The Syndicate

TBH, you should probably be asking the host or your BTS partners this, since you have them, re what is and is not acceptable.

Ricochet wrote:By making a strong, credible case against someone you think is bad. Isn't that the essence of this game?

Right now, I have no information about anyone bad; only information about people who are good.

Zomberella12 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:By making a strong, credible case against someone you think is bad. Isn't that the essence of this game?

Right now, I have no information about anyone bad; only information about people who are good.

Implying you have info in and of itself is info of a sort. Ask the host for clarification, or you teammates since in this game we are lucky enough to have them

Zomberella12 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:By making a strong, credible case against someone you think is bad. Isn't that the essence of this game?

Right now, I have no information about anyone bad; only information about people who are good.

That's not the best orientation (for reason already stated), that's all I can say. You can freely read into what people are posting, perhaps even read it in a both civ/bad way, but usually at the end of the day we come with reason to lynch people, for believing they are bad.

What happened to Rustifinko? He hasn't posted in two days. Did he vote?

thellama73 wrote:What happened to Rustifinko? He hasn't posted in two days. Did he vote?

Speaking of Russtifinko, he's high on my list of possible people to lunch today.

Here's why:
1) His perception regarding how we should play this game.
2) Thinking on it, and now knowing Epi only had one teammate, I doubt Epi's teammate would be the most obvious candidate (Trice). Instead, it's interesting to note how Epi distanced against Russ but never said whether he believed he was bad or not.

Ricochet wrote:

Zomberella12 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:By making a strong, credible case against someone you think is bad. Isn't that the essence of this game?

Right now, I have no information about anyone bad; only information about people who are good.

That's not the best orientation (for reason already stated), that's all I can say. You can freely read into what people are posting, perhaps even read it in a both civ/bad way, but usually at the end of the day we come with reason to lynch people, for believing they are bad.

Got it. Thanks.

Zomberella12 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Zomberella12 wrote:

Ricochet wrote:By making a strong, credible case against someone you think is bad. Isn't that the essence of this game?

Right now, I have no information about anyone bad; only information about people who are good.

That's not the best orientation (for reason already stated), that's all I can say. You can freely read into what people are posting, perhaps even read it in a both civ/bad way, but usually at the end of the day we come with reason to lynch people, for believing they are bad.

Got it. Thanks.

You're doing awesome, don't sweat it.

I'm in the process of reading the thread to look for clues about Epi's teammate. I will probably have more observations as I get through it, but I'm leaving this here.

This exchange, between him and Rico seems like the kind of thing Epi would do with a teammate. Gleeful, faux-accusations. He's having too much fun, like he's getting away with something.
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 20#p111207

Also this:
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 08#p111105

thellama73 wrote:I'm in the process of reading the thread to look for clues about Epi's teammate. I will probably have more observations as I get through it, but I'm leaving this here.

This exchange, between him and Rico seems like the kind of thing Epi would do with a teammate. Gleeful, faux-accusations. He's having too much fun, like he's getting away with something.
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 20#p111207

Why would that incriminate me, though? It was D0/N0 banter. You yourself said he was just trying to ruse me and I didn't fall for it.

S~V~S wrote:

FZ. wrote:Can we lunch SVS?

By the way Russ, if your BTSC buddies are civvies at this point, then lynching them means we lose a civ role in the count. But now that I think about it, it's interesting. Are you saying that you're bad right now and if you change roles anyway, there's no point in trying to help the baddies, I'm all for it. We can lynch you.

I do not wish to be lunched, I am a vegetarian and no threat to anyone

And yeah, Russ wanting to lunch his presumably civ teammates makes me wonder if they are indeed not civs.

Here's an interesting thought that I missed the first time around.

Defending Epig from our good friend Rico:

Ricochet wrote:So fill me in on the concept of infodumping. Is it what FZ. did?

Even if he's statistically right about Epig's alignment odds, how do we know what kind of group is FZ. in? And why trust FZ. at all? I didn't hear him suspect Epig of anything so far, either.

