The Syndicate

Sorsha wrote:Why does them not being logged into the site mean they had nothing to do with the decision to kill bea?

Sorsha wrote:So they had to have logged in to have talked to their btsc mates?

I know that a couple of the speed games have had btsc threads on the forum here. Are you assuming that this game has them also?

Scotty wrote: Does Epi usually use chatzy or has anyone seen Epi-hosted games migrating to threads in syndicate for Mafia chat?

DharmaHelper wrote:See why would I bother looking into it if people already are dismissing my point lmao.

DharmaHelper wrote:You guys are right total coincidence Gordon mentions MAC and COFFEE in his posts. How dare I think a traditional gossip role would ever put his suspicions into his posts like that's ever happened before lmao.

Turnip Head wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:See why would I bother looking into it if people already are dismissing my point lmao.

Chrysanthemums awarding dream it. Chrysanthemums awarding dam tire.

DharmaHelper wrote:See why would I bother looking into it if people already are dismissing my point lmao.

Epignosis wrote:Note: Location PMs will go out this afternoon.

Also. Gotham spring premiere tonight with Mr. Freeze.

Scotty wrote: I don't like this insanifier. Do we think this is the extension of the Riddler for not figuring out the riddle yesterday?

Scotty wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:See why would I bother looking into it if people already are dismissing my point lmao.

Chrysanthemums awarding dream it. Chrysanthemums awarding dam tire.

I don't like this insanifier. Do we think this is the extension of the Riddler for not figuring out the riddle yesterday?

Turnip Head wrote:

Enrique wrote:Hey TH repeat after me

against

Chrysanthemums tawdrier maid nag.

Enrique wrote:concerning

Chrysanthemums awarding dam tire.

Enrique wrote:down

Chrysanthemums rainwater dam dig.

Enrique wrote:like

Chrysanthemums awarding rim date.

Enrique wrote:off

Chrysanthemums awarding dream it.

Enrique wrote:opposite

Chrysanthemums tawdrier magna id.

DharmaHelper wrote:Good morning!

I did a little bit of re-reading on Juliets based on what I find usually suspect about her which is her votes and her reasonings behind how she votes when bad. Fun fact, her votes for:

1. Black Rock
2. Scotty
3. Nero

Were all based on other peoples points. The baddie juliets I know is one to be very agreeable with outhers in the thread, so this gels with my thought. I'm a little groggy right now but I can pull quotes later.

juliets wrote:I'm going to go ahead and vote Scotty for two reasons basically. First, he decided to vote lovedelic even though lovedelic is new to this site yet he ruled out Equivocate because Equivocate was new. Second, and here is a quote from Mac:

Dom then went on to point out that Scotty "needs concrete info" ... I actually love Dom's point. Scotty doesn't want to lynch MP because he needs concrete info, but earlier he wanted to lynch lovedelic who hasn't even posted.

This didn't make sense then and it doesnt make any more sense now and was a good point by Dom.

I decided not to vote Wilgy this time because his game seems different than the beginning of GOC where he was bad and i don't have time to read him in Recruitment or Pikmin where he was good. If he doesnt get lynched this round I will look at this tomorrow.

lots and lots of linki

MacDougall wrote:I feel like Scotty's argument for wanting to lynch (or more to the point expressing that sentiment) a no show is something I've seen scum do before at this point of the game. When a mafia aligned player is at sea early game without having been able to start a conflict with anybody (the usual driving force behind successful blending) lynch a lurker or policy lynch somebody is often the carrion cry. His interest in doing so was made to feel even less genuine when he said he specifically didn't want to do it to Equivocate for being new and left only lovedelic as an option, who is also new. His argument that he knows lovedelic is not new to Mafia by virtue of him having played with him on RYM is also sketchy on account of lovedelic only having played one complete game on RYM before, I'd consider that new and he's damn sure new to the syndicate. So Scotty knew he was new.

Dom then went on to point out that Scotty "needs concrete info" ... I actually love Dom's point. Scotty doesn't want to lynch MP because he needs concrete info, but earlier he wanted to lynch lovedelic who hasn't even posted.

Epignosis wrote:
Also. Gotham spring premiere tonight with Mr. Freeze.

REALLY? I didn't know that I thought it was coming out like March 19. I've got something to do tonight then.

juliets wrote:TH, you asked for my thoughts (sorry, I went to bed about that time) and they are:

I'm glad the Enrique/Golden discussion has been pretty much put to bed. That was a lot of posts to finally get to basically the same conclusion that both are important and the time to have that discussion is if we are facing lynching who we think is a baddie vs. someone we think is an indy.

