The Syndicate

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:No hammer vote.

Golden wrote:

Quin wrote:Some of my family went fishing yesterday and came back empty handed. I guess I got the good genes.

Keep this one for sockys 2017.

Also, I read through the OP and didn't get any reference to five baddies either. It's quite dense, though.

Silver Lantern wrote:I think the # of mafia thing is suspicious enough that I have no issues voting for him/her.

If we get to 6 votes on someone, the phase ends?

Quin wrote:I haven't played with hammer votes in a long time, so I didn't really think about the strategy behind it. So yeah, I don't think anybody else should throw their votes down on Dyslexicon yet. Let's discuss some other stuff.

What does everyone think about Sorsha re: my 'case'?

Silver Lantern wrote:I think the # of mafia thing is suspicious enough that I have no issues voting for him/her.

If we get to 6 votes on someone, the phase ends?

Golden wrote:

Silver Lantern wrote:I think the # of mafia thing is suspicious enough that I have no issues voting for him/her.

If we get to 6 votes on someone, the phase ends?

My understanding is that its 11 that ends the phase, but 6 are required to have any lynch at all. So we have to make sure at least somebody has 6 votes at day end. This is something we have to be careful about, because mafia could engineer a no lynch.

Fredwood wrote:As to Sorsha, the comment barely registered at the time as anything signifigant, but since it gives us something else to talk about, I guess it serves a purpose, still think it was a joke. As someone who posts a lot of jokes that people don't register I am sympathetic and perhaps too lenient in my view of failed attempts at humor.

Strawhenge wrote:

Quin wrote:I haven't played with hammer votes in a long time, so I didn't really think about the strategy behind it. So yeah, I don't think anybody else should throw their votes down on Dyslexicon yet. Let's discuss some other stuff.

What does everyone think about Sorsha re: my 'case'?

I agree that her response was fluff, but I don't see how she's 'appeasing' Jay. Would you care to unpack that thought a little?

Quin wrote:

Golden wrote:I didn't really expect Sorsha to consider the girls to be town. At this point, any argument for why one should be voted to have the map was inherently facetious.

I find Sorsha's response fair. She didn't say she read them as civilian, she said she had no reason to think they weren't. Useful pedantry. I disagree with Quin's assessment that she 'appeased' Jay.

By answering the questions the way she did, it looks like she's confirming her post to have been based on reads, which omits what I think the post was based on, the gimmick. That's the impression I get.

Strawhenge wrote:

Silver Lantern wrote:I think the # of mafia thing is suspicious enough that I have no issues voting for him/her.

If we get to 6 votes on someone, the phase ends?

I would advise what Jay advised: give Dyslexicon a chance to respond before piling votes on. We don't want a premature hammer-lynch if Dyslexicon has a reasonable explanation.

Silver Lantern wrote:

Golden wrote:

Silver Lantern wrote:I think the # of mafia thing is suspicious enough that I have no issues voting for him/her.

If we get to 6 votes on someone, the phase ends?

My understanding is that its 11 that ends the phase, but 6 are required to have any lynch at all. So we have to make sure at least somebody has 6 votes at day end. This is something we have to be careful about, because mafia could engineer a no lynch.

Yes that was also my understanding, it just seemed like JJJ was calling for a slow down, but I guess he was just saying not to pile on votes.

What's the mafia/town ratio for this # of players on this site? Where I usually play its usually 20-25% depending on powers. It's a power heavy meta.

Silver Lantern wrote:Is Dfaraday usually a low poster?

Silver Lantern wrote:

Fredwood wrote:As to Sorsha, the comment barely registered at the time as anything signifigant, but since it gives us something else to talk about, I guess it serves a purpose, still think it was a joke. As someone who posts a lot of jokes that people don't register I am sympathetic and perhaps too lenient in my view of failed attempts at humor.

That wasn't funny at all...





Just sayin.

Golden wrote:

Silver Lantern wrote:

Golden wrote:

Silver Lantern wrote:I think the # of mafia thing is suspicious enough that I have no issues voting for him/her.

If we get to 6 votes on someone, the phase ends?

My understanding is that its 11 that ends the phase, but 6 are required to have any lynch at all. So we have to make sure at least somebody has 6 votes at day end. This is something we have to be careful about, because mafia could engineer a no lynch.

Yes that was also my understanding, it just seemed like JJJ was calling for a slow down, but I guess he was just saying not to pile on votes.

