The Syndicate

DrWilgy wrote:What format you play LC?

Standard and Commander. And I have a few Tiny Leaders decks. I haven't gotten into Modern yet, it's pretty intimidating, and I feel like I'd just be netdecking if I wanted to be competitive. Standard, at least, I feel like I'm on even ground. I'm ravenously consuming spoilers for Oath of the Gatewatch these days.

MacDougall wrote:Really cool. I love the Jace one.

Thanks, the second one in? I made that for my brother-in-law, who always played Azorius decks.

Turnip Head wrote:This is not the 2015 Game of Nerds

But I love nerds, and this thread is already unreadable as is, and I'm drunk, so carry on

Gotta love the OT green! Uninterested parties can just skip and skim to their hearts' content.

Long Con wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:What format you play LC?

Standard and Commander. And I have a few Tiny Leaders decks. I haven't gotten into Modern yet, it's pretty intimidating, and I feel like I'd just be netdecking if I wanted to be competitive. Standard, at least, I feel like I'm on even ground. I'm ravenously consuming spoilers for Oath of the Gatewatch these days.

MacDougall wrote:Really cool. I love the Jace one.

Thanks, the second one in? I made that for my brother-in-law, who always played Azorius decks.

Yeah Blue Power. Love control.

Long Con wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:What format you play LC?

Standard and Commander. And I have a few Tiny Leaders decks. I haven't gotten into Modern yet, it's pretty intimidating, and I feel like I'd just be netdecking if I wanted to be competitive. Standard, at least, I feel like I'm on even ground. I'm ravenously consuming spoilers for Oath of the Gatewatch these days.

MacDougall wrote:Really cool. I love the Jace one.

Thanks, the second one in? I made that for my brother-in-law, who always played Azorius decks.

If you ever come to Modern we should play! I just got back into the competitive scene. Net decking is knowledge, I see no harm there as long as you splash things that suit you better. Besides players that net deck too often and don't mix in thier own spice will always be a tournament behind when it comes to who gets first.

thellama73 wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Dom wrote:Llama, why did you dismiss DH rather than take issue with the content of the post?

I don't actually know what you're referring to here. Can you be more specific?

Nevermind, I went back and looked and see what you mean.

I don't know what there is to address. I read Mac as behaving a certain way, and DH says that same read applies to Rico. I don't really agree. It amounts to different interpretations of the same data.

Why not speak about how the situations are different?
Why so obtuse?

DharmaHelper wrote:Also, since when is "Indy" synonymous with "Better let this person win the game"

This this this.
Even if Rico is Indy, there is no reason to allow him to live for that reason alone.

MacDougall wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Mac and Fuzz are teammates (in a bad kind of way).

Please don't make matter of fact statements like this without making a case or I will make your experience in this game very unpleasant.

Ok.

I would encourage you in this situation to not bother trying to force a case out of this ping because you will find absolutely nothing to support it beyond your own faulty intuition.

I was reading you as civ until this post. :/

I'm voting Rico for today. I am travelling tomorrow an dmight check in. NYC for the weekend. SEeing Hamilton and Spring Awakening (again).

Dom wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Dom wrote:Llama, why did you dismiss DH rather than take issue with the content of the post?

I don't actually know what you're referring to here. Can you be more specific?

Nevermind, I went back and looked and see what you mean.

I don't know what there is to address. I read Mac as behaving a certain way, and DH says that same read applies to Rico. I don't really agree. It amounts to different interpretations of the same data.

Why not speak about how the situations are different?
Why so obtuse?

DharmaHelper wrote:Also, since when is "Indy" synonymous with "Better let this person win the game"

This this this.
Even if Rico is Indy, there is no reason to allow him to live for that reason alone.

MacDougall wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Mac and Fuzz are teammates (in a bad kind of way).

Please don't make matter of fact statements like this without making a case or I will make your experience in this game very unpleasant.

Ok.

I would encourage you in this situation to not bother trying to force a case out of this ping because you will find absolutely nothing to support it beyond your own faulty intuition.

I was reading you as civ until this post. :/

I just wanted to clarify that I didn't want Metalmarsh to waste his time trying to look for a case that wasn't there because my previous post might have been construed that way.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:How many baddies do you think there are Mac?

Depends how many teams there are. If there is 1 team there's probably 5 or 6 baddies and a shit ton of independents. Unlikely.

If there are 2 teams then there are probably 2 teams of 5. So 10 Mafia. Perhaps 2 teams of 4 if there are lots of independents.

Perhaps even 3 teams of 4?

Hard to say. I hadn't really thought much about it until now. What's the purpose of the question?

