The Syndicate

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:The thing that made me reconsider Neverwhere as bad the most was her interaction with G-Man, but I think Sloonei has done well to show why that probably shouldn't be so important. G-Man seemed to enter the game as dead meat.

I feel more comfortable lynching Neverwhere than nutella. Anyone who follows my lead: I take full responsibility for whatever happens. I think it's the best move.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Sloonei wrote:But everyone seems to have left, rendering the discussion of other things unattainable.

Give me a topic. We can conquer the whole page if we must.

Sloonei wrote:The tally seems to have been pushed back an hour later from where it had normally sat at earlier when I was in the game. This is good, I thought we were approaching the final minutes before the deadline.

Sloonei wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Sloonei wrote:But everyone seems to have left, rendering the discussion of other things unattainable.

Give me a topic. We can conquer the whole page if we must.

You said you've got some town vibes from a few of nijuu's posts. Which posts in particular gave you these vibes and why?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:This seems to be ninja's primary defensive post in the face of Sloonei's suspicion, broken up so I can address individual points:

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:I don't want to quote Sloonei's entire case again because it was a real pain in the ass to format and re-format, but I will respond to points he brought up about me. For your convenience, his case can be re-read here for those of you who keep claiming you're going to "look up the case on Blooper again."

Reading through this case, I'm not even sure what team Sloonei is trying to peg me on, because neither team makes any sense. He said my interactions with G-Man and sig "do not paint me in a favorable light." So if he's making the claim that I'm on Team Webber, then he's also asserting that I threw not one, but TWO teammates under the bus without even trying to defend them. I don't count giving G-Man, a player who just subbed in, one day's grace as a defense. Even the host gave that to him. I also don't count not mentioning sig except later in an unfavorable way as a defense. And I sure as shit don't count VOTING FOR TWO PEOPLE ON MY "SUPPOSED TEAM" as a good way to play mafia. It doesn't matter if they were later votes. It would still be two supposed teammates. That's poor, lazy, and cruel team playing, and I'm not any one of those things.

I get the impression that Sloonei was more inclined to suspect you as a Team Webber member than a Team Wildhorn member. He can correct me if not. I have two points to make about your Team Webber-based self-defenses.

1.) They're unfair. It isn't remotely uncommon for a mafia player to vote for two team mates, and when it happens it is neither poor, lazy, or cruel play. It is perfectly valid strategy, and it often works. So for you to insinuate that it is an absurdity to be faced with these accusations is frankly incorrect.

2.) Your candor and language move me more than your logic. Your comments read to me like a frustrated townie who feels like the case against her is bunk (even if it is not bunk) who is lashing out. Mafia players are obviously capable of mimicking this manner of frustration, so it's up to everyone else to make a judgment call. And I think you read like a townie here.

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:If he's trying to peg me on Team Wilhorn, that's also nonsensical. I made a crazy tie-up vote Day 1 for LC a) to amuse myself and b) because I (rightly) believed LC was bad. I would never throw a teammate under the bus on Day 1, especially with a vote that close. That's idiotic. AND I VOTED FOR HIM AGAIN because my mind did not change about him.

I agree that it would be harder to peg you as a member of Team Wildhorn. That doesn't mean it's "nonsensical" though. In Economics on Day 1, Birdwithteeth placed a very bold vote for his mafia team mate Bass that could have legitimately gotten him lynched. It didn't. If someone suspects you've done something similar with your Day 1 LC vote, they have every right to say so. That person is then charged with the task of delivering a believable case for why he/she feels that way, but again -- it's never "nonsensical". That is unreasonable of you.

And given that I have illustrated a decently parallel example that worked brilliantly for the mafia, you definitely can't justify calling the notion "idiotic". Just like I said before: anti-town players have done these things and they have been effective in countless mafia games throughout the history of the Internet.

