The Syndicate

nijuukyugou wrote:My apologies - I've been busier/more tired than I thought the past two days, and am currently out enjoying tasty Mediterranean, so haven't had time to do the insightful investigation I wanted, nor do I have it now. Gonna vote JJJ because he's tricky and reactions to said vote may give me good insight/info. May the reactions commence!

Back to foods now.

nijuukyugou wrote:I agree with this today - I can at least vouch for the busy-ness as defense.

I've gotta do a thing for work for the next (hopefully NOT!) two hours, starting in the next 8 minutes, so I gotta vote. I also don't like the trains going on so far - votes for A Person, what I noticed, are either for being inactive or for a comment about "killing off the actives," which I took as a joke. Not good baddie hunting, IMO. The others with votes? Not feeling strongly enough about any of them to go their way, although I'd really like to take a look at slippery JJJ again, especially when he's not cursed/"cursed."

Anyway, going off my pathetic ISO (but at least it was an ISO of some sort), I'm going to vote Scotty (tough call with Wilgy in there, too). People keep mentioning that his vote for Epi was suspicious, but not acting on it, so I suppose I'll do it.

Now, time to monitor fundraising!

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.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Some beefs with the Epignosis of Day 2:

Epignosis wrote:The Golden Curse is Specific, While the Jagged Curse Would Require Wording That I Don't Believe Someone With Such a Power Would Use

What wording is this and would wouldn't someone with such a power use it? This would appear central to your assertions that I might be faking my curse, but I have no idea what it refers to.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:nijuukyugou, both of your votes on the first two days have landed on outlier wagons which were unlikely to develop into lynches.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:nijuukyugou, both of your votes on the first two days have landed on outlier wagons which were unlikely to develop into lynches.

I disagree with this assessment on both accounts.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I am more inclined to agree with Epignosis on the matter of Boomslang. I think there's a logical problem with his timmer vote that he should talk about, but there's the rub. When I look at the Boomslang controversy, my judgment veers toward that matter of logic -- is it truly damning for a player to make a logical misstep, and which alignment is more proned to making those? I don't know that there's a reliable correlation between being bad and being illogical. If anything there may be a negative correlation.

Boomslang, at your earliest convenience please discuss your current reads on timmer and MM, and describe where your head was at when you made your last post on Day 2.

Boomslang wrote:I seriously doubted that timmer would actually get lynched in the phase.

triceratopzeuhl wrote: One possible reason I can see for boomslang to vote timmer is if they are teammates, he knows timmer is unlikely to lynched, and wants to dissociate with him.

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

Boomslang wrote:I seriously doubted that timmer would actually get lynched in the phase.

still doesn't rule out

triceratopzeuhl wrote: One possible reason I can see for boomslang to vote timmer is if they are teammates, he knows timmer is unlikely to lynched, and wants to dissociate with him.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:nijuukyugou, both of your votes on the first two days have landed on outlier wagons which were unlikely to develop into lynches.

I disagree with this assessment on both accounts.

Okay. What is your read on the ninja?

MovingPictures07 wrote:Busier than I expected, my ISO analyses and further posts will have to wait for now.

Hopefully I don't get killed/silenced/insanified.

Epignosis wrote:

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

Boomslang wrote:I seriously doubted that timmer would actually get lynched in the phase.

still doesn't rule out

triceratopzeuhl wrote: One possible reason I can see for boomslang to vote timmer is if they are teammates, he knows timmer is unlikely to lynched, and wants to dissociate with him.

And What Would Rule That Out?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:nijuukyugou, both of your votes on the first two days have landed on outlier wagons which were unlikely to develop into lynches.

I disagree with this assessment on both accounts.

Okay. What is your read on the ninja?

Boomslang wrote:RIP Wilgy, and what a crazy Day 2.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I am more inclined to agree with Epignosis on the matter of Boomslang. I think there's a logical problem with his timmer vote that he should talk about, but there's the rub. When I look at the Boomslang controversy, my judgment veers toward that matter of logic -- is it truly damning for a player to make a logical misstep, and which alignment is more proned to making those? I don't know that there's a reliable correlation between being bad and being illogical. If anything there may be a negative correlation.

Boomslang, at your earliest convenience please discuss your current reads on timmer and MM, and describe where your head was at when you made your last post on Day 2.

Honestly, my vote was a logical misstep. "Where my head was at" was a place of sheer panic/preoccupation; I'd just come off a five-hour internship block, was about to head on an hour drive to an hour-plus-long job interview (that I'd just landed the day before and stayed up late preparing for), and at the time was changing into a suit. I didn't have the time or mental capacity to think clearly about my post or vote. I voted timmer out of some fuzzy train of thought relating him, MM, and me and wanting to see what happened after that vote. I seriously doubted that timmer would actually get lynched in the phase. You can believe me or not for this explanation; unlike Hillary Clinton, I can post time-stamped emails if you want them.

That being said, I think we can still gain some info from the debacle. MM immediately abandoning his timmer vote to vote me looks bad. If he truly believed in the timmer case, why would he abandon it instead of trying to recruit more people to the vote? Timmer seemed suitably confused/angry about a vote that was, as I've said, mostly illogical; he then tried to rationalize the vote after the emotional energy subsided. That reads very authentic to me. So I'll stop beating that horse for now.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Why do you think neither of those two options would have developed into a lynch?

Ricochet wrote:

Day 2: Like a Disease, He Comes to Me. Like a Disease, I Went to Him. (Antibacterial)

Spoiler: show

Metalmarsh89 wrote: You acknowledge that your vote was a logical misstep. Why do you suspect me for voting you as a result?

