The Syndicate

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 1:14 pm**

Yes I did, but I tried to make it really subtle in order to avoid Epi's wrath.

I can't give any more details, but I'd look for it in the posts were I was accusing Ricochet, a few days ago. Before I did the ISO on him.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 1:15 pm**

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:G-Man may have been Bernard. That might explain why he bet his mafia reputation on Elohcin being a civilian. Just a thought.
I love how every theory regarding G-Man's alignment is based on the addumption that he cheated the bet lol

She purchases a Hustler magazine from Bernard each Night; during this time, she tells Bernard the name of a person she isn’t.

So if G-Man was Bernard, he never couldn't have found out Joey is Eloh.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 1:18 pm**

Ricochet wrote:In fact, why don't you suspect DDL for the same profiling on Moloch you said you look for: "active baddie-hunting"?

linki: I think so, too. The player who sends messages at Night never suspecting himself doesn't strike me a rule. Considering Bernard was very vast in his suspicions, why would he risk being read by never adding himself on the list?

It all depends on the timing. Bernard could have waited for the right moment to name his suspicions in order to make sure he'd only be confirmed very close to the endgame, and minimize the possibility of a night kill. It wasn't very long ago that I made the theory that you = Bernard.

Though him suspecting you this night kind of threw a wrench into the theory.

I was planning on doing a similar thing in economics, with my John nash role, but I got killed too soon.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 1:24 pm**

I am to confused to believe what is going on right now.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 1:24 pm**

EWBOP: too

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 1:30 pm**

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I am to confused to believe what is going on right now.

wut

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 2:20 pm**

What i don't get is Why MM would pull such a stunt like this if he weren't the comedian, but reading through his post, i don't see anything that seems like an attempt to be night killed. Things like talking too much at night. Hell, Gman would of made a better comedian than MM imo. IF he's Moloch, then the goal of pulling this would be to shake suspicion, but i don't feel like he had much to begin with...Gonna reread Gman's reads. maybe it was a defensive night kill?

oh and

Ricochet wrote: Night 7 you said you made up your mind who to pursue or something... Was that Cookie, since you voted her the next Day? If not, who?

Yes.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 2:21 pm**

I mean actually tho, accusatory comments at night are like the easiest way to be night killed.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 2:30 pm**

Ricochet wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:I am to confused to believe what is going on right now.
wut

I don't understand this roleclaim you are talking about, and so I don't have reason to believe that it happened.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 2:31 pm**

Made wrote:I mean actually tho, accusatory comments at night are like the easiest way to be night killed.

I know, right? My tinfoil hat theory is that Ricochet is just trying to spite me.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 2:44 pm**

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:I am to confused to believe what is going on right now.
wut
I don't understand this roleclaim you are talking about, and so I don't have reason to believe that it happened.

But DDL just confirmed he did.

LoRab also commented on it that day.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 3:01 pm**

Ricochet wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:I am to confused to believe what is going on right now.
wut
I don't understand this roleclaim you are talking about, and so I don't have reason to believe that it happened.
But DDL just confirmed he did.

LoRab also commented on it that day.

Oh no wonder, I was looking at Night 7/Day 8, not Night 6/Day 7.

I guess it makes sense. Well that narrows things down.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 3:13 pm**

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Made wrote:I mean actually tho, accusatory comments at night are like the easiest way to be night killed.
I know, right? My tinfoil hat theory is that Ricochet is just trying to spite me.

I have no reason to fear any accusations you promised in your Night post, because I am not Moloch. I can only get wary right now, instead, of you potentially trying to plant something on me, since I suspect you.

You are even mixing up your suspicions. The "clue" you said you had in your nightpost blackmail was something about G-Man's activity. But you suspect me on grounds of reverse psychology ("what if the hunter among us is the killer", to paraphrase it). That is not the same as your clue. If you are indeed genuine with your nightpost comment, it means you would have unveiled the clue about G-Man specifically regardless if he was alive or dead; if he was alive, you would have especially went ahead and suss him with your evidence. But now you're trying to make it sound like it was a gambit to make Moloch shiver, so "<insert name> who might have shivered and kept me alive, based on current suspicions".

