The Syndicate

MacDougall wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Civvie behavior is hard to define because we pretty much always act irrationally.

You went out of your way to write "we" here.

No I didn't.

Was gonna spend this morning catching up (I haven't read a majority of Day 0) but then my Dad was like "Yo wanna go see Deadpool" and I was like "Fuck yeah I do lets bounce" So we bounced and we saw Deadpool and now I'm like, do I really want to catch up on Day 0?

So my response to Bass (and anyone I guess who gives a shit what I think of Day 0) Is that I don't care enough about what's happened to really dig into 10 pages and basically end up having to force myself to draw conclusions from Day 0 peacockery.

Still catching up from the first chunk of pages in the game, but just read from where I left off last night until now.

A few responses:

MacDougall wrote: Lorab's couple of posts had the vibe I commonly find in day 0 baddies as well.

You are wrong about me. And I don't know what you perceive as "baddie" tone, but I don't particularly feel like rehashing the argument of whether or not there are baddie traits. At any rate, I'm not bad, so whatever tone you're reading--it's not me being bad. It's just me being me. A tired and jetlagged me, but me.

MacDougall wrote:Okay Lorab is probably not here but bea appeared to totally ignore the fact that I eyeballed her so that's a point against her.

You are correct--I was not here.

Nerolunar wrote: Im happy that Arkham is the most voted for poll option. The game almost urges us to go there, so Im surprised more people aren´t voting for it.

That is exactly why I'm not voting for it. It seems like too obvious a choice and I know these hosts. The fact that the game is urging us to go there makes me think that we shouldn't go there. *insert it's a trap meme here*

MacDougall wrote:A hypocritical point.

Am I the only one who finds long wall posts almost intentionally designed to not be read? I have copped stick for posting a few replies in a row before but I would be much more willing to read that than one quote mountain post.

This probably could be green, but it's an on topic enough conversation that I'm keeping it black. But it's really a meta-idea.

I think it's largely a mafia culture thing. I'm used to wall posts. Multiple posts in a row look suspicious to me, because my instinct is to feel that they are trying to bump up their post count. I realize that the culture is different elsewhere, so I have learned to mostly overlook it. But walls of text seem completely natural to me, and often seem slightly more civ to me. What I'm learning more and more is that baddies and civs can easily be behind either.

LoRab wrote:Still catching up from the first chunk of pages in the game, but just read from where I left off last night until now.

A few responses:

MacDougall wrote: Lorab's couple of posts had the vibe I commonly find in day 0 baddies as well.

You are wrong about me. And I don't know what you perceive as "baddie" tone, but I don't particularly feel like rehashing the argument of whether or not there are baddie traits. At any rate, I'm not bad, so whatever tone you're reading--it's not me being bad. It's just me being me. A tired and jetlagged me, but me.

MacDougall wrote:Okay Lorab is probably not here but bea appeared to totally ignore the fact that I eyeballed her so that's a point against her.

You are correct--I was not here.

Nerolunar wrote: Im happy that Arkham is the most voted for poll option. The game almost urges us to go there, so Im surprised more people aren´t voting for it.

That is exactly why I'm not voting for it. It seems like too obvious a choice and I know these hosts. The fact that the game is urging us to go there makes me think that we shouldn't go there. *insert it's a trap meme here*

MacDougall wrote:A hypocritical point.

Am I the only one who finds long wall posts almost intentionally designed to not be read? I have copped stick for posting a few replies in a row before but I would be much more willing to read that than one quote mountain post.

This probably could be green, but it's an on topic enough conversation that I'm keeping it black. But it's really a meta-idea.

I think it's largely a mafia culture thing. I'm used to wall posts. Multiple posts in a row look suspicious to me, because my instinct is to feel that they are trying to bump up their post count. I realize that the culture is different elsewhere, so I have learned to mostly overlook it. But walls of text seem completely natural to me, and often seem slightly more civ to me. What I'm learning more and more is that baddies and civs can easily be behind either.

No twirl emoji civ Lorab confirmed.

Matt wrote:Unfortunately, I seem to be on the losing side of the argument here (again...I was on the losing side in Star Wars too where, yup, I called Zeebs out on her sketchy behavior there too), so hopefully peeps don't see her adversary (me) and go "Oh well guess we'll vote him".

