Mini 416 - AM Mafia - Game Over D:

[Ripley]

*_*_*_* Vote Count - 6:10:01 AM *_*_*_*

“Thomas Edison invented the light bulb because he thought sleep was a waste of time. But he was a 10-hour sleeper -- six hours a night and two, two-hour naps during the day.”
~ Mark Rosekind "

Panzerjager -2- (PBuG, Fircoal)
Thestatusquo -2- (CoG888, Jingolaw)
Fircoal -1- (Thestatusquo)
Not voting -4- (Panzerjager, Elias_the_thief , bird1111, Ripley)

It takes a majority - or

5

, to lynch.

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Thirdly, I never said I was staying away from the MG wagon I simply would have prefered a PBuG lynch. There was no one, myself included, wanted to spend the time to test MG's claim.

You did, say that you thought MG was town, and that's all you would say about it.

Vote: Panzerjager

er, i believe he actually said that he thought they were both nuetral. i dont think he said anything about him being town.

This is in danger of being buried by all the posts about tsq. I agree with Elias, I can't find where he said MG was town either. Fircoal, you put a fast third vote on here, can you please say where you got this from?

As for tsq - seems like he's demanding that people provide reasons why he would stage a post-restriction stunt as scum but not as town, while himself failing to offer any reason why he would do it as town but not as scum. Like the onus is all on us, and I don't see why that should be. He was the one who, at the very least, has wasted our time and needlessly cluttered the thread with strings of tiny posts, for no better reason than his own amusement. Once he has claimed that he would lie to us over a prolonged period, and with no possible benefit to us, why would we believe anything he says again? How do we know that he's not lying now? It's not hard to think of reasons why he could have been post restricted yesterday but not today.

[Elias_the_thief]

Elias,

You really feel I avoided discussion day1? You really feel I didn't address points and make some of my own? I even went to the lengths of quadruple and quintuple posting to get around that. You're completely missconstruing my d1 actions.

oh, im not saying you contributed nothing. you did successfully try to teach Nai a little, as well as fully explain a post restriction which you in fact, did not have.
regardless of what you did contribute, you could have have contributed much more had you not faked a restriction. and furthermore, you complained because you wanted to make an in depth post, but you couldnt because you had a post restriction. even if you're not scum, youre not really helping us out much either. did you honestly expect us to just accept that you lied and move on? the possibility of ensuing confusion was inevitable and completely predictable, and yet you went on anyways for a little bit of fun.

but all TSQ crap aside, i too would like an answer out of fircoal.

Thirdly, I never said I was staying away from the MG wagon I simply would have prefered a PBuG lynch. There was no one, myself included, wanted to spend the time to test MG's claim.

You did, say that you thought MG was town, and that's all you would say about it.

Vote: Panzerjager

er, i believe he actually said that he thought they were both nuetral. i dont think he said anything about him being town.

This is in danger of being buried by all the posts about tsq. I agree with Elias, I can't find where he said MG was town either. Fircoal, you put a fast third vote on here, can you please say where you got this from?

[PJ.]

Alright, I want an answer from Fircoal too, since thats what the cool kids are doing.

On TSQ, I fully believe Shea is both bored enough and ballsy enough to fake a post restriction if not for his pleasure but Skruff's pleasure. Have guys thought that the post restriction wasn't the challenge he wanted? It could be this right here. Defending himself against LAL. For all we know he is part of a band of gimps that are trying to revolutionize mafia by destroying the Lynch All Liars tactic. So what I'm trying to say is he could be telling the truth and I'm afraid if he did this with a power role. But I will throw one thing out there, the last time I saw TSQ lie he was scum. Isn't that right, "Liu Kang"?

Revolutionize Mafia? Sounds tempting... ~ Mod

[Thestatusquo]

I don't think using a mod given false claim is exactly lying, or for that matter, particularly damning here. My argument is not that town players lie, and scum do not. It's that ALL players lie.

Also, to address something else:

As for tsq - seems like he's demanding that people provide reasons why he would stage a post-restriction stunt as scum but not as town, while himself failing to offer any reason why he would do it as town but not as scum. Like the onus is all on us, and I don't see why that should be. He was the one who, at the very least, has wasted our time and needlessly cluttered the thread with strings of tiny posts, for no better reason than his own amusement. Once he has claimed that he would lie to us over a prolonged period, and with no possible benefit to us, why would we believe anything he says again? How do we know that he's not lying now? It's not hard to think of reasons why he could have been post restricted yesterday but not today.

1) You know nothing about arguments. The onus

IS

on you, because you're the one making the positive assertion. That's how arguments work, the person making a positive claim has the burden of PROOVING it.

Since you are making the positive claim "TSQ is scum." YOU are the one that needs to provide reasons why that is true. If you can't, then the assertion falls.

