Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Urist Imiknorris]

I know my opinion on it- I want to know yours.  Enlighten me.

The benefit of Plan Eradicate was the removal of a potential LyLo breaker from the game. Now I want to know your opinion.

I would say that mis-extrapolating the number of votes to hammer (6p yesterday = 3 to hammer, thus...) is more forgivable than forgetting that a player is dead concurrently with demanding an explanation from the person who hammered him.

Yes, because you did it and not me.

You keep making this about who. It isn't - it's about what.

In the technical sense, yes.  It hardly excuses it.

I fail to see how it needs excusing.

UI:  That's another reason why I wanted him online to do it- to give him less time to think.

You assume he'd default to trusting you.

What else would he do?  Say "LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU?"

Not trust you because of what usually happens if something is too good to be true. Really, the basic assumption behind your gambit is so naive it's stupid. The question is, if you didn't realize that, why not? You're not that terrible at Mafia that you'd assume scum would trust a townie to explicitly hand him the game. And if you did realize that, what was the point of doing it, other than to confuse the hell out of me for a few minutes while pretending to be productive?

[Leafsnail]

Unvote.

Leaf:  Can you give more detail on your failed martyrdom?  Do you die if there are no other kills?  Do you die if there is another kill, but it was protected against?

I assumed I wouldn't die if there were no other kills.  I'll go confirm with webadict though.

Leafsnail: Yes, I'd have been okay with having my kill lost, because a) I'd be too dead to care, and b) it wouldn't change the number of chances for town to kill scum (one eradicate + one lynch minimum vs. two lynches minimum).

It would've been one lynch actually since you dying would've left us at 4p.  But whatever.  I'd've still probably waited till day.

Toaster: You seem to have sprung to life finally now that your name has appeared in red and you've realised we've chosen to lynch.  Where were you before?  Like, on any day?  Urist I's assessment of your game seems pretty accurate, yet you decided to ignore it and attack him (presumably hoping that Book would hammer him) with really weak reasoning ("You made a mistake that could be construed as similar to one you accused me of making earlier", a dumb thing about the eradicate plan we've already been over, "apologizing for killing town" (whatever that means) and copying my reason).

[Bookthras]

Imiknorris: please clearly restate your role, abilities, night actions you've performed, results you've received.

Leafsnail: Toaster asked you before, and you failed to answer: please give details of your attempts at martyrdom, why you tried them, and why would you choose them over your other actions.

Toaster: You had a chance to act N1, why didn't you? In hindsight, who should you have acted upon?

[Urist Imiknorris]

Imiknorris: please clearly restate your role, abilities, night actions you've performed, results you've received.

I am a False Recurring Nightmare Retired Wolf Hunter. My only ability was my eradicate. Night 1 I noned, night 2 I also noned.

[Leafsnail]

Leafsnail: Toaster asked you before, and you failed to answer: please give details of your attempts at martyrdom, why you tried them, and why would you choose them over your other actions.

I tried to do it night 1 and night 2 because having no deaths trumps having a death (IE we'd get more lynches) and if I died and revived it would to some degree confirm my role.  The only other option I have is not doing anything, and while that would deflect kills off me it would still result in someone dying, thus making it an inferior choice.

I've now heard back from Webadict and I only die and revive if there's a kill for me to prevent.

[Urist Imiknorris]

Toaster, I'm curious why you're not voting me if I'm your top suspect.

[Toaster]

UI:

I know my opinion on it- I want to know yours.  Enlighten me.

The benefit of Plan Eradicate was the removal of a potential LyLo breaker from the game. Now I want to know your opinion.

Why the rush to remove a LYLO breaker when it's your own?  Don't try to tell me you weren't in a rush; you were trigger-happy to remove Tiruin.

My opinion is that I want to understand your thought process behind your actions there.

I would say that mis-extrapolating the number of votes to hammer (6p yesterday = 3 to hammer, thus...) is more forgivable than forgetting that a player is dead concurrently with demanding an explanation from the person who hammered him.

Yes, because you did it and not me.

You keep making this about who. It isn't - it's about what.

In the technical sense, yes.  It hardly excuses it.

I fail to see how it needs excusing.

Who or what, I still don't like the disparity.

Again, if you're so concerned about using it, why not about losing it?

UI:  That's another reason why I wanted him online to do it- to give him less time to think.

You assume he'd default to trusting you.

What else would he do?  Say "LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU?"

Not trust you because of what usually happens if something is too good to be true. Really, the basic assumption behind your gambit is so naive it's stupid. The question is, if you didn't realize that, why not? You're not that terrible at Mafia that you'd assume scum would trust a townie to explicitly hand him the game. And if you did realize that, what was the point of doing it, other than to confuse the hell out of me for a few minutes while pretending to be productive?

Okay, if he didn't trust me, what would he do as town?  Scum?  What's your read on him anyway?

Toaster, I'm curious why you're not voting me if I'm your top suspect.

I voted you to make a point- it being made, I unvoted you.  Since I'm pretty confident Book is town and fairly sold on you being scum, there's no reason to not vote you, especially if you want to insist.

Urist I.


Leaf:  I haven't been giving this game the time and attention it deserves, and my poor activity reflects that.  Both previous days the hammer came when I either rereading or getting ready to do so.

I don't see anything from UI about my activity that merits a response other than a repeat of what I said the previous paragraph.  Did I miss something?

My case on UI is a mix of what I've already stated, gut, and me not really suspecting either you or Book.


Book:  If I had acted, that would have prevented my revive.  I chose to have a revive instead of the fairly weak at that point ability to steal a vote.  In hindsight, I'd make the same decision.

