The Syndicate

Epignosis wrote:Class, I have another assignment for you:

If I had taken votes instead of Scotty, do you believe MM would have moved his vote elsewhere?

Epignosis wrote:I see three straight on Quin. In one or two sentences, please explain your reasoning. You may use links to support your response. Make sure to put your name and date on your paper. No cheating.

reywaS wrote:I is here

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:You've given us very little so far other than to criticize the play of someone you have declared a town read for.

If you think my methods are unhelpful, then take a look in the freaking mirror dude. This is useless.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:insertnamehere -- T^M -- While his approach to this game so far has frustrated me, it has largely mirrored what was seen in Battlestar Galactica and Triskaidekaphobia when he was town. Reminder to self: look into his play in The Office when he was bad for potential differences.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:My initial take on INH has been town, but I grant it's weak meta crap. "Criticize everything JJJ does while contributing nothing else" sounds like an easy meta to maintain either way.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:It appears INH's shtick functions cross-alignment.

The following quote is from Psych Mafia, in which INH was bad, not this game:

Spoiler: show

insertnamehere wrote:So, it looks like the Day 1 crazies have set in, and I think that everyone's more than a little bit coo-coo right now. There seem to be weird suspicions directed from sig at Elo, Lorab, and SVS/Soneji that are based on what looks like literally nothing except minute Day 1 interactions and "Why are you defending him? Your defense is weird! You two must be teammates!" All of it seems incoherent, and none of it jives with me logically or emotionally.

So his refusal to take Day 1 accusations seriously (from me or from anyone else) is not a reason to read him as town. Good then, I won't.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:The guy spends half his posts complaining about how I play, and then he places his trust in a different guy who plays a lot like me.

Golden wrote:It just appears to me like you have absolutely no desire to consider or acknowledge other approaches to the game, and just wish everyone would play your way, which... I'm not going to, because having come to see the benefits of the way I'm doing things I prefer it.

Ricochet wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:Jeez. Looks like I struck a nerve. After shit-talking me, declaring me town, shit-talking me some more, digging up a post from Psych Mafia where I disagreed with a few Day 1 suspicions, and waving it around as an excuse to finally declare me scum and vote my direction, I have to ask JJJ if the roles were reversed if he'd find his own super defensive mud-slinging reaction to me casting some doubt on his reasoning suspicious.

I think I know what the answer would be.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:insertnamehere and Scotty interaction:

Spoiler: show

insertnamehere wrote:I side more with Epi and Rico than JJJ and Scotty, although I do agree with No True Scotsman that Sloonei has been pushing Quin a wee bit too hard for my liking.

insertnamehere wrote:I'm going to throw my vote onto the Scotty bonfire. Him and Sloonei are probably my two most suspicious people at this point, and I'm willing to give Sloonei a chance to earn my trust here. Plus I really don't like the Leetic bandwagon, so helping to derail that is a nice bonus.

I've already talked about the second post. The first post is questionable in that he generates two arbitrary pairs: Epignosis/Ricochet and Scotty/JJJ. Epi and Rico haven't operated with a great deal of overlap to my memory, in terms of what they've decided to talk about in this thread. Scotty and I weren't really on the same side of any particular argument either other than leetic. INH did feel it was specifically necessary to say something nice about Scotty though alongside the shade, which featured a gripe about Sloonei.