What's the mafia/town ratio for this # of players on this site? Where I usually play its usually 20-25% depending on powers. It's a power heavy meta.

1) Our setups can be wildly different. For the game to be balanced you'd expect around 20-25%, but what if there are two teams, or malignant indys etc. The setups are normal more often than not but they can vary, and

2) Sprit is really bringing this set up (mostly, as far as I can tell) from elsewhere, so we have no idea of what he might do. This game set up is relatively new here (or at least could be).

Also, if we are talking about Dizzy, it's only his second game here, so he isn't overly familiar with this site either.

Silver Lantern wrote:Is Dfaraday usually a low poster?

The lowest we've got. Except maybe Vompatti.

Fredwood wrote:

Strawhenge wrote:

Silver Lantern wrote:I think the # of mafia thing is suspicious enough that I have no issues voting for him/her.

If we get to 6 votes on someone, the phase ends?

I would advise what Jay advised: give Dyslexicon a chance to respond before piling votes on. We don't want a premature hammer-lynch if Dyslexicon has a reasonable explanation.

This might be just a difference usage of terminology, but where Silver and I come from Hammer means ending the phase with a lynch....final nail in the coffin etc. Since 6 is a soft lynch threshold and we're already talking about a hammer vote is what is confusing. I think 6 is actually a good amount for pressure because it indicates that we're serious about it, instead of trying to skate if you don't answer to get people to remove their vote you will end up dead at the end of the phase.

I haven't voted for Dyslexicon either, but I'm not one to rush to voting. However I guess there is a chance that if the 5 scum slip holds true that if we get 6 civ votes ond Dys then 11 becomes an attainable lynch, but if there are 5 scum I'm sure at least one of them would be smarter then to play their hand that overtly on Day 1.

Strawhenge wrote:I don't know if Syndicate indicates people as 'online' for a while after they log off, like on RYM, but Dyslexicon was 'browsing this forum' through to the start of pg.7, plus some minutes. FWIW.

Silver Lantern wrote:

Strawhenge wrote:I don't know if Syndicate indicates people as 'online' for a while after they log off, like on RYM, but Dyslexicon was 'browsing this forum' through to the start of pg.7, plus some minutes. FWIW.

I am guessing this sort of Meta Data is not frowned upon here?

Quin wrote:

Strawhenge wrote:

Quin wrote:I haven't played with hammer votes in a long time, so I didn't really think about the strategy behind it. So yeah, I don't think anybody else should throw their votes down on Dyslexicon yet. Let's discuss some other stuff.

What does everyone think about Sorsha re: my 'case'?

I agree that her response was fluff, but I don't see how she's 'appeasing' Jay. Would you care to unpack that thought a little?

I gave my thoughts about it when I answered Golden here:

Quin wrote:

Golden wrote:I didn't really expect Sorsha to consider the girls to be town. At this point, any argument for why one should be voted to have the map was inherently facetious.

I find Sorsha's response fair. She didn't say she read them as civilian, she said she had no reason to think they weren't. Useful pedantry. I disagree with Quin's assessment that she 'appeased' Jay.

By answering the questions the way she did, it looks like she's confirming her post to have been based on reads, which omits what I think the post was based on, the gimmick. That's the impression I get.

To say it more explicitly, I feel like not being honest about her intentions behind the post and just playing into the idea that it was read-based was an effort to appease 3J.

insertnamehere wrote:

Long Con wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:MM, Golden, and 3J all want us to go to a different destination.

Only one of them will benefit the civilians (assuming whoever has the map is a civilian).

That's a problem.

I think you're inventing a problem where there isn't likely to be one, and you're suspecting people for it. This seems like a false way to have an opinion.

[VOTE: ] aubergine

[VOTE:
Would you care to be specific in your complete discrediting of my posts, or do you expect to just say "nuh-uh," throw a vote my way and hope someone else bites?] aubergine

Golden wrote:I think there's about a 20 minute lag

Strawhenge wrote:

Golden wrote:I think there's about a 20 minute lag

Good to know; I'll stop screaming through the screen at those who are browsing the thread and not responding.

speedchuck wrote:

Long Con wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:MM, Golden, and 3J all want us to go to a different destination.

Only one of them will benefit the civilians (assuming whoever has the map is a civilian).

That's a problem.

