The Syndicate

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 7:11 pm**

Golden wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Marmot voters: could you summarize your most significant beefs very briefly?
He reminds me of Dune marmot. Nominally contributing 'real reads' but it feels more like a smokescreen of playing out what Marmot is expected to do, and it feels like he isn't really reading the thread.

Plus, he made that case against me which had significant flaws but he never showed any indication that he was interested in considering or acknowledging that there could be flaws.

I was constantly behind on Day 1, and didn't bother reading everything. So, in a sense, I suppose you're right.

As I recently pointed out, I had an additional motive of trying to stir up activity. We're at T-minus 1 hour and everyone (myself included) doesn't know who they want to vote for.

I'm trying to make something happen because things had quieted down in a not-so-good-way. Don't blame me when I get mislynched.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 7:13 pm**

Unless I vote for me, then you can blame me.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 7:19 pm**

I have to be off. I'm going to check in on my phone prior to the deadline. Right now I'm not really feeling a Marmot lynch. I get the impression Golden and MP are suffering from a personal bias in that Marmot has voiced more suspicion of them than other have without the most substantive reasoning. It's understandable, but it isn't terribly compelling.

I find myself wondering something: is it ever a good move for a baddie Marmot to turn his attention against Golden in this day phase? Golden had been under no real pressure otherwise and that isn't a lynch Marmot would have an easy time mobilizing, and yet that's where he went with it. That move also increased the likelihood of Golden staying hard in his suspicion of Marmot, something I doubt would be lost on the rodent if he were bad. It doesn't seem like a sensible strategy, even for Lord WIFOM.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 7:23 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I have to be off. I'm going to check in on my phone prior to the deadline. Right now I'm not really feeling a Marmot lynch. I get the impression Golden and MP are suffering from a personal bias in that Marmot has voiced more suspicion of them than other have without the most substantive reasoning. It's understandable, but it isn't terribly compelling.

I find myself wondering something: is it ever a good move for a baddie Marmot to turn his attention against Golden in this day phase? Golden had been under no real pressure otherwise and that isn't a lynch Marmot would have an easy time mobilizing, and yet that's where he went with it. That move also increased the likelihood of Golden staying hard in his suspicion of Marmot, something I doubt would be lost on the rodent if he were bad. It doesn't seem like a sensible strategy, even for Lord WIFOM.

If I suddenly realize I'm suspicious of you, would you change your mind?

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 7:28 pm**

sig wrote:Also quick note before I go one of the top posters (JJJ, Sloonie, Golden, and MP) is most likely bad, I just have no clue which one it is. :P

well sloonei got silenced and we know for certain the silencing role is baddie. So unless it was a baddie self-silence on night 1 (possible but IMO unlikely, those usually happen later in games if at all), sloonei should be good

Golden and JJJ both got insanified, we don't know for certain the alignment of insanifiers. Most popular opinion is that there is a good one and a bad one, which would mean that somebody good thinks one of those two is bad (and could be 100% wrong of course), and the other one should be either good or indy/serial killer but not mafia. No way to know which is which that I can tell.

I have no idea with MP but he doesn't seem to have been the target of any night powers, unlike the other 3

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I decided to check my data compilation to see if I could assess trends among the lowest contributory tier of players in Syndicate Mafia games, as a way of qualifying any assumptions about A Person in this game. He has made 6 posts and we're about to complete the 3rd day phase. If he doesn't post again through the night, that'd be 2 posts per cycle. This is a statistic I have tracked for nearly every game played so far in 2016.

Alignment counts for players who have finished a game at or below 2 posts per cycle this year:

Good -- 11

Bad -- 9

Independent -- 5

This is a count of 25 players in the games I have tracked (17 or 18) whose rate of contribution has been comparable to A Person's so far in this game. 44% of them were purely good and 36% of them were purely bad. The indies can be judged as a gray area since their win conditions vary so much. This ratio is a lot closer than it would be if non-contributor alignments were arranged at random in accordance with typical starting rations between good and bad. In that regard, it means people who play like A Person is playing have been baddies more often than randomness would indicate -- suggesting lynching him wouldn't entirely be a guess.

The sample size isn't large enough to make a concrete assertion and stamp it into Mafia law, but it's enough to make me reconsider my prior statement that baddies don't want to let their team mates down by giving nothing to the game. There's clearly a precedent for that.

