@DA: I'm working on the 'unspoken rules' of realization.
It's like this:
Everything mentioned above...is substantial, and reasonable, but it brings...a general point.
On the premise of the jailer,
an extremely subtle note (in this...botched format -.-) is how I realized the content of my role and its ambiguity even in situations like this.
First of all, this:
I was attempting to provoke your note on you claiming as a jailer--I have also outlined the logic following it; for posterity, DA, in games such as these (non-vanilla; cult oriented), the problem is of a MUCH HIGHER DEGREE, so in my expectations (at least), any PR especially with the responsibility of the Jailer, should be EXTREMELY thorough due to the power they wield, and -especially- due to the ambiguity of that power as it cannot be used as a distinct and concrete grounds of validity in claiming (or implying innocence)
I was attempting social pressure, in other words, given my directness poking at your fakeclaim.
I've presented both possibilities because there are multiple possibilities. As far as I can see, you being the leader is the more likely, but why would I try to present it as though you're guaranteed to be the leader when that's simply not so?
I realize this
But I worded it back to ask you for clarity, with the mix of assertiveness too.
You make either/or for leader and cultist--and yes, I see the reasonability here when one thinks about it--but the problem is that you made it written AS a conjunction and including your vote later on.
While I still get that this could be a placeholder on grounds of suspicion (...you could just like,
ask, why I'm poking G.Me if you find my 'suspicion' on him so telling), how you go about with your point is...honestly blunt.
You had a good point in that quote. It was blunt, to me.
Everyone, night 1 I blocked Generally, night 2 I blocked OSG and night 3 I blocked Tiruin. Since Tiruin's trying to push suspicion onto GM, I'd be inclined to think he's town, or at least not the cult leader. Since one of my blocks must have worked, that means that OSG is either town or the cult leader (or could be a cultist if Tiruin's the leader), and Tiruin's either a cultist or the leader. Tiruin
Because this didn't provoke any emotional reaction on my side at all.
The wording didn't help, because of the mismatch of logic (since I take things literally a lot >.>).
I've covered this, yes.
Why are you so intent on twisting what I say? It means that, it follows, ergo... I took a logical step from the knowledge available to me and included the possibilities I could think of. If you can think of another possibility, I'd be happy to hear it rather than you complaining that I'm not showing every possibility and still doing nothing to rectify that.
Yes you have. And I'm not twisting your words, I'm putting detail to it which shows the holes. (also I think you broke my quote a bit there)
> You haven't covered how it gets there, in specifics, to single out one OVER the rest.
It's still a case of 'any of these could be my target, but I choose to pick this one to vote'.
I cannot rectify that because it is your responsibility to provide the backing for your point--I can show my opinion of it, and you can respond on it. It still seems unclear as of now.
Because there are multiple possibilities present? Finding the leader is the important issue at the minute, so the issue of GM being either town or a convert isn't a pressing issue.
But how can you be certain about this?
The 'so' part is pretty much the Point B to your unspoken Point A.
If you're sure about one's innocence, DEFEND THEM. Unlike a regular game, defending someone here, while there is the context of 'I was town but now I'm cult' is pretty much OK. Because the main problem is
primarily and exclusively the cult leader. I will detail this below after I poke at one last thing here.
And you still haven't said anything to contradict that pretty reasonable assumption. Are you waiting on a formal invitation?
Because it is pretty reasonable ^ ^
But it is not conclusive, and I do understand the plausability of it. Me just contradicting it...either doesn't make sense (and provokes unwarranted suspicion...due to not making sense in the first place), or me being defensive on a technical point under ambiguous grounds.
I mean really--I don't expect people to expect that despite my inactivity, there is always the notion that one could just PM in advance the note of action if they're not available.
Query to you: How did you get that idea in the first place?I presented what I knew, which isn't actually a lot given that I wasn't told when my blocks were successful.
If you were the real jailor, you would've known this by the exact mention within your role, good sir.
You're fakeclaiming jailer and saying that you blocked GM both days that you took action. That would count as pushing suspicion on him in my book.
And?
One can easily 'fakeclaim' because of the exact notice that one cannot direct prove their actions--this is the burden of the Jailer here.
The only proof which backs them up, is the awareness of the general situation. But that is STILL very unspecified
because it relies on the whole game still not ending, and the Jailer to only work on what they did.
Now, pushing suspicion--do you realize that you could've made an
extremely better point here?
You have a good point that it may occur as pushing suspicion, if you were the jailer.
So let me ask a pertinent question to you:
Why did you leave your accusing post vague?If you're town--back off and be honest. You're only drawing more attention to yourself and making me rectify my ideals that you may be the leader, or probably a cultist who was town D1. If I am the leader--prove it by due suspicion and not due to extraneous variables (ie She wasn't questioned earlier! [This doesn't make sense as its originally an 8v1 game...like, really. Player intent in regard, nobody has any reason to leave someone else unquestioned.] or... 'They're fakeclaiming!' [When there is no exact basis to actually specify and rule out someone as fakeclaiming. Like ever.)
Hypothetically, you could ask yourself why I haven't voted you. You haven't asked--despite voting me--why I am primarily keeping my vote on G.Me, however somehow you aren't questioning BOTH OSG and G.Me, your
"other jailed targets".
You even had the mention of OSG fakeclaim as jailer, or as far as I hope you've checked your reads.
...And made nothing from that note.
Leaving the unspoken 'why' of 'Why aren't you working on them?'
MeeTiruin what were the consequences for my vote?
May I ask you to answer for yourself?
You could mention you are uncertain, in all honesty.
But I would like to know why you answer in brevity, and whether or not you've noticed the -full- implications and consequences of your actions, and how it affects others' perceptions of you.
Are you feeling anxious or nervous? Could I ask why, too?
Author
Topic: Cult Mafia 2 - Game Over! Cult victory! (Read 35307 times)