Print

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

[O.Wilde]

That's what I guessed, just wanted clarification considering we've already extended the day and we're pretty well into the extension period.

[fillipk]

So I checked out the quote from the bottom of your megapost where I defended Roo.

Spoiler: This one (click to show/hide)

Why not pick on jwoodward48df?

Although I haven't figured out how to use lurkertraker yet, I checked his account at it's quite clear that he is lurking though. A bit suspicious, especially since he hasn't posted within the 2 days the game has been up.

Roo isn't a lurker, he has been offline before the game even began. Wait a minute...

Fillipk why did you target a player who has been offline for the duration of the entire game?!

And honestly Fillipk, I'm very disappointed in you for trying to use this as a scum tell. More specifically of you trying to use this as evidence of buddying. I can't even say you quoted me out of context since the context is right there in the quote!

What that post was, was me deciding to kick off the day with a lurkerhunt, and while I was checking out the profiles of our non-posters, I just happened to notice something interesting, so I shared it with the rest of the group, SINCE INFORMATION LIKE THAT IS SOMETHING YOU SHARE!!!

And then I finished the post off with a half-hearted pressure vote on the person who just happened to randomly select Roo of all people.

Seriously fillipk, your arguments against me are becoming as weak as my arguments against you. Shame on you too hector13 for actually going along with this.

Your disappointed in me?  Your entire case on me was weak and based off a misread sentence and your calling my arguments weak.

Let's run through the scenarios shall we.
You are town, you decide to do a lurker sweep and check on whoever hasn't posted, you see two people haven't posted, one because they haven't been on and the other just because I guess.  Well look see here, someone was voting the guy who hasn't been on since the beginning of the game, I'm going to pressure that person instead of the person who has been on the forum yet hasn't posted.

That one seems a bit far-fetched to me, simply because you went out of your way to check their profiles, yet you neglected to look at the date and time stamp on my post.  Not only that, but nothing interesting had happened up until that point so I had no reason to switch my vote, and thus my vote did not deserve pressure as much as the guy neglecting to post in this thread.

Now how about if you were Mafia and Roo was your scum partner.  I'm doing a lurker sweep because that is what a town would do and I want to look town, now I find two lurkers, this random guy who hasn't posted for whatever reason but has been on the forum and my scum partner who hasn't.  Now look someone is voting my scum partner and that is bad, I'm going to apply pressure to see if they back off stating that this random guy is lurking and my scum partner is not.

That scenario seems a little bit more likely to be honest, because why would a town pressure someone on their RVS stage vote when there is a lurker to go after that will get more information circulating and still get that RVS voter to respond in a more subtle way.

[heydude6]

Seriously fillipk, your arguments against me are becoming as weak as my arguments against you.

If we're honestly to the point you're admitting that your arguments are weak enough so as to have no merit, why are you still pursuing them? If you honestly can't come up with a strong case even after nearly 10 pages of discussion, why not move on?

First, I will say a few things about my arguements. I believe they were quite good (except for adding extra punctuation to one sentence, that was my bad), Fillipk in his mega post manage to deconstruct some of them (such as pointing out that I don't use the word contradiction properly). While he was doing this, he often remarked about how horrible my reasoning was. And so we have knowledge, hypothetical townie Fillipk, believes my reasoning sucks. I was just using terms that he would be able to understand and the hypothetical townie Fillipk that I'm trying to appeal to (who might not even exist btw) would realize that he's making a fool out of himself and try to come back with stronger arguements next time. Of course there's only one problem with that plan, hypothetical townie Fillipk might not exist. There might only be a scum Fillipk and that person would do whatever was in his power to get me lynched. I guess the same thing can be said about hypothetical sum heydude as well though.

I see a lot of similarities between me and Fillipk actually. Both of us want eachother lynched with a passion so strong that they are unlikely to accept evidence that the other might be town. Makes you think a bit.