This is interesting, thanks for crunching the numbers

MovingPictures07 wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:I don't really care if I get lynched. I've done what I can.
I find your indifference hard to believe.
Ok fine. I want to be lynched.
Why would you want that?

maybe he's protected somehow. but I think he's just joking around

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 7:29 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
nijuukyugou wrote:Good or bad, dude, I just want to applaud this science That's dedication.
Agreed.
It's rewarding when people appreciate my work.

...yeah, this is actually pretty convincing, at least at suggesting an AP lynch is a better chance than usual mafia proportions would indicate. And again, the one piece of content we have leans slightly bad, imo.

Linki: You're awful cheeky for someone near the chopping block, MM :P

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 7:30 pm**

triceratopzeuhl wrote: Golden and JJJ both got insanified, we don't know for certain the alignment of insanifiers. Most popular opinion is that there is a good one and a bad one, which would mean that somebody good thinks one of those two is bad (and could be 100% wrong of course), and the other one should be either good or indy/serial killer but not mafia. No way to know which is which that I can tell.

If one of the two dies we should keep this in mind though, might be useful info

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 7:46 pm**

Well, I'm fine with either an MM lynch or an AP lynch. And MM did say, and I quote, "I want to be lynched." In the words of Watto the Toydarian, "We'll let fate decide."

*votes MM*

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 7:51 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I have to be off. I'm going to check in on my phone prior to the deadline. Right now I'm not really feeling a Marmot lynch. I get the impression Golden and MP are suffering from a personal bias in that Marmot has voiced more suspicion of them than other have without the most substantive reasoning. It's understandable, but it isn't terribly compelling.

I was suspicious of marmot before he suspected me. I did not anticipate he would come suspecting me. I do not feel any particular bias towards voting MM because he suspects me, because I'm not convinced that he actually does in any meaningful way.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 7:55 pm**

timmer wrote:Yes but the seems to be a move again. Ap has contributed nothing to the game. MM has contributed in a goofy way that hasn't been very effective.

If ap is at 3 votes and mm at 0, why suddenky go for him when ther is no way to say that ap is more worthy to see sick around.

It's a word time to start creating an almost tie.

Great- Let the Mafia Kill Him (Don't Waste a Lynch)

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 7:56 pm**

Epignosis wrote:
timmer wrote:Yes but the seems to be a move again. Ap has contributed nothing to the game. MM has contributed in a goofy way that hasn't been very effective.

If ap is at 3 votes and mm at 0, why suddenky go for him when ther is no way to say that ap is more worthy to see sick around.

It's a word time to start creating an almost tie.
Great- Let the Mafia Kill Him (Don't Waste a Lynch)

What is your opinion on a marmot lynch? What is your opinion on a lorab lynch? Where do you think your vote is most likely to land?

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 7:59 pm**

Voting A Person.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:00 pm**

Epignosis wrote:
timmer wrote:Yes but the seems to be a move again. Ap has contributed nothing to the game. MM has contributed in a goofy way that hasn't been very effective.

If ap is at 3 votes and mm at 0, why suddenky go for him when ther is no way to say that ap is more worthy to see sick around.

It's a word time to start creating an almost tie.
Great- Let the Mafia Kill Him (Don't Waste a Lynch)

Offer an alternative for once then

you can't just sit here all game and claim every suspicion is bad without having counter-suspicions

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:11 pm**

Epig, you are offering very little of your own thoughts which is not like civ epig.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:13 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Dom, what do you like about timmer which allows you to forgive the perceived error in his read?

the fact that i have read him civ since the beginning and don't think because people are wrong that they are bad.

i just did a whirlwind catch up.

i fell asleep and had plans tonight. i'm trying to salvage them, but

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:14 pm**

Three minutes

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:15 pm**

Mm not moving his vote to protect himself has me freaked a bit.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:16 pm**

Unvote Golden

Vote A Person

Just got to work, and had a couple things to do. Almost missed it.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:17 pm**

I hope AP is bad. It's as good a lynch as any, even though I prefer Marmot.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:17 pm**

Epignosis wrote:
timmer wrote:Yes but the seems to be a move again. Ap has contributed nothing to the game. MM has contributed in a goofy way that hasn't been very effective.

If ap is at 3 votes and mm at 0, why suddenky go for him when ther is no way to say that ap is more worthy to see sick around.

It's a word time to start creating an almost tie.
Great- Let the Mafia Kill Him (Don't Waste a Lynch)

Says the man who hasn't placed a vote yet.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:17 pm**

Oh ther he goes. And Dom ignores what is obviously a very split lynch and throws away his vote.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:18 pm**

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
timmer wrote:Yes but the seems to be a move again. Ap has contributed nothing to the game. MM has contributed in a goofy way that hasn't been very effective.

