The Syndicate

I'm personally still inclined more towards seeing SVS as suspicious than Hedgeowl, but they'd be my numbers one and two right now.

I don't find anything suspicious about Gumshoe contributing to the discussion. I'm more pinged by those, like Sloonei, whose "initial reaction" was that Gum was defending Cobalt. I don't think it's likely that a baddie teammate would "jump to the rescue" so early, and for so little. He's trying to drum up a suspicion between Cobalt and Gumshoe that I don't buy. Is it that easy to catch baddies?

Epignosis wrote:Long Con is still my #1 suspect, however.

His manipulation is transparent to me.

Long Con wrote:I'm not too pinged by this truce thing, and I don't know what to think about the shoving match between MP and Epig yet.

In case I haven't been clear, here is what I see is happening in this one line:

Long Con mischaracterizes and trivializes the exchange MP and I had Day 0. He quoted a bunch of posts from MP and me and called it a shoving match. He said he doesn't like the term "pissing match" (Glad he forewent "tug of war" ). Neither of those terms accurately describes what was going on there.

However, this serves the neater purpose of giving LC a place to vote if either an Epignosis or MP lynch gains momentum. He comments on it without saying anything meaningful about it (except for making it sound uglier than it is), which shows his audience that he is aware something is going on there, all the while leaving himself free to vote for either of us if the opportunity presents itself.

The "manipulation" you're seeing is only your own paranoia. I wasn't manipulating anything, I was just offering my point of view on the current goings-on.

I don't think "tug of war" is the metaphor I would use for the exchange between you and MP. I saw it more as you each confronting the other with questions that demanded answers, while the other deflects it away with a different question. It's pretty much up to any reader to decide if the "shoving match" metaphor is accurate, or way off. It describes how I read the exchange, so it's the metaphor I used.

I'm surprised by how defensive you got about it. In the last part of the quoted post, you have me voting for you and MP over this. I didn't comment on it to say it's suspicious, or even that it's unusual for the two of you. I said I don't know what to make of it, and you are reading a lot into that and feeling threatened by it. All it means is that you guys asked more questions than you gave answers, and that left some things hanging, cut off others before they could become discussions. Maybe I'll "know what to make of it" when there's more answers and opinions, and less stonewalling.

I voted Long Con the Baddie because it's the right thing to do.

Also, I won't be around much until Saturday.

I'll have to get into the game tomorrow evening, I'm falling asleep. More to reread in this Day 0 than any I can remember, though!

I did think it was strange when Hedgeowl was talking about bandwagon votes before voting even started. I thought it was a good sentiment for me personally to have out there, since Epig and Cobalt seem to wish for a bandwagon to happen on me, but it's an odd thing to say nonetheless.

S~V~S may be trying to pocket me with her defense of the word "interesting" and attack on Epig. My lynch would end up making her look better, and my survival with her in my "good books" would be advantageous as well.

If I were making a rainbow list at this point, I'd have Sloonei, Hedgeowl, S~V~S, and Epig as slight Mafia reads, and Golden and MP as slight Civ. I guess I don't need to invoke the rainbow to just say that. I want to read back over the Gumshoe stuff to see who else seemed to be trying to cast it in a worse light than I think it is, I don't think Sloonei was the only one, just the one that stuck out to me.

Linki: Thanks, MM, good to know I can always count on your support. If you did vote, could you let us know if votes are changeable in this game?

LC why do you suspect Epi and SVS?

Nevermind I see it. Do you think Epi is bad because he wants to start a bandwagon on you?

Epi for his defensive reaction to the "shoving match" comment. He's turned it into an excuse to suspect and vote for him, when it was just a comment on the situation. And he's accusing me of lying about saying things to gauge reactions, when the shoving comment wasn't even the first time I did it.

The S~V~S suspicion is based on her possible buddying behaviour to me. I have seen her do this kind of thing in the past, so it stands out to me. It also seems a bit like she was choosing that "issue" to comment and offer opinion about, because it's not a direct player opinion or accusation, but it does show up as contribution. Comments on issues rather than players are an easy way for a baddie to be involved without getting their hands dirty.

