Newbie 922: Day 3

[Panacea]

We're lacking in Rayness... *pines*

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls... Dyin' time's here.

Listen all! This is the truth of it. Fighting leads to killing, and killing gets to warring. And that was damn near the death of us all. Look at us now! Busted up, and everyone talking about hard rain! But we've learned, by the dust of them all... Bartertown learned. Now, when men get to fighting, it happens here! And it finishes here! Two men enter; one man leaves.

Thank you.

Well, you said Lawls had been acting contrary to the town's interests. Do you infer he's mafia from that? That's what I want cleared up.

No, not yet. I kind of think he may be sincerely just... erm... let's say scummy by nature? Whoa, I need to check out that finished game!

So it occurs to me when I realize I've totally forgotten about Lawls in all this (and he's not helped me remember by not being present *cough cough*) that that could very well have been the point. Hmm...

Well, just a sec. In my last game, Thesp argued that a player with a vote left by the end of the Day would do best to cast it somewhere to move the game. He had some pretty good points. Later I learned he was scum... I should ask him about that.

Is this comment directed at anyone in particular? It reads as if you're thinking out loud.

Open, my apologies: is that accurate? I need to ask him that, or if it was a scum tactic...

unvote, FoS: cojin

because I'm way too lazy to check the vote count

Calling someone out post-Panacea...hm....thoughts, Ms. Panacea?

You mean it

isn't

obvious that I was going "WATCH ME ATTEMPT TO PERFECTLY MATCH THE META THAT PANACEA PUT FORTH IN SUCH AN OBVIOUS AND DELIBERATE FASHION THAT IT IS RIDICULOUS" in those posts?

Also, if you are going to ask somebody else their thoughts, you better be prepared to share your own.

What do

you

think about it, bub?

I think it could be something scummy as much as it could not be. Yes, he could have been matching the meta I laid out, or he could be acting on his own play patterns. I'd give you more than that, but I think it's far too delicate to judge standalone, you know?

Grr. Yes, I suppose that's a correct statement. ( DISLIKE meta!)

What do you dislike about it? Like I said, there are two sides to it...

Have you considered the thought (ha ha, I'm so sure you have) that setting up townies to meta each other could be a decent scum tactic? For instance, let's say everyone lynches me tonight, and I flip scum. You meta'd me, with the conclusion of a more-likely-town-than-scum feel. It wouldn't be too hard to lead a mislynch on you D2 if you're town. Paranoia? Probably. This thought leads me back to Bridges, who first mentioned meta, but never applied it. Small point, but at least it's in black and white (pixels).

@ Bridges: What's your favorite way to treat a scumbuddy?

Not sure what the danger is - scum will avoid being called out by RayFrost?

I suppose, yes. Now I imagine he has to change it up a little. Sorry, Ray.

Votecount
Lawls - 2 (Cojin, Acosmist)
Cojin - 2 (RayFrost, havingfitz)
Acosmist - 1 (Lawls)
Panacea - 1 (ElementaryFermion)
Elementary Fermion - 1 (Nachomamma8)
Nachomamma8 - 1 (BridgesAndBaloons)

Not Voting - 1 (Panacea)

With 9 alive, it's 5 to lynch

[Lawls]

You know what I can't play games on this site big step up from where I usually play.

Unvote Vote Lawls

[Panacea]

You know what I can't play games on this site big step up from where I usually play.

Unvote Vote Lawls

Please withdraw your vote? I'd very much like you to hang around MS. This is a great place to learn. I'm sorry this game has been a newbie-nightmare. Will you please consider replacing out here and trying one more newbie game before you give up on this site? I promise it can be a fun place. Or hang in a while longer? Elementary already woke us up to the need to make this game more newbie-friendly.

[Lawls]

You know what I can't play games on this site big step up from where I usually play.

