The Syndicate

S~V~S wrote:

Matt F wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

MacDougall wrote:I hope everyone is keen to vote MattF along with me. Floyd? Can you get your mates to help me railroad Matt on day 1?

Matt F wrote:Friends of Floyd - Please do not lynch me

So is this a joke carried from the other game, or are you two teammates, or what?

He keeps saying he's going to vote for me in this game and in Dune. Here is one of his posts in Dune:

MacDougall wrote:

sig wrote:As tricky as your question I would say.

Hang on MattF is playing.

Placeholder vote for MattF.

I think he's joking, so I'm having fun back with him. However, it's entirely possible he will tunnel me in both games until (as he states) one of us is dead. You'll have to ask him.

I WAS kinda asking both of you, so I did ask him~


And yeah, I was going back and forth a lot yesterday, I guess I must have thought all of those posts were in this thread, and I was like, "All right already, we get it, you don't trust each other, enough with the overkill", then it was a "hmm" thing. So fair enough.

Would you prefer me to vote for you?

Are you threatening me for asking a question?

S~V~S wrote:Are you threatening me for asking a question?

Yes

I am not sure I would define that as sarcasm, but OK.

Do you plan on making sarcastic responses to serious questions for the remainder of the game?

S~V~S wrote:I am not sure I would define that as sarcasm, but OK.

Do you plan on making sarcastic responses to serious questions for the remainder of the game?

Do you plan on feigning sincerity and building cases on joke posts made on day 0 for the remainder of the game? Rather opportunistic in my opinion.

And no I do not. Only until MattF gets lynched.

MattF is the perfect day 1 lynch in every game he plays. As a townie he distracts from genuine scum hunting with tunneling, a lack of focus and volumes upon volumes of posts trying to get people to ignore their genuine scum hunting efforts and follow his uninspired scumdar ... and of course there is as good a chance that he's scum as anybody else. He's a policy lynch for me in every game he plays. I make no apologies for this.

This is after he proposed I quit playing Mafia for three months after he flips town in another game. He flipped scum.

Matt F wrote:This is after he proposed I quit playing Mafia for three months after he flips town in another game. He flipped scum.

Can someone else please point out to Matt that his case on me was a far fetched serial killer case based on his interpretation of night role actions and he actually had nothing to do with me getting lynched as scum so he stops claiming he did?

Also Matt that game is still currently running so talking about it in this thread is the second time you've broken site rules on that subject today.

MacDougall wrote:

Matt F wrote:This is after he proposed I quit playing Mafia for three months after he flips town in another game. He flipped scum.

Can someone else please point out to Matt that his case on me was a far fetched serial killer case based on his interpretation of night role actions and he actually had nothing to do with me getting lynched as scum so he stops claiming he did?

Ah, but your reaction to said case got the ball moving on others thinkin' you were scum.

(Anyway, this is gettin' weird. We're spamming two games with your stalking of me)

MacDougall wrote:Also Matt that game is still currently running so talking about it in this thread is the second time you've broken site rules on that subject today.

Spreading lies gets you nowhere. If you're not informed on whether or not I broke a rule, I suggest you PM the site administrator and I guarantee you he will tell you otherwise.

Also, you brought up your agenda, and this is based on one game you've played with me, so technically, you started discussing the game before I did.

Matt F wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Also Matt that game is still currently running so talking about it in this thread is the second time you've broken site rules on that subject today.

Spreading lies gets you nowhere. If you're not informed on whether or not I broke a rule, I suggest you PM the site administrator and I guarantee you he will tell you otherwise.

Also, you brought up your agenda, and this is based on one game you've played with me, so technically, you started discussing the game before I did.

Vaguely referencing your meta =/= discussing the exact outcomes of a game currently in progress.

MacDougall wrote:

Matt F wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Also Matt that game is still currently running so talking about it in this thread is the second time you've broken site rules on that subject today.

Spreading lies gets you nowhere. If you're not informed on whether or not I broke a rule, I suggest you PM the site administrator and I guarantee you he will tell you otherwise.