The difference between us though is the fact that I was first, and so have been given time to calm down. I am trying to move on now (I don't have much hopes in the prospect of not getting lynched), it's just that Fillipk and Hector keep asking me questions and so I have to keep answering them (although my replies tend to contain attacks in them, which might be a reason why they don't back off). That's also the reason why I'm not doing my absolute best anymore at making my case. I just want to move on. There are still some holes to address with Fillipk. Such as why he was avoiding my question about his explanation of the bolded question (In case you can't figure out what I'm talking about, I'm talking about the question that finally made Fillipk change his vote to me, I would quote it but I'm on a mobile), when I asked that difficult question, he decided to vote for me and refused to answer it for several posts, instead choosing to attack me. To Fillipk: Couldn't you have answered that question earlier, why did we have to wait for that wall of text? You didn't have to wait for that wall of text. You could have simply said "The reason why voting for Roo would have helped me figure out what mode he was playing in was because If I were to apply pressure, I would hopefully get him to talk"

Spoiler: Heydude6 Quotes (click to show/hide)

When I asked you some questions before, you addressed them is several pretty bad ways (such as the OMGUS for example).

Anyway, due to ninjas I want to clarify that I am currently addressing the fillipk post that came before the one that he posted in reply to hector.

It was never an OMGUS, you admitted it yourself that you twisted the meaning of my sentence and moonlit agreed, I simply pointed it out saying that we should pay more attention to you too, it was never a vote, just a warning.

You think I'm talking about this:

At what point did I ever express a desire to kill him, I say we need to look more carefully at these two as they are twisting my words, or just assuming my vote means more then it actually does.

When I'm talking about this:

Let me get one thing straight, the only reason you are voting for me is because you misinterpreted what I said and thought I actually meant my vote, and you admit this yet you are still voting for me.  Unvote,

Heydude6 you admitted that you see TheMoonlitShadow as suspicious because he bandwagon'd me for the exact same reasons you did, a vote, a vote in the first post of the game, where there is no possible way for me to know anything about anyone at all, what evidence do you have besides a misunderstanding of my posts.

Perhaps this may feel unfair but the definition of OMGUS is simply:

OMGUSing: Short for Oh My God You Suck, by the way. Voting or otherwise applying pressure to whoever's voting you.

Maybe you find this definition too general, but it's the one quoted from the OP. It also didn't help that you were deliberatly avoiding a question and instead chose to attack me.

Aren't OMGUS situations basically bound to happen? I think you (heydude6) might be holding the 'possible scumtell' list a bit too high and mighty. I mean, if we're gonna be horribly technical about it, ever since fillipk voted you, your entire case against him has been a prolonged OMGUS. The vote isn't part of that, but the point of the case is applying pressure, which falls under the definition you used. Just because something can be a scumtell in certain situations doesn't mean it always is. In this case, I think it's a case of new town trying to save their ass.

I guess OMGUS situations are bound to happen inevitably.

And perhaps I may be the case of a new town trying too hard to roast his ass. I'm newer than he is, shouldn't I be the one more entitled to the benefit of the "newbie" doubt? It's either both of us or none of us. You just used faulty reasoning. If you think I'm wrong and your reasoning was perfectly valid in that isolated case, then try to prove why Fillipk is allowed to get off for refusing to answer critical questions because he was a newbie, while I can't get off for overanalyzing and having occasional bits of flawed logic because I'm a newbie. If occasional bits of flawed logic was all it took to be a scum, then you would be one for using that last statement. This is just being said so you can examine yourself more closely and realize that you may be defending Fillipk too much. Anyway, I was about to let this go but while I was typing this I realized another bit of flawed logic you used. I'll make a new paragraph for readability.

So, you just defended Fillipk, that is a scum tell. As a matter of fact, it was a scum tell that I myself was accused of, although it was for defending Roo, and then I proved that the accusation was based on bad logic, and now I'm just being accused for my subsequent very first vote instead. My point is, to use your own words, we all make scum tells, it doesn't necessarily make us scum. If you want to accuse someone of using scumtells, make sure they aren't ones you yourself participated in.


