The Syndicate

Choutas, you've helped a few people by explaining their behavior in a pro-town manner, and your explanations have been valid. I do wonder though whether you've been viewing the thread through the opposite lens: is anything suspicious to you yet?

Oh no, FZ is in Serious Business mode. I don't know why you treat me so bad. Think of all the things we could have had.

I am not bothered with how I appear in this game, either. Not one bit. I made a statement to the other players, back in the private Syndicate thread, but it's now vanished. It's not my fault you joined the RYM camp and now you seem to be lashing at me for not seeming as consistent as you'd expect like me to be, just because you have such meta on me from previous games.

Anyway, what I said over there can summed like this: I'm immersing in the theme. Incidentally, the Host happened to also issue a contest that totally justifies my plan to have fun and be zany. TH is fun and zany music, so I plan to have fun and be zany. This will not affect my regular gameplay, only add a dimension to it. As for my regular gameplay, I repeat that you may pretend too much from me, 10 hours into Day 1. You're saying I'm talking a lot, without saying anything, but you're accusing me without bringing too much just as well. If you're clinging on the my post on b24, I literally pointed out that I actually questioned him. If my replies haven't satisfied you, it's you shutting the door, not me.

Don't like fun? Lo siento. Take it easy, take it easy.

Diiny wrote:

Roxy wrote:

Diiny wrote:I'll spill the beans when you tell me whether or not it was your intention to provoke reactions with your threat of randomizing, bls

Both -

your turn

I like to go hard and fling shit on day 1, using pressure to gauge reactions not only from the person I'm putting pressure on but from other players, too. If you felt I was being needlessly condescending or aggressive I apologise as that's not my direct intention at all. It does help get the shitstorm brewing, though.

I'm not asking you to change you to convert to those holy words in the Book of Diiny, but I'm nonetheless unapologetically cracking down on behaviour I find potentially anti-town/scummy to try to better understand the motives behind it and hence get a better idea of where I stand on you, provoking reactions for everyone in the process.

And as much as I appreciate that this is your playstyle, there's only so much clemency that being on-meta can invoke from me when that playstyle really doesn't seem that pro-town to me.

I don't think random day 1 votes is anti-town.

I think random day 2 votes and beyond are anti-town.

But day 1? No I just don't philosophically believe it.

If there were a REALLY great case, maybe I would vote for it. If there were one that was stronger than most of the day 1 cases I read, I might vote for it. But if there is one niggle of doubt about that day 1 case, one thing that might make me think that person could be wrong or could be trying to manipulate me.. YES. I would rather throw my vote on a random person than help lynch a potential civ teammate on shite reasons. How is that anti-town?

This is a philosophical argument and both sides are right in their own way.

I see your side. Can you at least see why people like rox and I might think the way we do? And still have completely civ reasons for doing like we do? As I said several posts ago, both sides are valuable to the civ cause.

Ricochet wrote:Oh no, FZ is in Serious Business mode. I don't know why you treat me so bad. Think of all the things we could have had.

I am not bothered with how I appear in this game, either. Not one bit. I made a statement to the other players, back in the private Syndicate thread, but it's now vanished. It's not my fault you joined the RYM camp and now you seem to be lashing at me for not seeming as consistent as you'd expect like me to be, just because you have such meta on me from previous games.

Anyway, what I said over there can summed like this: I'm immersing in the theme. Incidentally, the Host happened to also issue a contest that totally justifies my plan to have fun and be zany. TH is fun and zany music, so I plan to have fun and be zany. This will not affect my regular gameplay, only add a dimension to it. As for my regular gameplay, I repeat that you may pretend too much from me, 10 hours into Day 1. You're saying I'm talking a lot, without saying anything, but you're accusing me without bringing too much just as well. If you're clinging on the my post on b24, I literally pointed out that I actually questioned him. If my replies haven't satisfied you, it's you shutting the door, not me.

Don't like fun? Lo siento. Take it easy, take it easy.

I don't have a meta on you from other games. It was just my observation of this game. As for the questioning you claim you did, that wasn't my interpretation of what you did, but okay, I'm backing off a little to make sure I'm not having a tunnel vision.


On to someone else, quiet Epi is never a good thing...

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Diiny wrote:How would you feel if I told you I've attempted to tried my Detective Aggressive Scumhunt von Threadleader strats as town on multiple occasions, and got lynched as town in the last game for the reason you're suggesting?

I observe effort but not necessarily hard aggression. The latter is the variable of note in this discussion.

I think you can look at my post history there re thoronir and see the same kind of aggression I'm using in this thread. I also got really pissy at aokiji in that one game where TCB won and I was town.

What does my aggression matter, though? I'm playing the same strats, do you think the intensity of doing so reflects on my alignment? You know, J, that I can feign Scumhunt von Threadleader without getting hyperbolic or over-aggressive. I'm wondering what's making you pursue this line of questioning.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Choutas, you've helped a few people by explaining their behavior in a pro-town manner, and your explanations have been valid. I do wonder though whether you've been viewing the thread through the opposite lens: is anything suspicious to you yet?

