Mini 404: Diablo Mafia (Game Over)

[Zindaras]

With so much time in between posts, I feel that it's not bad to put a

Tentative Deadline

for

March 11th, 21:00 PM GMT+1

.

If posting picks up, I will remove the deadline.

[Skruffs]

Hey, votecount please!

[Zindaras]

Official Voting Update

:

TheJiveMachine

: 5 (DragonsofSummer, chaotic_diablo, Save the Dragons, Mr. Flay, Cogito Ergo Sum)

DragonsofSummer

: 2 (Thestatusquo, remussaidow)

chaotic_diablo

: 1 (livingod)

Not Voting

: 4 (Aelyn, Skruffs, TheJiveMachine, Cheesefan)

With 12 alive, it's 7 to lynch.

Deadline is March 11th, 21:00 PM GMT+1.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

I think Zindaras is telling us to lynch TheJiveMachine.

[TheJiveMachine]

I think Zindaras is telling us to lynch TheJiveMachine.

Have you posted any content yet?

[Save The Dragons]

I'm still voting you. And nobody seems to care. I guess that means you are town?

Hell no. I want to kill DoS. If I were a dayvig, he'd be six feet under. That's why I want to be a dayvig.

JiveMachine is more urgent for the lynch.

[TheJiveMachine]

Why exactly am I urgent for the lynch?

[Save The Dragons]

cuz you've got a wagon.

[TheJiveMachine]

If you switched your vote off me to DoS then I'd have just one more than him.

Unless you're just really in a hurry to end the day.

[Skruffs]

The day's ending one way or another - STD - That message was directed to cheesefan actually. Shhh. For all it's mattered we can pretend I'm voting you though
Jive do you want to get dos lynched to save your own butt or do you really think dos is scum?

[Thestatusquo]

TJM could be scum be my calculations, but I am fairly certain of DoS. I'd rather go with a certainty.

[DragonsofSummer]

You still have not given good reason for it though.

[DragonsofSummer]

EBWOP: Also where is that response you were supposedly giving to my last breakdown of my actions?

[chaotic_diablo]

I'd like to hear TSQ's breakdown.

[Thestatusquo]

I already gave one, originally in post: 232, and he continued to make less and less sense in the subsequent posts. All there is left is to respond to his very latest defense, which I have thusfar not had time to do.

[TheJiveMachine]

I think DoS is scum.

Vote: DoS

I think StD is playing either reckless or scummy. Leaning towards reckless.


I find it odd that DoS and C_D both 'missed' TSQ's breakdown post and also happen to be the two I most suspect. It could be coincidence, but it doesn't alleviate the scummy vibes I'm getting from either of them.

[chaotic_diablo]

I already gave one, originally in post: 232, and he continued to make less and less sense in the subsequent posts. All there is left is to respond to his very latest defense, which I have thusfar not had time to do.

Your orginal was your attack, and I thought your "breakdown" post was the one with the words "I'll break it down".

That post is off in a couple things. I'll break it down after the 28th, because I have two big tests then, and won't be able to contribute much until I am done studying for them.

The argument isn't over until all points are made or when someone refuses to go further.

I find it odd that DoS and C_D both 'missed' TSQ's breakdown post and also happen to be the two I most suspect. It could be coincidence, but it doesn't alleviate the scummy vibes I'm getting from either of them.

It depends on what "breakdown" is referring to.

You are in the same situation as DoS, I find it odd that you're stalling. If you really want to save yourself, then make a defense. I had a nice post with quoted posts for you to respond, yet you're are obviously trying to avoid them. It's extremely scummy to wait for another bandwagon to overshadow your own.

[Save The Dragons]

I think DoS is scum.

Vote: DoS

I think StD is playing either reckless or scummy. Leaning towards reckless.

The most important part:

I think you're scummier. Good try, though.

[DragonsofSummer]

TJM I didn't miss it. There was a reason I said to my

last breakdown

. You are putting words in my mouth at this point and that is extremely scummy. I never said anything about not seeing a breakdown.

TSQ you have been posting on the site since yesterday afternoon. I will admit that life comes first, but I would like you to make this a priority while you are on the site. I do want to know what you think is off in my last post so that we can talk about it and maybe start to understand each other.

[Skruffs]

I"m here and willing to vote (I won't say who for tho ) but there's no reason to end the day before someone is justifyable incriminatable.

[Mr. Flay]

I'm willing to believe it's possible we've got two scum squirming here, although it's not likely. I still prefer the TJM lynch though, because DoS seems to be making more "poor logic" mistakes and not explicitly scummy "bad logic". TJM's willingness to vote DoS to get the heat off his back only reassures me of this decision.

[Thestatusquo]

I'm willing to believe it's possible we've got two scum squirming here, although it's not likely. I still prefer the TJM lynch though, because DoS seems to be making more "poor logic" mistakes and not explicitly scummy "bad logic". TJM's willingness to vote DoS to get the heat off his back only reassures me of this decision.

