The Syndicate

I feel like everybody's playing with more info than me. Y'all must be having fun in map squares or baddie chatrooms without me. Does the math say I'm bad because a bunch of people got together on the map and trusted each other? Does Tranq know MM's role? Does Sorsha? Does Dom?

MM, why do people who you think know your role want you dead?

Why can't MM win with the civs?

Turnip Head wrote:Tell me how I've given up Tranq. Tell me how I'm timmer's teammate.

What makes you say that? I've felt better about Sorsha's contributions than Golden's. At least she's not using basic mathematics to lynch civs.

That chameleon video is 100% the greatest thing I've seen in my life, more or less.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Golden wrote:
fingersplints wrote:That is an acceptable answer.
How acceptable - because... to me this matters very much. If you believe SVS killed you today, I also think MM is the right choice for a lynch.

And that also means... that I think tranq was right all along, and the trickster could fool us even in voting for them on the poll.
Lolwut?

There could be 4 Circle of Decay members and you want to lynch me?

Want to lynch Golden with me?

fingersplints wrote:Oh wait cabal was last night. I'm confused who you think we should lynch then if you don't want SVS.

I'm getting roles and teams mixed up. Sorry. I'll try and get a better grasp on it tomorrow.

I'm confused about this too. If we think it's SVS why aren't we voting for her?

fingersplints wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Tell me how I've given up Tranq. Tell me how I'm timmer's teammate.
I thought you did too with that vote for golden

Why would I give up?

Votes are changeable. Do you have a reason to trust Golden? I don't, and I'm wondering why nobody is talking about it. The math says he could be 100% bad, more or less.

Why do you think I'm timmer's teammate?

S~V~S wrote:I don't know if Tranq is stupid enough to kill someone on the same square as he is, but I am not. Even if I had a kill, which I don't.

So Dom, who told you about MMs role?

What does that mean, why would it be stupid to kill someone you shared a square with? The dead cannot talk. What if there was no one else in range for you to kill?

This whole post is WIFOM.

Tell me how I've given up Tranq. Tell me how I'm timmer's teammate.

Sorsha wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:
Sorsha wrote:When you were poisoned? I'm too lazy to go look now, what day?

I know svs did one day too, the day you apparently got cured. Not very nice of her.
Night 1

Tranq was on my case as soon as I mentioned it too. Like a piranha to blood in the water.
Jeeze TH learn to read. What day did Golden vote for you not what day were you poisoned.

Oh

Day 9, the Wilgy lynch. Votes for me were worth 8 that day.

Sorsha wrote:When you were poisoned? I'm too lazy to go look now, what day?

I know svs did one day too, the day you apparently got cured. Not very nice of her.

Night 1

Tranq was on my case as soon as I mentioned it too. Like a piranha to blood in the water.

Sorsha wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Where's all this talk about MM coming from? He's flown under the radar most of the game, with nary a peep about him from anyone.
Remember when he voted for you when you were poisoned? That wasn't very nice of him.

Good point. So did Golden.

Where's all this talk about MM coming from? He's flown under the radar most of the game, with nary a peep about him from anyone.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Sorsha

Congrats on not dying fingerplints.

What do you think of Golden? I'm more or less 100% sure he's bad.

Golden

It's basic mathematics.

Draconus wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:
Draconus wrote:
Draconus wrote:TH, I can't explain exactly how, but if the Thief comes back bad, you will look really good in my book. There's incentive for switching your vote.
Also, allow me to backtrack for a sec and clarify. You will look better to me. Not 100% better. But a little bit better.

Linki @Golden: I do understand what you mean... I'll think on it some more today, but you may be right.
Interesting How does this work? I wish you could elaborate... are you still near where you talked about going the other day?
Sad to say, I am long gone because I found I have trust issues (and that's not directed at you).

You mentioned a travelling buddy... trouble in paradise?

Draconus wrote:
Draconus wrote:TH, I can't explain exactly how, but if the Thief comes back bad, you will look really good in my book. There's incentive for switching your vote.
Also, allow me to backtrack for a sec and clarify. You will look better to me. Not 100% better. But a little bit better.

Linki @Golden: I do understand what you mean... I'll think on it some more today, but you may be right.

Interesting

How does this work? I wish you could elaborate... are you still near where you talked about going the other day?

Golden wrote:@TH - I've explained it over and over and over and over again. You just don't like the explanation.

