a2thezebra wrote:I think he wants us to think that he wants to be lynched so he can cruise his baddieness all the way to endgame. Fuck that.
yeeeea yeeees yeeeees
Black Rock wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:I'm voting for you because you're using your post count to control the direction of the thread, and you're using your attitude as an excuse for any suspicious things you might happen to say. Your wrap-up post above seems like a genuine effort, but in the greater context of your ISO it can't be trusted as genuine. And your gimmick seems to have even fooled some of the players. Black Rock for instance made the point that as a baddie you wouldn't have a decent reason to call so much attention to yourself. I know the reason. To get as many people as possible to think just that, that you wouldn't be so "reckless" as a baddie to perform the way you have. I'm not perfect but I like to think I'm pretty decent at being able to tell the difference between civ WIFOM and mafia WIFOM, and you reek of the latter.
I was trying to stay out of the WIFOM of it all, your point is valid and maybe I shouldn't just chalk it up to crap non-baddie behaviour. He does make me want to vote him for his crap posts.
I haven't heard your vocaroo. If you think we should stop fighting and just be friends then which of us would you rather see gone? I also really dislike it when people say votes not on leading wagons are going to waste. It's a very narrow-minded viewpoint that completely ignores any effect of lynch votes aside from voting to kill.
Hey Mac, question. If you had to blindly trust one player for the rest of the game, who would it be?
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Wilgy's vote is an enigma of science. Philosophers are known to throw their tomes across the auditorium in a fit of frustration after failing to solve its mystery.
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2017 11:50 pm
WTF was up with Wilgy's entire deal?
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
Does Ricochet talk too much? Does he appear to be an attention craving ho... prostitute? Am I going to vote for him? Is MM the number 1 Day 1 policy lynch on the syndicate? Am I joking because I actually want to vote for Rico?
"Modular forms and elliptic curves! Infinite fire revolving around infinite parallels fractals of infinite reality, each cascading, gliding in an infinite wheel. Tell me the true nature of my reality!"
Ricochet wrote:I'm sorry am i to believe policy lynches aren't rude but my successful tactic is?
I'm not the one to argue this point with. I hate the "policy" lynch thing. They are rude. Your tactic is not successful. Just crap.
You didn't criticise Fuzz voting Wilgy, Wilgy voting Fuzz, Mac policying Matt, Matt policying MM and so on.
You aren't consistent in hating the policy lynch thing.
Draconus wrote:Does Ricochet talk too much? Does he appear to be an attention craving ho... prostitute? Am I going to vote for him? Is MM the number 1 Day 1 policy lynch on the syndicate? Am I joking because I actually want to vote for Rico?
I wouldn't lynch LoRab toDay. Maybe tomorrow. She might be right about me, after all...
Thinking about Rico now... How could Ricochet be scum? It makes no fucking sense. He is playing sooooo whack, he is seemingly trying to get votes cast on him, and that's not a scum role imo. I think he might be my World Reborn role, or something like it. Where I had a win con of getting shit tons of votes on me and was a cop, and lynchproof etc. I was indy.
He smells indy as fuck to me.
In addition, Epig's argument about Lorab is compelling
LoRab wrote:I definitely see what others have pointed out about Rico. May vote there.
And I'm curious about Matt's vote for MM. MM's self-vote was also odd. But Matt's suspicion seems to have come out of nowhere--am I missing something there? The whole thing looks suspicious to me, and the rules imply that there is a vote forcer n the game (generally a baddie power); as Matt's posts on MM go back to before day 1, I can't help but wonder if Matt knows something about that.
First time I'm hearing about it. Can't you make up your own reasons for voting me?
I don't believe in making up reasons. Others have made valid points about your posts. I see the point they are making. I don't have any solid suspicions of my own (other than Matt being odd).
So you normally vote without having any reasons of your own? As for the rest, abstract talk. What valid points? What posts of mine?
Sounds like prepping up a comfy bandwagoning, what you're doing. And bandwagoning is frowned upon.