Unvote Vote Lawls

Please withdraw your vote? I'd very much like you to hang around MS. This is a great place to learn. I'm sorry this game has been a newbie-nightmare. Will you please consider replacing out here and trying one more newbie game before you give up on this site? I promise it can be a fun place. Or hang in a while longer? Elementary already woke us up to the need to make this game more newbie-friendly.

I don't see the point my first game was horrible as well

[Elementary Fermion]

You know what I can't play games on this site big step up from where I usually play.

Unvote Vote Lawls

Please withdraw your vote? I'd very much like you to hang around MS. This is a great place to learn. I'm sorry this game has been a newbie-nightmare. Will you please consider replacing out here and trying one more newbie game before you give up on this site? I promise it can be a fun place. Or hang in a while longer? Elementary already woke us up to the need to make this game more newbie-friendly.

I don't see the point my first game was horrible as well

C'mon Lawls, that's even worse talk than I was doing. Things have just started to get interesting!

[Acosmist]

You know what I can't play games on this site big step up from where I usually play.

Unvote Vote Lawls

Answering one or two questions every 48 hours was too much of a burden?

[havingfitz]

Executive summary: I have a remarkable proof that havingfitz is wrong which this margin is too small to contain.

Not trying to argue with the summary again (see comment below)...but what is the remarkable proof I am wrong...and what am I wrong about? The points I am making towards Cojin? If your remarkable proof is your comments quoted in the post below...I would say your proof is anything but remarkable.

And in honor of Acosmist (and Nacho)...a summary: Acosmist and I disagree in regards to Cojin’s scumminess.

I am not a fan is correct. How does your defense of Cojin exhibit reluctance?

There you go again, arguing with the summary.

I said why my defense is reluctant. There are non-scummy reasons for Cojin to be posting as he does. There are scummy reasons as well. I don't want to ride to his defense and posit all the non-scummy reasons, because he may not be innocent. Further, it's really a person's task to defend himself. Cojin should tell us what he meant by things and defuse the attacks on him himself. Even so, those attacks have not been argued well and I'm ready to dissect them. So, I see attacks on Cojin that are wrongheaded, so I defend him, but it'd be ideal for him to provide some explanatory notes and defenses himself, so my defense is reluctant.

I did not argue with the summary...I asked you to explain a comment you made within it. How is asking for clarification arguing?

I am in agreement with Cojin that Lawls is scummy.

Detente! Excellent.

Sort of...though I should have said Cojin is in agreement with me.

I’m the source of the meaning?

Yes, you are, because Cojin never exhibited the contradiction you seem to think he did. Panacea expressed an opinion about L-3 that was belied by her subsequent actions. Cojin called her on this anomaly. Cojin never took a stand on whether Panacea's opinion was good or bad; he took a stand against the contradiction between her statement and her action. What Cojin actually thought about L-3 or L-2 was not revealed

until he expressed shock that so many votes accumulated on Panacea

. Nothing he did before or has done since has contradicted that attitude.

I disagree.

WTF? Would you say a large part of this game is to interpret the actions and comments of other players? For me the answer is yes and that is what I am doing with Cojin. So yes I am the source of the meaning as it is my interpretation of Cojin’s words and actions.

Your interpretation depends on reading Cojin's mind.

How do you derive your interpretations...assuming you use interpretation in mafia to begin with.

He didn’t exclaim when people (Lawls and EF) were put at L-3 by Pan but did when she was put at L-3 (actually L-2) by Edprata.

As I said, he's not estopped from ever expressing shock at L-3 or L-2 situations just because he didn't before.

We disagree.

I see an inconsistency with the way he treated both situation. He called Pan out for her behavior and then basically did the same thing he called her out on.

No, he certainly did not. Panacea made a categorical statement about L-3, then acted in a way contrary to that statement. Here's what Cojin said (emphasis mine):

Wow have we seriously put

her

at l3 already?

Cojin did not express shock that we put anyone at L-3, but that we put Panacea at L-3.