Agree with the first.

If the second is true, I think 4 each is more probable. Unless the civvie roles are uber-powered (and supported by Indies).

3 teams of 4? Now that's just silly. :P Right?

This is not a BR game so no, not likely 3 teams of baddies.

Turnip Head wrote:This is not the 2015 Game of Nerds

But I love nerds, and this thread is already unreadable as is, and I'm drunk, so carry on

I'm drunk too

Just a thought in my head: I can't wait to see what Rico turns. I am so back and forth with him. I think he is civ or neutral but Zebra keeps on bringing up such valid points for him being a WIFOM baddie.

Black Rock wrote:Just a thought in my head: I can't wait to see what Rico turns. I am so back and forth with him. I think he is civ or neutral but Zebra keeps on bringing up such valid points for him being a WIFOM baddie.

Indeed. I am very interested to find out Blue Eye's motivations here. I don't find his excessive contribution to be healthy for the Civs or for the game, so there'd better be a damn good reason for it.

Long Con wrote:

When Golden senses civilian intent and quality play Golden is not feint with praise. This is normal for him.

To me, saying "This is not a testament to his alignment though" means that you could be sensing Civilian intent as a Civvie or a baddie, so we shouldn't assume you are Civ because of it.

I don't think so. There is a difference between saying 'I don't see that behaviour as alignment indicative' and saying 'This is not a testament to HIS alignment'. It was about me, in response to Mac saying it matched my civ game.

Golden wrote:

Long Con wrote:

When Golden senses civilian intent and quality play Golden is not feint with praise. This is normal for him.

To me, saying "This is not a testament to his alignment though" means that you could be sensing Civilian intent as a Civvie or a baddie, so we shouldn't assume you are Civ because of it.

I don't think so. There is a difference between saying 'I don't see that behaviour as alignment indicative' and saying 'This is not a testament to HIS alignment'. It was about me, in response to Mac saying it matched my civ game.

But that's exactly what I said above:

...we shouldn't assume you are Civ because of it.

It was an appropriate response to Mac saying it matches your Civ game. Because the behaviour is not alignment-indicative, Mac was erroneous in saying it matches your Civ game.

I'm not trying to say that you are not Civ in any way, I'm saying that it is not correct to assume you're Civ because you normally praise a player that you sense Civilian intent in.

Holy christ, guys, 13 pages already?

I've only barely skimmed the game up to this point. Day 0 is a write-off. About the only thing I've really caught so far is Rico acting crazy all game and now people are voting him for it? I'm going to go along with it since I'm not going to have much time to catch up better than this, and in the off chance he flips bad, it'll give us a serious amount of material to work with considering how early it is in the game.

voting rico

I'm kind of busy right now at work, but i hope to be able to participate more as the days go on and the game gets less populous. This level of posting is beyond me to follow right now, but it'll improve over time!

timmer wrote:Holy christ, guys, 13 pages already?

I've only barely skimmed the game up to this point. Day 0 is a write-off. About the only thing I've really caught so far is Rico acting crazy all game and now people are voting him for it? I'm going to go along with it since I'm not going to have much time to catch up better than this, and in the off chance he flips bad, it'll give us a serious amount of material to work with considering how early it is in the game.

voting rico

You're voting for a player who, in your own words, only has an off chance in flipping bad?

Long Con wrote:

Golden wrote:

Long Con wrote:

When Golden senses civilian intent and quality play Golden is not feint with praise. This is normal for him.

To me, saying "This is not a testament to his alignment though" means that you could be sensing Civilian intent as a Civvie or a baddie, so we shouldn't assume you are Civ because of it.

I don't think so. There is a difference between saying 'I don't see that behaviour as alignment indicative' and saying 'This is not a testament to HIS alignment'. It was about me, in response to Mac saying it matched my civ game.

But that's exactly what I said above:

...we shouldn't assume you are Civ because of it.

It was an appropriate response to Mac saying it matches your Civ game. Because the behaviour is not alignment-indicative, Mac was erroneous in saying it matches your Civ game.

I'm not trying to say that you are not Civ in any way, I'm saying that it is not correct to assume you're Civ because you normally praise a player that you sense Civilian intent in.

Of course it isn't correct to assume that, which is why my very first response to Metalmarsh was to agree that it isn't indicative of my alignment.

Mac was not erroneous at all. He carefully stated he had seen nothing of my baddie game, and the point he was making is that it matched his experience of me, which only included one affiliation. He said it was what he expected from me when civ. He didn't say it makes me civ-aligned.