Boomslang wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote: You acknowledge that your vote was a logical misstep. Why do you suspect me for voting you as a result?

Because, as JJJ pointed out, me being illogical doesn't necessarily mean I'm bad. And the suspicion arises more from you switching your previously committed timmer vote to me. If you believed in timmer as a target, why not take my vote support, regardless of whether I had a good reason for voting?

Also, let's dance *votes Hotel2Tango*

Scotty wrote:Looks like no one died?

Golden wrote:

Scotty wrote:Looks like no one died?

That's all I can get out of it as well.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Rico:

Must the baddies send night actions individually or can they send them as a team?

Ricochet wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Rico:

Must the baddies send night actions individually or can they send them as a team?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Fine.

The only player on the roster I think would fail to send a kill is A Person, and I'm not even sure he would. I think it's more likely something else happened.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I feel differently about you now

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Golden, let's talk about the ninja. You said she appears solvey; what are the posts she's made that have given you that impression?

nijuukyugou wrote:I'm gonna start with ISO'ing Epi votes, since I didn't even know that was a train (shows how much I've been paying attention, lol) and it stands out to me because of that reason (unexpected). It's probably all I'll be able to get through for tonight, but it's a start, I suppose.

LoRab wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

LoRab wrote:Frig. Totally thought the vote ended tomorrow. I seriously need to get my head in this game. Also frig to the result. Didn't really get the INH case, and probably woudn't have voted there (especially after being so wrong about him last game)--not a judgement necessarily against those who voted him, just my own opinion of him. He's an easy false case. So, yeah. Meh.

In case I'm about to end up dead, I want to clarify why I've been intermittently grilling LoRab tonight. The first couple sentences (underlined) suggest to me that she is not caught up or fully involved in this game, but then in the middle portion (italics) she condemns the case against INH as one she would not have supported.

By no means is it impossible for her to have enough of a footing in this game to have gathered some understanding of the reasons people gave to vote for INH, but the contrast from "I am out of the loop" to "that was a bad lynch which I would not have participated in" was something that stood out to me.

You could have just asked.

I got online. I realized I missed the vote. I read all the posts since my last post. I posted. Yes, I'm still getting into the game and I still never read those 5 pages from the other day. But I read from yesterday which had I had stuff that I had an opinion on while I was reading it and then saw the lunch result when I got to it.

I think you are trying to see my posts through a false lens. I am not bad. I just am not entirely into the game yet. I have a few opinions, but I'm still getting there.

I shared one opinion and you apparently suspect me for it. So, what's my motivation to tell you more opinions exactly?

Also, my other opinions are of folks who I feel are probably civ and I don't psrtocularly want to help the mafia by sharing that. I don't have any glaring suspicions st this point. I want to reread inh's suspects.

Golden wrote:This post, in particular, shows a particularly good mindset for somebody who is doing their best to solve with the limited time they have (and it's worth noting, it wasn't lip service - she followed through).

nijuukyugou wrote:I'm gonna start with ISO'ing Epi votes, since I didn't even know that was a train (shows how much I've been paying attention, lol) and it stands out to me because of that reason (unexpected). It's probably all I'll be able to get through for tonight, but it's a start, I suppose.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I feel differently about you now

Why?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I feel differently about you now

Why?

Why indeed.

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

timmer wrote:Wow, of all the days for me to be screwed by traveling.

So... two theories.

One, my Sig hunch from Day 0/1 may be true. His late actions were scummy as hell.

Two, MM is bad and we may have a vote forcer. This is a big hunch, but there is something so freaking odd about Boomslang's vote on me. It makes no sense. But we have bad guys whose role secrets are unknown. And MM introduced a VERY bizarre notion about me being bad simply because I showed up and posted when I did. I could TOTALLY see him, having introduced this nutty idea about me and Boomslang being bad because of when I posted so that he could then dick us around by forcing Boomslang to vote for me. MM would do this.

For now, I'm needing to look more into sig as I don't like how this ended. Also at the rest of the Boomslang voters, as his vote to me doesn't sound like a real baddie slip-up.

But MM? I got my on you, broth. Discuss

Boomslang's vote does not appear to be forced. He's been expressing suspicion of you going back to Day 1, I believe. You are right that his vote makes no sense though.

No, as far as I can tell boomslang has only ever said he thought timmer was good. Even in his own vote for timmer yesterday he didn't say he thought timmer was bad (or any reason deeper than "I think it would at least yield info on MM")

Sloonei wrote:Anyone who's here or is going to stop by during the night: Tell me a player you'd like to put more focus on for Day 3, and why?

I think I notice both dom and epignosis doing this thing where they will throw out a claim or accusation, then ignore any replies to it. Epi has done it to me at least twice. Dom might just be having trouble keeping track because most of his posts are full of quotes.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I feel differently about you now

Why?

Why indeed.

Sloonei wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I feel differently about you now

Why?

Why indeed.

Who's your strongest scum read?

Sloonei wrote:What's my townie status like right now? Do we all think I'm a Good Safe & Trusted Townie because I was silenced, or do we think I was pulling a gambit by faking my own silence?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:timmer

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I feel differently about you now

Why?

Why indeed.

Who's your strongest scum read?

timmer

nijuu, MP, and sig fall in the slight scumread category.

Golden and Jay fall in the tinfoil/Ineedlesscurseythingstojudge category, along with you.

I won't be voting for Epignosis, A Person, Boomslang, or Dom.


I don't have an opinion on anyone else.

Linki: Never mind, moving Sloonei to the red zone.