I have to admit I have no read in SVS at this point. I don't feel like I have enough information yet. Epi seems okay so far. Not sure about LC, he feels a bit squirrelly.

Long Con wrote:Comments on issues rather than players are an easy way for a baddie to be involved without getting their hands dirty.

I feel like this is so on point.

I find it interesting that Long Con has decided to name me as a suspect because of my Gumshoe posts. I'd like to hear more on that.

nutella wrote:FTR, one of Dom's rules on the first page is "do not copy and paste messages from the host" -- to me this indirectly implies that it is okay to talk about them in passing. However, still, it's usually looked down upon/seen as bad form/at least not common I think around these parts to discuss host PMs so it might be a good idea not to, although I of course realize I already participated in that exchange because I thought it was interesting (god I'm never going to be able to use that word without being self-conscious now )

This.

You may talk about your PMs. You may brainstorm ideas about what they might mean. You cannot share verbatim what they said. You cannot copy and paste them. You can, however, say something like this:

My PM said something about Mary Rodgers and Assassins. What do you guys make of that? Do you think Mary could be an Assassin?

Neither Mary nor Assassins are roles in this game, only examples.

In short, go ahead and talk about your PMs, but don't directly share WHAT you received.

Golden wrote:Are we allowed to speak of our PMs in the thread at all?

Yes.

Scotty wrote:Dom, wtf did I just receive. It looks like you had a stroke when writing that. I feel like I'm missing something here...

nijuukyugou wrote:

Golden wrote:Are we allowed to speak of our PMs in the thread at all?

Ah shit, probably should've waited for the answer to this. Sorry if I screwed up!

You didn't.

What role do we all think our positions in the poll played in the PMs we received?

Sloonei wrote:What role do we all think our positions in the poll played in the PMs we received?

I think the numbers might correspond to roles. Not necessarily in order (i.e. role 1 on the list might not be number 1 in the poll - they could have been randomized), but just because I think my PM was a role description based on its content. It was all jumbled up like others have said, but in the middle there were a few words that strung together to make an actual sentence. As I understand, I can't repeat that sentence. I will say that I think the description I got applied to a civ role, if that's what they actually are.

I don't get the Hedgeowl suspicion at all. She posted while catching up and gave her input on a couple main discussions. None of her posts look particularly bad to me, just kind of average minimal-but-sufficient participation. I guess I understood LC's point (though it was regarding SVS) about commenting on issues rather than players, but Hedgie gave her views on LC/Epi/SVS so that doesn't really apply. I don't know, she could be hiding behind that type of participation (I haven't played many games with her but isn't it kind of her norm?) but I just don't really see the reasons for suspecting her, they seem contrived.

I could see SVS as bad. I mean, SVS is always bad

Gumshoe wrote:

Hedgeowl wrote:MP's redonkulous rainbow list aside ( )

I feel like I've seen a couple of people making fun of his list and I don't really understand why. Keeping a list rating how suspicious you are of each person in addition to your notes seems like a good idea. Is it just because his is color-coded?

I can't speak for others, but for me personally, I feel like the last full game I played with multiple people using rainbow lists quickly led to a select few people dominating the conversation with information overloads. To the point where I often skimmed a lot of stuff because I simply didn't have the time to read everything.

That being said, it was a game I ended up subbing out of, so take that for what you will.

nutella wrote:I don't get the Hedgeowl suspicion at all. She posted while catching up and gave her input on a couple main discussions. None of her posts look particularly bad to me, just kind of average minimal-but-sufficient participation. I guess I understood LC's point (though it was regarding SVS) about commenting on issues rather than players, but Hedgie gave her views on LC/Epi/SVS so that doesn't really apply. I don't know, she could be hiding behind that type of participation (I haven't played many games with her but isn't it kind of her norm?) but I just don't really see the reasons for suspecting her, they seem contrived.