It's basic mathematics.

Yeah... that's what you said about Matt and Bass too... may they rest in peace.

Golden wrote:For me, I think it is easily timmer and TH first from that team... after that, figuring out who else is on the team is a possibility.

I'm confident that you will eventually explain why you keep bringing up my name with nothing to back it up.

He can't stay off the poll by himself, someone has to be helping him.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Oh damn I did. I almost lynched Turnip Head all by myself.

rude

Metalmarsh89 wrote:And what, pray tell, would have been wrong with lynching Turnip? Is he a civilian?

What do you think?

S~V~S wrote:If Timmer is going to keep hiding for the rest of the game in the Get Out of Lynch Free square, why are the rest of us even playing? He wins then, right?

Well he can't beat us all by his lonesome.

See I've felt like Golden has been talking out of his butt for a while now.

Golden wrote:I haven't evaluated 'who has been lynching the civilians', but I'm willing to bet your name is right there on the list. Didn't you also vote both Matt and Bass?

Yeah, but what I didn't do was say

Golden wrote:I'm more or less 100% sure he is bad.

or

Golden wrote:Right now, I believe the civs will win if they lynch all of you, th, timmer and bass. That's only four people, so I'm feeling good about our odds.

or

Golden wrote:You have to understand Matt - at some point this game becomes numbers. If I have 9 people I think are good and 4 that I don't know about, I don't need to feel sorry about lynching the four... even if one comes back civ. Each time the lynch goes for one of those 4, I'm confident I'm one step closer to getting the civs the win. Do you understand this? It's maths. It's the odds.

or

Golden wrote:It's also not 'I got vibes from bass he was bad'.

It was 'there is no mathematical way Bass could be good'. And yet he was.

I voted for Bass and Matt because I suspected them for their thread play. You voted for them because they mathematically had to be bad, in fact you specifically said it was not due to vibes that you voted for Bass.

You said Matt, Bass, timmer and myself all had to be the last 4 baddies because you trusted everyone else. You were wrong about Bass, and Matt, and you're wrong about me. timmer doesn't count, he's the free square in Baddie Bingo. So I think we need to hold you accountable for your actions now... why have you come to the conclusions that you have?

I also notice you didn't include yourself in the underlined statement above.

Why is Dr. Von Drezenbitch not on this poll?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Sorsha has voted for an awful lot of civilians lately.

I was going to say the same thing about Golden.

Draconus wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:
Draconus wrote:I'm skipping my read through of this whole Dom v. Matt suit. The only thing I agree with right now is that the Lich is bad, and he saved TH.
Well I for one think you should read the thread. Dom and Matt are both accusing each other of lying, you don't think that's worth looking into? I agree the Lich is bad but he did not save me. Do you have any other thoughts on me? It seems like you're basing your vote for me on a single event... I would ask you to consider your vote more carefully today.
The portion of their back and forth that I'm skipping is just repetition of what I have read from both of them. It's not helping me feel better or worse about both of them. It's just giving me a WIFOM migraine.
And my vote on you is based on more than just the one event. I have my own suspicion of what your role is based on a miner interaction we had on the map. Like I said it's miner, mostly gut. But there's also the circumstance of our location and where you were headed that gives me pause on my suspicion. Vague, yeah? I'd reveal more, but I don't want to after Matt's punishment
Anyways, my vote on you isn't necessarily permanent. I'm still mulling over those aforementioned circumstances.

Well the second part isn't vague, I told you exactly where I was going and what I was doing

The first part is vague though, I don't recall discussing anything that could have been related to my role. I understand if you don't want to elaborate but I hope we can sort this out.

But I urge you to take another look at Dom vs. Matt. Here's how I'm seeing it, FWIW:

Matt looks bad for going after Dom based on role alone. If the baddies missed out on recruiting the Statue it's going to be a difficult role for them to get rid of, and Matt was quick to paint Dom's potential recruitment in a bad light, immediately accusing him of being Cabal after the failed Circle kill. Matt had a lot to say this phase, but when I asked him how he could be sure the Star Gem wasn't located by a civvie, he clammed up. He was also dismissive of my point that he didn't mention Dom until 4 days after his quest failed, which seems to coincide with the NK attempt on Dom. He also didn't answer my question about why Dom would lie about sending him on a quest. I think these are pressing questions and Matt hand-waved it all.

