Mafia 96 - Murder in Emerald City (Game Over!)
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Ckd, NO I was not saying he must be vermillion. I was saying that I don't think he's as likely to be cerulean therefore he's less likely to be scum AT ALL. This is plain as day. YOU are adding the assumption that I think Lowell is some sort of scum despite it being DIRECTLY CONTRADICTED BY THE POST.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
If you're not going to meta, just look for misrepresentations, loaded questions, and trying to paint changes of opinion as "backtracking", together with shouting "he's so obv scum!" for reasons backed by the first three.SpyreX wrote:I'm not gonna meta. Not my style yo'.
However, I do want an answer. What is the connection?#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
You're not going to get it. I approach the game in terms of probabilities and likelihoods. I never rule scenarios out, I just change my estimates. So, if you ask what I was thinking, you're going to get a lot of "more likely" and "probably", becausecuriouskarmadog wrote:please try to avoid terms like "more likely"..I want a concrete answer today.that's what I was thinking.
I thought Lowell had a decent (around 50%) chance of being scum when I started the wagon on him. When the wagon reached L-1, and Lowell claimed, I unvoted then took a hard think and realized that Lowell didn't really make sense forcuriouskarmadog wrote:When did you think Lowell was scum?
When did you stop thinking Lowell is scum and why?
What brand (ver or Cer) did you think he was and when.eitherkind of scum. So I didn't revote.
I am historically pretty bad at guessing scumteams, but since you asked so sweetly and nicely I'll do some. I was guessing that we had 1 Cerulean and 2 Vermillion left. In that scenario, Lowell would be unlikely to be Cerulean; that would give the scumteams a power role imbalance. So if he was scum, he was probably Vermillion. After the wagon formed, andevery single other player I thought likely to be scumwas on Lowell, I decided that Lowell as Vermillion was unlikely too; it's a stupid place to bus. Thus, he was probably town. Since then, the 1 Cerulean and 3 Vermillion scenario, which I was considering fairly unlikely, has gotten (relatively) more likely. In that scenario Lowell is probably Cerulean, with three Cerulean power roles balancing four Vermillion goons.
It wasn't a scum/town list. It was a town/unsure/scum list withcuriouskarmadog wrote:one last issue I have a problem with...the back track on stance....When I read "maybe town" "maybe not town", I took that as a scum/town listnobody in the scum category. The first group is the people who I was reasonably sure were town ("town"). The second group is the people who I wasnotreasonably sure were town ("maybe not town"). There was nobody who I was reasonably sure was scum, thus, no third group. Really, I am utterly failing to see why you are having trouble with this.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
curiouskarmadog wrote:I'm giving you the chance to pick the game which will demonstrate your point the best. If you don't want to, I'll just pick one randomly.
I was trying to be totally fair to you by waiting for your answer to my question about which game I should look at. I guess the answer is Mafia 86, looking now.curiouskarmadog wrote:Hey Xyl don’t yell at people for not meta-ing if you are not going to do it, any reason you are not checking up on my games like you said you were? Again, you are trying to discredit me by pushing lies, but you never really checked did you?#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
First thing I notice, immediately, is that the person you are attacking in those quotes of yours ("Empking") is town. So, after two games of accusing someone of being scummy for "backtracking" and having them come up town, you haven't learned anything? Noted.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Funny, I'm not seeing that attitude here. You just assume I'm saying something I'm not and immediately start attacking over it. Why the difference?curiouskarmadog in Mafia 86 wrote: I dont want to misquote you or assume you are saying something you are not#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Hmm. I'm past the bit where the fight with Empking is. I was looking for loaded questions but didn't really see any, the closest I found was this:
But the person he's questioningcuriouskarmadog in Mafia 86 wrote:so there is a blatant connection between Stef and BA....Stef (like you) attacked me yesterday for my hammer, without knowing Pop's alignment. BA throws up shitty logic in attempt to "partially clear" Stef today...but you think I AM more worthy of a vote than BA?
care to explain why?didjust change vote to CKD, so there's no question about the truth of the premise.