I'm not Batman or anything but it will simply be a waste of a day if that's where we're going. Seeing Enrique call me stubborn and a few others (Golden for one) acting suss of me does not make me feel good about tomorrow's lynch, but anyway, just throwin' that out there.

I'm not sure I like this post, I haven't seen anyone say you should be lynched yet?
I don't think you are mafia and at this point and wouldn't lynch you.

Golden wrote:What I see from you at the moment is standard tunnelly Matt. I'm not seeing good evidence from you that she is bad, just 'I was right last time' and you reacting to her suspecting you.

If this is really what you are seeing then I would be skeptical as I really encouraged Matt to try to play hard to his "tunnely" meta in the GoC and he was last man standing so if he's sticking to it, it could be rather indicative of bad Matt.

The last civilian game I saw Matt in he was very different to "standard tunnely Matt". In Star Wars he was flip floppy, made shorter posts and generally had a tone of carefreeness.

Linki: Yeah that's probably the best disarming of a scum ping anyone has ever done to me. Lorab good.

man, all i wanted for this game was for us to all be batmen for a day.. track down all the bad homies.. yall need to stop fighting and start thinking like THE Bambu

what's a bambu. act like bats, yall, not bambus

Golden wrote:@Matt - zeebs is acting totally different (to me) here than in Star Wars. The zeebs I saw in Star Wars was poised, she was the one resolving fights and being a good mediator, trying to get people to have an open mind and see all sides etc. She lacked any real frustration. To me this frustrated zeebs reminds me much more of her dune self.

What I see from you at the moment is standard tunnelly Matt. I'm not seeing good evidence from you that she is bad, just 'I was right last time' and you reacting to her suspecting you.

I'm not tunneling. My priority is Zeebs at the moment, but I've also openly wondered about sig (who has ignored two of my posts about him) and I've also commented on other matters in thread.

However, yes, Zeebs NO U'd the fuck out of me, puts her vote on a random option and then attempts to call others out for where they put their vote.

Cool you don't see how that is worrying.

Linki - Mac, again, how have I been tunneling? I've been batting off Zebra's attempts to paint me as bad.

Turnip Head wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Civvie behavior is hard to define because we pretty much always act irrationally.

You went out of your way to write "we" here.

No I didn't.

I believe that you did. I think you went out of your way to call yourself a civ when the natural way to phrase that sentence would be to refer to civs as "they" but you were worried that someone would find it scummy for you to refer to civilians as that and didn't want to defend from a dumb comment. It's an irksome sentence. At best case scenario it's fluff content that you've created for the purpose of telling us you're a civilian.

DharmaHelper wrote:
No twirl emoji civ Lorab confirmed.

That's just me dancing. Hey, it's hard to give up habits!!

MacDougall wrote:
Linki: Yeah that's probably the best disarming of a scum ping anyone has ever done to me. Lorab good.

Why thank you.

And I'm voting police station--it seems like a safe choice and as I've said, I think the more obvious choices come with high risk.

MacDougall wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Civvie behavior is hard to define because we pretty much always act irrationally.

You went out of your way to write "we" here.

No I didn't.

I believe that you did. I think you went out of your way to call yourself a civ when the natural way to phrase that sentence would be to refer to civs as "they" but you were worried that someone would find it scummy for you to refer to civilians as that and didn't want to defend from a dumb comment. It's an irksome sentence. At best case scenario it's fluff content that you've created for the purpose of telling us you're a civilian.

Dunno, Sorsha slipped and said "you civs" in GOC and I correctly caught that.

Matt wrote:
Linki - Mac, again, how have I been tunneling? I've been batting off Zebra's attempts to paint me as bad.

I didn't say you were. I said if Golden feels that you are "standard tunnelly Matt" it should concern him. I am more or less ignoring you and Zebra's wallposts because otherwise I won't be able to remain caught up.

DharmaHelper wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Civvie behavior is hard to define because we pretty much always act irrationally.

You went out of your way to write "we" here.

No I didn't.

I believe that you did. I think you went out of your way to call yourself a civ when the natural way to phrase that sentence would be to refer to civs as "they" but you were worried that someone would find it scummy for you to refer to civilians as that and didn't want to defend from a dumb comment. It's an irksome sentence. At best case scenario it's fluff content that you've created for the purpose of telling us you're a civilian.

Dunno, Sorsha slipped and said "you civs" in GOC and I correctly caught that.