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 3:20 pm**

Ricochet wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Made wrote:I mean actually tho, accusatory comments at night are like the easiest way to be night killed.
I know, right? My tinfoil hat theory is that Ricochet is just trying to spite me.
I have no reason to fear any accusations you promised in your Night post, because I am not Moloch. I can only get wary right now, instead, of you potentially trying to plant something on me, since I suspect you.

You are even mixing up your suspicions. The "clue" you said you had in your nightpost blackmail was something about G-Man's activity. But you suspect me on grounds of reverse psychology ("what if the hunter among us is the killer", to paraphrase it). That is not the same as your clue. If you are indeed genuine with your nightpost comment, it means you would have unveiled the clue about G-Man specifically regardless if he was alive or dead; if he was alive, you would have especially went ahead and suss him with your evidence. But now you're trying to make it sound like it was a gambit to make Moloch shiver, so "<insert name> who might have shivered and kept me alive, based on current suspicions".

Rico, what are your thoughts, just in general.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 3:36 pm**

Made wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Made wrote:I mean actually tho, accusatory comments at night are like the easiest way to be night killed.
I know, right? My tinfoil hat theory is that Ricochet is just trying to spite me.
I have no reason to fear any accusations you promised in your Night post, because I am not Moloch. I can only get wary right now, instead, of you potentially trying to plant something on me, since I suspect you.

You are even mixing up your suspicions. The "clue" you said you had in your nightpost blackmail was something about G-Man's activity. But you suspect me on grounds of reverse psychology ("what if the hunter among us is the killer", to paraphrase it). That is not the same as your clue. If you are indeed genuine with your nightpost comment, it means you would have unveiled the clue about G-Man specifically regardless if he was alive or dead; if he was alive, you would have especially went ahead and suss him with your evidence. But now you're trying to make it sound like it was a gambit to make Moloch shiver, so "<insert name> who might have shivered and kept me alive, based on current suspicions".
Rico, what are your thoughts, just in general.

I posted these thoughts last Night and so far I don't have new leads to modify them. Me not getting NKd makes me think I'm not sniffing at the wrong tree and that Moloch is afraid to take the risk that, by killing me, others will look at my list and start doing "what ifs" regarding my top suspects. Of course, the "what ifs" could normally extend to "what if his least suspects are framing this" as well - since it's WIFOMy after all. But since Cookie was proven to have resisted killing Scotty at first, whilst he was hunting her down, then finally going ahead with it when it was too late, it's an option.

As I've said earlier, I'm not opposed to MM's "reverse psychology" idea, because I'm also claiming it for DDL's activity. He's wrong about me, though. But, from my two suspects, I'm starting to be more worried atm of MM possibly planting me than of DDL keeping the distance.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 3:39 pm**

Also (unfinished post before I saw Made's question):

Tbh the only claim that I thought I saw in DDL's posts back then was his insistance that Big Figure desperately needs him lynched. But doesn't that apply to every civ and Watchmen, as well as BF's MO (planting heat on someone else to try get them lynched instead of him)? Wouldn't make sense as a claim that broad. Ok, so then I tried to translate that into "somebody desperately needs me lynched" or even more generally "somebody desperately needs me dead". There's only non-baddie role match that a "certain somebody needs dead", but that somebody is long dead, so the claim doesn't make sense. So either this is not DDL's claim that I thought I spotted or DDL planted a bluff without realizing it's creaking as a claim.

But right now I'm going to put this down as "I (still) don't think I'm seeing the claim".

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 3:58 pm**

Ricochet wrote:or even more generally "somebody desperately needs me dead".

Don't do that. I did not say "dead", I said "lynched".

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 4:01 pm**

I'll be honest though, I'm pretty impressed LoRab actually figured out my role. I wasn't intending to claim it at all, just to justify a suspicion on Rico I had at the moment.

