The Syndicate

Rachel wrote:I had assumed that Martha was speaking in character tbh.





I also think Ruth's theory about Paul being a regular of the Syndicate was a bit far fetched given the lengths that Paul has gone to.

What lengths? I think, from what I can see of the people new to our community, that they would have read the rules & host posts and understood that the purpose of this sort of game is to NOT act like yourself. Thus I think Paul is playacting. You don't have to agree with me; it's just what I think. I also don't think it makes him bad per se, although that was my initial thought. I am thinking now that he was just trying to start conversation, which he did, and in spades.

If Paul is truly new to the ways of our flock as he claims, then I would feel bad to lynch him early in the game.

I mean, I'd feel pretty bad lynching anyone. I'm a pretty peaceful Christian.

Host: Can we attain sainthood by making martyrs of ourselves?


But I would be interested in exploring Jephthah more. I look at the vocabulary in his posts and it seems like at times he has the air of someone who's comfortable playing here

An analysis of two posts with barely something in them? Either you feel it or you don't. There's no way someone can logically and methodically accuse another person of being bad based on that and come out looking good.

And others, like he's picking up the terms used by Paul, possibly through osmosis that goes beyond the thread?

While the vote feels like a tactic to me too, it can easily be a valid tactic. Samuels' post seemed scummy to me too, especially the ridiculous question in the end, but the first part felt like him trying to convey: "I'm cool, I have nothing to hide". One way to try to push Samuel is by voting him and doing it fast. Nothing like pushing someone to the corner to get him talking. Worst case, Samuel comes in, eases his mind and he wasted a vote which has a high probability of being wasted anyway.

And his one post that's not defensive or supportive of Paul

You have voted early and maybe hastily wasted a vote.
You have not really given solid reasons for your vote. By your standards of d1 and how this game should be played, should we now vote for you? If not, why?

strikes me as flippant, forced, and not all that determined on a follow-up.

Rebecca, so you think Jephthah might be bad for defending Paul? Wouldn't the link to go after, in that case, be Paul?

I don't understand how Paul is a noob, it's clear he's played werewolf before.

I think the observation on jeph was a good one. It is hard to notice stuff like that when everyone's avatars look alike. A reread will definitely be in order day 2

Job wrote:I don't understand how Paul is a noob, it's clear he's played werewolf before.

I think the observation on jeph was a good one. It is hard to notice stuff like that when everyone's avatars look alike. A reread will definitely be in order day 2

I don't think Paul is a noob either. I thought people were using the word noob to mean he was new at our site. From what I've seen of his play and what I know of how other sites play he is definitely not a noob.

Rachel wrote:Rebecca, so you think Jephthah might be bad for defending Paul? Wouldn't the link to go after, in that case, be Paul?

Please refer to the first sentence I posted.

But if I believe both to be co-conspirators and they both have 0 votes against them, what would the difference be anyways?


I have doubts about Paul's sincerity Re: noobiness too. But I do have reservations about the potential of lynching a new player asap, be they good or bad. If he's bad and we can catch a teammate first, that's just as solid, in my opinion.

I don't see how Paul being new to the website matters. If we assume he is indeed acting to be new; this in no way evidence he's scum. A townie could just as likely be pretending to be a noob to avoid mafia attention.

And while I read Paul as town at first, his posts since do seem a little extra defensive. I mean it's not like he's getting lynched right now. eg:

Paul wrote:lol I don't understand why people think i am not actually new but ok

what I don't understand more is people putting words on my mouth

I don't know what is done here on d1

if you think I'm bad vote for me since I am not doing this for some kind of cover that's dumb

I would be more than happy to die d1 if it means doing so leads to a town victpry

so why Ruth are you implying I am doing this for cover

Paul wrote:playing the noob card is a low play

I don't play like that

But this could just be result of him getting irritated about people worrying about noob or not rather than scumhunting.