Ricochet wrote:This thread is officially wat.

First of all, why are you all rushing to vote / un-vote / re-vote, with one day left, even if the votes are changeable?

Second of all, I don't think I will vote for Epig. I have no idea what he figured out about the game or about the polls (or whatever he won), but I don't think it's a simple bluff. Maybe he's Wasatch and doesn't care about the fate of the other Forces, with the prospect of switching to a civ in the future, but I haven't seen anyone panic as if I'll they'll get lunched instead. He clearly incited a lot of votes his way fast, but this is a primary reaction I won't subcribe to. Outside this conflict, I don't have any read on him being bad.

I'll probably stick to voting for one of the infodumpers, because neither are making themselves trustworthy just by saying "Epi is not in my group and obviously not a Donner, but my group is good". One of them also revealed that infodumping was his way of working his (or his team's) way throught the game, so that'll weigh on my decision too.

Ricochet wrote:

Epig's role - (Secrets) Epig wins lol

I can see it already...

Ricochet wrote:RIP MM.

B-but... Epig!

Rico, it's circumstantial, I'll grant you, but Epig likes to get away with brazen behavior so he can brag about it in post game. Calling out your only teammate as bad on Day 0 is something he would find hilarious if you were to go on and win. Also, you defended him pretty hard.

It looks like a hella lot of defending in retrospect, but I didn't do any of that. I followed my own suspicion and supported it all the way through. I didn't vote for Epignosis because the lynch train was incited by his acting superior, fate-infaillable and just plain rusing everybody.

And again with getting suspected for a bloody smiley. Day 1 was crazy. Everything revolving around Epig was crazy. Then Epig gets killed and he is a MTI of all. The "Omg" smiley is self-explanatory.

Ok, stop posting so much please! I'm catching up and literally twice as I've finished a page a new one has been added. So at this rate it will be impossible for me to read the thread.

Russtifinko wrote:Ok, stop posting so much please! I'm catching up and literally twice as I've finished a page a new one has been added. So at this rate it will be impossible for me to read the thread.

Speak of the devil, and he appears.

MovingPictures07 wrote:And the only person that seemed to defend Epi was Trice, so make of that what you will.

But this isn't true....

S~V~S wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Can we not lynch Epi? I wanted to play mafia with him.

Agreed. I thought I'd see some insight reading through the thread why he and LC are the top candidates. It seems Epi's being voted for being Epi. Let the man play, for God's sake! :P LC seems to be voted because of (possibly fake?) infodumping, even though others have seemingly done the same, and given this as a reason to vote Epi (the whole "it's probability" thing). And now LC's voted himself. So many self votes and switches. Is there something I'm missing? There's definitely some weirdness going on here. Weird game. So let's make it interesting.

Let's make it a tie and see what happens.

I thought people were voting for Epi becasue of FZ's theory about probability. I voted for him because of how he reacted to my vote for Zomba. I think he knows I am not bad, and he voted for me anyhow.

In any case all the self voting, yikes.

Why so set on trice over these two, MP?

FZ. wrote:Had I just said that the probability of him being a baddie was higher for me because he wasn't a Donner, and then voted for him, would you not know he's not on my team?
The only way people would vote for someone on their team, is if they were baddies and then they'd probably move that vote before the actual deadline. So I am now convinced I didn't info dump, and I take my apology back.

This also isn't true. See my theory, and most of the Day 1 discussion.

FZ. wrote: When you regard something as info dumping, it's usually when you consider it to be the truth. Otherwise, it's just lying and I think that's a great tactic if it works for you, and it surprises me that you don't think that way.

This also doesn't work. This is why info dumping punishments are never public, because if you are lying about info dumping and aren't punished, but true info dumping is punished, the punishment validates the info dump. Then lying about info would never work. Personally, I consider true and false info dumps equally egregious rule breaking.

Epignosis wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Hence my Weather/Hunger theory. I can't think of anything else.