So this means he agreed with Scotty on a negative point about Sloonei. This is significant because in the second post, he sided with Sloonei against Scotty. That might be a red flag.

~~~

Spoiler: show

Scotty wrote:INH is probable.

Scotty wrote:Oh shit I forgot boom, INH, leetic, and SVS.

Man, I really want to vote one of them just because I don't remember wha they've done this game. But I said I wouldn't be looking at low posters and no-shows specifically. ITS SO HARD THO because that's inherently suspicious.

Scotty wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Scotty wrote:Can someone else comment on my interaction with Sloonei? Am I missing something here? I'm getting the heebeejeebies right now

I'm not sure what you'd be missing. You both seem to suspect Quin, which I don't really agree or disagree with. He's had less significant a presence in this game than usual which I suppose isn't ideal. I'm not sure why Sloonei associated you two as team mates, so he could talk about that. Hey! Sloonei!

My suspicion runs the same line as, say, INh or leetic. I don't remember what they said. I know they said something but to me, it's insubstantial.

I dunno, I think I still prefer voting for low-posters. This new day 1 strategy is not easy to navigate with Any sense of confidence.

The third post here might be telling. Scotty sought to expand upon his "suspicion" of Quin, and he likened it to his "suspicion" of INH and leetic. He lumped the three of them together into a sort of "forgettable" pile. This makes me think there's a team mate in the Quin, INH, leetic set but probably not two. I think I actually lean INH more than Quin on this one. I'd welcome other people's input.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I've decided I still don't like INH's vote. The reason he provided just looks like B/S regardless of the circumstances.

insertnamehere wrote:I'm going to throw my vote onto the Scotty bonfire. Him and Sloonei are probably my two most suspicious people at this point, and I'm willing to give Sloonei a chance to earn my trust here. Plus I really don't like the Leetic bandwagon, so helping to derail that is a nice bonus.

It came at a moment which definitely increased the chance of Scotty being offed, but it was probably evident at that point that the only counterwagon with any chance of changing that was leetic (a case he had already discarded well before). It was the only vote on the table for him.

insertnamehere wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I've decided I still don't like INH's vote. The reason he provided just looks like B/S regardless of the circumstances.

insertnamehere wrote:I'm going to throw my vote onto the Scotty bonfire. Him and Sloonei are probably my two most suspicious people at this point, and I'm willing to give Sloonei a chance to earn my trust here. Plus I really don't like the Leetic bandwagon, so helping to derail that is a nice bonus.

It came at a moment which definitely increased the chance of Scotty being offed, but it was probably evident at that point that the only counterwagon with any chance of changing that was leetic (a case he had already discarded well before). It was the only vote on the table for him.

So, me voting for a baddie instead of someone who I didn't find suspicious is pathetic baddie scrambling?

Whatever floats your boat, man.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Please talk to me about this, INH:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:insertnamehere and Scotty interaction:

Spoiler: show

insertnamehere wrote:I side more with Epi and Rico than JJJ and Scotty, although I do agree with No True Scotsman that Sloonei has been pushing Quin a wee bit too hard for my liking.

insertnamehere wrote:I'm going to throw my vote onto the Scotty bonfire. Him and Sloonei are probably my two most suspicious people at this point, and I'm willing to give Sloonei a chance to earn my trust here. Plus I really don't like the Leetic bandwagon, so helping to derail that is a nice bonus.

I've already talked about the second post. The first post is questionable in that he generates two arbitrary pairs: Epignosis/Ricochet and Scotty/JJJ. Epi and Rico haven't operated with a great deal of overlap to my memory, in terms of what they've decided to talk about in this thread. Scotty and I weren't really on the same side of any particular argument either other than leetic. INH did feel it was specifically necessary to say something nice about Scotty though alongside the shade, which featured a gripe about Sloonei.

So this means he agreed with Scotty on a negative point about Sloonei. This is significant because in the second post, he sided with Sloonei against Scotty. That might be a red flag.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:The guy spends half his posts complaining about how I play, and then he places his trust in [Scotty] who plays a lot like me.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Townies are more inconsistent that baddies.

insertnamehere wrote:When I was skimming the thread lightly before posting, I noticed a bit of a divide between your logic and Rico/Epi's logic. I included Scotty with you, because as you say yourself:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:The guy spends half his posts complaining about how I play, and then he places his trust in [Scotty] who plays a lot like me.

insertnamehere wrote:As for your second point against me, I'll quote you again.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Townies are more inconsistent that baddies.

