The Syndicate

Mister Rearranger wrote:

thellama73 wrote:This is going to sound weird, but honestly, boo and MR are pinging me the most for saying that there's nothing useful to be gleaned from me being the one who cried out. I mean, they are right. There is nothing useful to be gleaned from that. But my intuition is telling me that they know I'm civ (or at least not on their team) and they know I am likely to get lynched early so they are purposely not going after me, when it would be easy to do so, so when I flip civ they can avoid having been a part of it and establish credibility.

I know that sounds crazy convoluted and insane, but that is what my gut said to me when I read their posts.

Would it make you feel better if I voted for you now then?

Nope.

thellama73 wrote:

Mister Rearranger wrote:

thellama73 wrote:This is going to sound weird, but honestly, boo and MR are pinging me the most for saying that there's nothing useful to be gleaned from me being the one who cried out. I mean, they are right. There is nothing useful to be gleaned from that. But my intuition is telling me that they know I'm civ (or at least not on their team) and they know I am likely to get lynched early so they are purposely not going after me, when it would be easy to do so, so when I flip civ they can avoid having been a part of it and establish credibility.

I know that sounds crazy convoluted and insane, but that is what my gut said to me when I read their posts.

Would it make you feel better if I voted for you now then?

Nope.

I'm curious to see where your theory about me would go from there; if I don't vote for you, but push a lynch that flips civ anyways, I'll still be in hot sh*t.

MrThomas voted without posting. O.o Teammate of yours, Lizzy?

But, I'm the most uneasy about Rey and MP so far.

*votes Reywas* (autocorrect made that "Feuds" at first, haha)

I'm voting for Boo. He strikes me as shifty this game.

Sh*t, we can change our votes in the lynches too? Most excellent!

Vompirator: How do you feel about participating our usual vote exchange?

johns2jj wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Hey johns2jj, did you receive anything as a result of the Day 0 poll?

Not so sure how the giving out info from pm rule applies so take that statement as you will. May give a more direct answer later if I don't feel like it will break a rule.

I PMed the host. We can discuss it.

In fact, @Epig: We can indeed discuss (any, assuming there are any) results from the Day 0 poll, correct?

Dom wrote:

Mister Rearranger wrote:After 1 full reread...

Elephant in the room: Mongoose's joking gchat post. I've been lynched bad for similar behavior, so I'm not forming an opinion on this until a response is given by Mongoose.

Players I'll be looking over again: Bullz and Rey

Players I may look over again: MP and Eloh

Feeling best about so far: Dom and (maybe) boo


EBWOP: MP, who did he vote for?

thellama73 wrote:

Mister Rearranger wrote:
Elephant in the room: Mongoose's joking gchat post. I've been lynched bad for similar behavior, so I'm not forming an opinion on this until a response is given by Mongoose.

Full disclosure: Mongoose and I are good friends IRL and talk constantly on gchat. We never violate mafia BTSC rules though and I do not have BTSC with her this game. I'm not trying to defend her, because I am thinking about voting for her today too (it is not like her to miss a vote) but I just thought you should know.

What would Mongoose gain from missing a vote?

Very good question.

thellama73 wrote:

FZ. wrote:The way I see it, people know not voting is going to draw attention to them, so scum would not allow themselves to miss a vote. Furthermore, I could maybe see scum avoiding a vote much later in the game, and having to make a really good excuse for it. But the night 0 poll? No one would miss it on purpose. .

This would be true if people behaved rationally in mafia, which experience has taught me they almost never do.

LOL, so true. This is why conceived notions of "what a civvie/baddie would logically do", "baddie behavior", etc. never make any sense.

I have to vote now.

As much as I hate to do it (because I love playing with you, MR, and it's so great you're back), I am voting for MR.

1. His "after 1 full reread" post strikes me as opportunistic and trying too hard, combined with the fact that he cannot seem to elaborate why he finds anyone more suspicious than anyone else, even after I asked.
2. His subtle pushing of Mongoose for a ridiculous reason seems possibly suspect. Even more possibly suspect is how he completely abandoned it.
3. His vote of rey, which as far as I can tell is completely unexplained in addition to his "vibe"-esque baddie read on me, just makes no sense.
4. Llama actually made a gambit/paranoid type post I sort of find some sort of value with for once! I do feel MR was specifically avoiding llama possibly for the exact reasons llama stated.
5. I really have no solid opinion or read on anyone else at this point, frankly.

votes MR

Sorry, bud, but only if you are a civvie. If you're bad, good riddance. :P

MovingPictures07 wrote:I have to vote now.

