The Syndicate

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

Sloonei wrote:or it's a passive ability and they were targeted by Golden/Jay.

I hadn't thought of that, could be.

Speaking of epignosis, he seemed strongly against lynching either A Person or boomslang, and then ended up voting for a civ. This means either his judgments haven't been as sound as some of us have assumed, or that it was actively malicious (I'm sure his response will be "why would a mafia member draw attention to themselves like that" since he's said it about 5 times this game)

epi also seems to assume everybody is playing this game "straight" (no risky bluffing) even though MP explicitly said he has done those kinds of bluffs before, and I'm certain he's not the only one. I'm not sure in a game with only 3 mafia members whether it would be more or less likely for that kind of bluffing. Depending on who the mafia is and if they think their odds aren't as good as the civs they could go for some high risk play. I don't think any of the 3 curses were fakes though, just bouncing ideas.

I still want to know why boomslang voted for timmer, as the theory I posted before is the only sound reasoning I've come up with.

Golden wrote:Sig looks scummy as all fuck therefore sig is good.

triceratopzeuhl wrote: MP - several people changed votes off both A Person and Boomslang at Epi's prompting, as far as I could tell

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Golden wrote:Sig looks scummy as all fuck therefore sig is good.

Sadly, this is probably true. I cannot read this man.

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote: MP - several people changed votes off both A Person and Boomslang at Epi's prompting, as far as I could tell

to add a point, epi posts in a manner that suggests certainty, I'm just pointing out that what he says deserves as much scrutiny as anybody else. It wasn't even a main point of my post

MovingPictures07 wrote:Hey Sloonei McSloon, do you have a rainbow for me? I am suffering rainbow withdrawal.

I'll update mine but only after ISOs.

triceratopzeuhl wrote:@ric at least one mistake I can see in the poll results posted here is that I voted for A Person before changing to boomslang (after either Lorab or Metalmarsh, I forget exactly)

just an fyi to anybody using the votes thread that the day 2 results snapshot, as ric says, "is subject to errors"

MP - several people changed votes off both A Person and Boomslang at Epi's prompting, as far as I could tell

Sloonei wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Golden wrote:Sig looks scummy as all fuck therefore sig is good.

Sadly, this is probably true. I cannot read this man.

What's your strongest read in the game right now? If it's Scotty, what's your second strongest?

triceratopzeuhl wrote:Speaking of epignosis, he seemed strongly against lynching either A Person or boomslang, and then ended up voting for a civ. This means either his judgments haven't been as sound as some of us have assumed, or that it was actively malicious

Sloonei wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Hey Sloonei McSloon, do you have a rainbow for me? I am suffering rainbow withdrawal.

I'll update mine but only after ISOs.

Not at the moment, but I'll keep you posted!

MovingPictures07 wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote: MP - several people changed votes off both A Person and Boomslang at Epi's prompting, as far as I could tell

to add a point, epi posts in a manner that suggests certainty, I'm just pointing out that what he says deserves as much scrutiny as anybody else. It wasn't even a main point of my post

I don't think anyone would dispute that.

Do you think his posts aren't being held to appropriate scrutiny?

Golden wrote: Isn't it possible that he just had correct reads of 2 civilians? There are some people, like timmer, that I think I would fight against their lynch but that doesn't mean the person I vote for is guaranteed to be bad.

MovingPictures07 wrote:I'm sorry I didn't try to interact with you more, but I'm dense and I had a really hard time trying to figure out what you were saying, even if you were slightly easier to understand than JJJ.

Epignosis wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:Epi, re-reading sloonei just now I see very little content directed at JJJ. Sloonei has posted about (starting from most recently) Lorab, Scotty, metalmarsh (sort of, retracted later), dom, INH, whilgy. Why specifically did you mention JJJ there? besides that you're convinced for some reason he's faking his curse

I'm Not Convinced, and I Was Going By Memory

Golden wrote:3) I also think that epi's reasoning for AP is ok, but not a slam dunk. Trice said it well. There are three baddies, and the idea that APs voice would decide who was killed doesn't mesh for me. In fact, killing vomps and then moaning about load players is a good way to 'clear yourself'.

