Fire Emblem 6 Mafia: (Day 4)

[Rapier]

Probably because there is an existence of Rapier posts to begin with.

For now

Paper, don't disappear like that. u_u

[Paperblade]

I just feel like he's trying too hard, it reminds me of bear in fakeclaim

SB had the same deal, it's pretty much ED1 since nothing happened N0 but SB got really defensive over what was essentially an RVS vote imo

[Paperblade]

also I have a presentation in half an hour that I'm supposed to be finishing up on but lolgonnamafiainstead

[Xinnidy]

About the first part of the post, I find it as a mix between strawman fallacy and putting words into my mouth, so I'll dismiss it.

It's admittedly an extremism, not intended as a strawman. But considering mine was the 18th post of Day 1 with an oh-so-informative night 0, I find the parallel valid. I disagree with you punishing your read on me because you find my argument shallow, when it follows the same principle, only in an enviroment where there was naturally less content.

I am not against you putting pressure on SB. In fact, I find it LEGIT. What I didn't like was that your reasoning was too shallow and you didn't explain why he looked scummy to you (no justification for 'hey, his content doesn't seem town and I don't like the "it could go both ways" excuse'. Why don't you like that excuse? Why doesn't his content seem town to you?).

Because it doesn't seem town.

Too defensive too early, with a questionable information drop, I've repeated it a fair while back.

You said now that SB's defense was weak because it relied on uncertainty. I'm waiting for his defense. He could also tell me why he went to far as to vote me as a nudge.

Even you know it.

[Shinori]

Haven't been reading things but first post of game hi thar people.

##Vote: Paperblade

You're so rude.

I'll actually read things since I'm assuming something happened but I'm lazy and yeah.

[Rapier]

I just feel like he's trying too hard, it reminds me of bear in fakeclaim

SB had the same deal, it's pretty much ED1 since nothing happened N0 but SB got really defensive over what was essentially an RVS vote imo

How can I be trying too hard when the game just started? It's kind of soon to tell...

Also, sorry for not being a psych and knowing about your presentation. Seriously though, sorry for pressing you at a time like this. Feel free to answer me when you can.

Because it doesn't seem town.

Too defensive too early, with a questionable information drop, I've repeated it a fair while back.

You did... After I questioned you. While I don't really agree with you, you fixed the issue that I had with you about your point being shallow, and I found Paper to be a better target now. Going to rest my case on him until I see a bit more content (he already explained himself on that matter, and I am content in waiting for him until he's got more free time to play and expand his thoughts).

[Da Bear]

Paper's sb vote looked pretty in the norm for him imo. I wouldn't say it's lazy or anything like that

Rapier's posts bother me for some reason[/quote

People were asking why you found/find SB overly defensive.

You answered with a gutread and still haven't answered.

Then you still haven't answered rapier's case on you and instead have said he's trying too hard and you find that scummy. Yet aren't voting him over your case 2-3 hours into D1.

Paper seems literally dodgy rn.

[Da Bear]

Quoting is hard. I see Paper has a presentation, he was around long enough that he should've been able to answee but as long as he answers I'll be fine.

On phone so I have to say stuff separately.

[Rapier]

Then you still haven't answered rapier's case on you and instead have said he's trying too hard and you find that scummy. Yet aren't voting him over your case 2-3 hours into D1.

Paper seems literally dodgy rn.

If he switches his vote to me, I'll want to know the reason why I became a better target than SB. Trying too hard doesn't seem like a scum thing unless he can make a link between my content and scum purpose.

[Da Bear]

If he switches his vote to me, I'll want to know the reason why I became a better target than SB. Trying too hard doesn't seem like a scum thing unless he can make a link between my content and scum purpose.

Defensivenes is the same way though, defending yourself from a case is null, it's part of mafia. It's how either act is commited that matters.

The fact is that he's talked about your scumminess (iho) instead of SB's in those last few posts. That makes it look to me like he finds you scummier Yet he hasn't voteswitched

I'm not going to say more until he can clarify but I dislike his last few posts.

[Paperblade]

are you guys actually reading my posts

[Da Bear]

are you guys actually reading my posts

Restating that you found SB defensive =\= explaining what was defensive. I didn't see the defensiveness so I want an explanation On that

[Rapier]

An explanation on why our actions are scummy would be great, too.

[Prims]

##Vote Rapier

Bad Vibes™.

[Paperblade]

I stated twice why SB is scummy. Vhaltz made a vote with bad reasons and SB got defensive over it going all "lol I don't see how that's scummy". The posts are like 3 sentences you can go read them yourselves.

