Print

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

[origamiscienceguy]

On top of which, you failed a test I ran earlier but didn't comment on at the time (namely, you backed off of Shakerag just because I told you something about his meta, which may or may not be true and has nothing to do with your own experience, indicating wishy-washyness and desire to please, both scum traits). 

I must ask, why didn't you comment at the time?

[4maskwolf]

On top of which, you failed a test I ran earlier but didn't comment on at the time (namely, you backed off of Shakerag just because I told you something about his meta, which may or may not be true and has nothing to do with your own experience, indicating wishy-washyness and desire to please, both scum traits). 

I must ask, why didn't you comment at the time?

Yeah, that one's on me.  It happened just after I went to sleep (I turn off my devices at 9:00 PM PST and his post was 9:06) and an entire page of stuff happened over night, which caused me to overlook it.  I only noticed it again when I went back to find where it was that he voted TDS, because I couldn't remember when that happened.

[origamiscienceguy]

Fair enough. I just checked your facts to make sure you weren't BSing that.

[Peradon]

NQT: Is that a mess up, or can 4mask actually vote?

He did say it's the first game of CYOM that he didn't take that flaw; or rather, he said it's the first game where he started with the power to vote.

Yeah, I'm getting you and 4wolf mixed up...

Peradon, I just want you to know that you're next on my "vote off the island" list for blatant bandwagoning.  You honest-to-God just took my argument about him being active-lurky, which was somewhat flawed to begin with (but the second-best lead I had at the time after his pressuring OSG for silly reasons) and turned it up to the point of ridiculousness.

What am I supposed to do when I agree with someone? Am I not supposed to vote for fear of looking like I'm bandwagoning? I think I should vote based on the arguments that other people are making. I thought your active lurking theory was getting to something. So, I voted based on it. Why is this inherantly scummy?

On top of which, you failed a test I ran earlier but didn't comment on at the time (namely, you backed off of Shakerag just because I told you something about his meta, which may or may not be true and has nothing to do with your own experience, indicating wishy-washyness and desire to please, both scum traits).

Both you and Persus indicated that Shakerag is normally sarcastic. After that, I looked back on some threads to confirm, and you guys were right, he is normally like that. I didnt just take your word on it, and I'm not being wishy-washy. Your test was based on an asumption that I wouldnt do my homework and check for myself. I did check for myself, thus your test had no relevence.

[4maskwolf]

Peradon: It's not the fact that you agreed with me, it's mostly that the argument you latched onto was faulty and you've taken it beyond the extent it could be reasonable taken and still be valid.  But no, never hold back a vote for fear of it looking like a bandwagon, that is anti-town.  Better look scummy now than a scum weasel out of a lynch.

I will now quote what you said when you changed your vote:

Well, everyone is saying that Shakerag is just extremely sarcastic, so I guess I'll Unvote. But still, I think he needs to stop being like that.

Your reasoning for unvoting was stated as "everyone is saying that he is sarcastic" (with everyone being two people).

Additionally, you've cemented my view by not going after the actually incorrect part of my post, which was claiming that you added nothing new.  You did, in that very same post.  You started talking about the big post he had just made shortly beforehand, which as far as I know nobody else had commented on as being a method of active-lurking.  The problem here is that  this means that either you're not paying attention to your own scumhunting, which is a problem, or you are so worried about saving your own skin you can't even find logical fallacies in my arguments.  Either way is not a good thing.

[4maskwolf]

And I swear, if anyone else extends I will smack them.  At some point, the day has to end, and there's only so much debate that can happen before the day is just dragging on interminably without anything new happening.

[Shakerag]

flabort:

pfp@shakerag:
I believe tunnelling is scummy because I have been accused of being scum for tunnelling before.

That's interesting, because the traditional Toony Tunnel was seen as a method to root out scum, as I recall. 

I don'tncare if it's your meta or not. It's still scummy.

I don't care if tunneling is part of my meta or not either.  I asked you why you believed tunneling was not part of my meta, as what you originally said seemed to imply that my meta did not include tunneling.