The sample is quite small. Most RYMers have barely posted and I have no idea how to judge the Syndicators. Usually when someone acts aggressively I view that as a towntell. There is always a degree of patience and neutrality to a good scum play.
I think the Ricochet vs FZ is a good start. Rico's reaction looks a bit forced and unconvincing.

FZ. wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Oh no, FZ is in Serious Business mode. I don't know why you treat me so bad. Think of all the things we could have had.

I am not bothered with how I appear in this game, either. Not one bit. I made a statement to the other players, back in the private Syndicate thread, but it's now vanished. It's not my fault you joined the RYM camp and now you seem to be lashing at me for not seeming as consistent as you'd expect like me to be, just because you have such meta on me from previous games.

Anyway, what I said over there can summed like this: I'm immersing in the theme. Incidentally, the Host happened to also issue a contest that totally justifies my plan to have fun and be zany. TH is fun and zany music, so I plan to have fun and be zany. This will not affect my regular gameplay, only add a dimension to it. As for my regular gameplay, I repeat that you may pretend too much from me, 10 hours into Day 1. You're saying I'm talking a lot, without saying anything, but you're accusing me without bringing too much just as well. If you're clinging on the my post on b24, I literally pointed out that I actually questioned him. If my replies haven't satisfied you, it's you shutting the door, not me.

Don't like fun? Lo siento. Take it easy, take it easy.

I don't have a meta on you from other games. It was just my observation of this game. As for the questioning you claim you did, that wasn't my interpretation of what you did, but okay, I'm backing off a little to make sure I'm not having a tunnel vision.


On to someone else, quiet Epi is never a good thing...

Don't back off, FZ. If you've anything to fling at me, fling it.

bea wrote:

Diiny wrote:

Roxy wrote:

Diiny wrote:I'll spill the beans when you tell me whether or not it was your intention to provoke reactions with your threat of randomizing, bls

Both -

your turn

I like to go hard and fling shit on day 1, using pressure to gauge reactions not only from the person I'm putting pressure on but from other players, too. If you felt I was being needlessly condescending or aggressive I apologise as that's not my direct intention at all. It does help get the shitstorm brewing, though.

I'm not asking you to change you to convert to those holy words in the Book of Diiny, but I'm nonetheless unapologetically cracking down on behaviour I find potentially anti-town/scummy to try to better understand the motives behind it and hence get a better idea of where I stand on you, provoking reactions for everyone in the process.

And as much as I appreciate that this is your playstyle, there's only so much clemency that being on-meta can invoke from me when that playstyle really doesn't seem that pro-town to me.

I don't think random day 1 votes is anti-town.

I think random day 2 votes and beyond are anti-town.

But day 1? No I just don't philosophically believe it.

If there were a REALLY great case, maybe I would vote for it. If there were one that was stronger than most of the day 1 cases I read, I might vote for it. But if there is one niggle of doubt about that day 1 case, one thing that might make me think that person could be wrong or could be trying to manipulate me.. YES. I would rather throw my vote on a random person than help lynch a potential civ teammate on shite reasons. How is that anti-town?

This is a philosophical argument and both sides are right in their own way.

I see your side. Can you at least see why people like rox and I might think the way we do? And still have completely civ reasons for doing like we do? As I said several posts ago, both sides are valuable to the civ cause.

Yes, I can definitely see and to some level appreciate the mindset behind day 1 random voting even if I don't agree with the strat (we've caught many a scum on day 1 without any bussing), but saying that isn't exactly conducive to putting on pressure like I was trying to do.

You see, my beef wasn't with the random voting per se, it was that I didn't know WHY it was being done/suggested, and that I had a lot of fears that it may be a scum move for scum reasons, hence my attack. Get me, fam?

Bea, if you have the slightest suspicion, wouldn't it be better to throw your vote that way instead of voting randomly? There are more civvies than baddies in the game, so a random vote has a higher likelihood of getting civvies dead. If you vote according to your suspicion, even if you end up lynching a townie, it gets discussion going, you can see how others respond to it, and more.


linki: Diiny, the backing off was from Ricco, and I'm backing off a little. I want to follow other paths as well.

Diiny wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Diiny wrote:How would you feel if I told you I've attempted to tried my Detective Aggressive Scumhunt von Threadleader strats as town on multiple occasions, and got lynched as town in the last game for the reason you're suggesting?

I observe effort but not necessarily hard aggression. The latter is the variable of note in this discussion.

I think you can look at my post history there re thoronir and see the same kind of aggression I'm using in this thread. I also got really pissy at aokiji in that one game where TCB won and I was town.

What does my aggression matter, though? I'm playing the same strats, do you think the intensity of doing so reflects on my alignment? You know, J, that I can feign Scumhunt von Threadleader without getting hyperbolic or over-aggressive. I'm wondering what's making you pursue this line of questioning.

My concern is that you opened your aggression against Roxy more fervently than was sensible, potentially evidencing that you forced that aggression for the sake of appearance instead of reaction-generation. My assertion here is that you would have made a mistake. I'm not sure that's what happened. Is there an alternative explanation for your aggression beyond just generating reactions?

Choutas wrote:Rico's reaction looks a bit forced and unconvincing.