Cool theory. I use a secret lynch save no one knows about instead of just voting LC on the fly and keeping it. You should write more of those.

Now, if you will excuse me, I must go write my post for Night 11 of The Syndicate's 2014 Game of Infodumpers and Role-Outers.

Also, reading back on Epi's posts, it seems clear to me that he was a baddie frustrated with being info dumped against. That might explain why he voted himself - frustrated baddies will sometimes do that when outed or to express anger about the way they were lunched.

Russtifinko wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:And the only person that seemed to defend Epi was Trice, so make of that what you will.

But this isn't true....

S~V~S wrote:

nijuukyugou wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Can we not lynch Epi? I wanted to play mafia with him.

Agreed. I thought I'd see some insight reading through the thread why he and LC are the top candidates. It seems Epi's being voted for being Epi. Let the man play, for God's sake! :P LC seems to be voted because of (possibly fake?) infodumping, even though others have seemingly done the same, and given this as a reason to vote Epi (the whole "it's probability" thing). And now LC's voted himself. So many self votes and switches. Is there something I'm missing? There's definitely some weirdness going on here. Weird game. So let's make it interesting.

Let's make it a tie and see what happens.

I thought people were voting for Epi becasue of FZ's theory about probability. I voted for him because of how he reacted to my vote for Zomba. I think he knows I am not bad, and he voted for me anyhow.

In any case all the self voting, yikes.

Why so set on trice over these two, MP?

Because I forgot about them.

Thanks for pointing them out! All I remembered was Trice, but apparently I misremembered.

I also appreciate the thoughts that Llama brought forth on Rico. Something to think about.

Voting for Ricochet for lunch. A quick glance over the forums, and I'm convinced he's complicit with Epi. C'mon guys, vote early!

Snowman wrote:Voting for Ricochet for lunch. A quick glance over the forums, and I'm convinced he's complicit with Epi. C'mon guys, vote early!

Can you elaborate?

...or Russ, or Long Con. Lemme think....

Snowman wrote:Voting for Ricochet for lunch. A quick glance over the forums, and I'm convinced he's complicit with Epi. C'mon guys, vote early!

I like voting early too and LC hasn't said or done anything to make me change my mind about him. There are tonz of others that might be bad, but we have so little info to go on. I will change my vote if a better baddie target emerges.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Rezz please.

Yeah, resurrect eminem.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Rezz please.

Okay but are you fine with being a Zombie Marmot?

Zomberella12 wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Rezz please.

Okay but are you fine with being a Zombie Marmot?

Perhaps.

MovingPictures07 wrote: Yes, true, but if everyone from each civilian group comes in and says "Epi isn't on my team!", then it means Epi has to be bad, or someone has to be lying.

What you and LC said isn't role outing, but it's info dumping, which can be a bit of a grey area.

To be entirely fair, literally anybody regardless of actual alignment could just say "I'm civvie so don't lynch me." Baddies do it all the time.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Llama, the first player that comes to mind that defending Epi was Trice.

I'd also like to add that I said I would gladly eat my words.

Did we reach a solid conclusion on why epig didn't get lunched? Was anybody around to save the poll results? Last I saw it, epignosis was up by 2 votes so do we know that LC and him tied in the poll?

Hunger's power doesn't sound like it could protect Weather from lynch, only from nk (I could be wrong, but it does specify "on even nights")

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote: Yes, true, but if everyone from each civilian group comes in and says "Epi isn't on my team!", then it means Epi has to be bad, or someone has to be lying.

What you and LC said isn't role outing, but it's info dumping, which can be a bit of a grey area.

To be entirely fair, literally anybody regardless of actual alignment could just say "I'm civvie so don't lynch me." Baddies do it all the time.

I'm new here, but I'm totally with you on this.

triceratopzeuhl wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote: Yes, true, but if everyone from each civilian group comes in and says "Epi isn't on my team!", then it means Epi has to be bad, or someone has to be lying.

What you and LC said isn't role outing, but it's info dumping, which can be a bit of a grey area.