But all of that is entirely besides the point that I'm asking MM to respond to, and it feels like you are running inteference.

MM said it 'amazed him' that I did it. Then Mac pointed out that its my normal behaviour in his experience, in games that MM played in (and, of course, it is normal of me in any affiliation. It's a pretty well known trait, and it is a fact that MM has played games in which I've done it as both affiliations).

My point is... why did he say he was so amazed? What amazed him so much? It's just my normal behaviour. I find it difficult to understand what MM found amazing, and I want him to clarify that.

Wew, just made it through 19 pages of day 0 and got almost nothing out of that. I'm going to go back and investigate the merits of Rico's case on Zebra lurking and whatever else as objectively as possible; my gut sees Zebra as typical Zebra and Mac as typical Mac throwing out a lot of bullshit and the whole thing being meaningless, but that a number of Syndicaters find Rico suspicious makes me think I'm just getting lazy, so I'll try there.

The only ping I have that no one commented on was Elohcin's post here. From the few games I've played with her, it seemed a little out of meta. "Confirmed townie" on day 0 is obviously a joke/exaggeration unless it's a free peek, and I see Eloh as more of a reaction-type player (e.g. engages other conversations rather than starting totally new angles of attack). It's mild, but considering that people apparently see Rico as scum, I would gth her as a teammate of his right now.

Oh, I'll also add that I don't like a number of Dharma's posts, but it's the same feeling I had in Frisky Dingo where we were both Xticles so whatever. Ignoring the rainbow list stuff, this was one of the more intentionally misleading posts in the game so far imo. I'd gth him town still but I don't think I gave much opinion on anything during Frisky Dingo so this time I'm saying it.

Black Rock wrote:

LoRab wrote:Ugh. Just got home from a long day at work during which I had no time to mafia--so just read through everything since last night. Waiting for dinner to get here and will then answer the points made about me. In short, I'll say I'm not bad. I have nothing to hide. Eye me all you want. *twirls*

But, yeah, I'll go back and quote posts and make an actual defense when I'm on a full stomach.

Oh good, I've been waiting on you all day. I look forward to seeing what you have to say, the twirl stopped meaning anything to me years ago.

Fell asleep on the couch about 5 minutes into the episode I started of Making of a Murderer. Now I'm up and groggy and cranky. Sorry you have to wait until morning.

And I know my twirling means nothing to you. Although I do believe that you were the person that called me out one time for not twirling, which is more or less why I always do it now. Can't remember what game and if I was bad or not then.

Dom wrote:I'm voting Rico for today. I am travelling tomorrow an dmight check in. NYC for the weekend. SEeing Hamilton and Spring Awakening (again).

So envious!! I need to get Hamilton tickets. Did you hear they broke the internet the other day, kind of like Star Wars did when those tickets went on sale? And I'm bummed I didn't get to this production of Spring Awakening. I saw Deaf West Productions do Big River years back and they were amazing--I was hoping to see what they'd do with SA, a show I love. Alas. No time before they close. Have a great trip!!!

I have no intention of running interference for Metalmarsh. If he wants to use my contribution to avoid answering your questions, then that's on him. I have to participate in this game too. I saw some points that I thought were not accurate, and I spoke up.

HBoy, I don't follow your accusation of DH at all. I don't think that post was intentionally misleading. It looked more like a joke that was based on a misunderstanding of what RFuzz said in his first post.

LoRab wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

LoRab wrote:Ugh. Just got home from a long day at work during which I had no time to mafia--so just read through everything since last night. Waiting for dinner to get here and will then answer the points made about me. In short, I'll say I'm not bad. I have nothing to hide. Eye me all you want. *twirls*

But, yeah, I'll go back and quote posts and make an actual defense when I'm on a full stomach.

Oh good, I've been waiting on you all day. I look forward to seeing what you have to say, the twirl stopped meaning anything to me years ago.

Fell asleep on the couch about 5 minutes into the episode I started of Making of a Murderer. Now I'm up and groggy and cranky. Sorry you have to wait until morning.

And I know my twirling means nothing to you. Although I do believe that you were the person that called me out one time for not twirling, which is more or less why I always do it now. Can't remember what game and if I was bad or not then.

Dom wrote:I'm voting Rico for today. I am travelling tomorrow an dmight check in. NYC for the weekend. SEeing Hamilton and Spring Awakening (again).

So envious!! I need to get Hamilton tickets. Did you hear they broke the internet the other day, kind of like Star Wars did when those tickets went on sale? And I'm bummed I didn't get to this production of Spring Awakening. I saw Deaf West Productions do Big River years back and they were amazing--I was hoping to see what they'd do with SA, a show I love. Alas. No time before they close. Have a great trip!!!

