The Syndicate

sig wrote:First thing first what is an ISO post?

On Diiny he does seem to be being to aggressive, tone reading his posts I don't like them and would consider voting for him this phase. As well as the way he has targeted Roxy, out of the two I'm reading Diiny as scum more so then Roxy.

Jay's responses to Diiny was interesting it seems like he is trying to offer Diiny a way out of his behavior without directly doing so. This could just be because he thinks he is a strong civilian player and trying to help a fellow forum member, however if one were to flip mafia I would be inclined to think the other is as well.

I agree with Bea sentiment to not lynch Roxy based on random posting.
I dislike Long Con's lynch vote.

linki: To Long Con I'm just the "other guy" it seems. If I was the suspicious type I would say he used this wording on purpose hoping someone would pick up on it and see it as an attempt by Long Con to distance himself from me. Which would lead players to become suspicious and eventually lynch me. Good thing I'm not the suspicious type he probably just forgot my name.

sig wrote:Jay's responses to Diiny was interesting it seems like he is trying to offer Diiny a way out of his behavior without directly doing so. This could just be because he thinks he is a strong civilian player and trying to help a fellow forum member, however if one were to flip mafia I would be inclined to think the other is as well.

Roxy wrote:Be careful with ISO's sig bc they do islolate posts and then the meaning of your post can get lost out of context.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Roxy wrote:Be careful with ISO's sig bc they do islolate posts and then the meaning of your post can get lost out of context.

This can happen, certainly. Which is why I'd encourage anyone who feels they've been taken out of context to say so, and to judge the ISOing analyst for whether that contextual discrepancy was intentional.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Roxy wrote:Be careful with ISO's sig bc they do islolate posts and then the meaning of your post can get lost out of context.

This can happen, certainly. Which is why I'd encourage anyone who feels they've been taken out of context to say so, and to judge the ISOing analyst for whether that contextual discrepancy was intentional.

Why are we encouraging judgment of other players in a mafia game?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Which is basically what MM just said, so okay. :P

Ricochet wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Which is basically what MM just said, so okay. :P

Me too, earlier.

bea wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I have my doubts that most mafia teams would be concerned enough with a "Dusk 0" poll that they'd deliberately coordinate their votes beyond a couple people maybe on any one person.

I can testify from experience that a) its not unheard of but also b) it's really really really not a good move to make. I remember one game I played on another site where all but one of our team voted for an advantage to one of our teammates on day 0. After she flipped bad, the civs picked us off one by one. Except the one guy who didn't vote with us. He laughed at us bts. He laughed lots. I still hear his laughter.

bea wrote:

kneel4justice wrote:My main suspicion at this point is Ricco. First of all, he seems to be saying a lot, without really saying anything. Even when he voiced some suspicion, it's done in an "intrigued" tone, as if he's trying to avoid confrontation. If you add to that what K4J said about how he voted at the end of day 0 on the syndicate, it's another reason to not trust him at the moment.

As for rico - he seems fairly rico for me atm. I don't have a good feel for his civ vs his bad game as I've only played a few with him and tbh, I don't remember where he ended on any of them. (This is my fault not his) but his meta seems to be what I'd expect from him.

bea wrote:

Roxy wrote:

Diiny wrote:I should say that's more than an accusation of you being too quiet per se, it's an accusation of you being fundementally off-meta.

Sorsha also raised my eyebrow, chiming in to answer an easy question about polls and then leaving without sharing any views or making any real attempt to play mafia.

I'm also extremely unhappy with Roxy's off topic to mafia ratio. I won't be happy if you randomise at all. Day 1 is about MAKING concrete evidence through stirring shit and provoking reactions, not just waiting for it to happen and throwing your vote onto random people.

Seems my randomization post got a "provoking reaction"

It usually does from new peeps. Thanks for taking that bullet.

DIINY - Sorsha does that. She's got limited time too. She responds to what's most current/on topic when she catches up.

Rox and others - tend to Day 1 Day 1. We recognise that ALL arguments are based on very little. The weakest of pings. And lacking anything concrete to go on, we reserve the right to random vote.

Some of us feel that a random vote is as logical as a super weak "I got nothing else woe is me" Day 1 vote and JUST as easily manipulated by mafia as a "random" vote. I know one player that refuses to read the roles till like day 3.

