The Syndicate

Can't remember if I mentioned it, but RIP Made!

thellama73 wrote:Don't be sorry. What do you think of Long Con? His last couple of posts have me firmly distrusting him.

What brought this on?

thellama73 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I had to walk away for 24 hours. I suck, and I am sorry

Don't be sorry. What do you think of Long Con? His last couple of posts have me firmly distrusting him.

Then you have a knack at distrusting civvies.

It's primarily tone.

This post:

Long Con wrote:Sorry, Made, at the risk of sounding cliché, I really thought we had a baddie that time.

I PMed the host, and she told me that Uwe Boll can use the power at will, there doesn't seem to be a triggering mechanism.

We're being really crappy Civvies. I may have forgotten how to be an effective Civvie, after being Black Knight and Gollum and Miles Axelrod, and in the Monopoly game I was LMS very early on... I am just not a good Civvie anymore.

and this one:

Long Con wrote:TH, fantastic job on the Made research! That's looks like some top-quality analysis to me, and it put Made on top of my list, so I will vote for him now.

*votes Made*

Feel completely hollow and insincere. "We are being bad civvies" is I line I'm sure I've heard baddies say before, and his "goshamagolly, TH! You sure are smart! Made must be bad after all!" felt way too easy.

Combine that with the fact that he was one of the few people to get votes in before the thread was locked, and that is enough for me. I'll be voting Long Con tomorrow, but I would prefer if I were not alone.

thellama73 wrote:It's primarily tone.

This post:

Long Con wrote:Sorry, Made, at the risk of sounding cliché, I really thought we had a baddie that time.

I PMed the host, and she told me that Uwe Boll can use the power at will, there doesn't seem to be a triggering mechanism.

We're being really crappy Civvies. I may have forgotten how to be an effective Civvie, after being Black Knight and Gollum and Miles Axelrod, and in the Monopoly game I was LMS very early on... I am just not a good Civvie anymore.

and this one:

Long Con wrote:TH, fantastic job on the Made research! That's looks like some top-quality analysis to me, and it put Made on top of my list, so I will vote for him now.

*votes Made*

Feel completely hollow and insincere. "We are being bad civvies" is I line I'm sure I've heard baddies say before, and his "goshamagolly, TH! You sure are smart! Made must be bad after all!" felt way too easy.

Combine that with the fact that he was one of the few people to get votes in before the thread was locked, and that is enough for me. I'll be voting Long Con tomorrow, but I would prefer if I were not alone.

You should have listened to me earlier.

Good luck with that.

I voted for movies/IPs that I'm familiar with and looking forward to, but now I'm having fun IMDBing all the ones I've never heard of! This is the most educational game I've ever played, and the one that has most contributed to me not doing any of the work that I'm supposed to be doing. Thank you, Mongoose.

I might be looking forward to Pitch Perfect 2 the most out of these. Where is Hot Tub Time Machine 2?!?!?!

Very hesitantly looking forward to Star Wars 7... please JJ, don't screw this up any worse than George already did.

Holy crap how did I forget about Jurassic World. GIMME NOW PLEASE

Voted

Is it stiil Night 5? What's going on? I'm disoriented.

Well, it being night still allows me more time to catch up again.

S~V~S wrote:Well, it being night still allows me more time to catch up again.

You didn't miss much except Long Con turning out to be bad.

Um, sorry I don't agree there, Sparky.

S~V~S wrote:Um, sorry I don't agree there, Sparky.

That's okay. I'll be vindicated in the long run.

thellama73 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Well, it being night still allows me more time to catch up again.

You didn't miss much except Long Con turning out to be bad.

I'm neutral on LC--

other than tone, is there anything that sparks your eye?

About some things, perhaps. Not about this. I have known LC a long time, and I read him better than most. He does not have that ingratiating tone he gets when he's bad, and he feels totally sincere to me.

Linki~ I just started playing catch up. So not sure you. You?

*not sure yet

Dom wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Well, it being night still allows me more time to catch up again.

You didn't miss much except Long Con turning out to be bad.

I'm neutral on LC--

other than tone, is there anything that sparks your eye?