If ap is at 3 votes and mm at 0, why suddenky go for him when ther is no way to say that ap is more worthy to see sick around.

It's a word time to start creating an almost tie.
Great- Let the Mafia Kill Him (Don't Waste a Lynch)
Says the man who hasn't placed a vote yet.

And who never did... thats not like epi.

timmer wrote:And Dom ignores what is obviously a very split lynch and throws away his vote.

Yeah, I'm never a fan of that.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:18 pm**

Sorry Dom, I still have you at #1 baddie. I just wish more people were seeing what I'm seein.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:21 pm**

Day 3: A Title for a Person

Spoiler: show

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:24 pm**

: GYBE-D3Poll.png (60.43 KiB) Viewed 829 times

: GYBE-D3Poll v2.png (7.61 KiB) Viewed 826 times

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:26 pm**

RIP :\ it would have been nice if he were actually playing the game

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:35 pm**

No One Ever Listens

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:37 pm**

Epignosis wrote:No One Ever Listens

You are in no position to say this. You didn't vote and you didn't offer up a case on anyone. You can stick your thoughts-from-up-on-high somewhere else, man. This is the least helpful and the most sanctimonious I have ever seen you.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:38 pm**

give me an instance of when dom gave a shit about what other people "like"

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:40 pm**

timmer wrote:
Epignosis wrote:No One Ever Listens
You are in no position to say this. You didn't vote and you didn't offer up a case on anyone. You can stick your thoughts-from-up-on-high somewhere else, man. This is the least helpful and the most sanctimonious I have ever seen you.

I Absolutely Am in a Position to Say This: I Said Don't Lynch A Person and People Did Anyway

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:41 pm**

Timmer's Last Post is Worded to Set Me Up for the Next Lynch (Lynch to Punish Behavior We Don't Like Instead of Evil Intentions)

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:42 pm**

Epignosis wrote:
timmer wrote:
Epignosis wrote:No One Ever Listens
You are in no position to say this. You didn't vote and you didn't offer up a case on anyone. You can stick your thoughts-from-up-on-high somewhere else, man. This is the least helpful and the most sanctimonious I have ever seen you.
I Absolutely Am in a Position to Say This: I Said Don't Lynch A Person and People Did Anyway

Did you mean don't lynch A Person or 'a person' because you didn't vote to lynch anyone.

(Ps - I listened)

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:43 pm**

Epignosis wrote:Timmer's Last Post is Worded to Set Me Up for the Next Lynch (Lynch to Punish Behavior We Don't Like Instead of Evil Intentions)

I disagree. Timmer has pretty much made it clear who he wants to lynch next.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:44 pm**

You could have voted to tie the lynch, Epig. But you didn't. The chance to save AP was right there but you didn't take it. I'm not calling you bad. I'm not calling for your lynch. I'm calling your play sanctimonious and unhelpful. You cannot preach about trying to stop an AP lynch when you chose not to vote.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:45 pm**

Golden wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Timmer's Last Post is Worded to Set Me Up for the Next Lynch (Lynch to Punish Behavior We Don't Like Instead of Evil Intentions)
I disagree. Timmer has pretty much made it clear who he wants to lynch next.

Thank you.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:47 pm**

timmer wrote:Epig, you are offering very little of your own thoughts which is not like civ epig.

There's No Such Thing and You Know It

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:48 pm**

timmer wrote:
Epignosis wrote:No One Ever Listens
You are in no position to say this. You didn't vote and you didn't offer up a case on anyone. You can stick your thoughts-from-up-on-high somewhere else, man. This is the least helpful and the most sanctimonious I have ever seen you.

This, also posts like this don't help in the slightest either:

Epignosis wrote:Something Just Occurred to Me but Unfortunately For You I'm Going to Keep it to Myself

I'm not convinced epignosis cares about lynch results at all besides being able to say "I told you so" (which of course he can do if he just says not to lynch every person who gets multiple votes)

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:49 pm**

timmer wrote:You could have voted to tie the lynch, Epig. But you didn't. The chance to save AP was right there but you didn't take it. I'm not calling you bad. I'm not calling for your lynch. I'm calling your play sanctimonious and unhelpful. You cannot preach about trying to stop an AP lynch when you chose not to vote.

