The Syndicate

So... Seeing as Cops are naturally harder to lynch than mobs, and there hasn't been a skyrocket wagon take off and we only have 3 hours left, I think we are looking in the right direction. I'll vote Golden.

Balls. Scum sloonei is more timid in my experience.

linki: a fairly good option imo

AAAAAALTHOUGH I'm not sure I like votes based on that alone. And you've said FUCK AWW about golden this entire game.

Diiny wrote:AAAAAALTHOUGH I'm not sure I like votes based on that alone. And you've said FUCK AWW about golden this entire game.

Getting the heebee jeebees from him.

Golden's posts haven't seemed unnatural to me in anyway, which I take to be a solid town tell. He responded to my questions with ease. I don't think I'll vote for him.

DrWilgy wrote:

Diiny wrote:AAAAAALTHOUGH I'm not sure I like votes based on that alone. And you've said FUCK AWW about golden this entire game.

Getting the heebee jeebees from him.

This is on par with Enrique's earlier vote.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:@Gleam

Did you actually post civ reads on anyone though? Other than me? Please show because I think I missed those.

I didn't. I don't have solid reads on people apart from how they normally act in other games.

I think Matt is being a bit more quiet than normal, I think I remember him being a little more pandering for discussion than usual. But I have no reason to suspect him as being bad.

Scott and Epignosis are both acting pretty typical, even if they're somewhat low posters for the game right now.

The only other people I have played games with before (Mongoose, llama, zebra) have all been pretty inactive in the game right now. I'm inclined to say civilian just because their contributions seem normal.

I think S~V~S has a false read on me but I don't have reason to suspect her as bad.

Sloonei wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Agreeing with what you are saying doesn't equal reading you as a civ.

SVS and Sloonei pointed out something I hadn't yet noticed. I then read your posts and concluded that indeed, you were saying a lot without actually getting yourself involved in the actual game (hunting baddies).

When we're this early in the game and far more likely (statistically) to lynch a good guy, I'm more focused on minimizing civilian deaths than actively trying to suss out the police. That's just my strategy. You can agree with it or not, but that's what makes the most sense to me. Granted, once a day or two goes by and we have some patterns to examine, then the baddie hunt needs to become the main focus. If I'm still being noncommittal at that point, you can criticize me of not getting involved all you want. But I've certainly been participating in the discussion. Going all gung-ho and throwing accusations left and right isn't the only way to get involved.

What exactly do you mean by this? Are you saying you'd prefer not to lynch anyone today?

Ideally, I think it would be best if no one got lynched the first day.

Think of this mathematically. I'm of the firm opinion that no one has enough concrete evidence on anyone else to make more than, say, a 10 or 20% educated guess on alignment. We're close to lynching at random here. It's no different from a first day lynch. Statistically then we are more likely than not to lynch someone good. Then we wait for the results of the night actions to formulate more solid theories.

These are the two scenarios at this point:

1. The lynch vote ends up being civilian. The night phase happens, the Police Chief (unless they target the Don) is probably going to succeed in arresting someone. We're down two noble mafiosos/mafiosas.

2. The lynch vote ends up being police. Unless the Chief is lynched (a one in thirty chance), some mafia is probably going to be arrested. One baddie is down, we're down one good guy.

The first scenario is more likely to happen by a factor of 5. I agree that if a baddie is lynched this early, yes, it will go a long way towards helping the mafia teams in the long run. But. You risk civilian death as well. Some people might argue that it's worth the risk of killing a civvie if the chance of taking down even one baddie is there, I just don't agree with that strategy. Maybe it's a matter of personal taste to want to be more restrained. If we were able to somehow avoid lynching someone Day 1 then we would most likely be down one civvie but we also wouldn't be down two, probably. But that's not part of the rules, so I have to come up with my best educated guess.

Sloonei wrote:sig and enrique's names have been hanging out at the bottom of the page for a while but neither of them are saying anything. No one likes a tattle tale, but I'm gonna do it anyway.

This is scummy, and very pingy. Since I've had the tab up and haven't talked it must mean something? You bringing this up is very very troubling.

Could someone brief me on the Golden and Gleam case? It seems Wilgy is voting for him mainly based on tone? Yet I've got no idea why people are voting for Gleam.

I'll be moving my vote from Chain seeing how he has posted, but not sure who to yet.

I went ahead and voted for

Golden

Mostly because he putting me in his list of people he wouldn't lynch when I had barely posted anything at that point is the thing that has stuck out to me the most so far.

