Author Topic: Umineko Mafia - Day 4 (Read 70598 times)

Kiro · « **Reply #390 on:** July 25, 2009, 05:55:40 AM »

Quote from: Affinity on July 24, 2009, 06:06:01 AM

1) I never said that Rou was more suspicious than pesco. The vote was just a means of pressure rather than a statement pointing towards who I think is most scummy; I was merely calling him out on something I noticed. pesco was already getting a bulk of the votes with more than enough reasons, elaborated, after all; thus I didn't think my vote on him would be as important or useful at the start of D3

2) I was attacking Rou for voting pesco only the past days, so I don't think there is a basis for comparison.

3) You said Carthrat was not as scummy due to the fact that he didn't vote donut on D1. This should not have been the case.

4) Again, reasons, reasons, reasons, etc. It seems hypocritical that you sometimes analyze the bandwagons without the reasons behind the votes when there is a flip, and analyze the reasons behind votes only when there is no flip available.

1) I never intended to make it sound like you said that. All I'm saying is that Pesco is suspicious in a way that I don't think anybody should ignore after Day 2 and you never mentioned it while you voted Rou. And you were the first to vote on Day 3, you cannot be certain the same people who voted him before would vote him Day 3. Regardless, calling out Rou is fine, but trying to put more weight on it by voting is meh at best when he wasn't going to immediately respond. Can be interpreted as you just parking your vote in a convenient place for a while.

2) Rou voting Pesco only is true, but Pesco is similar for mostly only voting Nuclear Fusion once it got down to it. Pesco held his vote on me because I wasn't around for almost a whole day, but he did at some point state that NF all but has his vote. Since you seemed to be worried about the absolute tunneling, I can't dispute that specific point although I disagree with the idea that it weighs more to prod Rou on this rather than address Pesco first.

3) The point about Carthrat is true so I'll let that pass.

4) It's foolish to take everyone's reasons at face value because some of them are being made by Scum. It's all speculation and yes, it is hypocritical at times. But if you think I'm misreping something, then argue against it and/or accuse me of being scummy for doing so. Other than Pesco, nobody else has really done so. Zakeri didn't like my Day 2 case on him, but he didn't accuse me of misrep so the case stands and if he's Town, he just has to push cases that are better than the one on him including a case on me if he thinks I'm misreping.

Sodium: I'm not defending you explicitly, just saying what I think, that my impression is that you're still a Townie despite your recent unvote which objectively can be seen both ways. And Rou's responses to me do clarify his case on you and I'm seeing why he finds you scummy. My major complaint with his case is that you trying to interpret what Dorian said is a lose-lose situation because there is no answer to objectively satisfy people with. I harbor a strong suspicion of Pesco for trying to get you to do that because it feels like a setup and Rou somewhat for believing your interpretations are of significant weight.

Well, if Zakeri's asleep now, then he'll have to respond by around 10 AM his time or get modkilled?

Carthrat · « **Reply #391 on:** July 25, 2009, 07:51:02 AM »

Well, unless Zak comes back, I'm honestly not sure how this is an actual game anymore. Don't really know what to say, letting him get modkilled during day is obviously better than night, but he's not a frontrunner in my books and I'm pretty annoyed over this.

?lice Bl?ckb?rn · « **Reply #392 on:** July 25, 2009, 08:40:18 AM »

Io continuer? a viver qui, per trasmettere al futuro la prova che tu ci sei stato.
Guarda il cielo a ponente.
Tra poco la luna scomparir?.
La luce che zampilla dall'orizzonte trasforma a poco a poco il colore del cielo.
Ah! Diventa pi? luminoso, il mondo che hai lasciato.

Day 3 Votecount - 1 day, 19 hours remaining.
Pesco (3) - Serpentarius, Kiro, Carthrat
EX Na_2SO_4 (2) - Roukanken, Pesco
Roukanken (1) - Affinity

I'm going to be nice and give Zakeri until 22:00 EST to post before modkilling him, simply because this is fucking ridiculous.

WHMZakeri · « **Reply #393 on:** July 25, 2009, 09:54:30 AM »

I'm sorry. I'm having trouble keeping track of how long a day is with my weird sleeping schedual. I'm not planning on getting modkilled.

I'll sit down now and read try to reread everything before I do anything else.