I understood zebra after she explained the first time that she was suspicious of the location but not necessarily the people who voted for it so I was not pulled in to that giant scramble we had about what she was really saying. I will say I didn't get it when she first said it, it took some explanation.

I don't have suspicions about those three people, but then again I don't have suspicions about the others who have spoken either. Dom is doing the questions asking I would expect, MP I'm not sure of, Mac is doing the accusing I would expect, and SVS and bea haven't done anything that raises my suspicion. In other words, it's too early for me to have any real suspicions. It did lift my brow a little bit when bea included me with her when asking a question but she did that with Mac in GOC and she was good so I'm not going to put much into that.

Finally, after all the arguments I read about a choice in this poll the person who said "it's just a day 1 poll" made the most sense. So, I am going with my gut choice of Arkham Asylum. Just as a reminder I saw this as the most logical choice because the game instructions were to find the whereabouts of the excapees and I think it's wise to start from the breakout and fan out from there. Plus there could easily be some clues at Arkham itself, people who may know which way some of the escapees are headed.

I did look at your link Mac, thank you. And I am not buddying up to you.

juliets wrote:

Dom wrote:

Scotty wrote:[quote="TurnipHead]
I dislike how strongly Scotty is campaigning for lynching a no-show. I mean I get the sentiment, it sucks to play with someone who isn't playing, but it doesn't help us solve the game at all and it's basically admitting that the last 1000 posts were worthless. I feel pretty good about most of the high profile players and would lynch a no-show if it went towards saving someone I feel good about, but I'd rather lynch someone who is acting suspicious than lynch someone who's not playing at all

Im not discrediting all that has been posted thus far. But my modus operandi is matching people's suspicions, voting records, and lynch results. I am bad at finding a guilty party day 1, but will reference things from early on after we get more info.

Ultimately, I'll have to make a vote based on suspicion, but this is just how I do my day 1's.

Dom wrote:...but you think someone is suspicious.
And you'd rather vote for someone with no posts, and therefore no evidence?
That's not a difference in philosophy, that's a contradiction.

Yes, because that is a safer bet in short term AND long term to help civs.
If I don't have concrete info, and I can't no-lynch, what's the next step? No-poster. I still fail to see the contradictions but apparently many of you do. So be it.

TH beat me to my question.
What constitutes "concrete info"? Votes?

DharmaHelper wrote:Good morning!

I did a little bit of re-reading on Juliets based on what I find usually suspect about her which is her votes and her reasonings behind how she votes when bad. Fun fact, her votes for:

1. Black Rock
2. Scotty
3. Nero

Were all based on other peoples points. The baddie juliets I know is one to be very agreeable with outhers in the thread, so this gels with my thought. I'm a little groggy right now but I can pull quotes later.

juliets wrote:Well, DH whose case I'm considering voting for now says to vote Nero to have a better chance to save Matt. I don't think the evidence is strong for a Nero lynch so I would be taking a leap of faith in Matt in voting for him. Maybe it's time to take a leap of faith, not something I do often, if ever. This place has just been crazy today.

linki again of course

DharmaHelper wrote:Exhibit A2:

juliets wrote:Well, DH whose case I'm considering voting for now says to vote Nero to have a better chance to save Matt. I don't think the evidence is strong for a Nero lynch so I would be taking a leap of faith in Matt in voting for him. Maybe it's time to take a leap of faith, not something I do often, if ever. This place has just been crazy today.

linki again of course

Already been over this but There it is for posterity.

juliets wrote:As I start the day today I'm considering three people for a vote tonight.

I believe DH's theory that Typh is the penguin though what bea said about him being more restrictive with a curse does cause me pause because Typh is indeed that experienced. I really would like to hear what he has to say about it though and since he's working now I hope he comes on when he gets home.

The BR case comparing her from one game to another also appeals to me. Again though, I'd like to hear what BR has to say about herself. I did reread her yesterday and I don't have anything I can add to the case.

I'm still dithering over the Mac case. It's hard because I read him so hard as civ and to consider a vote for him I have to bring my mind around to see him as bad. I also thought he did a good job defending himself. If he is bad it sounds like he's mafia where as Typh looks like an independent and I don't know about BR. My point is he could be the worst of the three if all three are "bad".