As much as I hate to do it (because I love playing with you, MR, and it's so great you're back), I am voting for MR.

1. His "after 1 full reread" post strikes me as opportunistic and trying too hard, combined with the fact that he cannot seem to elaborate why he finds anyone more suspicious than anyone else, even after I asked.
2. His subtle pushing of Mongoose for a ridiculous reason seems possibly suspect. Even more possibly suspect is how he completely abandoned it.
3. His vote of rey, which as far as I can tell is completely unexplained in addition to his "vibe"-esque baddie read on me, just makes no sense.
4. Llama actually made a gambit/paranoid type post I sort of find some sort of value with for once! I do feel MR was specifically avoiding llama possibly for the exact reasons llama stated.
5. I really have no solid opinion or read on anyone else at this point, frankly.

votes MR

Sorry, bud, but only if you are a civvie. If you're bad, good riddance. :P

2. I never pushed for Mongoose. My "elephant in the room" comment was with regards to a push for her that I already found suspect. Now that she has responded, I do not think we should lynch her or Llama today.
5. After points 1, 3, and 4, your excuse-making is kind of a cop-out.
6. A vote for me would not be wise. Funny how you're catching so much heat in the other game, because I think THIS is you on your baddie isht.

1, 2, 3, 4, tell me that you love me more.

thellama73 wrote:

FZ. wrote:The way I see it, people know not voting is going to draw attention to them, so scum would not allow themselves to miss a vote. Furthermore, I could maybe see scum avoiding a vote much later in the game, and having to make a really good excuse for it. But the night 0 poll? No one would miss it on purpose. .

This would be true if people behaved rationally in mafia, which experience has taught me they almost never do.

That is true, but in most cases, they at least try to. The only way I can see a baddie (it's going to require some getting used to) saying that, is if they are using a reverse psychology on us, thinking we would say that baddies wouldn't do something so obvious. But Mongoose exchange with Llama, sounded genuine to me. At least that part.

Hedgeowl wrote:

Mongoose wrote:Vomperdoodle - wanna trade votes?

Llama usually has the target on his back to die first, but I don't want to vote him in case it turns into an actual lynch or a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Or the winner gets a prize.
I have to go bake more bread.

You bring the bread and I'll make a pot of tea.

That seems like the only thing you said so far. Sorry if I'm wrong about this. But if it is...really?

Vomps, you utter troll. You were supposed to vote for me.

Mattmatt, same offer to you. (It's Day 1, I got nothin').

I can't believe no one laughed at my hilarious list of communication methods.

<--- Look, it's me.

Hedgeowl wrote:

Mongoose wrote:Vomperdoodle - wanna trade votes?

Llama usually has the target on his back to die first, but I don't want to vote him in case it turns into an actual lynch or a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Or the winner gets a prize.
I have to go bake more bread.

You bring the bread and I'll make a pot of tea.

I've been baking a ridic amount lately and giving the big ole fluffy loaves as presents. Right now I have a cranberry-infused iced tea.

FZ - Don't worry, she'll post, she always does - it's still early on.

How do you guys cope with two games simultaneously? Which day ends sooner. Maybe that's the one I should focus on...

FZ. wrote:How do you guys cope with two games simultaneously? Which day ends sooner. Maybe that's the one I should focus on...

There have been times where I've been in three games at once. It is not easy though.

Also, don't lynch me today, guys. k? thx.

MP's impression of MisterRearranger has added a small amount of weight to the scale, and I'm not sure I'll be back in time to vote after this, so I'm going to go ahead and put my vote there.

FZ. wrote:How do you guys cope with two games simultaneously? Which day ends sooner. Maybe that's the one I should focus on...

I cope very, very poorly. When I'm in three games simultaneously, I can only perform half-a$$. I can usually fully a$$ my way through two games, especially if one is a speed game. When I have just one game to marinate over and pour myself into, it's the ultra-a$$ed experience.

Mongoose: I know what you mean, I'm in 3 right now and signed up for 2 more. I definitely needed the practice though.

Nevinera wrote:MP's impression of MisterRearranger has added a small amount of weight to the scale, and I'm not sure I'll be back in time to vote after this, so I'm going to go ahead and put my vote there.

Well this does not satisfy...

Mister Rearranger wrote:Mongoose: I know what you mean, I'm in 3 right now and signed up for 2 more. I definitely needed the practice though.

