Murder, Mayhem, and Mafia
https://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/
Because I've got nothing better to do with my life. Didn't find anyone suspicious enough to vote for, didn't want to miss the vote, decided to see if I could make someone pay attention to the game instead.Dom wrote:Why?Bullzeye wrote:A lot of people are way too quiet for my liking in this game... I think I'll random between the most silent and give them a vote to wake them up.
rip.Your perspective absolutely is logical, bea. Which is why I hoped bf would survive, and some unknown civvie would steal the will from him. But I don't think two opposing points of view can't both be logical. I think bfs move was risky, but I also think it was logical.bea wrote:Golden - I know you are getting the drfunk bea you've missed so much -but isn't what I'm saying logical? Maybe? Just maybe? it wasn't the best move for BF to make. Maybe- just maybe - he should have kept his info to himself - instead of painting a target on someone (zombra ) who has a 50/50 chance of being a civ. As well as anyone who would inherit his will post his demise. If BF is a civ - he's painted a target on two other potential civs. On Day 1. How is that logical "civ" game play?
Does the will really matter any more at this point? Unless BF lied about what it said, we already know everything about it, right?Golden wrote:Your perspective absolutely is logical, bea. Which is why I hoped bf would survive, and some unknown civvie would steal the will from him. But I don't think two opposing points of view can't both be logical. I think bfs move was risky, but I also think it was logical.bea wrote:Golden - I know you are getting the drfunk bea you've missed so much -but isn't what I'm saying logical? Maybe? Just maybe? it wasn't the best move for BF to make. Maybe- just maybe - he should have kept his info to himself - instead of painting a target on someone (zombra ) who has a 50/50 chance of being a civ. As well as anyone who would inherit his will post his demise. If BF is a civ - he's painted a target on two other potential civs. On Day 1. How is that logical "civ" game play?
Anyway, now that he is a proven civ, I guess that's easy for me to say! So, I'll just move on from my defence of bfs move and say... Once again I think some unknown civ should steal the will from svs tonight, so that there is no longer a target associated with the will (other than on zombra...)
It's pretty clear bf played it wrong in hindsight, but at the time I would have done the same, I think.
The will gives that person all of Zomba's items upon her death, no?Bullzeye wrote:Does the will really matter any more at this point? Unless BF lied about what it said, we already know everything about it, right?Golden wrote:Your perspective absolutely is logical, bea. Which is why I hoped bf would survive, and some unknown civvie would steal the will from him. But I don't think two opposing points of view can't both be logical. I think bfs move was risky, but I also think it was logical.bea wrote:Golden - I know you are getting the drfunk bea you've missed so much -but isn't what I'm saying logical? Maybe? Just maybe? it wasn't the best move for BF to make. Maybe- just maybe - he should have kept his info to himself - instead of painting a target on someone (zombra ) who has a 50/50 chance of being a civ. As well as anyone who would inherit his will post his demise. If BF is a civ - he's painted a target on two other potential civs. On Day 1. How is that logical "civ" game play?
Anyway, now that he is a proven civ, I guess that's easy for me to say! So, I'll just move on from my defence of bfs move and say... Once again I think some unknown civ should steal the will from svs tonight, so that there is no longer a target associated with the will (other than on zombra...)
It's pretty clear bf played it wrong in hindsight, but at the time I would have done the same, I think.
I suppose so. But don't baddies get your items when they kill you anyway? I feel like that point came up a few times in BF's posts.Dom wrote:The will gives that person all of Zomba's items upon her death, no?Bullzeye wrote:Does the will really matter any more at this point? Unless BF lied about what it said, we already know everything about it, right?Golden wrote:Your perspective absolutely is logical, bea. Which is why I hoped bf would survive, and some unknown civvie would steal the will from him. But I don't think two opposing points of view can't both be logical. I think bfs move was risky, but I also think it was logical.bea wrote:Golden - I know you are getting the drfunk bea you've missed so much -but isn't what I'm saying logical? Maybe? Just maybe? it wasn't the best move for BF to make. Maybe- just maybe - he should have kept his info to himself - instead of painting a target on someone (zombra ) who has a 50/50 chance of being a civ. As well as anyone who would inherit his will post his demise. If BF is a civ - he's painted a target on two other potential civs. On Day 1. How is that logical "civ" game play?