Could you show me?

Choutas wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Choutas, you've helped a few people by explaining their behavior in a pro-town manner, and your explanations have been valid. I do wonder though whether you've been viewing the thread through the opposite lens: is anything suspicious to you yet?

The sample is quite small. Most RYMers have barely posted and I have no idea how to judge the Syndicators. Usually when someone acts aggressively I view that as a towntell. There is always a degree of patience and neutrality to a good scum play.
I think the Ricochet vs FZ is a good start. Rico's reaction looks a bit forced and unconvincing.

You seem to have said in the same phrase "I have no idea how to judge the Syndicators" and "I have enough of an idea to judge a Syndicator".

I don't act agressively in mafia. Try over at Llama & Epignosis inc. I'm an ordinary guy, totally not burning the house.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Choutas wrote:Rico's reaction looks a bit forced and unconvincing.

Could you show me?

"Highly demanding of you for me to have already consistent suspicions. Try not to look so disappointed. I addressed the current topics, the way I always do."
FZ had a gut feeling about rico and his response was that FZ was asking too much from him. He glibly rejected her accusation. It's never good when someone pulls the "that's how I roll" card.

Also a bonus for the theme

our track record - across several sites - is not statistically as good as yours is claiming to be.

I go into games assuming that unless the town is DAMN lucky - we are prolly lynching a civ.

I know Rox from several forums as well. I know she has the same experience as I have had. I don't yet know her alligmnment, but I understand where she is coming from day 1.

As for why - I'm guessing to fleedge out the new site members. It's an OLD argument for us on this site. And sometimes it pops up again even with experienced peeps who've played 11tybillion games with all of us. (*coff*sockhost*coff*)

BUT - you at least can see the other side. It's more than some do. I applaud you for that. Also - I don't think rox was doing it for scum reasons. I think she was also stirring the pot to see what shook out - and you were what shook out. Get me fam?

i so don't know what "get me, fam?" means, I just wanted to look cool. God being an old lady sucks. someone give me new slang that doesn't make me look lame!! I'm tired of my staff laughing at me!!! I'm good with language, I swear I won't nub it!!

that up there was all to diiny..... still not used to people being around when I am...

Choutas wrote:It's never good when someone pulls the "that's how I roll" card.

Would you agree that Roxy responded in this manner to Diiny when he went after her?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Diiny wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Diiny wrote:How would you feel if I told you I've attempted to tried my Detective Aggressive Scumhunt von Threadleader strats as town on multiple occasions, and got lynched as town in the last game for the reason you're suggesting?

I observe effort but not necessarily hard aggression. The latter is the variable of note in this discussion.

I think you can look at my post history there re thoronir and see the same kind of aggression I'm using in this thread. I also got really pissy at aokiji in that one game where TCB won and I was town.

What does my aggression matter, though? I'm playing the same strats, do you think the intensity of doing so reflects on my alignment? You know, J, that I can feign Scumhunt von Threadleader without getting hyperbolic or over-aggressive. I'm wondering what's making you pursue this line of questioning.

My concern is that you opened your aggression against Roxy more fervently than was sensible, potentially evidencing that you forced that aggression for the sake of appearance instead of reaction-generation. My assertion here is that you would have made a mistake. I'm not sure that's what happened. Is there an alternative explanation for your aggression beyond just generating reactions?

I'm not sure I understand the argument that I was forcing the aggression for the sake of appearance when you yourself just claimed I don't normally act this aggressively.

Either way, to answer your questions I do what I do to a) generate reactions and b) put pressure on people. I don't understand what you're saying about my 'mistake', do you think I went overboard as town or that I'm failing to emulate as scum?

Choutas wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Choutas wrote:Rico's reaction looks a bit forced and unconvincing.

It's never good when someone pulls the "that's how I roll" card.

This is how Roxy responded to me AND how I responded to a bunch of allegations, yet you've defended me a couple of times. What's up?

Ricochet wrote:

Choutas wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Choutas, you've helped a few people by explaining their behavior in a pro-town manner, and your explanations have been valid. I do wonder though whether you've been viewing the thread through the opposite lens: is anything suspicious to you yet?

The sample is quite small. Most RYMers have barely posted and I have no idea how to judge the Syndicators. Usually when someone acts aggressively I view that as a towntell. There is always a degree of patience and neutrality to a good scum play.
I think the Ricochet vs FZ is a good start. Rico's reaction looks a bit forced and unconvincing.

You seem to have said in the same phrase "I have no idea how to judge the Syndicators" and "I have enough of an idea to judge a Syndicator".

I don't act agressively in mafia. Try over at Llama & Epignosis inc. I'm an ordinary guy, totally not burning the house.

I meant that the main pool of active players comes from the Syndicate in contrast to RYM. Of course I'll be feeling much less secure about my readings regarding players I've never played with. Tbh I've forgotten even the players I've played with(like Metalmarsh or Golden for example). Your exchange with FZ struck me as odd that's all.

