The Syndicate

Draconus wrote:Not a bad result for llama. Another potential kill is gone.

I really wanted to vote for Wilson But I will go with full service bar, instead. I'll keep myself entertained on this island

FZ. wrote:Don't you think that at this stage, if we figured out the poll is positions, the hosts my shift positions around and not fit it to chronological order?

Roger Rabbit - Who Framed Roger Rabbit BADDIE
In position 4, Roger Rabbit can frame a player by making them appear bad to alignment checks.
In any other Position, he may target a player and force them to post using only emoticons for the next Day.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I understand your case LC and though it drives me nuts to be seeing it again, the evidence you have can validly implicate me. I'm not sure what I can say in my defense beyond WIFOM, but I'll do it anyway:

Assuming the mafia team with the positions, if there is only one such team) communally benefits from those positions, then the lynch stop for Kubrick is probably not the only one they have left. In fact I know for sure that's still an active thing, so let's never vote position one in any night phase eh? Anyway as I was saying: I have the utmost confidence in myself that I can evade a lynch even when the pressure is at maximum, and I wouldn't feel the need to call for a lynch stop from my teamie's skillset -- I'd acquiesce that forced position right to some other ability in our collective and play my own game to get around the lynch pressure. If I had to identify a single trait as my strongest baddie skill, it'd be my ability to respond to pressure and move votes off of me. That's how I won the champs finale -- I was under pressure pretty much the whole game starting from the first half of the first day, but they waited until Day 4 to lynch me because I kept wiggling out of the noose.

This time I haven't resisted the noose that fervently. On Day 3.0 I knew I would survive either way because of my role. I did put effort into preventing the lynch because I wanted my ability to affect a night kill instead, but I still didn't fight it as hard as I usually have in the past. On Day 3.5 I literally welcomed my lynch and if LoRab hadn't been the lynch in that 4-way tie and FZ would have been, I'd have really regretted my own survival significantly (assuming I'm right that she's civilian). I knew then that people were too hung up on my case and that they only way to get over it would be for me to die. I told DharmaHelper as much when I practically asked for a lynch. I thought it was well in hand too when I left, but then the 4-way tie shenanigans developed and the rest is history.

Moreover, while I was under some pressure exiting Night 2, it wasn't intense pressure and I didn't feel like my lynch was imminent or even likely. I'd have felt the same way as a bad guy. There would have been better ways to use that position force of LoRab's, or at least I'd have felt that way.

It's all WIFOM, but that's all I can give you in response to a case built around someone else's role.

As for why I haven't been night killed, well... I think that's pretty clear. Just ask yourself how likely they are to kill me tonight with you yammering about lynching me and putting up numerous lengthy posts to support it?

It's all WIFOM, but that's all I can give you in response to a case built around someone else's role.

FZ. wrote:

bea wrote:a) I don't understand rico's spreadsheet, but then again, I never do.

b) should we talk at all about the night poll? Do we think all the positions are in order? Cuz I really want to vote for a well stocked bar, but if it could potentially be bad maybe not? IDK?

linki - my distrust of LC is pretty well documented FZ. He's really really good at this game. This how I feel during every game I play with LC - I'm all Mulder. I want to believe. More than any single player I've ever played with, I have a hard time 100 percent trusting LC. It's not fair to him. I know. It is what it is. That said, he's a stand up guy and kind as the day is long. I adore the dickens out of him. Also - most people don't know this, but he has a lovely singing voice.

also - wtf was up with my phrasing up there? "use thread stuff to build a completely believable case" is how that should have read.

I srrsly need to be not on the same schedule as the hubby if I want to mafia - he's been tempting me for hours with tv catch up - previews for Arrow and Game of Thrones, teefurry kitty shirts and stickers for my car.

I've been contemplating LC since the beginning of the game, but always come up with nothing. The two biggest problems I have with him are:

a. his continued suspicion of JJJ and unwillingness to budge. I think civvies waver, they hesitate. He's not hesitating.
b. The fact that when I said I was worried about him not wavering, he turned it right back at me and made it look like I was making him look bad or something. I felt like it was exactly what I did last game I played, and I was bad. When people doubted me, I made their suspicion look ridiculous and even scummier. At least that is what I tried to do.

So yeah, maybe it is time we discuss LC.

