Murder, Mayhem, and Mafia
https://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/
They don't have to talk during the hour they are on the thread. It's like Party Mafia, you don't huddle in a corner talking to your BTS while everyone else is looking.Made wrote:Just a thought, wouldn't baddies be a sort of disadvantage having to keep up with both BTSC chat as well as the thread?
lol. We cant lynch you anyway today.Epignosis wrote:I don't want you looking at me because of consistency. I'm trying to avoid suspicion.MovingPictures07 wrote:I don't like how subdued Epig is being.
um, yes we can.juliets wrote:lol. We cant lynch you anyway today.Epignosis wrote:I don't want you looking at me because of consistency. I'm trying to avoid suspicion.MovingPictures07 wrote:I don't like how subdued Epig is being.
Oh sure you can. You can do anything you set your mind to!juliets wrote:lol. We cant lynch you anyway today.Epignosis wrote:I don't want you looking at me because of consistency. I'm trying to avoid suspicion.MovingPictures07 wrote:I don't like how subdued Epig is being.
um why not loljuliets wrote:lol. We cant lynch you anyway today.Epignosis wrote:I don't want you looking at me because of consistency. I'm trying to avoid suspicion.MovingPictures07 wrote:I don't like how subdued Epig is being.
Well, with no one really having much to go on, coming out with a ping might provoke a bandwagon. I think you should just say it, but by the time I am finished typing, you will have said it i am surethellama73 wrote:No, I don't want a bandwagon. I want people to come to their own conclusions, which is why I'm not revealing my ping yet.S~V~S wrote:So in 10 minutes everyone will rush to vote in a bandwagon? You are trying to provoke a bandwagon?thellama73 wrote:Give it another ten minutes or so and I'll tell you. I want to see where things go without putting anyone on defense.juliets wrote:what is your ping llama?
What's the point of this post?Made wrote:Strategic thoughts for civvies. While this is definitely still forum mafia, It's going to be difficult to keep up with thread as well as rereading post to develop theories, So keep that in mind. In that sense anyways, this game will probably be more like party mafia than traditional forum.
this message was linki, spooky lol. but yeah, I agree.S~V~S wrote:They don't have to talk during the hour they are on the thread. It's like Party Mafia, you don't huddle in a corner talking to your BTS while everyone else is looking.Made wrote:Just a thought, wouldn't baddies be a sort of disadvantage having to keep up with both BTSC chat as well as the thread?
I have a few I'm eyeballing, trying to make up my mind.S~V~S wrote:Well, with no one really having much to go on, coming out with a ping might provoke a bandwagon. I think you should just say it, but by the time I am finished typing, you will have said it i am surethellama73 wrote:No, I don't want a bandwagon. I want people to come to their own conclusions, which is why I'm not revealing my ping yet.S~V~S wrote:So in 10 minutes everyone will rush to vote in a bandwagon? You are trying to provoke a bandwagon?thellama73 wrote:Give it another ten minutes or so and I'll tell you. I want to see where things go without putting anyone on defense.juliets wrote:what is your ping llama?
No. I'm not thinking about voting you at this point. I am thinking abut voting MP for pretending like my idea is false even though I have reason to believe it isn't too. I myself have gotten lynched early for randomizing. I have never gotten lynched for voting a low poster.thellama73 wrote:Fingersplints, are you just pushing Alex for consistency, or are you thinking about voting me based on what I said?
i have no clue who is bad. I don't see anyone who is acting suspicious. I do not know at this point what I'm doing with my vote.MovingPictures07 wrote:juliets, what are you thinking?
How does my belief system make me bad?fingersplints wrote:No. I'm not thinking about voting you at this point. I am thinking abut voting MP for pretending like my idea is false even though I have reason to believe it isn't too. I myself have gotten lynched early for randomizing. I have never gotten lynched for voting a low poster.thellama73 wrote:Fingersplints, are you just pushing Alex for consistency, or are you thinking about voting me based on what I said?
yeah, that's why I siad this:Made wrote:Strategic thoughts for civvies. While this is definitely still forum mafia, It's going to be difficult to keep up with thread as well as rereading post to develop theories, So keep that in mind. In that sense anyways, this game will probably be more like party mafia than traditional forum.
So do you have any thoughts on things other than the mechanics, Made?S~V~S wrote:They don't have to talk during the hour they are on the thread. It's like Party Mafia, you don't huddle in a corner talking to your BTS while everyone else is looking.Made wrote:Just a thought, wouldn't baddies be a sort of disadvantage having to keep up with both BTSC chat as well as the thread?
