The Syndicate

Choutas wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Choutas wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Choutas wrote:Fwiw I am not down for a seaside lynch. I am putting this now cause there is a strong wind to that direction.

Neat, why not?

Infodumping.

Then would you be so kind as to answer the post I quoted three times?

Which one?

Epignosis wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

seaside wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Spoiler: show

So right now, we have this:

Long Con
8
Choutas (12), sig (16), seaside (17), DrWilgy (18), motel room (31), bcornett24 (32), JaggedJimmyJay (34), Russtifinko (35) 21%

++++

Diiny
6
sig (22), seaside (23), MacDougall (24), motel room (26), Choutas (27), JaggedJimmyJay (28)
21%

MacDougall
7
DrWilgy (4), Ricochet (10), Metalmarsh89 (11), Epignosis (15), Matt F (18), Elohcin (21), Russtifinko (25)
24%

++++

JaggedJimmyJay
6
Metalmarsh89 (3), Epignosis (7), seaside (9), TheFloyd73 (13), Elohcin (16), sig (23)
25%

TheFloyd73
5
Choutas (10), Strawhenge (18), Matt F (20), bcornett24 (21), Bullzeye (22)
21%

Takeaway the third:

seaside was the third vote for LC, and the second for Diiny. His reason for LC was "survival" (quotations appropriate). So with only two votes at the time (hours before the deadline), seaside puts his vote on LC. Earlier, he had voted rundontwalk, and also said this:

seaside wrote:I must admit, i have a pretty strong town read on mac atm. despite me calling him a rogue earlier.

Yep, that all looks bad to me.

Nice job at taking things outta context

What is the context?

I would like third parties to consider what context I am missing here, since seaside has thus far declined to provide one.

If I took it out of context, I would like to know so that I may make a more educated vote (and that will probably be 3J again).

If I didn't take it out of context, and seaside says I did, then he needs to be lynched.

Epignosis wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

seaside wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Spoiler: show

So right now, we have this:

Long Con
8
Choutas (12), sig (16), seaside (17), DrWilgy (18), motel room (31), bcornett24 (32), JaggedJimmyJay (34), Russtifinko (35) 21%

++++

Diiny
6
sig (22), seaside (23), MacDougall (24), motel room (26), Choutas (27), JaggedJimmyJay (28)
21%

MacDougall
7
DrWilgy (4), Ricochet (10), Metalmarsh89 (11), Epignosis (15), Matt F (18), Elohcin (21), Russtifinko (25)
24%

++++

JaggedJimmyJay
6
Metalmarsh89 (3), Epignosis (7), seaside (9), TheFloyd73 (13), Elohcin (16), sig (23)
25%

TheFloyd73
5
Choutas (10), Strawhenge (18), Matt F (20), bcornett24 (21), Bullzeye (22)
21%

Takeaway the third:

seaside was the third vote for LC, and the second for Diiny. His reason for LC was "survival" (quotations appropriate). So with only two votes at the time (hours before the deadline), seaside puts his vote on LC. Earlier, he had voted rundontwalk, and also said this:

seaside wrote:I must admit, i have a pretty strong town read on mac atm. despite me calling him a rogue earlier.

Yep, that all looks bad to me.

Nice job at taking things outta context

What is the context?

I would like third parties to consider what context I am missing here, since seaside has thus far declined to provide one.

If I took it out of context, I would like to know so that I may make a more educated vote (and that will probably be 3J again).

If I didn't take it out of context, and seaside says I did, then he needs to be lynched.

Epignosis wrote:ELOH

What do you think of a seaside lynch?

Choutas wrote:Day 7 rainbow list

Epignosis

motel room
Ricochet
Metalmarsh89
Matt F

Russtifinko
JJJ
seaside
Bullzeye
Strawhenge
Roxy
Elohcin
RadicalFuzz
Diiny

bcornett24
DrWilgy
Black Rock

sig
fingersplints
TheFloyd73

Russtifinko wrote:I find Choutas' defense of seaside suspect, by the way. So that's at least a tiny bit encouraging.

Epignosis wrote:I encourage others to vote seaside in light of this revelation. At this juncture, I'm not budging from a seaside vote.

If he's good, then Choutas has access to info, God help him.

It he's bad, then Choutas is a Cootie, and God help him.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Choutas, you're telling me that we've been reading and going back and rereading and making cases all day today, and 5 minutes before the deadline, you're going to "put your neck out" with an obscure comment that looks borderline OB?

What?

Elohcin wrote:

Epignosis wrote:ELOH

What do you think of a seaside lynch?

Looks like a lot went down while I was watching netflix. And I only have 6 minutes to catch up :o Quck give me a summary of seaside

Elohcin wrote:and we are just giving up on JJJ being bad as he is voting seaside?

Choutas wrote:My first rainbow reads.