I think it's time to retire the twirl. It just feels so hollow to me now, and makes my gut want to START suspecting you for saying it.

Lots of serious talk over the night I don't know what to make of. Fuzz's thoughts are written in a complicated manner and Golden did nothing but hit the ball back at him the same way. Hmm. And then you let Baddie Con take it into OT zone. M'kay.

Elohcin wrote:This game is moving way too fast for me.

It'll be over soon, it seems.

Turnip Head wrote:This is not the 2015 Game of Nerds

But I love nerds, and this thread is already unreadable as is, and I'm drunk, so carry on

It'll be over soon, it see- oh wait, you're not a player.

It's becoming clear the game will virtually start on Night 1, the way the past 19 pages aren't about my spot on baddie catching anymore, but a skip button for players to appeal to. Let it be known, post-mislynch, how easy it was for Dom and Timmer, for instance, to play this card.

Long Con wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

LoRab wrote:Ugh. Just got home from a long day at work during which I had no time to mafia--so just read through everything since last night. Waiting for dinner to get here and will then answer the points made about me. In short, I'll say I'm not bad. I have nothing to hide. Eye me all you want. *twirls*

But, yeah, I'll go back and quote posts and make an actual defense when I'm on a full stomach.

Oh good, I've been waiting on you all day. I look forward to seeing what you have to say, the twirl stopped meaning anything to me years ago.

Fell asleep on the couch about 5 minutes into the episode I started of Making of a Murderer. Now I'm up and groggy and cranky. Sorry you have to wait until morning.

And I know my twirling means nothing to you. Although I do believe that you were the person that called me out one time for not twirling, which is more or less why I always do it now. Can't remember what game and if I was bad or not then.

Dom wrote:I'm voting Rico for today. I am travelling tomorrow an dmight check in. NYC for the weekend. SEeing Hamilton and Spring Awakening (again).

So envious!! I need to get Hamilton tickets. Did you hear they broke the internet the other day, kind of like Star Wars did when those tickets went on sale? And I'm bummed I didn't get to this production of Spring Awakening. I saw Deaf West Productions do Big River years back and they were amazing--I was hoping to see what they'd do with SA, a show I love. Alas. No time before they close. Have a great trip!!!

I think it's time to retire the twirl. It just feels so hollow to me now, and makes my gut want to START suspecting you for saying it.

I would love to. Seriously.

LoRab wrote:

Long Con wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

LoRab wrote:Ugh. Just got home from a long day at work during which I had no time to mafia--so just read through everything since last night. Waiting for dinner to get here and will then answer the points made about me. In short, I'll say I'm not bad. I have nothing to hide. Eye me all you want. *twirls*

But, yeah, I'll go back and quote posts and make an actual defense when I'm on a full stomach.

Oh good, I've been waiting on you all day. I look forward to seeing what you have to say, the twirl stopped meaning anything to me years ago.

Fell asleep on the couch about 5 minutes into the episode I started of Making of a Murderer. Now I'm up and groggy and cranky. Sorry you have to wait until morning.

And I know my twirling means nothing to you. Although I do believe that you were the person that called me out one time for not twirling, which is more or less why I always do it now. Can't remember what game and if I was bad or not then.

Dom wrote:I'm voting Rico for today. I am travelling tomorrow an dmight check in. NYC for the weekend. SEeing Hamilton and Spring Awakening (again).

So envious!! I need to get Hamilton tickets. Did you hear they broke the internet the other day, kind of like Star Wars did when those tickets went on sale? And I'm bummed I didn't get to this production of Spring Awakening. I saw Deaf West Productions do Big River years back and they were amazing--I was hoping to see what they'd do with SA, a show I love. Alas. No time before they close. Have a great trip!!!

I think it's time to retire the twirl. It just feels so hollow to me now, and makes my gut want to START suspecting you for saying it.

I would love to. Seriously.

Are you addicted to the twirl? Do you need help giving it up? I'm here for you.

OK, made it through the full thread, voting for Elohcin for reasons aforementioned although I'll be happy to switch later. A few pings for day 1 so far...

DharmaHelper wrote:1. RE: Fuzz, I'm going to have to go back and look at who exactly it was that started to look in his direction, but the Fuzz suspicion seemed opportunistic to me and I am surprised it was considered as seriously as I remember it being.

DharmaHelper wrote:Circling back to Fuzzy, DFaraday called his behaviour "weird" and "unusual". Kind of half-baked if you ask me.