I actually doubt anyone else is gonna figure it out. So I'd rather have people analyse me the classical way, not try to figure out what my specific role is.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 4:03 pm**

Though if you wanna spend your times reading through my posts looking for hints, be my guest.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 4:08 pm**

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:
Ricochet wrote:or even more generally "somebody desperately needs me dead".
Don't do that. I did not say "dead", I said "lynched".

Ok. As I've said, I didn't know where to go from you saying "lynched". You can't claim a role that "someone needs lynched". There isn't any such specific role that I can see.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 4:17 pm**

Well, there's nothing I can do about that, unless I want to risk a modkill.

Honestly, I won't mind if you drop this and go back to reading me the way you were. That's better than the possibility of people suspecting me because I tried to pull a failed gambit or something like that.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 4:20 pm**

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Well, there's nothing I can do about that, unless I want to risk a modkill.

Honestly, I won't mind if you drop this and go back to reading me the way you were. That's better than the possibility of people suspecting me because I tried to pull a failed gambit or something like that.

I kinda wish people would go back and reread me too. It's not like my entire game-read should be based on a single comment I made on Night 8 and whether players believe it or not.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:31 pm**

Going to work soon....can someone please explain what is meant by "reverse psychology" i don't understand how it's being used. Are we just describing someone who is baddie hunting?

Also guys, I was going to save this theory for tomorrow, but I'll play it now. We can expect a drastic change in play for the indie today and here's why: previously, the indie could genuinely baddie hunt because they needed bf and his crew dead just like how we did. Today is different because they no longer have a target, but we do. I'd expect consistancy from all players but the indie, and after rereading mm, I think that's where I want to put my vote as of now. Going to re-read Rico too because I think he might fit that bill too.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:38 pm**

At a glance(I go to work in ~ 20) Rico seems consistent..... Looking into ddl now. Also If someone could do me a solid and quickly repost gman's picture of his spreadsheet that'd be amazing.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:40 pm**

Made wrote:Going to work soon....can someone please explain what is meant by "reverse psychology" i don't understand how it's being used. Are we just describing someone who is baddie hunting?

Also guys, I was going to save this theory for tomorrow, but I'll play it now. We can expect a drastic change in play for the indie today and here's why: previously, the indie could genuinely baddie hunt because they needed bf and his crew dead just like how we did. Today is different because they no longer have a target, but we do. I'd expect consistancy from all players but the indie, and after rereading mm, I think that's where I want to put my vote as of now. Going to re-read Rico too because I think he might fit that bill too.

You're doing it wrong. I'm not Moloch.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:42 pm**

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Made wrote:Going to work soon....can someone please explain what is meant by "reverse psychology" i don't understand how it's being used. Are we just describing someone who is baddie hunting?

Also guys, I was going to save this theory for tomorrow, but I'll play it now. We can expect a drastic change in play for the indie today and here's why: previously, the indie could genuinely baddie hunt because they needed bf and his crew dead just like how we did. Today is different because they no longer have a target, but we do. I'd expect consistancy from all players but the indie, and after rereading mm, I think that's where I want to put my vote as of now. Going to re-read Rico too because I think he might fit that bill too.
You're doing it wrong. I'm not Moloch.

Do you think my theory is a rational one?

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:43 pm**

@Made: Basically saying "the person who acted the civviest among us must be the indy who blended all along" or "the person who hunted must be the indy who has taken the lead in such activities". I don't know if it's actual reverse psychology, but that's how I've been putting it.

As for your criteria, I haven't stopped baddie hunting and haven't changed anything in my play. Moloch is bad for me and I've had him plenty of times in mind when hunting, not just now. So I wouldn't say I fit the bill.

Why were you going to save theories for "tomorrow", though? Won't the game end today if we catch Moloch?

linki: I think this is G-Man's last spreadsheet.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:46 pm**

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Made wrote:Going to work soon....can someone please explain what is meant by "reverse psychology" i don't understand how it's being used. Are we just describing someone who is baddie hunting?