Diiny wrote:

Roxy wrote:

Diiny wrote:I'll spill the beans when you tell me whether or not it was your intention to provoke reactions with your threat of randomizing, bls

Both -

your turn

I like to go hard and fling shit on day 1, using pressure to gauge reactions not only from the person I'm putting pressure on but from other players, too. If you felt I was being needlessly condescending or aggressive I apologise as that's not my direct intention at all. It does help get the shitstorm brewing, though.

I'm not asking you to change you to convert to those holy words in the Book of Diiny, but I'm nonetheless unapologetically cracking down on behaviour I find potentially anti-town/scummy to try to better understand the motives behind it and hence get a better idea of where I stand on you, provoking reactions for everyone in the process.

And as much as I appreciate that this is your playstyle, there's only so much clemency that being on-meta can invoke from me when that playstyle really doesn't seem that pro-town to me.

First I *really* do not like flinging shit bc I am a girl and flinging shit sounds dirty and quite gross

You can think my behavior anti town/scummy/baddie/etc but idc. Imma play this my way. Your "threats" don't mean anything to me.

I am trying to decide how I feel about you seeing your response to my randomization post. I bring this topic up often in games (especially when MP plays ) just bc it does bring out the reactions then I judge them to be sincere and genuine or slippery and bad vibe-y.

I do not remember asking you for clemency about my play style and if you have to vote me bc I do not play the way you think I should then by all means be my guest. To me though that is a pretty weak reason for a vote in and of itself.

Ricochet wrote:

Choutas wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Choutas, you've helped a few people by explaining their behavior in a pro-town manner, and your explanations have been valid. I do wonder though whether you've been viewing the thread through the opposite lens: is anything suspicious to you yet?

The sample is quite small. Most RYMers have barely posted and I have no idea how to judge the Syndicators. Usually when someone acts aggressively I view that as a towntell. There is always a degree of patience and neutrality to a good scum play.
I think the Ricochet vs FZ is a good start. Rico's reaction looks a bit forced and unconvincing.

You seem to have said in the same phrase "I have no idea how to judge the Syndicators" and "I have enough of an idea to judge a Syndicator".

I don't act agressively in mafia. Try over at Llama & Epignosis inc. I'm an ordinary guy, totally not burning the house.

One more question before I back off :P : You said before that you were in fact questioning bcornett for his vote which you couldn't decide whether it was an banter vote, or was a serious one but with no good reason. How many times did votes like this end up being from a baddie? How many times did those suspecting those people end up being bad? I think the majority goes to the latter

Choutas wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Choutas wrote:Rico's reaction looks a bit forced and unconvincing.

Could you show me?

"Highly demanding of you for me to have already consistent suspicions. Try not to look so disappointed. I addressed the current topics, the way I always do."
FZ had a gut feeling about rico and his response was that FZ was asking too much from him. He glibly rejected her accusation. It's never good when someone pulls the "that's how I roll" card.

Also a bonus for the theme

You have no idea that card comes up here when I am conducting the sussing on someone else. Same as it ever was!

What I meant is that I was not vague in my actions so far, just not to FZ's standards, apparently, of following already a path.

FZ. wrote:Bea, if you have the slightest suspicion, wouldn't it be better to throw your vote that way instead of voting randomly? There are more civvies than baddies in the game, so a random vote has a higher likelihood of getting civvies dead. If you vote according to your suspicion, even if you end up lynching a townie, it gets discussion going, you can see how others respond to it, and more.


linki: Diiny, the backing off was from Ricco, and I'm backing off a little. I want to follow other paths as well.

I tend not to have suspicions on day 1. That's the issue with me personally. I read everyone at face value till they give me a reason not to.

I also argue the exact point you make. There are more townies than scum. If I follow SOMOENE ELSE'S day 1 suspicion as weak as day 1 suspicions are, I most likely hit a townie. If I random vote one vote on someone who's not likely to be lynched, I throw away my vote. I would self vote day 1 aka Jason Maurer from another forum if it didn't have the bag of shite attached to it that it does.

I understand someone voting their tiniest ping. I hope they understnad why I don't follow them and throw my vote away.

I don't think this discussion has a ton of bearing on who is town and who is not, but it's still important to me so I'll pipe in:

Day 1 is an extremely important phase, and when taken seriously it can be highly productive for town/civs. If the day is highly active and everyone makes their best effort to be involved in the continuing discussion, then there will be enough content for real, genuine suspicion to exist. And I would ask the Syndicateers to remember that in this game, if the town wins the game all of the town wins, dead or alive. This means we can be cooperative and transparent in the thread, and be less concerned about evading night kills and more concerned about eliminating the bad guys. That starts right now.

There are 8 people in this game that want to kill everyone else, and if you're not among them they want to kill you. Don't stand for that! They're trying to freaking murder you. They want to make soup out of your brains and toothpicks out of your bones. I hope we can work as a team right here in the thread from start to finish.

*puts down pom poms*

bea wrote:our track record - across several sites - is not statistically as good as yours is claiming to be.

I go into games assuming that unless the town is DAMN lucky - we are prolly lynching a civ.

I know Rox from several forums as well. I know she has the same experience as I have had. I don't yet know her alligmnment, but I understand where she is coming from day 1.