Compare to this game:
This is the logical fallacy of the loaded question: a question which can't be answered without implicitly accepting a false premise.curiouskarmadog wrote:you are back tracking and contradicting to the extreme yourself to avoid this lynch, why?
Now compare to Frogs Mafia, where curiouskarmadog was scum:
curiouskarmadog wrote:keep trying buddy...or are you going back to the "it wasnt 100% fool proof" back pedal?
CKD seems to be very fond of using loaded questions when he's scum.curiouskarmadog wrote:do you usually misrepresent facts in other games?
CKD, care to explain your use of loaded questions here? Or better yet, find a case of your using this particular logical fallacy as town, so we can compare.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
AndWickedestjr wrote:Vote: Xyl
The last page, I have gotten a scum read on him.this, ladies and gentlemen, is why I try to ignore attacks on me if I can. Too many people view the simple act of defense as scummy and don't even realize they're doing so.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Ahem.curiouskarmadog wrote:will answer Xyl posts then....but have a feeling he will keep avoiding my points by bringing up old games...once I demostrate that I do something as town, he tries to find something else...Xyl, when i demostrate that I always ask what you call "loaded" questions as town or scum, what are you going to say?...(oh know, another "loaded" question you will avoid).. Xyl you cant avoid the truth of the question by calling it loaded...
LOADED QUESTIONS ARE A LOGICAL FALLACY. CHECK WIKIPEDIA.
If you feel the need to use a logical fallacy to support your case, you must not feel your case is good enough to stand on its own without them, eh?
But sure, find me an example of a loaded question you used as town. I'm waiting.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
So he's probably not Cerulean, and probably not Vermillion. What does that make him?Wickedestjr wrote:
I doubt he's Cerulean, he pushed for the Mastin lynch day one even after Mastin claimed.Xylthixlm wrote:Current working hypothesis: SerialClergyman and Faraday are Vermillion together. I'm unsure whether curiouskarmadog is Cerulean, or whether Lowell is Cerulean and curiouskarmadog is Vermillion. In either case Lowell is not the best lynch.
I'm just pointing out that curiouskarmadog is making a case using a "scumtell" that he should know is invalid. I know CKD's case is bullshit here, the only question is if it's bullshit because CKD doesn't know any better than to use bogus scumtells and logical fallacies, or if it's bullshit because CKD is scum and using them deliberately.Wickedestjr wrote:
How is this game different from the fourth or fifth game that CKD has done this?Xyl wrote:First thing I notice, immediately, is that the person you are attacking in those quotes of yours ("Empking") is town. So, after two games of accusing someone of being scummy for "backtracking" and having them come up town, you haven't learned anything? Noted.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Wait wait wait wait. This is totally backwards. There are four possibilities: Both me and Lowell are scum, only I am scum, only Lowell is scum, and neither of us is scum. You say that Lowell is more likely to be scum than me, which means that you must think "only Lowell is scum" is more likely than "Only I am scum"*. But then you play up the possibility of "Only Xyl is scum" and dismiss the possibility of "Only Lowell" is scum.SerialClergyman wrote:However, I think we'll be just as likely to hit scum and we'll have more information if we lynch Lowell. If we lynch Xyl and he flips scum, it's possible he was just buddying Lowell and trying to ditch the responsibility of leading the town astray. But if we lynch Lowell and hit scum (Vermillon) then I think we can definitely understand this derailing that Xyl is doing.This doesn't make logical sense.
I think you are setting up to lynch Lowell, and then if he flips town, you're going to say I was just buddying up to him and turn around and try to lynch me.
So, right now, pick one. Either I am more likely to be scum than Lowell, or it's more likely that Lowell is scum without me than vice versa. Choose.