Spoiler: show

nijuukyugou wrote:Sloonei himself admits to making this case with major tunnel vision turned on, and it looks like the logic sensor was turned off. One of his other major points is that I didn't mention enough suspicion of sig at the right time, and that sig's weird posts about me gave him pause. I've already addressed the first point. As for the second point, I will say it again as I said to Sloonei: this is precisely the kind of paranoid suspicion that sig was going for. He attempted to paint me in a bad light by lying about me (he said I switched up a vote when I haven't switched a vote all game, even since he was lynched), then buddy up as he was going down (and then buddy back down again) so I could look bad.

Regarding the part I highlighted: please show me. You don't have to restate old defenses, but if you could refer me back to the point where you addressed this that'd be super. Otherwise, most of the points Sloonei makes about sig's commentary and then your responses must all be seen as speculative to anyone who is not either sig or you. However, you do provide an important example of sig attempting to smear you (by accusing you of some kind of bad vote switch that didn't happen).

Sloonei wrote:I am not familiar with nijuukyugou, so I can't claim to know how she would typically respond to a case like this one, but her strong dismissal of it as "nonsense", and all the stuff about her rejection of the theory that she's on a team with sig/g-man, makes me feel like this reaction is not genuine, and that she's reaching to swat the case away rather than addressing things directly.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Sloonei, I've reviewed your old case against ninja and I do disagree with some of your perspectives. I don't think you're suspicious for having them, but I'm not sure you're being entirely fair in your treatment of her content. It looks to me like you might be reading her through the "find the mafia alignment in this player" lens rather than the "find out what alignment this player is" lens. I'll reference a few specifics, quoting only your own text for the sake of brevity.

Spoiler: show

Sloonei wrote:Her response to MP here reads a little bit like backtracking/covering her tracks. She admits to misrepresenting (whether intentionally or not) the truth in regards to her earlier post about the truce discussion and also provides an excuse for herself to get off to a slow start. However, she then starts to provide a few reads. However however, as has been noted a bunch of times throughout this game, with two scum teams, the baddies should be doing about as much scum hunting as the townies in this game, so her observations that Epi 1.0 seemed to be "genuinely baddie hunting" and that "LC's response looks too defensive" could just as likely have been made by a baddie, presumably a non-Wildhorn one. The three names she mentions here (Epi, SVS, Long Con) were the three that everyone had an opinion of on Day 1, so it would have been nice to see Ninja dig a little deeper for reads here.

The matter of the "truce" on Day 0 strikes me as meaningless -- from everyone involved. I don't really care about Devin, MP/Epi, or ninja's perspective of that, because it is such a tiny thing. Otherwise, you seem to be leading yourself in the direction of a mafia read with the underlined content. It is indeed likely that members of both mafia teams have engaged in some mafia hunting, but that doesn't mean this should be raised as a point against ninja. Otherwise it must be raised against everyone who has shown any effort to mafia hunt. I don't see the logic.

The point you make about her choices of people to discuss being unoriginal is a better one. It's also one that could be applied to a ton of people from the Day 0/1/2 era when the Cobalt/LC controversy seemed to be 90% of the thread.

Spoiler: show

Sloonei wrote:I can't help but now read this post as her leaving the door open on all three lynch possibilities, creating the freedom for herself to vote any one of the three lynch candidates from that day. The bigger middle paragraph where she runs through her reasoning about all three feels a bit contrived and doesn't seem to fit as well with her previous statement that she's excited to have "decent suspicion" of all three and is "okay with voting any of them". Immediately after saying this, she expresses that she's not actually okay with voting Cobalt, waffles a bit on SVS, and ultimately settles on Long Con because she "likes Epi's case". I feel like a town Ninja would not have been so quick to make a decision here, even with changeable votes. Her later comments about doing it for the "interesting reactions" also now comes back to me as not particularly fitting with the tone of this post, as it is suggested here that she at least feigned careful reasoning before voting, and was not just doing it to provoke others.