I agree with this post except for the part "I do not think it's likely." TJM's post reeks of bussing scum to me, and I think I would be willing to lynch either of them at this point.

Look for my response around 6-7 oclock today. I will be able to devote serious time to mafia this weekend, and I will, as per request, make this game a priority.

[Thestatusquo]

I feel I explained well... Here I'll break it down again...

I FoS TJM for his post's statement

Proven by who? You?

because it seems like he doesn't care whether or not C_D has proven his point, (which at that point he had not, but he had some good evidence. You are attacking me for something that isn't even why I voted TJM by the way it just ended up being discussion)

1)`Answer me this, right now:

What proves points?

How is it possible to have evidence of something that is good without that something being proven?

It makes zero sense in a game of mafia to say "I like his evidence, but what he's saying is not true." That's like saying "Ye
s, you have provided me with a fully functional model, but I still do not believe you have proven that this new fangled invention, the car, exists."

2) Regardless of what you say you were attacking him for, for me, it boils down to this: He attacked CD for not proving his point. You semi-agreed semi-disagreed with him, and then attacked him, with very little basis at all. That's first off, second off I haven't even touched how blatently obvious it was that he was saying he hadn't seen him prove it yet, and TJMs post doesn't even begin to make sense in the way that you had interpreted it.

C_D provides no more evidence to solidify his claim, and STD calls me out on my FoS (which I explain why it stayed an FoS for so long earlier. But I will again. I wanted a response from TJM and I forgot about it because things in other games came up that I was dealing with in the interim, which is very much my fault.

1)The way you think things work in terms of proof are retarded. Why would x person, having provided "Good evidence." to back up claim y, then have to provide MORE evidence, even though claim y has already been supported? By your logic we have to keep providing more justification in every post we make. I don't think I need to explain how that is logically impossible.

2) I would like to make a BIG EXTENSION HERE.

Now, I would expect a town player, in any situation, to change off of a random vote to a non random vote very quickly. Townies on principle do not like the random voting stage, as it is, well. random, and often lets scum force a lynch which no one can really be blamed for the next day(I.E. Free lynch) THis means that I will be taking as an assumption that townies will try to place non random votes whenever possible. I know that's fairly true about me. Therefore, I eliminate this as a town action, because I do not see a single town justification for doing it.

A MAJOR part of my reasoning by suspecting DoS is my assumptions on how players approach the random voting stage. This goes STONE COLD DROPPED. No matter what DoS says about why he only FOSed her, it does not matter, because he has not responded to my analysis that townies and scum FUNDAMENTALLY have different approaches towards the random voting stage, and his use of the random voting stage MAKES NO SENSE if looked at through the lens of a townies set of motivations, but makes perfect sense through the lens of scum.



I vote TJM because he never answered me and STD reminded me.

The arguement of whether or not C_D has proven his point comes up here. Someone calls me on C_D proving his point, and as he did not give any more evidence it remained unproven. (The statemtent in my first post about liking his evidence more is what comes into play here).

Then I make this post:

You will have to notice that I didn't say he had proved his point. My point was that I liked Chaotic Diablo's evidence more at that point, and that the way you said it seemed like you wouldn't care if he had proved it. That looked extremely scummy to me.

Where I state that he hadn't proven his point, but three days earlier when I made my first post about it I thought he had some good points. But state again that my arguement against TJM isn't whether C_D had proven his point, but that even if he had it seemed like TJM didn't care.

Already addessed this sufficiently.

Then I state again that I agree C_D's point wasn't proven.

Now you are calling me on a discrepancy between the last two posts that doesn't exist, and you just keep saying that I'm not making any sense...

I believe I have already shown how there is an inherent discrepency between the two.

[Skruffs]

Bravo, Shea.

Vote : Dragons of Summer

Dosdos, you should claim or something. THere's still a few days left.

[DragonsofSummer]

TSQ:
The first part you talk about we will just have to agree to disagree because I know how I saw that statement, and you disagree with my assessment of it in the first place. We will not reach an understanding here no matter how hard either one of us pushes.

Your second point. You keep saying that I am using flawed logic, but I think it is just a problem of miscomunication between us. I will offer up something different this time to try to make it clearer what was going on.

In a hypothetical situation where two people are debating. Would you automatically agree with one of them because they provide a few pieces of good proof? Or would you wait to see how the other rebuts and then look for more good proof from the first person?

The latter is the type of person I am. So when I made my first post I was leaning more towards C_D's side, but by the time you are calling me a lier (on the next page and four days later) I have fallen back into a nuetral position because C_D does not get me to the point of convinced. So I agree that he has not proven his point. (This also adresses the discrepancy you are talking about).

Skruffs: If enough people want me to I will claim, but as of right now since you are the only one to request it, and I do not have the most votes on me (TJM still has one more than me) I do not want to have to do it yet. I am town, and I think the big problem here between me and TSQ is we have a fundementally different opinion of how to play the game.