I tend to not get anything near a vibe or feeling till like day 3 myself so I understand the random. I've done it. I've done it regardless of being civ or mafia. (Because even when I'm mafia, lots of our games are two mafia teams and then I still want to find baddies, just not my baddies) It's not done, at least in my part, to with hold info. It's done to find info. Some people find info differently than others. Some jump in and look and prod and question. Some sit back and watch the prodding and questioning and go from there. BOTH are needed for the civ cause.

Different styles for different folks. That's what makes this experiment awesome!

bea wrote:

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.

Diiny wrote:

Roxy wrote: Dii - get used to it

Your excuse for not actually really playing mafia is 'get used to it?' If you keep playing the way you're playing you're getting a vote. I want to see something solid, meaningful and accountable by day 1 standards from you. I'm not getting used to scumminess, and, if I understand you correctly, that you're asking me to is making me very uncomfortable

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Rbzmncaeaei wrote:@MM On my part or his?

On his part. Let me pull up some Syndicate statistics.

Economics Mafia, Jay had 769 posts.
Bullets over Broadway, Jay had 294 posts, but he subbed in Day 6.
Recruitment Mafia, Jay had 458 posts, but was killed Night 6.

Not your run-of-the-mill minimal poster.

sig wrote:

Matt F wrote:

sig wrote:...I understand it is Day 1 and we have little to go on but this seems kinda very weak.

Not sure how I feel about Rbz's theory, however, if you are civ, then shouldn't this read "...but this IS very weak" as opposed to "seems" and "kinda" ?

Also It could read is very weak, but it isn't very weak it just seems kinda weak. Writing is very weak is more confrontation in my opinion as well as implying it was meant to be weak. While seems kinda weak is just that is seems weak but it might not be.

This is quibbling over something very small, why if I'm civ would I right it the first way instead of the second way?

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

sig wrote:

Matt F wrote:

sig wrote:...I understand it is Day 1 and we have little to go on but this seems kinda very weak.

Not sure how I feel about Rbz's theory, however, if you are civ, then shouldn't this read "...but this IS very weak" as opposed to "seems" and "kinda" ?

Also It could read is very weak, but it isn't very weak it just seems kinda weak. Writing is very weak is more confrontation in my opinion as well as implying it was meant to be weak. While seems kinda weak is just that is seems weak but it might not be.

This is quibbling over something very small, why if I'm civ would I right it the first way instead of the second way?

This might be small, but I've seen people get lynched for wordplay on Day 1 enough in the past.

Same as it ever was.

sig wrote:Rbzmncaeaei I find you suspicious that you find it suspicious that I find you suspicious for thinking I'm suspicious.

Your counter argument is very good, though I don't believe there is any connection. I might have come off as being overly defense, but in my experience it is better to be proactive in defending oneself then being accused of ignoring what others have said about you. As I said Matt I didn't mean to keep the very there it just kinda happened.

When I mentioned bcornett24 I was unaware that we were allowed to change votes this game, this makes his early vote less strange.

linki: Interesting our day 0 poll was about different abilities such as option one does so and so.

Russtifinko wrote:Posting because the host tells me I will be a non-participant if I don't.

I will read up throughout today and try to say something intelligent.

rundontwalk wrote:

Russtifinko wrote:Posting because the host tells me I will be a non-participant if I don't.

I will read up throughout today and try to say something intelligent.

Why are you going to put so much thought in what you post? Trying to hide something? Just post your gut reads whether they are intelligent or not.

Choutas wrote:Thanks MP for tripping and getting us into this mess. I had a date with a scorching brunette and now I have to play a mafia with a bunch of smelly, uncivilized game engineers. When this is over I'll be bringing this over to the union...

Choutas wrote:I think I did my debt to the theme. I watched Stop Making Sense last night. I thought it was good. TH are musically great yet my style is miles away from that. New Wave must be my least favorite good period of rock. I have to say however that Girlfriend is Better is really addictive I have it on repeat.

Ricochet wrote:I don't get what the Host meant by "first virtual reality mafia game ever". If so, you may ask yourself, what have we been doing this entire time, playing online mafia?

It's driven by the story.

Virtual reality is not forum-based mafia.

Metalmarsh89 wrote: All I did was go into offline mode and open up some pages from the previous day. I'm pretty sure anyone has the ability to do that.

Cheater!

I need to figure out a way to prevent this from working.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

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

I will post in concurring crimson to agree with this statement.

Hey!!! No posting in my host color. Read the rules.

Do it again and see what happens.