Rapier is scummy because he has like twice as many posts as everyone else and is just pushing nonsense and switching his vote around, he goes "Paper made a point about SB" and then switches to "Paper has not explained his SB read." Which is it?

Also dislike how Rapier is grouping himself in with bear, feels like he's trying to buddy up to him imo

[Paperblade]

##Unvote, ##Vote: Rapier

fight me

[Eurykins]

Path of Exile and Starbound, man~ too good.

SB's actions thus far don't bug me too much; the way people seemed to blow up the situation bugged me far more. :/

Xinnidy/Rapier - I can see Rapier's logic in his posting, but at the same time I felt the tunneling posting on Xin that happened seemed a bit... (English is hard right now, can't seem to find the right words...) extreme/unnecessary?

Paper's earlier postings came off fragmented, but (given that I just got my post ninja'd and read his latest posts) the vibes from him are a little better atm.

Also, I didn't care for Rapier's last few comments either:

If he switches his vote to me, I'll want to know the reason why I became a better target than SB. Trying too hard doesn't seem like a scum thing unless he can make a link between my content and scum purpose.

Bolded part just seemed....idk. Like he was baiting Paper into voting for him anyways, as a test/bait? And instead of waiting to see what Paper himself does/replies with, Rapier's assuming/anticipating his actions beforehand (and pulling up his own response in exchange to the anticipated action), which seems pretty off to me. It's still relatively early in D1- either there's a lack of patience, or something else. Not sure if posting this towards Bear as well = win points with someone else? Or merely just part of the conversation flow.

Latter part: ...The statement itself isn't untrue, but... I'm feeling weird about it. The vibes... are unpleasant- something just strikes me as really off when reading it.

An explanation on why our actions are scummy would be great, too.

I guess this would tie in with the Bear situation- but also goes with the earlier comments of how I'm seeing Rapier's mountains of posting. (Yes, I myself have... what, 2-3 posts in comparison?) I just feel that he's moving/directing the flow of the conversation almost single-handedly- anticipating comments, prompting answers ASAP, and dropping one vote/interrogation of someone in lieu of another quickly, diverting the flow of the discussion as a result.

##Unvote

##Vote: Rapier

[Bluedoom]

Got some interesting info last night. Just came by to say that.

Heads up, might be busy until Monday lol, because EXAMS GOT POSTPONED. :|

[Bluedoom]

Ok so I have a bit of time. Hmmm

I have da BALLZ to say Paper and Rapier are both scummy. Totally waffling here, get on my level! *smugface*

Ok so, I think Rapier's vote pattern is bad because it feels like he voted Xinnidy when SB pressured him but then switched his vote to Paper after he was satisfied with her arguments, except he votes Paper for the same reasons anyway and it just feels weak and feels like "Oh My God U Suck." 8]

I think Paper looks bad because his SB vote was weak and I don't see what was so defensive about SB's statements? If I were in his position I'd be pretty pissed that someone is voting me just because I said something about the setup. Also Rapier vote feels too easy as well because he forgets that Rapier has a meta of doing dumb stuff and when he could defend Proto based on meta in CYOR mafia then you'd expect him to do the same for Rapier over here. Feels opportunistic to me.

##Vote: Paperblade for now because I don't have anything else to say.

[Rapier]

##Unvote, ##Vote: Rapier

fight me

En garde!

I stated twice why SB is scummy. Vhaltz made a vote with bad reasons and SB got defensive over it going all "lol I don't see how that's scummy". The posts are like 3 sentences you can go read them yourselves.

Except you didn't. Continue reading and see what I said below.

##Vote: SB

don't think Vhaltz's thing has merit but SB seems over defensive to me

You never specified why SB's defense could be counted as overdefensiveness or why it is bad. Really, answering "I don't see how that's scummy" is over defensive for you? At least Xin has a more valid point, since he finds uncertainty a weak defense. You however just left with a simple remark and a vote.

Rapier is scummy because he has like twice as many posts as everyone else and is just pushing nonsense and switching his vote around, he goes "Paper made a point about SB" and then switches to "Paper has not explained his SB read." Which is it?

Also dislike how Rapier is grouping himself in with bear, feels like he's trying to buddy up to him imo

"Pushing nonsense and switching his vote around", eh? I switched my vote from Xin to you (unless you count my lolvote on Rein), I haven't been jumping around all that time. I don't see how this is even a thing.

