Print

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

[dakarian]

Very well.  Pulling from your past post, which, was simply hanging on another person's argument:

Let's consider the scenarios:

A) There is a role which has a list of all the colours (and the roles that they have)

B) Scum have a list of all the colours (and the roles that they have)

C) This is a ploy by webadict to spread distrust throughout us all.


If B is true, then claiming our colours is the worst thing we can possibly do. If A is true, it's still bad, but not as bad. If C is true, it doesn't really matter either way. If A is true, then there's likely another role which can determine the colour someone has, but not the role.

Now, our lack of knowledge regarding this can be used by clever mafia very easily. They can try and trick us into thinking that:

A) Our colours mean nothing (if they do; they'll try and get us to claim in an effort to prove their theory while simultaneously getting a list of who has what role )
or
B) Our colours mean something (if they don't, then they'll try and spread misinformation, suggesting that our colours are important/do mean something and anyone who colour claims will immediately appear scummy. Admittedly, alone, there aren't many foreseeable advantages to this, but if there is a role that determines colours, and that role thinks that the colours mean something, then much fun could be had.)

Anyone suggesting that we claim our colours is scummy, Dakarian. I may have been more accurate with my random vote than I thought.

Furthermore, you say that your colour doesn't fit your role; this implies that you have a role which doesn't suit your colour.
Ex: Blue cop, green doctor, red mafia.

Since the only thing you added was WIFOM I imagine this is the inkstain.

As I said before, my color (red) does NOT fit my role.  Matched with my belief that there's a better chance that the colors are something to either red herring us (though that's more recently) or cause us trouble (original idea) than it is something that benefits the mafia, I do not see a problem with us learning more about our colors.

That's the reasoning behind my actions.

So far, your only response from you is WIFOM. 


If you believe I'm just plain old lying and that's that then you DON'T have an argument for me and you just want me dead.  Take responsibility then and get the town after me.  If you believe my argument mostly but still have some specific issue then stop referencing and voice them specifically.  If you believe me and you have nothing to add then what's left for you to consider me scummy?

This = not answers?

[ExKirby]

Oh. Looks like my eyes aren't working properly.

[dakarian]

Less fussing, more responding.

Is that a proper answer?

Did I miss an issue you still have?

Or do you still call me a liar?

[dakarian]

Shit, I forgot to unvote Org.

That reminds me, I have a randomvote to continue. ExKirby, what do you think the colors mean?

Hey Pandar.

You're WILLING to lynch your randomvote when all you had was a small question for him?


If all you had was a randomvote.. why is you vote still on him?

If you have more, why do I have to distract my own bandwagon just to pull it out of you?

[Pandarsenic]

Because honestly, I haven't been paying much attention to this mafia. :V

[dakarian]

Consider my FOS a prod then.  Wake up and talk.  If I can get ExKirby to give more than one line non-answers you might be next on the spotlight.

[ExKirby]

Less fussing, more responding.

Is that a proper answer?

Did I miss an issue you still have?

Or do you still call me a liar?

In order, Yes, Yes, No.

[dakarian]

Very well.. a proposal when you get back ExKirby.

1.  Get that vote OFF of me.

2. Get it ON someone else. 

3.  No Lynch and staying on Unvote are NOT options. 

If you don't have a reason to suspect someone, then find a reason.  I still don't mind this being your last day, but we're not done what we need to do this day. 

Oh, and no, 'ok, I'll do it' posts.  Lurk, and you'll get prodded.  Post anything BUT a vote change +   reason and I'll find someone to use that hammer.

Unvote    Vote Pandarsenic

Normally, when asked "Why you are still voting." Those that don't have an answer Unvote.  Why are you content to watch other games without caring if a scum or town dies here?

[ExKirby]

Very well.. a proposal when you get back ExKirby.

1.  Get that vote OFF of me.

2. Get it ON someone else. 

3.  No Lynch and staying on Unvote are NOT options. 

If you don't have a reason to suspect someone, then find a reason.  I still don't mind this being your last day, but we're not done what we need to do this day. 

Oh, and no, 'ok, I'll do it' posts.  Lurk, and you'll get prodded.  Post anything BUT a vote change +   reason and I'll find someone to use that hammer.

Unvote    Vote Pandarsenic

Normally, when asked "Why you are still voting." Those that don't have an answer Unvote.  Why are you content to watch other games without caring if a scum or town dies here?

Err... come again?

[dakarian]

To repeat.

Find someone you think is scum.. vote for them, and tell us why.

We're going to kill SOMEONE today.   If you don't want it to be you then find some scum.

[Apostolic Nihilist]

Er, now that I've been enlightened as to the whole 'no deadline, 5 votes to hammer' thing, disregard all of my previous arguments. Any decision will have to have almost unanimous town consent to pass which makes it a good deal more difficult for scum. Their best play is probably befriending town and providing convincing arguments; WIFOM here isn't really useful.

My vote is still on Pandarsenic, by the way. I think I was blind when I defended NUKE earlier; I'm finding his reactions to be scummy, too.

Also, (I may not be alone in thinking this) but ExKirby's answers seemed very obviously ambivalent. He doesn't strike me as scum but as lazy town. He'll be a good fallback lynch if we can't find anyone else.

[Vector]

Also, (I may not be alone in thinking this) but ExKirby's answers seemed very obviously ambivalent. He doesn't strike me as scum but as lazy town. He'll be a good fallback lynch if we can't find anyone else.

So, I played with him recently as town, and he's not behaving anything like he was then.  I really think he's scum and am waiting for him to do something that makes him more townish.

We really need to kill someone, doods >_>  Knowing we're getting scum is good, but if the entire town gets exhausted before we kill anyone things are going to be bad.

[ExKirby]

Also, (I may not be alone in thinking this) but ExKirby's answers seemed very obviously ambivalent. He doesn't strike me as scum but as lazy town. He'll be a good fallback lynch if we can't find anyone else.

So, I played with him recently as town, and he's not behaving anything like he was then.  I really think he's scum and am waiting for him to do something that makes him more townish.

We really need to kill someone, doods >_>  Knowing we're getting scum is good, but if the entire town gets exhausted before we kill anyone things are going to be bad.

What, so when I try a new tactic you all go against me?

[Vector]

So, I played with him recently as town, and he's not behaving anything like he was then.  I really think he's scum and am waiting for him to do something that makes him more townish.

We really need to kill someone, doods >_>  Knowing we're getting scum is good, but if the entire town gets exhausted before we kill anyone things are going to be bad.

What, so when I try a new tactic you all go against me?

No, when you change your behavior I go against you.  I don't trust changing things.

[dakarian]

Whenever you change your tactic, those that are using your meta will be more suspicious of you.

Whenever you use a tactic that causes you to look worse against certain players, those people will think worse of you.


You can change your tactics, but always be prepared for the backlash of suspicion and be ready to stand for it. 


i.e. the fact that you're still not trying to scumhunt is really really bothering me.  That you need to defend is irrelevant, since it just takes typing two posts: one to defend, one to attack.  Ignore folks that don't like it (i.e. the 'deflecting' argument) because they are fools that would vote for you no matter what you do.


Meanwhile, I think Pandar either needs a prod.  If he's actually here but lurking, then a lynch instead.