As for why - I'm guessing to fleedge out the new site members. It's an OLD argument for us on this site. And sometimes it pops up again even with experienced peeps who've played 11tybillion games with all of us. (*coff*sockhost*coff*)

BUT - you at least can see the other side. It's more than some do. I applaud you for that. Also - I don't think rox was doing it for scum reasons. I think she was also stirring the pot to see what shook out - and you were what shook out. Get me fam?

i so don't know what "get me, fam?" means, I just wanted to look cool. God being an old lady sucks. someone give me new slang that doesn't make me look lame!! I'm tired of my staff laughing at me!!! I'm good with language, I swear I won't nub it!!

I appreciate that you're used to the strategy, but alongside a lack of any other meaningful contributions it seems more likely to me that roxy played it not out of the intrinsic value you see in the strategy but due to the benefits it would give scum to play it that I mentioned earlier.

So the logical question that follows is: Has she had any helpful content besides this apparent trap/fleedge strategy in your opinion?

"Get me, fam?" translates approximately to "I do so hope I've made myself clear; is that the case, family?"

FZ. wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Choutas wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Choutas, you've helped a few people by explaining their behavior in a pro-town manner, and your explanations have been valid. I do wonder though whether you've been viewing the thread through the opposite lens: is anything suspicious to you yet?

The sample is quite small. Most RYMers have barely posted and I have no idea how to judge the Syndicators. Usually when someone acts aggressively I view that as a towntell. There is always a degree of patience and neutrality to a good scum play.
I think the Ricochet vs FZ is a good start. Rico's reaction looks a bit forced and unconvincing.

You seem to have said in the same phrase "I have no idea how to judge the Syndicators" and "I have enough of an idea to judge a Syndicator".

I don't act agressively in mafia. Try over at Llama & Epignosis inc. I'm an ordinary guy, totally not burning the house.

One more question before I back off :P : You said before that you were in fact questioning bcornett for his vote which you couldn't decide whether it was an banter vote, or was a serious one but with no good reason. How many times did votes like this end up being from a baddie? How many times did those suspecting those people end up being bad? I think the majority goes to the latter

Hold on now. I have every right to question a player's reasoning for voting someone. It's called playing mafia.

Furthermore, you've never suspected me questioning b24 until now. You've suspected me not questioning him one bit and fluffing in my serious-looking post on him. So, where we goin' with this?

Continuing my prior post...

If we put a lot of effort into this Day 1 and still lynch a townie -- that's okay. It's going to happen a lot of time. But we'll still have left ourselves with a thick, substantive Day 1 that can be reassessed in light of that town flip. Trepidation can only serve to make oneself look more suspicious than is necessary.

I don't mean to attack anyone's methods of course. I am just sharing my own philosophy.

Diiny wrote:I'm not sure I understand the argument that I was forcing the aggression for the sake of appearance when you yourself just claimed I don't normally act this aggressively.

Either way, to answer your questions I do what I do to a) generate reactions and b) put pressure on people. I don't understand what you're saying about my 'mistake', do you think I went overboard as town or that I'm failing to emulate as scum?

My assertion is that you'd have gone overboard as scum. I don't think you'd necessarily be trying to emulate your town game in this case, but rather promoting a harsher strategy of aggression for the sake of appearance because of the coercive effects that behavior can have on the people reading your content.

I'm going to move my vote elsewhere though. You're engaging this suspicion well enough.

Diiny wrote:

Choutas wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Choutas wrote:Rico's reaction looks a bit forced and unconvincing.

It's never good when someone pulls the "that's how I roll" card.

This is how Roxy responded to me AND how I responded to a bunch of allegations, yet you've defended me a couple of times. What's up?

There is no reason to defend RVP imo. Again that's a genuine strategy and it isn't much of a personal playstyle when maybe up to 10 players pursue it on day(me included). As for your aggressiveness it may be how you roll but personal experience has shown me that aggressiveness is more related to townie behavior than scum behavior. A townie is a more likely to make an accusation, rally a lynch and take the blame for it than a scummer. Even vocal scum who are rarer than vocal townies on rym tend to have a sense of neutrality and ask for others' opinions to reinforce their case.
Let's say I have feeling about you or to put it in a more concrete manner I think your playstyle does more good than bad.

The worst thing that could happen on day 1 is to not have enough data to link on day 2 after the first lynch/nightkill.

Also mind you all people that this is my second game in over a year. I've grown rusty. I'm veteran league material playing with young bucks.

bcornett24 wrote:I know nothing of the syndicate players , so I'm going to vote for Devin the omniscient because his name sounds like somebody who is of authority and rundontwalk because it would be chaotic.

He doesn't know me very well, does he?

Operation ketchup is a go! We have a 90% chance of failure as we have less than an hour to execute. Go!

Don't ask.

Diiny wrote:

Choutas wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Choutas wrote:Rico's reaction looks a bit forced and unconvincing.

It's never good when someone pulls the "that's how I roll" card.

This is how Roxy responded to me AND how I responded to a bunch of allegations, yet you've defended me a couple of times. What's up?

I said "get used to it"

Diiny wrote:

bea wrote:our track record - across several sites - is not statistically as good as yours is claiming to be.

