Print

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

[NUKE9.13]

Straight up asking someone if they are town will only ever get one answer*. The trick is in how they answer it.
I wanted to see if Shark would answer this question in a manner resembling the way in which he answered the 'how to win' question (overthinking it). If so, I would tentatively conclude that that's just the sort of person he is.
If he seemed overly reactive, I would press him for the reason for his panic. Four votes is an understandable reason to panic, so I would be lenient- but still, panicky people crack. It's always worth seeing what oozes out.
If he answered it in a very calm and rational manner- well, that would be interesting. I would question him on his sudden flip in behaviour, and perhaps concede that McArathos could be correct in identifying his previous actions as scummy.

Or something like that; those are the three reaction archetypes I was expecting, and what I would take from them.

McArathos, as I mentioned, looks to be scum looking for an easy D1 lynch; someone who made a clear mistake, which can easily be exaggerated, and through the application of (undue) pressure enhanced in a marinade of inexperience and panic. His case on Shark was valid, to an extent, but it felt... to well thought out, as it were. Like he thought "here is someone vaguely scummy, now how can I make them look scummier".

Shakerag: I was joking, of course, but I still don't like that you just totally ignore me. Mind telling me what was going through your mind as I unfolded my ridiculous assault on logic?

[Jim Groovester]

So what's his alignment?  This is a bit evasive for someone who is usually very blunt.

I thought saying that Orangebottle was getting taken advantage of would have made it clear.

I think he's town.

On that subject, why exactly are you voting Shark?  It looks more like a policy lynch than anything else right now.

Mostly because of flimsily justified bandwagon vote. Or rather, the only thing of content he posted before ditching the game.

He has a shitty day game that lots of people are taking advantage of right now.

While I appreciate the defense, I'm a big boy, Jim. I can handle myself. Do you think I'm town? Why don't you agree with the accusation of rolefishing?

I'm seeing something strange from you this game. I don't know what's bothering me, but I have a bad feeling about your posts. And these things have been very accurate in the past.

It's not about you, brehosephat, but the people voting you.

If I thought you were trying to rolefish by asking that question, I would have voted you for it. Instead, I saw it as an RVS question of little consequence. If I thought you were trying to be malicious about it I would have asked you several questions, like the RVS question I did ask about.

Jim, why did you put the fourth vote on Shark while he's being replaced?

'Cuz he's suspicious and asking for a replacement doesn't magically make him less scum.

[Shakerag]

Shakerag: I was joking, of course, but I still don't like that you just totally ignore me. Mind telling me what was going through your mind as I unfolded my ridiculous assault on logic?

That it was a ridiculous assault on logic. 

[Orangebottle]

The trick is in how they answer it.
I wanted to see if Shark would answer this question in a manner resembling the way in which he answered the 'how to win' question (overthinking it). If so, I would tentatively conclude that that's just the sort of person he is.
If he seemed overly reactive, I would press him for the reason for his panic. Four votes is an understandable reason to panic, so I would be lenient- but still, panicky people crack. It's always worth seeing what oozes out.
If he answered it in a very calm and rational manner- well, that would be interesting. I would question him on his sudden flip in behaviour, and perhaps concede that McArathos could be correct in identifying his previous actions as scummy.

Or something like that; those are the three reaction archetypes I was expecting, and what I would take from them.

Except that can only ever get one answer from anyone remotely intelligent, that answer being "Yes." Townies are townies, and we want to play the game instead of getting lynched, so we say "Yes." Scum will always say yes because they want to look like town. There's an exception to every rule, and for this one it's a claiming survivor.

It would take someone of Orglike intelligence to overreact to this question.

McArathos, as I mentioned, looks to be scum looking for an easy D1 lynch; someone who made a clear mistake, which can easily be exaggerated, and through the application of (undue) pressure enhanced in a marinade of inexperience and panic. His case on Shark was valid, to an extent, but it felt... to well thought out, as it were. Like he thought "here is someone vaguely scummy, now how can I make them look scummier".

And this feels...too much like bullshit to ignore. You're going to lynch someone for thinking too much?