That should warn you against leaping to the conclusion that Cojin thinks all L-3 situations at that point are bad. Maybe it was something about the Panacea case that shocked him. That'd be a pretty common opinion - more than one of us has pointed out that the case against her was garbage.

What? You say he did not express shock that we put anyone at L-3....but that we put Pan at L-3. What? Pan falls under the category of anyone for me. As do Lawls and EF whose placement at L-3 did not get the same response.

Is my interpretation of Cojin correct? I don't know. But it's at least as plausible as yours. The doubt I retain in my mind is something I don't see in your case, although the attitudes you ascribe to him are just as doubtful.

At least as plausible? Fine.

Uh...I read Cojin’s posts fine. His ISO 2 and 3 posts were cr@p and he still hasn’t answered my questions.

Nope. You misread the grammar, which he corrected in the next post. You haven't been reading carefully. You accused him of not paying attention; well, tu quoque.

Fitz, “No he didn’t.” Acosmist, “Yes he did.” Fitz, “No he didn’t.” Acosmist, “Yes he did.” Fitz, “No he didn’t.” Acosmist, “Yes he did.”

Please stop -->

I’m not dismissing anything. If anything I am doing the opposite of dismiss in regards to Cojin’s gameplay so far. Are you dismissing his play?

You're dismissing his points when they aren't expressed in the more coherent way.

I decoded the gibberish;

now you can't ignore his points. Continuing to dismiss them because he's not the best writer is wrong.

Actually...your ‘decoding’ doesn’t really help his comment any and he has still avoided answering my questions from the post where he ‘explained’ (unsuccessfully IMO) his previous comments. But at least you agree it is gibberish that required an effort to decode.

Well...considering Cojin quotes me and paraphrases me in his assessment/vote of Lawls...no, I don’t disagree. I’m just not as impressed with his scumhunting efforts towards Lawls as you are.

I am not nominating him for the Scumhunting Navy Cross or anything.

High five.

So in summary...if Cojin does something positive he gets a point, but if he does something scummy like spread a misconception...just gloss over it?

Uh, no. If he does something positive, he gets a point. If he does something scummy, we don't put our fingers in our ears and pretend the positive thing never happened.

Don't misrepresent me. That's a massive, massive warning sign for me.

A massive, massive warning sign? That sounds ominous. I’ll explain again and hope it catches this time. You felt the need to give Cojin a point for making a good comment. OK. I pointed out in his next comment that he should have a point removed for making a bad comment. Totally unrelated to the good comment point you awarded. You gave him a point for good. I took a point away for bad.

I disagree...him responding to a question by reiterating minor accusations he took from someone else is not applying pressure. It’s weak participation.

Pretty sure Cojin had original thoughts about Lawls.

How would you know? His first mention of lawls is in the post he votes for Lawls...in which he derives his suspicions from comments I made...which he quotes within that same post. So once again...how would you know Cojin had original thoughts on Lawls? Your comment would require “reading Cojin's mind.”

Call away. My opinion is that if he isn’t making sense (and his ISO post is...once again...cr @p) he’s talking gibberish and not bringing anything to the game.

I translated what he said. It's time to stop hiding behind the gibberish canard.

There is nothing misleading about my opinion. Your translation made more sense than his comments but does not remove the fact that Cojin’s posting is often gibberish, IMO. I’m not a fan of reading what someone says and trying to piece together what they intend to say. I don’t seem to have the same issue with the other 7 players in the game.

I think what Acosmist is saying is that getting something wrong (innocently) does not change the fact you got something right earlier.

[many words]

If Cojin leads us to a correct lynch, but only because it was his partner and not because of his analysis, then his point in retrospect was not deserved at all. This I believe to be the point Acosmist was making.

Yes. You get it! Perhaps havingfitz thought my explanation was gibberish, and thus of no relevance.

It’s enough we have to wade through multiple screens worth of your long winded, bombastic posts without you adding a dash of smartass.