Plus, I'm not bad. Eye me all you want.
You seem to be denying and yet accepting that there is something to the idea of you trying to get people to mention you. Your posts about that read as intentionally waffly.
Your rainbow posts and the coin flip post seem like a great way to appear to contribute without really contributing.
You seem to be confusing interpretation with fact in a way that doesn't read honestly.
And I will eye you all I want. I'll re-reread you tomorrow when I'm more awake. Not ready to vote yet.
Lorab says "seem," which is a strange word choice.
For example, this sentence:
"Your rainbow posts and the coin flip post seem like a great way to appear to contribute without really contributing."
I would have phrased it this way:
"Your rainbow posts and the coin flip post are bullshit, and aren't contributing anything. Please stop cluttering the thread that everyone is expected to read in order to be informed."
There's nothing "seeming" about it. Ricochet is flooding the thread with bullshit.
But Lorab's phrasing is hedging her stance, which is ordinarily something Mafia do. Like here:
LoRab wrote:I definitely see what others have pointed out about Rico. May vote there.
What is it about Ricochet that others have pointed out that Lorab "definitely" sees? With Ricochet being the author of almost a quarter (!) of the thread's posts, this is as unspecific as it gets.
Lorab has interacted more with Ricochet than any other person so far, so why does the possibility of her vote hinge on what others have pointed out? Her stance is disingenuous. That's why.
Sorsha followed soon after with some points of her own that also made me re-evaluate how I felt about Lorab (I was neutral on her up until Epi's post).
So, I'm leaning Lorab but I would like to see what she has to say before I cast a vote for her.
Does this not accurately represent this thread to a T?
DharmaHelper wrote: The phrasing of the reply "Post count or mention count have nothing to do with it", to me, indicates that there is something gimmicky behind the behavior, but post/mention count are not it.
Thinking about Rico now... How could Ricochet be scum? It makes no fucking sense. He is playing sooooo whack, he is seemingly trying to get votes cast on him, and that's not a scum role imo. I think he might be my World Reborn role, or something like it. Where I had a win con of getting shit tons of votes on me and was a cop, and lynchproof etc. I was indy.
He smells indy as fuck to me.
In addition, Epig's argument about Lorab is compelling
LoRab wrote:I definitely see what others have pointed out about Rico. May vote there.
And I'm curious about Matt's vote for MM. MM's self-vote was also odd. But Matt's suspicion seems to have come out of nowhere--am I missing something there? The whole thing looks suspicious to me, and the rules imply that there is a vote forcer n the game (generally a baddie power); as Matt's posts on MM go back to before day 1, I can't help but wonder if Matt knows something about that.
First time I'm hearing about it. Can't you make up your own reasons for voting me?
I don't believe in making up reasons. Others have made valid points about your posts. I see the point they are making. I don't have any solid suspicions of my own (other than Matt being odd).
So you normally vote without having any reasons of your own? As for the rest, abstract talk. What valid points? What posts of mine?
Sounds like prepping up a comfy bandwagoning, what you're doing. And bandwagoning is frowned upon.
Plus, I'm not bad. Eye me all you want.
You seem to be denying and yet accepting that there is something to the idea of you trying to get people to mention you. Your posts about that read as intentionally waffly.
Your rainbow posts and the coin flip post seem like a great way to appear to contribute without really contributing.
You seem to be confusing interpretation with fact in a way that doesn't read honestly.
And I will eye you all I want. I'll re-reread you tomorrow when I'm more awake. Not ready to vote yet.
Lorab says "seem," which is a strange word choice.
For example, this sentence:
"Your rainbow posts and the coin flip post seem like a great way to appear to contribute without really contributing."
I would have phrased it this way:
"Your rainbow posts and the coin flip post are bullshit, and aren't contributing anything. Please stop cluttering the thread that everyone is expected to read in order to be informed."
There's nothing "seeming" about it. Ricochet is flooding the thread with bullshit.