THIS IS WIDELY ACCEPTED EVERYWHERE. Just look at wikipedia, ask anyone who does debate. Anything. It is logically impossible to prove a negative.

2) This is also true in the context of a mafia game. You have to prove why I am scum, if you do not, then there is no reason to vote me. Asking people to prove they're NOT scum is nonsensical, as if you asked all of us right now, we'd all be able to do basically nothing, and it would be wifom anyway, because we all could have done those things for the purpose of looking town.

3) There are a lot of things which have no benefit to the town, and yet are not scummy. A good example is recently I played (and won) a noobie without reading my role PM. This was obvious detrimental to the town, in theory, but you certainly can't tell alignment from it. This is the same way. Unless there is a reason scum would do what I did, there is really no reason to vote for it.

4) Your understanding is wrong. I made the PR completely up, I was not PRed yesterday at all.

These are not the droids I'm looking for? O RLY? Thanks for the advice, but I'll leave my vote where it is.

The statement was a half claim, not arrogance. But that seems lost on you. I'm sorry if my breadcrumbs go right over your head.

[TBuG]

Panzer

- I don't reember getting overdefensive, what I DO remember is you fishing.

TSQ

- Damn, you're good.

All

- TSQ lies, both as town and scum, get used to it. LAL is not a valid argument, protown people lie all the time.

Gasp, Fircoal misremembered something. It happens.

[Ripley]

1) You know nothing about arguments. The onus IS on you, because you're the one making the positive assertion. That's how arguments work, the person making a positive claim has the burden of PROOVING it.

Since you are making the positive claim "TSQ is scum." YOU are the one that needs to provide reasons why that is true. If you can't, then the assertion falls.

THIS IS WIDELY ACCEPTED EVERYWHERE. Just look at wikipedia, ask anyone who does debate. Anything. It is logically impossible to prove a negative.

This sounds like a prerehearsed argument tsq had prepared in readiness for people claiming he was scum, and he didn't like to have it go to waste. I didn't claim anything of the sort. If anybody's making positive claims here, it's tsq, who is claiming "TSQ is innocent despite having lied to everybody all through Day 1". (If you're

not

claiming this, please clarify.) So, you are the one who needs to provide reasons why that is true. According to your own logic.

Your understanding is wrong. I made the PR completely up, I was not PRed yesterday at all.

No, your understanding is wrong. I know that's what you're

claiming

happened. My point was, why should we believe you? When a player has openly admitted to lying throughout Day 1, don't you think their subsequent credibility is damaged? Once you're established as a liar, it's just as likely that you were telling the truth yesterday and lying today (as opposed to the other way round). And for all we know, you'll pop up tomorrow and say that both yesterday's story and today's story were lies, and that the challenge you set yourself for Day 2 was to see if you could fool us two days running.

[Fircoal]

Thirdly, I never said I was staying away from the MG wagon I simply would have prefered a PBuG lynch. There was no one, myself included, wanted to spend the time to test MG's claim.

You did, say that you thought MG was town, and that's all you would say about it.

Vote: Panzerjager

er, i believe he actually said that he thought they were both nuetral. i dont think he said anything about him being town.

This is in danger of being buried by all the posts about tsq. I agree with Elias, I can't find where he said MG was town either. Fircoal, you put a fast third vote on here, can you please say where you got this from?

I believe it was on page 7-8.

As, for TSQ, I believe that making up the PR doesn't make him that scummy. Thought I argee with Ripley, that is makes it seem like he'll do it again. Also, but how would be fool us today without claiming scum?

[Thestatusquo]

1) You know nothing about arguments. The onus IS on you, because you're the one making the positive assertion. That's how arguments work, the person making a positive claim has the burden of PROOVING it.

Since you are making the positive claim "TSQ is scum." YOU are the one that needs to provide reasons why that is true. If you can't, then the assertion falls.

THIS IS WIDELY ACCEPTED EVERYWHERE. Just look at wikipedia, ask anyone who does debate. Anything. It is logically impossible to prove a negative.

This sounds like a prerehearsed argument tsq had prepared in readiness for people claiming he was scum, and he didn't like to have it go to waste. I didn't claim anything of the sort. If anybody's making positive claims here, it's tsq, who is claiming "TSQ is innocent despite having lied to everybody all through Day 1". (If you're

not

claiming this, please clarify.) So, you are the one who needs to provide reasons why that is true. According to your own logic.

No, you're dumb. It's not a prerehersed argument, it's TRUTH. Like 3 people have said that I am scum for the lying (that's what LAL MEANS, tard.)

Second. I do not have to make any positive claims to my innocense. No one does. Thats not how claims work. Unless there is a reason for someone to do so, no one ever HAS to defend the statement you made. The only reason one would have to make the claim "TSQ is innocent." is if it were being contested.