I don't get the remarks being made about Matt. To me it looks so clear that he was cursed by a different person last night than the one who cursed him the night before. I know Matt can be a little crazy but I find it difficult to believe he chose to post in lines from Shakespeare. So in short, i don't understand why there is suspicion on him.

DharmaHelper wrote:See why would I bother looking into it if people already are dismissing my point lmao.

juliets wrote:In my re-read of BR I didn't find anything else to bring to the table but it did cement my thoughts that TH's case was a good one. I'll be interested to see what you find S~V~S. I've been rolling around with this lack of response hang up I have and I guess it can be said that she's had plenty of time to respond she just hasn't. I think I'm going to have to give Mac the BOTD today because TH's points meshed with my thought that Mac had done a good job at responding to the case against him. So, it's looking like a BR vote for me today. I'll wait a bit just in case something happens.

linki

DharmaHelper wrote:Exhibit A3:
Considering 3 people based on 3 other people's cases:

juliets wrote:As I start the day today I'm considering three people for a vote tonight.

I believe DH's theory that Typh is the penguin though what bea said about him being more restrictive with a curse does cause me pause because Typh is indeed that experienced. I really would like to hear what he has to say about it though and since he's working now I hope he comes on when he gets home.

The BR case comparing her from one game to another also appeals to me. Again though, I'd like to hear what BR has to say about herself. I did reread her yesterday and I don't have anything I can add to the case.

I'm still dithering over the Mac case. It's hard because I read him so hard as civ and to consider a vote for him I have to bring my mind around to see him as bad. I also thought he did a good job defending himself. If he is bad it sounds like he's mafia where as Typh looks like an independent and I don't know about BR. My point is he could be the worst of the three if all three are "bad".

I don't get the remarks being made about Matt. To me it looks so clear that he was cursed by a different person last night than the one who cursed him the night before. I know Matt can be a little crazy but I find it difficult to believe he chose to post in lines from Shakespeare. So in short, i don't understand why there is suspicion on him.

DharmaHelper wrote:Exhibit A5:

juliets wrote:In my re-read of BR I didn't find anything else to bring to the table but it did cement my thoughts that TH's case was a good one. I'll be interested to see what you find S~V~S. I've been rolling around with this lack of response hang up I have and I guess it can be said that she's had plenty of time to respond she just hasn't. I think I'm going to have to give Mac the BOTD today because TH's points meshed with my thought that Mac had done a good job at responding to the case against him. So, it's looking like a BR vote for me today. I'll wait a bit just in case something happens.

linki

So far thats 3/4 votes based on other peoples thoughts.

Turnip Head wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:Exhibit A5:

juliets wrote:In my re-read of BR I didn't find anything else to bring to the table but it did cement my thoughts that TH's case was a good one. I'll be interested to see what you find S~V~S. I've been rolling around with this lack of response hang up I have and I guess it can be said that she's had plenty of time to respond she just hasn't. I think I'm going to have to give Mac the BOTD today because TH's points meshed with my thought that Mac had done a good job at responding to the case against him. So, it's looking like a BR vote for me today. I'll wait a bit just in case something happens.

linki

So far thats 3/4 votes based on other peoples thoughts.

Chrysanthemums warming radiated.

DharmaHelper wrote:Exhibit A5:

juliets wrote:In my re-read of BR I didn't find anything else to bring to the table but it did cement my thoughts that TH's case was a good one. I'll be interested to see what you find S~V~S. I've been rolling around with this lack of response hang up I have and I guess it can be said that she's had plenty of time to respond she just hasn't. I think I'm going to have to give Mac the BOTD today because TH's points meshed with my thought that Mac had done a good job at responding to the case against him. So, it's looking like a BR vote for me today. I'll wait a bit just in case something happens.

linki

So far thats 3/4 votes based on other peoples thoughts.

DharmaHelper wrote:You guys are right total coincidence Gordon mentions MAC and COFFEE in his posts. How dare I think a traditional gossip role would ever put his suspicions into his posts like that's ever happened before lmao.

Dom wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:You guys are right total coincidence Gordon mentions MAC and COFFEE in his posts. How dare I think a traditional gossip role would ever put his suspicions into his posts like that's ever happened before lmao.

I think the Mac point is stronger than the coffee. Cops drink coffee.
But I'm not opposed to putting some pressure on any player who we don't know is civvie.

