The Syndicate

Choutas wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:43 am Wait. What does the EoD meant?
I voted for Golden i see similarities between his play and Ancient Greece. Thats a good sign for me.

Choutas! Vote for me.

So going back a little ....

Golden wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:51 pm

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:41 pm

Golden wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:23 pm

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 6:30 pm For example, Golden has offered relatively strong scum reads or accusations of fake behavior against these users: Quin, Epignosis, Scotty, insertnamehere

Scotty has done the same, or voiced his favor for a lynch, for Zephyrus, Golden, Spacedaisy, Choutas, and a few maybe-serious-maybe-not votes for sig and insertnamehere.

Is it just me, or does wildly vacillating between all these people seem kinda weird (particularly for Scotty)?

Nope, no scum read on epi. Get your glasses checked. I said I’d policy lynch him. I’m also not ‘wildly vaccilating’ between the other three.

If Scotty is bad book Quin as teammate. Inh is a separate theory of the game. Quin was, however, essentially my first ping vote and I’ve never implied I would vote for him today since switching of him.

And why would it be bad even if you were correct?

It’s bad because it looks inauthentic.

Why?

You seemed to very very strongly suspect Scotty. You abandoned this suspicion to go after INH with very little persuading. It made your suspicion of Scotty look false to me.

Golden wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:57 pm

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:39 pm

Golden wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:20 pm

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 6:35 pm

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 6:32 pm Is this a question about Scotty or golden?

Both. Golden moreso for the severity he offers while still being fine switching tacks to whomever is fighting him the hardest.

Never have I suggested Mac (who was first) or epi (who was hardest for a while) is bad. This is a false statement.

I am severe on the false. You’re on my list.

A lot of people are on your list. You said you didn’t believe Epi was being truthful earlier so I think I am right.

Nope. Epi likes to play games, as town as well. Truthfulness isn’t necessarily baddieness.

I suppose so but it seemed an implication of your post to me. Strike Epi from that observation if it’s not the case.

Golden wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 9:00 pm

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:48 pm Golden, how about this: remove the NO U goggles for a second and look at my post about the wide net of targets as it pertains to Scotty. Do you find what I have to say there disagreeable too?

I don’t see any reason for a wide range of targets to suggest badness. Jays stats demonstrate in gth exercises baddies tend to make fewer ‘bad’ reads than civilians, so if anything it’s a rick in the town column for Scotty.

I don’t understand why you perceive many suspects = bad and would like you to expand on this.

Because if everybody is bad, nobody is, especially if you’re on the chopping block and willing to take on anybody who might be able to slip in instead.

Scotty wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 10:10 pm I’m just...disappointed you hVe stooped to me. You don’t agree with my points? Or you do, and just think I’m fishy? I dunno.

Colin should knock this shit off because this is nothing like my Easter play and he should be ashamed

Picture a player named Spotty. Spotty just came off an exhaustingly hard-fought win in which he managed to be the game MVP as scum and fool just about everybody for 90% of the game. If Spotty gets a scum rolecard right after that, would he want to deliberately avoid the spectre of that previous game’s play? My head and gut tell me, yep, he would.

Scotty wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 11:25 pm Reading back theshit I missed:

insertnamehere wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 5:48 pm

Scotty wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 5:39 pm

sig wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 5:37 pm I don't think INH is right on Golden, but i'm not a fan of Golden's NO U.

INH gave a massive meaty post, so I'd rather not lynch him atm.

What does everyone think of Epi? His push on Zeph seemed very meh and I wasn't a fan of Choutus jumping on.

He’s buddying me. It’s fine. We’re buddies

As for INH- yes it had a lot of substance but it was more of a bean burger than a beef burger, ya dig?

This post is also officially dumb. Dumb, dumb, dumb. What is this, a beloved Disney film about an elephant with a feather? Because y'all are acting like a bunch of Dumbos.

[VOTE: scotty] aubergine

Good one. Also nice NO U

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 6:10 pm Tell me what your thoughts are on choutas. I have no thoughts developed there yet.

Choutas is a conundrum. I also have no developed opinions of him. I’ll iso him later

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 6:17 pm Golden, you can say “this is my town meta” all you want, but it doesn’t mean much and to my eyes you are acting differently than in previous games where I played you and you were town. I don’t recall you being a D1 lynch in either AG or U-Pick, I don’t recall you reacting to suspicions so severely and I don’t recall you labeling half the game with scumreads right out the gate.

