Mafia 60: Face-to-Face - Game over!

[Adele]

Glrok, hop on the wagon! If, for some reason, he comes up town, you'll have lots of juicy info on Mgm and Adele. It's win-win.

This is a very suspect/dangerous attitude.

FOS: Cogtio Ergo Sum.

Although my comment wasn't really serious, I'll ask you to state the problem you have with that type of attitude. After all, hypothetically, if a mislynch were to give us two scums, then the lynch would certainly have been in the town's interest.

But even if I'm wrong and Thesp's a nice guy, I'm still not scum!

Why am I on Thesp? It started out with the undercontributing that everyone noticed, then he did some stuff that just didn't seem at all likely to be from pro-town motivations:

So your tossing out suggestions that its suspicious, but but distancing yourself from saying it's suspicious?

Explaning both sides of an argument does not equal scummy. Again your behaviour doesn't seem right. Do you care about finding scum? Not that I can see. You seem instead very eager on arguing with Pat here over precisely nothing.

This is from the post where I voted him. Prior to this I'd been reading and rereading, but this comment stood out as an example of someone looking to make trouble/have a discussion when I have real trouble believing he found anything genuinely suspicious/ discussionworthy in the orginal post (Pat's).
The analogy he presented to back up his case was a strawman. Just... "picking people out to try to undermine

and then

searching for something that can be twisted into problematic-y", rather than scum-huntery.

Now he's doing the same with CES; taking a sentence that doesn't have any real meaning - we aren't machines, we do post jokes and exagerations and offhand thoughts and whatnot - and turning it into something uber-sinister.

I think he's a Bad Man.

[Mgm]

That's a strange thing to say. Especially when MBL just went and asked about 5 questions to various people. I didn't see you having a problem with that. Not that there is a problem, but accusing me of asking too many questions is strange.

I didn't notice that about MBL. I guess that means an

UnPFOS

is in order.

[Mr Stoofer]

New Page Vote Count (unchanged)

Thesp: 5 (ChannelDelibird Cogito Ergo Sum Adele Mgm Zindaras)
Mgm: 3 (Glork Patrick Fritzler)
ChannelDelibird: 1 (Thesp)
Ether: 1 (MrBuddyLee )
Nightfall : 1 (Ether)

Not voting: Nightfall

Looking for 7 votes for a lynch!

[Thesp]

I recognize that it's more or less joking, but it sortof feels like you were hoping that I'd take the bait anyway. Even insinuating that we should lynch to try to set up two futrure lynches sets off my scumdar pretty hardcore. FoS: CES

I agree with the sentiment of this thought, though not on the "set up two future lynches" part.

This is from the post where I voted him. Prior to this I'd been reading and rereading, but this comment stood out as an example of someone looking to make trouble/have a discussion when I have real trouble believing he found anything genuinely suspicious/ discussionworthy in the orginal post (Pat's).
The analogy he presented to back up his case was a strawman. Just... "picking people out to try to undermine and then searching for something that can be twisted into problematic-y", rather than scum-huntery.

I could have sworn I'd acknowledged that the case was an exaggeration, and I'd explained how my FOS of him wasn't for "Explaning both sides of an argument" (which you had actually strawmanned

me

on), yet you're bringing it up again. That's odd. I also saw this which I've neglected to follow up on:

That's a really leading example; a bloody knife is bloody good evidence (reasonable man clause) the confusion much more quesitonable.

I agree that it's exaggerated to illustrate a point. What do you think of Patrick's consent to the validity of the exaggerated model?

I didn't interpret his response as agreement that your analogy was valid; I saw him consider the repsonse within the example valid, which is a different thing.

What did you think of his acceptance of the model I presented as a reasonable one? You interpreted his response as I did (though perhaps that didn't come across clearly enough in how I asked it of you), what do you think of it?

[Adele]

I could have sworn I'd acknowledged that the case was an exaggeration, and I'd explained how my FOS of him wasn't for "Explaning both sides of an argument" (which you had actually strawmanned

me

on), yet you're bringing it up again. That's odd.

Someone asked me to explain why I was voting you. I was answering.

I also saw this which I've neglected to follow up on:

That's a really leading example; a bloody knife is bloody good evidence (reasonable man clause) the confusion much more quesitonable.