I could see SVS as bad. I mean, SVS is always bad

You've commented more frequently on issues than on players in this game. Do you have any opinions about players yet?

As a follow up to my last post, discussion of game mechanics and ideas can be just as important as discussion about players and neither one should be looked down upon. It's important to get a good balance of both, I think, especially in a game like this one. My above post directed at nutella is just me seizing an opportunity to generate Day 1 discussion.

...I just stated some.
For the most part though it is too early for me to form reads unless something crazy happens. As for LC and Epi, idk I think they're their usual zany selves, could be any alignment.

Bullzeye wrote:

Sloonei wrote:What role do we all think our positions in the poll played in the PMs we received?

I think the numbers might correspond to roles. Not necessarily in order (i.e. role 1 on the list might not be number 1 in the poll - they could have been randomized), but just because I think my PM was a role description based on its content. It was all jumbled up like others have said, but in the middle there were a few words that strung together to make an actual sentence. As I understand, I can't repeat that sentence. I will say that I think the description I got applied to a civ role, if that's what they actually are.

My thoughts exactly, pretty much. I was thinking there could be multiple roles mixed in to a single PM, or muliple PMs containing the entire description of a role when combined together, but I imagine it will be difficult/near impossible to test these theories.

nutella wrote:...I just stated some.
For the most part though it is too early for me to form reads unless something crazy happens. As for LC and Epi, idk I think they're their usual zany selves, could be any alignment.

Is there any more to your seeming suspicion against SVS, or is it just a hunch at this stage?

Sloonei wrote:

Bullzeye wrote:

Sloonei wrote:What role do we all think our positions in the poll played in the PMs we received?

I think the numbers might correspond to roles. Not necessarily in order (i.e. role 1 on the list might not be number 1 in the poll - they could have been randomized), but just because I think my PM was a role description based on its content. It was all jumbled up like others have said, but in the middle there were a few words that strung together to make an actual sentence. As I understand, I can't repeat that sentence. I will say that I think the description I got applied to a civ role, if that's what they actually are.

My thoughts exactly, pretty much. I was thinking there could be multiple roles mixed in to a single PM, or muliple PMs containing the entire description of a role when combined together, but I imagine it will be difficult/near impossible to test these theories.

Hmm, maybe... It does look like there's a lot more to my PM which is too jumbled to read. I'd assumed I was only able to understand half of one description, but I suppose it's equally possible that some of the rest actually refers to a different role entirely.

Guys I'm sorry to say that but I'm gonna ask to be replaced. Turns out playing two games at once is just a bad idea.

I do have time in real life for it, but I just can't focus on two games at once. I don't have the patience necessary, and I think this game is the one that's gonna suffer the most for it (the other game is smaller and has a bunch of people I'm used to play with, so I'm having an easier time focusing on it than this one).

So I'm gonna quit before my performance starts suffering too much. I'm sorry. I promise I'll still play more games at the syndicate in the future.

but... but, Dragon! :'(
just get lynched day 1 of your other game.

Bullzeye wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Bullzeye wrote:

Sloonei wrote:What role do we all think our positions in the poll played in the PMs we received?

I think the numbers might correspond to roles. Not necessarily in order (i.e. role 1 on the list might not be number 1 in the poll - they could have been randomized), but just because I think my PM was a role description based on its content. It was all jumbled up like others have said, but in the middle there were a few words that strung together to make an actual sentence. As I understand, I can't repeat that sentence. I will say that I think the description I got applied to a civ role, if that's what they actually are.

My thoughts exactly, pretty much. I was thinking there could be multiple roles mixed in to a single PM, or muliple PMs containing the entire description of a role when combined together, but I imagine it will be difficult/near impossible to test these theories.

Hmm, maybe... It does look like there's a lot more to my PM which is too jumbled to read. I'd assumed I was only able to understand half of one description, but I suppose it's equally possible that some of the rest actually refers to a different role entirely.

I just looked back at mine and it seems more consistent, like it could just be a single role, than I'd initially thought. I could still see it being parts of multiple roles, but I think I'm leaning more towards it being a single role.