[Urist Imiknorris]

Why the rush to remove a LYLO breaker when it's your own?  Don't try to tell me you weren't in a rush; you were trigger-happy to remove Tiruin.

My opinion is that I want to understand your thought process behind your actions there.

Because I'm fallible, I'm not confirmed town, and LyLo breakers are only useful to scum, who can use them without fear of hitting an ally.

You have a terribly passive non-opinion. Provide an actual opinion, please.

Again, if you're so concerned about using it, why not about losing it?

Using it gets rid of it. Losing it... wait for it... also gets rid of it. Either way, it ceases being a factor in gameplay.

Okay, if he didn't trust me, what would he do as town?  Scum?  What's your read on him anyway?

I'm willing to bet that he'd have said clear regardless of alignment. And my read on him hasn't changed.

I voted you to make a point- it being made, I unvoted you.  Since I'm pretty confident Book is town and fairly sold on you being scum, there's no reason to not vote you, especially if you want to insist.

Then why didn't you vote me earlier? You made two posts where I was your top suspect and you were actively making a case against me, but weren't actually voting me. Why not? And you can't say you were worried about Book hammering, because that didn't stop you before.

I don't see anything from UI about my activity that merits a response other than a repeat of what I said the previous paragraph.  Did I miss something?

Ooh, I know: Why didn't you respond to it earlier? I voted you over it, so one would think that you'd try to explain yourself then.

[Toaster]

UI:  That's my opinion.  If you don't like it, too bad.

Eradicate:  I suppose that is true.

Mind restating your read on Book?

I remember considering revoting you, but I decided against it, and the only reason I could think of is paranoia; a bit silly considering the circumstances.

Ooh, I know: Why didn't you respond to it earlier? I voted you over it, so one would think that you'd try to explain yourself then.

Because I didn't think it was worth stating then.  Leaf explicitly asked me about it while yours was a statement.

[Leafsnail]

Toaster, I'm curious why you're not voting me if I'm your top suspect.

I voted you to make a point- it being made, I unvoted you.  Since I'm pretty confident Book is town and fairly sold on you being scum, there's no reason to not vote you, especially if you want to insist.

...So you need a mafia member to tell you to vote them before you actually do?  Well it's a good thing you've found such a cooperative mafia member, Toaster!

Leaf:  I haven't been giving this game the time and attention it deserves, and my poor activity reflects that.  Both previous days the hammer came when I either rereading or getting ready to do so.

On day 1 Book hammered with 25 minutes to go.  You were really planning to squeeze in that content with so little time left?  In addition, if you had this reread ready why was your early day 2 game so contentless too (I'm aware you tried to excuse it by saying you stopped reading after the flip, but surely if you had time for mafia then you should've used it to do something)?

Day 2 I can believe that explanation a little more but your content today has nevertheless been "vote UI until the daykill, then advocate a No Lynch in spite of not knowing anyone else's roles (and the flip of someone who makes no lynching a bad idea), then vote UI for a dumb trick, then unvote, then revote him when he calls you out on it".  Being busy is not an adequate explanation when you haven't been lacking in content so much as posting scummy content.

I remember considering revoting you, but I decided against it, and the only reason I could think of is paranoia; a bit silly considering the circumstances.

...Paranoia?

You were prepared to put UI at L-1.  You explained how you'd win even if Book was scum and hammered.  Yet for some reason you were paranoid that... what, Book would hammer and be lynched the next day?  That I would suddenly pull an extra vote out of nowhere (and then lose due to being disabled)?  You only revoted after I unvoted - are you so cowardly you're not only unwilling to cast the lynching vote, but also unprepared to cast the L-1 vote?

[Urist Imiknorris]

UI:  That's my opinion.  If you don't like it, too bad.

The problem with your opinion is that it's not an opinion on the plan itself - it's an opinion on my reason for doing it. So did you really not see the point of me using my eradicate?

Mind restating your read on Book?

[@Book:]
I'm going to reread again tomorrow morning, but I'm currently reading townish on both you and Leafsnail, you moreso than him.

I remember considering revoting you, but I decided against it, and the only reason I could think of is paranoia; a bit silly considering the circumstances.

Very silly. About as silly as your gambit.

Because I didn't think it was worth stating then.  Leaf explicitly asked me about it while yours was a statement.

You didn't think it was worth refuting my case against you. How cute.

[Toaster]

Leaf:  Don't call me a coward- your vote is immaterial to UI being scum.

I'm sure enough now to hammer him myself.  Yes, there was no good reason to not revote him yesterday.  What's done is done.

I've already said my piece about D1.

[Urist Imiknorris]

You're starting to sound a bit desperate. Also you're ignoring about 95% of what's been directed at you.

I'm sure enough now to hammer him myself.

Really? What's changed?

[Toaster]

UI:  I'm ignoring it because it's the same as what's already been dredged out.  Do you have anything new for me to respond to?

What's changed is I reread and continue to get a solid town read from Leaf, and I don't suspect Book either.

[Leafsnail]

Leaf:  Don't call me a coward- your vote is immaterial to UI being scum.

I'm sure enough now to hammer him myself.  Yes, there was no good reason to not revote him yesterday.  What's done is done.

I've already said my piece about D1.

You can't explain your actions, can you?  Because if you were town then no matter who was scum lynching UI is a good move for you.  The only reason you'd want to unvote is scum paranoia ("oh no it looks like I'm bandwagonning, better make it look like a silly trick").  Die.  If you're alive tomorrow then die again.