Anyway, now that he is a proven civ, I guess that's easy for me to say! So, I'll just move on from my defence of bfs move and say... Once again I think some unknown civ should steal the will from svs tonight, so that there is no longer a target associated with the will (other than on zombra...)
It's pretty clear bf played it wrong in hindsight, but at the time I would have done the same, I think.
Yaeh, I do want to know how I'm supposed to have a discussion with someone who keeps calling me a liar and saying I don't care what you think. And accuses me of not being able to read their posts when clearly they don't read mine... or choose to twist them.Dom wrote:You didn't find my overly suspicious but wanted to vote me?Golden wrote:
@dom - Do you read mine? Because, the starting point of my suspicion of you was when you didn't, and tried to stir up more heat on me (when I already had it from other sources) without reading my posts properly. I find you suspicious for the call you made on JC. I can keep saying it all day if you like. I didn't find it overly suspicious, but I never said I did. Nothing you can possibly ever say will make me take back that I found it suspicious. The only thing you can do is to continue to make me think your overdefensiveness is the sign of someone who didn't like to be called out for something they don't feel they did, but know that the ultimate truth is still the same - the Aces defence, if you want a recent example.
Nothing I could say could change your suspicion of me that is based on things that did not happen?
Sounds like you are #1) a liar and #2) someone who does not hold high regard for facts.
I don't think I could say anything to you. You'd twist it into a suspicion of me for no reason whatsoever other than I suspect Blindfaeth because you two have apparently decided whose opinions matter and whose do not in a game about opinions. You two have said that you trust each other, that you do not care what anyone else thinks. Please, do tell, how the hell anyone is supposed to have a discussion with that?
Interesting, it sounds like BF might have been reading too much into the will. That does not explain Zombas reaction to her name being said. What do you think about that SVS?S~V~S wrote:Also, I did receive the will. All it says is that if Zomba dies, whoever holds the will will get everything she has. It does NOT say she is wealthy. Just becasue she has a will does not mean she is rich. Normally I would not even post this, but since her name was already out there, I just want to confirm that BF was not lying, but that there is nothing that indicates a specific role holds the will. I thought BF might have been witholding something, but he was not.
How can you not see why I think you are bad when you say stuff like this:Dom wrote:There is no way we're both right because both Blindfaeth and Golden have decided I am bad (I am not) on shaky (at best) presumptions they have made. These presumptions are essentially outright lies. I seem to be the only one calling them on this. Tell me, Bea, am I only analytical when I am on a team?
It's very frustrating to talk to a pair of people who have literally said they do not care what anyone else thinks. It's also very frustrating to try and point out why someone is wrong when they literally say, "Nothing you could say could change my mind" when their mind was made up on an incorrect supposition.
I get that, my opinion is she is not very likely Oliver Oliver but more likely to be the Millionaire since that was what BF was pushing. No one likes this, but can is opened.S~V~S wrote:She said it ruined her role. It could be the Millionaire or Oliver Oliver. I don;t think her reaction is related to wealth via item, or otherwise. She said role.