FZ. wrote:

bea wrote:

Long Con wrote:

FZ. wrote:LC, you're making me doubt myself with your case, but other than the Kubrick thing, I just don't get a baddie vibe from him.

I think this is the main reason why his lynch has totally lost steam. Such a Civvie vibe! Hey, JJJ, a question for you: are you an experienced enough Mafia player to be able to play a "Civ game" when you are not Civ? FZ, what is a baddie vibe? Is it something only baddies give off, uncontrollably, and Civs never have? Vibe. Vibe vibe vibe. Gut feel? Are you that good?

I can easily explain why he wasn't NK with the reasoning the baddies thought they could get him lynched. As for why baddies didn't take that bait you gave them, I think he was getting votes every day now, as well as the last day, but my thought is, baddies were feeling this train lost its momentum.

As for the Kubrick issue, it reminds me of Death Note game, when Russ died and was revealed to be a role checker and changed my mind about me the day before he died from being civ, to probably being bad. Epi made a really good case with statistic reasoning that even I couldn't ignore. It was probably the best case I've seen in a long time...but it was wrong. I was good, it was circumstantial, and as much as it appeared like a solid evidence based case, it was wrong. I can't tell you how frustrated I was that game. By the way, I could survive a lynch too, and I fought really hard to prevent my lynch that game. So at least consider all of that when you're looking at things.

Believe me, I know that I could be wrong, and that JJJ could be Civ. Like I said before, I truly was posting to let the thread know a very good reason why I suspected him less (before I factored in Lorab's control of the Position that day). I'm not tunnelling here. I have other suspicions. It's just that the evidence is practically glaring at this point. Considering everything JJJ has done that has made people feel like he's Civ, it comes down to one question: is he a skilled enough player to write these things as a baddie?

I hope you take this the complementary way it's intended.

I believe that JJ is a capable enough mafia player to snow me into thinking he's a civ EXACTLY as much as I think a capable baddie LC is able to use thread stuff to build a completely case on a civ while saying the whole time, "Guys, I'm just as doubtful as you are, but the evidence is there."

So. Yea.

This is running through my head from time to time as well. He's used JJJ as his suspect the entire game, and he comes off the most genuine when pushing that case, but if I really had to choose, I feel there's more chance of LC being the scum here, than JJJ.

DharmaHelper wrote:

Draconus wrote:Not a bad result for llama. Another potential kill is gone.

I really wanted to vote for Wilson But I will go with full service bar, instead. I'll keep myself entertained on this island

MFW Draconus votes for Position 1 and JJJbrick isn't dead yet

Draconus wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

Draconus wrote:Not a bad result for llama. Another potential kill is gone.

I really wanted to vote for Wilson But I will go with full service bar, instead. I'll keep myself entertained on this island

MFW Draconus votes for Position 1 and JJJbrick isn't dead yet

Wow I wasn't thinking about positions. LOL. I was actually at an open bar event for my company last night and was very easily drawn to that option this morning

Ricochet wrote:

Dom wrote:Hey everyone: would you all say I ask lots of questions or nah?

When you're bad, you pressure players greatly with your inquisitiveness, to act like you're top civ dawg.

Dom wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Also, I did not expect the pairing to be the original one.

Now, about the baddies, can we move on to Dom now?

No.

Wasn't asking you.

FZ. wrote:

bea wrote:a) I don't understand rico's spreadsheet, but then again, I never do.

b) should we talk at all about the night poll? Do we think all the positions are in order? Cuz I really want to vote for a well stocked bar, but if it could potentially be bad maybe not? IDK?

linki - my distrust of LC is pretty well documented FZ. He's really really good at this game. This how I feel during every game I play with LC - I'm all Mulder. I want to believe. More than any single player I've ever played with, I have a hard time 100 percent trusting LC. It's not fair to him. I know. It is what it is. That said, he's a stand up guy and kind as the day is long. I adore the dickens out of him. Also - most people don't know this, but he has a lovely singing voice.

also - wtf was up with my phrasing up there? "use thread stuff to build a completely believable case" is how that should have read.

I srrsly need to be not on the same schedule as the hubby if I want to mafia - he's been tempting me for hours with tv catch up - previews for Arrow and Game of Thrones, teefurry kitty shirts and stickers for my car.