Dragon D. Luffy has been replaced by Cancucklehead. She cannot be lynched today.

Welcome Canucklehead.
Peace out Dragon, and good luck in your other game. I look forward to playing more games with you in the future. Sorry you had to leave.

Dom wrote:Dragon D. Luffy has been replaced by Cancucklehead. She cannot be lynched today.

Epignosis wrote:

Dom wrote:Dragon D. Luffy has been replaced by Cancucklehead. She cannot be lynched today.

what are you so scared of, little puppy?

Sloonei wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Dom wrote:Dragon D. Luffy has been replaced by Cancucklehead. She cannot be lynched today.

what are you so scared of, little puppy?

You didn't witness the maelstrom of deceit that was Canucklehead in Roger Rabbit.

They still whisper about it in Toontown.

Long Con wrote: I don't think "tug of war" is the metaphor I would use for the exchange between you and MP.

I should hope not. It was a crude joke.

Long Con wrote:I'm surprised by how defensive you got about it. In the last part of the quoted post, you have me voting for you and MP over this. I didn't comment on it to say it's suspicious, or even that it's unusual for the two of you. I said I don't know what to make of it, and you are reading a lot into that and feeling threatened by it. All it means is that you guys asked more questions than you gave answers, and that left some things hanging, cut off others before they could become discussions. Maybe I'll "know what to make of it" when there's more answers and opinions, and less stonewalling.

You think I'm feeling threatened and getting defensive? About a suspicion I initiated against you?

Long Con wrote:Epi for his defensive reaction to the "shoving match" comment. He's turned it into an excuse to suspect and vote for him, when it was just a comment on the situation. And he's accusing me of lying about saying things to gauge reactions, when the shoving comment wasn't even the first time I did it.

Yes, that it what I'm accusing you of. Nail on the head. You had two posts prior (this one and this one, putting an eye on DFaraday and Scotty, respectively. I could (maybe) see how these are attempts to gauge reactions, but don't you think those two attempts lack subtlety? They're so blatant that you had to know no one would take them seriously enough for you to learn anything.

But those two posts are very different from you saying this:

Long Con wrote:I'm not too pinged by this truce thing, and I don't know what to think about the shoving match between MP and Epig yet.

I don't know what kind of reactions you thought this post might generate. Rather, this is the kind of thing you say in order to AVOID a reaction, not get one. So I don't believe in this particular instance, you were gauging reactions, which is what you implied you were doing.

So I've been doing some Zodiac Killer type shit with my message last night and I'll get to my ideas on that in a bit after work, but this post has me questioning:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I almost got lynched day 1. But I managed to talk myself out of it.

Now it's day 2 and suddenly I got a lot of vote analysis to do.

While here, there are like 15 players I don't know and which I have to do ISOs of and decide what to think about.

This ain't gonna work. I'm gonna start procrastinating and both games are gonna suffer for it.

I get it, having split focus in this type of game is probably not the best idea. But psychologically, what variable would have him choose the other game over this? More relevancy? Or just that he doesnt know people here? I'm willing to bet it's the former.
Now what would make him most relevant? Could be that he has a role or is mafia in the other game. I don't know exactly. Not gonna speculate about the other game in so much as it seems that THIS game he has less of a role. So I'm willing to BET that he is probably roleless in this game. Am I reading too much into nothing?

Either way, welcome Cancucklehead!

I don't have anything to add to the Epi-LC-SVS discussion.

Also, sorry Long Con. I had you and Forge Digger mixed up from the JTM game. MY BAD. I take back what I said aboutcha.

Canuck!!

@Sloonei: Nah I don't really see any particular reason to really suspect SVS right now, just that I'm always wary of her as she has a notorious record and I don't want to be subject to potential deceit. But yeah no I don't agree with Epi's comments on her, I think so far her posts have been reasonable. I just don't want to assume anything either way.

linki @ Scotty I don't really think there are vanilla roles in this game? I could be wrong of course but I'm guessing everyone has an ability of some sort. But it's possible Dragon's role wasn't a particularly exciting one. I don't want to read too much into his decision though.