*
Chance that Lowell is scum = chance we're both scum + chance only Lowell is scum
Chance that I'm scum = chance we're both scum + chance only I am scum
Chance Lowell is scum > Chance that I'm scum -->
Chance we're both scum + chance only Lowell is scum > chance we're both scum + chance only I am scum -->
Chance only Lowell is scum > chance only I am scum#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Mmmhmmm.SerialClergyman wrote:Your cases are weak and your defences are weaker.
Tell me, do you think that pointing out that the person attacking you is using a logical fallacy is a weak defense?#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
SerialClergyman wrote:So, right now, pick one. Either I am more likely to be scum than Lowell, or it's more likely that Lowell is scum without me than vice versa. Choose.
If you would be more sure about me being scum on a Lowell scumflip than vice versa, then you think it's more likely I am scum without Lowell than vice versa. That isSerialClergyman wrote:I think, therefore, that I'd prefer the second scenario, because I think I would be more sure about you being scum on a Lowell scumflip than Lowell being scum on a Xyl scumflip.notthe second scenario. It's the first. You think I'm more likely to be scum than Lowell is.
So vote me.
Xylthixlm wrote:Tell me, do you think that pointing out that the person attacking you is using a logical fallacy is a weak defense?
Really.SerialClergyman wrote:Yes, I do.
Do you think that fallacious arguments are still valid?#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
I've invited curiouskarmadog to rephrase his questions without the fallacy, and I'll answer them. I'm still waiting there.SerialClergyman wrote:You find a part of the argument that's a logical fallacy and then dismiss everything about it without tryign to get to the gist of the argument.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Obviously you don't work in percentages, since you've gotten the math totally wrong.SerialClergyman wrote:
This statemtent isn't logically true. You are mixing up the stages.
Say A has 60% chance of being scum. (totally arbitrary percentage, I don't work in percentages)
Say B has 60% chance of being scum.
At the moment, there is no difference between A and B in terms of who to lynch.
Now say, if you knew A was scum, you think B moves to a 70% chance of being scum with A.
But if you knew B was scum, you think A has a 90% chance of being scum with B.
That means that now, if you lynch B, you will be able to confirm scum more powerfully, making B's lynch better now.
Let's say A and B have the same chance of being scum. Some portion of that is the chance that both are scum, which is the same for both of them, for obvious reasons. That means the remaining part, the chance that each of them is scum without the other, mustalsobe the same. It's totally symmetrical. If you know that one is scum, the chance of the other one being scum based on that knowledge must be the same in either case.
Work it in the other direction. If A being scum means that B is very likely to be scum, that means that the chance of A being scum without B is low relative to the chance of both being scum. If B being scum doesn't mean that A is very likely to be scum, then the chance of B being scum without A is not low relative to the chance of both being scum. But the chance of both being scum is the same in either case; so the chance of B being scum without A must be high relative to the chance of A being scum without B. Which means that B must be more likely scum than A.
So, since you say "I would be more sure about you being scum on a Lowell scumflip than Lowell being scum on a Xyl scumflip.", logically I must be more likely to be scum than Lowell from your point of view. Vote me.
In math.
Let X be the case that A is scum, and Y be the case that B is scum.
"It's more likely that B is scum given A is scum than it's likely A is scum given B is scum".
P(Y|X) > P(X|Y) [Given]
P(Y & X) / P(X) > P(Y & X) / P(Y) [Definition of conditional probability]
P(X) / P(Y & X) < P(Y) / P(Y & X) [Invert both sides]
P(X) < P(Y) [Multiply through by P(Y & X)]
"It's less likely that A is scum than that B is scum."#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
What if I pointed to a game where I didSerialClergyman wrote:So if you're telling me that you read his question and didn't get that surge of frustration at being wrongly accused and didn't want to go out and prove him wrong when he says you were backpeddalling and contradicting yourself and instead just thought well the question is phrased in an invalid way so I'll pretty much ignore the issue entirely, then yeah, that's dead scummy to me.exactlythis as town? Would that change your opinion on the scumminess?#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Hmm. Now you're misrepresenting my arguments. Fixing:
rofl, remember when you thought I was scum in some other game? (this was not an argument, it was an attempt to jog roflcopter's memory)
ckd, I notice every time you asked a loaded question to someone, you've been scum. (therefore ckd is likely to be scum now as well)
I've done that as town before (therefore it doesn't prove I'm scum)
Funny, those aren't bad logic.
