The Syndicate

@canuck: never mind- I see where you explained the squicky-ness a few posts up.

Frankly Doc, I think aapje is correct. A baddie had a chance to switch a lynch. Why wouldn't he? It sows chaos and confusion. It's entirely likely that neither unfurl or Bubbles have any relevance to that player and they were chosen just 'coz.

I am more piqued by those who seem to think they understand the motivations behind the switch, because it could suggest background knowledge.

timmer wrote:@Wilgy, I'm not sure I agree with your stance on unfurl/Bubbles. I'm not saying you are necessarily wrong, but that you are tuned in too heavily on one possibility.

Looking back, we were in position 2, so yes, Ubzargan had a lynch switch to use. So yes, it seems likely that he caused unfurl's death. But it's to what END where I am not sure you are right.

But Timmer, I'm never wrong.

Sorsha wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:While I fully acknowledge being one of the coal-shovellers on this Bubbles Lynch Train, the more passengers we acquire the more squicky I feel about it..... like, I'm starting to feel like I'm on the damn Snowpiercer and eating children and doing really unsubtle allegory and stuff.

I assume your past votes for bubbles have been because you really thought she was bad. So why now that others are seeing the same thing are you getting squicky about it?

Because my thoughts about things change when new information comes in, and new information suggests that many many people have no qualms about a Bubbles lynch, which could indicate she has no teammates.
I still think she's suspicious as guck, but this new information is causing me to assess in light of it.

Does new information not change the way you think about things? Do you think the same thoughts for the same reasons on Day 1 and Day 5?

Sorsha wrote:@canuck: never mind- I see where you explained the squicky-ness a few posts up.

....and you can disregard my previous post as well, because I now see that you see where I explained.

timmer wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
In one paragraph, you say you jump on bandwagons and you're cool with it. In the next paragraph, you call the cases bullshit. So you are admitting to jumping on bandwagons with bullshit cases.

My mantra has been this: support people who are remaining true to themselves, such as the people I mentioned (SVS, DH, Canuckle, etc. ) and vote for people who seem to be "playing a part" or who are trying to act a certain way that feels false. Because I really don't think this format requires people to change. So yeah, that's the path I've been following, basically.

I'm happy to vote for TinyBubbles because she doesn't seem genuine.

ETA: Wilgy, I have no idea why the word arbitrarily is funny to you, but I like that you're rolling with it, and I doubt I'll be voting you anytime soon

I support this strategy. I like your response.

DrWilgy wrote: But Timmer, I'm never wrong.

timmer wrote:

DrWilgy wrote: But Timmer, I'm never wrong.

Yes, really.

timmer wrote:

DrWilgy wrote: But Timmer, I'm never wrong.

Yes, really.

Double post. My bad.

So the temptation won: Voting DP, hopefully for the last time

So Doc, talk to me about your vote on SVS. What's your reasoning? I caught DH's thoughts, but I don't recall yours.

I'll follow you for now, aapje. No reason to support complete apathy.

vote moved to DP

thellama73 wrote:I actually do think DH would have been a likely choice for an early recruit, before it became clear what style he was adopting this game, and his refusal to give us anything this game makes me think he is expecting to coast into endgame. Not on my watch, Jack.

Is this hindsight you are employing?

I intended to try to finish my reads from the Golden files, but it'll have to be rather "breve", incomplete, occassionally inconclusive or undecided comments, because I have to wake early-ish again (and would rather test my new reflexes of going to bed earlier to go to work, even if tomorrow's just a stupid board meeting.../digress). I fully admit being absorbed into a certain talk the other day and not doing a great job focusing on what I said I will on this day, but I'll redress that.

This will be a sort of colorless list, with a not so clear hierarchy. None of them come perfectly clean out of it, but I still get worse vibes from some compared to the rest.

SVS, I think, feels least ungenuine and orchestrating, despite being so wrong and tunneling with her disconcertment. I get DH's ping to a degree, because her change of perspective about Golden did stood out to me as well, but SVS's idea that her switch was in sync of Golden's comments also checks out.

LoRab gives me pause with her timing (or rather her outburst, so to say) rather than the content of the suspicions. She started her case here, with rather more tangential criticism towards Golden (that he's holding on to his neutral unrecruitable mentality or something, plus some contradiction from him about Epig and himself ever working together) compared to the major backlash (the bait comment), developed then in her, so far, favourite MO, "neutral that don't inspire civ behavior are a danger". I'm more than aware she can make her arguments stick and be consistent, so it's her moodchange on D3 that I'm drawn back to. It's very sudden and decisive and I think there's nothing between it and her D1 verdict on the matter (that Golden sounds simply frustrated from being hounded). Nothing from her on D2, when Golden was getting heat no less. Sure she moved her vote to TH afterwards, but her eyeballing of Golden still stands out to me.