So civvies don't get distracted rereading while thread is moving a million miles a minute. Found myself doing that a moment ago, and now i'm behind.MovingPictures07 wrote:What's the point of this post?Made wrote:Strategic thoughts for civvies. While this is definitely still forum mafia, It's going to be difficult to keep up with thread as well as rereading post to develop theories, So keep that in mind. In that sense anyways, this game will probably be more like party mafia than traditional forum.
Okay, since my ping has cased to be a ping in the intervening hustle, I will say it.S~V~S wrote:Well, with no one really having much to go on, coming out with a ping might provoke a bandwagon. I think you should just say it, but by the time I am finished typing, you will have said it i am surethellama73 wrote:No, I don't want a bandwagon. I want people to come to their own conclusions, which is why I'm not revealing my ping yet.S~V~S wrote:So in 10 minutes everyone will rush to vote in a bandwagon? You are trying to provoke a bandwagon?thellama73 wrote:Give it another ten minutes or so and I'll tell you. I want to see where things go without putting anyone on defense.juliets wrote:what is your ping llama?
Your refusing to see other sides of it makes you suspicious to me.MovingPictures07 wrote:How does my belief system make me bad?fingersplints wrote:No. I'm not thinking about voting you at this point. I am thinking abut voting MP for pretending like my idea is false even though I have reason to believe it isn't too. I myself have gotten lynched early for randomizing. I have never gotten lynched for voting a low poster.thellama73 wrote:Fingersplints, are you just pushing Alex for consistency, or are you thinking about voting me based on what I said?
Gerunds get me all a-tingle.fingersplints wrote:Your refusing to see other sides of it makes you suspicious to me.MovingPictures07 wrote:How does my belief system make me bad?fingersplints wrote:No. I'm not thinking about voting you at this point. I am thinking abut voting MP for pretending like my idea is false even though I have reason to believe it isn't too. I myself have gotten lynched early for randomizing. I have never gotten lynched for voting a low poster.thellama73 wrote:Fingersplints, are you just pushing Alex for consistency, or are you thinking about voting me based on what I said?
You misrepresent me.thellama73 wrote:Okay, since my ping has cased to be a ping in the intervening hustle, I will say it.S~V~S wrote:Well, with no one really having much to go on, coming out with a ping might provoke a bandwagon. I think you should just say it, but by the time I am finished typing, you will have said it i am surethellama73 wrote:No, I don't want a bandwagon. I want people to come to their own conclusions, which is why I'm not revealing my ping yet.S~V~S wrote:So in 10 minutes everyone will rush to vote in a bandwagon? You are trying to provoke a bandwagon?thellama73 wrote:Give it another ten minutes or so and I'll tell you. I want to see where things go without putting anyone on defense.juliets wrote:what is your ping llama?
It was Alex.
I no longer think he is bad though. His whole "we should look at people acting normal" thing and aggressive jump on Roxy pinged me, but then I realized that he is being exactly like himself, which, according to his own theory, means I should vote for him!
I'm not going to though.
This is not true according to what I am readingMovingPictures07 wrote:Let the record show that splints is intending to vote me because she disagrees with me, not because anything I'm doing is actually suspicious.
Carry on.
Maybe should stop posting things like they are fact when they aren't true?MovingPictures07 wrote:Let the record show that splints is intending to vote me because she disagrees with me, not because anything I'm doing is actually suspicious.
Carry on.
Oh, the irony.fingersplints wrote:Your refusing to see other sides of it makes you suspicious to me.MovingPictures07 wrote:How does my belief system make me bad?fingersplints wrote:No. I'm not thinking about voting you at this point. I am thinking abut voting MP for pretending like my idea is false even though I have reason to believe it isn't too. I myself have gotten lynched early for randomizing. I have never gotten lynched for voting a low poster.thellama73 wrote:Fingersplints, are you just pushing Alex for consistency, or are you thinking about voting me based on what I said?
Atm, not reallyS~V~S wrote:yeah, that's why I siad this:Made wrote:Strategic thoughts for civvies. While this is definitely still forum mafia, It's going to be difficult to keep up with thread as well as rereading post to develop theories, So keep that in mind. In that sense anyways, this game will probably be more like party mafia than traditional forum.
So do you have any thoughts on things other than the mechanics, Made?S~V~S wrote:They don't have to talk during the hour they are on the thread. It's like Party Mafia, you don't huddle in a corner talking to your BTS while everyone else is looking.Made wrote:Just a thought, wouldn't baddies be a sort of disadvantage having to keep up with both BTSC chat as well as the thread?