Dharma was one of those that started to look in Fuzz's direction, and I really don't like how he chose DFaraday as the one to single out. Based purely on A World Reborn, DFaraday is a lighter poster and was lynched more for that than anyone thinking he was indie, i.e., an easy target, and I'll just take a leap and Dharma is sizing him up for that this game. Gun to head scum.

juliets wrote:

Ricochet wrote:All I'm reading in juliets' post is I'm following Mac's, Epig's and Sorsha's train of thoughts.

Yes, that is exactly what i am saying. Is there something wrong with that? Sometimes people post their thoughts to persuade others and whether or not that was their intent, I was persuaded to look hard at Lorab as a result of those posts. That's how the game works.

This is exactly the same juliets I saw last game, and it's just as suspicious as ever to me. I know she said that she was playing her usual game back then as well, but I definitely can't ignore this. Gun to head scum.

a2thezebra wrote:I'm fairly certain there are two curse roles, even if Draconus and/or JJJ is faking their curse.

Weird post, trying to see it as a roleclaim/fakeclaim but can't. Best thing I can come up with is that it was bait which Black Rock took. I hounded Sloonei incorrectly recently on RYM #91 along similar lines and that turned out wrong, but just noting it now.

Long Con wrote:I have no intention of running interference for Metalmarsh. If he wants to use my contribution to avoid answering your questions, then that's on him. I have to participate in this game too. I saw some points that I thought were not accurate, and I spoke up.

Fair enough.

LoRab the twirl junkie

Can people suspecting Ricochet give an example of a game where he was scum and behaved similarly to this one? I hate it when I see a case that goes like "X is a good player, they're playing weird and their posts suck this game, I don't know why they'd be doing this, they must be scum".

@HB - what would you describe as the objective theoretical civilian motivation for Rico's behaviour?

Hi. My name is LoRab. And I'm a twirlaholic.

How would you describe his behavior? I searched through your post history and I'll admit that he's being indirect at times, especially more in relatively recent posts than his earliest. I am starting to see the possibility that he's a scum that was caught early, and is now intentionally shooting himself in the foot to distance himself from his scummates and give them townie points when he flips.

Incidentally, searching your history also led me to this (which I see had a couple back-and-forth posts with Fuzz)...

Golden wrote:I don't think the point here is that they 'give information whether they are asked or not'. I think the point is that I do think voting off-wagon is justifiable, but people should provide their justifications.

For instance, lets say right now my top two suspects were Rico and, lets say JJJ for the sake of argument (I'm reading JJJ as civ in actuality, but I choose him because I don't think he is actually going to take any votes, especially given he is cursed). Now, if given the choice between voting one of the two, wouldn't my vote be more impactful on rico, given rico might be lynched, rather than off-wagon on JJ, even though it would be a legitimate suspicion? As a civ, isn't my interest in choosing my suspect that is more likely to be lynched?

For me, a civilian voting off-wagon (at least, after the point at which the wagons have formed) is effectively a civilian saying they don't suspect either of the wagon candidates. Or at least not enough to give them a vote. Otherwise they'd vote on the wagon. I don't think it is a big leap from there to say why.

How does bandwagoning impact anything in this hypothetical? You're saying that it is better to vote for a player likely to be lynched because they are likely to be lynched; that is almost contradictory, if a player is going to be lynched then any votes at that point and beyond have zero value. It seems to be built on a pessimistic assumption regardless; any lynch where one person is far in the lead is a sad one unless there's really good evidence. Also, since the topic is indirect answering of questions, what apparently started this:

Golden wrote:1) there are 24 hours to go, so it's hardly time to be talking about where the major wagons in this lynch are... if I think your vote is to be criticised, I'll wait until I see where the wagons actually are and your vote is at the end of the day
2) Just because someone does something scum might do, does not mean that particular thing is the only thing I take into account when making a read. If I felt like you were deliberately skirting creating any opinions on the main candidates by voting off-wagon, then my opinion of you would probably start to fall from 'top town read', but it wouldn't immediately send you to 'worst scum read', either.

You didn't directly answer why you found Fuzz specifically so townie, you just kinda backed off on your praise as if you were buddying a townie to make him uncomfortable. "If I felt like you were deliberately skirting...", you're answering "Why am I town?" with "If I felt you were scum, I wouldn't find you town".

Gun to head, golden is scum.

Going to switch off of Eloh and vote DharmaHelper now for reasons above. I know others here suspected him too.

Interesting catch-up ketchup, Fuzz is looking very civ right now. Most useful in my opinion are Boomslang's recent posts. Let's just say I'm glad I put him at the top of my list. My kill list, if I may be so bold. Also...