Third: Even if that were true: I HAVE ALREADY DONE THIS. I have already shown, quite conclusively I might add, that I lie as town, and therefore lying is not a scumtell for me. I have also argued that there is no logical reason why scum would do what I did, which is somehting you have ignored.

Your understanding is wrong. I made the PR completely up, I was not PRed yesterday at all.

No, your understanding is wrong. I know that's what you're

claiming

happened. My point was, why should we believe you? When a player has openly admitted to lying throughout Day 1, don't you think their subsequent credibility is damaged? Once you're established as a liar, it's just as likely that you were telling the truth yesterday and lying today (as opposed to the other way round). And for all we know, you'll pop up tomorrow and say that both yesterday's story and today's story were lies, and that the challenge you set yourself for Day 2 was to see if you could fool us two days running.

Um...Are you really saying that you think that I am lying and I really have a PR? Because I think if so then it's the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

Furthermore, no one should ever have credability in a mafia game. mafia is a game of deception.

[TBuG]

Nai, where do I say the case is based on Fluff? I in no way have endorsed M_G, but have endorsed CoG due to liking his view on things, except for the fluff bit.


About MG posting, I simply did not like why he voted for Nai and don't agree that my logic was along the same lines as him. Are logic was very different and attacked different parts of the post, as has been point out by Elias I believe. Currently, I like the explanation given by Elias and am going to FoS MG later in this post.

Why are you voting me MG? If you are trying make a connection between us your doing a good job. And I don't mind since you happen to be a one shot vig. I also don't believe the town should direct the vig, but will throw in my two cents if it comes down to that.

On this current incident with PBuG and the MG claim. I don't think MG is looking at the right thing about PBuG. I don't believe he subclaimed vig, I believe PBuG just said he was the House Telephone. I'm sure we all have house phones at are homes, so I'm going to give my take on it. It doesn't seem to me that the Home Phone is a work related object because it you can call in sick and if you don't not run your buisness from your house(which our "owner" does not) it is not used for work. It is not sleep because it rings and can wake him up interupting his sleep. The reason I believe the cell phone is because he can use his cell phone for work and bring it to work. The one shot works because if we was going to call in sick he could simply turn off the cell phone. House phone, to me at least, sounds like a neutral. Take this for what you will. Remember that mods around here(MS) tend to make games unbreakable by mass claim. I'm not going to vote PBuG but I would like a response, not a claim necessarily but a little explanation.


To sum this up,

Unvote, FoS:MG and PBuG

This might be the post Fircoal was talking about. Panzer heavily infers that he thinks MG is town.

[Thestatusquo]

No...He FOS;s him.

[TBuG]

Which conflicts with what he said earlier in the post.

[Thestatusquo]

No, actually. Read the posts you quote. He makes three points AGAINST massive in that post.

[PJ.]

Exactly, thank you shea. I was never with MG.

I was just throwing the Liu Kang thing as a point to grasp for any takers. For now, My thoughts of you are pro town, as the post said.

[TBuG]

No, actually. Read the posts you quote. He makes three points AGAINST massive in that post.

I should. Damn, I fail.

[Thestatusquo]

Which is a point I do not understand the merits of arguing...Wouldn't it be better to be with MG than against him, at this point? Someone explain this argument to me.

[PJ.]

Well, consistency. Better to be wrong then inconsistent. Another reason is because PBuG case in a nutshell is how I am connected with MG and CoG which he pushes with fluff and terrible arguement. I still feel he is scum. I'd bet my life on it.

[Thestatusquo]

Well, saying someone is connected with a protown player is, to me, a non argument.

[PJ.]

Grats, you follow good logic. I agree it simply because PBuG's terrible logic is a case in and of itself.

[IH]

I'd just like to say I was which is why I didn't post this earlier but...

bah go town!

I believe IH was referring to this.

[TBuG]

My only faulty logic has been your connection to MG. All of my other logic is incredibly valid.

[CoG888]

Logically, I agree with you, panzer. TSQ is making my head hurt. perhaps we will be more enlightened about him tomorow, so for today,

unvote

[CoG888]

ebwop

unvote TSQ

[PJ.]

Nothing you have said beside my connection to CoG during the TSQ is faking as an Alarm Clock thing. Everything else has been either False, terribly thought out, or both.

[TBuG]

Nothing you have said beside my connection to CoG during the TSQ is faking as an Alarm Clock thing. Everything else has been either False, terribly thought out, or both.

...What? I'm confused. Alarm Clock?

[Elias_the_thief]

im kind of lost in all this talk about who accused who and whos logic is faulty. i'll have to do a reread so I remember who actually said what, exactly. right now im just posting to assure you that im still alive. i'll try to make some sense of this stuff tomorrow.