Also, you brought up your agenda, and this is based on one game you've played with me, so technically, you started discussing the game before I did.

Vaguely referencing your meta =/= discussing the exact outcomes of a game currently in progress.

Dude, whatever man. You started this crazy "I'm gonna tunnel Matt F every single game we play", I can guarantee you I have never done something like this. Also, it takes two seconds for any player to look into the TH thread to see your outcome. It's not like it was a secret, bro. Again, you brought it up, I kindly responded.

MacDougall wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I am not sure I would define that as sarcasm, but OK.

Do you plan on making sarcastic responses to serious questions for the remainder of the game?

Do you plan on feigning sincerity and building cases on joke posts made on day 0 for the remainder of the game? Rather opportunistic in my opinion.

And no I do not. Only until MattF gets lynched.

You have clearly never met SVS. I don't see her feigning sincerity at all here. And I've seen baddies caught day 1 due to joke posts. Baddie slips, actually I find, more often than not happen in less serious posts.

MacDougall wrote:It is my modus operandi as a mafia player on this website to tunnel MattF in every game until one of us are dead. You are officially forewarned of my intention in every game we both play in.

That's not very good strategy, and certainly isn't helpful in finding mafia.

MacDougall wrote:MattF is the perfect day 1 lynch in every game he plays. As a townie he distracts from genuine scum hunting with tunneling, a lack of focus and volumes upon volumes of posts trying to get people to ignore their genuine scum hunting efforts and follow his uninspired scumdar ... and of course there is as good a chance that he's scum as anybody else. He's a policy lynch for me in every game he plays. I make no apologies for this.

Oh, so now you're not joking?!

How many games have you played with him? And someone having a different strategy than yours in finding baddies doesn't mean that they are a distraction. Policy lynches don't really make sense strategically--just like random votes don't really make sense imho, or policy self votes. Find people you suspect and explain why you suspect them. It's what civies do.

I make no apologies for suspecting you.

LoRab wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I am not sure I would define that as sarcasm, but OK.

Do you plan on making sarcastic responses to serious questions for the remainder of the game?

Do you plan on feigning sincerity and building cases on joke posts made on day 0 for the remainder of the game? Rather opportunistic in my opinion.

And no I do not. Only until MattF gets lynched.

You have clearly never met SVS. I don't see her feigning sincerity at all here. And I've seen baddies caught day 1 due to joke posts. Baddie slips, actually I find, more often than not happen in less serious posts.

MacDougall wrote:It is my modus operandi as a mafia player on this website to tunnel MattF in every game until one of us are dead. You are officially forewarned of my intention in every game we both play in.

That's not very good strategy, and certainly isn't helpful in finding mafia.

MacDougall wrote:MattF is the perfect day 1 lynch in every game he plays. As a townie he distracts from genuine scum hunting with tunneling, a lack of focus and volumes upon volumes of posts trying to get people to ignore their genuine scum hunting efforts and follow his uninspired scumdar ... and of course there is as good a chance that he's scum as anybody else. He's a policy lynch for me in every game he plays. I make no apologies for this.

Oh, so now you're not joking?!

How many games have you played with him? And someone having a different strategy than yours in finding baddies doesn't mean that they are a distraction. Policy lynches don't really make sense strategically--just like random votes don't really make sense imho, or policy self votes. Find people you suspect and explain why you suspect them. It's what civies do.

I make no apologies for suspecting you.

Show me where a baddie was caught on day 1 due to a joke post please. I'd like a link to that thread.

I disagree you see because now you are inspired to build a case because of what I have done. It may be on me, but now we have a subject to talk about. Conversation to have. It's an enjoyable experience for all. The game has started in earnest and we have hit the ground running. No fuckery.

Well I am and I'm not.

Apologise for suspecting me? What do you suspect me of? You needn't apologise to me for anything my love.

The apology was simply replying to your not apologizing for policy voting Matt in every game.

I know that 2 baddies in LOST on The Piano were lynched for jokey posts (they were my teammates), but you can't exactly get to that. If you search chubbz on Lostpedia, I'm quite certain that you can find multiple games as examples. The first star wars game, I believe. And Harry Potter, I think, both come to mind.