You made a point about SB, albeit a weak, vague one. There's no contradiction here. Why is my content considered as nonsense again?

@Prims

Thanks for voting me without using arguments as a back up. Your weak gut-read vote contributes a lot to the discussion and scumhunting in general.

Bolded part just seemed....idk. Like he was baiting Paper into voting for him anyways, as a test/bait? And instead of waiting to see what Paper himself does/replies with, Rapier's assuming/anticipating his actions beforehand (and pulling up his own response in exchange to the anticipated action), which seems pretty off to me. It's still relatively early in D1- either there's a lack of patience, or something else. Not sure if posting this towards Bear as well = win points with someone else? Or merely just part of the conversation flow.

Latter part: ...The statement itself isn't untrue, but... I'm feeling weird about it. The vibes... are unpleasant- something just strikes me as really off when reading it.

I thought Paper was going to vote me but didn't because he said he didn't have enough time, so I just assumed that was going to happen after he was back. In Mafia, it's common to switch to a better target once you have more arguments against it than against your previous one (Paper has more points against me than against SB). I answered Bear because I agreed with the "you didn't answer Rapier's questions and you didn't answer why he's scummy" part, my response was a complement to this.

I guess this would tie in with the Bear situation- but also goes with the earlier comments of how I'm seeing Rapier's mountains of posting. (Yes, I myself have... what, 2-3 posts in comparison?) I just feel that he's moving/directing the flow of the conversation almost single-handedly- anticipating comments, prompting answers ASAP, and dropping one vote/interrogation of someone in lieu of another quickly, diverting the flow of the discussion as a result.

Which flow am I diverting others from? SB? Well, the only ones going after SB are (were) Xin, Paper and Vhaltz. If Paper and Vhaltz decided to drop their thing about SB, that was their choice. I addressed Xin after Vhaltz's point, then decided that Paper was better because his justification on voting SB is worse than Xin's. My suspect list is too simple and clear, so is my action pattern. Also, sorry, but I can't predict comments and think before hand what I'm going to answer, this is a somewhat absurd allegation unless I've been rehearsing with the others in some hidden thread now isn't that suspicious??

I already explained why I dropped my interrogation on Xin (actually, I think we reached a stalemate for now). Also, I see a contradiction here: You said I was being too extremist by 'tunneling' Xin, then you said I dropped his case too quickly. Which is it?

Ok so, I think Rapier's vote pattern is bad because it feels like he voted Xinnidy when SB pressured him but then switched his vote to Paper after he was satisfied with her arguments, except he votes Paper for the same reasons anyway and it just feels weak and feels like "Oh My God U Suck." 8]

OMGUS is to Mafia as Hitler is to Sturgeon's Law. Someone should make a Law about OMGUS, seriously. Also, you're missing the meaning of it.

OMGUS stands for "Oh My God, You Suck (for voting for me)!". it is sometimes used as a shorthand to indicate that you are voting for someone primarily because they voted for you.

Paper only voted me AFTER I voted him (I'm NOT calling him for a OMGUS, by the way), so accusing me of doing that doesn't make any sense. You're missing the chronological order here, Mar-Mar.

I also pressioned and addressed Xin BEFORE SB "pressioned" me. As I said before, I derped and forgot to vote Xin on my last post. I waited for another post so I wouldn't be double-posting a lot. I already answered this...

I voted Paper for the same reason, yes. The difference is that Xin explained himself whereas Paper only made a weak, vague point about SB being overdefensive for his "this could go either way, scum or town" excuse. Also:

I think Paper looks bad because his SB vote was weak and I don't see what was so defensive about SB's statements? If I were in his position I'd be pretty pissed that someone is voting me just because I said something about the setup. Also Rapier vote feels too easy as well because he forgets that Rapier has a meta of doing dumb stuff and when he could defend Proto based on meta in CYOR mafia then you'd expect him to do the same for Rapier over here. Feels opportunistic to me.

You seem to agree with my points, yet you call me for my reason to vote Paper. Am I missing something here? You're voting Paper for the same reason that I am.

Also, why do you not consider your vote on me "too easy" as well? You agree with my reasoning, yet you find me scummy.

[Elieson]

Rein Still Isn't Playing Votals

---

Paperblade (5): bearclaw13, Polydeuces, Rapier, Shinori, Bluedoom {L-3}

Rapier (4): SB., Prims, Paperblade, Eurykins

SB. (1): Xinnidy

Xinnidy (1): Vhaltz

Voteless Dorks: scorri, Helios, Refa

With 14 voters, 8 votes equals a phase ending Hammer (although it's not necessary).