Hey folks I'd like to remind you that there are six friggin cops so manipulation of tight lynches should be easy. I suggest y'all get your shit together and join me in voting Diiny because he's clearly the right choice

Or come to a consensus yourselves. It's been a way hectic past couple days for me and I'm not really following the game as well as I could be, and I can't say I have many reads besides being freaked out by Diiny's over-eagerness (supatownin?) and general vagueness to his actions.

jeez dudes the game just started why are you being so demanding already

btw wilgy's plan is terrible and the don would have to be a silly billy to go through with it

Sloonei wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Diiny wrote:AAAAAALTHOUGH I'm not sure I like votes based on that alone. And you've said FUCK AWW about golden this entire game.

Getting the heebee jeebees from him.

This is on par with Enrique's earlier vote.

It's bad.

linki: EASY LYNCHES EH WILGY?

Sloonei wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Diiny wrote:AAAAAALTHOUGH I'm not sure I like votes based on that alone. And you've said FUCK AWW about golden this entire game.

Getting the heebee jeebees from him.

This is on par with Enrique's earlier vote.

Can you please explain what this means and how you could've perceived my vote?

Diiny wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Agreeing with what you are saying doesn't equal reading you as a civ.

SVS and Sloonei pointed out something I hadn't yet noticed. I then read your posts and concluded that indeed, you were saying a lot without actually getting yourself involved in the actual game (hunting baddies).

When we're this early in the game and far more likely (statistically) to lynch a good guy, I'm more focused on minimizing civilian deaths than actively trying to suss out the police. That's just my strategy. You can agree with it or not, but that's what makes the most sense to me. Granted, once a day or two goes by and we have some patterns to examine, then the baddie hunt needs to become the main focus. If I'm still being noncommittal at that point, you can criticize me of not getting involved all you want. But I've certainly been participating in the discussion. Going all gung-ho and throwing accusations left and right isn't the only way to get involved.

The best way to minimize noble mafioso deaths is to hunt the cops. I'm glad you're admitting you're being noncomittal even now. who, out of the people with decent content, is most likely to be scum, even if you don't want to hunt them to instead focus on protecting mafia ( )

I'm still trying to decide that. I should have been working on homework for the last hour instead of trawling through mafia posts. I'll be back with a vote in a bit.

I hope I addressed every question aimed at me. If I missed something I apologize.

Why Diiny?

I'm not sure I understand the case for Golden either. I will try and reread the posts before the deadline.

@ gleam, Sorry but I fundamentally disagree with the thought that lynching no one is a better option than lynching someone. If no one is lynched, town gains no information. Town can only win by gaining information.
Epi explains it well:

Epignosis wrote:No lynches are terrible. Civilians control the lynches. By forfeiting a lynch, you forfeit the civilians' attempt to bag Mafia. I would never vote such a thing if it existed.

(granted he was scum in this game, but)

Sloonei wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Diiny wrote:AAAAAALTHOUGH I'm not sure I like votes based on that alone. And you've said FUCK AWW about golden this entire game.

Getting the heebee jeebees from him.

This is on par with Enrique's earlier vote.

At least I explained it's a gut feel.

as I read through Golden's posts I feel like I don't gain anything or absorb anything from them. Strikes me as odd. I also feel the same feel from Diiny, but I'm noticing a trend of commonly gut reading him as bad. I'm unsure if I want to act on that feel.

Linki - I suddenly feel less sure about my feel. Hey Enrique! What took you so long?

sig wrote:

Sloonei wrote:sig and enrique's names have been hanging out at the bottom of the page for a while but neither of them are saying anything. No one likes a tattle tale, but I'm gonna do it anyway.

This is scummy, and very pingy. Since I've had the tab up and haven't talked it must mean something? You bringing this up is very very troubling.

Could someone brief me on the Golden and Gleam case? It seems Wilgy is voting for him mainly based on tone? Yet I've got no idea why people are voting for Gleam.

I'll be moving my vote from Chain seeing how he has posted, but not sure who to yet.

Why is it troubling? I never said it's scummy of you, I just wanted you to say something. Hello.

Enrique wrote:Hey folks I'd like to remind you that there are six friggin cops so manipulation of tight lynches should be easy. I suggest y'all get your shit together and join me in voting Diiny because he's clearly the right choice

Or come to a consensus yourselves. It's been a way hectic past couple days for me and I'm not really following the game as well as I could be, and I can't say I have many reads besides being freaked out by Diiny's over-eagerness (supatownin?) and general vagueness to his actions.

jeez dudes the game just started why are you being so demanding already

btw wilgy's plan is terrible and the don would have to be a silly billy to go through with it

I know it's pedantic and over-eager to ask for an explanation to a terrible vote, and I should really calm down and just vote for anyone cuz it's only day one I guess.