Dom too ignored my questions directed at him. I think Dom looks bad for making a big stink about Matt "outing" him. Even being outed, Dom should have nothing to fear if he's civvie. He's getting defensive over Matt outing him but he's not getting defensive over his alignment, which makes me think he has something to hide.

They've both accused each other of lying, so something's gotta give there. I don't know which I'm voting for yet, I think there's a chance they both could be bad, and they're both better options than me today.

Draconus wrote:I want a better poll

You and me both buddy

Draconus wrote:I'm skipping my read through of this whole Dom v. Matt suit. The only thing I agree with right now is that the Lich is bad, and he saved TH.

Well I for one think you should read the thread. Dom and Matt are both accusing each other of lying, you don't think that's worth looking into? I agree the Lich is bad but he did not save me. Do you have any other thoughts on me? It seems like you're basing your vote for me on a single event... I would ask you to consider your vote more carefully today.

Matt wrote:He knows my role yet insists on lynching me.

Isn't the reverse just as true?

Matt wrote:Oh, and at this point, I've said all I can about Dom really. He tried to say he didn't send me to fetch the Gem, then backtracked. He knows my role yet insists on lynching me. I mean, once everyone else sees my role, if I'm lynched, I hope you take the time to consider how utterly preposterous it is to think I'm bad.

So, you have nothing more to say about Dom, thereby dodging my questions... and then you proceed to accuse Dom some more.

Why would Dom lie about sending you to fetch the Gem? I must have missed that bit... it was a dense read

I will be voting for either Dom or Matt today.[/obviousolive]

Matt, why are you voting for yourself if you're an important civvie on an important quest? How can you be sure that Dom wasn't recruited by a civilian? And why does your first suspicion of Dom come 4 RL days after your quest had failed? You said your quest failed on Night 7, but your first mention of Dom as suspicious comes on Night 9, the same night the Circle of Decay failed to kill Dom, and you have only accused him more heavily since that kill failed.

Dom, why are you getting defensive over Matt knowing your role and accusing you of being recruited? From my point of view you should be defensive over your alignment, not your role. What exactly is Matt lying about? Did you trust him until he accused you?

I think you both could be bad

Matt wrote:Anyway, on my way to the Star Gem, I ran across the Spirit Oracle. The SO told me that to continue my current mission was a quest doomed to failure

Around which Night did this take place?

Long Con wrote:Timmer has been removed from the poll!

Golden wrote:TH, what are you able to tell me about why you survived?

I'll answer your question, but I'd like you to answer mine. Matt's not the only one who's been questing

I was poisoned on night 1 but after assembling a few pieces of an item I was able to construct an apparatus that could keep me safe. A separate item from the marketplace allowed me to search for the cure to my poison, and after 30 fucking days I finally found it yesterday.

My question for you Golden is why you felt "more or less 100% sure" that Bass was bad, but you did not have those same odds for Matt being bad. You later said that in both cases you were playing the mathematical odds through some process of elimination. Why did that process lead you to different percentages for Matt and Bass being bad? What conclusions are you making, and why are you making them?

Votes are changeable in this poll.

Tranq wrote:Voted Dom + the three musketeers.

Go ahead and lay it out for me Tranq, start to finish. Me timmer and Matt as teammates. I'd like to get your thought process on the record.

Matt wrote:Turnip - What do you make of Dr Dre being on the bad guy team? You were insistent earlier that he was a civ in the first World game, as if by bringing that up, maybe people would leave you alone about it. I appreciate you voting Bass but I think seeing Dre with the baddies is kind of interesting.

I was not "insistent" about anything, you are rewriting history. Here is the post I made on the subject, you'll see it was made in direct response to Golden asking me what alignment I thought the doctor could be. You're acting like I was waving my arms around insisting he's a civvie role; I only brought it up because Golden questioned me, and I made no conclusion one way or the other.

But allow me to be more insistent now. Here are 8 roles I think are more likely to be bad than Dr. Von Drezenstein:

Long Con wrote:
Cursecrafter - Can create items to leave on a location that seem to have a minor positive effect, but may hide a greater negative one.

Misinformation/manipulation.

Long Con wrote:
Grim Shaman - Can use the powers of dead players, one-time use. *secrets*

Confirmed bad. Offensive/discovery role.

Long Con wrote:
Infectious Goblin - Targets a player to poison each night. Players who are poisoned get votes for them multiplied by their poison counters. Poison counters increase each night. Can poison an Item and leave it in a square for a player to find.