I agree that it's exaggerated to illustrate a point. What do you think of Patrick's consent to the validity of the exaggerated model?

I didn't interpret his response as agreement that your analogy was valid; I saw him consider the repsonse within the example valid, which is a different thing.

What did you think of his acceptance of the model I presented as a reasonable one? You interpreted his response as I did (though perhaps that didn't come across clearly enough in how I asked it of you), what do you think of it?

Did we interpret it the same way? I'm not convinced; you still seem to think that he considered the "model" reasonable, I think he thought the action of one person within it reasonable. I could be wrong, you could be wrong, and I honestly don't think it matters. Why are you still obsessed with his response to your invalid analogy anyway? Are you so happy that he fell for it that you have to keep dragging it out?
If so, I'd be grateful if you'd actually show the flawed analogy next time you bring it up, so the town can see your shame anew.

I'm serious. It's easier for town to fall for craplogic than it is for town to present it, so if you're right, and he treated your invalid analogy as valid, that still reflects worse on you than him.
And, in the future, seperate your rhetoric from your arguments, and make your analogies as close to the situation you're mirroring, as exaggeration can completely undermine their validity.

[Patrick]

To clear this up, Adele is right, I thought the response of the person within the analogy was valid.

[Thesp]

Did we interpret it the same way? I'm not convinced; you still seem to think that he considered the "model" reasonable, I think he thought the action of one person within it reasonable.

That was how I understood it, that given the following exchange...

Q: Do you think Professor Plum killed Mr. X?
A: Well, some people would say the bloody knife he was caught with would indicate he killed him, but I'm not sure if he killed Mr. X or not.

...

A

's response is not scummy. Patrick, is that how you understand it?

Given that,

what do you think of Patrick's assessment? (I think it's patently absurd to think

A

's response is not scummy.)

Why the vitrol, Adele? You accused me of trying to make something of nothing, this sounds a whole lot like you're doing that with me.

[Thesp]

Hrm. This is all getting in the way of ChannelDelibird's scumminess.

[Glork]

Guys, I don't think Thesp is the play.

[Adele]

(I think it's patently absurd to think

A

's response is not scummy.)

In the context of others pointing at the bloody knife - which IIRC the equivalent was happening in this game - I'd say almost any response

other

than A's is scummy. He can't just ignore what everyone else is saying.

[Ether]

And here I am, whatever I said, making late and late-night posts without getting work (I still have it) done. Some things never change.

MBL: the false dilemma attacks were in other games; they connected people who remarked "he's either stupid or scum" to the well-known fallacy. Here and here are the two examples I've seen (especially the first one, where there's a big squabble over it later). I feel that his attack on Patrick is bullshit* (I'd strongly consider Patscum right now if Nightfall turns up scum, but that's unrelated

and Thesp is either stupid or the third scumbag for painting his case this badly

), but nonetheless along those lines. The singlemindedness is also, er, Thespian, judging by 289, although he did change his mind much, much later in the day. I'm empathetic over his hesitation after Andrew's role was revealed; I was stunned when IH came up town, and that was

without

a fully-fledged three-person conspiracy already on my mind. (Until Thesp's 710, I was under the impression that his Channelscum/MBLscum/Nightfallscum thoughts on Day 1 revolved almost entirely around AndrewScum. Right now I would like him to clear up how much of it did.) His behavior around the IHvig did bother me, but that was the worst of it.

"Meh" is "meh" is "I understand that there are pushes against Adele which you would probably like me to address and I do not have objections to these, but I do not have anything original to say on this subject and I find Mgm scummier if pairings are not brought into play." I understood the "agreement" statement (I did post shortly after Adele's clique remark) and was aiming for specific post numbers.

Please clarify what "significant effort" refers to if you want to know if I find it scummy in particular.

CES and Fritzler, I haven't even tried to read. Glork is probably town. MBL is probably probably town. Zindaras is probably probably probably town. (More "probablies" dilute it.) None of these people are particularly interesting to me (beyond the whole awesomeness-of-Zindie-and-Glork factor) or particularly in need of my interest, and my conscience has bothered me on worse matters than this paragraph.

To be clear then, I'm not pushing a case against MgM based on weird day one posts/not paying attention. As I said before, that wasn't terribly suspicious in my eyes.