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #394 on:** July 25, 2009, 10:52:49 AM »

As much as Zak's lurking annoys me, I'm going to wait for his next post before I start judging him. I'd also appreciate if he could produce something with a little more content than his IIoA bandwagon analysis and dissection of Pesco's (now apparently fake) crumbing. :V

Pesco · « **Reply #395 on:** July 25, 2009, 11:39:05 AM »

Did Sodium ever give us the full story of why my claim is believable all of a sudden?

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #396 on:** July 25, 2009, 11:40:36 AM »

No, on the grounds of needing to claim for it. >_>

Pesco · « **Reply #397 on:** July 25, 2009, 11:44:24 AM »

You think that's acceptable? I certainly don't from my role's PoV.

Sodium · « **Reply #398 on:** July 25, 2009, 12:51:21 PM »

Well, it's not really that I need to claim as it is that my role is similar in that it's flavoured useless, except different. How else would I know that there are those roles? This might as well be a roleclaim. =V You probably don't believe me, but yeah.

"Zakeri getting modkilled" train safely stopped before causing a trainwreck. Hurray!

Pesco, what you said implied that you didn't read my posts. -_-

WHMZakeri · « **Reply #399 on:** July 25, 2009, 01:44:54 PM »

The reason I didn't vote for Pesco was because I felt that votes were piling up on him rather quickly and didn't want to end the day too early. the person who brought pesco to L-1 was Sodium, who followed his vote by asking for a vote count.

Pesco:

Quote

I'm disappointed that I didn't come home to a hammer. Y'all suck.

Why were you expecting a hammer not even 24 hours into day 3?

I think I gave my opinion on the questioning Pesco took on Sodium for Dorian's actions. If not, here it is: Why does Sodium's interpretation matter? He got the same role pm, he already knows if Dorian was town or scum. This only serves to trip sodium up.

347 - Why did you ask if you could self-hammer, and why was that priority over voting for Sodium?

Quote from: Pesco 357

If I was going to self hammer, I would have done so long ago.

Really? I thought you were still waiting for an answer to that question.

As for Sodium, I think he's opening himself up to be victimized by Roukanken and Pesco. What I'm getting from his latest posts is that he's letting Pesco's claim confuse him, which honestly seems like the intent of most of Pesco's role claims and breadcrumbs. I do want a fullclaim from Sodium, due to his insistence that knowing Pesco's role name means something important to him.

357 - 377
Again, Pesco, why do you want to be taken to L-1? I'd like to know this especially because of my thoughts on your 347.

Quote from: Roukanken

On D2, pulls out a case on Zakeri for stepping back from the Pesco lynch. Then flips BACK onto NF after he storms off, claiming it'd only help scum. I stand by my earlier belief that Scum!NF would have nothing to gain from this course of action.

Considering that if we had lynched yesterday we would have lost all of day 3 to auto-lynching Nuke do you feel this is a decent point against Kiro?

The first half of Rou's 378 on Sodium is facepalm inducing. I know from experience what it's like to go back and try to justify what the person you replaced said, And I know it's rather hard, since you weren't there when that person said it. Especially if you don't agree with what they said. Basically, no matter how you answer to justifying another person's actions, your answer will always seem scummy. The best answer is to refuse to answer in the first place. This means that the question is loaded to make the answerer look scummy, which means the question itself is scummy because it put equal pressure on town and scum. I don't see why Sodium should take the heat for the way he answered them anymore than for the fact that he did answer them in the first place.

Cut by Sodium: That's pretty much what I was expecting your claim to look like. Taking Asprine is no more significant than using Traffic signs or being a wimp, and unless Alice is stupid (which I seriously doubt) He wouldn't make alignment determinable just from these little pieces of flavor. right now, it should just be treated as a Vanilla ---- claim.

Pesco seems to be doing his best to try and Mindscrew the rest of the town, and targeting Sodium for it. Roukanken's case on Sodium seems to be based largely on Rou buying Pesco's scummy line of questioning

Additionally, I'd like to see quite a bit more from Serp now. Your last posts of note have been (In reverse order)
387-389: Thinks the modkill isn't entirely bad.
368: Tries to Waffle on Sodium after stating he thinks he's town.
324: Scumpair theories resulting in IIoA and prods on Carth and Affinity
I'm seeing Serp give less and less as the day goes on, and while his 312 looks genuine (Listing who he wants to vote and the reasons why) he's yet to do much beyond that.