If anything, your play reminds me of your Easter game. It’s the way you phrase sentences and it’s a gut read I also had on you then. Which is funny because I knew you were bad, except for day 2 when I had a lapse where I forgot I was bad and saw you post and had some sort of weird epiphany that you were way too careful with your words before I came back to earth and realized that you were my teammate.

But it still applies here. I will need to iso you later too.

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 6:30 pm For example, Golden has offered relatively strong scum reads or accusations of fake behavior against these users: Quin, Epignosis, Scotty, insertnamehere

Scotty has done the same, or voiced his favor for a lynch, for Zephyrus, Golden, Spacedaisy, Choutas, and a few maybe-serious-maybe-not votes for sig and insertnamehere.

Is it just me, or does wildly vacillating between all these people seem kinda weird (particularly for Scotty)?

Does “weird” = “bad” or are you just setting me up on a pedestal and poking the glass hoping you get to see me dance?

Weird generally = bad when I use it in those contexts

Golden wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 7:01 am

Golden wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:32 am Im considering policy lynching Turnip Head

I went off this idea when he read the thread and just ignored me completely.

does "went off" mean you've left the idea behind because he ignored you or does it mean you picked up the idea when he ignored you

speedchuck wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 12:33 pm Night is half over and I'm missing a loooooot of night actions.

Never submit night actions that's my policy. Why hide your actions? I never do I'll tell you straight up what I plan to do. Which is why a vote for sig is a vote for open night actions. No more hiding no more fear no more control. Vote Sig a player you can trust.

I understand how mafia works but let’s review the only cases that have been brought against me

Nutella: this is fake and she’s bad.
Quin: agree
Mac: daisy must’ve told her baddie teammates in their chat that she can’t contribute so they should bus her.
Scotty: It’s weird to find it suspicious that I didn’t vote for the person I was badgering most of the day
Someone else I can’t remember: Daisy is upset because she is scum that got caught for the wrong reasons.

These are literally the worst cases I’ve ever seen on me. Ever. And if I am upset it’s because I’ve felt like a lot of you that I expected to see those cases for the sheer ridiculousness that they are did, did not see it.

But whatever, I’m done talking about this. Unless someone has something worthwhile to discuss with me about some suspicion they have. Otherwise I’m moving on.

Golden, I didn’t actually read that part from INH when I first said I believed he was town. Normally I would say no blackmailing a vote is not civilian minded. However, even after you mentioned it the first time and I saw it my mind wasn’t changed. Because it’s not just, “would a civ do this?” It’s “Would a civ INH do this?” I could very easily see it. It’s INH. I would be more inclined to think he would do it as a civ than a baddie. Though I could see it either way. I don’t find him more suspicious because of it anyway.

I'm not ignoring you Goldy I'm watching ya.

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 2:46 am I love drunk mafia, lol. I already think you’re town Colin.

I never get that kind of endorsement.

Because your drunk okay is indistinguishable from your sober play. Wait, do you play sober?

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:47 am So going back a little ....

Golden wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:51 pm

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:41 pm

Golden wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:23 pm

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 6:30 pm For example, Golden has offered relatively strong scum reads or accusations of fake behavior against these users: Quin, Epignosis, Scotty, insertnamehere

Scotty has done the same, or voiced his favor for a lynch, for Zephyrus, Golden, Spacedaisy, Choutas, and a few maybe-serious-maybe-not votes for sig and insertnamehere.

Is it just me, or does wildly vacillating between all these people seem kinda weird (particularly for Scotty)?

Nope, no scum read on epi. Get your glasses checked. I said I’d policy lynch him. I’m also not ‘wildly vaccilating’ between the other three.

If Scotty is bad book Quin as teammate. Inh is a separate theory of the game. Quin was, however, essentially my first ping vote and I’ve never implied I would vote for him today since switching of him.

And why would it be bad even if you were correct?

It’s bad because it looks inauthentic.

Why?

You seemed to very very strongly suspect Scotty. You abandoned this suspicion to go after INH with very little persuading. It made your suspicion of Scotty look false to me.

You misrepresent on multiple levels: 1) I didn’t abandon it (until something happened much later) and 2) there was no ‘persuading’ at all - I expressed very clearly why the change and 3) I just missed a goal thanks to responding to this and I hold you personally responsible for that.

A goal?

Kylemii wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 12:07 pm

Golden wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 7:01 am

Golden wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:32 am Im considering policy lynching Turnip Head

I went off this idea when he read the thread and just ignored me completely.

does "went off" mean you've left the idea behind because he ignored you or does it mean you picked up the idea when he ignored you

If I have to explain a lame joke it just makes it even lamer.

