 pmLaziness.
Buddying.
Not voting for Llama even when DH did.
DH is about halfway down my list because all he's done to make himself look town is go after Llama. Bussing is pretty common where I come from. The mafia kills in this game have been quality-of-life kills. Kills that make the game more talkative, better. DH is having fun, I might could see him doing this (until phase 2 starts). It doesn't seem like anyone has genuinely put up any investigating toward DH.
Still, the llama push is pretty convincing. Good push I guess. Of course, Llama didn't die when lynched...
Anyway, there's that. And good job keeping me from following you, DH. I'm lazy and in fun mode, but not to the point of self-voting.
As for you, sloonei, I thought epic made some decent points, but I'm still not putting you much lower than SVS or Quin. The bottom three on my list are about even, and are very lazily non-controversial. I like things that way.
And you guy have an auto-rainbow tool? That's fantastic!
There does seem to be a part of you that is coasting off the goodwill you built up from lynching llama. You don't seem to have a confident read on who his teammates might be though. Does this worry you at all?DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 11:13 pmCool.speedchuck wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 11:05 pmLaziness.
Buddying.
Not voting for Llama even when DH did.
DH is about halfway down my list because all he's done to make himself look town is go after Llama. Bussing is pretty common where I come from. The mafia kills in this game have been quality-of-life kills. Kills that make the game more talkative, better. DH is having fun, I might could see him doing this (until phase 2 starts). It doesn't seem like anyone has genuinely put up any investigating toward DH.
Still, the llama push is pretty convincing. Good push I guess. Of course, Llama didn't die when lynched...
Anyway, there's that. And good job keeping me from following you, DH. I'm lazy and in fun mode, but not to the point of self-voting.
As for you, sloonei, I thought epic made some decent points, but I'm still not putting you much lower than SVS or Quin. The bottom three on my list are about even, and are very lazily non-controversial. I like things that way.
And you guy have an auto-rainbow tool? That's fantastic!
Coasting? I mentioned it once.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 11:15 pmThere does seem to be a part of you that is coasting off the goodwill you built up from lynching llama. You don't seem to have a confident read on who his teammates might be though. Does this worry you at all?DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 11:13 pmCool.speedchuck wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 11:05 pmLaziness.
Buddying.
Not voting for Llama even when DH did.
DH is about halfway down my list because all he's done to make himself look town is go after Llama. Bussing is pretty common where I come from. The mafia kills in this game have been quality-of-life kills. Kills that make the game more talkative, better. DH is having fun, I might could see him doing this (until phase 2 starts). It doesn't seem like anyone has genuinely put up any investigating toward DH.
Still, the llama push is pretty convincing. Good push I guess. Of course, Llama didn't die when lynched...
Anyway, there's that. And good job keeping me from following you, DH. I'm lazy and in fun mode, but not to the point of self-voting.
As for you, sloonei, I thought epic made some decent points, but I'm still not putting you much lower than SVS or Quin. The bottom three on my list are about even, and are very lazily non-controversial. I like things that way.
And you guy have an auto-rainbow tool? That's fantastic!
While sitting back, not getting your hands dirty. Look at me, criticizing active players after i did shit for an entire weekDharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 11:16 pmCoasting? I mentioned it once.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 11:15 pmThere does seem to be a part of you that is coasting off the goodwill you built up from lynching llama. You don't seem to have a confident read on who his teammates might be though. Does this worry you at all?DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 11:13 pmCool.speedchuck wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2017 11:05 pmLaziness.
Buddying.
Not voting for Llama even when DH did.
DH is about halfway down my list because all he's done to make himself look town is go after Llama. Bussing is pretty common where I come from. The mafia kills in this game have been quality-of-life kills. Kills that make the game more talkative, better. DH is having fun, I might could see him doing this (until phase 2 starts). It doesn't seem like anyone has genuinely put up any investigating toward DH.
Still, the llama push is pretty convincing. Good push I guess. Of course, Llama didn't die when lynched...
Anyway, there's that. And good job keeping me from following you, DH. I'm lazy and in fun mode, but not to the point of self-voting.
As for you, sloonei, I thought epic made some decent points, but I'm still not putting you much lower than SVS or Quin. The bottom three on my list are about even, and are very lazily non-controversial. I like things that way.
And you guy have an auto-rainbow tool? That's fantastic!
Sorry about that. Today was the Stouffville Food Truck Frenzy, and we were in it with our food truck, The Sandwich Shack. So, I was there for about eight hours starting mid-afternoon today, and before that, I worked several hours at my regular job. I think that a lot of good analysis has taken place today. I just read through and got caught up so I could post. I have a couple of posts I'd like to respond to, and a couple of suspects, but I'm exhausted and I'm going to bed.
Wilgy's PM was sent out to multiple people, and he changed the name(s) depending on who he sent it to.Sloonei wrote: ↑Fri Jun 23, 2017 1:16 am Another note about the PM wilgy sent me: he said he'd also shared things with DH and Speedchuck. He said if Speedchuck went after SVS (in the aftermath lf Day 1), then he is bad. He noted that he was wary of DH for doing nothing with whatever information wilgy shared with him.
This is fun. I assumed he had sent similar messages to other people, but I also trusted that there was at least some truth in it somewhere. Should I assume everyone has already talked about these things?DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Fri Jun 23, 2017 1:19 amWilgy's PM was sent out to multiple people, and he changed the name(s) depending on who he sent it to.Sloonei wrote: ↑Fri Jun 23, 2017 1:16 am Another note about the PM wilgy sent me: he said he'd also shared things with DH and Speedchuck. He said if Speedchuck went after SVS (in the aftermath lf Day 1), then he is bad. He noted that he was wary of DH for doing nothing with whatever information wilgy shared with him.
It was a misdirection.