I've been contemplating LC since the beginning of the game, but always come up with nothing. The two biggest problems I have with him are:

a. his continued suspicion of JJJ and unwillingness to budge. I think civvies waver, they hesitate. He's not hesitating.
b. The fact that when I said I was worried about him not wavering, he turned it right back at me and made it look like I was making him look bad or something. I felt like it was exactly what I did last game I played, and I was bad. When people doubted me, I made their suspicion look ridiculous and even scummier. At least that is what I tried to do.

So yeah, maybe it is time we discuss LC.

Dom wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Dom wrote:Hey everyone: would you all say I ask lots of questions or nah?

When you're bad, you pressure players greatly with your inquisitiveness, to act like you're top civ dawg.

Dom wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Also, I did not expect the pairing to be the original one.

Now, about the baddies, can we move on to Dom now?

No.

Wasn't asking you.

So how am I doing that this game?
Answer: I'm not.

(I also think you're wrong about this characterization but your observations don't match your predictions my friend)

FZ. wrote:

bea wrote:a) I don't understand rico's spreadsheet, but then again, I never do.

b) should we talk at all about the night poll? Do we think all the positions are in order? Cuz I really want to vote for a well stocked bar, but if it could potentially be bad maybe not? IDK?

linki - my distrust of LC is pretty well documented FZ. He's really really good at this game. This how I feel during every game I play with LC - I'm all Mulder. I want to believe. More than any single player I've ever played with, I have a hard time 100 percent trusting LC. It's not fair to him. I know. It is what it is. That said, he's a stand up guy and kind as the day is long. I adore the dickens out of him. Also - most people don't know this, but he has a lovely singing voice.

also - wtf was up with my phrasing up there? "use thread stuff to build a completely believable case" is how that should have read.

I srrsly need to be not on the same schedule as the hubby if I want to mafia - he's been tempting me for hours with tv catch up - previews for Arrow and Game of Thrones, teefurry kitty shirts and stickers for my car.

I've been contemplating LC since the beginning of the game, but always come up with nothing. The two biggest problems I have with him are:

a. his continued suspicion of JJJ and unwillingness to budge. I think civvies waver, they hesitate. He's not hesitating.
b. The fact that when I said I was worried about him not wavering, he turned it right back at me and made it look like I was making him look bad or something. I felt like it was exactly what I did last game I played, and I was bad. When people doubted me, I made their suspicion look ridiculous and even scummier. At least that is what I tried to do.

So yeah, maybe it is time we discuss LC.

Civvies waver?
So why do you criticize me for wavering and hesitating?

DharmaHelper wrote:

FZ. wrote:

bea wrote:a) I don't understand rico's spreadsheet, but then again, I never do.

b) should we talk at all about the night poll? Do we think all the positions are in order? Cuz I really want to vote for a well stocked bar, but if it could potentially be bad maybe not? IDK?

linki - my distrust of LC is pretty well documented FZ. He's really really good at this game. This how I feel during every game I play with LC - I'm all Mulder. I want to believe. More than any single player I've ever played with, I have a hard time 100 percent trusting LC. It's not fair to him. I know. It is what it is. That said, he's a stand up guy and kind as the day is long. I adore the dickens out of him. Also - most people don't know this, but he has a lovely singing voice.

also - wtf was up with my phrasing up there? "use thread stuff to build a completely believable case" is how that should have read.

I srrsly need to be not on the same schedule as the hubby if I want to mafia - he's been tempting me for hours with tv catch up - previews for Arrow and Game of Thrones, teefurry kitty shirts and stickers for my car.

I've been contemplating LC since the beginning of the game, but always come up with nothing. The two biggest problems I have with him are:

a. his continued suspicion of JJJ and unwillingness to budge. I think civvies waver, they hesitate. He's not hesitating.
b. The fact that when I said I was worried about him not wavering, he turned it right back at me and made it look like I was making him look bad or something. I felt like it was exactly what I did last game I played, and I was bad. When people doubted me, I made their suspicion look ridiculous and even scummier. At least that is what I tried to do.

So yeah, maybe it is time we discuss LC.

To point a) I completely disagree. To say that conviction to one's cause is a solely mafia trait is just untrue. Especially so in LC's case. Am I right, Mr. Gollum? :P

to point b) Am I understanding you correctly? "He made it look like I was making him look bad, so here I am making him look bad let's discuss LC."

Matt wrote:RIH LLama.