Sorsha wouldn't have been too worried about that on account of her being a rather benign independent in a game where there was already one revealed to the thread that the civilians seemed intent on not lynching. Sorsha is also not Turnip Head. Sorsha probably would have said that if she were a civilian, and the context of the sentences is no doubt different.

Anyway if I'm the only one who scrunched my nose at it I will drop it. I'm not going to get hung up on one sentence.

MacDougall wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Civvie behavior is hard to define because we pretty much always act irrationally.

You went out of your way to write "we" here.

No I didn't.

I believe that you did. I think you went out of your way to call yourself a civ when the natural way to phrase that sentence would be to refer to civs as "they" but you were worried that someone would find it scummy for you to refer to civilians as that and didn't want to defend from a dumb comment. It's an irksome sentence. At best case scenario it's fluff content that you've created for the purpose of telling us you're a civilian.

Actually I wrote it exactly the way that I posted it, briefly considered that someone like you might give me shit for it, and then when out of my way to not change it because I don't care and it's true. I act irrationally as a civ even when I'm trying hard not to.

Turnip Head wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Civvie behavior is hard to define because we pretty much always act irrationally.

You went out of your way to write "we" here.

No I didn't.

I believe that you did. I think you went out of your way to call yourself a civ when the natural way to phrase that sentence would be to refer to civs as "they" but you were worried that someone would find it scummy for you to refer to civilians as that and didn't want to defend from a dumb comment. It's an irksome sentence. At best case scenario it's fluff content that you've created for the purpose of telling us you're a civilian.

Actually I wrote it exactly the way that I posted it, briefly considered that someone like you might give me shit for it, and then when out of my way to not change it because I don't care and it's true. I act irrationally as a civ even when I'm trying hard not to.

You briefly considered that someone like me would give you shit for this ... but you posted it anyway. Okay noted. Interesting.

MacDougall wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:Civvie behavior is hard to define because we pretty much always act irrationally.

You went out of your way to write "we" here.

No I didn't.

I believe that you did. I think you went out of your way to call yourself a civ when the natural way to phrase that sentence would be to refer to civs as "they" but you were worried that someone would find it scummy for you to refer to civilians as that and didn't want to defend from a dumb comment. It's an irksome sentence. At best case scenario it's fluff content that you've created for the purpose of telling us you're a civilian.

Dunno, Sorsha slipped and said "you civs" in GOC and I correctly caught that.

Sorsha wouldn't have been too worried about that on account of her being a rather benign independent in a game where there was already one revealed to the thread that the civilians seemed intent on not lynching. Sorsha is also not Turnip Head. Sorsha probably would have said that if she were a civilian, and the context of the sentences is no doubt different.

Anyway if I'm the only one who scrunched my nose at it I will drop it. I'm not going to get hung up on one sentence.

I just mean that if he *had* phrased it poorly, and if someone *had* called him on it, it would be a legitimate call and not a "dumb comment".

And if you think the purpose of that post was to highlight my civvieness then you missed the point of my post. I believe civilians lynch each other all the time simply because they can't understand one another's behavior.

Turnip Head wrote:And if you think the purpose of that post was to highlight my civvieness then you missed the point of my post. I believe civilians lynch each other all the time simply because they can't understand one another's behavior.

Oh so NOW its "they".

DharmaHelper wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:And if you think the purpose of that post was to highlight my civvieness then you missed the point of my post. I believe civilians lynch each other all the time simply because they can't understand one another's behavior.

Oh so NOW its "they".

Oh damn you got me.

Turnip Head wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:And if you think the purpose of that post was to highlight my civvieness then you missed the point of my post. I believe civilians lynch each other all the time simply because they can't understand one another's behavior.

Oh so NOW its "they".

Oh damn you got me.

He really did.

I guess if I get mislynched because of this you'll have no one to blame but me.

Turnip Head wrote:I guess if I get mislynched because of this you'll have no one to blame but me.

What is this post?

Probably won´t be a mislynch though.

MacDougall wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:I guess if I get mislynched because of this you'll have no one to blame but me.

What is this post?

Just me saying something I probably should have kept to myself, aka acting irrationally

Nerolunar wrote:Probably won´t be a mislynch though.

What makes you say that?

I hope it was obvious I was kidding. I already admitted to not reading anything that's happened in Day 0. I don't even know the context or severity of the TH case.

He did say "they" though. Fuckin' gotem.

