The Syndicate

Golden wrote:Golden voters.

Rey: I've made my feelings here pretty clear. Rey voted for me on day one because I said that 'certainly epi wouldn't end up on my team' and didn't say to his satisfaction that I recognised this was not true (even though I did say it multiple times).

Golden wrote:

reywaS wrote:

Golden wrote:

reywaS wrote:

Golden wrote:Oh, then I'm sorry I didn't understand that a response to my question 'what is the baddie motive' was not you answering my question.

But I'd still like you to answer it.

I don't know what the baddie motive is for it. If you read my post more clearly you would see that I said that it doesn't make sense for you to think that way even as a recruiter. That is not why I think you could be bad. You do not sound sincere to me. It's that simple. Epig basically made the same argument about a different post from you and you kept trying to argue semantics with him over the content of the posts like you are with me right now.

Fine. I think you are not being sincere. You seemed to recognise my argument with epi as civvie golden just fine.

I didn't perceive the events through Epig's point of view. I read it differently that he did. I drew the parallel to his argument because they are similar. Just because I read the two situations differently, it doesn't mean I'm wrong.

Fair enough.

You are wrong, but I feel way better about you than I do about epi. Having worked through your thought process, I can understand where things went wrong and I do not think it was any intent on your part to misrepresent.

On the other hand, I think you should read my posts again and recognise that my posts about epi were (and are) emotionally charged and that my primary meaning is that I don't think epi would be wanting me recruited to his team and I won't recruit him to mine, and for this reason it is no skin off my nose to see him lynched. I recognise this falls short of the 'certainty' I said yesterday. But lynching someone who is best case neutral who I don't think will ever be aligned with me makes sense to me.

thellama73 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: What I find dubious, llama, is that you don't seem willing to grant that what I was doing was directly relevant to "detecting bad guys". I wasn't forcing Bass to "dance for my amusement" at all.

There are lots of things you coul have asked Bass. I don't think demanding reads on random people was productive at all. It just seemed mean.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: What I find dubious, llama, is that you don't seem willing to grant that what I was doing was directly relevant to "detecting bad guys". I wasn't forcing Bass to "dance for my amusement" at all.

There are lots of things you coul have asked Bass. I don't think demanding reads on random people was productive at all. It just seemed mean.

I certainly didn't intend to be mean. I intended to generate meaningful information to further my own understanding of Bass. Bass, if you found my behavior distasteful then I apologize for that.

Did anyone else feel that way? I ask because if this perspective is a trend then I'll need to reassess my approach. I don't want to baddie hunt so hard that I become a jerk.

DharmaHelper wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

Golden wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

DH: I think is playing a neutral game and was happy to vote for me a threat. I've no problem seeing that as genuine.

DH - I don't buy that you are scared for a second. It's just more bullshit. If I successfully baited an epi kill, there is no way I succeed in doing that twice.

Lets play Which One of These Did Golden Say?

If you guessed both, you are correct.

I don't think you are scared that I am going to get you killed, which is what you claimed. I have no problem believing you simply have no qualms getting me out because you see me as a threat. Those are two different things.

What is the difference between seeing you as a threat and being afraid of you leading to my death? Do you think I am threatened that you might hug me too hard?

DharmaHelper wrote:You didn't even answer my question.

Golden wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:You didn't even answer my question.

Yes I did. That's what the third paragraph is for.

Golden wrote:

Dom wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

unfurl wrote:Also Bye Bass
I think this is become an elitist game tbqh, where the people who arenot hard core player will going to be lynched, my prediction, less see in an a fortune teller

I disagree 100%, have you been reading the same thread as me? Golden and I have been in hot seats for almost the entire game, and Golden barely made it out of the last lynch alive.

Meanwhile, we have TinyBubbles, timmer, and DisgruntledPorcupine, who are recently receiving a bit of heat, but have not come under near as much fire as those who have put their words on the line and posted much more.

I think your post here trying to further the divide, making this a hardcore v. non-hardcore fest, is troubling greatly. I think players with post counts of all sizes should be eyeballed with equal fervor, not lopsided, and it's entirely why I've been defending Golden because his posts have read completely reasonable as a neutral-aligned Golden. The only accusations against him legitimately fall into two categories: (1) fear mongering and (2) belief that neutral Golden would play like a civilian.