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:11 pmA goal?

It’s the soccer (shh don’t tell dunya I called it that)

Turnip Head wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 1:01 pm I'm not ignoring you Goldy I'm watching ya.

Oh good, policy lynching you is back on the table!

Golden wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:13 pm

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:11 pmA goal?

It’s the soccer (shh don’t tell dunya I called it that)

Golden wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:15 pm

Turnip Head wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 1:01 pm I'm not ignoring you Goldy I'm watching ya.

Oh good, policy lynching you is back on the table!

sig wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 12:35 pm

speedchuck wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 12:33 pm Night is half over and I'm missing a loooooot of night actions.

Never submit night actions that's my policy. Why hide your actions? I never do I'll tell you straight up what I plan to do. Which is why a vote for sig is a vote for open night actions. No more hiding no more fear no more control. Vote Sig a player you can trust.

Sig, your campaigning is gold. I'm voting for you. I believe I can count on you to sign that Bill of Rights with the most beautiful signature

[VOTE: sig] aubergine

Lunalee wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:20 pm

sig wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 12:35 pm

speedchuck wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 12:33 pm Night is half over and I'm missing a loooooot of night actions.

Never submit night actions that's my policy. Why hide your actions? I never do I'll tell you straight up what I plan to do. Which is why a vote for sig is a vote for open night actions. No more hiding no more fear no more control. Vote Sig a player you can trust.

Sig, your campaigning is gold. I'm voting for you. I believe I can count on you to sign that Bill of Rights with the most beautiful signature

[VOTE: sig] aubergine

Golden wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:09 pm

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:47 am So going back a little ....

Golden wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:51 pm

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:41 pm

Golden wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:23 pm

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 6:30 pm For example, Golden has offered relatively strong scum reads or accusations of fake behavior against these users: Quin, Epignosis, Scotty, insertnamehere

Scotty has done the same, or voiced his favor for a lynch, for Zephyrus, Golden, Spacedaisy, Choutas, and a few maybe-serious-maybe-not votes for sig and insertnamehere.

Is it just me, or does wildly vacillating between all these people seem kinda weird (particularly for Scotty)?

Nope, no scum read on epi. Get your glasses checked. I said I’d policy lynch him. I’m also not ‘wildly vaccilating’ between the other three.

If Scotty is bad book Quin as teammate. Inh is a separate theory of the game. Quin was, however, essentially my first ping vote and I’ve never implied I would vote for him today since switching of him.

And why would it be bad even if you were correct?

It’s bad because it looks inauthentic.

Why?

You seemed to very very strongly suspect Scotty. You abandoned this suspicion to go after INH with very little persuading. It made your suspicion of Scotty look false to me.

You misrepresent on multiple levels: 1) I didn’t abandon it (until something happened much later) and 2) there was no ‘persuading’ at all - I expressed very clearly why the change and 3) I just missed a goal thanks to responding to this and I hold you personally responsible for that.

It looked to me that you did abandon it, though. That’s sort of an implication of switching your vote.

Sorry about the goal!

I’m voting Mac in the poll.

I don’t think either that switching a vote automatically means abandoning your previous suspicion, or that you actually think that’s true as a rule.

So is there something specific about the circumstances that led you to that conclusion?

SlyScotty has 2 votes can we trust a man who was almost lynched? NO
MadMac is mad he's crazt! How can we depend on someone insane to win this election? We cant!

Golden, I think you will trust me fully soon.

Golden wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:25 pm I don’t think either that switching a vote automatically means abandoning your previous suspicion, or that you actually think that’s true as a rule.

So is there something specific about the circumstances that led you to that conclusion?

I felt that INH’s argument was pretty good and didn’t agree with your assessment of it. I felt like the high high level of suspicion you were leveling against Scotty would not allow you to be swayed so easily away. I understand why your vote ended up away from him, but at that moment, it didn’t feel authentic.

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:28 pm

Golden wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:25 pm I don’t think either that switching a vote automatically means abandoning your previous suspicion, or that you actually think that’s true as a rule.

So is there something specific about the circumstances that led you to that conclusion?

I felt that INH’s argument was pretty good and didn’t agree with your assessment of it. I felt like the high high level of suspicion you were leveling against Scotty would not allow you to be swayed so easily away. I understand why your vote ended up away from him, but at that moment, it didn’t feel authentic.

None of this explains how you think my scotty suspicion was abandoned. Pressure votes then returning back to something is a common tactic.

On what basis did you think the inh vote represented an abandoned suspicion?

My vote is up for sale.