Pesco · « **Reply #400 on:** July 25, 2009, 02:37:01 PM »

There's too many people distancing from my lynch. L-1 is no big deal when I'm ready to die anytime.

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #401 on:** July 25, 2009, 04:58:42 PM »

Quote from: Zakeri on July 25, 2009, 01:44:54 PM

Considering that if we had lynched yesterday we would have lost all of day 3 to auto-lynching Nuke do you feel this is a decent point against Kiro?

I was unaware at that point that if NF got modkilled during the night scum got a free kill. Thus I'm willing to withdraw this point.

Quote

The first half of Rou's 378 on Sodium is facepalm inducing. I know from experience what it's like to go back and try to justify what the person you replaced said, And I know it's rather hard, since you weren't there when that person said it. Especially if you don't agree with what they said. Basically, no matter how you answer to justifying another person's actions, your answer will always seem scummy. The best answer is to refuse to answer in the first place. This means that the question is loaded to make the answerer look scummy, which means the question itself is scummy because it put equal pressure on town and scum. I don't see why Sodium should take the heat for the way he answered them anymore than for the fact that he did answer them in the first place.

Well from how you put it Francium answered in the worst way possible - he contradicted himself by saying that there was something useful in those posts and then admitting later that he was grasping with what he had to work with. Even admitting 'Dorian's posts were crap' would be better than that in my opinion.

WHMZakeri · « **Reply #402 on:** July 25, 2009, 06:54:00 PM »

Quote from: Pesco

There's too many people distancing from my lynch. L-1 is no big deal when I'm ready to die anytime.

Actually It is a big deal when you're ready to die anytime.

Quote

I was unaware at that point that if NF got modkilled during the night scum got a free kill. Thus I'm willing to withdraw this point.

Okay.

Quote

he contradicted himself by saying that there was something useful in those posts and then admitting later that he was grasping with what he had to work with.

Yes, it's a legitimate contradiction, but contradictions aren't automatically scummy. Yes, it's important to note things like "I want to lynch x, Vote: y" and ["Vote: X" "X is Town" "I didn't like that lynch."]. This only works when you don't know other's alignments. Sodium already knows what Dorian's alignment is. He came into this game knowing because he was given Dorian's Role PM.

Imagine this: You replace in for X. X babbled a little bit, but was vague and eventually dropped out. You recieve the role PM and it reads town. Later you're asked to explain X's actions. Are you more likely to think "X was just a bad player." or "X was a townie, so there has to be some coherent thought behind his posts."

Now imagine if X Was Scum. Would you say "Yeah, he was probably just trying to bandwagon, so I'm just gonna call him a bad player." or "Well, there has to be some coherent thoughts behind his posts."

In the end, the correct answer is just to say "He's a bad player." But I believe that a Naive Townie would be much more likely to try and analyze the previous poster's thoughts before giving up on it like sodium did.

Serp · « **Reply #403 on:** July 25, 2009, 08:30:17 PM »

Quote from: Zakeri on July 25, 2009, 01:44:54 PM

I'm seeing Serp give less and less as the day goes on, and while his 312 looks genuine (Listing who he wants to vote and the reasons why) he's yet to do much beyond that.

Some of that has been legitimate business outside the game. If I had had more time to focus on the thread, I probably would've pressed Sodium again to just tell us who he wants to lynch and maybe added to the Affinity/Kiro exchange. Most of it, though, has just been that my preferred lynch looks like it's going to go through, and there's no real opposition against it for me to argue with. I need to see Pesco's flip to put all this in proper context.

I also object to your mischaracterization of my 368. I was saying that Sodium had not produced anything scummy in my view between my last post and the post where I said I was keeping my eye on him. I noted that his reactions to Roukanken's pressuring gave us all something to chew on. For the record, I agree that asking Sodium to explain Dorian doesn't really give Sodium an easy way out, but I wouldn't call that a scumtell - it's a viable way to force another player to open up and put some statements out there. Those statements can then be analyzed, and if for some reason a player would take any answer to the question as scummy, that's a flaw in the player doing the analyzing, not a flaw in the player doing the questioning.