I'm going to look at the last two pages and see if there's anything I want to comment on. However, I wanted to post about the cryptic pm I received first.

I would like to preface this by saying that I showed Dom word for word what I planned to say about my PM and asked him if that was okay. I would recommend everyone else do the same before sharing information about their PMs out of respect to Dom but I'm not your mother. Also, your room is a pigsty. Clean it up or you're grounded.

My pm mentioned Sondheim, Brown, Schwartz, and Hammerstein together. It also repeated "lyricist" and "3/4" over and over. I think it may be Schwartz's role and I don't think he's a threat to us but I obviously can't be certain.

XthAtGAm3RGuYX wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Hey Gamer Guy what do you make of this day zero?

Jesus Toast all around.

Personally I don't really start playing until day 2. I work better with hard facts and analytical data. Occasionally the classic freduian slip. For now none of this shit really means anything, but it may be useful in hindsight later down the road. I've mostly been skimming because I make a conscious effort not to engage in day 0. Gotten myself in trouble quite few times because I thought I would be smartass in one way or another.

This post keeps worrying me every time my eyes pass over it. I know every player has theirnown style, and i've certainly seen this particular style used effectively by townies (i do it sometimes myself), I never like a player giving themselves an excuse not to be active at any stage in the thread. GamerGuy has a few posts like this already. I am not saying that this strategy is dishonest or that his internet problems are not real, but I Refuse to give him a pass just because of these posts.
Tell us if you have any thoughts, Mr Gamer.

Scotty wrote:

I get it, having split focus in this type of game is probably not the best idea. But psychologically, what variable would have him choose the other game over this? More relevancy? Or just that he doesnt know people here? I'm willing to bet it's the former.
Now what would make him most relevant? Could be that he has a role or is mafia in the other game. I don't know exactly. Not gonna speculate about the other game in so much as it seems that THIS game he has less of a role. So I'm willing to BET that he is probably roleless in this game. Am I reading too much into nothing? [/quote]

Allow me to explain.

1) Size of the game (which requires more work)
2) More people I don't know (which again, requires more work)
3) Return of a bunch of people who have been away from my forum for months (which just makes me excited to play the other game).

Nothing to do with roles. I can guarantee that.

Again, I'm sorry.

/out

Gumshoe wrote: My pm mentioned Sondheim, Brown, Schwartz, and Hammerstein together. It also repeated "lyricist" and "3/4" over and over. I think it may be Schwartz's role and I don't think he's a threat to us but I obviously can't be certain.

Lyricist could apply to any of those names. And 3/4 is a time signature indicative of a waltz. Mine was something about "revived" and "most overrated". I hope that's not a shot at The King and I.

I do think it was odd that Hedge brought up bandwagons for no particular reason. I think it could be to preemptively establish herself as looking better if one player does take a lot of votes, while also not really committing to anything herself.

Epi is reading as standard throw-everything-at-the-wall Epi to me, and LC hasn't done anything to ping me either. I don't agree with Epi that LC was using inflammatory language or trying to avoid offering his thoughts. He's done quite a lot of offering that I can see.

SVS is also on my radar for how strongly she reacted to the "interesting" thing. I doubt anyone will get lynched because they used an empty term like "interesting" or such, so her reaction towards Epi seemed misplaced.

Sorry to keep getting you roped back into this, Luffy. For now I'm keeping you neutral-civ in my book til Canuck makes an appearance.

Now if what Nutella said is true, it would make sense that maybe the PMs are hints at what the roles/shows do in this game?

DFaraday wrote:Epi is reading as standard throw-everything-at-the-wall Epi to me

I had a brief exchange with MP, went after LC for how he characterized it and construed his purpose in commenting on it, and I'm also suspicious of S~V~S for reasons I gave yesterday.

Is "throw-everything at-the-wall" how you are really reading me?