You have just under 46 hours left until Day 1 ends.

[Eurykins]

(1) I thought Paper was going to vote me but didn't because he said he didn't have enough time, so I just assumed that was going to happen after he was back. In Mafia, it's common to switch to a better target once you have more arguments against it than against your previous one (Paper has more points against me than against SB). I answered Bear because I agreed with the "you didn't answer Rapier's questions and you didn't answer why he's scummy" part, my response was a complement to this.

(2) Which flow am I diverting others from? SB? Well, the only ones going after SB are (were) Xin, Paper and Vhaltz. If Paper and Vhaltz decided to drop their thing about SB, that was their choice. I addressed Xin after Vhaltz's point, then decided that Paper was better because his justification on voting SB is worse than Xin's. My suspect list is too simple and clear, so is my action pattern. Also, sorry, but I can't predict comments and think before hand what I'm going to answer, this is a somewhat absurd allegation unless I've been rehearsing with the others in some hidden thread now isn't that suspicious??

(3) I already explained why I dropped my interrogation on Xin (actually, I think we reached a stalemate for now). Also, I see a contradiction here: You said I was being too extremist by 'tunneling' Xin, then you said I dropped his case too quickly. Which is it?

1. Hmmmm.... reasonable enough. And I suppose the complement just seemed too convenient at the time (the feeling of buddy-buddying aspect seemed, at least to me, pretty bold.), but I see/ackowledge that point.

2. I can't say that I altogether believe the italicized comment stated, given that, as seen below, you're already at least half-way anticipating a vote switch from Paper (since, if you hadn't thought/considered it to happen, you wouldn't have posted the thoughts to begin with). And as a result, you were prepared in how to respond to said vote even before his vote actually switched on you.

If he switches his vote to me, I'll want to know the reason why I became a better target than SB. Trying too hard doesn't seem like a scum thing unless he can make a link between my content and scum purpose.

And underlined claim: So.... according to you, you're unable to think/consider how people will respond/take comments, and therefore unable to look ahead and consider the consequences (and your resulting actions)? That seems a bit surprising to claim, and I don't altogether believe that after the amount of posting/content I've seen you post so far in this game.

3. There is no contradiction to be had. While you were still on Xin, you were tunneling on him hard. And then you abruptly switched your case to Paper after Xin satisfied your earlier interrogations. Perhaps you were somewhat justified in your change of targets, but that doesn't change how hard the prior target's tunneling happened.

[However, in sheer responsiveness/willingness to post your replies, I can say that your vibes are improving just a tiny bit, maybe. Still not thrilled/convinced, but in a slightly better light.]

I can see Blue's point regarding Paper's posting (as I stated earlier, his fragmented typing seemed pretty awkward/weird to me and was dropping some bad vibes), but I'm not sure atm if it warrants me vote-swapping onto him.

[Eurykins]

*acknowledge

Typos, so good.

[inb4 "BBM cum meta" strikes]

[Refa]

##Vote: SB

First post in-thread amounts to "hey guys I'm asking the mod setup/role questions I'm so town"

Scorri is guilty of the same thing but I don't have two votes this time.

This logic is just a little too forced for my liking. I don't like how you erroneously drew the assumption that him asking the mod setup/role questions and appearing to be a townie are one and the same.

But if he would have to be scum to know that you're scum then you just claimed scum and outed a buddy.

##Unvote
##Vote: Paperblade

Your reasoning may be but jest, but even then your actions don't match up with your words. Why did you not vote for Rapier at the time?

Imo I don't see how SB's posts amounted to claim any towniness and scorri's interaction just seems more unlikely and graspy.

How were scorri's interactions any better than SB's?

That said, I find defending the logic of it by saying 'it could be valid for both town and scum' suspect.

##Vote: SB

That's bad scumhunting. Noone is going to be the ideal perfect townie 100% of the time, so it's important to search for actions that specifically have scum intent. It's one thing if you felt his action had scum intent (according to your post, it just didn't benefit town), but saying that "well it could be scum" is a rather weak reason to be voting someone (especially since that could be applied to almost every other player).

I don't see the point on SB's case, honestly. Seems like a nulltell for me. However, this being early D1, I didn't expect an awesome point against him either.

Nice job idly commenting on the situation without offering any new thoughts on it, your position on the matter (notice how he waffled), or really anything productive. 48 points.