Quote from: Zakeri

In the end, the correct answer is just to say "He's a bad player." But I believe that a Naive Townie would be much more likely to try and analyze the previous poster's thoughts before giving up on it like sodium did.

And this is practically WIFOM. Of course, a smart scummy player would know what a naive townie's reaction would be. Anyone can feign play that's ordinarily below his level. I believe that Sodium's responses don't contain anything overtly scummy, but his flailing is a somewhat scummy reaction. It doesn't really compare to my preferred case, but it's worth noting in the future.

Also note that I'm going offline and I probably won't be back before the deadline. I'm keeping my vote on Pesco.

Affinity · « **Reply #404 on:** July 25, 2009, 10:47:57 PM »

@Sodium:

Quote

...Isn't that basically ignoring them? I mean, your saying that you acknowledged the bad points about Dorian, dismissed them for being obvious, and still attacked Serp for voting Dorian, while knowing that he had justification for his vote. Why do obvious points=irrelevant?

Well, no, obvious points =/= irrelevant in the big picture, but they were irrelevant to my questioning of Serp. Newbies were newbies after all, and any accusation has to be balanced out by good and bad points on that person, especially at that point in D1.

---

@Kiro:

All I can say at this point is that I sincerely expected others like Rou to further the pesco case, with me focusing on the Rou questioning, and that I neglected to comment on pesco based on this reason.

---

Zakeri's WIFOMing has not been pleasing. Neither are the circular arguments engaged with Roukanken; saying that 'bad players aren't necessarily scummy' and then following it up with 'naive townies are more likely to be bad' doesn't do it for me.

?lice Bl?ckb?rn · « **Reply #405 on:** July 26, 2009, 01:25:19 AM »

Votecount is unchanged, pesco is at L-2, Na_3PO_4 is at L-3, deadline is in 1 day, 2 hours.

Carthrat · « **Reply #406 on:** July 26, 2009, 02:03:21 AM »

I agree with Zak in spirit, I think, if not quite to the letter of what he's saying. The best answer to the interpretation question is to basically ignore it, but if for some reason you feel compelled to reply, then no matter what your alignment, you're probably better off trying to put some townie reasoning behind it. I don't really think there's much there to find short of flamebait.

Quote from: Serp

For the record, I agree that asking Sodium to explain Dorian doesn't really give Sodium an easy way out, but I wouldn't call that a scumtell - it's a viable way to force another player to open up and put some statements out there. Those statements can then be analyzed(snip)

Anything can be analyzed and that's no excuse for asking leading trap questions. Has what's happened given us potential insight into town-scum relations? I guess, sort of, except this is telling us far more about the questioners than the questioned imo.

Is there really another real-time day left of the day? I thought there was a day left... yesterday. Huh.

Sodium · « **Reply #407 on:** July 26, 2009, 02:14:42 AM »

"If *noun here* were scum, I/he/she/it would..." arguments are always WIFOM. Stop using them.

But anyways, I'll admit that it was in poor judgement for me to have done that. There's really no more point in trying to actually argue if it were bad/scummy or not.

So, I'm not impressed with Zakeri's last two posts. Aside from questioning Pesco(which is pretty futile to be honest), he goes out of his way to defend me(it's mainly his "Oh, I've been in a situation like this before, take it easy on him), targets Serp for lacking post content when 1.everyone's been posting less as the Day has been going on and 2.there are others that arguably posted less then Serp(Carthrat,Affinity, etc.). Then his second post is...IF X WERE SCUM WIFOM. Some of the points from Day 2 I also still hold against him(although less now), so...

##Vote Zakeri

Oh, and if I ignored it, they would ask why I didn't answer, and that would've also been viewed as bad/scummy(ignoring questions). The best way out would've probably been to point out the trap aspect of it, but then answering it concisely and clearly anyways.

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #408 on:** July 26, 2009, 02:39:57 AM »

Quote from: Zakeri on July 25, 2009, 06:54:00 PM

In the end, the correct answer is just to say "He's a bad player." But I believe that a Naive Townie would be much more likely to try and analyze the previous poster's thoughts before giving up on it like sodium did.

So your logic is that the contradiction arises simply because CO2 is a bad player? o_o

Meanwhile, I think we've got enough out of the day for a quick self-hammer to not be a tragic loss.