I already gave you a link to the game: Frogs Mafia. In it, the exchange basically goes like this:SerialClergyman wrote:If you gave me a link of you doing it as town then I'd consider it less scummy
CKD makes an attack on me that contains a bunch of loaded questions.
I ignore the questions.
CKD complains that I ignored his questions.
Much excitement over whether ignoring questions is scummy.
Now, there aretwo, count them, two important points here.
First,I was town in Frogs Mafia. Therefore this is part of my town meta, and more importantly, CKDknowsit is part of my town meta, a fact which he is conveniently ignoring. Does this prove I'm town? No, but the fact that I'm behaving the same way this game sure as hell doesn't prove I'm scum. The fact that he is ignoring meta information that he knows also suggests that CKD is arguing in bad faith, therefore scum.
Second,CKD was scum in Frogs Mafia. And he is doing all the same things in this game that he did as scum in that game. Does that prove he's scum in this game? No, but it's damn suggestive.
No. Nothing of the sort. I did not use "today" or "tomorrow" anywhere. I will repeatSerialClergyman wrote:Xyl - if I followed your logic correctly, and God knows there was a lot of it, I think you're trying to separate the chance that either of you is scum from the chance of further scum finding tomorrow.just the conclusionin bold letters so you cannot missunderstand it. (On the theory that bold letters help understanding, I guess.)
If you think that Lowell being scum implies my being scum, but Lowell being town does not imply my being town, then I am more likely scum than Lowell.
Quite simple.
Now, you can think that maybe I'm scum and making up bullshit here. But if I am, you should vote me. If I'm not, then my logic is correct (really - I was a math major and I'm very good with probability). My logic means that, if you really believe that Lowell being scum would imply my being scum but not vice versa, you should votemeand not Lowell. Is this totally clear?
No, it's not, because you don't want to vote me. Why not? Because Lowell is at L-1, and you want to get him lynched today, because you know he's not part of your scumteam. But you want to insist that even if he comes up town, I could still be scum, so that you can get a mislynch tomorrow. You aren't willing to give up either of those, because they go against your goals as scum, even though they're logically contradictory.
Prove me wrong. Vote me.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
And if you're going to ask for a specific post where I ignored a question, well, that's going to be a tough request becauseignoring a question doesn't result in a post. But this post shows some of the resulting argument, and should make it pretty clear that I don't answer some kinds of question when I'm town.
Note for SpyreX: I'll be happy to debate you for why ignoring loading questions is not scummy on theoretical grounds, if you'd like. I can also go into whyaskingloaded questions is a scumtell. Although I bet you can figure that one out yourself.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Also, please add "bad logic" and "strawman" to the list of reasons I'm voting SerialClergyman. Although he and CKD are doing a damn good job convincing me they're both scum.
Faraday hasn't done anything to make himself scummier lately, though. Where is he?#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
I'm not asking to be lynched. I'm just pointing out that SerialClergyman's claimed beliefs are logically inconsistent, and therefore unlikely to be genuine.
Again, for reference, the three statements that were logically inconsistent (all in the same paragraph no less!) are:
SerialClergyman wrote:However, I think we'll be just as likely to hit scum and we'll have more information if we lynch Lowell. If we lynch Xyl and he flips scum, it's possible he was just buddying Lowell and trying to ditch the responsibility of leading the town astray. But if we lynch Lowell and hit scum (Vermillon) then I think we can definitely understand this derailing that Xyl is doing.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
I'm also waiting for SerialClergyman's explaination for why I would bus a scumbuddy to L-1 and then try to derail the lynch.