We can always make it easier for you though.

Mongoose wrote:Vomps, you utter troll. You were supposed to vote for me.

Mattmatt, same offer to you. (It's Day 1, I got nothin').

I can't believe no one laughed at my hilarious list of communication methods.

<--- Look, it's me.

I could do in voopvoop's place, i have nothing to go on either.

I've just done a reread of the thread and am fairly stumped as to who might get my vote. I wasn't feeling good about MR and I sort of agree with MP's points about him, though I could see myself being talked away from that perspective. I was wondering about Llama a little after his day 0 comments to johns2jj (haven't come up with a good way to abbreviate that yet!) but I think that could just be Llama being a Llama.

A Person wrote:

Mongoose wrote:Vomps, you utter troll. You were supposed to vote for me.

Mattmatt, same offer to you. (It's Day 1, I got nothin').

I can't believe no one laughed at my hilarious list of communication methods.

<--- Look, it's me.

I could do in voopvoop's place, i have nothing to go on either.

kk. Voting Mattmatt/A Person before I forget to do so.

Love,

Mister Rearranger wrote:Mongoose: I know what you mean, I'm in 3 right now and signed up for 2 more. I definitely needed the practice though.

Just do the best you can, and make sure the players in each game know you are a bit over-committed so they can interpret it how they wish if they perceive you as acting differently in a game. Like me, I'm typically an analyzer and a synthesizer and I also post goofy fluff too in-between. But when I'm spread too thin, my posts come across as rushed and not as thoughtful and SUPER SRS. You probably want to avoid getting into 4 games though or that would be total meltdown city haha.

What's up with people asking others to vote for them? Am I missing something?

I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the MR vote. While I can see where MP is coming from, and some of the points I can even agree, I'm not sure I want to bet on it just yet. Is this his usual game play? I know logic and mafia don't always work, but I can't help the way I view others and the post where he says who he feels good about, who he will look at again and all that seemed legit. I could totally see myself doing this kind of summary without really having good reasons to back it up, just instinct

Bullzeye wrote: I was wondering about Llama a little after his day 0 comments to johns2jj (haven't come up with a good way to abbreviate that yet!) .

Have you considered "John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt""? That's what I've been using.

I am curious as to why Thomas voted for me. I hope he can be bothered to explain.

Mongoose wrote:

A Person wrote:

Mongoose wrote:Vomps, you utter troll. You were supposed to vote for me.

Mattmatt, same offer to you. (It's Day 1, I got nothin').

I can't believe no one laughed at my hilarious list of communication methods.

<--- Look, it's me.

I could do in voopvoop's place, i have nothing to go on either.

kk. Voting Mattmatt/A Person before I forget to do so.

Love,

Vote exchanged.

FZ. wrote:What's up with people asking others to vote for them? Am I missing something?

I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the MR vote. While I can see where MP is coming from, and some of the points I can even agree, I'm not sure I want to bet on it just yet. Is this his usual game play? I know logic and mafia don't always work, but I can't help the way I view others and the post where he says who he feels good about, who he will look at again and all that seemed legit. I could totally see myself doing this kind of summary without really having good reasons to back it up, just instinct

FZ - It's a slightly better alternative than voting for yourself on Day 1. We exchange votes - Matt votes for me and I vote for him. No harm done usually. Since a couple of people already have 2 votes each, we are probably in the clear. Mainly, it's a time-buying device as it allows us to get our sealegs a little better. I generally think stuff like this is acceptable on Day 1 when there's usually not a lot of (legit) leads, but by Day 2, I think you can usually start (or adopt or ratify) a case on someone.

Mister Rearranger wrote: @Eloh: As I'm finding out on another site in another game, "scum" and "town" are variants on our slangs for "baddies" and "civvies". I said "civ" in that game and people were like, "lolwut?", haha.

That's funny
Day 1 vote is difficult....*votes BWT*

thellama73 wrote:I'm voting for Boo. He strikes me as shifty this game.

I'd vote trade this for ease, but you already have 2. Did either of them even post when they voted for you?

thellama73 wrote:

Bullzeye wrote: I was wondering about Llama a little after his day 0 comments to johns2jj (haven't come up with a good way to abbreviate that yet!) .

Have you considered "John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt""? That's what I've been using.

I find this nomeclature a very succinct, concise, brief, and efficient abbreviation, that is to say I think it is an effective permutation of his moniker and I will wholly ratify its adoption henceforth.