[havingfitz]

You know what I can't play games on this site big step up from where I usually play.

Unvote Vote Lawls

I am inclined to think this self-vote is more town throwing in the towel than it is scum throwing it in.

Still happy with my Cojin vote.

[Elementary Fermion]

Executive summary: I have a remarkable proof that havingfitz is wrong which this margin is too small to contain.

Not trying to argue with the summary again (see comment below)...but what is the remarkable proof I am wrong...and what am I wrong about? The points I am making towards Cojin? If your remarkable proof is your comments quoted in the post below...I would say your proof is anything but remarkable.

Google Pierre de Fermat.

Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et generaliter nullam in infinitum ultra quadratum potestatem in duos eiusdem nominis fas est dividere cuius rei demonstrationem mirabilem sane detexi.

Hanc marginis exiguitas non caperet

. (emphasis added)

I see an inconsistency with the way he treated both situation. He called Pan out for her behavior and then basically did the same thing he called her out on.

No, he certainly did not. Panacea made a categorical statement about L-3, then acted in a way contrary to that statement. Here's what Cojin said (emphasis mine):

Wow have we seriously put

her

at l3 already?

Cojin did not express shock that we put anyone at L-3, but that we put Panacea at L-3.

That should warn you against leaping to the conclusion that Cojin thinks all L-3 situations at that point are bad. Maybe it was something about the Panacea case that shocked him. That'd be a pretty common opinion - more than one of us has pointed out that the case against her was garbage.

What? You say he did not express shock that we put anyone at L-3....but that we put Pan at L-3. What? Pan falls under the category of anyone for me. As do Lawls and EF whose placement at L-3 did not get the same response.

There is a rule against making universal generalizations based on an existential instantiation. For instance (keeping with my American football analogies), I am upset when The Steelers (one of 32 NFL Franchises) loses The Superbowl (one of several NFL Playoff Contests). From this you cannot validly conclude that I am upset when

any

NFL Franchise loses

any

NFL Playoff Contest. To the contrary, it makes my heart sing to see the Dallas Cowboys lose

any

NFL Playoff Contest (or indeed any game of any sort). Acosmist is pointing out that Cojin expressed shock at A SINGLE OCCURRENCE and that it is not logically permissible to extend that to EVERY POSSIBLE OCCURRENCE. Stop arguing about it; he's right.

You know what I can't play games on this site big step up from where I usually play.

Unvote Vote Lawls

I am inclined to think this self-vote is more town throwing in the towel than it is scum throwing it in.

Still happy with my Cojin vote.

This is good reasoning; as an until recently frustrated townie, I understand exactly what Lawls is saying.

Of course, he could be a genius and playing us all, but I doubt it.

[Acosmist]

Stop arguing about it; he's right.

This will pretty much apply to my next reply to havingfitz.

[Panacea]

You know what I can't play games on this site big step up from where I usually play.

Unvote Vote Lawls

I am inclined to think this self-vote is more town throwing in the towel than it is scum throwing it in.

Still happy with my Cojin vote.

This is how I read it. As a rule, I tend to find Kamakazi votes scummy, but as far as my personal experience goes, Lawls's breaks the mold:

- He has what, two votes on him? (Mobile- can't check.) If there was more pressure and we knew it was inevitable, I'd be more worried about his motivations.

- His reasoning, his own abilities, better suits town-intentions (as much as a townie going suicidal can) than if he'd said "Well, you're gonna lynch me anyway!"

- Eheh. I considered leaving this game, too.

[havingfitz]

I see an inconsistency with the way he treated both situation. He called Pan out for her behavior and then basically did the same thing he called her out on.

No, he certainly did not. Panacea made a categorical statement about L-3, then acted in a way contrary to that statement. Here's what Cojin said (emphasis mine):

Wow have we seriously put

her

at l3 already?

Cojin did not express shock that we put anyone at L-3, but that we put Panacea at L-3.