Also, yes I read the whole post, it still doesn't change my opinion that I wrote at the top. Deliberately attacking someone and ignoring vital questions isn't a very townie thing to do. I believe that a townie would have tried to answer his questions as honestly as possible rather than go on the offensive. As a matter of fact look at myself. Why have I not blatantly refused to answer questions even though I'm being attacked using faulty logic? It's like the townie (Fillipk) is more scummy than the alleged scum (me). And don't try to use the newbie defence. I'm a bigger newbie than Fillipk.


I'm gonna reply to Fillipk tomorrow. I'm stuck on a mobile and I need to go to sleep.

[origamiscienceguy]

I have to replace already?? I was expecting at least a few days of respite. (sigh)

Alright, time to read the whole thread.

[O.Wilde]

And so we have knowledge, hypothetical townie Fillipk, believes my reasoning sucks. I was just using terms that he would be able to understand and the hypothetical townie Fillipk that I'm trying to appeal to (who might not even exist btw) would realize that he's making a fool out of himself and try to come back with stronger arguements next time.

This sounds like a massive pile of shit, but I suppose it could just be a terrible choice of words. Why would you open yourself up to him like that? I mean it's open to allllllll sorts of crazy interpretations from Freudian slip with you genuinely thinking your arguments are bad (And leaving us assuming you are scum, which is the only real reason to pursue a crappy argument), to him taking it as a compliment now that you've explained you think your arguments are actually good. Why would you compare two things like that? You say it was to 'relate' to him, but I don't believe that. You don't need to bring yourself down to "just use terms that he would be able to understand," that's patronizing bullshit. Do you legitimately think that he's incapable of comprehending your words unless you do that, or are you just trying to be all sarcastic and make him mad?

Of course there's only one problem with that plan, hypothetical townie Fillipk might not exist. There might only be a scum Fillipk and that person would do whatever was in his power to get me lynched. I guess the same thing can be said about hypothetical sum heydude as well though.

Yeah, it's almost like we're playing a game in which alignments are unknown and anyone could be secretly working against you. Scary.

(although my replies tend to contain attacks in them, which might be a reason why they don't back off)

The fact you're aware of this and yet continue to write those attacks while professing to want to 'back off' is ridiculous. Choose a side.

And perhaps I may be the case of a new town trying too hard to roast his ass. I'm newer than he is, shouldn't I be the one more entitled to the benefit of the "newbie" doubt? It's either both of us or none of us.

When exactly did I say you aren't entitled to that? You seem to think that I believe you're 100% def scum, which I don't.

You just used faulty reasoning. If you think I'm wrong and your reasoning was perfectly valid in that isolated case, then try to prove why Fillipk is allowed to get off for refusing to answer critical questions because he was a newbie, while I can't get off for overanalyzing and having occasional bits of flawed logic because I'm a newbie.

He's not getting off, you're still questioning him. I'm not saying your case is invalid, I'm pointing out parts of it that don't make sense. I don't need to get on his ass because YOU are already doing that, therefore I'm gonna get on yours.

If occasional bits of flawed logic was all it took to be a scum, then you would be one for using that last statement. This is just being said so you can examine yourself more closely and realize that you may be defending Fillipk too much. Anyway, I was about to let this go but while I was typing this I realized another bit of flawed logic you used. I'll make a new paragraph for readability.

So, you just defended Fillipk, that is a scum tell. As a matter of fact, it was a scum tell that I myself was accused of, although it was for defending Roo, and then I proved that the accusation was based on bad logic, and now I'm just being accused for my subsequent very first vote instead. My point is, to use your own words, we all make scum tells, it doesn't necessarily make us scum. If you want to accuse someone of using scumtells, make sure they aren't ones you yourself participated in.

I'm not accusing you of scumtells, I'm pointing out how ridiculous it is to use them in an end all be all manner. Read my post again. We're literally arguing the same thing to each other. Honestly, I'm not particularly worried if I happen to give off a ton of scumtells or not. Are you?