I go into games assuming that unless the town is DAMN lucky - we are prolly lynching a civ.

I know Rox from several forums as well. I know she has the same experience as I have had. I don't yet know her alligmnment, but I understand where she is coming from day 1.

As for why - I'm guessing to fleedge out the new site members. It's an OLD argument for us on this site. And sometimes it pops up again even with experienced peeps who've played 11tybillion games with all of us. (*coff*sockhost*coff*)

BUT - you at least can see the other side. It's more than some do. I applaud you for that. Also - I don't think rox was doing it for scum reasons. I think she was also stirring the pot to see what shook out - and you were what shook out. Get me fam?

i so don't know what "get me, fam?" means, I just wanted to look cool. God being an old lady sucks. someone give me new slang that doesn't make me look lame!! I'm tired of my staff laughing at me!!! I'm good with language, I swear I won't nub it!!

I appreciate that you're used to the strategy, but alongside a lack of any other meaningful contributions it seems more likely to me that roxy played it not out of the intrinsic value you see in the strategy but due to the benefits it would give scum to play it that I mentioned earlier.

So the logical question that follows is: Has she had any helpful content besides this apparent trap/fleedge strategy in your opinion?

"Get me, fam?" translates approximately to "I do so hope I've made myself clear; is that the case, family?"

No. And I'm not sure yet if she's civ or scum. that's exactly my point. I don't know yet. IF she is civ she's a great asset. I would hate to get rid of someone who would be awesome to our cause for something so simple as she's OT and she went random.

Rox spent a lot of time in MY home mafia forum. Hedville. And it's like the forgotten step child of the rest of our forums. We were all about the zany OT and the fun. Our motto was srrsbns is NOT our bnss. I can't judge her allignment because it's day 1 and day 1 is kinda a wash while it's going down. After the lynch, after the night phase - then we can talk.

Let us see if she a) random votes b) who it's for and c) if anyone else goes along with it.

If 3 other people "random" there, I might look her way. If she "random" votes and it's all by it's self, I might not.

Ricochet wrote:

FZ. wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Choutas wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Choutas, you've helped a few people by explaining their behavior in a pro-town manner, and your explanations have been valid. I do wonder though whether you've been viewing the thread through the opposite lens: is anything suspicious to you yet?

The sample is quite small. Most RYMers have barely posted and I have no idea how to judge the Syndicators. Usually when someone acts aggressively I view that as a towntell. There is always a degree of patience and neutrality to a good scum play.
I think the Ricochet vs FZ is a good start. Rico's reaction looks a bit forced and unconvincing.

You seem to have said in the same phrase "I have no idea how to judge the Syndicators" and "I have enough of an idea to judge a Syndicator".

I don't act agressively in mafia. Try over at Llama & Epignosis inc. I'm an ordinary guy, totally not burning the house.

One more question before I back off :P : You said before that you were in fact questioning bcornett for his vote which you couldn't decide whether it was an banter vote, or was a serious one but with no good reason. How many times did votes like this end up being from a baddie? How many times did those suspecting those people end up being bad? I think the majority goes to the latter

Hold on now. I have every right to question a player's reasoning for voting someone. It's called playing mafia.

Furthermore, you've never suspected me questioning b24 until now. You've suspected me not questioning him one bit and fluffing in my serious-looking post on him. So, where we goin' with this?

I was doubting your sincerity concerning your suspicion of bcornett, but you said you really did question him (which I understand as voicing suspicion). Of course you have a right to do so, but if you are voicing suspicion of him, I' would say I don't find it genuine, and I find it going after an easy target.

Choutas wrote:

Diiny wrote:

Choutas wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Choutas wrote:Rico's reaction looks a bit forced and unconvincing.

It's never good when someone pulls the "that's how I roll" card.

This is how Roxy responded to me AND how I responded to a bunch of allegations, yet you've defended me a couple of times. What's up?

There is no reason to defend RVP imo. Again that's a genuine strategy and it isn't much of a personal playstyle when maybe up to 10 players pursue it on day(me included). As for your aggressiveness it may be how you roll but personal experience has shown me that aggressiveness is more related to townie behavior than scum behavior. A townie is a more likely to make an accusation, rally a lynch and take the blame for it than a scummer. Even vocal scum who are rarer than vocal townies on rym tend to have a sense of neutrality and ask for others' opinions to reinforce their case.
Let's say I have feeling about you or to put it in a more concrete manner I think your playstyle does more good than bad.

The worst thing that could happen on day 1 is to not have enough data to link on day 2 after the first lynch/nightkill.

Now I know I adore you. That and the post you made just after this one.

Hi! I'm bea and I'm now a suppafan of you.

I need to go. I'll be back a few hours before deadline

FZ. wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

FZ. wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Choutas wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Choutas, you've helped a few people by explaining their behavior in a pro-town manner, and your explanations have been valid. I do wonder though whether you've been viewing the thread through the opposite lens: is anything suspicious to you yet?

The sample is quite small. Most RYMers have barely posted and I have no idea how to judge the Syndicators. Usually when someone acts aggressively I view that as a towntell. There is always a degree of patience and neutrality to a good scum play.
I think the Ricochet vs FZ is a good start. Rico's reaction looks a bit forced and unconvincing.