I'm not pissed. I see that you're completely ignoring facts. You disregard things I say because it is convenient to do so. I have pointed out to you that ONLY you and BF built suspicions on an ASSUMPTION and then proceeded to present it as fact (in BF's case). You were a part of this. I think that's a poopy reason to suspect someone because it is based on an ASSUMPTION that is WRONG that I have explained and literally everyone else has taken notice but you. I have explained myself so many times and you act like I have not. NO ONE else continues to bring it up as a relevant point of discussion in the context that you do because they realize that LC's speculation was incorrect and that it would not be productive to do so.Golden wrote:Yaeh, I do want to know how I'm supposed to have a discussion with someone who keeps calling me a liar and saying I don't care what you think. And accuses me of not being able to read their posts when clearly they don't read mine... or choose to twist them.Dom wrote:You didn't find my overly suspicious but wanted to vote me?Golden wrote:
@dom - Do you read mine? Because, the starting point of my suspicion of you was when you didn't, and tried to stir up more heat on me (when I already had it from other sources) without reading my posts properly. I find you suspicious for the call you made on JC. I can keep saying it all day if you like. I didn't find it overly suspicious, but I never said I did. Nothing you can possibly ever say will make me take back that I found it suspicious. The only thing you can do is to continue to make me think your overdefensiveness is the sign of someone who didn't like to be called out for something they don't feel they did, but know that the ultimate truth is still the same - the Aces defence, if you want a recent example.
Nothing I could say could change your suspicion of me that is based on things that did not happen?
Sounds like you are #1) a liar and #2) someone who does not hold high regard for facts.
I don't think I could say anything to you. You'd twist it into a suspicion of me for no reason whatsoever other than I suspect Blindfaeth because you two have apparently decided whose opinions matter and whose do not in a game about opinions. You two have said that you trust each other, that you do not care what anyone else thinks. Please, do tell, how the hell anyone is supposed to have a discussion with that?
I do care what you think, Dom. I'm listening to every word you say. Unfortunately, right now, every word you say is telling me that you are pissed at me for suspecting you, and you don't think I have a right to. I do have a right to. You might be better off looking at your own actions and recognising that, actually, they did look a little hinky. You might be better off realising that, actually, someone might suspect you for it. But you would definitely be better off realising that you are calling me out for making an 'assumption'... that near everyone else made too... while you are busy assuming things about me.
So you never admit you're wrong?Golden wrote:How can you not see why I think you are bad when you say stuff like this:Dom wrote:There is no way we're both right because both Blindfaeth and Golden have decided I am bad (I am not) on shaky (at best) presumptions they have made. These presumptions are essentially outright lies. I seem to be the only one calling them on this. Tell me, Bea, am I only analytical when I am on a team?
It's very frustrating to talk to a pair of people who have literally said they do not care what anyone else thinks. It's also very frustrating to try and point out why someone is wrong when they literally say, "Nothing you could say could change my mind" when their mind was made up on an incorrect supposition.
You call ME a liar just for making an presumption while ACTUALLY lying about what I've said. I've never said I don't care what you think.
I have said 'nothing you can say can change the fact your question to JC looks suspicious'. Yes, because it can't. You made that comment, it pinged me, thats that. All you can do is choose how you play the rest of the game. A ping is a ping. I never lose sight of what has pinged me. I have never said 'nothing you could do could make me change my mind about your alignment', and that would be frankly ridiculous.
This game is about making suppositions, to figure out who is bad, I don't know why you are having so much of a problem with that.
Epignosis wrote:I've hosted right around 25% of the games on this site. I can tell you why civilians lose a lot.Golden wrote:I, for one, am not surprised this site has such a major bias towards mafia wins if this: "I'd rather trust a man who doesn't shout what he's found." is the prevailing attitude.
There's one reason.Metalmarsh89 wrote:That's a lot of people not voting right there.
A Person
Bea
Canucklehead
DFaraday
fingersplints
ShepinWolfsClothing
Sophie/Mongoose
It's not my opinion what I meant... it's what I meant? Like since when do you have an opinion about what you meant? YOU might not believe me, but you aren't saying that.Golden wrote: Unless there are some facts I'm missing that you don't think I'm taking into account - like, not your opinion about what you meant when you made the JC post, but actual facts? In which case - tell them to me and I'll listen.
Just remember that the "super civ" Zomba that you are used to in Donner and Death Note got NK'd.S~V~S wrote:I voted Dearborn. I am in the middle of rereading The Dark Tower books, and that name figured in the books.