FZ - I was thinking that you were most likely Golden's Monopoly play buddy. But if that were true, then why the never ending defense of 3J? I don't think I've played with a civ LC since I came back for Mafia, but he seems pretty legit to me in this game. I think it's odd that he's simply asking people to talk about his case, and now people are calling him bad.

bea - Do you believe Sorsha/BR to be good this game?

Voting for Dolphin Army

DharmaHelper wrote:

It's all WIFOM, but that's all I can give you in response to a case built around someone else's role.

That's HARDLY the crux of LC's suspicions against you.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

It's all WIFOM, but that's all I can give you in response to a case built around someone else's role.

That's HARDLY the crux of LC's suspicions against you.

He built a case earlier in the game based upon my treatment of llama, and I've already thoroughly addressed that. Now it's about the revealed Kubrick role, LoRab's revealed role, and my survived lynch. Those are all facts in this game, they cannot be disputed. I can only dispute the assumption that Kubrick's ability and my survival were not related -- something that cannot be done substantively or in an evidence-based way. I can only provide WIFOM based upon the truth of my mindset in this game and as a player. Whether anyone believes me isn't something I can control.

What else has he stated against me that you'd like to see me address? If it can be addressed I will do so. My time is very limited tonight, but I highly doubt I'm gonna die so I'll get around to it eventually.

Matt wrote:RIH LLama.

FZ - I was thinking that you were most likely Golden's Monopoly play buddy. But if that were true, then why the never ending defense of 3J? I don't think I've played with a civ LC since I came back for Mafia, but he seems pretty legit to me in this game. I think it's odd that he's simply asking people to talk about his case, and now people are calling him bad.

bea - Do you believe Sorsha/BR to be good this game?

Voting for Dolphin Army

Dom wrote:FZ you say I hesitated and delayed action On Lorab. There are many perspectives to be had, and with me you have been very close minded. Like how you accuse baddies of being.

Tranq wrote:Voting #4 makes the most sense as a baddie role who benefits from that position is already dead.

Matt wrote:RIH LLama.

FZ - I was thinking that you were most likely Golden's Monopoly play buddy. But if that were true, then why the never ending defense of 3J? I don't think I've played with a civ LC since I came back for Mafia, but he seems pretty legit to me in this game. I think it's odd that he's simply asking people to talk about his case, and now people are calling him bad.

bea - Do you believe Sorsha/BR to be good this game?

Voting for Dolphin Army

Long Con wrote:

FZ. wrote:Don't you think that at this stage, if we figured out the poll is positions, the hosts my shift positions around and not fit it to chronological order?

I do think that they're likely mixing it up, and they may have been doing it all along for all I know. I've seen arguments against it, but there's ways to get around them. "They wouldn't randomize them on the baddies, making them unable to plan their Position!" Well, they could just tell the people with Positions which options stands for which number.

Long Con wrote: I also think that there may be a Trickster-type role that can affect the content and game-result of the night polls - that's the role SVS had in A World Reborn, and I know she enjoyed it. Perhaps this role is inventing things like the Brangelina Photo Shoot and the Sonny and Cher Revival. So I would advise people to be wary of an option that is a big crowd-pleaser, a likely choice to get more votes. It could be a trap designed by a baddie. I'm going to go with hat and sunscreen, because it's the lamest one.

Turnip Head wrote:It would only affect checks, not actual role reveals.

So we don't have to feel bad about any of the baddies we lynched so far.

Dom wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Dom wrote:Hey everyone: would you all say I ask lots of questions or nah?

When you're bad, you pressure players greatly with your inquisitiveness, to act like you're top civ dawg.

Dom wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Also, I did not expect the pairing to be the original one.

Now, about the baddies, can we move on to Dom now?

No.

Wasn't asking you.

So how am I doing that this game?
Answer: I'm not.

(I also think you're wrong about this characterization but your observations don't match your predictions my friend)

DharmaHelper wrote:Question(s) to the thread:

Who was it that first brought up the idea of Roger Rabbit corrupting the Kubrick flip? Who ran with that thought process?

Who was it that first theorized that there was only one baddie team?

Tranq wrote:Voting #4 makes the most sense as a baddie role who benefits from that position is already dead.

juliets wrote:

Tranq wrote:Voting #4 makes the most sense as a baddie role who benefits from that position is already dead.

Good point. That's where I'm going to vote.