To be entirely fair, literally anybody regardless of actual alignment could just say "I'm civvie so don't lynch me." Baddies do it all the time.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Llama, the first player that comes to mind that defending Epi was Trice.

I'd also like to add that I said I would gladly eat my words.

Did we reach a solid conclusion on why epig didn't get lunched? Was anybody around to save the poll results? Last I saw it, epignosis was up by 2 votes so do we know that LC and him tied in the poll?

Hunger's power doesn't sound like it could protect Weather from lynch, only from nk (I could be wrong, but it does specify "on even nights")

The final poll wasn't a tie. Epi should have been lunched. MP thinks that Weather & Hunger had a secret lunch stop power.

Was there a 1 vote difference? If Margaret Reed was one of the voters for LC it could have been made into a tie as well.

Though we don't even know if rox would void the lynch due to a tie result, in the games I've played a more common thing is randomize or to just lynch both of them

It's true that we don't know what the Host would do in case of a tie, but it's still an option. As you've said, the easy interpretation is that Margret Reed was a LC voter and thus brought it back to a tie. The subtle interpretation is that Epignosis had a secret power preventing him altogether from being lynched. Due to the complementary nature of the Weather/Hunger forces, a guess would be something like "neither of them can be day lynched as long as the other is alive".

Another guess, but without fully knowing if this can actually be true from the rules, would be that their protections extend to or are in effect on the Day. So Hunger opted on N0 to protect Epignosis (since killing was not allowed) and the protection ran through Day 1. Thus, Epignosis nonchalantly didn't mind the lynch train he himself set and that is also what he meant by the "I can read" part: "You can decide whether to let someone starve to death on even nights or protect Weather." The starving part is basically a night kill, but the protection could in fact take place outside the Night phase.

Snowman wrote:Voting for Ricochet for lunch. A quick glance over the forums, and I'm convinced he's complicit with Epi. C'mon guys, vote early!

Encouraging people to vote early is pointless, because the durations of the Day/Night cycles are invariably 48/24 (subject to change only if the Host announces it). Early votes, even if not definitive (i.e. they are changeable), can usually have a destabilizing effect (bandwagoning, taking some players' mind off other cases or off their own, etc.). Quick skims of a discussion can also often lead to nothing good more often than not, especially as the game progresses - what seems so obvious or evident can in fact be misleading (which is also totally the case here, I might personally add). Behaviour of a baddie or of a baddie team can be obvious, subtle, hidden or anything in between.

triceratopzeuhl wrote:Was there a 1 vote difference? If Margaret Reed was one of the voters for LC it could have been made into a tie as well.

Though we don't even know if rox would void the lynch due to a tie result, in the games I've played a more common thing is randomize or to just lynch both of them

last I saw before I feel asleep was 6 epi 5 LC. I'm fairly confident that Rox wouldn't void a lynch as a result of a tie. I've only ever seen one host do that (Epi) and I have not ever seen Rox do that in all the games I have played of hers and hosted with her.

I think the Rico/epi connection is definitely interesting. I totally could see epi doing that

Here is the D1 tally:

I see players posting they could totally see what happened as something Epignosis would do, as a baddie, but would I do it too? SVS, I think, said that the bad teams sound formidable, given their powers. We can assume the Forces will do everything to dodge bullets, since they'll need an immediate switch to disappear off the radar. So why would Epignosis and me adopt such a he-snarls-at-me-and-I-defend-him-completely tactic that could prove disastrous the second one is hit?

Anyway, if looking for defenders is your tactic of choice, there are plenty who didn't join the lynch train and have said it so. But I also suggest you don't ignore the chance that, since Epignosis lynched him so nonchalantly, knowing (and openly teasing everyone) that nothing will happen to him, perhaps Hunger wasn't far behind, pushing for the same lynch that would not affect them.

I'll be later for, presumably, more defending.

What do others make of Elizabeth Donner's new message?
What do others make of her old message, in light of how Epi flipped?

Epignosis lynched himself*, I meant

Why didn't you post that before?