That should warn you against leaping to the conclusion that Cojin thinks all L-3 situations at that point are bad. Maybe it was something about the Panacea case that shocked him. That'd be a pretty common opinion - more than one of us has pointed out that the case against her was garbage.

What? You say he did not express shock that we put anyone at L-3....but that we put Pan at L-3. What? Pan falls under the category of anyone for me. As do Lawls and EF whose placement at L-3 did not get the same response.

There is a rule against making universal generalizations based on an existential instantiation. For instance (keeping with my American football analogies), I am upset when The Steelers (one of 32 NFL Franchises) loses The Superbowl (one of several NFL Playoff Contests). From this you cannot validly conclude that I am upset when

any

NFL Franchise loses

any

NFL Playoff Contest. To the contrary, it makes my heart sing to see the Dallas Cowboys lose

any

NFL Playoff Contest (or indeed any game of any sort). Acosmist is pointing out that Cojin expressed shock at A SINGLE OCCURRENCE and that it is not logically permissible to extend that to EVERY POSSIBLE OCCURRENCE. Stop arguing about it; he's right.

Your NFL analogy doesn't work because fans of teams are just that...fans of teams and they don't feel the same way towards other teams. Other than Panacea towards Ray...I don't think anyone in here is a fan of another member (except perhaps scum for their partner). I've made my opinion known regarding Cojin's shock and it isn't going to change. As I doubt either of your is so it's not worth thrahsin out longer (though I have a feeling someone will want to). There is no right or wrong here. Cojin's actions are suspicious to me.

Stop arguing about it; he's right.

This will pretty much apply to my next reply to havingfitz.

<shudder> Is Cojin really worth this much debate? I think a single exchange between us on this matter has exclipsed his entire input to the game. Do you have an objective in this debate? To clear Cojin? To make the horse deader? Let's agree to not agree.

- Eheh. I considered leaving this game, too.

Why? Was it the wall posts?

Oh...and

FoS on Panacea

for piggy-backing on the town feel some have towards Lawls self vote.

[Elementary Fermion]

Your NFL analogy doesn't work because fans of teams are just that...fans of teams and they don't feel the same way towards other teams. Other than Panacea towards Ray...I don't think anyone in here is a fan of another member (except perhaps scum for their partner). I've made my opinion known regarding Cojin's shock and it isn't going to change. As I doubt either of your is so it's not worth thrahsin out longer (though I have a feeling someone will want to). There is no right or wrong here. Cojin's actions are suspicious to me.

There is no wrong or right regarding your suspicions. Perhaps your pancakes were burned this morning, and so you now find RayFrost suspicious. Whatever. What you are entirely incorrect about is making universal generalizations based on existential instantiations. That is a logically invalid operation. Google it, or take a logic course, or simply listen to me. You can not do that.

The fact that NFL team fans are indeed fans has no bearing of any sort on the analogy. What I did was present a specific instantiation, and then showed how it was obviously incorrect to conclude based on a universal generalization. You cannot go from specifics to generalizations. Well, your gut can, but logic cannot. Acosmist was pointing out the logic of the situation, and I have a feeling that you were responding with your gut. That's fine; just make it clear lest it be made clear for you.

[Panacea]

Why? Was it the wall posts?

Partially, somewhat because this is the most decidedly unenjoyable game of which I've ever taken part (despite valiant efforts to the contrary, lest I neglect credit). But mostly it was drek like this:

Oh...and

FoS on Panacea

for piggy-backing on the town feel some have towards Lawls self vote.

[Nachomamma8]

Vote first, pretext later, right?

I like to do that sometimes. If someone just attacks a vote you've cast seemingly without any reason, there's a good chance they're scum. If you've had a town read on them for a while, and they follow your vote with little/no reasoning, you might want to rethink your town read. If they do nothing but question as Panacea did, then it's a bit of a null-tell, but it does show they're not believing that the vote is out of place.