HamburgerBoy wrote:Can people suspecting Ricochet give an example of a game where he was scum and behaved similarly to this one? I hate it when I see a case that goes like "X is a good player, they're playing weird and their posts suck this game, I don't know why they'd be doing this, they must be scum".

I've given reasons why Rico would be playing the way they are multiple times.

1. They're trying to shift the focus of the thread on to them, possibly away from other teammates who would otherwise get too much spotlight.

2. They're hoping by making it look like they're trying to get votes, not enough people will vote for them by the end of the day, or perhaps game.

3. They were feigning supatown to the nth degree in the beginning and have now gone full WIFOM since being called out on it by multiple players.

And Rico's meta is irrelevant since as others have said, Rico has never played this way before as town or mafia. Asking for an example of Rico playing this way as a baddie before this is questionable in its own right. Not only have reasons been given from more than one person voting for Rico as to why they would do this as a baddie, there have also been reasons given as to why them doing this is unlikely to have civilian motivation.

a2thezebra wrote:1. They're trying to shift the focus of the thread on to them, possibly away from other teammates who would otherwise get too much spotlight.

Interesting theory if you know who he might be covering for. If the goal was still to get out of it in one piece, he obviously is failing there. Considering that he's been facing heat since the middle of day 0 (i.e. no lynch risk yet), I find this theory a bit unlikely.

a2thezebra wrote:2. They're hoping by making it look like they're trying to get votes, not enough people will vote for them by the end of the day, or perhaps game.

I could see this working on RYM where a supertown Jay may work town into not settling on a lynch too early, and where lynches are often by narrow margins, but not here where the results often seem called far in advance of the deadline (even when the votes haven't been placed yet). Certainly not for a game-long tactic.

a2thezebra wrote:3. They were feigning supatown to the nth degree in the beginning and have now gone full WIFOM since being called out on it by multiple players.

Was Rico feigning supatown earlier? I saw some crap given over excessive posting of rainbows, others complaining that he's posting too much and it's counter-productive, but not really supatown. In fact, even in Talking Heads, there were many people unaccustomed to JJJ's posting style and complained that it was counter-productive to the game. Since Rico was runner-up for most active that game, it sounds more like another way of saying "It's only day 1 and I already have to put up with this? Bleh, lynch him".

I'll admit that's some well-reasoned skepticism towards those interpretations. However, do you really think Rico having town-motivated reasons for doing this is more likely than any of those ideas?

See, my problem is the "this". I still don't know what he's doing that badly. Would town make a bad case? Maybe. Some town players may just be total nubs and never make a good case in their life. Rico is evidently a "good player", but that doesn't preclude him from off-days or simply being wrong. Didn't RYM only pick up the RVS concept after Jimmy and Sloonei made their first pilgrimage to the Syndicate? So why can't Rico's case about you and bcornett24 being scumbuddies because of timing be a case of a silly little day 1 (correction, day 0) theory rather than deliberate evil? Dumb cases at least usually generate content, which is better than just lurking or bandwagoning. Mac earlier said something like "Rico isn't even denying that his posts suck, he's obviously doing this on purpose", but posts like that don't allow room for explanation. It's not like someone can create a mess to see what it generates and admit to doing it.

Now, if Rico survives this lynch and keeps holding onto the same day 0/1 cases for the rest of the game, then I'll push him far down the rainbow, but I'm not voting for a guy just because his motivations seem unclear on day 1.

And that's not to say I'm not taking anything Rico is saying seriously either; honestly, compared to some of the stuff a townie rundontwalk (for example) can throw out there, Rico has been a lucid as anyone. A person that makes their townie motivations clear isn't always useful. Since Rico is almost certainly going to be lynched, here's an obvious reason a town player would want to look lynchable: they have a good power role and want mafia to target less lynchable candidates.

Going to bed, will try to check in before the deadline a bit, but I'll still be in the middle of work by the time the poll ends.

So you seem to be hesitant to vote for Rico because of the great uncertainty that surrounds them. I can understand that.

What I can't understand is how you would interpret some of his ideas such as me and b24 being teammates by posting near each other as a genuine case. Am I misreading here? You really think that it's possible that Rico has been genuine with all of their opinions and volume so far and that they're just having an off day regarding winning others over with their logic? Tell me I'm misreading that you're really suggesting that.

linki - You lost me.

This post felt all over the place to me, and difficult to follow your thought process or why you are doing a gth on me specifically - so replied inline with colours:

HamburgerBoy wrote:How would you describe his behavior? Unfathomable as a civilian. Fathomable as indy. Fathomable as scum.