This is the point you made that inspired me to compile this post. I think there are a few problems with your reasoning. You started with "I can't help but now read this post as her leaving the door open on all three lynch possibilities", which is definitely true since she said exactly that in the very post you're talking about. You're "reading" her post to mean something, as if it's a veiled implication, when it was actually something she stated explicitly. Moreover, if her stated strategy of "generating reactions" for her LC vote is to be viewed with suspicion, I find myself wondering why? If she is Team Wildhorn, then she is bussing the crap out of her team mate on Day 1. If she is Team Webber, then why should she even need to employ this "generate reactions" method when all three lynch candidates are not on her team? She could just pick one regardless of how and when and be comfortable.

Spoiler: show

Sloonei wrote:I especially disagree with her when she says sig's reaction to her vote gave many people their "first real ping" about him. I know I first became suspicious of sig because of the way he handled his own vote that day. I did not even become wary of his response to niju's vote until after he had been lynched and I looked back through his posts, and the only reason it stood out to me was because of how strange he was acting towards niju in particular. I think it's also worth noting that she makes absolutely no mention of that sig ping in her big huge follow up post. She does spend a lot of time telling us why Cobalt is bad, though.

It must be said that ninja didn't claim "many" people's initial ping on sig was related to sig's take on ninja's LC vote. ninja actually asserted that this sig reaction was her own first ping "and others in their analyses". This doesn't imply majority, it only implies someone. If it can be verified that at least one other player referenced sig's response to ninja's LC vote as a suspicious thing, then I'm satisfied with that.

However, the point you make about ninja failing to mention this ping she had about sig in her large catch-up compilation is sound. ninja should answer to that now, even if she has already done so. I'd like to hear a fresh defense.

Spoiler: show

Sloonei wrote:Lots of suspects, but still none named sig. She does offer support of Golden's G-man/Gamerguy theory, but she also remarks that it's "a bit of a stretch" and that she wants to give G-man a pass for a day. Perhaps setting herself up to begin bussing a teammate later on, but not right away. Because we can lynch Cobalt first (I'm aware I've just done a 180 from my previous stance on her "give G-man BOTD" remark).

Sloonei wrote:Here she finally mentions sig, after Scotty and I had both posted our cases against him and I specifically asked for people to respond to it a couple of times. As I noted in my previous post about sig/Ninja interactions, I find it a bit inconsistent that she claims to have both "forgotten about" sig and been "weirded out" by him. I now find it even more inconsistent, considering her later post about "getting her first ping" on sig after his reaction to her Day 1 vote.

I think these are the most suspicious moments in ninja's post history, so I agree with your concerns. I'll look back to see how she has addressed this problem.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Sloonei wrote:I am not familiar with nijuukyugou, so I can't claim to know how she would typically respond to a case like this one, but her strong dismissal of it as "nonsense", and all the stuff about her rejection of the theory that she's on a team with sig/g-man, makes me feel like this reaction is not genuine, and that she's reaching to swat the case away rather than addressing things directly.

I can understand your perspective. I don't know her style either so we're both left with our judgment calls, and as you said: we don't agree. I've found that some players are just a little cranky by nature when they are accused (particularly when accused repeatedly by one person). I think her behavior in defense against you seems to gel well enough with her conduct elsewhere in the game that I lean in favor of authenticity. She strikes me as a confident and capable player, and that type of player is probably more likely to be dismissive of cases against them regardless of alignment.

It's a tenuous gut read.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Sloonei wrote:I am not familiar with nijuukyugou, so I can't claim to know how she would typically respond to a case like this one, but her strong dismissal of it as "nonsense", and all the stuff about her rejection of the theory that she's on a team with sig/g-man, makes me feel like this reaction is not genuine, and that she's reaching to swat the case away rather than addressing things directly.

I can understand your perspective. I don't know her style either so we're both left with our judgment calls, and as you said: we don't agree. I've found that some players are just a little cranky by nature when they are accused (particularly when accused repeatedly by one person). I think her behavior in defense against you seems to gel well enough with her conduct elsewhere in the game that I lean in favor of authenticity. She strikes me as a confident and capable player, and that type of player is probably more likely to be dismissive of cases against them regardless of alignment.