Choutas wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Choutas, you're telling me that we've been reading and going back and rereading and making cases all day today, and 5 minutes before the deadline, you're going to "put your neck out" with an obscure comment that looks borderline OB?

What?

JUST TRUST ME. Seaside is town. This lynch will end up killing a townie.

Epignosis wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

Epignosis wrote:ELOH

What do you think of a seaside lynch?

Looks like a lot went down while I was watching netflix. And I only have 6 minutes to catch up :o Quck give me a summary of seaside

It's Day 7. Choutas defends seaside but cites "Infodumping" as a reason he can't say more. But on his Day 7 rainbow list, seaside was in the middle, not at the top.

Furthermore, there was no Night 6, so Choutas couldn't have gained info in the interim.

Lynch seaside, and then lynch Choutas either way next for playing a foul trick at the eleventh hour.

Choutas wrote:linki: cause you wouldn't believe me if I told you.

Choutas wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Choutas, you're telling me that we've been reading and going back and rereading and making cases all day today, and 5 minutes before the deadline, you're going to "put your neck out" with an obscure comment that looks borderline OB?

What?

JUST TRUST ME. Seaside is town. This lynch will end up killing a townie.

Epignosis wrote:

Choutas wrote:Day 7 rainbow list

Epignosis

motel room
Ricochet
Metalmarsh89
Matt F

Russtifinko
JJJ
seaside
Bullzeye
Strawhenge
Roxy
Elohcin
RadicalFuzz
Diiny

bcornett24
DrWilgy
Black Rock

sig
fingersplints
TheFloyd73

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Choutas, you're telling me that we've been reading and going back and rereading and making cases all day today, and 5 minutes before the deadline, you're going to "put your neck out" with an obscure comment that looks borderline OB?

What?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Choutas wrote:linki: cause you wouldn't believe me if I told you.

You're talking to the guy who defended a confirmed scum for days and days. I'm willing to listen, but you're going to have to speak.

Russtifinko wrote:2) In Death Note, llama knew I was civ and purposely read me in the middle of his list so I wouldn't be NK'ed. It may not be super likely, but it's at least possible this is happening here.

Russtifinko wrote:Linki: Epi, 2 cautions:

1) Deciding who to lynch the day before the lynch rarely works. I don't see how Choutas looks bad if seaside flips civ, could you explain? Unless you mean he purposely offered a defense so suspect he knew it would convince more people to switch, which seems very involved.

2) In Death Note, llama knew I was civ and purposely read me in the middle of his list so I wouldn't be NK'ed. It may not be super likely, but it's at least possible this is happening here.

Linki again: pleas elet me post.

Russtifinko wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Russtifinko wrote:I actually wouldn't be opposed to a seaside lynch if there's time - dude's been acting weird since D1. However, motel room voted for him, and motel room just took a big jump up my suspect list.

I'd definitely be down to try to pull votes onto motel room.

Why?

Mainly, he's throwing out totally unsupported opinions, every so often and saying we should believe them just because.

He was on Rico for days for being bad, and then suddenly N5 he thought Rico was good "despite really wanting you to be scum".

Since D3 he's been saying JJJ, espers, Diiny, and Zebra were bad, for no other reason than that they voted Rico on D3. (He later retracted his suspicion of Zebra upon learning Zebra was a dead civ when he posted this, and he's since back off of also-dead-civ espers.) This post in particular reeks:

seaside wrote:anyway, i reakon there is a strong chance one of those three are scum
i'm not saying those three are my most suspicious (or suspicious at all) but i think 1 of the 3 could be scum

He hasn't offered even a modicum of a case against any of them, but is trying like hell to get people to join him in a lynch just because. He even tried to use JJJ's move away from Mac yesterday to get Diiny.

Today, though, he's all about the easy JJJ lynch. He has precisely one point of evidence: he's been going on about JJJ's Mac connection all day, despite the fact that everyone is perfectly clear on it. I think he's trying to lock up the lynch without making it look like he is. Which actually makes me wonder if my vote should be on Floyd after all. If there has been a save attempt in the thread so far, this is the one. It's just subtle enough that people might miss it, and just unsubstantiated enough that he might be able to laugh it off.

Epignosis wrote:

Russtifinko wrote:motel room for now. Come join! It's a nice big room, and we have free HBO and a continental breakfast.

It isn't free. It's included in the price of the room.

Some economist.

rekt

Linki: Oh wow, big push toward seaside here. Holy cow. That's a bit nerve-wracking.

motel room, my suspicion of Mac arose because he was willing to lynch civs for no good reason. I've suspected people for less. I'll read you in full by tomorrow, but since you won't be lynched today and I'm short on time it's not worth the bother. As it stands now, I consider you a major suspect. I see you voted me for most of the day - what do you find suspicious about me?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I don't have words.

motel room wrote:So one of the three players he's been going on about (espers, jjj, diiny) have vote manipulation powers? I don't get why he was so adamant there was a scum in there and he never bothered to explain. Are there no town vote manipulation roles?

sig wrote:Okay JJJ was saved this is similar to what could have happened yesterday, Mac vs Diiny. JJJ is mafia those who pushed seaside are also most likely mafia.

bcornett24 wrote:

motel room wrote:So one of the three players he's been going on about (espers, jjj, diiny) have vote manipulation powers? I don't get why he was so adamant there was a scum in there and he never bothered to explain. Are there no town vote manipulation roles?