For extra points, explain how this could be consistent with my "no bussing" meta.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
So... you won't vote me because you think I'm scum.SerialClergyman wrote:I'll be damned if I let one of my top suspects tell me who to lynch
I can dissect the rest if anyone (other than SerialClergyman and curiouskarmadog) cares, but I think that right there is enough to prove that SerialClergyman is spouting bullshit.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
SerialClergyman: Ah, but I know I'm town. I just have to hope that the rest of the town is competent.
Anyways, keep on with your plan to get Lowell lynched. He's at L-1, just a push away, why give up a sure thing? Oops, I guess SpyreX unvoted. Well, you still have a chance there, you only need two more votes. You must be too afraid to lynch me first because when I come up town people will think maybe I was right. So keep on insisting that we're both scum, and then if Lowell gets lynched and he comes up town (or maybe Cerulean) you can turn around and say that hey, Xyl is still scum, let's lynch him next. It'll still work as long as no one believes me! So keep on trying.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Which attacks are you calling "weak"?Wickedestjr wrote:No, I am voting you because of all your weak attacks of CKD during pages 80 and 81.
Wickedestjr wrote:I don't see how a townie would benefit from randomly choosing evidence to use.That's why I gave him a chance to pick.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
If it's what I think, let me just summarize the case again, and you can tell me if it's weak.
- CKD's attacks on me in this game contain loaded questions, which according to Wikipedia is a logical fallacy.
- CKD has definitely used similar attacks, including loaded questions, in a previous game where he was scum.
- CKD has not shown any cases of him using similar attacks in any previous game where he was town.
#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Looking through every game CKD has played as town would be a poor use of my time, and if CKD doesn't pick I have no reason to pick any one game over another. So I'd just pick one. ("Random" here doesn't mean selected by chance, it means selected arbitrarily.)
I asked CKD to provide a town example and he hasn't. I'm assuming that's because he can't.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Looking through ckd's posts for quotes for Wickedestjr. Just found this about roflcopter:
Interesting. So CKD, by this logic my avoiding questions is a null tell - you attacked me for it in Frogs Mafia and were wrong. Do you agree that it is a null tell?curiouskarmadog wrote:I have been down this EXACT same road with him before (exept maybe he posted more). I attacked him for spouting that "X is obv town"....I felt that it was scum motivated...I was wrong...his play is scummy to be sure, but for him, it is a null tell.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Your wish is my command.Wickedestjr wrote:I think it's a null tell. I have seen townies ask pretty stupid questions. I have asked some pretty stupid questions when I was town. Give me the three worst questions that CKD has asked in this game in your opinion, and that may change my mind.
curiouskarmadog wrote:KK, why are you in a rush to get the day over?curiouskarmadog wrote:you are back tracking and contradicting to the extreme yourself to avoid this lynch, why?
Again, compare those with this quote from a game where he was town.curiouskarmadog wrote:If you think he is scum of any variety, why is it a bad lynch? How is it protown to lead people away from a lynch of someone YOU THINK IS SCUM?
Does that seem like it's from the same player who is making wild assumptions and misrepresentations about what I said, and then immediately accusing me of contradictions without even trying to get clarification?curiouskarmadog in Mafia 86 wrote:I dont want to misquote you or assume you are saying something you are not#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Do you disagree that they're loaded questions?curiouskarmadog wrote:also, your attack of loaded questions is sad....it is a way for you to avoid answering my questions by attacking the question itself.
I've looked at every game you've asked me to look at. Namely, Mafia 86.curiouskarmadog wrote:How many games of my have you looked at when I have been town...please name the games.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
For reference the wikipedia definition of a loaded question isIt is committed when someone asks a question that presupposes something that has not been proven or accepted by all the people involved.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Xylthixlm wrote:Do you disagree that they're loaded questions?