And I suspect you of being bad, for the record.

LoRab wrote:The apology was simply replying to your not apologizing for policy voting Matt in every game.

I know that 2 baddies in LOST on The Piano were lynched for jokey posts (they were my teammates), but you can't exactly get to that. If you search chubbz on Lostpedia, I'm quite certain that you can find multiple games as examples. The first star wars game, I believe. And Harry Potter, I think, both come to mind.

And I suspect you of being bad, for the record.

Hmm Mr. LoRab your examples aren't exactly convincing. I can show you endless examples of scum players saying "the" in a thread. That doesn't mean we should lynch players who say "the".

You suspect me of being bad? What roles do you consider bad in this particular design of game?

Mr. Lorab?

MacDougall wrote:

LoRab wrote:The apology was simply replying to your not apologizing for policy voting Matt in every game.

I know that 2 baddies in LOST on The Piano were lynched for jokey posts (they were my teammates), but you can't exactly get to that. If you search chubbz on Lostpedia, I'm quite certain that you can find multiple games as examples. The first star wars game, I believe. And Harry Potter, I think, both come to mind.

And I suspect you of being bad, for the record.

Hmm Mr. LoRab your examples aren't exactly convincing. I can show you endless examples of scum players saying "the" in a thread. That doesn't mean we should lynch players who say "the".

You suspect me of being bad? What roles do you consider bad in this particular design of game?

No, and I'm not suspecting you for making a jokey post--I'm suspecting you for the content of that post and your subsequent posts.

The roles not specifying which are bad and which are civ is irrelevant to the fact that the host has made it clear that players are bad are good. I think that the players who are on the 2 baddie teams are bad. And the darkness. And possibly the other indies (hard to know with indies). Or are you going to try to convince us that there aren't really baddies in this game because the roles don't specify them (even though we have been told multiple times that there are baddies).

Also, I'm female.

Terribly sorry is it Mrs. Lorab?

MacDougall wrote:Terribly sorry is it Mrs. Lorab?

Miss LoRab, Ms LoRab, Rabbi LoRab, Twirly LoRab....I'm not picky.

LoRab wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

LoRab wrote:The apology was simply replying to your not apologizing for policy voting Matt in every game.

I know that 2 baddies in LOST on The Piano were lynched for jokey posts (they were my teammates), but you can't exactly get to that. If you search chubbz on Lostpedia, I'm quite certain that you can find multiple games as examples. The first star wars game, I believe. And Harry Potter, I think, both come to mind.

And I suspect you of being bad, for the record.

Hmm Mr. LoRab your examples aren't exactly convincing. I can show you endless examples of scum players saying "the" in a thread. That doesn't mean we should lynch players who say "the".

You suspect me of being bad? What roles do you consider bad in this particular design of game?

No, and I'm not suspecting you for making a jokey post--I'm suspecting you for the content of that post and your subsequent posts.

The roles not specifying which are bad and which are civ is irrelevant to the fact that the host has made it clear that players are bad are good. I think that the players who are on the 2 baddie teams are bad. And the darkness. And possibly the other indies (hard to know with indies). Or are you going to try to convince us that there aren't really baddies in this game because the roles don't specify them (even though we have been told multiple times that there are baddies).

Also, I'm female.

I am very sorry about that. How embarrassing for me.

Let me clarify my question for you.

I wouldn't try to convince you of that. I simply would not be aware of which roles were in fact bad. Aside from the obvious one. And in the interest of encouraging discussion I thought I would ask for your opinion.

linki: Twirly LoRab. I like that.

MacDougall wrote:

LoRab wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

LoRab wrote:The apology was simply replying to your not apologizing for policy voting Matt in every game.

I know that 2 baddies in LOST on The Piano were lynched for jokey posts (they were my teammates), but you can't exactly get to that. If you search chubbz on Lostpedia, I'm quite certain that you can find multiple games as examples. The first star wars game, I believe. And Harry Potter, I think, both come to mind.