G-Man wrote:I am in need of another replacement player. If you know of anyone who might be willing to step in, please let me know so we can fill another vacancy.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:When I was skimming the thread lightly before posting, I noticed a bit of a divide between your logic and Rico/Epi's logic. I included Scotty with you, because as you say yourself:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:The guy spends half his posts complaining about how I play, and then he places his trust in [Scotty] who plays a lot like me.

Nope. It's Sloonei who plays a lot like me, not Scotty. Scotty and I have very little in common as Mafia players, and indeed we debate logic in most games. You voted in confidence alongside Sloonei, who had used a REACTIONARY TACTIC to generate his suspicion of Scotty. You don't like those. Why did you like Sloonei's?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Inconsistency alone isn't a problem. Your decision was more than "inconsistent" though, it was contradictory. There's no visible progression in your posts to project or explain why you chose to side with Sloonei instead of Scotty. So please talk about that.

insertnamehere wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:When I was skimming the thread lightly before posting, I noticed a bit of a divide between your logic and Rico/Epi's logic. I included Scotty with you, because as you say yourself:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:The guy spends half his posts complaining about how I play, and then he places his trust in [Scotty] who plays a lot like me.

Nope. It's Sloonei who plays a lot like me, not Scotty. Scotty and I have very little in common as Mafia players, and indeed we debate logic in most games. You voted in confidence alongside Sloonei, who had used a REACTIONARY TACTIC to generate his suspicion of Scotty. You don't like those. Why did you like Sloonei's?

If you are so different than Scotty, explain your earlier post.

When I made my post, the lynch was between Scotty and Leetic. Leetic, I viewed as the subject of a bandwagon. Now I view him as the subject of a counter-wagon. Sometimes I decide to vote with a person who I find suspicious, assuming this person did, in fact, make a cogent case against someone.

Really, my vote against Scotty had 3 motivations behind it, one of which being that I slightly leaned towards the scum side on him. (I'm sorry I didn't announce that in big red lettering but I think posting "I THOUGHT THIS PERSON WAS GOOD BUT NOW I SEE THE REASONING BEHIND THE SUSPICION DIRECTED TOWARDS THEM" is pointless.) The other two being that I thought Leetic's suspicion was baloney, and I wanted to test Sloonei.

insertnamehere wrote:If you are so different than Scotty, explain your earlier post.

Epignosis wrote:We have no regular Internet for the next few days. I can read and vote, but large posts or extensive exchanges aren't going to happen during that time.

Sloonei wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:When I was skimming the thread lightly before posting, I noticed a bit of a divide between your logic and Rico/Epi's logic. I included Scotty with you, because as you say yourself:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:The guy spends half his posts complaining about how I play, and then he places his trust in [Scotty] who plays a lot like me.

Nope. It's Sloonei who plays a lot like me, not Scotty. Scotty and I have very little in common as Mafia players, and indeed we debate logic in most games. You voted in confidence alongside Sloonei, who had used a REACTIONARY TACTIC to generate his suspicion of Scotty. You don't like those. Why did you like Sloonei's?

If you are so different than Scotty, explain your earlier post.

When I made my post, the lynch was between Scotty and Leetic. Leetic, I viewed as the subject of a bandwagon. Now I view him as the subject of a counter-wagon. Sometimes I decide to vote with a person who I find suspicious, assuming this person did, in fact, make a cogent case against someone.

Really, my vote against Scotty had 3 motivations behind it, one of which being that I slightly leaned towards the scum side on him. (I'm sorry I didn't announce that in big red lettering but I think posting "I THOUGHT THIS PERSON WAS GOOD BUT NOW I SEE THE REASONING BEHIND THE SUSPICION DIRECTED TOWARDS THEM" is pointless.) The other two being that I thought Leetic's suspicion was baloney, and I wanted to test Sloonei.

I think the point he is trying to make, and which I'd also like to see you respond to, is that you spent so much of Day 1 criticizing him for the way he played, but then supported my case (or tested me) when I employed a very similar strategy to the one you were criticizing Jay for. You never criticized me for the way I handled Scotty. You supported me.

insertnamehere wrote:Can I just say that I find it kinda hilarious how 3J, Sloonei, and Rico attempted to lead a counter-lynch by trying to lynch me instead of Scotty, and yet they've managed to shift all suspicion onto me once again? I mean, come on. Don't either of you guys have anything else to do but try and find logical loopholes where I come out of Day 1 more suspicious than you three?

I'd bet my bottom dollar that there's a baddie in that trio.

DrWilgy wrote:We rise...

insertnamehere
3
JaggedJimmyJay (11), Sloonei (12), Ricochet (14)
21%

leetic
2
Scotty MAFIA (4), Boomslang DEAD CIV (6)
14%

MovingPictures07
1
Beck (2)
7%

Ricochet
1
DrWilgy DEAD CIV (3)
7%

Scotty MAFIA
5
Golden (7), Epignosis (8), leetic (9), insertnamehere (10), Metalmarsh89 (13)
36%

Sloonei