Nope. That's enough.

thellama73 wrote:

Dom wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Well, it being night still allows me more time to catch up again.

You didn't miss much except Long Con turning out to be bad.

I'm neutral on LC--

other than tone, is there anything that sparks your eye?

Nope. That's enough.

Well, right now your opinion is about as valuable as mine

Dom wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Well, it being night still allows me more time to catch up again.

You didn't miss much except Long Con turning out to be bad.

I'm neutral on LC--

other than tone, is there anything that sparks your eye?

I am gonna be frank, when made turned up civ, I tucked tail and hid. I had to walk away for a bit, and get my bearings back. At this stage, I want to reexamine everything. So no, not yet, And I am gonna be reaaaallly circumspect about when I do see something, and worry less about what people think of me.

thellama73 wrote:Is it stiil Night 5? What's going on? I'm disoriented.

I made the Night 5 cycle longer to get us back on a normal schedule.

Canucklehead wrote:I voted for movies/IPs that I'm familiar with and looking forward to, but now I'm having fun IMDBing all the ones I've never heard of! This is the most educational game I've ever played, and the one that has most contributed to me not doing any of the work that I'm supposed to be doing. Thank you, Mongoose.

Wow, that is super nice! Thank you for the feedback and pleased as punch you are enjoying the game!

Mongoose wrote:

thellama73 wrote:Is it stiil Night 5? What's going on? I'm disoriented.

I made the Night 5 cycle longer to get us back on a normal schedule.

Oh, there's nothing normal here.

thellama73 wrote:

Mongoose wrote:

thellama73 wrote:Is it stiil Night 5? What's going on? I'm disoriented.

I made the Night 5 cycle longer to get us back on a normal schedule.

Oh, there's nothing normal here.

Wow, how obvious and heavy handed. I congratulate you baddies for your total lack of subtlety

RIP llama! I still thought you were likely a civ btw.

I know who I'm voting for in this lynch now. Give me a bit here.

Oh, and plot twist: It isn't Ricochet.

Alright. A big part of the reason I haven't really posted much of anything is because I've been spending my available time today going through and re-reading all the posts from a few people in this game. And one person stands out to me big time.

Rather than drudge through all the quotes I could pull, I think this boils down to voting patterns mostly. So for said individual, let's look at how they've voted in every lynch so far.

Day 1 Vote: Against me.
Falling in line with the rest of the crowd. Attempting to blend in here.

Turnip Head wrote:The vote is hella spread out so far. The only thing I agree with so far was SVS's analysis of Birdy's vote for LC. Seemed like BWT was intent on voting for Con regardless of Con's response. DFaraday just did something similar as a baddie on Day 1 in the Champions game, so my vote will likely go to BWT for what feels like a drummed up vote.

I'll cast my vote now, but I'll be around til deadline to see what happens with the remaining votes, because I don't like how spread out it is.

*votes Birdo*

Day 1 Part 2: Votes MP. Says it's because of his "maximum frustration", but suggests "something really feels off about you here". Mentions AP and Vomps as well as potential vote-getters.

Turnip Head wrote:I'm still looking at you, MP. Your more recent posts suggest maximum frustration, which is a trait I have encountered in both the civvie and baddie flavors of MP, so that doesn't help... but something really feels off about you here, and I wish I could place my finger on what exactly it is.

Turnip Head wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:TH: You still around? Who are you voting for?

I'm thinking MP but I'm not feeling 100% about it. But I don't think the cases on Vomp or AP are very strong.

Turnip Head wrote:BUT if I vote MP and one of the other two is lynched and flips bad, my vote will (quite reasonably) be deemed opportunistic, so I have to consider that risk when casting my vote as well...

Turnip Head wrote:Okay, I'm voting for MP. He is my strongest suspicion so far.

Day 2 Vote: Votes Made. Says he wants "the real story" for his Day 1 part 2 vote. I won't pull all the quotes (feel free to go back and examine them yourselves), but it really feels like a good opportunity to throw away one's vote here.

Day 3 Vote: Missed vote.