I think you're inventing a problem where there isn't likely to be one, and you're suspecting people for it. This seems like a false way to have an opinion.

*lynch vote for INH*

On the contrary, I think it's pretty good D1 play. I support it. I also support flinging votes that cause discussion, suspicion, and pressure. I do not support shutting down lines of questioning that result in discussion, suspicion, and pressure. Which is what it seemed like you did.

Support Long Con for Lynchee

Long Con wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:

Long Con wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:MM, Golden, and 3J all want us to go to a different destination.

Only one of them will benefit the civilians (assuming whoever has the map is a civilian).

That's a problem.

I think you're inventing a problem where there isn't likely to be one, and you're suspecting people for it. This seems like a false way to have an opinion.

[VOTE: ] aubergine

[VOTE:
Would you care to be specific in your complete discrediting of my posts, or do you expect to just say "nuh-uh," throw a vote my way and hope someone else bites?] aubergine

[VOTE:
Does it have to be one or the other?

If you need me to explain further, I can do that. Your first real post of the game was to cast doubt on the map-claimers. I happen to think that, if any map-claiming is going to happen, then it's a good thing to have a couple of other dudes covering the claimer's tracks. So, right away, you're going after guys I thought looked more townish.

Then I thought about your reason. They're suspicious now for something you imagined they might try to do in the future. WTF? Does not compute. How about waiting to see if one of them tries to do what you say before squinting at them with your eyebrow thing?

And why so hesitant to cast a vote?] aubergine

insertnamehere wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:INH:

What do you suspect may have been the nefarious motivations for three people (now four) all claiming to have the map? In particular, what worries you about Golden's flip-flop in that discussion?

I feel like the reason is patently obvious: to control the conversation and influence where people go. I don't think it's too big of a leap to think that the mafia has info about certain destinations leading to certain effects. I could see at the very least one scummeister fake-claiming just to gain credibility.

Quin wrote:If he's referring to 3J, marmot and Golden specifically, all of them had already claimed. I don't think controlling the conversation is something baddies 'will do', rather I think it's just a constant approach to the game. I don't really see it.

Nachomamma8 wrote:Changeable votes?
I like this game already!

Vote: Golden

Nachomamma8 wrote:Changeable votes?
I like this game already!

Vote: Golden

Fredwood wrote:It's my first game, I deserve a map. It was rather difficult to sign up and meet new people.

Quin wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:Changeable votes?
I like this game already!

Vote: Golden

hey

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'm open to other map requests, but I want to know how y'all intend to forge a civilian victory in this game if you are entrusted with it.

Quin wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Quin wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'm open to other map requests, but I want to know how y'all intend to forge a civilian victory in this game if you are entrusted with it.

I'll lead lynches on the unanimous civ-reads and make a fool of myself.

Town read.

If that's what it takes for you to give me the map.

Golden wrote:

nutella wrote:Oh boy a fresh hot new game!

The map thing kinda reminds me of selecting prefects, in that it kinda feels almost like some kind of popularity/trust contest between the enthusiastic players who nominate themselves, and it feels dangerous to put that trust in someone who asks for it but... idk, anyone who played that game should remember that whole can of worms. But it would be best to eventually form some kind of consensus, we just have to hope we don't pick the wrong nominee.

As for the poll I don't know what the context or consequences may be but I think scientist is the coolest out of those

The more I think about it, the more I think people should just go with their gut and not declare it. It does potentially put a target on a person's back.

Also, I don't remember what game the prefect thing was now, and what actually happened with that?

I'm assuming in this game there will be more items (based on the way the PM was written) and so there will be opportunities to spread them out a bit, hopefully.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I like nutella and Strawhenge already.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Fredwood wrote:It's my first game, I deserve a map. It was rather difficult to sign up and meet new people.

Fredwood's four posts are only marginally relevant, but I still react positively. This in particular, where he calls for the map, pleases me considering the personality he conveyed in the sign-up thread:

Fredwood wrote:Thanks. Jack and Silver are the only two names I recognize been competing with them from anywhere from 5 to 10 years. I'm not a proper representation of the talent pool, I'm not very good (false humility), going to have to find a way to figure out how games are played here.

If there's any truth to the highlighted portion, I'd anticipate a civilian Fredwood would be a lot more comfortable doing that right off the bat than a mafioso Fredwood in this foreign environment. This read can be qualified with a little insight from those people who have played with Fredwood before -- please tell me what you think of this perspective.