HE SAID HE WOULD

When did I ever say I would play "Like my civilian meta" - if anything, I've said the exact opposite - that I am neutral and don't know what team I'm on and am one of the few people overtly being clear that I am playing like that. I have literally never said I'm playing 'like a civilian'.

I am, however, saying that I do not believe epi was a civ, and I would not have made my move if I thought he was a civilian. I'm not playing anti-civilian.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Spoiler: show

Dom wrote: Why the wishy-washy-ness on Bass?
When Epignosis pushed for his lynch, he had one vote, did he not? Golden was hardly in danger on Day 1.

Dom wrote:This does not address Golden's change in tone. This does not address Golden's change in actions since Day 0.

Dom, I'm confused. What wishy-washyness are you talking about? I feel I've been consistent on Bass.

I don't discount that fact; you raise a good point. Nonetheless, I've been pursued by Epignosis before on Day 1, and Day 1 always unpredictable. I suppose it's so easy for me to understand Golden's perspective because I was just feeling everything he seemed to be feeling here on Day 1 of Economics when Epi relentlessly attacked me because he thought I was lying about RL.

Regarding Golden, I do believe his tone changed rapidly once Epi started going after him hard, and I can completely understand why. I do not think Golden's change in tone is indicative of anything other than being under intense emotional fire. What do you think?

Golden wrote:Golden voters.

Dom: I feel is probably genuine, although I don't entirely understand why he suspects me. But it's been consistent and felt real. I'd like to understand what specific things I've done that have him suspecting me.

aapje wrote:

Scotty wrote:

aapje wrote:So what's a rainbow post? Other than the thing DH posted

Some would say they are posts that are outwardly supportive of Gay rights.

Do you have any rainbow posts you would like to share with the class, aapje?

Oooh I know just the thing! I'm sure some people will appreciate this classic:

DharmaHelper wrote:

Golden wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:You didn't even answer my question.

Yes I did. That's what the third paragraph is for.

Doesn't address the discrepancy in those quotes I mentioned.

DharmaHelper wrote:Why would you be a threat if you weren't eventually going to kill me?

Do you think I am in control of a nightkill?

DharmaHelper wrote:

Do you think I am in control of a nightkill?

I'm not sure how this question is relevant.

Turnip Head wrote:

aapje wrote:

Scotty wrote:

aapje wrote:So what's a rainbow post? Other than the thing DH posted

Some would say they are posts that are outwardly supportive of Gay rights.

Do you have any rainbow posts you would like to share with the class, aapje?

Oooh I know just the thing! I'm sure some people will appreciate this classic:

I will not be voting for aapje today. Thank you for this blast from the past

Rest in peace G-Man. Whoever's doing the killing so far doesn't like fun.

Golden wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

Do you think I am in control of a nightkill?

I'm not sure how this question is relevant.

You do not think whether or not you believe I have a nightkill is relevant to the question of whether or not you are legitimately scared of me killing you?

Scotty wrote:JJJ, do you feel like you would be a good candidate to be recruited? Why or why not?

DharmaHelper wrote:

Golden wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

Do you think I am in control of a nightkill?

I'm not sure how this question is relevant.

You do not think whether or not you believe I have a nightkill is relevant to the question of whether or not you are legitimately scared of me killing you?

You either do, and will eventually try and kill me, or you don't, and you'll put another hit out on me, or you'll get recruited to someone with a kill, and probably want to kill me. There are several possiblities that would lead to you being "responsible" for my death.

Scotty wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:I will not be voting for aapje today. Thank you for this blast from the past

Rest in peace G-Man. Whoever's doing the killing so far doesn't like fun.

Are you not voting him today because he's pushed your nostalgia button or something else? If it's the former, then that's a pretty weak reason not to vote for aapje.

Golden wrote:Is the day actually ending in only 24 hours?

Golden wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

Golden wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

Do you think I am in control of a nightkill?

I'm not sure how this question is relevant.

You do not think whether or not you believe I have a nightkill is relevant to the question of whether or not you are legitimately scared of me killing you?

You either do, and will eventually try and kill me, or you don't, and you'll put another hit out on me, or you'll get recruited to someone with a kill, and probably want to kill me. There are several possiblities that would lead to you being "responsible" for my death.

So you are legitimately scared that if I am not on the team that killed epi, I could say 'kill DH for me', and they will?

DharmaHelper wrote:

Golden wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

Golden wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

Do you think I am in control of a nightkill?

I'm not sure how this question is relevant.