Day 4 Vote: Votes Roxy. But wait. I thought you said the whole Roxy vs. llama thing was civ vs. civ?

Turnip Head wrote:Roxy vs Llama felt like civ vs civ to me. The words BR used to describe Llama - "aggressive", "flippant" - are traits I associate with Llama's civvie game. And if I were civ Llama, I would feel like my suspicions were being abused by the baddies, too. I think Roxy and llama have different ideals that cause them to butt heads a bit.

I'm curious what Roxy thinks about MM's insistence that we vote for her though.

Day 5: Missed Vote

But this here is the real nail in the coffin for me:

Turnip Head wrote:Rest in peace Timmer hope your hand feels better.

MM, we cannot look at voting patterns, we cannot look at who voted for civvies, because we haven't lynched a baddie yet. So none of those data points have enough context. That is why it's so important we get a baddie, like RIGHT NOW. Otherwise we will be flailing around aimlessly all game until one by one we're all put out of our misery.

With everything I've gone back and read, this translates IMO to: We can't look at voting patterns. Because it will reveal that I have a not-so-good one. Including 2 obvious throw-away votes.

I encourage others to do a read-through on TH. I still think there's a chance Rico is bad, but after all my reading today, I think the biggest thing I've learned is that TH is bad. And he shall be the first baddie we lynch.

Votes TH

See, there you go BWT, looking simply at voting records and not at all looking at the context those votes were made in.

Rest in peace Llama I'll miss you you crazy bastard.

He seemed to have some context; where did he go wrong?

I can respond more thoroughly when I get home.

S~V~S wrote:He seemed to have some context; where did he go wrong?

I can't remember if you've re-read TH yet or not. But I would encourage you to do so. Regardless of the quality of his response.

Turnip Head wrote:I can respond more thoroughly when I get home.

And I look forward to your response. So I can destroy it with evidence.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:Day 1 Part 2: Votes MP. Says it's because of his "maximum frustration", but suggests "something really feels off about you here". Mentions AP and Vomps as well as potential vote-getters.

I never mentioned considering a vote for Vomps or AP. That's just not true. It's even in one of the quotes you put in your post:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:TH: You still around? Who are you voting for?

I'm thinking MP but I'm not feeling 100% about it. But I don't think the cases on Vomp or AP are very strong.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:Day 2 Vote: Votes Made. Says he wants "the real story" for his Day 1 part 2 vote. I won't pull all the quotes (feel free to go back and examine them yourselves), but it really feels like a good opportunity to throw away one's vote here.

I voted for Made because, after mulling over an MP vote all day, he came into the thread with a really genuine sounding defense that made me not want to vote him. I wasn't trying to throw away my vote like you claim. I explicitly tried to start a counterbandwagon because I suddenly found myself not wanting MP lynched. Nobody joined my vote, so I guess looking only at voting records makes it look like a "throwaway vote" eh? But my explanation here is all stuff I said in the thread, so I don't know why you're ignore those relevant quotes.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:Day 4 Vote: Votes Roxy. But wait. I thought you said the whole Roxy vs. llama thing was civ vs. civ?

Yes, I said her argument with Llama sounded like civ vs civ to me. But as it came down to the end of the lynch I ended up being the only one left to vote and there were three people tied with the lead in votes: MM, Bloops, and Roxy. Upon rereading I really wasn't feeling an MM or Blooper vote, and I saw a few small things in some of Roy's posts that reminded me of her baddie game, and so out of the three of them I chose Roxy.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:But this here is the real nail in the coffin for me:

Turnip Head wrote:Rest in peace Timmer hope your hand feels better.

MM, we cannot look at voting patterns, we cannot look at who voted for civvies, because we haven't lynched a baddie yet. So none of those data points have enough context. That is why it's so important we get a baddie, like RIGHT NOW. Otherwise we will be flailing around aimlessly all game until one by one we're all put out of our misery.

With everything I've gone back and read, this translates IMO to: We can't look at voting patterns. Because it will reveal that I have a not-so-good one. Including 2 obvious throw-away votes.