Also guys, I was going to save this theory for tomorrow, but I'll play it now. We can expect a drastic change in play for the indie today and here's why: previously, the indie could genuinely baddie hunt because they needed bf and his crew dead just like how we did. Today is different because they no longer have a target, but we do. I'd expect consistancy from all players but the indie, and after rereading mm, I think that's where I want to put my vote as of now. Going to re-read Rico too because I think he might fit that bill too.
You're doing it wrong. I'm not Moloch.

Russti fits your theory more than I do to be honest.

But still, I would imagine Moloch to at least try to baddie-hunt like everyone else. It's just a question of how genuine.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:47 pm**

Ricochet wrote:Why were you going to save theories for "tomorrow", though? Won't the game end today if we catch Moloch?

That is a good question. I think we should play it that way.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:47 pm**

Ricochet wrote:@Made: Basically saying "the person who acted the civviest among us must be the indy who blended all along" or "the person who hunted must be the indy who has taken the lead in such activities". I don't know if it's actual reverse psychology, but that's how I've been putting it.

As for your criteria, I haven't stopped baddie hunting and haven't changed anything in my play. Moloch is bad for me and I've had him plenty of times in mind when hunting, not just now. So I wouldn't say I fit the bill.

Why were you going to save theories for "tomorrow", though? Won't the game end today if we catch Moloch?

linki: I think this is G-Man's last spreadsheet.

Then we'd have a full day to look for a change rather than a partial day

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:49 pm**

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:49 pm**

Made wrote:
Ricochet wrote:@Made: Basically saying "the person who acted the civviest among us must be the indy who blended all along" or "the person who hunted must be the indy who has taken the lead in such activities". I don't know if it's actual reverse psychology, but that's how I've been putting it.

As for your criteria, I haven't stopped baddie hunting and haven't changed anything in my play. Moloch is bad for me and I've had him plenty of times in mind when hunting, not just now. So I wouldn't say I fit the bill.

Why were you going to save theories for "tomorrow", though? Won't the game end today if we catch Moloch?

linki: I think this is G-Man's last spreadsheet.

Then we'd have a full day to look for a change rather than a partial day

But someone gets lynched and someone gets nightkilled (perhaps), and then there are only three players left. Why give Moloch that chance?

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:50 pm**

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Made wrote:
Ricochet wrote:@Made: Basically saying "the person who acted the civviest among us must be the indy who blended all along" or "the person who hunted must be the indy who has taken the lead in such activities". I don't know if it's actual reverse psychology, but that's how I've been putting it.

As for your criteria, I haven't stopped baddie hunting and haven't changed anything in my play. Moloch is bad for me and I've had him plenty of times in mind when hunting, not just now. So I wouldn't say I fit the bill.

Why were you going to save theories for "tomorrow", though? Won't the game end today if we catch Moloch?

linki: I think this is G-Man's last spreadsheet.

Then we'd have a full day to look for a change rather than a partial day

But someone gets lynched and someone gets nightkilled (perhaps), and then there are only three players left. Why give Moloch that chance?

That's why I said it now, duh.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:55 pm**

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Linki: remember that thing where I said I won something in the Day 0 poll? That was a lie.

Why did you lie, MM?

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:55 pm**

Made wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Made wrote:
Ricochet wrote:@Made: Basically saying "the person who acted the civviest among us must be the indy who blended all along" or "the person who hunted must be the indy who has taken the lead in such activities". I don't know if it's actual reverse psychology, but that's how I've been putting it.

As for your criteria, I haven't stopped baddie hunting and haven't changed anything in my play. Moloch is bad for me and I've had him plenty of times in mind when hunting, not just now. So I wouldn't say I fit the bill.

Why were you going to save theories for "tomorrow", though? Won't the game end today if we catch Moloch?

linki: I think this is G-Man's last spreadsheet.