Okay. So going by the definition I just posted, you are saying that everything presupposed by this quote has been proven or accepted by all the people involved? Is that correct?curiouskarmadog wrote:short answer...I attack the same way as scum or town. Do I think they are loaded?..nocuriouskarmadog wrote:you are back tracking and contradicting to the extreme yourself to avoid this lynch, why?#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Uh. IWickedestjr wrote:3: Has he said that he won't provide examples? I think that if you are going to pick a game randomly, then you should wait for him to say that he won't be posting any examples.didwait. What I said was thatif he didn't pick a gameI would pick one randomly. He picked one, so I used that. Pay attention.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
1. Go to the bottom of the page, where it says "Display posts from previous:".Wickedestjr wrote:When was this question asked? What post? Who was it directed at? I don't know much about it.
2. Click the "All users" dropdown and select curiouskarmadog.
3. Hit the "Go" button.
4. Search the resulting page for that quote. (Ctrl-f searches the page in many browsers.)#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
"just mis-repping somebody" isWickedestjr wrote:I don't think this question is so bad. If he was just mis-repping somebody, then they could clarify. (Instead of ignoring the question.)
I believe this question was directed at you. If yo really are town, then you must of had a reason to direct the lynch away from Lowell, even though you think he is scum. What is that reason?what a loaded question is. Why would a townie have any reason to be misrepresenting somebody? In the game CKD provided where he was town, he actually went to trouble toavoidmisrepresenting anyone. In this game he seems to be misrepresenting people deliberately. You don't think that's scummy? Really? Seriously? I don't even need meta here to say that misrepresenting someone is scummy.
I have said repeatedly that the reason I want to direct the lynch away from Lowell is that Idon'tthink he's scum! Or to be precise, that I think he's less likely to be scum than SerialClergyman. The fact that you think otherwise proves that curiouskarmadog's loaded question has done its job of confusing you.Thatis why loaded questions are so scummy: they confuse people about the truth.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
How scummy would you say Lowell was if I wasn't defending him?SerialClergyman wrote:Wicked, I've had Xyl gunning for me ever since his white-light moment backflip about Lowell and he's been practically daring me to vote him for days, but I keep coming back to Lowell, his really suspicious behaviour on the bandwagon yesterday and that neighbor crumb. Lowell has done absolutely nothing to try to quell any of that suspicion, and Xyl's defence of him only makes me more convinced that if they're scum together, Lowell is the more important one to lynch - we've already seen a roleblocker and a doctor, I'm sure there are other scum power roles out there and I imagine Lowell is one of them.
Given all of this, what makes you want to vote Xyl over Lowell?#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
No. That would be stupid, anyone could just check the meta themselves, like I keep encouraging people to do in this case.curiouskarmadog wrote:post and questions answered tomorrow.
since I have to go through my old cases....questions Xyl, have you ever attacked someone as scum using a meta you manipulated to serve your purpose? Will be checking....
Has anyone read Frogs Mafia yet? Anyone?#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Sum to 300% = I was guessing 3 scum left, each with a 100% chance of being somebody.
On iPhone, will respond with quotes later.
Saying something I'm not? Just look at your "you invited Lowell even though you said he's scum". I said that I thought he wasless scummyand that's why I unvoted him. Is your reading comprehension really that poor? I don't think so.
"Attack the same as scum as town"... Yeah right. I'm sure you try to the best of your ability. So does everyone. No one succeeds. Stop trying to claim you have no meta.
Maybe I'm not scum... Wait, so now I might not be misrepresenting your meta? Didn't you say I was?
Please answer the question about asking loaded questions in frogs mafia. Yes or no. I'll even take "yes but" or "no but".
Nope, I haven't pushed lurker lynches - the only person lurking who I don't have reason to think is town is Faraday. You'll notice he's on my list of scum.
What did you learn about my town meta on answering questions from frogs mafia?#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Mmmh. Well, they do seem to be loaded. On the other hand it seems like there's a difference between "You are backtracking" and "You are stretching" on one hand, and "You are backtracking and contradicting yourself to the extreme to avoid this lynch" on the other. You're much morecuriouskarmadog wrote:Mini 655 post 67, I felt Raider had been back tracking and was being scummy.
“Why are you back tracking now?”
My Post 58, Mini 688, I felt EA was scummy and stretching to push a case..I stated such.