Translate it however you want BWT, but I stand by my philosophy that voting records are useless without lynched baddies, I've said it before in other games. You can design a narrative around practically any vote at this point. You made up your own narrative of my votes, so that definitely proves my theory

Anyways this reminds me of the infodump post that BWT made (as a sock account) against k4j in the X-men game, so I'm pretty sure he thinks he knows something about my role (because this comes out of nowhere)... but he would be wrong to think it.

Turnip Head wrote:Anyways this reminds me of the infodump post that BWT made (as a sock account) against k4j in the X-men game, so I'm pretty sure he thinks he knows something about my role (because this comes out of nowhere)... but he would be wrong to think it.

Your response sounds pretty damning to me. I think I see what you mean though. BWT has a role that would allow him to learn what players do at night, potentially. I don't know the details on that.

But what do you expect? Should BWT sit on the sidelines, or make a case against someone he thinks is bad? If he's right, this is an infodump based on circumstance, assisted by a fine move by MP. Nothing anyone can do about it though.

Or did I completely misread Howard Hawks?

Yeah but he must have somehow made some wrong conclusions along the way because I'm not bad.

I hid from the thread too, mostly out of mortification.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:He seemed to have some context; where did he go wrong?

I can't remember if you've re-read TH yet or not. But I would encourage you to do so. Regardless of the quality of his response.

i did a bit, when him & MM seemed to be discussing the same topic all day long the other day. I started again last night, and will finish tonight.

Turnip Head wrote:Anyways this reminds me of the infodump post that BWT made (as a sock account) against k4j in the X-men game, so I'm pretty sure he thinks he knows something about my role (because this comes out of nowhere)... but he would be wrong to think it.

I remember that post; I thought it was a lot more wink wink nudge nudge than this one is. He makes some valid points, and I do not plan on dismissing BWTs suspicions (or branding him a dumper) solely becasue he is a confirmed civ with a source of info. He can't spend his whole game witholding suspicions because someone might say he has info.

I have no reason to not trust BWT, and plan to reread tonight, especially with a view to your relationship to MM in mind. I think the thread was going towards MM before the last lynch started, lots of people had mentioned him, then you made the post on Made, and swayed some people. I kinda played right into that with my paranoid "lets all stick together" thing.

So yeah, BWT makes some sense, and I want to read to see for myself.

RIP Llama

Hey guys-- I'm here, but I'm going to have a busy couple of days. :/


TH-- "See, there you go BWT, looking simply at voting records and not at all looking at the context those votes were made in." was the first thing you said upon BWT's case against you. You then said nothing until SVS pointed out how poopy of a response that was. Why so dismissive?


MM-- who should we lynch today?


SVS-- if LC is not bad, can you still draw some similarities in his tone to the Monty Python game, or is that something I'm imagining? That's the reason I'm on the fence about him-- I feel like his tone is similar here. Maybe I'm misremembering or wrong, but that was my initial reaction.

When LC is bad, he has this faux hearty, hail fellow well met kinda feel to his posts, which is totally absent here.

I think of it as LOST Season 1 baddie Sawyer vs. Season 5 upstanding Sawyer. They sound different because they have different motivations. Even if they are saying the same thing. Does that make sense to you?

I want to apologise as well for being offline for more than a day now. It also was an almost sleepless night, but at least I finished writing my project - something I had to do with little experience or knowledge - and sending it,. Fortunately, the workshop is actually about doing a proper such project (they just need me to decide on a topic and send a first draft), so hopefully this will all be a trial&error thing.

RIP Llama. Don't fully understand if the Lucas part is for story flavour or not, but I assume the former.

Not sure I fully understand how BWT's role could help him find out info about certain players, either. Doesn't he simply adopt a power from the roles still active, without finding out who is using it?

Thanks for your input, BTW, btw (nice anagramming, there). If voting record is the main criteria, then I would agree TH is worth re-reading (and will do that myself) and that his remark on voting record being pointless till the point of nailing a baddie pinged me, too. However, if the voting record is the main criteria, then I also think BR and Dom are worth re-reading. What to make, however, off the case TH's built on Made? Yesterday many felt it was compelling. Does a baddie TH usually make a more purposefully convincing hunt than a civvie TH?