No I Couldn't Have...I Couldn't Have Voted at All

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:50 pm**

Golden wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Timmer's Last Post is Worded to Set Me Up for the Next Lynch (Lynch to Punish Behavior We Don't Like Instead of Evil Intentions)
I disagree. Timmer has pretty much made it clear who he wants to lynch next.

Then He Should Have Done a Better Job Getting Him Lynched

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:50 pm**

Epignosis wrote:
timmer wrote:You could have voted to tie the lynch, Epig. But you didn't. The chance to save AP was right there but you didn't take it. I'm not calling you bad. I'm not calling for your lynch. I'm calling your play sanctimonious and unhelpful. You cannot preach about trying to stop an AP lynch when you chose not to vote.
No I Couldn't Have...I Couldn't Have Voted at All

Were you prevented from saying that during the day?

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:50 pm**

Dude Just Says He Doesn't Like the Lynch and Abandons All Conviction

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:52 pm**

Not true. I can generally get a sense that you care about the civs winning, even when you shake your play up. All I feel like you care about is making others feel bad for voting the wrong way and making sure your post in titles thing keeps going. I'm walking away until tomorrow.

Linki: oh? That's interesting. .. then way not try harder to convince people? Fuck. .. walking away.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:52 pm**

Well, that sucks. RIP AP.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:53 pm**

Golden wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
timmer wrote:You could have voted to tie the lynch, Epig. But you didn't. The chance to save AP was right there but you didn't take it. I'm not calling you bad. I'm not calling for your lynch. I'm calling your play sanctimonious and unhelpful. You cannot preach about trying to stop an AP lynch when you chose not to vote.
No I Couldn't Have...I Couldn't Have Voted at All
Were you prevented from saying that during the day?

I Was Unexpectedly Tied Up and Unable to Do Anything Related to Mafia

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:53 pm**

It would be nice for Epi to do some mafia hunting, even if he's been giving plenty of insightful reasons to find players town.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:54 pm**

Epignosis wrote:
Golden wrote:
Epignosis wrote:Timmer's Last Post is Worded to Set Me Up for the Next Lynch (Lynch to Punish Behavior We Don't Like Instead of Evil Intentions)
I disagree. Timmer has pretty much made it clear who he wants to lynch next.
Then He Should Have Done a Better Job Getting Him Lynched

This doesn't seem relevant to the question of whether timmer is setting you up to be lynched next.

I asked you what you thought of other wagons - you didn't reply. You may not have been able to vote, but you seemed entirely capable of talking about who your biggest suspect was.

I'm not sure I would agree with someone who said that you are bad, but I can certainly see why people can find you sanctimonious without them having to have manipulative intent in saying it.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:55 pm**

Epignosis wrote:
Golden wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
timmer wrote:You could have voted to tie the lynch, Epig. But you didn't. The chance to save AP was right there but you didn't take it. I'm not calling you bad. I'm not calling for your lynch. I'm calling your play sanctimonious and unhelpful. You cannot preach about trying to stop an AP lynch when you chose not to vote.
No I Couldn't Have...I Couldn't Have Voted at All
Were you prevented from saying that during the day?
I Was Unexpectedly Tied Up and Unable to Do Anything Related to Mafia

Fair enough. So, you could have voted earlier, but at the moment you assumed you would have been able to vote, you couldn't.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:56 pm**

Civilians Are On Their Own for a While Because I'm Done Telling You Who is Good and Giving Solid Reasons for Each One (Going to Watch Fuller House)

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:56 pm**

Fwiw, I don't find epi's behaviour particularly problematic. He is finding good reasons not to lynch people. I agree it would be ideal if he also hunted baddies, but I think that we should also listen to his pearls of wisdom about why people aren't bad and judge them on their merits.

I could do without the 'told you so' posts, though.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:58 pm**

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I am not feeling a significant degree of tinfoil about MP, Sloonei, or Golden.
Why? That seems unlike town!JJJ.
The baddies killed Vompatti. Do you think anyone in the high poster group goes for that? I also don't think Sloonei likely pursued a self-silence on the second day, and I am fine with his content. I don't think Golden pursued a self-insanification on the second day, and I am fine with his content. I think you played Day 1 as balls out as you could, and I doubt you lost your shit as a ruse. That would have been straight up bad gamesmanship.

Tinfoil is circumstantial, not inherently necessary.

I don't really disagree with any of this, but I just think town!JJJ would be more willing to constantly re-assess.

The Syndicate

GY!BE Mafia [E.N.D.]

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

[Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: GY!BE Polls

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Night 3] GY!BE Mafia

Re: [Day 3] GY!BE Mafia