Epignosis wrote:

DFaraday wrote:Epi is reading as standard throw-everything-at-the-wall Epi to me

I had a brief exchange with MP, went after LC for how he characterized it and construed his purpose in commenting on it, and I'm also suspicious of S~V~S for reasons I gave yesterday.

Is "throw-everything at-the-wall" how you are really reading me?

Would you object to this analysis of you? Why?

Sloonei wrote:

XthAtGAm3RGuYX wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Hey Gamer Guy what do you make of this day zero?

Jesus Toast all around.

Personally I don't really start playing until day 2. I work better with hard facts and analytical data. Occasionally the classic freduian slip. For now none of this shit really means anything, but it may be useful in hindsight later down the road. I've mostly been skimming because I make a conscious effort not to engage in day 0. Gotten myself in trouble quite few times because I thought I would be smartass in one way or another.

This post keeps worrying me every time my eyes pass over it. I know every player has theirnown style, and i've certainly seen this particular style used effectively by townies (i do it sometimes myself), I never like a player giving themselves an excuse not to be active at any stage in the thread. GamerGuy has a few posts like this already. I am not saying that this strategy is dishonest or that his internet problems are not real, but I Refuse to give him a pass just because of these posts.
Tell us if you have any thoughts, Mr Gamer.

Allow me to clarify. I am not declaring that I will be inactive. Just stating that I normally don't have very strong opinions early on. I'm pretty indecisive, and without anything I could call proper evidence I normally don't chase down any suspicions. When I make a case, I want make it good, and I want to make it once. If I see anything worth pointing out, then I do. But otherwise I wait for the indisputable vote data and night kills to land at my door, and see what I can do with that.
I also deal in profile activity from time to time but most of you seem to be already circumventing my hunting methods for that angle.

It also doesn't help that in 90% of the games I play I can't help but see most day 1 talk as baseless banter. Game doesn't really start until day 2 for me.

Sloonei wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

DFaraday wrote:Epi is reading as standard throw-everything-at-the-wall Epi to me

I had a brief exchange with MP, went after LC for how he characterized it and construed his purpose in commenting on it, and I'm also suspicious of S~V~S for reasons I gave yesterday.

Is "throw-everything at-the-wall" how you are really reading me?

Would you object to this analysis of you? Why?

I'd rather hear DF respond first.

XthAtGAm3RGuYX wrote:I also deal in profile activity from time to time but most of you seem to be already circumventing my hunting methods for that angle.

It also doesn't help that in 90% of the games I play I can't help but see most day 1 talk as baseless banter. Game doesn't really start until day 2 for me.

What do you mean when you say people are circumventing your methods? What are your methods and how are the being circumvented? Am I one of the people who is doing this?
I don't disagree with the rest of your post. Day 1s are always a shot in the dark. However, I think Day 2 and everything afterwards become easier if we all talk and ask as many questions as we can. The more information that is available to the thread, the better.

Sloonei wrote:

XthAtGAm3RGuYX wrote:

Bass_the_Clever wrote:Hey Gamer Guy what do you make of this day zero?

Jesus Toast all around.

Personally I don't really start playing until day 2. I work better with hard facts and analytical data. Occasionally the classic freduian slip. For now none of this shit really means anything, but it may be useful in hindsight later down the road. I've mostly been skimming because I make a conscious effort not to engage in day 0. Gotten myself in trouble quite few times because I thought I would be smartass in one way or another.

This post keeps worrying me every time my eyes pass over it. I know every player has theirnown style, and i've certainly seen this particular style used effectively by townies (i do it sometimes myself), I never like a player giving themselves an excuse not to be active at any stage in the thread. GamerGuy has a few posts like this already. I am not saying that this strategy is dishonest or that his internet problems are not real, but I Refuse to give him a pass just because of these posts.
Tell us if you have any thoughts, Mr Gamer.

As far as I've experienced that's classic TGG, and before anyone jumps down my throat saying "defending him" and "interesting" I'm just pointing out things based on my prior knowledge and don't have a lean on him in either direction.

He's already defended himself just fine.