[IronyOwl]

Nuke: That's great and all, but it still doesn't explain why you used your just-now attack on OB as proof that you didn't suspect Shark. Why did you feel the need to prove yourself like that, and how is that supposed to mean anything?

[NativeForeigner]

Native:

Been busy with holiday stuff at my family's, as a result, this game hasn't been getting the attention it deserves. That'll change, soon. Regardless, I'm content with the placement of my vote for obvious reasons.

You're content with lynching someone for not answering your question immediately?  Even though he has now answered the question, he is still doomed to die?

No, I'm content with lynching someone for trying to metalynch someone for always wanting to metalynch someone else, among other things.

[Leafsnail]

I've used pressure today, asked questions, and hunted a bit. Do I really need to be voting someone constantly to be effective? It sounds pretty ridiculous to me.

You'd been asking questions, but didn't seem to have any actual suspicions.  Certainly nothing that was worth your vote, it seems.

Apparently you do, because I don't understand. Both have a great deal to lose from their power roles targeting a PWV.

Mafia care more about losing their members since they start off with fewer people, and generally the reasonably high chance of a loss of a mafia member will outweigh the relatively slight chance of the loss of a town PR.

This looks like a lazy bandwagon.

I have a hard time figuring out what your case is, other than you're just agreeing with Leafsnail for the sake of agreeing with Leafsnail.

Man, I sure hope you have original arguments that you're not just borrowing from Leafsnail.

Hey, you can talk to me directly, you know.  It seems odd that you hate my case so much yet won't confront me about it at all.  Maybe while you're at it you can explain why Orangebottle looks so town in spite of asking a rolefishing question, deflecting when pressed on said question, then denying it was rolefishing, then eventually deciding that actually yes, it was rolefishing, but he didn't want to just admit a mistake in the first place for some reason.

Incidentally, he also decided to bandwagon my point about Nuke here, but I guess it's only bad to agree with my point when you're doing it to Orangebottle.

Speaking of which, Nuke, I feel this is more pertinent that ever:

I can really feel you trying to end the RVS you hate so much by asking RVS type questions after the RVS has finished.

And doing nothing else.

Stuff is happening.  You don't need to be doing lolrandom crap for reactions now.  Especially if you don't like RVS.

[Orangebottle]

Apparently you do, because I don't understand. Both have a great deal to lose from their power roles targeting a PWV.

Mafia care more about losing their members since they start off with fewer people, and generally the reasonably high chance of a loss of a mafia member will outweigh the relatively slight chance of the loss of a town PR.

Right. Thanks for explaining.

Incidentally, he also decided to bandwagon my point about Nuke here, but I guess it's only bad to agree with my point when you're doing it to Orangebottle.

Not only did I say I was agreeing with you, but I was actually doing something with your point instead of just sitting there with it like you were.

[Urist Imiknorris]

Native:

No, I'm content with lynching someone for trying to metalynch someone for always wanting to metalynch someone else, among other things.

What other things?

Leafsnail:

This looks like a lazy bandwagon.

I have a hard time figuring out what your case is, other than you're just agreeing with Leafsnail for the sake of agreeing with Leafsnail.

Man, I sure hope you have original arguments that you're not just borrowing from Leafsnail.

Hey, you can talk to me directly, you know.  It seems odd that you hate my case so much yet won't confront me about it at all.

I'm trying to figure out how Jim implied that he hates your case. Would you please explain?

[Jim Groovester]

Hey, you can talk to me directly, you know.  It seems odd that you hate my case so much yet won't confront me about it at all.  Maybe while you're at it you can explain why Orangebottle looks so town in spite of asking a rolefishing question, deflecting when pressed on said question, then denying it was rolefishing, then eventually deciding that actually yes, it was rolefishing, but he didn't want to just admit a mistake in the first place for some reason.

Incidentally, he also decided to bandwagon my point about Nuke here, but I guess it's only bad to agree with my point when you're doing it to Orangebottle.

But I'd rather talk around you until it moves you to respond. Or maybe I just don't care as much about what you're doing as I do all the people who are lazily going along with you.