Golden wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:35 pm

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:28 pm

Golden wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:25 pm I don’t think either that switching a vote automatically means abandoning your previous suspicion, or that you actually think that’s true as a rule.

So is there something specific about the circumstances that led you to that conclusion?

I felt that INH’s argument was pretty good and didn’t agree with your assessment of it. I felt like the high high level of suspicion you were leveling against Scotty would not allow you to be swayed so easily away. I understand why your vote ended up away from him, but at that moment, it didn’t feel authentic.

None of this explains how you think my scotty suspicion was abandoned. Pressure votes then returning back to something is a common tactic.

On what basis did you think the inh vote represented an abandoned suspicion?

Maybe “abandoned” is too strong for the conversation but the crux is: it looked like you really wanted Scotty dead for a lot of reasons. When you changed your vote it looked like you decided you want INH dead more and for fewer reasons.

Golden wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:11 am There should be a motive.

“Your words don’t line up with your actions and I think the reason why is because...”

Otherwise the observation is empty. You find baddie conduct in nefarious motive, not something being odd.

Besides, when I said scotty is 100% town I meant it. If you think I’m town then you should not suspect Scotty either. I have no reason to make this up when I was after him half the day.

I don’t understand what convinced you of this but I take my martinis shaken and stirred thank you

nutella wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:17 am [VOTE: Scotty ] aubergine I guess I'd also support quin if he's running

You both are just assuming I know how to write

Scotty wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:55 pm

Golden wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:11 am There should be a motive.

“Your words don’t line up with your actions and I think the reason why is because...”

Otherwise the observation is empty. You find baddie conduct in nefarious motive, not something being odd.

Besides, when I said scotty is 100% town I meant it. If you think I’m town then you should not suspect Scotty either. I have no reason to make this up when I was after him half the day.

I don’t understand what convinced you of this but I take my martinis shaken and stirred thank you

Are you sure you don't? Because if not, you should revisit when I turned my opinion around, and see if anything clicks for you.

[mention]Lunalee[/mention] would you like to be president sometime? And do you think you might campaign a tad less obnoxiously than sig has?

I'm looking for a new horse to back. I've got a lot riding on who's in charge round these parts, you see. Both today AND tomorrow AND yesterday

I’d back scotty. Or if not scotty, me.

I actually do think sig is pretty kosher, but could I trust him with the bill of rights? Meh...

At least I’m a constitutional lawyer

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:50 pm My vote is up for sale.

I won't vote for you tomorrow or use any night actiosn on you

I miss the old job where I vetted legislation for consistency with the bill of rights lol.

But not really. I like my new job more.

Golden wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 4:10 pm I’d back scotty. Or if not scotty, me.

I actually do think sig is pretty kosher, but could I trust him with the bill of rights? Meh...

At least I’m a constitutional lawyer

You're Australian though

Turnip Head wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 4:07 pm @Lunalee would you like to be president sometime? And do you think you might campaign a tad less obnoxiously than sig has?

I'm looking for a new horse to back. I've got a lot riding on who's in charge round these parts, you see. Both today AND tomorrow AND yesterday

Switch and you die,

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:50 pm My vote is up for sale.

I promise not to policy lynch you.

sig wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 4:11 pm

Golden wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 4:10 pm I’d back scotty. Or if not scotty, me.

I actually do think sig is pretty kosher, but could I trust him with the bill of rights? Meh...

At least I’m a constitutional lawyer

You're Australian though

Australia actually has a constitution.

NZ doesn’t.

Vote for yourself Epignosis, screw these clowns.

I think colin is cool, for now. Tentative town read.

Golden wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 4:10 pm I’d back scotty. Or if not scotty, me.

I actually do think sig is pretty kosher, but could I trust him with the bill of rights? Meh...

At least I’m a constitutional lawyer

Yes but do you have any experience managing the transdimebsionl frequency shifts within the temporal gravitonic pull of blue matter?

sig wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 4:11 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:50 pm My vote is up for sale.

I won't vote for you tomorrow or use any night actiosn on you

I don't think you were planning on doing either, so what have I to gain?

ColinIsCool wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 4:13 pm Vote for yourself Epignosis, screw these clowns.

In real life, it's "Screw yourself Epignosis; vote for these clowns."

Epi if you vote me, I'll vote you in your time line.

Same with everyone else.

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 4:18 pm

sig wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 4:11 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 3:50 pm My vote is up for sale.

I won't vote for you tomorrow or use any night actiosn on you

I don't think you were planning on doing either, so what have I to gain?

I mean no, but now I won't for sure.