No, I'm not saying everyone else has poor reasons, I'm saying he's doing something really wrong if so many people are convinced he's scum.

You literally said: "Man, I don't know how you managed to top the charts of so many people."  That seems to imply you're not sure why so many other people find TDS scummy.  Is that not what you intended?


Deus Asmoth:
Just because you can't vote, doesn't mean you get a free pass to not participate.  Who would you be voting for right now if you could and why?


Varee:

Well.... I don't have a large read list to offer yet, I think mybplay style rely more on using action and less on trying to judge people as am not very good at it. I think my vote is gone, someone might steal it or something.
Anyway I will try compile a list before the lynch.

Day would have ended without that last extend, and we haven't heard a peep out of you.  What do you think of 4mask's play?  Do you think his "tests" are good scumhunting, or do you think he's scum trying to trick town into stumbling into a mislynch?


Peradon:

Oh come on. I was using hyperbole, and you know it.

Maybe you should have used [hyperbole][/hyperbole] tags.  I guess you must think that hyperbole is okay to use in mafia but sarcasm isn't, eh?  Allow me to revisit an old post of yours for my amusement, emphasis mine:

Shakerag: First off, I dont think hyperbole should ever be used in mafia. I analyse a post, assuming you mean every word you say. Hyperbole misleads the town and does nothing but muddy the water. From the way you act, you still seem like scum, so my vote stays right where it is. From now on, if you dont want me to vote for you, dont be hyperbolic.

So, in reference to the italicized part:  Double standard or hypocrisy?

[origamiscienceguy]

Peradon:

Oh come on. I was using hyperbole, and you know it.

Maybe you should have used [hyperbole][/hyperbole] tags.  I guess you must think that hyperbole is okay to use in mafia but sarcasm isn't, eh? 

Shakerag, you didn't use [sarcasm][/sarcasm] during your posts. Just because people knew that you were being sarcastic doesn't mean you can pretend he wasn't.

[Shakerag]

Peradon:

Oh come on. I was using hyperbole, and you know it.

Maybe you should have used [hyperbole][/hyperbole] tags.  I guess you must think that hyperbole is okay to use in mafia but sarcasm isn't, eh? 

Shakerag, you didn't use [sarcasm][/sarcasm] during your posts. Just because people knew that you were being sarcastic doesn't mean you can pretend he wasn't.

*facepalm*

I know that.
That.  Was.  Sarcasm.  You.  Dolt. 

[Peradon]

Additionally, you've cemented my view by not going after the actually incorrect part of my post, which was claiming that you added nothing new.

You made an allusion to that post by saying that I turned the active-lurking theory up to the point of rediculousness. There was only one way it could be thought that I turned it up, and that was via the quote post. Thus, I assumed that you were taking that post into account. So of course I'm not going to mention the quote-post, which you were saying was rediculous for me to attribute to active lurking.

4makwolf, you seem to be trying to set up traps for me to fall into. If I has mentioned that post, you would have said I'm not paying enough attention to your post, and thus am scum. But, if I didnt mention it, you would say what you said above, and thus say I'm scum. You are trying to trap me into a corner with not way out.

Peradon:

Oh come on. I was using hyperbole, and you know it.

Maybe you should have used [hyperbole][/hyperbole] tags.  I guess you must think that hyperbole is okay to use in mafia but sarcasm isn't, eh?  Allow me to revisit an old post of yours for my amusement, emphasis mine:

Shakerag: First off, I dont think hyperbole should ever be used in mafia. I analyse a post, assuming you mean every word you say. Hyperbole misleads the town and does nothing but muddy the water. From the way you act, you still seem like scum, so my vote stays right where it is. From now on, if you dont want me to vote for you, dont be hyperbolic.

So, in reference to the italicized part:  Double standard or hypocrisy?

Are you seriously still on this? Ugh. Hyperbole is obvious. Sarcasm isnt.