Epignosis wrote:

Golden wrote:3) I also think that epi's reasoning for AP is ok, but not a slam dunk. Trice said it well. There are three baddies, and the idea that APs voice would decide who was killed doesn't mesh for me. In fact, killing vomps and then moaning about load players is a good way to 'clear yourself'.

Nobody Said Anything In His Defense But Me

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

Sloonei wrote:or it's a passive ability and they were targeted by Golden/Jay.

I hadn't thought of that, could be.

Speaking of epignosis, he seemed strongly against lynching either A Person or boomslang, and then ended up voting for a civ. This means either his judgments haven't been as sound as some of us have assumed, or that it was actively malicious (I'm sure his response will be "why would a mafia member draw attention to themselves like that" since he's said it about 5 times this game)

epi also seems to assume everybody is playing this game "straight" (no risky bluffing) even though MP explicitly said he has done those kinds of bluffs before, and I'm certain he's not the only one. I'm not sure in a game with only 3 mafia members whether it would be more or less likely for that kind of bluffing. Depending on who the mafia is and if they think their odds aren't as good as the civs they could go for some high risk play. I don't think any of the 3 curses were fakes though, just bouncing ideas.

I still want to know why boomslang voted for timmer, as the theory I posted before is the only sound reasoning I've come up with.

Epignosis wrote:

Golden wrote:3) I also think that epi's reasoning for AP is ok, but not a slam dunk. Trice said it well. There are three baddies, and the idea that APs voice would decide who was killed doesn't mesh for me. In fact, killing vomps and then moaning about load players is a good way to 'clear yourself'.

Nobody Said Anything In His Defense But Me

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote:Linki - Really? Because it sounds like AP not wanting to read anything. Like, not for any particular reason - just that he doesn't feel like reading a massive thread. Quite a negative way to put it, though, I'll agree, but seems too easy.

Well there's also the fact that he hasn't put forth a single suspicion or commented on anything that has happened this game so far

Golden wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Golden wrote:3) I also think that epi's reasoning for AP is ok, but not a slam dunk. Trice said it well. There are three baddies, and the idea that APs voice would decide who was killed doesn't mesh for me. In fact, killing vomps and then moaning about load players is a good way to 'clear yourself'.

Nobody Said Anything In His Defense But Me

Fair point, but would you expend much effort trying to save him if you were his baddie teammate?

Overall I'm agreeing with you and have ap as a town read. Just not a slam dunk.

Epignosis wrote: Who Is Assuming My Judgment is Sound?

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote: Do you think his posts aren't being held to appropriate scrutiny?

I think some of them weren't in day 2, yes, though on re-reading I'm having trouble finding specific responses to him - it's more just all the people moving votes around seemed to come shortly after epi's (somewhat weak, imo) arguments against lynching A Person or Boomslang. And the fact that I was the only one who called out his reason for initially voting JJJ as being 100% hot air.

Ricochet wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:@ric at least one mistake I can see in the poll results posted here is that I voted for A Person before changing to boomslang (after either Lorab or Metalmarsh, I forget exactly)

just an fyi to anybody using the votes thread that the day 2 results snapshot, as ric says, "is subject to errors"

MP - several people changed votes off both A Person and Boomslang at Epi's prompting, as far as I could tell

I recall that and that omission is most likely correct.

Spoiler: show

Epignosis wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

Sloonei wrote:or it's a passive ability and they were targeted by Golden/Jay.

I hadn't thought of that, could be.

Speaking of epignosis, he seemed strongly against lynching either A Person or boomslang, and then ended up voting for a civ. This means either his judgments haven't been as sound as some of us have assumed, or that it was actively malicious (I'm sure his response will be "why would a mafia member draw attention to themselves like that" since he's said it about 5 times this game)

epi also seems to assume everybody is playing this game "straight" (no risky bluffing) even though MP explicitly said he has done those kinds of bluffs before, and I'm certain he's not the only one. I'm not sure in a game with only 3 mafia members whether it would be more or less likely for that kind of bluffing. Depending on who the mafia is and if they think their odds aren't as good as the civs they could go for some high risk play. I don't think any of the 3 curses were fakes though, just bouncing ideas.