Dom's posts I'll definitely have to ISO, but I would like to say this, his meta doesn't give me the right vibes. I think I only played Film and Biblical with him and his directness, his suspicion-finger-waving, his occassional exclamations, etc., rather remind me more of Film, where, it so happens, he was in one of the bad teams (it was also a two-mafia-team format). In Biblical he was inquisitive and hunting, but with more restraint (to the point I couldn't even read him as Dom; for a while, I thought it was SVS, lol). Again, I couldn't spot anything blatantly bugging or inconsistent in his questioning, but it probably requires a re-read to figure it out.

for Rey we have a legacy suspicion from Golden and a very mixed bag of interaction(z) with him, some of his hounding not looking great (turning the heat on for Golden's guilt sentiments? calling the WIFOM of Golden killing Epig plausible out of nowhere, after two straight Days of debates? stuff like that, probably more). not liking his "siesta mode" either, does anyone have any meta on it? it doesn't quite make me believe it's a baddie tactic to retreat in the shadows after such a failed hunt (baddies who mislynch with a passion would probably try to save appearances, look elsewhere, brings out better names, stay in touch and don't lose cred altogether etc.), but I still find it odd. I'll put this "siesta" as just a ping for now and likely re-read the interaction to decide on the rest.

DH - mixed bag of interactions with Golden as well, but he'll probably require an ISO overall

Boomslang - didn't manage to focus on the case(s) on him whilst he was second wagon and a hot suspect Day 3 & 4, guilty as charged. I'd put his Golden vote into the "weak sauce" category, wagony even, but would really need to revisit his posts and others' stances on him atm.

Devin - I've said my share about his vote and activity, others say he does that all the time and that he'd be awful recruiting material the way he acts. Fair enough, I guess, but I still don't like it.

Timmer - addressed him in the same abovementioned post; still don't getting good vibes from him

with Bubbles' lynch not going through, I think the odds that she might be Uzbain's teammate exist, but they're admittedly slight compared to the idea that Uzborg is simply making a victim out of her as he did with unfurl. I don't feel this detracts my suspicions about Bubbles, though. I still think she may have pedalled away from Golden's wagon, had contradicting stances, might have tried to save appearances. Stuff for which I voted her D4 - her recent reactions to the lynch switch don't make me feel any better about her, but aren't the backbone of my case either - stuff for which I think I'll keep the vote, right now.

TinyBubbles

aapje wrote:

DisgruntledPorcupine wrote:

aapje wrote:

DisgruntledPorcupine wrote:

aapje wrote:

DisgruntledPorcupine wrote:Hello friends. I will try to answer some questions.

I'll try one. When are you planning on playing the game?

I am.

So apart from your lack of reading skills do you have anything of value to add to this thread?

I don't follow. My response made sense. You asked when I plan on playing, and I told you that I am playing.

And sure. I requested questions for a reason. For the record I plan on voting TinyBubbles again. She doesn't feel good to me.

Ah that would be why that response didn't make sense to me. We have a different definition of playing.

Ugh, not this again.

Well now I feel better about my vote.

Die DigruntledStevenWilson.

I am here behind around 4 or 5 pages.

Will try to add my thoughts when finished.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Well now I feel better about my vote.

Die DigruntledStevenWilson.

Why is that?

DisgruntledPorcupine wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Well now I feel better about my vote.

Die DigruntledStevenWilson.

Why is that?

Because timmer followed my vote.

Canucklehead wrote:

Sorsha wrote:

Canucklehead wrote:While I fully acknowledge being one of the coal-shovellers on this Bubbles Lynch Train, the more passengers we acquire the more squicky I feel about it..... like, I'm starting to feel like I'm on the damn Snowpiercer and eating children and doing really unsubtle allegory and stuff.

I assume your past votes for bubbles have been because you really thought she was bad. So why now that others are seeing the same thing are you getting squicky about it?

Because my thoughts about things change when new information comes in, and new information suggests that many many people have no qualms about a Bubbles lynch, which could indicate she has no teammates.

but there are a few players coming to her defense and there have been players saying for the past few days that they don't find her suspicious. If she was bad I don't expect baddie teammates would come to her defense.

I still think she's suspicious as guck, but this new information is causing me to assess in light of it.

Does new information not change the way you think about things? Do you think the same thoughts for the same reasons on Day 1 and Day 5?

It does. But in this case I'm not sure more people finding her suspicious changes my feelings on her.

timmer wrote:So Doc, talk to me about your vote on SVS. What's your reasoning? I caught DH's thoughts, but I don't recall yours.