And I suspect you of being bad, for the record.

Hmm Mr. LoRab your examples aren't exactly convincing. I can show you endless examples of scum players saying "the" in a thread. That doesn't mean we should lynch players who say "the".

You suspect me of being bad? What roles do you consider bad in this particular design of game?

No, and I'm not suspecting you for making a jokey post--I'm suspecting you for the content of that post and your subsequent posts.

The roles not specifying which are bad and which are civ is irrelevant to the fact that the host has made it clear that players are bad are good. I think that the players who are on the 2 baddie teams are bad. And the darkness. And possibly the other indies (hard to know with indies). Or are you going to try to convince us that there aren't really baddies in this game because the roles don't specify them (even though we have been told multiple times that there are baddies).

Also, I'm female.

I am very sorry about that. How embarrassing for me.

Let me clarify my question for you.

I wouldn't try to convince you of that. I simply would not be aware of which roles were in fact bad. Aside from the obvious one. And in the interest of encouraging discussion I thought I would ask for your opinion.

linki: Twirly LoRab. I like that.

is my smiley for a reason.

And it depends on if the roles were designed with teams, or if LC randomized which roles/players were on which team. I don't think he's clarified that and I can see him doing either. Also, knowing the host, if he did design it with certain roles being civ/bad/indy, then it's probably, at least in part, the ones that are least likely to be in any of those allignments.

I'd rather focus on which players are acting suspiciously, and worry less about particular role (which is how I generally play the game regardless). I think figuring out which roles we think are bad and which players we think have which roles is a dangerous path.

LoRab wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

LoRab wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

LoRab wrote:The apology was simply replying to your not apologizing for policy voting Matt in every game.

I know that 2 baddies in LOST on The Piano were lynched for jokey posts (they were my teammates), but you can't exactly get to that. If you search chubbz on Lostpedia, I'm quite certain that you can find multiple games as examples. The first star wars game, I believe. And Harry Potter, I think, both come to mind.

And I suspect you of being bad, for the record.

Hmm Mr. LoRab your examples aren't exactly convincing. I can show you endless examples of scum players saying "the" in a thread. That doesn't mean we should lynch players who say "the".

You suspect me of being bad? What roles do you consider bad in this particular design of game?

No, and I'm not suspecting you for making a jokey post--I'm suspecting you for the content of that post and your subsequent posts.

The roles not specifying which are bad and which are civ is irrelevant to the fact that the host has made it clear that players are bad are good. I think that the players who are on the 2 baddie teams are bad. And the darkness. And possibly the other indies (hard to know with indies). Or are you going to try to convince us that there aren't really baddies in this game because the roles don't specify them (even though we have been told multiple times that there are baddies).

Also, I'm female.

I am very sorry about that. How embarrassing for me.

Let me clarify my question for you.

I wouldn't try to convince you of that. I simply would not be aware of which roles were in fact bad. Aside from the obvious one. And in the interest of encouraging discussion I thought I would ask for your opinion.

linki: Twirly LoRab. I like that.

is my smiley for a reason.

And it depends on if the roles were designed with teams, or if LC randomized which roles/players were on which team. I don't think he's clarified that and I can see him doing either. Also, knowing the host, if he did design it with certain roles being civ/bad/indy, then it's probably, at least in part, the ones that are least likely to be in any of those allignments.

I'd rather focus on which players are acting suspiciously, and worry less about particular role (which is how I generally play the game regardless). I think figuring out which roles we think are bad and which players we think have which roles is a dangerous path.

I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments. So you suspect me of being a role that is probably, at least in part, one of the ones that are least likely to be any of those alignments?

Interesting questions that poses to me.

MacDougall wrote:It is my modus operandi as a mafia player on this website to tunnel MattF in every game until one of us are dead. You are officially forewarned of my intention in every game we both play in.

....

Dom wrote:

MacDougall wrote:It is my modus operandi as a mafia player on this website to tunnel MattF in every game until one of us are dead. You are officially forewarned of my intention in every game we both play in.

....

Hello Dom! Pleasure to make your acquaintance.

