The Syndicate

Silverwolf wrote:If ika flips town, I'm gonna lose a lot of motivation to play. I mean at this point serge coming in here and voting him for no reason is annoying enough, but I feel a lot of the reasoning on ika has to do with his overall playstyle and the fact that he plays differently, and that just looks like policy to me which is not a good way to welcome new players on the site. I'm very demoralized by this.

Silverwolf wrote:If ika flips town, I'm gonna lose a lot of motivation to play. I mean at this point serge coming in here and voting him for no reason is annoying enough, but I feel a lot of the reasoning on ika has to do with his overall playstyle and the fact that he plays differently, and that just looks like policy to me which is not a good way to welcome new players on the site. I'm very demoralized by this.

Turnip Head wrote:

Silverwolf wrote:If ika flips town, I'm gonna lose a lot of motivation to play. I mean at this point serge coming in here and voting him for no reason is annoying enough, but I feel a lot of the reasoning on ika has to do with his overall playstyle and the fact that he plays differently, and that just looks like policy to me which is not a good way to welcome new players on the site. I'm very demoralized by this.

It's not a policy thing per se. People don't trust what they don't understand. And it's early in the game so people will vote for whatever stands out the most. It happens a lot, but I don't think anyone should take it personally. In the event that ika is lynched and does flip town, you can bet that people will remember it in future games.

Silverwolf wrote:If ika flips town, I'm gonna lose a lot of motivation to play. I mean at this point serge coming in here and voting him for no reason is annoying enough, but I feel a lot of the reasoning on ika has to do with his overall playstyle and the fact that he plays differently, and that just looks like policy to me which is not a good way to welcome new players on the site. I'm very demoralized by this.

ika wrote:

Enrique wrote:ika are you a baddie?

I wish i was. i might have more fun then

Silverwolf wrote:If ika flips town, I'm gonna lose a lot of motivation to play. I mean at this point serge coming in here and voting him for no reason is annoying enough, but I feel a lot of the reasoning on ika has to do with his overall playstyle and the fact that he plays differently, and that just looks like policy to me which is not a good way to welcome new players on the site. I'm very demoralized by this.

ika wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Silverwolf wrote:If ika flips town, I'm gonna lose a lot of motivation to play. I mean at this point serge coming in here and voting him for no reason is annoying enough, but I feel a lot of the reasoning on ika has to do with his overall playstyle and the fact that he plays differently, and that just looks like policy to me which is not a good way to welcome new players on the site. I'm very demoralized by this.

It's not a policy thing per se. People don't trust what they don't understand. And it's early in the game so people will vote for whatever stands out the most. It happens a lot, but I don't think anyone should take it personally. In the event that ika is lynched and does flip town, you can bet that people will remember it in future games.

Well considering this is how i play regardless of alignment i don't think people will be taking it into much.

*shrugs*

Golden wrote:I think its pretty telling that none of our regulars are voting ika... we are actually pretty good at giving interesting different play styles some rope.

Thats because lots of us also play in odd ways.

@TH - I'm I guess expressing my own view from where I'm up to (which is about page 15). I have found both suspect but I feel like with ika its his playstyle and with gleam it's more the actual content of the posts that I find bad, less the style. So, I guess I don't mean objective in an 'everyone should think so' sense, but objective more in the specific aspects of how gleam comes across as bad to me.

I haven't even got to a point where I understand why Epi is taking votes.

Scotty wrote:

Quin wrote:

indiglo wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Depending on how SVS responds to my earilier questions, my vote today seems like it will be coming down to her, Epignosis, or ika.

I actually disagree with you on all 3 of these vote prospects. I haven't seen anything from SVS yet that reads scummy, Epi's response to my questions has satisfied me for now, and I won't be voting ika because I think it's mean.



I was actually leaning towards perhaps a Matt vote, but then he posted this:

Matt wrote:'Sides Golden, Quin is reading funny to me. Can't put my finger on it. Perhaps an ISO is in order!