You have expressed that you have a different empirical data set than I do.fingersplints wrote:Maybe should stop posting things like they are fact when they aren't true?MovingPictures07 wrote:Let the record show that splints is intending to vote me because she disagrees with me, not because anything I'm doing is actually suspicious.
Carry on.
You said it wasn;t true and I was wrong. How is that allowing me to be entitled to my belief?MovingPictures07 wrote:Oh, the irony.fingersplints wrote:Your refusing to see other sides of it makes you suspicious to me.MovingPictures07 wrote:How does my belief system make me bad?fingersplints wrote:No. I'm not thinking about voting you at this point. I am thinking abut voting MP for pretending like my idea is false even though I have reason to believe it isn't too. I myself have gotten lynched early for randomizing. I have never gotten lynched for voting a low poster.thellama73 wrote:Fingersplints, are you just pushing Alex for consistency, or are you thinking about voting me based on what I said?
I even said you're entitled to your belief, did I not?
Both.thellama73 wrote:MM: were the roles randomized or hand picked?
Yeah, positivism boy!S~V~S wrote:There is no empiricism in Mafia
I'm dying llama.. I don't have time to laugh.thellama73 wrote:Yeah, positivism boy!S~V~S wrote:There is no empiricism in Mafia
Because I disagree, but there is still the initial issue at hand. You thinking that someone is more suspicious for posting in advance that they want to randomize over multiple people who posted they would lynch a low poster. Then you said "well lama has gotten lynched for that" but ignored that it was MULTIPLE people not just llama who suggested the low poster thing, so your empirical data doesn't even apply since its about one person not the many in question.MovingPictures07 wrote:Explain to me how that's not just "disagreeing" with me then.
How does it not apply? That's your opinion. Of course it applies. It's MY belief system.fingersplints wrote:Because I disagree, but there is still the initial issue at hand. You thinking that someone is more suspicious for posting in advance that they want to randomize over multiple people who posted they would lynch a low poster. Then you said "well lama has gotten lynched for that" but ignored that it was MULTIPLE people not just llama who suggested the low poster thing, so your empirical data doesn't even apply since its about one person not the many in question.MovingPictures07 wrote:Explain to me how that's not just "disagreeing" with me then.
Quite often that bandwagon follows on Day Two when a quiet civ was lynched on Day One, though, is that not true? I think voting low posters is lazy, and doing the baddies job for them. So I always think it is bad. Although i try to grit my teeth when Llama does it becasue he always does it.MovingPictures07 wrote:I've seen game after game when no player ever gets called out for a random vote on D1. I however have seen multiple games on this site ALONE where someone who dares speak of low poster voting on D1 gets bandwagoned. I therefore hold a belief that intent to vote a randomizer is more suspicious than intent to vote a low poster.
Splints disagrees with me.
She thinks I'm bad.
Makes sense, right?
Was eating dinner :/Metalmarsh89 wrote:Dunno. He posted 30 minutes before gametime, but hasn't received his role PM yet.S~V~S wrote:Where is Boogs?
I believe that MP is good, so I'm voting you.fingersplints wrote:Whatever. I'm voting MP.
He continues to push that his belief is better then mine because its off this site alone that hasn't been around that long. I'm basing my beliefs off of what I know, not what he thinks is true.
I'm being confrontational because I'm just being told point blank that I am wrong and its rubbing me seriously the wrong waythellama73 wrote:Nine minutes to vote. Observations.
Alex is being Alex.
Rob is being quiet.
Juliets is being blendy (which is typical of her.)
Fingerslints is being confrontational (could be civ on civ, but makes me wonder.)
SVS is being slightly subdued.
I'm voting splints.fingersplints wrote:Whatever. I'm voting MP.
He continues to push that his belief is better then mine because its off this site alone that hasn't been around that long. I'm basing my beliefs off of what I know, not what he thinks is true.
Part of it is because that is the way Alex is. Part of it is because you are wrong.fingersplints wrote:I'm being confrontational because I'm just being told point blank that I am wrong and its rubbing me seriously the wrong waythellama73 wrote:Nine minutes to vote. Observations.
Alex is being Alex.
Rob is being quiet.
Juliets is being blendy (which is typical of her.)
Fingerslints is being confrontational (could be civ on civ, but makes me wonder.)
SVS is being slightly subdued.