Ricochet wrote:Is banter early voting common habit on RYM? I'm oscillating between reading bcornett24's vote as such and wanting to hear more from him on why he desired to make such an early vote for no serious reasons.

rundontwalk wrote:In RYM I like to vote for a lot of different people but I don't know how to do that here. Can we change votes?

Diiny wrote:Brian. (bcornet), you've had a weak start. From a player such as yourself that loves to quickly go toe-to-toe with anything new or challenging that may present itself and read into stuff a lot, I expected more from you than a pretty weak RVS and a lack of meaningful interaction with the thread whatsoever. What's up?

Diiny wrote:I'm also extremely unhappy with Roxy's off topic to mafia ratio. I won't be happy if you randomise at all. Day 1 is about MAKING concrete evidence through stirring shit and provoking reactions, not just waiting for it to happen and throwing your vote onto random people.

Roxy wrote:To whoever asked (I do not remember right now) - My vote for Ricochet was a for me to say to him - stop posting so famn much. Hence why I said "slow your roll".

I also find it highly suspicious MP was in the thread and did not say one word about random voting
(I bet it is KILLING him not to be able to argue his side)

Part of me wishes to be playing this awesome game, but then I would need to clone myself, and make sure that my clone has none of the memories from me developing the game or sending out the roles.

Hosting you all so far is really awesome though and better than playing.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Roxy wrote:To whoever asked (I do not remember right now) - My vote for Ricochet was a for me to say to him - stop posting so famn much. Hence why I said "slow your roll".

I also find it highly suspicious MP was in the thread and did not say one word about random voting
(I bet it is KILLING him not to be able to argue his side)

Part of me wishes to be playing this awesome game, but then I would need to clone myself, and make sure that my clone has none of the memories from me developing the game or sending out the roles.

Hosting you all so far is really awesome though and better than playing.

Ricochet wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Roxy wrote:To whoever asked (I do not remember right now) - My vote for Ricochet was a for me to say to him - stop posting so famn much. Hence why I said "slow your roll".

I also find it highly suspicious MP was in the thread and did not say one word about random voting
(I bet it is KILLING him not to be able to argue his side)

Part of me wishes to be playing this awesome game, but then I would need to clone myself, and make sure that my clone has none of the memories from me developing the game or sending out the roles.

Hosting you all so far is really awesome though and better than playing.

Fa-fa-fa-fa fa-fa fa-fa-fa far better, would you say?

bcornett24 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Is banter early voting common habit on RYM? I'm oscillating between reading bcornett24's vote as such and wanting to hear more from him on why he desired to make such an early vote for no serious reasons.

this vote seems to be generating some content so it seems to have served its purpose

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Diiny, I need you to talk to me. If I have developed any ability to read Syndicate games at all yet, I'd say you're the most likely player on Day 1 to be lynched right now as a direct result of your recent content. If you're town, I need you to give me confidence of that with open and continuous dialogue. You're an asset if you're on my side, but for the moment I harbor doubts.

Ricochet wrote:

bcornett24 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Is banter early voting common habit on RYM? I'm oscillating between reading bcornett24's vote as such and wanting to hear more from him on why he desired to make such an early vote for no serious reasons.

this vote seems to be generating some content so it seems to have served its purpose

By some content do you mean how it made some of us wonder qu'est-ce que c'est with your vote and some of us even voting for you after your move? Is this the content you imply you intended to achieve?

Diiny wrote:

Roxy wrote: Dii - get used to it

Your excuse for not actually really playing mafia is 'get used to it?' If you keep playing the way you're playing you're getting a vote. I want to see something solid, meaningful and accountable by day 1 standards from you. I'm not getting used to scumminess, and, if I understand you correctly, that you're asking me to is making me very uncomfortable

Long Con wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

bcornett24 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Is banter early voting common habit on RYM? I'm oscillating between reading bcornett24's vote as such and wanting to hear more from him on why he desired to make such an early vote for no serious reasons.

this vote seems to be generating some content so it seems to have served its purpose

By some content do you mean how it made some of us wonder qu'est-ce que c'est with your vote and some of us even voting for you after your move? Is this the content you imply you intended to achieve?

This post made "qu'est-ce que c'est?" ring through my mind over and over, even as I read on. I would Like this post if we had that here.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

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?

Long Con wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

sig wrote:

Matt F wrote:

sig wrote:...I understand it is Day 1 and we have little to go on but this seems kinda very weak.