I'm also laughing at En- 'uh joke vote' -rique calling me vague

sig wrote:Why Diiny?

I just shared literally all my insight on this game. But this dude voted Wilgy without an explanation and then changed his vote to me for doing the same thing before him? Like really dude?

linki- ey doc i didnt sleep friday night bc i was gettin ready for my trip on saturday where i spent literally all day before getting home and collapsing in bed. as far as im concerned the game just started

DrWilgy wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Diiny wrote:AAAAAALTHOUGH I'm not sure I like votes based on that alone. And you've said FUCK AWW about golden this entire game.

Getting the heebee jeebees from him.

This is on par with Enrique's earlier vote.

At least I explained it's a gut feel.

as I read through Golden's posts I feel like I don't gain anything or absorb anything from them. Strikes me as odd. I also feel the same feel from Diiny, but I'm noticing a trend of commonly gut reading him as bad. I'm unsure if I want to act on that feel.

Linki - I suddenly feel less sure about my feel. Hey Enrique! What took you so long?

Why didn't you mention this when you placed the vote, but instead mentioned the far less useful/reliable ease-of-lynch thing?

Enrique wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Diiny wrote:AAAAAALTHOUGH I'm not sure I like votes based on that alone. And you've said FUCK AWW about golden this entire game.

Getting the heebee jeebees from him.

This is on par with Enrique's earlier vote.

Can you please explain what this means and how you could've perceived my vote?

Remember when you voted and offered no explanation and just posted a bunch of smilies when people asked you about it, and then people called you out for it? That's what Wilgy just did. Only I think his actually looks bad.
I didn't perceive your vote as bad because it was too early and you were clearly just being difficult on purpose to make people squirm. Wilgy did it late in the day and was contributing to a wagon-in-progress. But wilgy is always an enigma, and I can't pretend to know how to read him.

remember that one time everybody knew diiny was bad but i was lynched last second instead for calling out wilgy on being full of shit

We have so much fun together

Sloonei wrote:

sig wrote:

Sloonei wrote:sig and enrique's names have been hanging out at the bottom of the page for a while but neither of them are saying anything. No one likes a tattle tale, but I'm gonna do it anyway.

This is scummy, and very pingy. Since I've had the tab up and haven't talked it must mean something? You bringing this up is very very troubling.

Could someone brief me on the Golden and Gleam case? It seems Wilgy is voting for him mainly based on tone? Yet I've got no idea why people are voting for Gleam.

I'll be moving my vote from Chain seeing how he has posted, but not sure who to yet.

Why is it troubling? I never said it's scummy of you, I just wanted you to say something. Hello.

Hi, how you doing?

Silverwolf wrote:I went ahead and voted for

Golden

Mostly because he putting me in his list of people he wouldn't lynch when I had barely posted anything at that point is the thing that has stuck out to me the most so far.

Do you think he should read you as bad?

Enrique wrote:

sig wrote:Why Diiny?

I just shared literally all my insight on this game. But this dude voted Wilgy without an explanation and then changed his vote to me for doing the same thing before him? Like really dude?

The explanation for my vote wasn't that it was a 'joke vote'. I have more content in my post history than a shit 'joke vote'. You outright refused to explain yours and needlessly wifommed everywhere. We voted for the same person but our votes were completely different, interesting that you're trying to push the idea that they weren't.

linki: Now it's your turn to be the one everyone knows is bad

Any reactions to your "distraction" that you took notice of Enrique?

Linki - Those were just thoughts I thought I would share... Didn't mean for those thoughts and my Golden vote to be connected. Also, I was most definitely not full of shit that game Enrique!!!

LINNNNNKKKKIIIIIIII

sig wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

sig wrote:

Sloonei wrote:sig and enrique's names have been hanging out at the bottom of the page for a while but neither of them are saying anything. No one likes a tattle tale, but I'm gonna do it anyway.

This is scummy, and very pingy. Since I've had the tab up and haven't talked it must mean something? You bringing this up is very very troubling.

Could someone brief me on the Golden and Gleam case? It seems Wilgy is voting for him mainly based on tone? Yet I've got no idea why people are voting for Gleam.

I'll be moving my vote from Chain seeing how he has posted, but not sure who to yet.