You do not think whether or not you believe I have a nightkill is relevant to the question of whether or not you are legitimately scared of me killing you?

You either do, and will eventually try and kill me, or you don't, and you'll put another hit out on me, or you'll get recruited to someone with a kill, and probably want to kill me. There are several possiblities that would lead to you being "responsible" for my death.

So you are legitimately scared that if I am not on the team that killed epi, I could say 'kill DH for me', and they will?

Were you legitimately scared that if you didn't put the hit out on Epi he would have A) Not ended up on your team eventually and B) Killed you.

Scotty wrote:Man, looks like we had very similar days. Glad we both stayed in.

Scotty wrote:You are forgetting that BWT had no votes in the abbreviated lynch so he was a non-factor after all. What about BWT's presence do you like? What does tenacity mean in this context?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:What kind of content did you see? Less? Because I'll give you that much. How am I different now? How is my driving? Call 1-800-4-SCOTTY

Golden wrote:Now answer mine.

DharmaHelper wrote:

Golden wrote:Now answer mine.

If it worked once, It could work again. You've already shown you have no problem basically asking the people with the kills to do your dirty work, why would I, how could I in good faith, assume you wouldn't be above doing it twice?

Did you not think you could have lynched Epi? Or were you afraid that having lynched him would have put a nail in your coffin?

Golden wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

Golden wrote:Now answer mine.

If it worked once, It could work again. You've already shown you have no problem basically asking the people with the kills to do your dirty work, why would I, how could I in good faith, assume you wouldn't be above doing it twice?

Did you not think you could have lynched Epi? Or were you afraid that having lynched him would have put a nail in your coffin?

OK, so you were scared of me on the offchance that I would pull the same ploy a second time and on the offchance it would work twice (note, even after I had stated I don't think I would possibly be able to replicate it) and on the offchance that if I tried it again I would choose you as the target...

What has 'in good faith' got to do with it?

What I see in your answer to my question is exactly the same as what I thought of your suspicion all along.... you are not particularly scared of me killing you, you just see me, generically, as a threat.

And no, I did not think I could lynch epi (at least not before he lynched me). As I said, when epi has done what he did in this game in the past, it has not worked out well for me. Everything I did to epi was specifically about epi, and the impact he has on games, and I don't think anyone who claims they legitimately think I might do the same to them without any reason to think it is being genuine.

Oh, btw, you didn't actually directly answer my question. I thought I should point that out, since it seemed you had a problem with that when I did it. You've actually been avoiding it all afternoon.

Were you legitimately scared that if I am not on the team that killed epi, I could say 'kill DH for me', and they will?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Scotty pings:

Spoiler: show

Scotty wrote:I'm also in the mindset of not saddened at all to see him gone. Not as a person, but as a role. You guys remember Disney's Fantasia?? Remember how much of a bully and meanie that Sorcerer was when Mickey futzed with the magic brooms? Who wants that in this game? Sorcerers can be badddd in this game.

As for Golden, I feel like if he were to stop responding to every little thing said about him his heat would die down a bit, but he has kept going, much to people's chagrin, and people are finding that even more suspicious. I feel that he's probably gonna have that monkey on his back all game until we can get a better picture of who actually killed Epi (we may never).
I have no reason to believe he is anything more than neutral right now.

I give MP credit for drawing even more attention to himself by taking a controversial stance -- that there's reason for civilian-inclined players to celebrate the death of neutral Bass. However, the people who tagged along on that notion (which might actually just be Scotty, I'm not sure) are a little more suspicious for it. MP's stance provided an opportunity for people to espouse a potentially damaging perspective: that killing off unaligned sorcerers is a worthy objective. You're putting me on a pedestal for agreeing with a position that you said you see a reason for? Grasping. At straws. You're grasping at straws. And you're also hypocritical for it. Could Bass be a potentially powerful role for the civilians? Yes. But the same could be said for baddies. If there were a gun in a field equidistantly between you and a Nazi, both being unarmed, and you had the option of attempting to beat him to the line or destroying the gun so neither could wield it, what would you do? I know what I would do.

The more significant ping here is in the second paragraph though. I don't like any of these sentences. Scotty echoes my own sentiment that Golden could stand to benefit from dropping the self-defense agenda for a while, but he does so in the third person as a detached commentator. He is calling the plays on a delay:

Golden is making life worse for himself by continuing to defend himself so much. He's probably going to keep doing that, and that is why he's going to remain a big suspect. This won't change until the Epignosis kill is resolved if ever. I read Golden as neutral. So you're calling me out on something you, again, agree with, because you don't like how Scotty is talking in third person? Scotty doesn't understand the beef with this statement either.