1
Quin (5)
7%

insertnamehere wrote:Can I just say that I find it kinda hilarious how 3J, Sloonei, and Rico attempted to lead a counter-lynch by trying to lynch me instead of Scotty, and yet they've managed to shift all suspicion onto me once again? I mean, come on. Don't either of you guys have anything else to do but try and find logical loopholes where I come out of Day 1 more suspicious than you three?

I'd bet my bottom dollar that there's a baddie in that trio.

Golden wrote:I'd say its quin

And one of beck/MP/SVS

I don't think it's naive to think there are no baddies on the inh wagon. There were only two baddies not named scotty. Scotty didn't jump on the inh wagon, scotty came back civ initially, I think there was no intent to endeavour to save him.

I think Quin voted sloonei because it was very intentional for quin to then push sloonei after scotty came back town.

I think this game really is the easy mode it appears to be.

insertnamehere wrote:Can I just say that I find it kinda hilarious how 3J, Sloonei, and Rico attempted to lead a counter-lynch by trying to lynch me instead of Scotty, and yet they've managed to shift all suspicion onto me once again? I mean, come on. Don't either of you guys have anything else to do but try and find logical loopholes where I come out of Day 1 more suspicious than you three?

I'd bet my bottom dollar that there's a baddie in that trio.

insertnamehere wrote:We start out with Scotty being the first one to vote for Leetic, presumably hoping to start a trend. He manages to convince Boomslang, rest his soul, but people aren't buying it. As Scotty gets more and more votes, the mafia obviously have to start sweating. What happened after I cast the 4th vote for Scotty, putting him two votes ahead of Leetic? 3J, Sloonei, and Rico pounce on my post, and now the lynch is tied at 4-3-2, putting Scotty a single vote away from tying things up.

I think it's naive to assume all the other baddies decided to just cannibalize Scotty.

I think it's naive to assume that the baddies wouldn't pounce on a last second lynch candidate who could possibly beat Scotty.

I think it's naive to think that there isn't a single baddie in my voters.

Golden wrote:Just want to remind people how sloonei caught scotty, and why I think this says quin is bad. Also, I kind of think MP is the third teammate.

I particularly like the quote where quin suggests there might be a case against him 'if you lynched scotty and he came back bad'.

Spoiler: show

Scotty wrote:Quin? I have no read on Quin. But fine, if I must. GTH: Bad.

Sloonei wrote:Scotty and Quin are scum partners.

Sloonei wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Why did you put a gun to your own head and scum read Quin?

Cuz I had no read of him, and figured I should.

so you arbitrarily put a scum read on him?

Sloonei wrote:Come on Scotty, let's vote for Quin together.

Scotty wrote:Meh, ok. vote Quin

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Scotty and Quin are scum partners.

Woah, I TOTALLY missed this.

Wtf?

Scotty wrote:Can someone else comment on my interaction with Sloonei? Am I missing something here? I'm getting the heebeejeebies right now

Sloonei wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Scotty wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

Scotty wrote: Basically. I put those reads in as I thought of them, and after the fact realized I forgot about 4 more peeps. I can't really remember Quin's content this game, hence the scum read.

What's your beef with him?

My beef is the same as yours.

Medium rare?

Meh, ok. vote Quin

Why?

Same as you.

I mean you seemed to trust me enough there to follow along in a vote that you've got no substantial reason to believe in, despite claiming to believe in it. You've also got no substantial reason to trust me, just a minute ago you were complaining that I haven't been active enough, and now I'm here and I'm throwing this bullshit in your face, so why are you listening to me?

Sloonei wrote:The truth is I felt like your post of reads was one of those "substance for the sake of substance" posts, and your read on Quin came off to me as very forced and completely meaningless. So I decided to throw an accusation out there and goad you into acting on your "suspicion" of Quin, which you've done even though you have no reason to distrust Quin or trust me. How bogus is this?

Scotty wrote:Sloonei, if you could vote anywhere else, where would it be? Since you have such little reason to be voting for Quin (I assume) as I do.

Sloonei wrote:

Quin wrote:

Beck wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Hey Beck, I hereby accuse you of using (trying to use) a fake random vote as a means of comfortably getting your feet into the scary cold water that is this game. I've done it before. What say you?

I say nay!

I voted for MP7 for one post in particular -- would be curios to see if you see what I see.

But let's say I did vote for MP7 to ease myself into the game, what does that make me?

(There's a right answer and a wrong answer, Jimmy.)

I'm looking at all of his four posts pretty intently, but I'm not seeing anything at all. The very most I can come up with is his 'I'll post more strategies later' thing and I'm pretty sure that's a political joke.

Quin wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Everyone else: I don't expect you to read our text walls. Once we've had our chat and I am satisfied with whatever conclusion I come to I'll summarize it.

My suspicion of you has grown, sir. Why wouldn't you expect people to read what you've posted and form their own opinions and instead rely on your summary?