And actually Quin read funny to me too. I just ISO'd (oh man, it feels weird to type that and not say I did a Quin re-read) and something felt funny. He kind of jumped around from suspicion to suspicion, not really holding on to any of them, and deciding to change his vote when his previous suspicion didn't gain any traction. Quin, I'm not sure have a concrete question to ask you, but I'd like to hear anything you can provide as to your thinking or developing of suspicions.

Then as I think about it, I wonder if my weirdness meter is actually tweaked because you changed your vote so many times. And that all goes back to my old school ways - one vote and you're done for the day. And I gather that with changeable votes, it seems to be encouraged to move them as many times as you can, making your first few changes null and void. In that case, my not voting yet may look strange to someone used to changeable votes.


I did notice Quin mentioned Enrique, so I'm happy to check there to see if I see what Quin saw. Ah, there I do have my first concrete question for you - How are you feeling about Enrique now? And what changed/affected your mind?

I also think it's a little strange to see the Tranq NA (Night Arrest) and then immediately assume Scotty did it and is a cop, and try to push that idea. Maybe it seems a little opportunistic? Do you still believe that to be the case Quin? (That Scotty NA'd Tranq, that is.)



Planning to look over Golden's posts now to see if anything feels funny. Also cannot wait to see how much linki there will be...

Yep, tons. Will post then read.

I feel as though all of my votes thus far have been pretty well reasoned. With ika on Day 1, I made it clear that I found the initial vote for Silverwolf was suspicious, given the context of the whole traitor/don situation, but I did take Silverwolfs word for it that it was not atypical behaviour for him. My current vote is all about his tight-lippedness. Withholding information like this isn't a town-move.

I am not entirely sure how I think about Enrique, now. His actions in the thread were very fishy to me, from his vote to his justifications, but the way he responded to me when I questioned him felt good to me. I think if I ran out of options I'd return to him, but there are currently better candidates out there at the moment.

I do still have that suspicion for Scotty. People keep saying they disagree, but nobody is presenting any viable alternatives. I can't agree with things like 'too opportunistic' or 'too convenient'. There is a reason why Tranq was the target over somebody else, y'no? I've changed my vote from him on account of this, but I am still adamant on the fact that I believe him to be a good lynch. If you wonder why I'm voting ika instead of Scotty, I'd answer that it's because I don't support a gleam lynch, and I am sufficiently suspicious of ika to warrant hopping on a bandwagon. Well, since Sloonei jumped off I guess that means I'm leading it?

Careful Quin, or I might name you my biggest suspicion heading into the next day.

We all know what happens when I name someone as my biggest suspicion...

Turnip Head wrote:

Golden wrote:I think its pretty telling that none of our regulars are voting ika... we are actually pretty good at giving interesting different play styles some rope.

Thats because lots of us also play in odd ways.

@TH - I'm I guess expressing my own view from where I'm up to (which is about page 15). I have found both suspect but I feel like with ika its his playstyle and with gleam it's more the actual content of the posts that I find bad, less the style. So, I guess I don't mean objective in an 'everyone should think so' sense, but objective more in the specific aspects of how gleam comes across as bad to me.

I haven't even got to a point where I understand why Epi is taking votes.

Okay, I understand that. What specific aspects of Gleam come across as bad to you?

Quin wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Quin wrote:

indiglo wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Depending on how SVS responds to my earilier questions, my vote today seems like it will be coming down to her, Epignosis, or ika.

I actually disagree with you on all 3 of these vote prospects. I haven't seen anything from SVS yet that reads scummy, Epi's response to my questions has satisfied me for now, and I won't be voting ika because I think it's mean.



I was actually leaning towards perhaps a Matt vote, but then he posted this:

Matt wrote:'Sides Golden, Quin is reading funny to me. Can't put my finger on it. Perhaps an ISO is in order!