I am going to vote for you at this time. I think Llama made some good points, and this post:

Ricochet wrote:It's true that we don't know what the Host would do in case of a tie, but it's still an option. As you've said, the easy interpretation is that Margret Reed was a LC voter and thus brought it back to a tie. The subtle interpretation is that Epignosis had a secret power preventing him altogether from being lynched. Due to the complementary nature of the Weather/Hunger forces, a guess would be something like "neither of them can be day lynched as long as the other is alive".

Another guess, but without fully knowing if this can actually be true from the rules, would be that their protections extend to or are in effect on the Day. So Hunger opted on N0 to protect Epignosis (since killing was not allowed) and the protection ran through Day 1. Thus, Epignosis nonchalantly didn't mind the lynch train he himself set and that is also what he meant by the "I can read" part: "You can decide whether to let someone starve to death on even nights or protect Weather." The starving part is basically a night kill, but the protection could in fact take place outside the Night phase.

...seriously pinged the living daylights out of me.

Since you ask about Elizabeths messages, while her old message had some truth in it re Epi, she did not have info, so I got the impression it was just a "let's start discussion" ploy by naming two of the most aggressive players out of the gate. I have no real opinion on Blooper but she tends to be a gray area for me in general. So far I am not alarmed by Zomba.

Before I vote I want to reread MM to see why he was killed, perhaps that will give me some guidance that my instincts are correct. Then i likely will vote early myself. I disagree with you, Ricochet, about early voting. I think *bad* bandwagons tend to form late in the day when people come in wanting to vote, but not being really being caught up, and a last minute "catch" gets people into that pitchfork waving frenzy without giving the focus of the votes time to respond.

Fine, vote for me then. I'm not defending myself as a cornered Hunger, I am defending myself as a civ mortified that everything I have done in D1 is now blowing up in my face simply because I did not respond to Epig's agressive and rousy banter and gameplay and such. Llama's points are indeed excellent for an easy hunt and lynch. They'll also highly circumstantial and blinding.

Why didn't I post what before?
What exactly pinged you about my interpretations of the vote result? What are you own interpretations?

I did not imply E. Donner had any real info. I did not imply we should go back and hunt from there on. I simply asked what others think, in new context. Same question for E. Donner's new message.

I think early and late are both bad timings, in general. I've seen the effects of both, so far, in the two games I've played so far. The early started lynch train for Epignosis now circumstancially seems like a great action, because he ended up flipping bad. You will have the opportunity to witness the opposite outcome, if you lynch me in the same manner. But you seem fine with wrapping up my trial as quick as Snowman urged it himself, so by all means.

Here's SVS stance on voting early on D1. She feels more ready this time.

The poll; why didn't you post the poll before. I posted right after you, I thought it would have been clear, sorry . People have been talking about the confusion re the poll since day ended, and you had a screenshot, and did not post it?

And I though that your whole post felt bad, it felt like you knew why Epi survived, and you were trying too hard to explain it.

And yes, you asked for others opinions on the Gossip posts, and I gave mine. That's all. Why are you defensive about that?

Linki, yeah, on Day One when there had not been days of discussion, lol. I love changeable votes, as of now I am pretty sure and at this time I want to put my money where my mouth is. I can always realign my investments at a later time, though.

Sorry, here it is.

S~V~S wrote:Why is everyone voting already? Why did Epi self vote?

I have to catch up to the film thread, but will bbl to read back.

S~V~S wrote:The poll; why didn't you post the poll before. I posted right after you, I thought it would have been clear, sorry . People have been talking about the confusion re the poll since day ended, and you had a screenshot, and did not post it?

And I though that your whole post felt bad, it felt like you knew why Epi survived, and you were trying too hard to explain it.

And yes, you asked for others opinions on the Gossip posts, and I gave mine. That's all. Why are you defensive about that?

Linki, yeah, on Day One when there had not been days of discussion, lol. I love changeable votes, as of now I am pretty sure and at this time I want to put my money where my mouth is. I can always realign my investments at a later time, though.