But Lorab's phrasing is hedging her stance, which is ordinarily something Mafia do. Like here:
LoRab wrote:I definitely see what others have pointed out about Rico. May vote there.
What is it about Ricochet that others have pointed out that Lorab "definitely" sees? With Ricochet being the author of almost a quarter (!) of the thread's posts, this is as unspecific as it gets.
Lorab has interacted more with Ricochet than any other person so far, so why does the possibility of her vote hinge on what others have pointed out? Her stance is disingenuous. That's why.
Sorsha followed soon after with some points of her own that also made me re-evaluate how I felt about Lorab (I was neutral on her up until Epi's post).
So, I'm leaning Lorab but I would like to see what she has to say before I cast a vote for her.
"Modular forms and elliptic curves! Infinite fire revolving around infinite parallels fractals of infinite reality, each cascading, gliding in an infinite wheel. Tell me the true nature of my reality!"
Best Townie, Maffies 4, 8 and 9 Best Scum, Maffies 3 Best Moderator, Maffies 8 and 9 Most Valuable Player, Maffies 7 and 9 Best Roleplay, Maffies 4 and 6 Spirit Award, Maffies 9 Hall of Fame inductee, Maffies 4
Mafia Universe
Mafia Championship Finalist, 2015 and 2020 Best Town Player, 2020
"Modular forms and elliptic curves! Infinite fire revolving around infinite parallels fractals of infinite reality, each cascading, gliding in an infinite wheel. Tell me the true nature of my reality!"
Best Townie, Maffies 4, 8 and 9 Best Scum, Maffies 3 Best Moderator, Maffies 8 and 9 Most Valuable Player, Maffies 7 and 9 Best Roleplay, Maffies 4 and 6 Spirit Award, Maffies 9 Hall of Fame inductee, Maffies 4
Mafia Universe
Mafia Championship Finalist, 2015 and 2020 Best Town Player, 2020
Ricochet wrote:I'm sorry am i to believe policy lynches aren't rude but my successful tactic is?
I'm not the one to argue this point with. I hate the "policy" lynch thing. They are rude. Your tactic is not successful. Just crap.
You didn't criticise Fuzz voting Wilgy, Wilgy voting Fuzz, Mac policying Matt, Matt policying MM and so on.
You aren't consistent in hating the policy lynch thing.
Draconus wrote:Does Ricochet talk too much? Does he appear to be an attention craving ho... prostitute? Am I going to vote for him? Is MM the number 1 Day 1 policy lynch on the syndicate? Am I joking because I actually want to vote for Rico?
I wouldn't lynch LoRab toDay. Maybe tomorrow. She might be right about me, after all...
It's true, I haven't paid attention to them near as much. I went at Mac about policy lynching Matt in another game. It did not end well for me.
"Modular forms and elliptic curves! Infinite fire revolving around infinite parallels fractals of infinite reality, each cascading, gliding in an infinite wheel. Tell me the true nature of my reality!"
Best Townie, Maffies 4, 8 and 9 Best Scum, Maffies 3 Best Moderator, Maffies 8 and 9 Most Valuable Player, Maffies 7 and 9 Best Roleplay, Maffies 4 and 6 Spirit Award, Maffies 9 Hall of Fame inductee, Maffies 4
Mafia Universe
Mafia Championship Finalist, 2015 and 2020 Best Town Player, 2020
Black Rock wrote:
It's true, I haven't paid attention to them near as much. I went at Mac about policy lynching Matt in another game. It did not end well for me.