Actually, I can see how SB's first post could've been useful from a town perspective. It doesn't necessarily make him town but I'd feel dumb going to sleep while keeping that vote.

##Unvote

##Vote: Xinnidy

All of the fluff. Not only fluff but useless waffle fluff:

- dismiss my line of reasoning

- delve into line of reasoning anyway

- dismiss it again

- jump on SB anyway over the reasoning the other guy on the wagon brought up

Are Xin's posts commonly like this?

Ugh, this case. It's like, hello pot, my name is kettle. And fluff isn't necessarily scummy, as long as there is something of actual value in that post.

On the contrary. If you're accusing someone, you can't deal with uncertainty as if it was nothing. However, the defensive side CAN use uncertainty as a point in their favor against the other side's case, because it could be both ways and the burden of proof is first on the offensive side.

Both you and Paper fail to answer why SB's content was scum inclined and how it couldn't be a null tell. You're the worst offender because of the parroting.

lolwhat. The accusing side can never be absolutely certain that they'll catch scum barring extreme circumstances, and the defensive side being able to use it is fucking retarded. The defensive side should prove their towniness, not be like "WELL THIS ACTION COULD COME FROM TOWN INTENT." Also it's a bit high of you to complain about someone's ED1 vote on a potentially null tell when you haven't had any stronger votes yourself.

About the first part of the post, I find it as a mix between strawman fallacy and putting words into my mouth, so I'll dismiss it.

Don't throw around terms you clearly don't know the meaning of. You say she's misrepping your position, prove that that is the case, don't just wuss out.

I am not against you putting pressure on SB. In fact, I find it LEGIT. What I didn't like was that your reasoning was too shallow and you didn't explain why he looked scummy to you (no justification for 'hey, his content doesn't seem town and I don't like the "it could go both ways" excuse'. Why don't you like that excuse? Why doesn't his content seem town to you?). I am not criticizing you for voting SB or trying to get any reaction out of him. I am criticizing the way you did so.

This is BS, you're essentially voting Xinny because her vote wasn't strong enough to you, rather than because you're finding any scum intent from it. Your vote is worse than hers.

You did... After I questioned you. While I don't really agree with you, you fixed the issue that I had with you about your point being shallow, and I found Paper to be a better target now. Going to rest my case on him until I see a bit more content (he already explained himself on that matter, and I am content in waiting for him until he's got more free time to play and expand his thoughts).

I thought your Paperblade case was fine, but then I realized my problem with you. You're just going around and laying easy prodvotes. No doubt if the Paperblade bandwagon hadn't picked up, you'd have voted me and told me to post more. After Xinny started actually arguing back you just sort of gave up on your case (tbf it kind of sucked anyways), and prodded someone else.

Ok so, I think Rapier's vote pattern is bad because it feels like he voted Xinnidy when SB pressured him but then switched his vote to Paper after he was satisfied with her arguments, except he votes Paper for the same reasons anyway and it just feels weak and feels like "Oh My God U Suck." 8]

How is Rapier's vote on Paperblade an OMGUS, if anything it would be the other way around...

##Vote Rapier

If you didn't read my massive quote block, just know this. His scumhunting amounts to a bunch of prodvotes and telling people their arguments aren't good enough. I don't think I've seen a single action from him where he actually looks at the scum intent of the person involved, yet he complains that Xinny and Paperblade are voting SB for what amounts to a null read; hypocritical much? Additionally, he's clogging up the thread with his prodvotes and defense of his superlame actions.

Other people bothering me are Xinny and Vhaltz. For Xinny, it's not so much the weak case on SB that bothers me as her holding onto it for so long. Also note that her case on SB involves him being overly defensive, but then she spends a good deal of her posts defending her actions (although tbf that's probably because Rapier is pushing that case for so long) which just bothers me (wouldn't really call it hypocritical though). Vhaltz's scumhunting has just read as weak and forced to me.

Not really too gutted by Paperblade or SB atm. I don't like how Paperblade hasn't posted all that much either, but I'm dying to hear what makes him worse than the many other players who could probably be in the same category. As for SB, it's less that I think that he's town and more that I think the case on him was just bad.

[Paperblade]

SB responded to a vote that had pretty contrived reasoning, which I think is totally unnecessary. I'm getting really annoyed that I've had to explain this to you multiple times and you just go "lol not good enough."

You thinking the only reason I didn't vote you was that I was busy is ridiculous, it takes 2 seconds to type up a vote and I had already posted

Shinori's vote is bad bad bad, if he doesn't come back later to give actual reads I'm gonna be furious