His post prior to this was largely about Golden and his detractors in the thread, and he really had a lot to say. He even specifically stated that he doesn't believe Golden killed Epignosis (I agree). I feel like this mindset should appear in this post too, as a component of what becomes a developed and nuanced read on Golden. Instead he offers a summary of everyone else's take on Golden and Golden's behavior in response without putting forth an original thought. This troubles me.You agreed with me once more- that's thrice in the same post- and yet I'm the one being ragged on for not having an original thought?! And if I don't repeat my thoughts that I already said in a previous post, that doesn't mean I'm inconsistent with my overall thoughts, JJJ. You remember that old Dr. Seuss book: One Fish Two Fish Red Fish One Fish? No? Well it's because that's not how that book goes. It doesn't double back.

And even if someone else stated an opinion before, why is that suspicious to agree with the thought if a) it's makes logical sense and b) I happen to agree with it? I know about bandwagoning, I know about opportunism. I can't say that I would even objectively see my opinion of Golden's innocence in the Epi kill as opportunistic. I could be very wrong about Golden- I dunno, I've never seen him mafia. But on the surface, this much effort, and this much back-against-the-wall effort he's made, including the admittance of being responsible for Epi's death, doesn't look bad, but neutral. I'd reckon he's a recruit at best, but I also don't see anyone wanting to recruit him...right now anyway.

I still have reason to believe that you would make a good recruit however

I admit that this is a complex read by me, so I invite Scotty to talk about it.

DharmaHelper wrote:It'd be like putting my name on the top of a rainbow list.

Golden wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:It'd be like putting my name on the top of a rainbow list.

Well I disagree with SVS view that rainbow lists make the slightest bit of difference as to who baddies kill anyway.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Scotty wrote:Man, looks like we had very similar days. Glad we both stayed in.

Scotty wrote:You are forgetting that BWT had no votes in the abbreviated lynch so he was a non-factor after all. What about BWT's presence do you like? What does tenacity mean in this context?

I like that BWT emerged early in Day 2 with a bone to pick. He put the work in to lend confidence that the attempt at lynching him might have been ill-advised and that he has something to offer. I thought he seemed genuine in his conduct post-lynch and didn't strike me as a baddie trying to recover in the face of immense suspicion. Fair enough. BWT seems to me as an intriguing character in that he seemed rather non-chalant immediately after the lynch, and even through Night 1, but got back into a groove, especially with that long post detailing unfurl. With knowledge that I'm agreeing with you, I like the content he's been giving of late.

Scotty wrote:What kind of content did you see? Less? Because I'll give you that much. How am I different now? How is my driving? Call 1-800-4-SCOTTY

What I hadn't seen much of at the time I posted that was what some Mafia communities call "WIM" (want it more). In Broadway your effort was fantastic and constant, and I wasn't seeing the same level of dedication early in this game. I actually hadn't realized you've been faced with time constraints until now, so I am willing to relax on that front some.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Scotty, my concern wasn't the stances you took -- it was the language you employed in taking them. I saw a detached observer more than a person making reads he can be held accountable for, something I view as suspicious. You shouldn't reduce my discussion of language merely to my mention of you speaking in the third person; that was hardly my only point of interest (indeed it wasn't actually one of them at all, it was a contextual observation within a more relevant read).

Scotty wrote:Yup. The last week really beat me to a pulp. I do hope to contribute as much as I can for the time being until it gets busy again.
But at the same time, this concept where I'm expected to churn out as much as another game really sucks. I guess I should've set me bar lower and posted half the content I did in that game so that I could come in here, get acquainted with the new gameplay theme/style, and not have someone breathing down my back for more. Real life sucks man. If I could just Polly Wolly Mafia all the live-long day I would. But my dad Polly Wolly'd for a few years, couldn't get a job, couldn't raise his son, and ultimately left. And I ultimately don't want to end up doing the same when I have kids, ya get me? I gotta be real with you man. I had a lot happen this past week that I'm not even going to discuss, but RL ALWAYS comes first. I forget it sometimes and I have been losing my livlihood in the process.

Golden wrote:I do not perceive any of Scotty's posts as suspicious this game.