I still want to know why boomslang voted for timmer, as the theory I posted before is the only sound reasoning I've come up with.

Who Is Assuming My Judgment is Sound? (A Symphony)
a. Nobody Listened to Me the First Day
b. The Second Day Was Like Pulling Teeth With Birds Stuck in Them
c. You've Never Thought My Judgment Was Sound (You Tried to Kill Me and Then Boomslang)
d. Now You are Presenting a False Dilemma

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

Sloonei wrote:or it's a passive ability and they were targeted by Golden/Jay.

I hadn't thought of that, could be.

Speaking of epignosis, he seemed strongly against lynching either A Person or boomslang, and then ended up voting for a civ. This means either his judgments haven't been as sound as some of us have assumed, or that it was actively malicious (I'm sure his response will be "why would a mafia member draw attention to themselves like that" since he's said it about 5 times this game)

epi also seems to assume everybody is playing this game "straight" (no risky bluffing) even though MP explicitly said he has done those kinds of bluffs before, and I'm certain he's not the only one. I'm not sure in a game with only 3 mafia members whether it would be more or less likely for that kind of bluffing. Depending on who the mafia is and if they think their odds aren't as good as the civs they could go for some high risk play. I don't think any of the 3 curses were fakes though, just bouncing ideas.

I still want to know why boomslang voted for timmer, as the theory I posted before is the only sound reasoning I've come up with.

Who Is Assuming My Judgment is Sound? (A Symphony)
a. Nobody Listened to Me the First Day
b. The Second Day Was Like Pulling Teeth With Birds Stuck in Them
c. You've Never Thought My Judgment Was Sound (You Tried to Kill Me and Then Boomslang)
d. Now You are Presenting a False Dilemma

You gave us reason to not vote for APerson.

You did not give reason to vote for Boomslang.

You heeded us against both votes, why's that?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:@ric at least one mistake I can see in the poll results posted here is that I voted for A Person before changing to boomslang (after either Lorab or Metalmarsh, I forget exactly)

just an fyi to anybody using the votes thread that the day 2 results snapshot, as ric says, "is subject to errors"

MP - several people changed votes off both A Person and Boomslang at Epi's prompting, as far as I could tell

I recall that and that omission is most likely correct.

Spoiler: show

Epignosis wrote:I Gave Plenty of Reasoning

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:I Gave Plenty of Reasoning

Fine.

What do you think of timmer and sig?

Epignosis wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:I Gave Plenty of Reasoning

Fine.

What do you think of timmer and sig?

You're Just Trying to Get a Better Idea of Whom to Kill

Dom wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Dom wrote:i think he's purposefully exposing how flawed poe is

MP stated earlier that he isn't using PoE anymore. So what makes you think he is still doing it?

i'm talking about epi

birdwithteeth11 wrote:MP, you never answered my question directed at you earlier.

and you never answered mine

jay-- i'll bite.
*votes wilgy*

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:I Gave Plenty of Reasoning

Fine.

What do you think of timmer and sig?

You're Just Trying to Get a Better Idea of Whom to Kill

What would this question do in that regard?

If I was a killer, I'd have my target picked already.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:MP, you never answered my question directed at you earlier.

I'm sorry bud, must have missed it. I'm trying to quickly catch up here while playing Lost Again. Lol. Can you quote it for me?

MovingPictures07 wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Boomslang wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Boomslang wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote: Also, I find your two statements contradictory. How can he be pretty much impossible to read and yet you lean town on him?

Did you read my post? I said I leaned town on Epi because I didn't think his gimmick was doing any damage to the town effort. Beyond obfuscating his own alignment, of course.

Sloonei wrote:Why do you like Scotty avoiding the INH vote?

He had a correct read on INH and promoted that read in the thread. Had we followed that advice, it would've been profitable to the town effort. That's more town evidence than we have for most people at this point.

Also, voted the mini-market because food.

I did read it; I just don't understand how you interpret Epi's behavior as obfuscating.

I find your highlighted conclusion dubious. Accuracy does not make alignment.

