The Syndicate

Emotional to have been on a team, but to divest oneself of that bond and go back to an individual perspective. Realistically, I hope that the better player will lose between the two of you. But I feel sad to see either of you go. Good luck guys.

An ugly round. Let's hope the next one is better.

Wow speedchuck was the leader

DharmaHelper wrote: ↑Sat May 05, 2018 12:06 am To be honest all I saw was that MP/Daisy etc were on it.

bla bla glasses bla bla bla bla

This looks like a fresh take. [VOTE: approve] aubergine

Got something in your eye, Scotty?

That is true... plus the increasing number of jurors is a factor.

I think he meant that one of you is a baddie, so it's best to eliminate all of you from the possible roster. Because we don't know who the baddie is.

M Plus 7 wrote: ↑Thu May 03, 2018 10:21 pm

Oh no this was supposed to be a slam dunk.

Scotty wrote: ↑Thu May 03, 2018 12:30 am

Long Con wrote: ↑Thu May 03, 2018 12:24 am

Scotty wrote: ↑Thu May 03, 2018 12:22 am [VOTE: approve] aubergine
I’ve been holding out

I have no idea what sprit thinks in this game

What do I think in this game?

I think you pretend not to read the teams you end up voting for

Then somehow you don't know me very well.

Scotty wrote: ↑Thu May 03, 2018 12:22 am [VOTE: approve] aubergine
I’ve been holding out

I have no idea what sprit thinks in this game

What do I think in this game?

Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Wed May 02, 2018 11:55 pm No one wants to make teams they aren't on.

That's self-centred and foolish.

I don't understand why DP replaced Edjou and it was approved, and I don't understand why this team isn't Ed, DP, Scotty, MP, Spacedaisy. What's going on here; what is the dynamic I'm not understanding??

Oh, cool, I'll have to go back and see. It wasn't my computer screen, it was my phone.... I was at a friend's house, and just doing a quick one-minute check in.... didn't realize the second round had already gone through. I'm assuming we duplicated the first round and got another guilty. I'll go back and see that at some point.

[VOTE: disapprove] aubergine

I'm not up to date with the thread, but that's not the original jury so no.

Scotty wrote: ↑Wed May 02, 2018 10:08 am

Long Con wrote: ↑Tue May 01, 2018 9:31 pm I believe MP+7 will not be a problem with a prompt enough vote, because Spacedaisy is there to nudge him. And I would not count that as any kind of BTSC even during closed BTSC time. It's just sensible.

So, if a Not Guilty verdict comes up, is the common practice to create juries that contain none of the original four?

So you approved the team, we had a guilty verdict, DH makes a team that only has 2 of the original, adding himself and...DP, who no one has talked about yet, and you wholeheartedly agree with it, saying that it’s in the bag?

I actually assumed that he made the same team, I didn't realize he had changed people. We need to have the same jury.

Nice! It's in the bag. [VOTE: approve] aubergine

Scotty wrote: ↑Tue May 01, 2018 9:39 pm

Long Con wrote: ↑Tue May 01, 2018 9:31 pm I believe MP+7 will not be a problem with a prompt enough vote, because Spacedaisy is there to nudge him. And I would not count that as any kind of BTSC even during closed BTSC time. It's just sensible.

So, if a Not Guilty verdict comes up, is the common practice to create juries that contain none of the original four?

I would *usually* make a mission with 1-2 from the original with only 1 fail. Sometimes I would even make an entirely different team just to see what patsy votes for it

Is that in a five-round game?

I believe MP+7 will not be a problem with a prompt enough vote, because Spacedaisy is there to nudge him. And I would not count that as any kind of BTSC even during closed BTSC time. It's just sensible.

So, if a Not Guilty verdict comes up, is the common practice to create juries that contain none of the original four?

We'll only have a basis on who to trust once a verdict has come in.

nutella wrote: ↑Tue May 01, 2018 10:54 am also we do have open btsc yeah? idk exactly how we can use that to suss people out but we can try

Seems like a good way for Mafia to get Civs on their side with some sweet and clever words. Beware agreeing to anything to someone who assures you they're Civ.

speedchuck wrote: ↑Tue May 01, 2018 8:40 am

Long Con wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 11:14 pm I am heading to bed. I am going to [VOTE: disapprove] aubergine to cleanse the palate of this automated crap, and I hope the next Head Juror will pick their jurors with some more thought.

Ow

Well, you just did what was suggested. It sounded legit to me at first as well.

This jury looks fine. [VOTE: approve] aubergine

I am heading to bed. I am going to [VOTE: disapprove] aubergine to cleanse the palate of this automated crap, and I hope the next Head Juror will pick their jurors with some more thought.

And 'botulism' is 'steak-and-kidney-pie'!

On... the mission?

Ugh, then this round will provide no info because he didn't pick those players himself.

speedchuck wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 10:30 pm

Long Con wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 10:28 pm Ok, so do you guys know some simple strategies we can use?

It's like mafia, and there are scumpeople. It just has a different set of rules/phases.

Mafia are trying to get people on the jury to sabotage it. We're trying to get scum-free juries. Most mafia strategies work? And based on the round results, we can POE pretty well.

I assume that getting a Not Guilty will make all jurors on that jury a lot more suspect... there are so few rounds to shuffle and sort them though.

So, first team is?

1. Speedchuck
2. EdJou
3. Dharmahelper
4. DisgruntledPorcupine

Ok, so do you guys know some simple strategies we can use?

We'll have to all veto some juries in order to cover for the Civ Leader's identity.