You've got your logic turned around there. I picked Hapah because he correctly picked out the king, which means he got lucky, or he knows something. I don't believe in luck, not in this game, so
that leaves him knowing something. So, he has an inspection, or he's damn good at finding scum. Both are pluses I'd look for in a potential fellow mason.
What you said just now is not the same as what you said before. Your original answer focused entirely on him having an inspect. You never mentioned that his effectiveness in hunting scum was a factor.
Tell me how I'm not supposed to interpret "I'm fairly certain he has an inspect" as you picking him because you think he has an inspect?
I picked him because I thought he had an inspect. That was the important bit. You asked for clarification, so I clarified. I don't see the problem here.
So why are you ignoring your own question in order to devise a reason for me to be scum, Captain Ford?
I'm not. There was zero evidence of Hapah having an inspect. He didn't show any suspicion of Toaster until after Toaster claimed miller. He only unvoted with 20 minutes to spare, and he was clearly very reluctant to do so.
On top of that, you don't have to be cop to know what result you would have gotten on Toaster last night. As soon as Toaster claimed miller, any inspect results on him would have been thrown right out the window.
I disagree with the idea that inspect results on a claimed miller should go right out the window in a role-heavy game. Anyway, where you see "zero evidence", I see a behavior pattern that makes him significantly more probable as the best choice for a Mason Recruit. Just because he's the best option, doesn't mean he's a great one, or even necessarily a good one. Your question was "If you had a mason role, who would you recruit as your buddy today?", not "If you had a mason role, would you recruit anyone as your buddy today?".
Also, you're objectively wrong, since he's flipped now.
I've been wrong before. I'll be wrong again. New data, new analysis.
I asked you those questions for the purpose of clarification. It was in the early stages of the day. What makes you think I was aiming for a lynch on you and not simply pressuring you?
You apparently disregarded your own question, and took my answer out of context. I'm satisfied with explanation for this here:
You appeared to be looking for someone with an inspect and molding the evidence to fit your theory, rather than actually trying to draw conclusions from the evidence. It struck me that you might have already drawn that conclusion while looking for threats and simply reused it in this answer. It otherwise doesn't make any sense to me, as I explained above.
Unvote. As a Mason, I have the unique opportunity to confirm someone as town with a successful recruit. That means whatever information they provide is inherently trustworthy. If I were to try to recruit a Vigilante, a Doctor, or a Roleblocker, all they could tell me is who they targeted. They may pay off in the long run, but they may also get lynched or mafiakilled at any time. A Cop, on the other hand (one who hasn't yet claimed), has inspect results available right then and there. That increases their value sufficiently that I feel it would be foolish, as a mason, to try and recruit anyone else. So you see, asking me to evaluate potential buddies from a mason's perspective is effectively the same as asking me who I think is a cop.
I believe I grasped this metaphor, but let me explain how I understand it:
A frog can be put in a water and boiled, and it won't attempt to escape because it isn't physically capable of detecting that it's in danger before it loses consciousness.
It sounded like you were implying that I was the frog, and you were attempting to catch me in a trap that I wouldn't notice until I was "already boiled".
Needless to say, I felt a little insulted.
No insult was intended. I was more concerned with the process of boiling a frog than with the disposition of the frog itself, which is a variable outside of my control. That said, no metaphor is perfect, and this one had the intended effect of getting reactions from Deathsword.
Deathsword - Your explanation so far is "I knew it was a 7 player game, and I knew that I was the 4th vote on you, but I failed to put 2 and 2 together." Do I have that right? Why do you think that's a good enough excuse for lynching me?
Author
Topic: King of the Mafia 3 - Game over! (Read 72052 times)