“EA, why are you stretching so much?”
My Post 42 in California trilogy.
“seems to me that you are warping what really happened yesterday...why?”charitablein those quotes. Do you disagree?#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Let's read that first quote again.curiouskarmadog wrote:you and semantics again....let everyone read it..
curiouskarmadog wrote:
for the record, is lowell "unlikely to be cerulean" or "almost certianly Cerulean" In both posts, you feel that Lowell is not a good lynch...so please dont act like you didnt say itcuriouskarmadog wrote:Xylthixlm wrote:If Lowell is the last Cerulean, and is a neighbor, that would give the Ceruleans three power roles (doctor, roleblocker, neighbor). That's not impossible, butit's a little unlikely.That lowers my estimate of the likelihood that Lowell is scum enough to make me want to look elsewhere today.
.Xylthixlm wrote:
Even if you're convinced he's scum, if he isHayker wrote:/vote:Lowell
Sorry Lowell, ut I'm convinced that you are scum.he's almost certainly Cerulean.If that's the case then lynching him today isNot as bad as lynching a townie, but still bad.bad.
funny how you dont post your quote with you semantics defense. I will do it again for you,
first quote bolded.
first post you say that it is "unlikely" that Lowell is Cer, and "that lowers my estimate that Lowell is scum". If he is not Cer, he fucking must be Ver....and that lowers your estimate that he is scum., thus you dont want to lynch him. I am not misreresenting anything....are you trying to say now, that you werent trying to indicate that Lowell is ver in this post?
What do I say about Lowell's scumminess in this post? I say thatXylthixlm wrote: If Lowell is the last Cerulean, and is a neighbor, that would give the Ceruleans three power roles (doctor, roleblocker, neighbor). That's not impossible, but it's a little unlikely. That lowers my estimate of the likelihood that Lowell is scum enough to make me want to look elsewhere today.I don't want to lynch him because I don't think he's scum. Nowhere do I say that he's likely to be Vermillion, and in fact that idea contradicts what I've said in previous posts. You aremaking up a position for me that contradicts what I've actually saidand then accusing me of contradicting myself! That is incredibly scummy and you know it.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Lowell feels like frustrated town here.
Lowell: Take a closer look at Farady for the last Cerulean. He's lurking, which is a pretty good strategy if you're the last member of one scumteam and the other scumteam is caught in the spotlight.
Although honestly I can't say SpyreX isn't lurking.
And all the time hoping for another townie to jump in and help. Grrrr.Lowell wrote:He also gets points for being by far the most dynamic player in the past 10 pages or so, at times single-handedly pushing the discussion.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
Maybe the reason I'm not finding the breadcrumb compelling evidence is that I'm the one who found it, and the way I did that is start at page 1 and look for anything that looked like a breadcrumb by anyone. The chance of a false positive doing that is not negligible.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
I found this very interesting, because I had the same reaction to Wicked that SerialClergyman is accusing Lowell of. I thought he was totally obv scum, and then he claimed, and now I don't. So I looked to see what SerialClergyman said about Wicked to see if he had the same reaction and ... nothing. Serial didn't say much about Wicked, and what he did say gave the impression that he was just assuming Wicked is town.SerialClergyman wrote:Lowell's posts reek of convinience. When Wicked was unclaimed, Lowell found everything he did scummy. Now, not so much.
So I asked. SC's response is at least consistent with his interactions before.#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi-
-
Xylthixlm !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- !xmafia win
- Posts: 5414
- Joined: July 12, 2006
I didn't like it because people who were ringing my scumdar jumped on the wagon. Jumping on the wagon was not why they were ringing my scumdar.Kublai Khan wrote:@Xylthixlm: in post 1952 you condemn the Lowell bandwagon and SerialClergyman and Faraday in particular for "ringing your scumdar", yet you ignore that SpyreX jumped in between those two. Why?#mafia@irc.globalgamers.net
"Xyl was completely berserk" -dramonic
"Xyl's ruthless policy lynching won the game." -Vi