I searched through your post history and I'll admit that he's being indirect at times, especially more in relatively recent posts than his earliest. What does this have to do with searching MY post history?

I am starting to see the possibility that he's a scum that was caught early, and is now intentionally shooting himself in the foot to distance himself from his scummates and give them townie points when he flips. Is this you setting up the end point of your post? I'm unclear, but are you saying that 'if rico flips scum, golden is his teammate'? Because thats how this post is reading to me.

Incidentally, searching your history also led me to this (which I see had a couple back-and-forth posts with Fuzz)...

Golden wrote:I don't think the point here is that they 'give information whether they are asked or not'. I think the point is that I do think voting off-wagon is justifiable, but people should provide their justifications.

For instance, lets say right now my top two suspects were Rico and, lets say JJJ for the sake of argument (I'm reading JJJ as civ in actuality, but I choose him because I don't think he is actually going to take any votes, especially given he is cursed). Now, if given the choice between voting one of the two, wouldn't my vote be more impactful on rico, given rico might be lynched, rather than off-wagon on JJ, even though it would be a legitimate suspicion? As a civ, isn't my interest in choosing my suspect that is more likely to be lynched?

For me, a civilian voting off-wagon (at least, after the point at which the wagons have formed) is effectively a civilian saying they don't suspect either of the wagon candidates. Or at least not enough to give them a vote. Otherwise they'd vote on the wagon. I don't think it is a big leap from there to say why.

How does bandwagoning impact anything in this hypothetical? You're saying that it is better to vote for a player likely to be lynched because they are likely to be lynched; that is almost contradictory, if a player is going to be lynched then any votes at that point and beyond have zero value. It seems to be built on a pessimistic assumption regardless; any lynch where one person is far in the lead is a sad one unless there's really good evidence. Also, since the topic is indirect answering of questions, what apparently started this: I don't really understand the point you are making here at all, and it feels like you have snipped a single post out of a long conversation that was about me and Fuzz talking through philosophies of voting off-wagon. None of this paragraph appears to address any aspect of what I was saying. Unless you are asking 'why is it useful for people to be on a major wagon at day end' in which case my answer is 'because voting records are a good place to find baddies'.

Also, this next bit did not 'apparently start it' as it came at the very end... are you reading my ISO backwards?

Golden wrote:1) there are 24 hours to go, so it's hardly time to be talking about where the major wagons in this lynch are... if I think your vote is to be criticised, I'll wait until I see where the wagons actually are and your vote is at the end of the day
2) Just because someone does something scum might do, does not mean that particular thing is the only thing I take into account when making a read. If I felt like you were deliberately skirting creating any opinions on the main candidates by voting off-wagon, then my opinion of you would probably start to fall from 'top town read', but it wouldn't immediately send you to 'worst scum read', either.

You didn't directly answer why you found Fuzz specifically so townie, you just kinda backed off on your praise as if you were buddying a townie to make him uncomfortable. "If I felt like you were deliberately skirting...", you're answering "Why am I town?" with "If I felt you were scum, I wouldn't find you town".

I gave Fuzz four numbered reasons why I specifically found him so townie, so this is blatantly incorrect and demonstrates that you haven't read my iso very carefully at all.

Gun to head, golden is scum.

Some questions for you...

Why did you call me out for apparently 'not answering a question', while not answering the question I asked you? What is your civ motivation for rico's behaviour?
Why did you frame your scum read to me as a 'gth' read? You weren't doing gth reads. What you mean is, you find some of my posts suspicious.
Where is your mindset, in which you defend rico over several posts, but also appear to set me up in this post as his teammate bussing him?

You seem so torn over your read on rico... this sentence in particular (requoted from above) I really do not like in the context of everything you've said before and since.

HamburgerBoy wrote:I am starting to see the possibility that he's a scum that was caught early, and is now intentionally shooting himself in the foot to distance himself from his scummates and give them townie points when he flips.

It seems to me you are ok reading rico as civ if you can then point to who you would choose to lynch next. You can see him as bad if there is an additional agenda to you saying it. Otherwise, you just don't see what he is doing as that bad.

So, I'll ask you again, HBoy - what is your objective theoretical motivation for his behaviour from a civ perspective. You say his cases are 'wrong' or 'bad'? No - they are just him saying people are confirmed scum, making rainbows where everyone is red, flipping coins to say who is red. They are literally impossible to take seriously (or be seen as bad) and noone does take them seriously or see them as bad. If you think thats the case, you don't even understand the case. You say there isn't room for explanation? He has been given plenty of room to explain, and has chosen not to. He's had four whole days to do it.