DharmaHelper wrote:I hope it was obvious I was kidding. I already admitted to not reading anything that's happened in Day 0. I don't even know the context or severity of the TH case.

He did say "they" though. Fuckin' gotem.

I knew you were kidding. Nerolunar seems to be fully onboard though

I think TH slipped tbh.

Nah Im not haha. Theres still lots of time until first lynch.

DH reacting bizzarely to this.

MacDougall wrote:DH reacting bizzarely to this.

Golden wrote: You and I definitely see game mechanics the same way, sig. Wayne can win with the mafia. They don't want to (because killing mafia nets them points and killing civs subtract points) but ultimately they will do what they need to do to win, and if that means taking out the last civ to end the game alive and above 100% they would do so.

It's difficult for Wayne's Manor to win with the baddies. Adding up all the percentages available in the game nets them 100% (with Rupert Thorne being the wildcard).
If a baddie team wins, it means that atleast all of GCPD (11) are dead + one other baddie team (3), giving them a base percentage of 11*-2+3*5 = -7%. Best case scenario, they would need at least 9 of the Arkham Asylum dead. If one of Wayne's Manor dies, they would need all the inmates dead. I don't see a scenario where they will be in favor of a civ lynch, ever.

Matt wrote:(cept nub Typh)

no u

Matt, I'm going to say this one time. Until you not only acknowledge the existence of but also respond to my analysis of our initial back-and-forth that took me an hour and a half to compose, until you stop misrepresenting me every time you respond to what I say, until you stop asking questions with options that are inaccurate and appear as if they're desperately trying to justify your disingenuous, desperate suspicion of me, and until you realize that maybe, just maybe, you're on the losing side of the argument not because I've brainwashed the players but because you're not doing a very good job of making logical arguments and putting in an effort to see my side of what's been happening, I'm not going to give you the time of day.

Now that doesn't mean I'm going to ignore you for the rest of the game, I'm not low like that, but it does mean that I'm not going to continue to waste my time, effort, and energy with you when you refuse to do the same for me and refuse to convince me that you're more than a brick wall right now. That's all.

Typhoony wrote:

Golden wrote: You and I definitely see game mechanics the same way, sig. Wayne can win with the mafia. They don't want to (because killing mafia nets them points and killing civs subtract points) but ultimately they will do what they need to do to win, and if that means taking out the last civ to end the game alive and above 100% they would do so.

It's difficult for Wayne's Manor to win with the baddies. Adding up all the percentages available in the game nets them 100% (with Rupert Thorne being the wildcard).
If a baddie team wins, it means that atleast all of GCPD (11) are dead + one other baddie team (3), giving them a base percentage of 11*-2+3*5 = -7%. Best case scenario, they would need at least 9 of the Arkham Asylum dead. If one of Wayne's Manor dies, they would need all the inmates dead. I don't see a scenario where they will be in favor of a civ lynch, ever.

Matt wrote:(cept nub Typh)

no u

Ewww math.
This is true, which is why I said they are pro civ indys, but I think they'd win at the expensive of GCPD.

Oh and Matt, until you meet all of these conditions I'm just going to respond to anything you have to say both to me and about me with a quotation of that post I just published.

Dom wrote:I think TH slipped tbh.

I don't.

MacDougall wrote:DH reacting bizzarely to this.

This I agree with.

a2thezebra wrote:

MacDougall wrote:DH reacting bizzarely to this.

This I agree with.

https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51.2 ... 4852_n.jpg

DharmaHelper wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

MacDougall wrote:DH reacting bizzarely to this.

This I agree with.

https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51.2 ... 4852_n.jpg

God damnit.

What is that reaction saying exactly?

That he's a nub

not a slip

Seems legit.

Enrique wrote:not a slip

Amen.

a2thezebra wrote:What is that reaction saying exactly?

You Bizarro best friend. Bizarro love you.

DharmaHelper wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:What is that reaction saying exactly?

You Bizarro best friend. Bizarro love you.

Same?

Dom wrote:I think TH slipped tbh.

I doubt it tbh.

a2thezebra wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:What is that reaction saying exactly?

You Bizarro best friend. Bizarro love you.

Same?

This make Bizarro so happy.

DharmaHelper wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

DharmaHelper wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:What is that reaction saying exactly?

You Bizarro best friend. Bizarro love you.

Same?

This make Bizarro so happy.

a2thezebra wrote:

Enrique wrote:not a slip

Amen.

Hmm why so adamant?