Then we'd have a full day to look for a change rather than a partial day

But someone gets lynched and someone gets nightkilled (perhaps), and then there are only three players left. Why give Moloch that chance?

That's why I said it now, duh.

Ok.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:55 pm**

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Made wrote:Going to work soon....can someone please explain what is meant by "reverse psychology" i don't understand how it's being used. Are we just describing someone who is baddie hunting?

Also guys, I was going to save this theory for tomorrow, but I'll play it now. We can expect a drastic change in play for the indie today and here's why: previously, the indie could genuinely baddie hunt because they needed bf and his crew dead just like how we did. Today is different because they no longer have a target, but we do. I'd expect consistancy from all players but the indie, and after rereading mm, I think that's where I want to put my vote as of now. Going to re-read Rico too because I think he might fit that bill too.
You're doing it wrong. I'm not Moloch.
Russti fits your theory more than I do to be honest.

But still, I would imagine Moloch to at least try to baddie-hunt like everyone else. It's just a question of how genuine.

Nah, Russ is consistant, busy but trying. Honestly, the more I think about the more I think your stunt was trying to escape persecution today. You night post don't make you seem like your trying to get nked to me, and you today seems very different that any other day you've played. Voting you...after reading link I anyways.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:56 pm**

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Linki: remember that thing where I said I won something in the Day 0 poll? That was a lie.
Why did you lie, MM?

Because I wanted to be nightkilled.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:57 pm**

I seem to be in quite the pickle now.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:58 pm**

MM, any other things you have done in this game with the intent of being night killed?

Do you think the way you played would increase the chance of you being killed? How?

You want to be the comedian, show your game is consistent with that.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 5:59 pm**

I'm trying to read your posts right now but it's really annoying. 90% of what you posted in this game seems to be OT. It would be easy if you had use green letters for that.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 6:02 pm**

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:MM, any other things you have done in this game with the intent of being night killed?

Do you think the way you played would increase the chance of you being killed? How?

You want to be the comedian, show your game is consistent with that.

I was a bit pleased when Scotty was nightkilled on Night 1, since he was hounding me all of Day 1.

I was a bit worried upon his return.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 6:03 pm**

I'm in a kind of complicated situation too. People seem to be divided between MM and me. I'm not sure whether I want to vote MM or not. But I won't be here by the end of the phase to throw a possible self defense vote, I'll go out with my family about 1 hour before.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 6:04 pm**

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I'm in a kind of complicated situation too. People seem to be divided between MM and me. I'm not sure whether I want to vote MM or not. But I won't be here by the end of the phase to throw a possible self defense vote, I'll go out with my family about 1 hour before.

Well I don't have any chance of lynching you now.

The best I can do is make a case on Russti or Made. But Made does not seem bad to me at all. Russti's vote today on the other hand feels less sincere.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 6:05 pm**

Made just voted, which means DDL cannot be lynched today.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 6:06 pm**

Ricochet wrote:Made just voted, which means DDL cannot be lynched today.

Nor you, for that matter.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 6:06 pm**

Oh that's true, unless there's a tie.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 6:09 pm**

What's the deal Ricochet and DDL? Do you believe me or not?

Do either of you plan on voting for me?

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 6:10 pm**

For all it's worth, you replied to my question pretty fast. It seems you had already thought of those posts before.

Anything else? I mean, I think you played a game that would help you avoid suspicions, but would also prevent mafia from wanting to kill you. Do you disagree with that?

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but there was at least one time where you voted to avoid entering Rorscrach's list. Why would you do that if you wanted to be NK'd?

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 6:10 pm**

You're my biggest suspect right now, but I think there's a very high chance you're the Comedian so I'm not feeling good about it.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2015 6:12 pm**

The problem is the others. I don't want to lynch Russ or Made today. If they are mafia, they are wolves in sheep's clothing.

The Syndicate

Watchmen [ENDGAME]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]

Re: Watchmen [Day 9]