Confirmed bad. Offensive/vote manipulation.

Long Con wrote:
Lich of Khastor Keep - Cannot be nightkilled while his phylactery exists. Each night, the Lich may discover the location of one player. Can stop one lynch.

Bad based on name alone. Godfather type role.

Long Con wrote:
Possessing Entity - *secrets*

No way this creep is civvie.

Long Con wrote:
Puppet Master - Can control the night powers of another player in close proximity.

Nightmare Fuel. Manipulation of others.

Long Con wrote:
Scrippleskitz - Starts out each lynch with -3 votes. *secrets*

Negative votes is not typically a civvie power, but *secrets* makes it hard to know for sure.

Long Con wrote:
Trickster - The Trickster can appear as any role to a role check, even after death. Can appear as any player in temp BTSC. The Trickster may leave a message behind in a square twice in the game, and may cast an illusion once in the game, causing a lynched person to seem as though they were the role of his choice.

Manipulation/misinformation.

You might notice somebody missing

So as a bonus, here's #9:

Long Con wrote:
Splinter Twin - In addition to moving, Splinter Twin can choose to send his holographic self out two squares. He will enter BTSC with people on the same square as his holographic self, and only his physical form can suffer from targeted effects. His physical form can only been seen from one square away by ranged targeters.

I know we got a baddie result with this role with Floyd. But when I look at this role it doesn't scream baddie to me. It is defensive in nature, able to protect itself from harm. No offensive capabilities whatsoever.

I think Floyd's flip might have been Trickster influenced.

S~V~S wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:
S~V~S wrote:I also think there is no question that TH is bad, what with the lynch stop.
That's a bulletproof theory you've got there. Don't forget I'm also Dr. Dre's evil sidekick.
I did not say it is bulletproof. Snideness does not suit you

You said there is no question. I take that to mean you are not considering other possibilities.

I apologize for being snide though. The accusations have been frustrating this game. Everyone's a conspiracy theorist.

Bass_the_Clever

S~V~S wrote:I also think there is no question that TH is bad, what with the lynch stop.

That's a bulletproof theory you've got there. Don't forget I'm also Dr. Dre's evil sidekick.

Golden wrote:Well, why didn't you just ask that? Instead of making silly semantic comments like 'do you mean more than 100% or less?' I will repeat, I don't buy that this is what you were doing. When people are asking genuine questions because they want information, those questions tend to be asked genuinely - not loaded.

You are misunderstanding me if you think my question was loaded. I genuinely want to know if you are 100% sure Bass is bad, or if you're not. You mention "100%" repeatedly in tandem with Bass, but you curtail that with "more or less". I genuinely want to know what that means.

Golden wrote:@TH - the definition of madness is asking the same question over and over and hoping for a different answer.

You have read my very detailed posts about where my head is at. You already know the answer to that question you are asking over and over. So why do you keep asking it?

I guess I was hoping to figure out if there was something more to it, but I can see I'm getting nowhere

Why are you voting for Matt when you're so sure about Bass?

Golden wrote:If you want me to vote bass instead of matt, bullying me into it is not going to help.

You call it bullying, I call it trying to understand your point of view.

So you're not voting for Bass, who you are more or less 100% sure is bad, because Matt upset you?

Golden wrote:Do you have a problem with me voting matt?

I have a problem with you voting Matt for some emotional reason over the person you supposedly think is 100% bad.

That is exactly my point. Why do you repeatedly mention "100%" in regards to Bass, yet you hedge your bets? You're either 100% sure he's bad or you're not. It's a strong percentage to be throwing around willy-nilly.

Golden wrote:You know what, Matt?

I really really really really want to vote bass today.

I'm more or less 100% sure he is bad.

But you make it impossible.

Golden wrote:I find bass 100% bad. I don't have those odds on you. I still have you more likely bad than good.

Golden wrote:Or, to put it another way, Matt.

The rational part of my brain says 'vote bass'.

And, I'm with draconus, in that of those four who I think could be bad, I actually think you ARE the least likely. Now, I still have the odds at somehwere over 50%. But I have the odds on bass being bad at close to 100%. I had no intent of voting for you today at all.

Why are you not voting for Bass?

And how can you be "more or less 100% sure" Bass is bad? Is it less than 100%? Is it more?

Search found 319 matches