Why is it troubling? I never said it's scummy of you, I just wanted you to say something. Hello.

Hi, how you doing?

Not too good, sig. I don't know who to vote for.

Who is Gleam? I dont see anyone with that name.

I don´t think Im going to vote for Golden. I don´t see what you guys see in him, and I would prefer to lynch someone else entirely, but I just don´t know who that should be.

@ Sig I find it suspicious that you reacted so violently and defensive towards Sloonei pointing out you were lurking.

What are our thoughts on Fuzz?

Sloonei wrote:

sig wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

sig wrote:

Sloonei wrote:sig and enrique's names have been hanging out at the bottom of the page for a while but neither of them are saying anything. No one likes a tattle tale, but I'm gonna do it anyway.

This is scummy, and very pingy. Since I've had the tab up and haven't talked it must mean something? You bringing this up is very very troubling.

Could someone brief me on the Golden and Gleam case? It seems Wilgy is voting for him mainly based on tone? Yet I've got no idea why people are voting for Gleam.

I'll be moving my vote from Chain seeing how he has posted, but not sure who to yet.

Why is it troubling? I never said it's scummy of you, I just wanted you to say something. Hello.

Hi, how you doing?

Not too good, sig. I don't know who to vote for.

What do you make of Enrique/Diiny

I've got a good gut vibe of LC so far, Zebra seems really quite which is weird.

linki: @Nero

umm Diiny boy i'm not sure you know what wifom means... I haven't talked about my vote except to say, um, I made it. No hint of "I'd never do that if I were bad!" so quit pulling shit out of your ass and lemme play this thing aight?

DrWilgy wrote:Any reactions to your "distraction" that you took notice of Enrique?

Linki - Those were just thoughts I thought I would share... Didn't mean for those thoughts and my Golden vote to be connected. Also, I was most definitely not full of shit that game Enrique!!!

LINNNNNKKKKIIIIIIII

um yeah people care too much about first minute changeable votes for one. also diiny's a piiiiig.

Silverwolf wrote:I went ahead and voted for

Golden

Mostly because he putting me in his list of people he wouldn't lynch when I had barely posted anything at that point is the thing that has stuck out to me the most so far.

Welcome to a community where people are nice to newbies. I like your tone. I like this vote, too. You've posted plenty enough for me to have a read on you.

You will not be lynching a cop if you lynch me.

I have to go in about 10 minutes, so I need to decide on a vote soon. As I look at all the top suspects in the poll, I think Ika is the player I'd be most comfortable voting for. He hasn't exactly been a low-poster, but all of his posts have the singular focus of trying to get a feel for Silverwolf's alignment, and I don't see a lot of progress being made there and he's practically outright refused to pursue anything else.

Enrique wrote:umm Diiny boy i'm not sure you know what wifom means... I haven't talked about my vote except to say, um, I made it. No hint of "I'd never do that if I were bad!" so quit pulling shit out of your ass and lemme play this thing aight?

DrWilgy wrote:Any reactions to your "distraction" that you took notice of Enrique?

Linki - Those were just thoughts I thought I would share... Didn't mean for those thoughts and my Golden vote to be connected. Also, I was most definitely not full of shit that game Enrique!!!

LINNNNNKKKKIIIIIIII

um yeah people care too much about first minute changeable votes for one. also diiny's a piiiiig.

Then what was the point Enrique?

DrWilgy wrote:What are our thoughts on Fuzz?

Why ask before posting your own?

He seems alright.

Your last few posts haven't been making me happy wilgo

Nerolunar wrote:Who is Gleam? I dont see anyone with that name.

agleaminranks

Nerolunar wrote:
@ Sig I find it suspicious that you reacted so violently and defensive towards Sloonei pointing out you were lurking.

I didn't react violently, I did react defensively yes since usually accusing someone of being present and lurking is followed by someone saying it is pingy, then BAM Sig gets lynched and there is no more Sig.

DrWilgy wrote:

Enrique wrote:umm Diiny boy i'm not sure you know what wifom means... I haven't talked about my vote except to say, um, I made it. No hint of "I'd never do that if I were bad!" so quit pulling shit out of your ass and lemme play this thing aight?

DrWilgy wrote:Any reactions to your "distraction" that you took notice of Enrique?

Linki - Those were just thoughts I thought I would share... Didn't mean for those thoughts and my Golden vote to be connected. Also, I was most definitely not full of shit that game Enrique!!!