And actually Quin read funny to me too. I just ISO'd (oh man, it feels weird to type that and not say I did a Quin re-read) and something felt funny. He kind of jumped around from suspicion to suspicion, not really holding on to any of them, and deciding to change his vote when his previous suspicion didn't gain any traction. Quin, I'm not sure have a concrete question to ask you, but I'd like to hear anything you can provide as to your thinking or developing of suspicions.

Then as I think about it, I wonder if my weirdness meter is actually tweaked because you changed your vote so many times. And that all goes back to my old school ways - one vote and you're done for the day. And I gather that with changeable votes, it seems to be encouraged to move them as many times as you can, making your first few changes null and void. In that case, my not voting yet may look strange to someone used to changeable votes.


I did notice Quin mentioned Enrique, so I'm happy to check there to see if I see what Quin saw. Ah, there I do have my first concrete question for you - How are you feeling about Enrique now? And what changed/affected your mind?

I also think it's a little strange to see the Tranq NA (Night Arrest) and then immediately assume Scotty did it and is a cop, and try to push that idea. Maybe it seems a little opportunistic? Do you still believe that to be the case Quin? (That Scotty NA'd Tranq, that is.)



Planning to look over Golden's posts now to see if anything feels funny. Also cannot wait to see how much linki there will be...

Yep, tons. Will post then read.

I feel as though all of my votes thus far have been pretty well reasoned. With ika on Day 1, I made it clear that I found the initial vote for Silverwolf was suspicious, given the context of the whole traitor/don situation, but I did take Silverwolfs word for it that it was not atypical behaviour for him. My current vote is all about his tight-lippedness. Withholding information like this isn't a town-move.

I am not entirely sure how I think about Enrique, now. His actions in the thread were very fishy to me, from his vote to his justifications, but the way he responded to me when I questioned him felt good to me. I think if I ran out of options I'd return to him, but there are currently better candidates out there at the moment.

I do still have that suspicion for Scotty. People keep saying they disagree, but nobody is presenting any viable alternatives. I can't agree with things like 'too opportunistic' or 'too convenient'. There is a reason why Tranq was the target over somebody else, y'no? I've changed my vote from him on account of this, but I am still adamant on the fact that I believe him to be a good lynch. If you wonder why I'm voting ika instead of Scotty, I'd answer that it's because I don't support a gleam lynch, and I am sufficiently suspicious of ika to warrant hopping on a bandwagon. Well, since Sloonei jumped off I guess that means I'm leading it?

Careful Quin, or I might name you my biggest suspicion heading into the next day.

We all know what happens when I name someone as my biggest suspicion...

You take me out to lunch and we talk about the weather?

Golden wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Golden wrote:I think its pretty telling that none of our regulars are voting ika... we are actually pretty good at giving interesting different play styles some rope.

Thats because lots of us also play in odd ways.

@TH - I'm I guess expressing my own view from where I'm up to (which is about page 15). I have found both suspect but I feel like with ika its his playstyle and with gleam it's more the actual content of the posts that I find bad, less the style. So, I guess I don't mean objective in an 'everyone should think so' sense, but objective more in the specific aspects of how gleam comes across as bad to me.

I haven't even got to a point where I understand why Epi is taking votes.

Okay, I understand that. What specific aspects of Gleam come across as bad to you?

Bearing in mind, again, that I'm addressing basically only things that happened up to, maybe, the nightkill or a bit before... the two things which stood out to me the most, and almost got me to vote gleam yesterday, was that I felt he made an attempt to link SVS and DDL as teammates that seemed transparently insincere and an attempt to discredit his current voters at that time (which they were), and then his vote for diiny did not look good to me.

agleaminranks wrote:With regards to the new player thing, ika, it is frustrating. I have played a handful of mafia games here and at piano, it's tough to get integrated into a community that's had each other for a while. The Pikmin mafia I played most recently was the first game on this site where I wasn't lynched or nightkilled in the first voting period. Hence the very low post count for someone who has been here since 2013. And even so, this game is the first real mafia game I've gotten any sort of a platform whatsoever.