##Unvote: EX Na2O2
Vote: Pesco

That's L-1. Feel like contributing to this discussion rather than prodding at Einsteinium's role?

Kiro · « **Reply #409 on:** July 26, 2009, 04:24:50 AM »

Well, I don't think I have anything more to add at the moment. Pesco doesn't give me much to respond to, in regards to his defense and his suspicions of me. My vote is going to remain there as I'm ready to see the end of Day 3. It's hard to say whether I'd go for Affinity or Zakeri more if Pesco flips scum, but I wouldn't ignore anyone else as Carthrat and Serp have quieted down and there are still minor concerns with Sodium and Rou. Otherwise, a Pesco Town flip throws those first 2 cases out of wack a bit.

Pesco · « **Reply #410 on:** July 26, 2009, 07:29:11 AM »

Rou is town. Kiro is more likely town to me due to external reasoning. I still think Random Chemical is scum, and wouldn't put it past Serp and Carthrat riding it out as stand-alones.

How did I conclude all this? Satorimindhax^TM

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #411 on:** July 26, 2009, 10:08:15 AM »

When I asked you to contribute to the discussion, I didn't mean 'I trust A B and C and don't like D based on gut'. I've noted that Zak is mysteriously absent from your List of Mindhax, and it's strange you don't have any opinion on him given how much he's come up in recent discussion.

On that note, what's your opinion of Affinity?

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #412 on:** July 26, 2009, 10:24:52 AM »

EBWOP: Obviously I'm expecting an opinion on Zak as well. Just saying that so you don't worm your way out with an excuse like 'but you didn't ask'. >_>

Pesco · « **Reply #413 on:** July 26, 2009, 10:29:26 AM »

No opinion on Zak. Just call him the Alice stand-in for this game.

If I've got an opinion on Affinity, I'm keeping it to myself.

I've told you all enough times I'm well past my sell-by date.

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #414 on:** July 26, 2009, 10:36:34 AM »

Quote from: Pesco on July 26, 2009, 10:29:26 AM

No opinion on Zak. Just call him the Alice stand-in for this game.

By which you mean...what? Lurking But Still Contributing Something Of Use Alice or Lurking And Being Generally Useless Alice?

Quote from: Pesco on July 26, 2009, 10:29:26 AM

If I've got an opinion on Affinity, I'm keeping it to myself.

...Sometimes you make me wish I had two votes instead of one. :|

Pesco · « **Reply #415 on:** July 26, 2009, 10:53:40 AM »

I think Zak's been busy in general. What can you really do about it.

I've ignored Affinity most of the game. There's simply nothing to see.

You better stop with the conspiracy theories if you don't want to burst some veins. It's for your own physical health.

WHMZakeri · « **Reply #416 on:** July 26, 2009, 11:13:30 AM »

I know I've already lost the argument, but I still feel it's more likely that a townie would fall into that trap than scum would. I don't get how what I said becomes WiFoM before the part where you dismiss Occam's Razor.

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #417 on:** July 26, 2009, 11:17:57 AM »

Quote from: Zakeri on July 26, 2009, 11:13:30 AM

Occam's Razor

Yeah, Occam's Razor doesn't really apply to Mafia games (as someone told me a few games back). For the sake of example, let's look at Alice's claim in Workers' Union. 'His claim is legitimate and he's really a doc' is indeed the simpler answer, but 'His claim is fake and he's coming up with excuses as to why he can't kill as he goes along' is the correct one. Just because something is simple doesn't mean it's probably right here.

Quote from: Pesco on July 26, 2009, 10:53:40 AM

You better stop with the conspiracy theories if you don't want to burst some veins. It's for your own physical health.

ITT subtle attempts to distract me from playing via health concerns.

WHMZakeri · « **Reply #418 on:** July 26, 2009, 12:20:20 PM »

That's one instance where the Unlikely was true, yes, but does that mean we should start dismissing the things that are more likely? At what point then does a Scumtell become a scumtell and a towntell become a towntell? Doesn't everything then become undecipherable WiFoM?

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #419 on:** July 26, 2009, 12:57:29 PM »

The point is that Occam's Razor says 'because it's simple, it's probably right'. I'm not saying that scumtells aren't scumtells, I'm saying we shouldn't assume one argument is true just because it's simpler.