I'm not going to type out everything again, here's the short and simple version.
1. Past history shows SVS has a thing for being a baddie
2. SVS was one of the leaders in lynching Golden
3. SVS was one of the players who survived day 1, meaning they had immunity (Ububuzagoon)

DrWilgy wrote:

timmer wrote:So Doc, talk to me about your vote on SVS. What's your reasoning? I caught DH's thoughts, but I don't recall yours.

I'm not going to type out everything again, here's the short and simple version.
1. Past history shows SVS has a thing for being a baddie
2. SVS was one of the leaders in lynching Golden
3. SVS was one of the players who survived day 1, meaning they had immunity (Ububuzagoon)

I also survived past Day 1. So did you. Have a cookie.

So you think BR made me a baddie recruiter becasue I would like it? Whether I have a "thing" for being a baddie has no bearing on role assignment. One & Three don't go together.

You're just stringing stuff together, when your attempt to save Bubbles with your Timmer suspicions did not fly, you jumped onto DHs post.

DrWilgy wrote:

timmer wrote:So Doc, talk to me about your vote on SVS. What's your reasoning? I caught DH's thoughts, but I don't recall yours.

I'm not going to type out everything again, here's the short and simple version.
1. Past history shows SVS has a thing for being a baddie
2. SVS was one of the leaders in lynching Golden
3. SVS was one of the players who survived day 1, meaning they had immunity (Ububuzagoon)

Survived what? I don't recall her being up for lynch or NK?

Day one there was a 12 or 13 player tie I think.

S~V~S wrote:Day one there was a 12 or 13 player tie I think.

Oh that?

Wilgy, so your case is three points, one of which is that SVS likes being bad (WTF?) and one of which is that she is one of a ton of people who didn't die from a hugely tied lynch? And this is because you assume one of them was Ubby? What about Terras protecting all Guardians that day?

If that's your case, I'm moving' on, sorry dude.

Don't wanna miss the vote but I've got no energy for mafia today and too tired to properly catch up from where I left off. Gonna vote Bubbles because it's very possible she was being saved yesterday and her lynch will help us to find out for sure.

I should hopefully be less busy within the next few days, depending on how quickly I get my work done.

So whats the plan when Tiny Bubbles doesn't flip bad?

Bullzeye wrote:Gonna vote Bubbles because it's very possible she was being saved yesterday and her lynch will help us to find out for sure.

One day this logic will be used against you, and you'll hate it.

Bullzeye wrote:Don't wanna miss the vote but I've got no energy for mafia today and too tired to properly catch up from where I left off. Gonna vote Bubbles because it's very possible she was being saved yesterday and her lynch will help us to find out for sure.

I should hopefully be less busy within the next few days, depending on how quickly I get my work done.

It's also possible a giant Unicorn took a dump on your lawn yesterday and flew into the sky to escape justice.

Out of class/work, need to cook/go to band practice. I'm not jumping on the Bubbles bandwagon because I haven't studied the case, so I'm putting in a protest vote for Lorab based on my previous analysis of the Rico/Lorab shooting match.

There's still time to do something else with this lynch. Even if we still do lynch Bubbles, the total landslide in the tally is the coziest possible position any baddie could ever want. Holding anyone among the current 11 voters accountable for any potential undesirable flip is going to be difficult by default simply because there are so many.

DH, if you could describe your desire to lynch S~V~S with one word, what would it be?

I mean the magnitude of your emotion. How strong is your desire?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:DH, if you could describe your desire to lynch S~V~S with one word, what would it be?

I mean the magnitude of your emotion. How strong is your desire?

I have two answers, but the one I'll use is Indomitable

Hey Turnip, please help me feel that you're not making things up:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Turnip, what difference(s) do you observe between my civilian game as you'd expect it and what you see in this game?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:DH, if you could describe your desire to lynch S~V~S with one word, what would it be?

I mean the magnitude of your emotion. How strong is your desire?

Hey JJJ make me feel you really care about being fair.

So I'm strangely moved by timmer's words. His responses to my questions/accusations and those of DrWilgy didn't seem to boast persuasive evidence-based content, but the tone and emotion of his responses is making me feel a good feeling. The feeling that I feel, it's intuitive man. It's like, I see his blue avatar of sadness, and I see the words in his posts, and I'm like yanno, okay man. I'll chill. Touched by a timmer.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Hey Turnip, please help me feel that you're not making things up:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Turnip, what difference(s) do you observe between my civilian game as you'd expect it and what you see in this game?

Do you think I'm making things up?

S~V~S wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:DH, if you could describe your desire to lynch S~V~S with one word, what would it be?

I mean the magnitude of your emotion. How strong is your desire?