Best Townie, Maffies 4, 8 and 9 Best Scum, Maffies 3 Best Moderator, Maffies 8 and 9 Most Valuable Player, Maffies 7 and 9 Best Roleplay, Maffies 4 and 6 Spirit Award, Maffies 9 Hall of Fame inductee, Maffies 4
Mafia Universe
Mafia Championship Finalist, 2015 and 2020 Best Town Player, 2020
Best Townie, Maffies 4, 8 and 9 Best Scum, Maffies 3 Best Moderator, Maffies 8 and 9 Most Valuable Player, Maffies 7 and 9 Best Roleplay, Maffies 4 and 6 Spirit Award, Maffies 9 Hall of Fame inductee, Maffies 4
Mafia Universe
Mafia Championship Finalist, 2015 and 2020 Best Town Player, 2020
Black Rock wrote:
It's true, I haven't paid attention to them near as much. I went at Mac about policy lynching Matt in another game. It did not end well for me.
So you admit it!
Yes, I admit that you have been distracting me and are continuing to do so.
Black Rock wrote:
It's true, I haven't paid attention to them near as much. I went at Mac about policy lynching Matt in another game. It did not end well for me.
So you admit it!
Yes, I admit that you have been distracting me and are continuing to do so.
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.
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.
Buuut LoRab was also "persuaded" by others and she is the one you are suspecting, "persuaded" by others.
I don't care much about sig vs Dharma. Seems civ on civ. Or pleb on pleb.
I wish Fuzz and Wilgy would stop fighting and be friends, like I asked in my vocaroo. Your votes are going to waste, if you keep it up.
I don't agree with Epignosis dismissing my valuable work that ended up with four (4) confirmed baddies, but that seems (oops) like a cool post he wrote. I'mma follow his vote on LoRab...
Then again, I don't know if LoRab is bad, so...
If anything, Dom looks the opportunistic one now, because with only 4 posts, his comeback was "ew catching up" and coattailing Epig's case.
If you want to call me opportunistic for making the posts I can make, that's fine. I disagree.
I'm not going to spam the thread just to make it harder for other epople to keep up.
MacDougall wrote:
MacDougall wrote:
Unvote
vote MacDougall
So that test didn't work.
Thinking about Rico now... How could Ricochet be scum? It makes no fucking sense. He is playing sooooo whack, he is seemingly trying to get votes cast on him, and that's not a scum role imo. I think he might be my World Reborn role, or something like it. Where I had a win con of getting shit tons of votes on me and was a cop, and lynchproof etc. I was indy.
He smells indy as fuck to me.
When INH had Media as a role, he did this as well. I don't think his role is literally Media, but perhaps it's a Mr. Popular style role.
sig wrote:I see, I wouldn't' say it appears contributory at all, minus my one line about Llama. I mean the entire post was basically about Zebra and a book series. I have however, made a few on topic posts. Not many, but when I saw something worth pointing out I did. Which was mainly the video thing, besides that I can't think of anything else big. This phase has been fast with lots of pages, but a good portion doesn't seem to be note worthy. So the fact you point out one fluff post of myself when several people have fluff posts or almost no posts is strange.
If you actually read your post, it isn't contributory. However at a glance the size of the post makes it seem as though you have something to say. If people skim, or do not read it at all, their immediate impression is "Sig is posting big posts, he must be in the thick of things" which is untrue.
Are you two arguing the same point?
I'm clarifying. Sig admits that the content of his post is not and does not look to be contributory. I'm saying that by virtue of it being a sizeable post, with quotes, etc, it looks contributory at first glance regardless of the actual content.
Do you find him more suspicious because he agrees with you?
"Modular forms and elliptic curves! Infinite fire revolving around infinite parallels fractals of infinite reality, each cascading, gliding in an infinite wheel. Tell me the true nature of my reality!"
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.
Buuut LoRab was also "persuaded" by others and she is the one you are suspecting, "persuaded" by others.
Hmmmm-etc-mmm?
I don't understand your point. If Lorab was persuaded by others what does that have to do with me being persuaded by others that she could be bad? Persuasion is at the root of this game, i expect a lot of people to be persuaded. And just as a reminder, I want to hear or see Lorab's response to the allegations before making any decisions.
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.
Buuut LoRab was also "persuaded" by others and she is the one you are suspecting, "persuaded" by others.
Hmmmm-etc-mmm?