It's a tenuous gut read.

Epignosis wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Sloonei wrote:I am not familiar with nijuukyugou, so I can't claim to know how she would typically respond to a case like this one, but her strong dismissal of it as "nonsense", and all the stuff about her rejection of the theory that she's on a team with sig/g-man, makes me feel like this reaction is not genuine, and that she's reaching to swat the case away rather than addressing things directly.

I can understand your perspective. I don't know her style either so we're both left with our judgment calls, and as you said: we don't agree. I've found that some players are just a little cranky by nature when they are accused (particularly when accused repeatedly by one person). I think her behavior in defense against you seems to gel well enough with her conduct elsewhere in the game that I lean in favor of authenticity. She strikes me as a confident and capable player, and that type of player is probably more likely to be dismissive of cases against them regardless of alignment.

It's a tenuous gut read.

I worked with her for four years in real life.

Sloonei wrote:@ jay: Have you had a chance to look into MP/Epi 2.0?

Sloonei wrote:@ jay: Have you had a chance to look into MP/Epi 2.0?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Sloonei wrote:I am not familiar with nijuukyugou, so I can't claim to know how she would typically respond to a case like this one, but her strong dismissal of it as "nonsense", and all the stuff about her rejection of the theory that she's on a team with sig/g-man, makes me feel like this reaction is not genuine, and that she's reaching to swat the case away rather than addressing things directly.

I can understand your perspective. I don't know her style either so we're both left with our judgment calls, and as you said: we don't agree. I've found that some players are just a little cranky by nature when they are accused (particularly when accused repeatedly by one person). I think her behavior in defense against you seems to gel well enough with her conduct elsewhere in the game that I lean in favor of authenticity. She strikes me as a confident and capable player, and that type of player is probably more likely to be dismissive of cases against them regardless of alignment.

It's a tenuous gut read.

I worked with her for four years in real life.

Was she dismissive when people accused her of murder at work?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Sloonei, what do you think of Epi numero dos?

Sloonei wrote: I also plan on looking into him when I can.

Epignosis wrote:

Sloonei wrote: I also plan on looking into him when I can.

When you cut me open with a hatchet?

Sloonei wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Sloonei wrote: I also plan on looking into him when I can.

When you cut me open with a hatchet?

is that permissible?

What do you think of Neverwhere? Why is your vote on me?

Epignosis wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Sloonei wrote: I also plan on looking into him when I can.

When you cut me open with a hatchet?

is that permissible?

What do you think of Neverwhere? Why is your vote on me?

Neverwhere? More like NeverHere amirite?

I don't think of Neverwhere. No opinion. I'll vote to keep it from being a tie, as I've always said.

My vote is on you because you left when I asked you a question. You came back, ignored it, and then when I asked again, you treated it as though it was a joke.

It wasn't a joke.

Sloonei wrote:For the people currently voting for or suspicious of Nutella: which team do you think she is more likely be on? Why?

OH MY GOD I DID IT THE SPOILER TAG WORKED

Sloonei wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Sloonei wrote: I also plan on looking into him when I can.

When you cut me open with a hatchet?

is that permissible?

What do you think of Neverwhere? Why is your vote on me?

Neverwhere? More like NeverHere amirite?

I don't think of Neverwhere. No opinion. I'll vote to keep it from being a tie, as I've always said.

My vote is on you because you left when I asked you a question. You came back, ignored it, and then when I asked again, you treated it as though it was a joke.

It wasn't a joke.

I had left before you asked the question. Would you like to know what real life activity I was engaged in at the time? When I returned I responded to it when I saw it. I did not take it seriously because it was an entirely speculative point. You believe I was converted upon resurrection because hooded figures appeared in the mod's night message. You believe the mod told the thread that I am a bad guy. I am new to the Syndicate, but I don't think that sort of thing happens in any game of mafia anywhere.

nijuukyugou wrote:I do have a heart and I feel bad reading nutella's recent posts imploring others not to lynch her, but I've been both burned by and laughed behind the scenes at baddie pathos too many times to let it sway me away from what I see regardless.