You seem to have said in the same phrase "I have no idea how to judge the Syndicators" and "I have enough of an idea to judge a Syndicator".

I don't act agressively in mafia. Try over at Llama & Epignosis inc. I'm an ordinary guy, totally not burning the house.

One more question before I back off :P : You said before that you were in fact questioning bcornett for his vote which you couldn't decide whether it was an banter vote, or was a serious one but with no good reason. How many times did votes like this end up being from a baddie? How many times did those suspecting those people end up being bad? I think the majority goes to the latter

Hold on now. I have every right to question a player's reasoning for voting someone. It's called playing mafia.

Furthermore, you've never suspected me questioning b24 until now. You've suspected me not questioning him one bit and fluffing in my serious-looking post on him. So, where we goin' with this?

I was doubting your sincerity concerning your suspicion of bcornett, but you said you really did question him (which I understand as voicing suspicion). Of course you have a right to do so, but if you are voicing suspicion of him, I' would say I don't find it genuine, and I find it going after an easy target.

Well, I don't understand questioning as voicing suspicion. I said I want to hear from him. That's questioning. You implied there was nothing there in my post of substance, not even real questioning.

FZ. wrote:I need to go. I'll be back a few hours before deadline

So...tomorrow evening?

Actually guys I have to go and watch footy in the evening and then I'll be fuck tired to be helpful. You guys have a 2 hours window to ask me things. After that it'll take me half a day or more to contribute.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Diiny wrote:I'm not sure I understand the argument that I was forcing the aggression for the sake of appearance when you yourself just claimed I don't normally act this aggressively.

Either way, to answer your questions I do what I do to a) generate reactions and b) put pressure on people. I don't understand what you're saying about my 'mistake', do you think I went overboard as town or that I'm failing to emulate as scum?

My assertion is that you'd have gone overboard as scum. I don't think you'd necessarily be trying to emulate your town game in this case, but rather promoting a harsher strategy of aggression for the sake of appearance because of the coercive effects that behaviour can have on the people reading your content.

I'm going to move my vote elsewhere though. You're engaging this suspicion well enough.

I understand that you think there's a reason for scum to use aggression, and I don't contest that, but why does going overboard hint at scum-aggression rather than town-aggression? Both require aggression that's forced to some extent, and so one can go overboard on both. I want to make sure I understand your concerns/arguments

Diiny wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Diiny wrote:I'm not sure I understand the argument that I was forcing the aggression for the sake of appearance when you yourself just claimed I don't normally act this aggressively.

Either way, to answer your questions I do what I do to a) generate reactions and b) put pressure on people. I don't understand what you're saying about my 'mistake', do you think I went overboard as town or that I'm failing to emulate as scum?

My assertion is that you'd have gone overboard as scum. I don't think you'd necessarily be trying to emulate your town game in this case, but rather promoting a harsher strategy of aggression for the sake of appearance because of the coercive effects that behaviour can have on the people reading your content.

I'm going to move my vote elsewhere though. You're engaging this suspicion well enough.

I understand that you think there's a reason for scum to use aggression, and I don't contest that, but why does going overboard hint at scum-aggression rather than town-aggression? Both require aggression that's forced to some extent, and so one can go overboard on both. I want to make sure I understand your concerns/arguments

The material that motivates that aggression is what I'd use as the measuring stick to make that distinction. I thought your degree of aggression was sharp enough relative to Roxy's behavior that I was unsure of your sincerity.

Bea has opinions about who is Civvie, but none about who is bad. A Mafia member knows every Civvie out there, so can proclaim their trust with confidence. I think bea is Mafia, and I'm going to put my vote on her for now.

*votes bea*

bea wrote:

Diiny wrote:

bea wrote:our track record - across several sites - is not statistically as good as yours is claiming to be.

I go into games assuming that unless the town is DAMN lucky - we are prolly lynching a civ.

I know Rox from several forums as well. I know she has the same experience as I have had. I don't yet know her alligmnment, but I understand where she is coming from day 1.

As for why - I'm guessing to fleedge out the new site members. It's an OLD argument for us on this site. And sometimes it pops up again even with experienced peeps who've played 11tybillion games with all of us. (*coff*sockhost*coff*)

BUT - you at least can see the other side. It's more than some do. I applaud you for that. Also - I don't think rox was doing it for scum reasons. I think she was also stirring the pot to see what shook out - and you were what shook out. Get me fam?

i so don't know what "get me, fam?" means, I just wanted to look cool. God being an old lady sucks. someone give me new slang that doesn't make me look lame!! I'm tired of my staff laughing at me!!! I'm good with language, I swear I won't nub it!!

I appreciate that you're used to the strategy, but alongside a lack of any other meaningful contributions it seems more likely to me that roxy played it not out of the intrinsic value you see in the strategy but due to the benefits it would give scum to play it that I mentioned earlier.

So the logical question that follows is: Has she had any helpful content besides this apparent trap/fleedge strategy in your opinion?

"Get me, fam?" translates approximately to "I do so hope I've made myself clear; is that the case, family?"