Don't mind that post my friend. I was just being a little bit playful.

MacDougall wrote:

LoRab wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

LoRab wrote:

MacDougall wrote:

LoRab wrote:The apology was simply replying to your not apologizing for policy voting Matt in every game.

I know that 2 baddies in LOST on The Piano were lynched for jokey posts (they were my teammates), but you can't exactly get to that. If you search chubbz on Lostpedia, I'm quite certain that you can find multiple games as examples. The first star wars game, I believe. And Harry Potter, I think, both come to mind.

And I suspect you of being bad, for the record.

Hmm Mr. LoRab your examples aren't exactly convincing. I can show you endless examples of scum players saying "the" in a thread. That doesn't mean we should lynch players who say "the".

You suspect me of being bad? What roles do you consider bad in this particular design of game?

No, and I'm not suspecting you for making a jokey post--I'm suspecting you for the content of that post and your subsequent posts.

The roles not specifying which are bad and which are civ is irrelevant to the fact that the host has made it clear that players are bad are good. I think that the players who are on the 2 baddie teams are bad. And the darkness. And possibly the other indies (hard to know with indies). Or are you going to try to convince us that there aren't really baddies in this game because the roles don't specify them (even though we have been told multiple times that there are baddies).

Also, I'm female.

I am very sorry about that. How embarrassing for me.

Let me clarify my question for you.

I wouldn't try to convince you of that. I simply would not be aware of which roles were in fact bad. Aside from the obvious one. And in the interest of encouraging discussion I thought I would ask for your opinion.

linki: Twirly LoRab. I like that.

is my smiley for a reason.

And it depends on if the roles were designed with teams, or if LC randomized which roles/players were on which team. I don't think he's clarified that and I can see him doing either. Also, knowing the host, if he did design it with certain roles being civ/bad/indy, then it's probably, at least in part, the ones that are least likely to be in any of those allignments.

I'd rather focus on which players are acting suspiciously, and worry less about particular role (which is how I generally play the game regardless). I think figuring out which roles we think are bad and which players we think have which roles is a dangerous path.

I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments. So you suspect me of being a role that is probably, at least in part, one of the ones that are least likely to be any of those alignments?

Interesting questions that poses to me.

I have no idea what role you are. I do suspect that you are a baddie.

Also, having nothing to do with this particular conversation, but before I forget, I'm out of town at a convention all next week (Monday to Monday). OK, I'm going to Harry Potter World, then the convention, then Disney World (because, Orlando). I will be around, but my timing may be wonky. Even more than usual.

In related news, I'll be shaving my head to raise money for childhood cancer while I'm there, to raise money for the St Baldricks Foundation, which directly funds childhood cancer research through grants. So, I will look like this as of next Thursday If any of you are interested in donating (and thanks to those of you that donated the first time I did this), lemme know and I'm happy to share the link to donate.

Meant to share all that in the sign up thread before roles went out, but then I completely forgot.

Hello players. It has come to my attention that you recently voted in a Day 0 poll in which 'spice' was an option. While you may not have been voting for Old Spice per se, I can't help but feel that a vote for 'spice' was a vote for Old Spice in spirit. To those who voted for 'spice,' I commend you. Clearly you have an education in sophistication and realize that spice makes things better. I agree with you completely. Stay beautiful.

To those of you who did not vote for 'spice' while the option was still available, I simply shake my head in disappointment. Clearly you have more to learn about the virtues that spice, in all of its varieties, has to offer. Particularly Old Spice body wash, which 999,999 out of one million women agree smells 150 bajillion times better on a man than lady-scented body wash. In time, under the right tutelage, you will learn tha-





Now Terry, remember what we talked about? Your incessant shouting and constant outbursts are frightening to some players. Why, you might just scare away some of the new folks who just joined the forum recently.

MacDougall wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I am not sure I would define that as sarcasm, but OK.

Do you plan on making sarcastic responses to serious questions for the remainder of the game?

Do you plan on feigning sincerity and building cases on joke posts made on day 0 for the remainder of the game? Rather opportunistic in my opinion.