I agree with this. But at the same time, what JJJ said about 'being satisfied with the conclusion' makes me feel good. It tells me he's not just trying to shake off the attention.

I didn't really like these two posts from Quin, for the record. In the top one he makes sure to keep his distance from actually accusing MP of anything, but leaves the door open a crack, and in the second one he manages to take both sides of a case against Jay in consecutive sentences.

Scotty wrote:What made you pick me and Quin as teammates out of all my reads?
I'm not liking this conscious effort to manipulate me, Sloonster. I'm sorry you don't like my reads. It's something new I'm trying.

Sloonei wrote:

Scotty wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I think I like Scotty's attempt to get reads, even when he is uncertain of how to go about it. He's trying to expand his Day 1 repertoire and it appears mostly genuine to me. I also don't get the wrong vibes from Sloonei's interrogation tactic. He observed a specific thing (Scotty's read of Quin) that he found interested, and then harnessed that into a an exchange that stands a chance of producing a more complete read.

Sloonei came in saying he read Quin as bad "same as me" but then quoted examples after the fact, as if he stole cookies from the cookie jar and then replaced them with some pieces of cardboard he found in the garage so no one would know he ate the cookies preemptively.

What is your opinion of Quin, JJJ?

I do not get this analogy. Also you never said a word about why you might suspect Quin, just that you did. Why should it be a mark against me that I am able to substantiate this read we supposedly share?

Sloonei wrote:

Scotty wrote:By answering with "same as you" you are affirming that I am reading him bad because 'I can't remember what he said'. But then you come in backing it up after the fact, like you had a reason initially, you just lied about it.
It's Like me saying now that I'm suspicious of Quin because he killed my cat...I just chose not to mention that in my initial read.

Oh, yeah I was just trying to see if you'd vote for him without any given reason.

Quin wrote:1. I didn't accuse MP of being suspicious because I don't think he's suspicious. There was no crack, either. Not sure where you're looking

2. Fair enough.

linki: My reason for the voting is right there. You're basing your vote on me off of Scotty, not me. That's bad.

Sloonei wrote:I do not understand how that would make me bad if it was true.

Quin wrote:More specifically, you are using Scotty's actions as a means to vote for me, without any insight as to whether what Scotty is doing is civvie or baddie behaviour. Had he been lynched and flipped bad, you might have a reason to look at him as inspiration to vote me, but as it is, he has not, and therefore you are bad.

Golden wrote:I could see either Epi or Scotty as bad, but probably not together.

I think an Epi/Rico team is still well possible.
I think a Scotty/Quin team is also well possible.

That's me for now.

Quin wrote:

Golden wrote:I could see either Epi or Scotty as bad, but probably not together.

I think an Epi/Rico team is still well possible.
I think a Scotty/Quin team is also well possible.

That's me for now.

I don't think you think either of the latter two at all.

I really have difficulty seeing why we wouldn't lynch Quin today. That he is scotty's teammate is written all over everything. It's part of WHY we caught scotty. Quin spent time, even before the lynch, setting sloonei up to be today's lynch after scotty flipped town. It's Quin all the way.

Quin wrote:In what scenario would a baddie immediately push hard against a civ knowing that Scotty's real flip would be revealed shortly after? I don't believe for a moment that the baddies were unaware of what was going on. Do you?

Quin wrote:scottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscotty

what about quin?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Quin wrote:scottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscottyscotty

what about quin?

Scotty's posts are more indicative to me that you're a team mate candidate than your posts are. Tough luck, but it's the game. Golden is also right that it isn't difficult to find evidence that you were lining up Sloonei for bad times today.

G-Man wrote:I am in need of another replacement player. If you know of anyone who might be willing to step in, please let me know so we can fill another vacancy.

I'm for hire.

Golden wrote:I'll also say that if Quin was actually town, I think he would have found the way Scotty was handling him suspicious, and I think Quin would have been digging into scotty as well.

I don't think a natural reaction from town!quin to scotty having a lame reason for voting for you, is to attack sloonei for suspecting scotty. I think a more natural reaction is to agree about scotty, but say that sloonei is wrong about the teammate bit and that you think scotty might be setting you up to look that way.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:At this point Quin, I'm not certain how far defending yourself can realistically take you. Whether you end up lynched or not, the best thing for the town faction would be for you to focus purely on hunting for baddies and leaving us with a legacy. If it's good enough shit, the votes might evaporate anyway. I say this mostly because it's what I'd most like to see; I've already seen the defenses and I can conjure them before they are shown to me. Give me the suspects.

The choice is yours obviously.