I get that frustration entirely. I was maddeningly frustrated for someone who just wanted to play a mafia game somewhere. But I think if you stick with the community it'll become more enticing.

agleaminranks wrote:

Golden wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Golden wrote:I think its pretty telling that none of our regulars are voting ika... we are actually pretty good at giving interesting different play styles some rope.

Thats because lots of us also play in odd ways.

@TH - I'm I guess expressing my own view from where I'm up to (which is about page 15). I have found both suspect but I feel like with ika its his playstyle and with gleam it's more the actual content of the posts that I find bad, less the style. So, I guess I don't mean objective in an 'everyone should think so' sense, but objective more in the specific aspects of how gleam comes across as bad to me.

I haven't even got to a point where I understand why Epi is taking votes.

Okay, I understand that. What specific aspects of Gleam come across as bad to you?

Bearing in mind, again, that I'm addressing basically only things that happened up to, maybe, the nightkill or a bit before... the two things which stood out to me the most, and almost got me to vote gleam yesterday, was that I felt he made an attempt to link SVS and DDL as teammates that seemed transparently insincere and an attempt to discredit his current voters at that time (which they were), and then his vote for diiny did not look good to me.

Holy hell, are we still talking about this? I said that was sarcasm. Parody. It was in response to something I thought Luffy said was outlandish, so I said something equally outlandish in return. Oy vey.

a2thezebra wrote:Fucking Xanatos.

Golden wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:With regards to the new player thing, ika, it is frustrating. I have played a handful of mafia games here and at piano, it's tough to get integrated into a community that's had each other for a while. The Pikmin mafia I played most recently was the first game on this site where I wasn't lynched or nightkilled in the first voting period. Hence the very low post count for someone who has been here since 2013. And even so, this game is the first real mafia game I've gotten any sort of a platform whatsoever.

I get that frustration entirely. I was maddeningly frustrated for someone who just wanted to play a mafia game somewhere. But I think if you stick with the community it'll become more enticing.

I agree.

Poor scotty and sig, I felt sorry for those two and it was often me sticking up for them in their early games, but they died early often. Now zebra is experiencing it. But I promise you this is a community of people that are more than just a community... here we are friends that really like each other. Even if you go down and you are town, stick with us... you'll see that people will come to love and understand your style and 'thats ika' will be the new 'thats marmot'.

a2thezebra wrote:Both the gleam and ika wagons are highly suspicious/dubious.

Silverwolf wrote:I appreciate the words of support, but the fact that "we lynch new players because they play differently" is a style here, is not really that comforting to me.

A couple of people have given good enough reasons for voting him-sloonei and quin, but others have given bad or no reasoning and this is what is very annoying and depressing to me overall and no amount of "feel good" words are gonna help, when you guys are lynching him anyway despite saying these kind words.

Silverwolf wrote:I appreciate the words of support, but the fact that "we lynch new players because they play differently" is a style here, is not really that comforting to me.

A couple of people have given good enough reasons for voting him-sloonei and quin, but others have given bad or no reasoning and this is what is very annoying and depressing to me overall and no amount of "feel good" words are gonna help, when you guys are lynching him anyway despite saying these kind words.

Sloonei wrote:Gleam, tell me what you think of myself and Matt. Please.

Sloonei wrote:Gleam, tell me what you think of myself and Matt. Please.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Gleam, tell me what you think of myself and Matt. Please.

I think it could work, your seriousness and Matt's joker demeanor could complete each other

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Gleam, tell me what you think of myself and Matt. Please.

I think it could work, your seriousness and Matt's joker demeanor could complete each other

agleaminranks wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Gleam, tell me what you think of myself and Matt. Please.

I have a highly favorable opinion of you, Sloonei. My initial conception on day 1 I think was grasping at straws to come up with something against someone who had voted against me. You've been good at stirring discussion, calling people out on challenging ways of thinking, and you've been active and useful in formulating thought processes. You are a good civilian. And I love bearded dragons and am in love with your avatar.