Some ppl argue that scum are less likely to pay attention, but I'm not sure about that.

If it's a scum tell, it's a weak one at best.

Without the struck-through quote, he's answered the question of whether or not he thinks it's a scum tell. I don't think the addition of the struck through sentence, "Some ppl argue that scum are less likely to pay attention, but I'm not sure about that", is accidental - he's trying to add extra suspicion on Mgm. Why bother adding that sentence? He's already made his point.

Don't think for a second that speech is accidental.

*I feel that the knife case has the wrong focus. "Bloody knife" and "caught" are evidence in themselves;

they

draw attention, not the mention of the opinions of "some people." Popular opinion needn't be brought up there at all to raise a reader's eyebrow. You imply that you wouldn't have a problem with Patrick's statement if the struck-out sentence wasn't there, but he brings up Mgm's failure to pay attention elsewhere anyway, and that mention's not something that especially bothers me.

[Patrick]

Q: Do you think Professor Plum killed Mr. X?
A: Well, some people would say the bloody knife he was caught with would indicate he killed him, but I'm not sure if he killed Mr. X or not.

...A's response is not scummy. Patrick, is that how you understand it? Given that, what do you think of Patrick's assessment? (I think it's patently absurd to think A's response is not scummy.)

A's response in not scummy. I think it's patently absurd to suggest it is. I feel that this is generally a distraction from finding scum.

[Patrick]

Ether - I'm not sure how you've managed to link me to Nightfall. You claim he showed a double standard between my defence of Andrew and yours, even though several other people have apparently done the same thing. That suggests that there was actually a difference, and not a double standard being applied at all.

[Zindaras]

Unvote

I now officially hate the difficulty of finding scum in this game.

[Mr Stoofer]

Vote Count

Thesp: 4 (ChannelDelibird Cogito Ergo Sum Adele Mgm)
Mgm: 3 (Glork Patrick Fritzler)
ChannelDelibird: 1 (Thesp)
Ether: 1 (MrBuddyLee )
Nightfall : 1 (Ether)

Not voting: Nightfall Zindaras

Looking for 7 votes for a lynch!

Although the discussion level is good, no new votes have been placed in the last 2 days. So I'm thinking that a deadline is probably necessary to keep the game moving again.

[ChannelDelibird]

Post within 24 hours.

[Patrick]

Although the discussion level is good, no new votes have been placed in the last 2 days. So I'm thinking that a deadline is probably necessary to keep the game moving again.

Unvote, Vote: Adele

Unvote, Vote: Mgm

[Glork]

What Patrick said.

I want MGM or Adele killed dead today. Period. I'm at the point where I don't think I'd even support a Thespwagon for the sake of attaining a lynch. If we have to NL, so be it.

[Adele]

O joy. So we've basically made no prgress whatsoever?

Hands up, everyone who thinks I'm a poopyhead

[MrBuddyLee]

Any of you wagonny types... I think we're far enough into the game that if you're going to do that kinda shit, you should still accompany your votes with reasons.

For example, I foresee votes moving off Thesp right about now and I wanna know if that's because you don't find him scummy anymore or because you don't think he's lynchable today and are looking for a compromise target.

[Mgm]

What Patrick said.

I want MGM or Adele killed dead today. Period. I'm at the point where I don't think I'd even support a Thespwagon for the sake of attaining a lynch. If we have to NL, so be it.

If Thesp isn't going to get lynched I want to see you dead. Difference is that I am realistic, I am willing to compromise unless the alternative target is not on my suspect list. You can't always have your own way. Quit pushing and start reasoning.

[Mgm]

That should have said, not even remotely near the top of my suspect list.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

You do realize, Glrok, that a no-lynch would seriously undermine a roleblocker's usefulness? We should strive to lynch as many people as possible. Besides, Thesp is scum. Maybe Adele and Mgm are bussing him?

[Patrick]

You do realize, Glrok, that a no-lynch would seriously undermine a roleblocker's usefulness? We should strive to lynch as many people as possible. Besides, Thesp is scum. Maybe Adele and Mgm are bussing him?

That's not really how the posts felt to me.
MBL - What do you think of Mgm?

[Adele]

OK. Say Stoof sets a deadline. What do we do then?