Also, yes I read the whole post, it still doesn't change my opinion that I wrote at the top. Deliberately attacking someone and ignoring vital questions isn't a very townie thing to do. I believe that a townie would have tried to answer his questions as honestly as possible rather than go on the offensive. As a matter of fact look at myself. Why have I not blatantly refused to answer questions even though I'm being attacked using faulty logic? It's like the townie (Fillipk) is more scummy than the alleged scum (me). And don't try to use the newbie defence. I'm a bigger newbie than Fillipk.

Again, not sure why you have such a massive victim complex at the moment. Own up when your arguments don't make sense, and don't whine about how unfair I'm being in my distribution of ass kicking. Plenty to go around.

The bottom line is certain aspects of your arguments suck, and because of that I'm gonna attempt to tear those bits apart. You're already doing that to everything fillipk says, so I don't really have to. Honestly, having weak/unclear arguments doesn't help you at all, I'm doing you a favor.

Fillipk response coming in another post.

[O.Wilde]

Let's run through the scenarios shall we.

I can already tell this is terrible and WIFOM-y.

You are town, you decide to do a lurker sweep and check on whoever hasn't posted, you see two people haven't posted, one because they haven't been on and the other just because I guess.  Well look see here, someone was voting the guy who hasn't been on since the beginning of the game, I'm going to pressure that person instead of the person who has been on the forum yet hasn't posted.

This is not garbage. Bravo.

That one seems a bit far-fetched to me, simply because you went out of your way to check their profiles, yet you neglected to look at the date and time stamp on my post.

I do the exact same thing, the thread kinda tends to run together. Heydude, did you or did you not note the time on his post vs. the profile times?

Not only that, but nothing interesting had happened up until that point so I had no reason to switch my vote, and thus my vote did not deserve pressure as much as the guy neglecting to post in this thread.

Literally nobody cares what you deserve or don't deserve. You got what you got, and we've kinda moved on at this point from the original issue that tore these two compatriots asunder  . To quote myself:

Own up when your arguments don't make sense, and don't whine.

Now how about if you were Mafia and Roo was your scum partner.  I'm doing a lurker sweep because that is what a town would do and I want to look town, now I find two lurkers, this random guy who hasn't posted for whatever reason but has been on the forum and my scum partner who hasn't.  Now look someone is voting my scum partner and that is bad, I'm going to apply pressure to see if they back off stating that this random guy is lurking and my scum partner is not.

Or they would not do that because it's a massive scumtell when you try to defend someone that is later lynched. That's possible, granted, especially in a BM, but I don't think Heydude is that stupid.

That scenario seems a little bit more likely to be honest

Ahhhhhh, the scenario that forwards your agenda seems more likely to you. I can't imagine why. It's incredible how things turn out so well.

because why would a town pressure someone on their RVS stage vote when there is a lurker to go after that will get more information circulating and still get that RVS voter to respond in a more subtle way.

Because people like taking the direct route? Not everyone is gonna lightly poke people and then see what EVERYONE else around them does. Plus, pressuring people on their RVS votes is what kicks us out of RVS.

[fillipk]

PFP

@heydude I did answer the question you just read it weirdly and went on a wild goose chase using that.  I did not wait till my mega post to answer the question you just refused to accept the answer up until that point.

So you want me to give up this lead and move on?  If that's not the biggest scum tell I've seen so far I don't know what is.  Anyway I'm perfectly happy to put this down and move on as soon as you can prove that someone else is scummier then you, until then I'm going to keep pressuring you so deal with it.  Also it's not just the flawed logic that makes you scum, it's the fact that 90% of your case on me was based on something I didn't say, and the fact that now that your down prosecuting me that I should take this chance and stop prosecuting you, well I actually have a case on you that isn't based off a misread sentence so prove to me you are town, or that someone else is scummier then I'll drop it.