Epi's posts have gotten much less obtuse as the game has gone on, I'll give you that much. So I'm stepping back from the idea of obfuscation for now. And I agree that accuracy does not make alignment. But he actively pursued other targets (Epi, BWT, JJJ) in thread instead of just saying he disagreed with the inh lynch. He could've done more late in the day, but he did offer some potential alternatives if others would've taken them.

Linki w/Golden: I don't necessarily think both are fake. But I think odds are high one is, given what we know about the roles.
Linki w/MP: Spinning my wheels here, but I'd say a mafia J could be pretending to help temper his high post count from yesterday. He came out swinging, establishing himself as a strong inquisitive force (see Scotty calling him the Spanish Inquisition, for crying out loud), and playing insanified lets him fade back a bit while retaining that impression.

Second linki: Ahh Blooper I want to post tooooo

That's all fair. Thanks for the response. I'll see whether I agree with that claim when ISO Scotty tomorrow (that's what I'm hoping to do anyway).

That's a logical conclusion. I'm not sure what I think of it. I think mafia members faking curses almost never happens, but it's possible. I've done it once before.

No, no, NO. Don't do this to me, man! This is the first notable thing you've said so far that I've disagreed with.

If you wouldn't put it past a mafia member, and you yourself have faked a curse, then why do you think it's a stretch for mafia members to do it?

Because it's unnecessarily risky. Most people don't play like I do.

sig wrote:hey here i am to save the day, or at least make a post and vote. :P


So I don't see a good case for Boomslang or Wilgy or A person. However, out of the three the Wilgy thing seemed to have come out of nowhere? His vote for Epi seems to be the only thing agaisnt him. For now I'm voting for Boom when I go back and read if anyone can tell me what exactly the case on Wilgy is that would be great.

Dom wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Scotty wrote:DrWilgy

Can you quote a reason why?

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Fuck this game. Seriously. I don't even care if you other townies win anymore.

MovingPictures07

HETHZBEMADWDGFLMCECRSALOKYHNENMTEKTXEJSYVQOPXMHNCKBJRIBNJHBDITEUMGUBXUMD

This curse sucks.

Indeed. Anyone have an idea what the code for it is?

What made you say this?

Dom wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:I Gave Plenty of Reasoning

Fine.

What do you think of timmer and sig?

You're Just Trying to Get a Better Idea of Whom to Kill

What would this question do in that regard?

If I was a killer, I'd have my target picked already.

what does bad epi have to gain from this?

triceratopzeuhl wrote:What if, e.g., Sunshine + Gasoline's secret is that night powers targeting one will affect both of them?

Or if something in Mladic role (I believe he is probably the mafia insanifier) says "if you target one of a btsc pair it affects both of them" or something along those lines?

sig wrote:I have a few I'd look at but with less then 13 minutes until the poll closes there isn't a huge point in pursing them to much is there?

A quick skim, I find MM's votes to be eyebrow raising he goes from Timmer to Boom to Epi to Boom. This is odd, he also provides no reason for his Epi vote.

Also the Vomp kill was very odd? It makes very little sense why he was killed.

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:What if, e.g., Sunshine + Gasoline's secret is that night powers targeting one will affect both of them?

Or if something in Mladic role (I believe he is probably the mafia insanifier) says "if you target one of a btsc pair it affects both of them" or something along those lines?

Possible.

Here's why I bring it up, before anybody asks:

-JJJ and golden both seem good to me

-that means if there is a civ insanifier role they maybe used their power irresponsibly last night, BUT the alternate possibility exists that there is no civ who can insanify

-I believe if Mladic's role was simply "can insanify 1 player each night" then it would be listed visibly like Storm's silence, so it must be more complicated than that

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:What if, e.g., Sunshine + Gasoline's secret is that night powers targeting one will affect both of them?

Or if something in Mladic role (I believe he is probably the mafia insanifier) says "if you target one of a btsc pair it affects both of them" or something along those lines?

Maybe. I feel like we need more time and evidence to confirm or deny this though.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Wow, I missed a lot in a mere 1-2 hours.

What's the scoop?