Martha wrote:Wow you dears are a little taken back on my opinions and think I'm fake too? I understand this is one of the sock games, but me talking a certain way makes me fake? How do you know I don't talk that way In my daily life? There are new player hunny and I don't think a girl's way of speech deserves any fire. What I meant to clarify by Paul acting fake and forced was, that his posts to me seem like he's purposefully saying "scum, let's catch scum, scum scum scum" many many times as if he's trying very hard to look like he is good to everyone very early in the game. I don't think there is a comparison on the two of us by me naturally calling anyone sweetie or hunny versus someone being over the top saying "they are good, let's catch heathens!" Maybe I'm not used to his style, but I just don't feel good about it and expressed that. I don't even see why this is an issue with me and think you guys are making it an easy way of Heathens to stir up fire.

Well I find it hard to believe you actually say hunny and sweetie and dear in all the mafia games you participate in. I definitely recognise the fact that I might be mistaken but as far as I'm reading you, fillers like hunny sweetie don't seem your style and you're definitely coming across as if you're forcing it.

Now that itself isn't something that would concern me but you called out Paul for being fake while sounding fake and it just stood out to me.

A wagon on me would be a bad choice. I don't have a problem with how you are playing, you just be you, that's cool with me. But if you are on the side of God's people you are going to be making a mistake by leading a lynch train on me. Just giving you fair warning.

I don't see any good reason in voting Paul. Let's say Ruth is right and he is really someone who has played here a long time. We are going to lynch him because he might be covering his true identity? I think that is just a crazy ridiculous reasoning. Which is why I am still looking at Ruth.

Paul, I'm only talking about Ruth because I find her suspicious. The only other people I would look at right now are the two who jumped on your suggestion my first comment was scummy saying it was. I think it is fairly obvious I am playing in character and goofed because I am relying on google for my info. Now my bible scholar cover is blown, was trying to keep my identity obscured, but oh well. But there was nothing but lighthearted joking intended with my first post. I might look at whoever just said something about female identities. How is that relevant to anything I have said? Because I call Paul bro? Whoever he really is, his sock is male so I will continue to address him as such. If that makes me scummy, this game is whack. I think there are some seriously opportunistic people jumping on the Samuel wagon.

I am not saying we should lynch him, rather the opposite. Initially I saw bad reasons for playacting, but after catching up, I see less sinister reasons. If I am in fact right about the playacting. I may not be.

Do you specifically find me suspect becasue of my reaction to Pauls posts?

Rachel i am getting talk happening that is how I'm not above anyone else unless they choose not to talk and catch scum that's not my choice it's theirs

fair enough on the first link but on the second lol I really only put my vote on Samuel to see how he would take the pressure I don't actually think his posts were scummy

I also wanted to see how other players would respond

its not perfect far from it but at least it started d1 and has given plenty to talk about

considering that much it's very interesting to me that Samson latched onto my vote for Samuel with no explanation

real scummy

If you don't want to lynch Paul for possibly trying to conceal his identity, then no I don't find you as suspicious as I did. I mean, we are all concealing our identity, that would be a bad reason to vote him. I guess I misunderstood what you were getting at. Maybe I mixed up your response to Paul with others. I think those either wanting to vote me or Paul are opportunistic at the moment.

also I don't understand why anyone would feel bad to lynch me b/c I'm new that really bothers me actually

I'm not sure how I feel about Rebecca but she has said that more than once now and it is strange to me and it does raise my scum radar

you should never feel bad about lunching who you most suspect even if you're wrong at least you're playing the game

I won't be upset at all if I get lynched d1 it's just a game and I am playing to have fun and to win but if I die it's not a big deal I am used to getting lynched

lunching lol autocorrect strikes again

Samuel wrote:If you don't want to lynch Paul for possibly trying to conceal his identity, then no I don't find you as suspicious as I did. I mean, we are all concealing our identity, that would be a bad reason to vote him. I guess I misunderstood what you were getting at. Maybe I mixed up your response to Paul with others. I think those either wanting to vote me or Paul are opportunistic at the moment.

what about those who are trying too hard to stay neutral would that also not be a viable scum move

new wagon

Samson and Nicodemus

or Samson and Lot

low posters why you not post

Paul wrote:new wagon

Samson and Nicodemus

or Samson and Lot

Could you explain why it is you suspect me now, again, after having dropped your initial suspicion? This is what I mean when I say I find you suspicious. You're flooding the thread, but not saying anything that really has any meat to it. You voted very early on for Samuel, and now you're throwing names out with nothing to back it up. I do not trust you.