Silver Lantern wrote:Hi everyone. Apologies for dumb questions ahead of time, I will be asking them all game and for games to come too.

DO NOT GIVE ME THE MAP, I REPEAT, DO NOT GIVE ME THE MAP.

Alright, now that I got the reverse psychology argument out of the way, should we try to coordinate the poll votes, or would that be against the spirit of the game? And would there be a benefit in doing so? I am guessing not much aside from pissing off the mod.

You guys call the mod the host here from what I gather, right?

What is BTSC?

What is Civ or Civilian? Is that like a regular townie?

Nachomamma8 wrote:I can't foresee a situation where "this player has an item" is a reason for me to nightkill them as scum over "this person is a threat to my team" and if the scumteam has a different approach then I don't think there is a very good chance of us losing this game.

Silver Lantern wrote:You guys normally cannot change votes?

How uncivilized... heh.

nutella wrote:So if day 1 starts tonight I believe that means we have to have map votes in by 10pm EST today (a little over 6 hours from now).

I liked the way LC nominated himself, and I want to trust him I think. Though the way he worded it also felt like a preemptive safeguard against future suspicion on him. But I think that's fine.
I also feel super good about JJJ now. Super civ leader mode, strong green aura And I always want to trust Golden but I'm a little more wary of him fooling me.

I think my map vote will be one of those... unless I decide to be more secretive about it, which may be a good decision seeing as the map disappears if the owner is killed (I'm assuming based on the description of items in the rules, and because the votes are private, that the recipient will not be publicly announced)

Silver Lantern wrote:

Quin wrote:I mistook poll votes for map votes. I apologise.

Great, now I just look like I got overly defensive for nothing. I bet that won't ping anyone.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I would prefer not to disclose all of the details of the map, because the mafia team might be able to find ways to turn it to their advantage. I will say though that Golden's guesses are at least reasonably close all things considered. Once I have had a few opportunities to utilize it myself and get acquainted with the effects it creates, I might be more inclined to talk about it. We'll see.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote: I don't understand the progression from ONE to TWO to THREE. I poked Sorsha about her girls-only map promotion to determine whether/how much she cared about the recipient of the map being a trustworthy civilian (instead of merely a female). She told me that she did care. So I then extracted, via the transitive property, the implied reads that she had not overtly stated:

1. Sorsha wants a female to get the map.
2. Sorsha wants a civilian to get the map.
Thus
Conclusion: Sorsha believes the females are civilians.

Beyond those specifics, squeezing reads out of people is what I do and I know you've seen that before many times. You look fake right now. I rescind my town read.

Quin wrote:

Golden wrote:I didn't really expect Sorsha to consider the girls to be town. At this point, any argument for why one should be voted to have the map was inherently facetious.

I find Sorsha's response fair. She didn't say she read them as civilian, she said she had no reason to think they weren't. Useful pedantry. I disagree with Quin's assessment that she 'appeased' Jay.

By answering the questions the way she did, it looks like she's confirming her post to have been based on reads, which omits what I think the post was based on, the gimmick. That's the impression I get.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Silver Lantern wrote:You guys normally cannot change votes?

How uncivilized... heh.

In recent memory most of the time votes have been changeable.

Nachomamma8 wrote:JJJ faking having the map is a decent towntell for me on top of fairly good engagement/content so far.

Nachomamma8 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'm open to other map requests, but I want to know how y'all intend to forge a civilian victory in this game if you are entrusted with it.

How is responding to the question "how will you forge a civilian victory in this game?" ever indicative of alignment? It seems to me that the most important factor of these items are getting them into town hands, no?

Nachomamma8 wrote:I can see a case for Strawhenge (and probably agree now that I think about it), but why nutella?

Soneji wrote: A rather strong reaction to what was a rather tame observation. Wants evidence supporting the accusation but is already dismissing it as a fake argument, therefore backhandedly saying that Quin is scum.

[VOTE: ] aubergine[VOTE:


Don't understand how Quin is reading into Sorsha's posts so strongly. Her responses to JJJ pretty plainly state that she would like for her vote to have given the map to a civ and that she doesn't have reason to suspect at the moment that the other girls are mafia.] aubergine

Golden wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:JJJ faking having the map is a decent towntell for me on top of fairly good engagement/content so far.

Is this fishing?