And BR, I know the point you were making. I think it is a 50/50 on Zomba BUT I think if she had the civ role, she would have said more, and said what she did say differently. I could be wrong
What would you do if you felt like someone was outright misrepresenting what you were saying? You would let it sit?Long Con wrote:I voted Archer Ave because maybe my Ivory Arrow will become cool.
Dom, I think that you have explained yourself sufficiently, and there is still a ping on you from it.
For all I know, I could have been absolutely right about your intentions with the "us" comment, and you're a baddie, and you came up with a very reasonable explanation for the whole exchange. It's not like that's not within your mental capabilities. The explanation was sound, but that doesn't make the original ping get deleted.
I find that the earliest thing people say on a subject is the most useful, because after it happens, explanations and excuses swirl and form that could be fake or real. You can talk your way out of anything, and that's something important to remember.
Not if you keep talking about it, it won't.Zomberella12 wrote:Just remember that the "super civ" Zomba that you are used to in Donner and Death Note got NK'd.S~V~S wrote:I voted Dearborn. I am in the middle of rereading The Dark Tower books, and that name figured in the books.
And BR, I know the point you were making. I think it is a 50/50 on Zomba BUT I think if she had the civ role, she would have said more, and said what she did say differently. I could be wrong
I'm bugged that BF said that the will said that killing me would give him lots of money and then jumped to the millionaire conclusion. Maybe my role is okay after all.
okGolden wrote:I do not think I created 'suspicion' around the comment, no. You think I did. I disagree. I don't think rabbit and my intent was any different. I think you chose to read different intent in by the way we phrased it. This is you choosing to have an opinion about what I meant. Just like I'm choosing to have an opinion about what you meant.
I think YOU created suspicion around my comment. Honestly, I wasn't doing anything but simply saying the statement pinged me, and not that much. It's your reaction to it which has led to this big conversation.
I have never acted like you didn't clarify. All I've said is that I'm suspicious of the statement itself, because I believe you can clarify it whatever way you like, but the original statement itself is still meaningless - the kind of statement one makes to put suspicion on someone else without ever getting real data back. I believe your clarification could be true. I also believe it could be false. Either way, I agree that your statement has literally zero bearing on my suspicion of you, because I think its what a civ would say in the situation, and what a baddie would say in the situation. Do you get what I'm saying there? In that sense, yes, I see your clarification as worthless to my own suspicion. But I did not pay it no mind. I expressly said on at least two occasions that I did not think your clarification altered my ping either way. This is what I mean when I said 'nothing you can say would alter my original ping'... literally you would say the same thing if you were good or bad.
Of much more interest to me was the overall tone and approach of your reaction. Saying things like you did in your last post... 'you are leaving things out for your own benefit'... that kind of stuff. Calling me a liar, but still not pulling what my apparent lie is even when I challenge you on it. Saying I've said I don't care, when I've actually tried to get you to present answers to me but all you do is go at me, with a lot of words but not a lot of content.
Epignosis wrote:I'll take a stroll with my lady down Archer Avenue and make sure Mr. Con doesn't try funny business.
You know how archery does it for me.This post form Zomba seems shifty to me. Does anyone agree or am I off base?Zomberella12 wrote:Just remember that the "super civ" Zomba that you are used to in Donner and Death Note got NK'd.S~V~S wrote:I voted Dearborn. I am in the middle of rereading The Dark Tower books, and that name figured in the books.
And BR, I know the point you were making. I think it is a 50/50 on Zomba BUT I think if she had the civ role, she would have said more, and said what she did say differently. I could be wrong
I'm bugged that BF said that the will said that killing me would give him lots of money and then jumped to the millionaire conclusion. Maybe my role is okay after all.
note to self - polls end at noon this game. I'm going to try to adjust the poll to a later time. The long Day 1 threw me off a little.bea wrote:Rip bf. I'm so sorry I missed the vote.
I'm going with Wabash Ave cuz we had one of those in my hometown and I miss my hometown.
bf