Epignosis wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Sloonei wrote: I also plan on looking into him when I can.

When you cut me open with a hatchet?

is that permissible?

What do you think of Neverwhere? Why is your vote on me?

Neverwhere? More like NeverHere amirite?

I don't think of Neverwhere. No opinion. I'll vote to keep it from being a tie, as I've always said.

My vote is on you because you left when I asked you a question. You came back, ignored it, and then when I asked again, you treated it as though it was a joke.

It wasn't a joke.

I had left before you asked the question. Would you like to know what real life activity I was engaged in at the time? When I returned I responded to it when I saw it. I did not take it seriously because it was an entirely speculative point. You believe I was converted upon resurrection because hooded figures appeared in the mod's night message. You believe the mod told the thread that I am a bad guy. I am new to the Syndicate, but I don't think that sort of thing happens in any game of mafia anywhere.

Do you mean that, because you have been resurrected, you should be above suspicion?

I have witnessed a resurrected lynched civilian be secretly recruited to the Mafia's side.

Guess which team won.

Sloonei wrote:No, I am just saying that your suspicion is 100% speculative, so there is nothing serious I can say in response to it. I am town because the Loch Ness Monster has ordained it so.

Epignosis wrote:I don't think of Neverwhere because Neverwhere is Neverhere.

I will vote to break a tie.

Epignosis wrote:

Sloonei wrote:No, I am just saying that your suspicion is 100% speculative, so there is nothing serious I can say in response to it. I am town because the Loch Ness Monster has ordained it so.

The Loch Ness Monster doesn't exist, dummy. Nice try.

Epignosis wrote:

Sloonei wrote:No, I am just saying that your suspicion is 100% speculative, so there is nothing serious I can say in response to it. I am town because the Loch Ness Monster has ordained it so.

The Loch Ness Monster doesn't exist, dummy. Nice try.

nijuukyugou wrote:Popping in. I will be short, sweet, and popping out after this, because after a fabulous night with friends I haven't seen in ages, I'm exhausted today from the late night travel and need a little less...cerebral activity. I can't even think of a good synonym for that.

Sloonei wrote:For the people currently voting for or suspicious of Nutella: which team do you think she is more likely be on? Why?

Based on vote record, probably Team Wildhorn.

I think her suspicion of splints is contrived (I expressed this in an earlier post), as well as others she's voted for multiple times (e.g., Cobalt), to go for the consistency merit badge in case they don't end up flipping Team Webber. This also gives me pause:

Spoiler: show

Epignosis wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Linki: What's a wasted opportunity?

To not use your vote strategically. It isn't vacant of value right now even if it might not be your final choice.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Look at me, capitalizing sentences (and fragments) like a real boy.

Split infinitive!

You know what I hate worse than rainbow lists?

Rainbow lists that make no sense.

nutella wrote:Sloonei
Golden
JJJ
SVS
Spacedaisy

Gumshoe
Niju (putting her in the middle because I was suspicious of her but am inclined to trust Golden and can see her as civ)

Devin
Epignosis
Metalmarsh

Neverwhere
DFaraday
Fingersplints

Gumshoe hasn't posted since Night 1. What warrants his place in your top six?

Devin hasn't posted since Night 1. What warrants his place lower than Gumshoe and nijuukyugou but higher than me?

I'm pleased to see brown was used in this "rainbow read." It's fitting.

It all looks contrived. I do have a heart and I feel bad reading nutella's recent posts imploring others not to lynch her, but I've been both burned by and laughed behind the scenes at baddie pathos too many times to let it sway me away from what I see regardless. I see sudden enthusiasm for a Neverwhere vote. I can see that from the inactive baddie perspective, but I don't have strong enough feelings in that direction to change my vote.

OH MY GOD I DID IT THE SPOILER TAG WORKED

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'm assuming the "by" in that post is meant quite literally. Correct Epignosis? You want content from the players in question, not others?