I've killed Rainbow Raider MP.

sig wrote:What I'm talking about is simple? I can ISO people in this amount of time and do a quick skim sure, but it isn't like I'm going to have the time to build a proper case. Therefore at this stage it makes more sense for me to review the preexisting cases and if I feel one is very wrong vote against it. Besides I generally strongly dislike CFDs and I'd be trying to make one if I built a case at this point.

This is my fault I thought I had another 24 hours left in this phase, so I did goof here.

sig wrote:Also moving over to boom I don't like the case on Wilgy or Mp's last minute switch

sig wrote:So quick thing before the phase ends, MP trying to turn it over to Scotty is odd, I don't know if this was an attempt at anything or not, but I disliked it.

linki: Ah okay so off the top of my head I suspect and plan to look into MM, Dom, and Scotty. I also kind off suspect you and Epi, but that is mainly tinfoiling I think.

I don't see the case on Boom, but I think the case on Boom is better then voting wilgy since Sloonie was silenced and since he voted for Epi?

Sloonei wrote:I probably would have been on the Wilgy train, but I am also compelled by what I've seen said about Boomslang. I do not get his thought process RE: timmer, and I've still seen nothing from timmer that merits serious suspicion.

MovingPictures07 wrote:It's clear that I need to keep my emotions out of this game as much as possible. I'll be ISOing folks late tonight.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:Yeah, this. I would be shocked if sig wasn't bad at this point.

Golden wrote:Thank goodness I can talk normally again.

1) Epi just played PoE very well. I don't know why people (eg Dom) would say he is showing its flaws. It also paints his comment about MP from day one in another light. He is giving legitimate reasons for people to be town, and they are legitimately good reasons, they aren't just crap, and epi was suspicious of MP saying he was playing a PoE strategy but not taking his 'reason why inh is town' on board. I voted for epi briefly because I didn't like what felt like a complete lack of effort to try to engage with me or understand me (that continued throughout). But, epi is now probably my strongest town read when all is said and done. He warded me off voting AP and boomslang because, he was right, they didn't belong in a "PoE" because there were legitimately good reasons why their behaviour didn't mesh with what is bad.

Sorry for not responding. I felt like I had enough coals to the fire that I wasn't able to adequately see and/or address what was going on there during this phase. I will work harder on that going forward though.

I will say that I do agree that Epig did not make an effort to engage or put any ideas forth. Just to criticize decisions that were being discussed and made, and even openly refused to share a certain thought he had. Does not look good for him right now to me.

2) I think Epi is wrong about MP, though. But also a little disappointed MP made no real effort to understand or engage me. The only person who did was scotty. He gave me an in to be a little understood, and yet still people essentially ignored and chose not to engage with me. I think that looks real good on scotty.

I still have a slightly bad read on Scotty. But I feel like I can't address this properly yet because I do not have a read on you at all in this game yet.

3) I also think that epi's reasoning for AP is ok, but not a slam dunk. Trice said it well. There are three baddies, and the idea that APs voice would decide who was killed doesn't mesh for me. In fact, killing vomps and then moaning about load players is a good way to 'clear yourself'.

True. Killing a low poster and then bemoaning people posting so much would definitely be a way to not be tagged as being bad.

4) I don't believe Jay was faking. But I don't know for sure. I would never 'fake a curse', and I don't believe Jay would either. FAR too restrictive for such high posters. MP isn't a good barometer for what high posters would bring on themselves, because he's a suicidal moron. I always screw up curses, and so have to suffer the consequences. If I was bad and had the ability to curse someone within the time, I might consider REALLY cursing myself or someone in my team though. And I think town cursers are entirely possible. I don't assume that Jay is good just because he was cursed. But I very much doubt the curse was fake.

Agree fully with this. But that also begs the question: Do we think a baddie cursed a teammate in this last phase? Because right now I'm leaning no on that one. Unless we have a baddie team that is really brazen and willing to take huge chances early on.

5) @boom - I do not feel like I've taken any heat (the rants weren't people trying to vote for me, just bitching about me generally), but thanks for explaining what you meant - it checks out for me.

Can't agree on Boom yet. I need to hear what he says in his defense before I judge him any further.

Golden wrote:Sig looks scummy as all fuck therefore sig is good.