@Owilde bravo you intelligently deconstructed my post, thank you.  Now your right I did kind of whine in the middle, and you are right it did sort of kick us out of RVS, in a more active way.  The problem is the defense was subtle and it was in addition to an attack which will automatically get more attention in the thread, and while it did kick us out of RVS it also made us the focus of this now non RVS day allowing everyone else to slip by with minimal posting and by that logic.

@everyone except me and heydudeaa out of me and heydude who do you feel has the better case and why, or do we both have shitty cases and refuse to admit it?

[heydude6]

Anyway, I won't be on this computer for long (because I have plans that I thought I cancelled), so I can't write the fillipk reply yet unfortunately. Instead I''l just try to address O Wilde's points against me as briefly as possible.

And so we have knowledge, hypothetical townie Fillipk, believes my reasoning sucks. I was just using terms that he would be able to understand and the hypothetical townie Fillipk that I'm trying to appeal to (who might not even exist btw) would realize that he's making a fool out of himself and try to come back with stronger arguements next time.

This sounds like a massive pile of shit, but I suppose it could just be a terrible choice of words. Why would you open yourself up to him like that? I mean it's open to allllllll sorts of crazy interpretations from Freudian slip with you genuinely thinking your arguments are bad (And leaving us assuming you are scum, which is the only real reason to pursue a crappy argument), to him taking it as a compliment now that you've explained you think your arguments are actually good. Why would you compare two things like that? You say it was to 'relate' to him, but I don't believe that. You don't need to bring yourself down to "just use terms that he would be able to understand," that's patronizing bullshit. Do you legitimately think that he's incapable of comprehending your words unless you do that, or are you just trying to be all sarcastic and make him mad?

This one is a difficult one to respond to, it's very easy to say something that can be misinterpreted.

For a while, I did think that my reasoning was bad (and now that I look over it again, fillipk's megapost is still very solid). Although there are still a few gems among my over analysis. FAKE EDIT: While I was looking through posts I finally understand town fillipk's reason for the OMGUS. 

Spoiler: I missed this quote (click to show/hide)

There are 5 days and no hammers, 1 vote does not make me want to kill Roo, its an RVS thats a little bit less random.

This probably made him think that I was after him.


 

Well, that's it then. Go ahead and lynch me now. I suck at being town, so let's get this day over with now. You'll find out my alignment upon my death and you can all try to use that... somehow.

Still, I learned a bit. Good luck guys and have fun.

No fillipk response will be made although the belief that I was defending roo is still stupid.

[fillipk]

I don't get why we are lynching tawa, I haven't seen him do much of anything.

[O.Wilde]

I think Shadow is trying to... pressure him to talk? Feels like a very early gamey in what is no longer an early game.

[hector13]

I guess it would be better to actually keep votes on the lurking people, given activity is the name of the game in the early stages.

heydude has been quite active, so I'm inclined to keep them about. Fillipk came off slightly more scummy of the two in my opinion, but not to the point I'm willing to move my vote.

D1 no lynches are not all that great though, so we should be trying to avoid that.

Tawa and DA being ICs and quite inactive though, is bothersome. Not sure if we should be further bothered by the fact they both posted within 24hrs of the deadline so can avoid prods...

[heydude6]

What really bothers me though, is the fact that Tawa said that he was gonna post something soon and yet he hasn't.

I'll probably be more active now that things are picking up, though.

Of course, not authoritatively. He just said he might.

Don't mind me, I just feel this may be relevant.

[hector13]

There's about 90 minutes left, by my calculations.

[hector13]

I have to replace already?? I was expecting at least a few days of respite. (sigh)

Alright, time to read the whole thread.

Come on dude, you posted hours ago! You said 4 contentful posts a day wouldn't be a hassle who did you replace? (it hasn't been changed in the OP yet)

Well... Hazard or jwoodward, probably. TDS, I think whichever one of those two that remains needs a poke.

[hector13]

This will basically consign heydude to be lynched. Do you think he needs to be lynched?