Tranq wrote:I disagree. Position 4 > 2/3/5 > 1 imo.

bea wrote:You guys probably didn't know this, but my husbands bff is jason momoa. To honor the fact that he is bfff with aquaman I vote dolphin army since the preferred get drunk option is off the table. Stoopid kubrik takin my booze.

juliets wrote:If I vote for someone and evidence comes to me later that another individual is really the one who is bad I will change my vote. If I vote for someone and the votes are centered on two or three other people I often change my vote to one of the two or three to show what I'm thinking about those two or three. Would you rather I continue to vote the person who is now out of it or move my vote to a place where it counts from the perspective of other people judging it? When you start talking about bandwagoning you have to look at each vote that person made and assess whether it's truly just jumping on to jump on or there is a reason for the vote. I don't think you've looked at my votes in that light.

Ricochet wrote:

bea wrote:You guys probably didn't know this, but my husbands bff is jason momoa. To honor the fact that he is bfff with aquaman I vote dolphin army since the preferred get drunk option is off the table. Stoopid kubrik takin my booze.

Whoa. Nice.

juliets wrote:If I vote for someone and evidence comes to me later that another individual is really the one who is bad I will change my vote. If I vote for someone and the votes are centered on two or three other people I often change my vote to one of the two or three to show what I'm thinking about those two or three. Would you rather I continue to vote the person who is now out of it or move my vote to a place where it counts from the perspective of other people judging it? When you start talking about bandwagoning you have to look at each vote that person made and assess whether it's truly just jumping on to jump on or there is a reason for the vote. I don't think you've looked at my votes in that light.

I soon will.

bea wrote:You guys probably didn't know this, but my husbands bff is jason momoa. To honor the fact that he is bfff with aquaman I vote dolphin army since the preferred get drunk option is off the table. Stoopid kubrik takin my booze.

Ricochet wrote:There isn't a "good/better" position to vote for. Position 1 is the only taboo position so far, if you're civ-minded. There shouldn't be any lobby for voting any other position because it's "better".

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Ricochet wrote:There isn't a "good/better" position to vote for. Position 1 is the only taboo position so far, if you're civ-minded. There shouldn't be any lobby for voting any other position because it's "better".

I actually agree with Tranq. Yes, it's possible there's another position 4 baddie still out there, but with one confirmed and dead there's a valid reason to be less concerned with that position than the others. There are a lot of possible scenarios and one of them is "only one baddie operating on position 4".

Ricochet wrote:

Dom wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Dom wrote:Hey everyone: would you all say I ask lots of questions or nah?

When you're bad, you pressure players greatly with your inquisitiveness, to act like you're top civ dawg.

Dom wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Also, I did not expect the pairing to be the original one.

Now, about the baddies, can we move on to Dom now?

No.

Wasn't asking you.

So how am I doing that this game?
Answer: I'm not.

(I also think you're wrong about this characterization but your observations don't match your predictions my friend)

Yes, how are you doing the thing that you should best take a break from doing, after consecutive baddie wins?
Answer: it's WIFOM either way.

Also, you're the only player left eligible for saying suspish influenced by LoRab. Q.E.D.

(I don't think I'm wrong. When I played with you bad, I was anxious to even remotely call you suspicious or saying something you might find questionable and jump on me for. That's how strong the effect is.)

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Ricochet wrote:There isn't a "good/better" position to vote for. Position 1 is the only taboo position so far, if you're civ-minded. There shouldn't be any lobby for voting any other position because it's "better".

I actually agree with Tranq. Yes, it's possible there's another position 4 baddie still out there, but with one confirmed and dead there's a valid reason to be less concerned with that position than the others. There are a lot of possible scenarios and one of them is "only one baddie operating on position 4".

Long Con wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Ricochet wrote:There isn't a "good/better" position to vote for. Position 1 is the only taboo position so far, if you're civ-minded. There shouldn't be any lobby for voting any other position because it's "better".

I actually agree with Tranq. Yes, it's possible there's another position 4 baddie still out there, but with one confirmed and dead there's a valid reason to be less concerned with that position than the others. There are a lot of possible scenarios and one of them is "only one baddie operating on position 4".

I also agree. There are x-1 baddies who benefit from Position 4, where x is the average number of baddies who started the game with each Position. Or something like that. The rest are x, which is a greater chance of MORE baddies benefiting, right?