Juliet, are you describing your civ meta right now?


Woah, chill DH. Keep linki-ing me.

Dom wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:You guys are right total coincidence Gordon mentions MAC and COFFEE in his posts. How dare I think a traditional gossip role would ever put his suspicions into his posts like that's ever happened before lmao.

I think the Mac point is stronger than the coffee. Cops drink coffee.
But I'm not opposed to putting some pressure on any player who we don't know is civvie.

Juliet, are you describing your civ meta right now?


Woah, chill DH. Keep linki-ing me.

S~V~S wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:See why would I bother looking into it if people already are dismissing my point lmao.

I am not dismissing it; I would like to wait a day is all, to perhaps allow the commissioner to clarify his point. Pushing to lynch someone over an ambiguous reference in a gossip post is not something I am comfortable with. Just becasue he said "Mac" in one post does not mean he makes similar references in every post.

*Everyone* would get "Mac", not everyone would get "coffee" due to history. It would be like one of us who played at the Piano dropping "Chameleon" as a hint, when there are probably 10 people playing this game that would get that reference as a reference to YOU. Or referring to me with a comment about Vincent the dog, since that used to be in my user name at LP and for a while all my avatars were yellow labs. Again, half the players would feel the breeze ruffling their hair at that reference flew over their heads.

Dom wrote:Juliets what did you think when MP came under fire for describing his own civ meta?

Turnip Head wrote:

Dom wrote:Juliets what did you think when MP came under fire for describing his own civ meta?

Chrysanthemums warming radiated.

Scotty wrote:This also isn't damning or anything because it was two different teams, but I found slightly coincidental: the last person both bea and sig addressed was Glorfindel.

Turnip Head wrote:

Dom wrote:Juliets what did you think when MP came under fire for describing his own civ meta?

Chrysanthemums warming radiated.

Matt wrote:

Scotty wrote:This also isn't damning or anything because it was two different teams, but I found slightly coincidental: the last person both bea and sig addressed was Glorfindel.

Oh, a theory!

Harvey "Glorfy" Dent held bea hostage last night, and someone targeted Glorfy for a NK.

Scotty wrote:

Matt wrote:

Scotty wrote:This also isn't damning or anything because it was two different teams, but I found slightly coincidental: the last person both bea and sig addressed was Glorfindel.

Oh, a theory!

Harvey "Glorfy" Dent held bea hostage last night, and someone targeted Glorfy for a NK.

you solved it Matt. Good work everyone. We can go home

juliets wrote:

HamburgerBoy wrote: See this comment about me by Hamburger Boy in GOC.

juliets wrote:

Ricochet wrote:All I'm reading in juliets' post is I'm following Mac's, Epig's and Sorsha's train of thoughts.

Yes, that is exactly what i am saying. Is there something wrong with that? Sometimes people post their thoughts to persuade others and whether or not that was their intent, I was persuaded to look hard at Lorab as a result of those posts. That's how the game works.

This is exactly the same juliets I saw last game, and it's just as suspicious as ever to me. I know she said that she was playing her usual game back then as well, but I definitely can't ignore this. Gun to head scum.

I understand what you're saying about last game we played (and I will reiterate this answer to Ricochet is indicative of my style) but i don't understand why you see my reply as suspicious. Can you explain that for me?

I have several appointments today and will likely not be back until 5:00+ pm. Just want everyone to know why I'm not responding to any questions or putting forth any thoughts during the day. I still suspect Lorab but whether I vote for her is dependent on what her reply is to the comments made about her.

Scotty wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Dom wrote:Juliets what did you think when MP came under fire for describing his own civ meta?

Chrysanthemums warming radiated.

Ok TH. Is there something preventing you from using those emojis are responses? Because I'm not sure of your opinion.

Do you agree with DH's points against Juliets?

Turnip Head wrote:

Enrique wrote:Hey TH repeat after me

against

Chrysanthemums tawdrier maid nag.

Enrique wrote:concerning

Chrysanthemums awarding dam tire.

Enrique wrote:down

Chrysanthemums rainwater dam dig.

Enrique wrote:like

Chrysanthemums awarding rim date.

Enrique wrote:off

Chrysanthemums awarding dream it.

Enrique wrote:opposite

Chrysanthemums tawdrier magna id.

Scotty wrote:Do you agree with DH's points against Juliets?

Turnip Head wrote:Chrysanthemums warming radiated.