Hey JJJ make me feel you really care about being fair.

I don't understand. Do you feel I have been unfair in this exchange with DH or elsewhere?

Turnip Head wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Hey Turnip, please help me feel that you're not making things up:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Turnip, what difference(s) do you observe between my civilian game as you'd expect it and what you see in this game?

Do you think I'm making things up?

Not necessarily. I think you could be making things up, or you could be wrong. I have rarely felt more comfortable within my civilian-styled game than I have in this one, frankly. If you perceive me to be mimicking it inadequately, then I need to see what inspired that perception.

If you can point something out and explain how it lead to your feelings, I'll decide whether I think you're making things up.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:If you perceive me to be mimicking it inadequately, then I need to see what inspired that perception.

Why?

Turnip Head wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:If you perceive me to be mimicking it inadequately, then I need to see what inspired that perception.

Why?

Because some portion of my brain is telling me that you don't actually feel the way you claim to feel about me and that I should sound the horns around the kingdom and call for your lynch. I need to understand your thought process to have the ability to believe you are expressing a real read.

DharmaHelper wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:DH, if you could describe your desire to lynch S~V~S with one word, what would it be?

I mean the magnitude of your emotion. How strong is your desire?

I have two answers, but the one I'll use is Indomitable

It sounds like you might be starved for an S~V~S lynch.

I'm not so inclined at the moment.

DharmaHelper wrote:In Recruitment Mafia's, it always pays to look for changes in tone and shifts in opinion. These are SVS's thoughts regarding Golden Day 1:

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 61#p168261

The part where he said he wanted Epi dead or God help him felt fairly sincere to me, Golden being a lay preacher and all. As I said initially, Goldens original line of questioning to me did not feel that odd,

-------

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 59#p168459

Unless Golden started out on someones short list, or is a recruiter himself, I don't see him applying for baddie positions in the various contests that the host is likely to have, based on prior experience with their games. I also think that, based on odds, he is as unlikley to have started out as a baddie recruiter as anyone else,

So I think that the odds of Golden finishing the game as a civ or a neutral are somewhat higher than for most people.

==================

She spent all of Day 2 hounding Golden for "baiting" the Epi kill, ignoring that 24 hours previous, she made some good points about how unlikely he was to be bad. To me, this reads like SVS sees an easy lynch and is going for it. No skin off her back, if he flips neutral early.

I think SVS is the Ubzergan (sp) recruit from the role picture contest, or Ubzergan herself.

I think this case is a stretch based on time periods between the events you listed. However, SVS's reaction didn't sit well with me-- do you have any other observations of SVS that you think are damming?

I don't.

So, unless you can illuminate something, I won't be voting for her.

Canucklehead wrote:While I fully acknowledge being one of the coal-shovellers on this Bubbles Lynch Train, the more passengers we acquire the more squicky I feel about it..... like, I'm starting to feel like I'm on the damn Snowpiercer and eating children and doing really unsubtle allegory and stuff.

You always crack me up, Canuck.

I don't see why the Sorsha lynch has gone to the wayside.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:DH, if you could describe your desire to lynch S~V~S with one word, what would it be?

I mean the magnitude of your emotion. How strong is your desire?

I have two answers, but the one I'll use is Indomitable

It sounds like you might be starved for an S~V~S lynch.

I'm not so inclined at the moment.

I'm not being forced by the hunger to promote an SVS lynch.

DharmaHelper wrote:I'm not being forced by the hunger to promote an SVS lynch.

Is that a thing? I just picked a word that appealed to me.

Rico/Lorab - n/rc or n/n or rc/n etc. I am not sure. What I do think we have hereis a style clash of sorts. I have reallly had no particularly bad vibes from either so I think I will just be watching them both for now. Beside when you watch loran she does this
cute twirly thing.

DH/SVS - I am not feeling DH:s case atm It feels like he just popped up with it so he would have something new to add to the thread to discuss poss bc he was not agreeing with the Bubbles lynch but then he goes on and asks to be voted for. I do not understand this ploy at all.

Bubbles - already stated how I feel about her and her lynch.

DP - was very disappointed that he cba,ed to respond to me. I understand why he is getting the votes he has so far.

Llama vote for DH - I cannot remember much from you inre:DH. is it bc of his asking to be lynched?or his overall play this game?

I forgot to mention my suspicion of JJJ still stands I am waiting to see what happens but aorn my vote is on him

Dom wrote:
I don't see why the Sorsha lynch has gone to the wayside.

Because players saw it for the cop out bandwagon that it was.

I'm heading in to work now and don't know if I'll be able to check in anymore before the lynch closes. I haven't seen anything strong enough to change my mind for my vote today.

Votes bubbles