Part of Orangebottle's shitty day game is that he doesn't know how to defend himself when he gets attacked, opting to defer to his attacker's opinion very frequently. He did this in Wild West Mafia and I lynched him for it on Day 3, after almost lynching him for it on Day 2. I'm sure I could find other examples if I really wanted to, but it satisfies me enough that this isn't too far from normal for him.

Essentially I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill, but then there are all these other people who totally agree with you about it for some reason.

[NativeForeigner]

Rolefishing and saying it's not rolefishing because people can lie.

[Urist_McArathos]

McArathos, as I mentioned, looks to be scum looking for an easy D1 lynch; someone who made a clear mistake, which can easily be exaggerated, and through the application of (undue) pressure enhanced in a marinade of inexperience and panic. His case on Shark was valid, to an extent, but it felt... to well thought out, as it were. Like he thought "here is someone vaguely scummy, now how can I make them look scummier".

This is just plain silly.  I saw something scummy, and clearly stated why I felt that way.  You're seriously criticizing me for thinking my actions through before voting?

[Jack A T]

Oh, you find him scummy, do you?

Maybe you could explain just exactly what it is you find scummy about him. You see, that's what I wanted when I said that I had a hard time figuring out what your case is.

All I see you saying is that Orangebottle was rolefishing, which is an accusation I don't agree with and I suspect you for so readily agreeing with it.

Jim: Sorry, I saw that statement as just a snarky rhetorical anti-bandwagoning jab, and not an attempt to clarify my case.

Second, I'm not impressed, Jim.  Please, in the future, actually read my posts when you want to attack me for them.  Here's one quotation, bolded and underlined to assist the willfully blind:

The problem I have is your reaction to the idea that it might be rolefishing.

If you want a more detailed description of my case, keep on reading from there.  But just remember this: my case has never been about OB's question being rolefishing.  It has been about his reaction to that idea.  This can be recognized from the post in which I voted as well, where I voted for his belief that his question wasn't rolefishing because people might lie.

Also, I have to wonder now: how strongly do you suspect Leafsnail?

The problem I have is your reaction to the idea that it might be rolefishing.  Essentially, the possibility of lying doesn't make a question suddenly not rolefishing, or usable for rolefishing.  For example, take the question "What action did you take last night?".  Yes, the response may be a complete and total lie, but that doesn't change the fact that the question is blatant rolefishing.  Under your logic, however, the possibility of lying makes the question a non-rolefishing question.
Do you see the problem now?

.........
Sometimes I amaze myself.
I was stating my opinion on why I think rolefishing is useless, for some reason.
So, yeah, totally get why that question was rolefishing. It was entirely unintentional rolefishing, though.

Orangebottle: I'm not exactly sure I understand.  In this post, you explicitly used what you are now calling your opinion on why rolefishing is useless to prove that your question wasn't rolefishing.  I'm having trouble understanding how you got here from there.  So, do you have any idea why you did this?

[Dariush]

Jim, why did you put the fourth vote on Shark while he's being replaced?

'Cuz he's suspicious and asking for a replacement doesn't magically make him less scum.

Except he can't really defend himself if he's being replaced. This looks like looking for an easy lynch, Jim.

Dariush:

It's dependent on both, or rather whether the reality and the impression coincide.

How so?

If the question is stupid and he says it's stupid, it's a nulltell.
If the question is not stupid and he says it's not stupid, it's a nulltell.
If the question is not stupid and he says it's stupid, it's a scumtell.
If the question is stupid and he says it's not stupid, it's a scumtell.

Also, "How did you miss this?" was a question. Now it's "How did you miss both of these plus that other thing?" though.

I missed it. How exactly am I supposed to explain how did I miss it?

[Orangebottle]

Orangebottle: I'm not exactly sure I understand.  In this post, you explicitly used what you are now calling your opinion on why rolefishing is useless to prove that your question wasn't rolefishing.  I'm having trouble understanding how you got here from there.  So, do you have any idea why you did this?

You're not the only one who has trouble understanding what the hell I was doing when that happened. I'm thinking it was me going,"It's useless, why would I do it?" etc.