No. And I'm not sure yet if she's civ or scum. that's exactly my point. I don't know yet. IF she is civ she's a great asset. I would hate to get rid of someone who would be awesome to our cause for something so simple as she's OT and she went random.

Rox spent a lot of time in MY home mafia forum. Hedville. And it's like the forgotten step child of the rest of our forums. We were all about the zany OT and the fun. Our motto was srrsbns is NOT our bnss. I can't judge her allignment because it's day 1 and day 1 is kinda a wash while it's going down. After the lynch, after the night phase - then we can talk.

Let us see if she a) random votes b) who it's for and c) if anyone else goes along with it.

If 3 other people "random" there, I might look her way. If she "random" votes and it's all by it's self, I might not.

I guess the crux of this is that I personally don't see 'OT and random voting' as just a trivial concern, even if it is on-meta, nor do I consider someone being an asset when they're town a good reason to not question someone's towniness (although MP said that one time and turned out to be town, maybe it's a TS thing.)

Long Con wrote:Bea has opinions about who is Civvie, but none about who is bad. A Mafia member knows every Civvie out there, so can proclaim their trust with confidence. I think bea is Mafia, and I'm going to put my vote on her for now.

*votes bea*

Hi,

what are your thoughts on the game so far outside of bea

Long Con wrote:Bea has opinions about who is Civvie, but none about who is bad. A Mafia member knows every Civvie out there, so can proclaim their trust with confidence. I think bea is Mafia, and I'm going to put my vote on her for now.

*votes bea*

Srrsly? Lamest day 1 vote ever LC. I haven't stated at all who I think is civ with confidence. My whole argument is I don't know yet who is or isn't . It's like you aren't even reading my posts....

I expect better from you tbh.

Seeing the melding of communities is going to be so fucking awesome! Some styles will be the same and others so different. It is exciting!

This will be another post Dii will be hating me for.

Linky bea

Diiny wrote:

bea wrote:

Diiny wrote:

bea wrote:our track record - across several sites - is not statistically as good as yours is claiming to be.

I go into games assuming that unless the town is DAMN lucky - we are prolly lynching a civ.

I know Rox from several forums as well. I know she has the same experience as I have had. I don't yet know her alligmnment, but I understand where she is coming from day 1.

As for why - I'm guessing to fleedge out the new site members. It's an OLD argument for us on this site. And sometimes it pops up again even with experienced peeps who've played 11tybillion games with all of us. (*coff*sockhost*coff*)

BUT - you at least can see the other side. It's more than some do. I applaud you for that. Also - I don't think rox was doing it for scum reasons. I think she was also stirring the pot to see what shook out - and you were what shook out. Get me fam?

i so don't know what "get me, fam?" means, I just wanted to look cool. God being an old lady sucks. someone give me new slang that doesn't make me look lame!! I'm tired of my staff laughing at me!!! I'm good with language, I swear I won't nub it!!

I appreciate that you're used to the strategy, but alongside a lack of any other meaningful contributions it seems more likely to me that roxy played it not out of the intrinsic value you see in the strategy but due to the benefits it would give scum to play it that I mentioned earlier.

So the logical question that follows is: Has she had any helpful content besides this apparent trap/fleedge strategy in your opinion?

"Get me, fam?" translates approximately to "I do so hope I've made myself clear; is that the case, family?"

No. And I'm not sure yet if she's civ or scum. that's exactly my point. I don't know yet. IF she is civ she's a great asset. I would hate to get rid of someone who would be awesome to our cause for something so simple as she's OT and she went random.

Rox spent a lot of time in MY home mafia forum. Hedville. And it's like the forgotten step child of the rest of our forums. We were all about the zany OT and the fun. Our motto was srrsbns is NOT our bnss. I can't judge her allignment because it's day 1 and day 1 is kinda a wash while it's going down. After the lynch, after the night phase - then we can talk.

Let us see if she a) random votes b) who it's for and c) if anyone else goes along with it.

If 3 other people "random" there, I might look her way. If she "random" votes and it's all by it's self, I might not.

I guess the crux of this is that I personally don't see 'OT and random voting' as just a trivial concern, even if it is on-meta, nor do I consider someone being an asset when they're town a good reason to not question someone's towniness (although MP said that one time and turned out to be town, maybe it's a TS thing.)

I get where you are coming from. I do. I am just saying I'm not there yet for these reasons. Maybe down the road I will be there, but I don't feel it yet. Ya know?

Roxy wrote:Seeing the melding of communities is going to be so fucking awesome! Some styles will be the same and others so different. It is exciting!

This will be another post Dii will be hating me for.

Linky bea

Also just now noticed your wabbit avi. I miss that bitch. He'd be all over lc's lame vote for me too.

Roxy wrote:Seeing the melding of communities is going to be so fucking awesome! Some styles will be the same and others so different. It is exciting!

This will be another post Dii will be hating me for.

Linky bea

I've made it clear that I've got nothing against different styles, Roxy, and you pushing the agenda that I'm only happy with one style of play is getting old

it is bc I am old Dii <3

and I was joking sorry if that was not apparent.