First of all, I don't want this to sound the wrong way, but I don't think posting the polls is a responsability. Roxy made it clear we'll have to track it ourselves, which is what I did. If some players don't do, miss it or get confused about it, that's kinda the trick of Roxy's plan. Second of all, just like when fingersplints wasn't sure of the poll outcome and I addressed it, I think I addressed the outcome of the lynch, with possibilities of what might have happened, every time someone was confused by what did happen (i.e. why didn't Epig get lynched). I did not withheld any information regarding the D1 poll.

I don't know why Epi survived. I was discussing possibilities outside the poll tally i.e. powers (such as Margret Reed's) or secrets. I am not aware of what Epignosis knew on D1 about them. I am not even convinced the possibilities I mentioned are the things he knew about. Nevertheless, why is my input on those possibilities wrong or pingey?

You gave your opinions of the Gossip posts, but first you were offensive about me implying something. I was defensive at those assumptions.

Actually, I read it again and you weren't offensive about the Gossip posts. I was on the defensive about the whole post and probably reacted that way to the Gossip part as well. My apologies.

Ricochet wrote:Fine, vote for me then. I'm not defending myself as a cornered Hunger, I am defending myself as a civ mortified that everything I have done in D1 is now blowing up in my face simply because I did not respond to Epig's agressive and rousy banter and gameplay and such. Llama's points are indeed excellent for an easy hunt and lynch. They'll also highly circumstantial and blinding.

IMO civs shouldn't ever give up a defense...so then the question becomes, are you a civ or aren't you?

Early votes start discussion and make for less last minute "I'm with him/her" claims. However, FTR I would never purposefully vote for a player I didn't think was probably bad just to make discussion.

My opinion on the Eliz Donner letter is that Zombie Kitty is not bad (obviously)

No it isn't a responsibility, but being helpful to the civs IS a responsibility if you are one. Just saying.

And how is this implying anything about you?:

Since you ask about Elizabeths messages, while her old message had some truth in it re Epi, she did not have info, so I got the impression it was just a "let's start discussion" ploy by naming two of the most aggressive players out of the gate. I have no real opinion on Blooper but she tends to be a gray area for me in general. So far I am not alarmed by Zomba.

No mention of you, no snide remarks or implication about you. No *you* whatsoever.

I did not vote before, but I am going to do so now. The whole "not my responsibility" is possibly one of the least civvie like statements I have ever seen in a Mafia game.

Linki @Ricochet, then ignore that up there ^^
Linki@ Zomba~ any opinion on Ninjajujube?

S~V~S wrote: I did not vote before, but I am going to do so now. The whole "not my responsibility" is possibly one of the least civvie like statements I have ever seen in a Mafia game.

Agree that Rico has not been acting like a civie.

S~V~S wrote: Linki@ Zomba~ any opinion on Ninjajujube?

No opinion right now on Noniballoons. I will reread the thread.

I'm not giving up on defending myself, in fact I kept doing it in the exact paragraph you quoted.

Linki @SVS: yes, I was helpful in talking with the others what might have happened after the D1 poll. Every single time. If you or others wish for poll screenshots to be posted after a Day concludes, kindly request it as a rule.
Thanks for taking what I said the wrong way, just like I didn't want you to, though.

S~V~S is sketchy to me. I think Rico is a fine fellow. *votes S~V~S*

Bottom line, if anyone wishes to point out what constitutes me defending Epig in my D1 writings, even in the quote llama brought up, I'm looking forward to hear the specifics. What I said there was that I'm not joining the lynch train just on grounds of Epig bantz (especially in light of having my own suspicions and preferring to follow them). That is not the same thing.

Long Con wrote:S~V~S is sketchy to me. I think Rico is a fine fellow. *votes S~V~S*

This is an example of the kind of post that makes me want to vote for LC. How is SVS sketchy? Rico does not appear to be a fine fellow (see my previous post). LC you are still at the top of my list for probable baddies.