Angry like:

That?

So, when you change your vote, one can assume you've found a good reason. And if you've found a good reason, then one could assume you've found a good reason to believe that the person whose vote you switched to was scum. And since the feeling of pegging scum is the greatest feeling in the world, one could most definitely you wouldn't be bored if you had pegged scum, unless that nonchalance was feigned.

If you need clarification, I can provide it.

Waiting eagerly for some Ray/B

[Nachomamma8]

Waiting eagerly for some Ray/BaB responses.**

And Lawls, this isn't a game for everyone. So, if you truly don't want to play, I urge replacing out as opposed to hurting whatever alignment you're playing for...

[havingfitz]

Waiting eagerly for some Ray/BaB responses.**

And Lawls, this isn't a game for everyone. So, if you truly don't want to play, I urge replacing out as opposed to hurting whatever alignment you're playing for...

Agreed...Lawls, if you have lost interest in playing this game you should request a replacement rather than contribute (more than you already have) to your role's demise.

[Cojin]

Responding to prod reading now

[Cojin]

Acomist is right on what i was going with, Having fits is dead wrong.


Having fits i seem to be so hardcore locked in your sights as def scum, what are you going to do when you find out im town? I mean even your FOS seems like a rage post to me. You attack me throughly for the exact same thing laws is doing yet Compleatly ignore him. you said so yourself "His wagon is bigger so he is prob less likely to be scum" Scince when is that a valid statment. If anything lawls is scum and you are his buddy.

META

I draw scum tunnels [/b] End meta

Fos Havingfitz

Oh im having trouble uploading an avatar btw

[Cojin]

uploading MsPaint avatar XD

[Lawls]

replace me then IDC

[havingfitz]

Acomist is right on what i was going with, Having fits is dead wrong.


Having fits i seem to be so hardcore locked in your sights as def scum, what are you going to do when you find out im town? I mean even your FOS seems like a rage post to me. You attack me throughly for the exact same thing laws is doing yet Compleatly ignore him. you said so yourself "His wagon is bigger so he is prob less likely to be scum" Scince when is that a valid statment. If anything lawls is scum and you are his buddy.

META

I draw scum tunnels [/b] End meta

Fos Havingfitz

Oh im having trouble uploading an avatar btw

Why don't you try explaining what you meant to say again and not leave it up to others to make sense of it for you. If you are town I will look for scm from the group of players who are contributing vastly more thoughtful and frequent posts. You yourself have not exactly been the strongest proponent of your play...why should others be different? Since when is my interpretation of the way Lawls' wagon grew not a valid statement (aka consideration)?

What exactly are you trying to point out in your

Meta

attempt? And which FoS (of the two I have made) do you consider a "rage post?" I do not see rage in either of them (or any of my posts IMO).


Also...Lawls...if you do want to replace out...you probably need to bold the request and address it to the Mod.

[havingfitz]

Acomist is right on what i was going with, Having fits is dead wrong.

Also Cojin...could you provide more detail on what it is I said that you are considering to be dead wrong? And while you are at it...could you answer the questions I had for you here?

[havingfitz]

OK...just got around to a closer read on a page or two that had been glossed/skimmed over due to RL, other games, and reading all the chapters from Acosmist's postings.

Elementary...just noticed your FG analogy. FYI...it was not pertinent to the situation you were using it for, but that subject IMO is not worth further comment.

In your IC slam...what were you expecting from this game? An ongoing Mafia 101 lesson? If you have a question I, and I'm sure the other IC or SE quilified players, will be glad to answer. There is benefit to just participating and experiencing the game with us that goes beyond asking specific questions and providing pointers. I think your gameplay has definitely picked up and brought some life into the game and other than perhaps early infrequent posting, you seem to be doing just fine.

That said...I answered a question you had specifically for me, and have not seen any response from you. Did the response clear up your question?

[Lawls]

Replace me please mod