wagons pressure scum to make a choice

you are a possible good wagon b/c you have been posting but all you have said is you don't trust me

you say I'm flooding the thread but you choose to drown instead of swimming

scum are caught by forcing them to lie and give opinions and talk so if you think this has no meat then I would love to hear what you are doing to catch scum today my friend

Paul wrote:wagons pressure scum to make a choice

you are a possible good wagon b/c you have been posting but all you have said is you don't trust me

you say I'm flooding the thread but you choose to drown instead of swimming

scum are caught by forcing them to lie and give opinions and talk so if you think this has no meat then I would love to hear what you are doing to catch scum today my friend

Right now, I'm observing as much as possible to gather evidence to inform my vote. It's difficult to do that with 3 pages+ of Paul's Ramblings to sift through. And, for future reference, around these parts "bandwagoning" is usually frowned upon.

The hands of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people. So thou shalt put the evil away from among you.

why would a wagon be bad

if everyone observes then can scum don't have to lie

don't see how that works

i am tired of talking to myself anyway and understand the argument that useless posts do not help so will leave again now

that said i still think we should wagon the two options I said before

I find it real interesting you say nothing about Samson or anyone else

this phase would be real boring if everyone observed

I agree not lynching someone based on being new is weird. Seems like a ploy to avoid suspicion. If someone is scum, lynch them. If you were new to the forum, tough luck.

Paul wrote: this phase would be real boring if everyone observed

oh wait that's right

*crickets*

bbl

Nicodemus wrote:

Paul wrote:wagons pressure scum to make a choice

you are a possible good wagon b/c you have been posting but all you have said is you don't trust me

you say I'm flooding the thread but you choose to drown instead of swimming

scum are caught by forcing them to lie and give opinions and talk so if you think this has no meat then I would love to hear what you are doing to catch scum today my friend

Right now, I'm observing as much as possible to gather evidence to inform my vote. It's difficult to do that with 3 pages+ of Paul's Ramblings to sift through. And, for future reference, around these parts "bandwagoning" is usually frowned upon.

The hands of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people. So thou shalt put the evil away from among you.

Chatting is good for the town. If Paul is bad he will talk himself into a corner. Are you worried about us jumping on your scum buddy's wagon? I don't buy that you find it difficult to gather evidence because of Paul, when all he's done is fished for conversations and reactions, and offered opinions.

Paul wrote:

Paul wrote: this phase would be real boring if everyone observed

oh wait that's right

*crickets*

bbl

Oh well, invisible again

lol job you can't take half the shit that comes onto my posts too seriously or seriously enough for that matter

but seriously i recognize i am not the only one trying to solve this game so thanks for your input and the input of others

also when I say bbl it really means I am still here but shutting up on purpose lol not really

I am curious what everyone thinks of everyone else no joke try to force yourself to make an opinion of those who have posted and share it b/c that's now town wins this game

srs now bbl

or am I

Rebecca wrote:

Rachel wrote:Rebecca, so you think Jephthah might be bad for defending Paul? Wouldn't the link to go after, in that case, be Paul?

Please refer to the first sentence I posted.

But if I believe both to be co-conspirators and they both have 0 votes against them, what would the difference be anyways?


I have doubts about Paul's sincerity Re: noobiness too. But I do have reservations about the potential of lynching a new player asap, be they good or bad. If he's bad and we can catch a teammate first, that's just as solid, in my opinion.

....you are my #1 suspect, Rebecca. Welcome.

Paul wrote:wagons pressure scum to make a choice

you are a possible good wagon b/c you have been posting but all you have said is you don't trust me

you say I'm flooding the thread but you choose to drown instead of swimming

scum are caught by forcing them to lie and give opinions and talk so if you think this has no meat then I would love to hear what you are doing to catch scum today my friend

Can you see how a bandwagon would be used as a tool by baddies to avoid any accountability for their vote?