And no I do not. Only until MattF gets lynched.

Was it a joke post? You seem to be saying something different in later posts.

I am much friendlier & softer when I "feign sincerity" and I would hardly call one post asking if the back and forth between the two of you wan sincere or not a "case"

It was and it was not.

G-Man, either sign up for a game and play it, or stop posting man titties, You can't have both.

As the sun rose after a peaceful night, weary travellers arrived at their destinations, and began to explore their new surroundings...

Day 1 has begun. You will be getting a PM about your new location (if you moved) within the next hour or so.

The poll will come up first. Those that voted for Prog will not be on the poll. One Civvie, one baddie, and one Indy role were told at the outset of the poll that this was a possible outcome of the Day 0 poll.

Long Con wrote:

-= Discovery =-

As the sun rose after a peaceful night, weary travellers arrived at their destinations, and began to explore their new surroundings...

Day 1 has begun. You will be getting a PM about your new location (if you moved) within the next hour or so.

The poll will come up first. Those that voted for Prog will not be on the poll. One Civvie, one baddie, and one Indy role were told at the outset of the poll that this was a possible outcome of the Day 0 poll.

HELL YEAH.

Epignosis and MattF in this game. This will be a hoot.

MacDougall wrote:Epignosis and MattF in this game. This will be a hoot.

Listen to the song I posted. Tell me what you think.

Epignosis wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Epignosis and MattF in this game. This will be a hoot.

Listen to the song I posted. Tell me what you think.

Dat bass

Epignosis wrote:

MacDougall wrote:Epignosis and MattF in this game. This will be a hoot.

Listen to the song I posted. Tell me what you think.

Cool song

Songwriting/pop sensibilities = -10/10

Musicianship and wankery = 10/10

So the guy's name is MetalMarsh but he just happened to vote prog here? Not buying it.

linki: Siberian Khatru is awesome btw, definitely one of my favorite songs ever.

That's prog.

Epignosis wrote:That's prog.

Heh I know

Is there a copy of the poll? One baddie was told of the poll "prize" so I'd imagine they could share that with their team?

Since Mac posted the same Matt stuff in this game as in dune I'll just repeat what I said there too:
I'm still digesting the Matt f/ Mac thing. I was a civvie tunneled by Matt last game so it's tempting to vote him but I'd definitely be waiting to see if something else comes up before I place my vote. I'd rather go with a legit suspicion but those don't always come out on day one.

Sorsha wrote:Is there a copy of the poll? One baddie was told of the poll "prize" so I'd imagine they could share that with their team?

Since Mac posted the same Matt stuff in this game as in dune I'll just repeat what I said there too:
I'm still digesting the Matt f/ Mac thing. I was a civvie tunneled by Matt last game so it's tempting to vote him but I'd definitely be waiting to see if something else comes up before I place my vote. I'd rather go with a legit suspicion but those don't always come out on day one.

Can you clarify? Matt had tunnel vision in the last game (which game?)? Was he a baddie in that game? Was he right or wrong about the player he was set on suspecting?

And how does that relate to his behavior in this game? Or are you punishing him for an earlier game?

I get if Mac (can I call you Mac?) is set on policy voting for Matt always (although I suspect him for that and don't agree with the concept of policy votes), but I really, really don't understand why you'd follow along with that. Please explain?

The feud between Mac and Matt feels trivial and unproductive imo.

The talking heads game.

I was civ, he's still alive in the game so his role isn't known. He tunneled me from my day 0 vote for days. Adding pretty much everything I did to his list of "things that make Sorsha bad." he did the same thing to others. His thing is just coming up with completely outlandish theories that really only make sense to him and not letting go.

And I'm saying that if nothing else comes up as suspicious I could see myself possibly voting for Matt to spare us that in this game. It's entirely unpleasant and really ruins the game. I'm not sure how many other civvies were tunneled by Matt during that game (or others that he's done it in) can attest to that.

If he says he's not going to tunnel players and act like he did in the TH game then fine. I really have no problem with him. We'll see how this day goes.