I don't understand your point. If Lorab was persuaded by others what does that have to do with me being persuaded by others that she could be bad? Persuasion is at the root of this game, i expect a lot of people to be persuaded. And just as a reminder, I want to hear or see Lorab's response to the allegations before making any decisions.
Really?
LoRab taking others' opinion for granted is what's getting her suspected. Dontcha see the irony in you doing the same? If persuasion is good, then why do you accept others' suspicions on LoRab and suspect her yourself?
I think our fifth baddie is looming on the horizon...
Ricochet I'm not getting into a long boring nobody will read it discussion with you over whether it's possible for me to be persuaded. In Lorabs case she was not specific about what others had said that caused her suspicions. In my case I was specific. And calling me a potential baddie does not scare me in the lease because i know I am civ.
Dom wrote:Llama, why did you dismiss DH rather than take issue with the content of the post?
I don't actually know what you're referring to here. Can you be more specific?
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
Dom wrote:Llama, why did you dismiss DH rather than take issue with the content of the post?
I don't actually know what you're referring to here. Can you be more specific?
Nevermind, I went back and looked and see what you mean.
I don't know what there is to address. I read Mac as behaving a certain way, and DH says that same read applies to Rico. I don't really agree. It amounts to different interpretations of the same data.
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
juliets wrote:Ricochet I'm not getting into a long boring nobody will read it discussion with you over whether it's possible for me to be persuaded. In Lorabs case she was not specific about what others had said that caused her suspicions. In my case I was specific. And calling me a potential baddie does not scare me in the lease because i know I am civ.
Yes, you used quotes. I didn't realize this was the thin line between suspect and legit.
And I'm not doing anything to "scare you". Calling out baddies is what needs to be done to eliminate them, that's all.
To further elaborate, I guess I view Rico as remaining jokey all game. MacDougall suddenly switched from jokey attacks to serious business, which is not in itself bad, but it looked to me rather insincere in the case of his attack on Rico.
Anyway, I'm off MacDougall now. That was just a starting point that led me to Sig, my current top suspect.
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
Best Townie, Maffies 4, 8 and 9 Best Scum, Maffies 3 Best Moderator, Maffies 8 and 9 Most Valuable Player, Maffies 7 and 9 Best Roleplay, Maffies 4 and 6 Spirit Award, Maffies 9 Hall of Fame inductee, Maffies 4
Mafia Universe
Mafia Championship Finalist, 2015 and 2020 Best Town Player, 2020
Also, my green color may lose its intensity if you keep dismissing me as jokey.
I am sorry. I will take you seriously from now on.
No, I did not curse JJJ, and I have no idea what he is trying to say, although it seems like he is trying to tell me something in his last post.
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
If I had the power to curse people, does anyone think I wouldn't have used it on Rico? Come on.
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
sig wrote:I see, I wouldn't' say it appears contributory at all, minus my one line about Llama. I mean the entire post was basically about Zebra and a book series. I have however, made a few on topic posts. Not many, but when I saw something worth pointing out I did. Which was mainly the video thing, besides that I can't think of anything else big. This phase has been fast with lots of pages, but a good portion doesn't seem to be note worthy. So the fact you point out one fluff post of myself when several people have fluff posts or almost no posts is strange.
If you actually read your post, it isn't contributory. However at a glance the size of the post makes it seem as though you have something to say. If people skim, or do not read it at all, their immediate impression is "Sig is posting big posts, he must be in the thick of things" which is untrue.
Are you two arguing the same point?
I'm clarifying. Sig admits that the content of his post is not and does not look to be contributory. I'm saying that by virtue of it being a sizeable post, with quotes, etc, it looks contributory at first glance regardless of the actual content.
Do you find him more suspicious because he agrees with you?
I find his posts about it odd, and suspicious.
He doesn't agree with me.
Oh? I must have read it wrong, I thought he agreed that his posts weren't contributory.
Fiddler on the Roof
[-Mass Effect Mafia banner-]