Job wrote:I agree not lynching someone based on being new is weird. Seems like a ploy to avoid suspicion. If someone is scum, lynch them. If you were new to the forum, tough luck.

Very cool.
Why don't you comment on my posts about Paul that aren't derivative of the fact that he's new to the site then, Job?

Paul wrote:i am tired of talking to myself anyway and understand the argument that useless posts do not help so will leave again now

that said i still think we should wagon the two options I said before

I find it real interesting you say nothing about Samson or anyone else

this phase would be real boring if everyone observed

You don't think my posts were scummy, yet you still think a wagon on me and someone else would be a good idea? Please explain.

And who is the comment about Samson directed toward.?

Has Samson answered the question as to why he voted Samuel? If so I missed it.

Sure, but the only one that seems to apply is your post where you point out his hypocrisy by putting words in others mouths. I'll be happy to comment on that, but I think your other questions directed toward him are odd, did you want my input on something in particular?

Paul wrote:

Lot wrote:I could see Paul getting a lot of votes... I'd consider voting that way. So far not much has stood out for me. Paul has, very much, with posts and practices which seem designed to set himself apart. So has Ruth - what with the apparent fishing for finding out where people are from and then waving it off as a joke.

Out of curiosity, I wonder if anyone felt that their vote in the poll yesterday turned out to be worthwhile. I, for one, do not - at least I have no reason to believe it was for now.

this post essentially says I could see a wagon on Paul so I'm not gonna commit to voting him but gonna leave the possibility here for later b/c I am scum and need to find a reason to vote someone

I agree this post of Lots was odd. Why state your intent to vote someone simply because they have the potential to get a lot of votes? Vote for who you find suspicious, don't vote someone just because all the cool kids are doing it.

Rachel yeah but in doing so scum have to give terrible reasons for a vote

when I say wagon I assume a conscious effort by the thread, otherwise its not as effective

Samuel wrote:

Paul wrote:i am tired of talking to myself anyway and understand the argument that useless posts do not help so will leave again now

that said i still think we should wagon the two options I said before

I find it real interesting you say nothing about Samson or anyone else

this phase would be real boring if everyone observed

You don't think my posts were scummy, yet you still think a wagon on me and someone else would be a good idea? Please explain.

And who is the comment about Samson directed toward.?

yo Samuel you want to be best buds? you seem like a cool guy

I think you misread

I want Samson and lot

Or Samson and nicodemus atm

not Samuel

also that was meant at nicodemus

Paul wrote:

Balaam wrote:Holy early vote! Got any proof there Paul?

you should read his posts there are only two

the first post is like how cute everyone else is look how awesome and tough I am bitches I am totally scum

This one is pointing out how totally fluff and void of any real content Samuels first two points are. I'm not convinced like Paul seemed to be that he's scum but it was an OK observation.

If I had to vote now it would be for belshazar.

I lean scum on Ruth, Martha and Lot. I've felt a little better about Lot recently though.

Townreading Paul and Jonah.

Paul wrote:

Samuel wrote:

Paul wrote:i am tired of talking to myself anyway and understand the argument that useless posts do not help so will leave again now

that said i still think we should wagon the two options I said before

I find it real interesting you say nothing about Samson or anyone else

this phase would be real boring if everyone observed

You don't think my posts were scummy, yet you still think a wagon on me and someone else would be a good idea? Please explain.

And who is the comment about Samson directed toward.?

yo Samuel you want to be best buds? you seem like a cool guy

I think you misread

I want Samson and lot

Or Samson and nicodemus atm

not Samuel

also that was meant at nicodemus

All these names are obviously blending together for me. I will do a read of Samson and Lot and let you know what I think specifically of these two.

Paul wrote: I am curious what everyone thinks of everyone else no joke try to force yourself to make an opinion of those who have posted and share it b/c that's now town wins this game

actually how about everyone instead name their top 3 scum atm

1 Samson
2 Lot
3 Nicodemus

i await your thoughts, wonderful people

ofc there are a lot (lol) of players who aren't solving the game I will judge them more harshly closer to EoD

Paul wrote:

Paul wrote: I am curious what everyone thinks of everyone else no joke try to force yourself to make an opinion of those who have posted and share it b/c that's now town wins this game

actually how about everyone instead name their top 3 scum atm

1 Samson
2 Lot
3 Nicodemus

i await your thoughts, wonderful people

Okay, the Paul show is getting a little old. I don't think he's bad, but he's drowning out everything else in the thread, make it hard for me to get a read on others.