[Shakerag]

Peradon:

Shakerag: First off, I dont think hyperbole should ever be used in mafia. I analyse a post, assuming you mean every word you say. Hyperbole misleads the town and does nothing but muddy the water. From the way you act, you still seem like scum, so my vote stays right where it is. From now on, if you dont want me to vote for you, dont be hyperbolic.

So, in reference to the italicized part:  Double standard or hypocrisy?

My asshole-ish snark aside, you still missed something.

[4maskwolf]

Peradon: I'm not setting up "traps for you to fall into" in the kind of no-win situation you're talking about.  You're actually entirely wrong about what I would have done had you addressed the fallacy in my statement.  For posterity, here's what would have happened:
Nothing.  I wouldn't have mentioned it, although I would have addressed other parts of the post.  However, it would have eased my doubts about your loyalty to the town somewhat.

Actually, by "turning it up to the point of ridiculousness" I'm referring to the fact that as far as I can tell the active-lurking allegation is your only beef with DarkStar and it has been pointed out by several players that one-two RL days into the game is an entirely unreasonable time to start throwing around active-lurking allegations.

You're grasping at straws, bud, at least with your allegations that I'm trying to set you up in no-win situations.  It's an entirely unprovable allegation, entirely silly, and not at all reasonable.  Sorry Peradon, but you just bought yourself a trip to lynchtown.  Darky will have to wait.  He at least has brought some reasonable defenses against various accusations, even if he proceeds to be scummy while doing them by misrepresenting other people's points.

[Peradon]

Peradon: I'm not setting up "traps for you to fall into" in the kind of no-win situation you're talking about.  You're actually entirely wrong about what I would have done had you addressed the fallacy in my statement.  For posterity, here's what would have happened:
Nothing.  I wouldn't have mentioned it, although I would have addressed other parts of the post.  However, it would have eased my doubts about your loyalty to the town somewhat.

I seriously doubt you wouldnt have mentioned. By the way you have been acting, and "testing" me, you would have jumped all over it. But, you are correct, it is an entirely unprovable situation, as it deals with hypothetical reaction scenarios.

Ok, I'm going to approach this from a different angle. These tests are designed to trip scum up. The problem with your tests is that there is the human element involved. For instance, in the first one, you didnt expect me to actually look for myself as to whether shakerag is normaly sarcastic. Doing your homework is a pro-town move. Thus, your trap triggers both scum and town, and thus does not provide any evidence.
Your second test was based on sentence embeded in a paragraph with several other accusations. I was focusing on the accusations, not the one sentence. Thus it was set up to fail in the first place.

Ok, so I know unless some of the lurkers come out of the woodworks to vote for TDS, I'm going to get lynched. So, I'm going to go ahead and post my reads for analysis when I flip town:

Most Scummy
-------------
TDS: For active lurking and evasion of posts. He doesnt even give a defence for the evasions.
4maskwolf: For setting up tests against me that were doomed to fail, then providing them as evidence against me.
Varee: For pushing a no-lynch for more time to investigate, then not investigating when the day got extended.
OSG:Still here for a hunch, though that hunch is beginning to go away.
Hector: Seems to be tunneling a bit on TDS, but I guess we all have been doing that a bit.
-------------
Nuetrality Line:Shakerag, Tiruin, DA, Persus, and anyone else lurking really bad.
-------------
Flabort: For previously mentioned question that was directed at me. I'll reveal this at the last minute.

Man.... I have a lot of suspects...

Anyway, I'll reveal my powers and such if there is no chance that I get saved. For now, my fate is in your hands.

[origamiscienceguy]

So, I'm going to go ahead and post my reads for analysis when I flip town:

...

Anyway, I'll reveal my powers and such if there is no chance that I get saved. For now, my fate is in your hands.

You sound like you are giving up. Or trying to guilt-trip us into unvoting you. This is extremely anti-town as a townie would know he is innocent and try to persuade us rather than do this.
  Unvote TDS
Vote Peradon

[Peradon]

That because I have no more arguments against 4wolf. He will just say "Your wrong" and leave it at that. And to tell you the truth, I dont see any way out of this mess. My only argument is entirely opinion based, and thus unprovable.