Not sure how I feel about Rbz's theory, however, if you are civ, then shouldn't this read "...but this IS very weak" as opposed to "seems" and "kinda" ?

Also It could read is very weak, but it isn't very weak it just seems kinda weak. Writing is very weak is more confrontation in my opinion as well as implying it was meant to be weak. While seems kinda weak is just that is seems weak but it might not be.

This is quibbling over something very small, why if I'm civ would I right it the first way instead of the second way?

This might be small, but I've seen people get lynched for wordplay on Day 1 enough in the past.

Same as it ever was.

I agree, in that Mafia have more need to "craft" their posts than Civvies. Sig's accidental reveal that he was going back over his post before posting it to make sure it's just right is a little suspicious to me.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote: All I did was go into offline mode and open up some pages from the previous day. I'm pretty sure anyone has the ability to do that.

Cheater!

I need to figure out a way to prevent this from working.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote: All I did was go into offline mode and open up some pages from the previous day. I'm pretty sure anyone has the ability to do that.

Cheater!

I need to figure out a way to prevent this from working.

So I'm not really sure how to get around this, but I trust that everyone will not engage in this behavior, just as if I would hope that players do not break the "NO BTSC" rule.

The threads have been removed from viewing for a specific purpose, so please don't use backdoor ways to view them.

I appreciate that Metalmarsh89 was forthright about it and brought this to public attention, so despite engaging in it he will not be punished. However, going forward I would appreciate if both he and others did not do this.

Thanks!

sig wrote:First thing first what is an ISO post?

On Diiny he does seem to be being to aggressive, tone reading his posts I don't like them and would consider voting for him this phase. As well as the way he has targeted Roxy, out of the two I'm reading Diiny as scum more so then Roxy.

Jay's responses to Diiny was interesting it seems like he is trying to offer Diiny a way out of his behavior without directly doing so. This could just be because he thinks he is a strong civilian player and trying to help a fellow forum member, however if one were to flip mafia I would be inclined to think the other is as well.

I agree with Bea sentiment to not lynch Roxy based on random posting.
I dislike Long Con's lynch vote.

linki: To Long Con I'm just the "other guy" it seems. If I was the suspicious type I would say he used this wording on purpose hoping someone would pick up on it and see it as an attempt by Long Con to distance himself from me. Which would lead players to become suspicious and eventually lynch me. Good thing I'm not the suspicious type he probably just forgot my name.

sig wrote:

Long Con wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

sig wrote:

Matt F wrote:

sig wrote:...I understand it is Day 1 and we have little to go on but this seems kinda very weak.

Not sure how I feel about Rbz's theory, however, if you are civ, then shouldn't this read "...but this IS very weak" as opposed to "seems" and "kinda" ?

Also It could read is very weak, but it isn't very weak it just seems kinda weak. Writing is very weak is more confrontation in my opinion as well as implying it was meant to be weak. While seems kinda weak is just that is seems weak but it might not be.

This is quibbling over something very small, why if I'm civ would I right it the first way instead of the second way?

This might be small, but I've seen people get lynched for wordplay on Day 1 enough in the past.

Same as it ever was.

I agree, in that Mafia have more need to "craft" their posts than Civvies. Sig's accidental reveal that he was going back over his post before posting it to make sure it's just right is a little suspicious to me.

I always read through my posts as I'm sure you've seen my spelling and grammar skills aren't always the best when typing, especially when I type quickly. It seems as if your trying to find more reasons to find me suspicious, I've played as mafia before and while I'm not great I wouldn't have done something quite so stupid.

This is also all in regards to my wording of Seems/Kinda/Very which I've already said was a mistake on my part. This seems to me to be a desperate attempt to get me lynched.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Option 1: A player of your choice may ask the host whether a certain player is a certain role. That player will be told yes or no.
Option 2: All female players gain temporary BTSC for one cycle. Info-dumping and role outing is not permitted.
Option 3: Every player picks a city. Players will live in that city during the subsequent cycle.
Option 4: A player of your choice is consumed by insanity, the effects of which are unknown.
Option 5: Five players of your choice receive a rock. These rocks can be thrown at another player to block them.
Option 6: A player of your choice can use their night power twice during the subsequent Night.
Option 7: A player of your choice can track another player. During the subsequent Day, the player tracked may send a message to the tracker.
Option 8: A fake account can post and cast a vote the subsequent Day.