LINNNNNKKKKIIIIIIII

um yeah people care too much about first minute changeable votes for one. also diiny's a piiiiig.

Then what was the point Enrique?

Why does there have to be a point?

DrWilgy wrote:What are our thoughts on Fuzz?

I liked his one post, but he's done absolutely nothing else.

sig wrote:

Nerolunar wrote:
@ Sig I find it suspicious that you reacted so violently and defensive towards Sloonei pointing out you were lurking.

I didn't react violently, I did react defensively yes since usually accusing someone of being present and lurking is followed by someone saying it is pingy, then BAM Sig gets lynched and there is no more Sig.

but why did you say i was scummy for pointing it out?

Been trying to get my thoughts together, what is the harm in that Diiny?

He pinged me with this

RadicalFuzz wrote:Wilgy you knew perfectly well that your voting plan wasn't going to work before you posted it.

and I asked about it to no response. If I knew that my plan wasn't going to work, why did I suggest it? He didn't formulate any thoughts based upon this action of mine to share... so this quote seems rather malicious.

I think my real vote would be between Enrique and Fuzz. Doing things without reason pings me enough.

DrWilgy wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

DrWilgy wrote:

Diiny wrote:AAAAAALTHOUGH I'm not sure I like votes based on that alone. And you've said FUCK AWW about golden this entire game.

Getting the heebee jeebees from him.

This is on par with Enrique's earlier vote.

At least I explained it's a gut feel.

as I read through Golden's posts I feel like I don't gain anything or absorb anything from them. Strikes me as odd. I also feel the same feel from Diiny, but I'm noticing a trend of commonly gut reading him as bad. I'm unsure if I want to act on that feel.

Linki - I suddenly feel less sure about my feel. Hey Enrique! What took you so long?

Why don't you absorb anything from my posts? That sounds odd to ME. I was probably the first person to come out in favour of your plan, contributing on it meaningfully and to the point without making it dominate. Then, when I read the thread I came up with seven town reads and a specific suspect for a specific reason. What about any of that is lacking in content?

It's odd, that in all the games I take heat on day one it appears to be because I'm accused essentially of lack of content. Was the same in Star Wars (indy, but essentially town-focussed). Economics springs to mind, where I was actually lynched day one and was civ. It's odd because can anyone name a time when I've waffled around not contributing when bad? Definitely not. But then, I also think it's inaccurate to say there is nothing to gain from my posts to date, as well.

Enrique wrote:umm Diiny boy i'm not sure you know what wifom means... I haven't talked about my vote except to say, um, I made it. No hint of "I'd never do that if I were bad!" so quit pulling shit out of your ass and lemme play this thing aight?

WIFOM isn't that exact sentence, brother. Posting I'M A WILDCARD when people want an explanation is wifom, whether you want to admit you're a wine-putter-in-front-of-people or not.

um yeah people care too much about first minute changeable votes for one. also diiny's a piiiiig.

first minute changeable votes that you didn't change nor explain. Did you mean to type ping or are you being RUDE?

DrWilgy wrote:Been trying to get my thoughts together, what is the harm in that Diiny?

He pinged me with this

RadicalFuzz wrote:Wilgy you knew perfectly well that your voting plan wasn't going to work before you posted it.

and I asked about it to no response. If I knew that my plan wasn't going to work, why did I suggest it? He didn't formulate any thoughts based upon this action of mine to share... so this quote seems rather malicious.

I think my real vote would be between Enrique and Fuzz. Doing things without reason pings me enough.

What is your "real vote" and how is it different from the one you put on Golden?

I haven't really fully caught up but my final vote won't be on diiny. His response was good enough for me.

Golden wrote: It's odd because can anyone name a time when I've waffled around not contributing when bad? Definitely not. But then, I also think it's inaccurate to say there is nothing to gain from my posts to date, as well.

I was waiting for you to say this, as this is also what I found.

Sloonei wrote:

Nerolunar wrote:Who is Gleam? I dont see anyone with that name.

agleaminranks

Thanks. I read it completely different.

@ Sig To me its not "highly pingy" to call out lurking.

I am going to change my vote. Losing Ika now will eradicate all meta reads that he can give us on Silverwolf. I don´t like that uncertainty.

Im going to check up un Gleam and see if thats whgere my vote will be.

I think the part on Fuzz that bothers me the most is that his last visit to the site was today at noon. He didn't post "Hey I'll catch up later" or respond to anything. It seems that he's OK with sitting back and watching whatever happens happen.

@Sloonei - My final vote, where my vote locks.