Well if that's true then there are only 2 possibilities left being jjj and diiny as espers obviously had no such powers.

Reviewing roles.

sig wrote:Okay JJJ was saved this is similar to what could have happened yesterday, Mac vs Diiny. JJJ is mafia those who pushed seaside are also most likely mafia.

motel room wrote:So one of the three players he's been going on about (espers, jjj, diiny) have vote manipulation powers? I don't get why he was so adamant there was a scum in there and he never bothered to explain. Are there no town vote manipulation roles?

Elohcin wrote:I ask again...who came up with the sudden suspicion of seaside?

MovingPictures07 wrote:Pulled Up - Every time a non-civilian player is lynched, its vote increases by 1. Conversely, if three civilian players are lynched consecutively, its vote decreases by 1. Its vote can be worth negative.

I Zimbra – Insanifies a player of its choice every night, forcing that player to speak in another language of its choice the subsequent day. If that player is from the same forum as I Zimbra, its vote is worth x3; if it is from the opposing forum, it is worth negative x3. The value of the insanified player's vote is unknown to everyone except I Zimbra.

Once in a Lifetime – Asks a player a multiple choice question every night. It must alternate between members of the two forums. If it correctly predicts its target's answer, they both gain an extra vote to be used at any time. If it is incorrect, Once in a Lifetime must vote the same player as it did yesterday; if that player is dead, then it loses one of its extra votes.

Love for Sale – Every night, it offers to sell its subsequent lynch vote to all players. The first player that PMs the host accepting the deal may control how Love for Sale votes the subsequent day. (Secrets)

Blind – Cannot be night killed. At the start of the game, its vote will go to the person voted. In future lynches, however, Blind may not know who it actually is voting for. Any time that a civilian is lynched, then its lynch vote is secretly randomized among the player it voted and the one alphabetically above and below its vote. For every civilian lynch, the possible vote recipient range is increased by one player above and below its current range. In contrast, any time that a mafia is lynched, the range decreases by one player above and below its current range.

Drugs – Slips drugs to a player of its choice every even night. That player will start every subsequent lynch with two votes against them. If it carries out the kill, it cannot kill any player it hasn't drugged.

Elohcin wrote:I ask again...who came up with the sudden suspicion of seaside?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I think these are all the vote-relevant roles which are potentially still in the game. Please let me know if I omitted something.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Pulled Up - Every time a non-civilian player is lynched, its vote increases by 1. Conversely, if three civilian players are lynched consecutively, its vote decreases by 1. Its vote can be worth negative.

I Zimbra – Insanifies a player of its choice every night, forcing that player to speak in another language of its choice the subsequent day. If that player is from the same forum as I Zimbra, its vote is worth x3; if it is from the opposing forum, it is worth negative x3. The value of the insanified player's vote is unknown to everyone except I Zimbra.

Once in a Lifetime – Asks a player a multiple choice question every night. It must alternate between members of the two forums. If it correctly predicts its target's answer, they both gain an extra vote to be used at any time. If it is incorrect, Once in a Lifetime must vote the same player as it did yesterday; if that player is dead, then it loses one of its extra votes.

Love for Sale – Every night, it offers to sell its subsequent lynch vote to all players. The first player that PMs the host accepting the deal may control how Love for Sale votes the subsequent day. (Secrets)

Blind – Cannot be night killed. At the start of the game, its vote will go to the person voted. In future lynches, however, Blind may not know who it actually is voting for. Any time that a civilian is lynched, then its lynch vote is secretly randomized among the player it voted and the one alphabetically above and below its vote. For every civilian lynch, the possible vote recipient range is increased by one player above and below its current range. In contrast, any time that a mafia is lynched, the range decreases by one player above and below its current range.

Drugs – Slips drugs to a player of its choice every even night. That player will start every subsequent lynch with two votes against them. If it carries out the kill, it cannot kill any player it hasn't drugged.

It seems to me that seaside was suspicious of espers, Diiny, and I because he observed discrepancy in the Rico bandwagon that suggested to him that someone was scum. This only makes sense if it was two extra votes specifically due to the Drugs role. I don't know how seaside's role worked exactly, but would he not just see the name of the player placing those two extra votes? That would eliminate the need for the whole "1 of these 3" thing. He may have just misinterpreted the evidence, there are a pile of town roles that affect voting and even more roles with *secrets* so who knows.

Basically all this tells me is that seaside thought Diiny or I was Drugs, but I don't understand why he'd have any doubt about which one.