I wish Cain would come back. He is my biggest suspect at this point. I am not reading Nicodemus as bad, but it seems like Lot said something to make me nervous a while ago. I will have to reread. I have no reason to suspect Samson.

Absalom wrote: Okay, the Paul show is getting a little old. I don't think he's bad, but he's drowning out everything else in the thread, make it hard for me to get a read on others.

then vote me fool

srsly I will leave now

Paul wrote:

Absalom wrote: Okay, the Paul show is getting a little old. I don't think he's bad, but he's drowning out everything else in the thread, make it hard for me to get a read on others.

then vote me fool

srsly I will leave now

Why would I vote for you if I don't think you are bad? That is not a good strategy.

Job wrote:Sure, but the only one that seems to apply is your post where you point out his hypocrisy by putting words in others mouths. I'll be happy to comment on that, but I think your other questions directed toward him are odd, did you want my input on something in particular?

If you're going to complain about the talk of him being based on being new to the site, then why not encourage the discussion that DOES exist about him that has nothing to do with that?

Paul wrote:Rachel yeah but in doing so scum have to give terrible reasons for a vote

when I say wagon I assume a conscious effort by the thread, otherwise its not as effective

Do civilians never give terrible reasons for votes in this case?

I don't understand the "bandwagons are good" idea. That seems ridiculous to me.

I'm rooting for the scum.

Job wrote:

Paul wrote:

Lot wrote:I could see Paul getting a lot of votes... I'd consider voting that way. So far not much has stood out for me. Paul has, very much, with posts and practices which seem designed to set himself apart. So has Ruth - what with the apparent fishing for finding out where people are from and then waving it off as a joke.

Out of curiosity, I wonder if anyone felt that their vote in the poll yesterday turned out to be worthwhile. I, for one, do not - at least I have no reason to believe it was for now.

this post essentially says I could see a wagon on Paul so I'm not gonna commit to voting him but gonna leave the possibility here for later b/c I am scum and need to find a reason to vote someone

I agree this post of Lots was odd. Why state your intent to vote someone simply because they have the potential to get a lot of votes? Vote for who you find suspicious, don't vote someone just because all the cool kids are doing it.

This is what I find suspicious about Lot too. His first post of the game was a similar comment, voting for The Law because everyone else was. How is that a good reason?

Still in the middle of the catch up. Two things that I noticed are a lot of people are seeing my flippiant behaviour as suspicious, and Paul vs. Lot back and forth.
Well, I admit it, I'm enjoying the sock identity. It's freeing, and I for one intend to enjoy it. I used Paul's terms because it was fun trying to get you to guess whether I was new or not. Busted.

I did not defend Paul, nor did I accuse him of anything. I questioned him. The fact that I like that he's moving things a long doesn't mean I'll declare him as righteous right off the bat. So I both eyed those who expected him to explain what it was he saw as scummy, when I don't really think he could have done that, and I pushed him as well.
You are all funny. Someone plays a little different than you're used to, you automatically feel the need to mark him. It doesn't mean you need to give him a free pass, but don't all jump on him.

That said, and I'm coming to the second thing I noticed, Lot and Paul seemed to go at each other quite strongly. I'm thinking maybe too strongly. Conveniently, Paul has already voted, and Lot said he wouldn't vote for Paul now, because unlike Paul, he's holding off on his vote until later. I wonder if they're not trying to put some distance from each other. In any case, if I had to call one of them bad right now, I'd go with Lot.

And Martha is just annoying. I wouldn't mind lynching her just to get rid of the dear hunny

Rebecca wrote:Host: Can we attain sainthood by making martyrs of ourselves?

What? No! That would ruin the carpet.

Sainthood is bestowed upon those who bring the beer.