(Pardon me, I've been reading Lemony Snicket and now I fear I am starting to adopt his speech meter and syntax).

boo wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I'm voting for Boo. He strikes me as shifty this game.

I'd vote trade this for ease, but you already have 2. Did either of them even post when they voted for you?

John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt did, but Thomas did not.

thellama73 wrote:

boo wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I'm voting for Boo. He strikes me as shifty this game.

I'd vote trade this for ease, but you already have 2. Did either of them even post when they voted for you?

John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt did, but Thomas did not.

I think Mr Thomas is new to mafia (can someone confirm?) so he may not know it's the protocol to do so.

thellama73 wrote:

Bullzeye wrote: I was wondering about Llama a little after his day 0 comments to johns2jj (haven't come up with a good way to abbreviate that yet!) .

Have you considered "John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt""? That's what I've been using.

I'm too lazy to even consider that, I'm afraid

Mongoose wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

boo wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I'm voting for Boo. He strikes me as shifty this game.

I'd vote trade this for ease, but you already have 2. Did either of them even post when they voted for you?

John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt did, but Thomas did not.

I think Mr Thomas is new to mafia (can someone confirm?) so he may not know it's the protocol to do so.

He is new, which is the only reason I haven't come down on him like Mjolnir.

Mongoose wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

boo wrote:

thellama73 wrote:I'm voting for Boo. He strikes me as shifty this game.

I'd vote trade this for ease, but you already have 2. Did either of them even post when they voted for you?

John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt did, but Thomas did not.

I think Mr Thomas is new to mafia (can someone confirm?) so he may not know it's the protocol to do so.

Thomas is new...first time playing.

So it is common to vote for yourself? It strikes me as something baddies would do to appear like they have nothing to hide. Why vote for yourself? Theoretically, you're the only one you could trust, so if I didn't know who to vote for, I'd randomize my vote, but definitely leave myself out

FZ. wrote:So it is common to vote for yourself? It strikes me as something baddies would do to appear like they have nothing to hide. Why vote for yourself? Theoretically, you're the only one you could trust, so if I didn't know who to vote for, I'd randomize my vote, but definitely leave myself out

I detest the practice personally, but have given up arguing about it. A random guess may yield a baddiee, but a self-vote is guaranteed to be against your interests. It has not historically been a strong indicator of baddieness, though, just wackiness.

thellama73 wrote:

FZ. wrote:So it is common to vote for yourself? It strikes me as something baddies would do to appear like they have nothing to hide. Why vote for yourself? Theoretically, you're the only one you could trust, so if I didn't know who to vote for, I'd randomize my vote, but definitely leave myself out

I detest the practice personally, but have given up arguing about it. A random guess may yield a baddiee, but a self-vote is guaranteed to be against your interests. It has not historically been a strong indicator of baddieness, though, just wackiness.

We are like the last two people who need to indict wackiness.

thellama73 wrote:

FZ. wrote:So it is common to vote for yourself? It strikes me as something baddies would do to appear like they have nothing to hide. Why vote for yourself? Theoretically, you're the only one you could trust, so if I didn't know who to vote for, I'd randomize my vote, but definitely leave myself out

I detest the practice personally, but have given up arguing about it. A random guess may yield a baddiee, but a self-vote is guaranteed to be against your interests. It has not historically been a strong indicator of baddieness, though, just wackiness.

Yeah, I get you.

So I see you chose Boo. You were suspicious of both Boo and someone else...forgot who it was. Why did you choose Boo? Are we required to reach a minimum vote or does the person with most numbers work?

thellama73 wrote:

Dom wrote:

thellama73 wrote:This is going to sound weird, but honestly, boo and MR are pinging me the most for saying that there's nothing useful to be gleaned from me being the one who cried out. I mean, they are right. There is nothing useful to be gleaned from that. But my intuition is telling me that they know I'm civ (or at least not on their team) and they know I am likely to get lynched early so they are purposely not going after me, when it would be easy to do so, so when I flip civ they can avoid having been a part of it and establish credibility.

I know that sounds crazy convoluted and insane, but that is what my gut said to me when I read their posts.

Would you say the same of anyone who does not suspect you as of yet?

Nope.

I'm giong to vote for your voter then, John Jacob whatever.

MovingPictures07 wrote:In fact, @Epig: We can indeed discuss (any, assuming there are any) results from the Day 0 poll, correct?

The Day 0 poll results (assuming there are any) may be discussed.