Matt: slightly suspect. He started this Golden train early in the game and has been relentless in pursuing it, while at the same time saying stuff that's all over the board. Then he places a vote on me and then flips around again. He's been a little more talkative lately, but I read him as someone with an agenda. In my experience, it's too early for the good guys to have an agenda.

Epignosis wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Depending on how SVS responds to my earilier questions, my vote today seems like it will be coming down to her, Epignosis, or ika.

Why me?

You don't seem as aggressive as usual. It's disconcerting.

People have been saying that about me for the past several months.

I would like to see some evidence for this. What recent mafia game did another player accuse you of being less aggressive?

Linki: Sloonei, I don't think you can use Rock and Bullwinkle as a reference point since it's still an ongoing game.

I really don't want to trudge through old games to find specific posts, but it's true.

There are multiple reasons I am not as aggressive as I was last year. In terms of time, I've been hosting for six months. I also have a new profitable hobby in fantasy NBA, which takes a great deal of time and research to stay profitable.

In terms of Mafia, though, I started trying to dial back as far back as Death Note, when I was almost certain FZ. was bad and would not relent in hunting her down. It was a terrible blow when I realized how much time and effort I wasted contributing to my own loss. That made me begin to reevaluate my approach.

One big thing for me recently was Lost Again, in which I couldn't imagine Bullzeye being bad and argued against his lynch. S~V~S successfully got him lynched and won us the game. If I had my way, we would have Lost. Again.

Another major reason I'll just mention, without going into it, is that our site is becoming too confrontational for some people, and I'm trying to make a conscious effort to avoid contributing to that. I know I'm not the only one.

If I get lynched because I'm not being aggressive, oh well.

Golden wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Gleam, tell me what you think of myself and Matt. Please.

I think it could work, your seriousness and Matt's joker demeanor could complete each other

Why the sarcastic orange?

Sloonei wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Gleam, tell me what you think of myself and Matt. Please.

I think it could work, your seriousness and Matt's joker demeanor could complete each other

Do I come off as a serious person here? That's a first.

Sloonei wrote:Does anyone who's played with Matt before want to comment on how this game fits into his meta? It's been a topic of some discussion, but not enough for me to assess it thoroughly

Golden wrote:@DDL - oops, maybe I should have used sarcastic orange so you would get the joke...

a2thezebra wrote:Both the gleam and ika wagons are highly suspicious/dubious.

Golden wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Does anyone who's played with Matt before want to comment on how this game fits into his meta? It's been a topic of some discussion, but not enough for me to assess it thoroughly

Matt's town meta is to tunnel on an idea, no matter how fruitless it is. But recently, he's become aware of this, to the point that he did it deliberately to success (ie, being alive and winning his team the game) in the Game of Champions. Macdougall pointed out, in Arkham, that he had used this strategy and now saw this perception of him as something he could use.

Matt's tunneling on me is even more extreme than I am used to from civ Matt. Even tunnelly Matt usually engages in rational discussion. The sense I got from Matt is that he was specifically fishing for others to meta-defend him.

@DDL - oops, maybe I should have used sarcastic orange so you would get the joke...

Turnip Head wrote:I don't like that Epignosis has 3 votes. I don't like it one bit

Sloonei is supatowning, which means he's either one of our most valuable assets or an undercover cop Only time will tell I suppose. He defended his Nerolunar read really well, but I don't like that he's criticizing Epignosis for not agreeing with his read, as if Nero's civvieness is obvious.

I don't really know who I want to vote for. I'm not a fan of any of the major wagons but don't have strong baddie reads on anyone.

Enrique wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:Both the gleam and ika wagons are highly suspicious/dubious.

I agree with this but I also seem to have missed the Epignosis one being a thing at all.

Quin wrote:Captain Seaweed, on the other hand ...