A no u? Yes. I find your suspicion of me disingenuous. It's based on a poor read of an iso and seems way more, to me, like someone trying to discredit me and get votes off rico. It has served to make me more determined to keep my vote on rico.

Everything HBoy has said regarding Rico is leading me to believe he's desperately trying to save his teammate.

For you HBoy

Golden wrote:There are lots of reasons you are my top town read, including:

1) The way a number of people jumped on you for poor reasons, at least some of which I think is likely from baddies.
2) The way you called that out when it just got dropped (completely right, and although I still haven't analysed who those people were I'm waiting to find out...)
3) The way you have added your own content even when it is going against popular opinion without any reason to do so.
4) The way you have handled Dr Wilgy... unflappable in the face of meaningless suspicion.

But I'll also point out Fuzz did not ask me 'why am I your top civilian read', which would have gotten this answer to begin with. He asked me (paraphrasing) 'how can I be your top civilian read when I've done x y and z, which you say you find suspicious', and my first response was to explain why he had not done x, y and z, and therefore how it was possible for him to be my top read despite the specific actions he mentioned.

I just read back to before the stuff I caught up on and realised HBoy, you did start doing some gth reads before then.

So, you can ignore my second question.

a2thezebra wrote:Everything HBoy has said regarding Rico is leading me to believe he's desperately trying to save his teammate.

There's a part of me that feels that this is exactly what is going on. That sentence I requoted for emphasis feeds in to this in particular. That whole "I guess I could see an angle where that person is bad, and it is angle x' thing... it feels manufactured.

There is another part which just feels like a player who is trying to catch up on the thread and missing large chunks of information, but even if bad I like that he has come in so late and made an effort. It would be tempting to just slide by for a while (especially if bad), so that is a point in his favour.

I'm torn. But I'm interested in his responses to my questions.

Oh HBoy he knows me
And he knows I'm right

Golden wrote:I just read back to before the stuff I caught up on and realised HBoy, you did start doing some gth reads before then.

So, you can ignore my second question.

I requested GTH reads for the past two nights and you all kept treating me like some jerk.

Hammy you were suppsed to busz me we talked about this dammit!!

LoRab wrote:

Long Con wrote:

LoRab wrote:

Black Rock wrote:

LoRab wrote:Ugh. Just got home from a long day at work during which I had no time to mafia--so just read through everything since last night. Waiting for dinner to get here and will then answer the points made about me. In short, I'll say I'm not bad. I have nothing to hide. Eye me all you want. *twirls*

But, yeah, I'll go back and quote posts and make an actual defense when I'm on a full stomach.

Oh good, I've been waiting on you all day. I look forward to seeing what you have to say, the twirl stopped meaning anything to me years ago.

Fell asleep on the couch about 5 minutes into the episode I started of Making of a Murderer. Now I'm up and groggy and cranky. Sorry you have to wait until morning.

And I know my twirling means nothing to you. Although I do believe that you were the person that called me out one time for not twirling, which is more or less why I always do it now. Can't remember what game and if I was bad or not then.

Dom wrote:I'm voting Rico for today. I am travelling tomorrow an dmight check in. NYC for the weekend. SEeing Hamilton and Spring Awakening (again).

So envious!! I need to get Hamilton tickets. Did you hear they broke the internet the other day, kind of like Star Wars did when those tickets went on sale? And I'm bummed I didn't get to this production of Spring Awakening. I saw Deaf West Productions do Big River years back and they were amazing--I was hoping to see what they'd do with SA, a show I love. Alas. No time before they close. Have a great trip!!!

I think it's time to retire the twirl. It just feels so hollow to me now, and makes my gut want to START suspecting you for saying it.

I would love to. Seriously.

I'm going to write this in OT, because it's meta talk and I don't consider it to have any impact on the ongoing game.

If what you told BR is serious, it's a very silly reason to keep using your catchphrases. As I've alluded in some discussion, early during N0 or so, any meta read I'd have on you, in theory, would tell me nothing about you being civ or bad, really, because the style in which you do can easily be either genuine or a smokescreen behind a baddie alignment. So your claims and twirls are basically blank, implacable and, at work, slighty vexating input in all discussions/debates carried out.

Then again, I'm not sure changing skin between games is the better tactic, either. I mean, look at what's happening to me, finding my best rhythm and finest instincts in catching baddies out of the tiniest details, only to be put down by everyone.

Despite his malicious attempt to lynch me based on nothing, I really like RadicalFuzz's observations about Golden buddying. Buddying is a classic tell. I think Golden deserves a reread.