Mongoose wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

FZ. wrote:So it is common to vote for yourself? It strikes me as something baddies would do to appear like they have nothing to hide. Why vote for yourself? Theoretically, you're the only one you could trust, so if I didn't know who to vote for, I'd randomize my vote, but definitely leave myself out

I detest the practice personally, but have given up arguing about it. A random guess may yield a baddiee, but a self-vote is guaranteed to be against your interests. It has not historically been a strong indicator of baddieness, though, just wackiness.

We are like the last two people who need to indict wackiness.

I can be plenty wacky in the thread, but I take voting seriously.

FZ. wrote:So it is common to vote for yourself? It strikes me as something baddies would do to appear like they have nothing to hide. Why vote for yourself? Theoretically, you're the only one you could trust, so if I didn't know who to vote for, I'd randomize my vote, but definitely leave myself out

When I vote for myself I know I won't die from one vote and I know I'm not accidentally lynching a civ by randomly guessing. Most hosts penalize players for not voting, so it's a way to throw a vote away when I don't feel like I can do something useful with it.
I generally switch between wanting to randomize and wanting to self vote depending on what mood i'm in.

thellama73 wrote:This is going to sound weird, but honestly, boo and MR are pinging me the most for saying that there's nothing useful to be gleaned from me being the one who cried out. I mean, they are right. There is nothing useful to be gleaned from that. But my intuition is telling me that they know I'm civ (or at least not on their team) and they know I am likely to get lynched early so they are purposely not going after me, when it would be easy to do so, so when I flip civ they can avoid having been a part of it and establish credibility.

I know that sounds crazy convoluted and insane, but that is what my gut said to me when I read their posts.

MR apparently had no interest in responding to this (and voted without any real reasons... I'll come back to this at some point even if it isn't this vote), so I have nothing to quote and say "here's why" easily from him, so I'll go back to what I've already said on it myself.

1) You were among 3 people who took 2 votes in d0, and we know powers had no impact on those votes, so it had to be randomized among the 3 of you.
2) The only one of you (you, MR, john) who have made it seem like they got anything out of it was john, your second voter. If (and for now I'll assume it is) true john got something, then the d0 poll is probably confined to usefulness in d0, and whoever gets killed first (or NKed, or whatever other theory you want to operate under that we discussed prior to the d0 results) is irrelevant to prize distribution.
3) It makes me think the prize was based around the idea of votes being insults (the prison vets yelling at the fish on their first night), with the final vote for a person being considered what broke the winner/loser of the poll (you) into crying.
4) None of this makes me think you are civ, or john, or anyone else. It has nothing to do with alignment all across the board, and so I'm discounting d0 wholesale (as far as the voting goes) in deciding who I'll be voting for.

As for the logic of going after you (or in this case, not), your entire argument falls apart when I can just as easily argue that I or MR were (or are in his case, I have no idea) a baddie, if your eventual lynch came around, piling onto you would still be quite easy at this point. You make it sound like I have said I think you're a civvie by saying d0 gives me nothing to go, which is entirely inaccurate. I wouldn't care enough about you as a baddie to create a scenario that would supposedly help me by giving me a, "welp, I called it, that's on you guys" path to credibility, because guessing someone is a civ in the early game is relatively worthless since there's over a 50% chance of it, so it establishes no credibility by pulling that guess out of your ass, and really only actually makes you look like a baddie since someone on either baddie team can eliminate 3 roles that you are not (since you're not on their team), upping the odds of a guess that you're being a civvie working out.

Anyways, mr thomas despite not posting did turn up to vote, which means there are no fall back votes for non-players, so I need to find something else. Going to get food and then I'll be back to actually figure out my vote.

~wellfuckyouallforpostingsomuch,I'lldealwithitlater.nospacesisyourpunishment

There's less than an hour til lynch time. Would be nice to like, not die and stuff...

Mister Rearranger wrote:There's less than an hour til lynch time. Would be nice to like, not die and stuff...

Funny, I feel the same way.

And thanks for the response, boo. It gives me much food for thought.

thellama73 wrote:

Mister Rearranger wrote:There's less than an hour til lynch time. Would be nice to like, not die and stuff...

Funny, I feel the same way.

If you send me money I'll change my vote.

thellama73 wrote:

Mister Rearranger wrote:There's less than an hour til lynch time. Would be nice to like, not die and stuff...

Funny, I feel the same way.

Well, I will not change my vote to you, no matter what happens.