Fire Emblem 6 Mafia: (Day 4)

[Elieson]

Please dont discuss other games in my game, unless using as a source of information.

[Rapier]

okay now I know you're maf

btw Rapier I sent FSN Mafia for checking

I'll notify you of any changes once we've gotten it approved, since you're co-hosting and all

Objection!

Where is your evidence?

Also, if Xin is like that or not doesn't matter. Meta is almost useless anyway. Vhaltz has a valid point about Xin.

Imo I don't see how SB's posts amounted to claim any towniness and scorri's interaction just seems more unlikely and graspy. I can see the worry with this not being helpful information to town and potentially helpful to scum.

And then:

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

If you find this logic reasonable, why vote him for it?

[MRDRHAWK]

He just did, Rapier...

and sorry Elie, I figured it was okay since it was a game not even queued up yet

[Elieson]

Save that talk for Mafia HQv4.

[charlie_]

Poly and Rapier should stop spamming the thread, it just makes rereads a pain.

##Unvote

##Vote: Rapier

If you agree with Vhaltz's point, why aren't you doing anything with your vote?

[Rapier]

He just did, Rapier...

Yeah, but he failed to explain why SB looks more like scum for his post. If the "it could be valid for both town and scum" excuse is suspect, why's that so? He should expand his answer a bit when he gets back.

##Vote: Xinnidy

Forgot about that, then waited for another post so I wouldn't be double-posting three times.

[MRDRHAWK]

I don't see what is so suspect about that, true. Paper made a similar (highly questionable) point about SB, though, and nobody's on him for it; instead zeroing in on Xin. Is that just because Paper's not here to elaborate on that, or is this a "pick on the new guy" kind of thing?

[Xinnidy]

Telling the mafia I'm not a completely standard role doesn't mean much though. It could mean I'm just a normal role with a weird modifier or something completely different, but it still doesn't help them to guess it.

I don't see how stating a fact is suspicious.

Thoughtless information drop can stand to be more damaging to town than to scum, and that stands as my point.

If you find this logic reasonable, why vote him for it?

Rapier in charge of reading.

Read this as: I might have missed a "but" or "though" in my sentence forming. Try to read the first sentences you quoted again, and see if I supported SB's logic at any moment.

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

That's a lot of fluff being thrown around.

This is a fluff response.

- dismiss my line of reasoning

I don't agree with their interactions being scummy and don't agree that SB was trying to get towniepoints.

I believe there's a very clear difference here.

- delve into line of reasoning anyway

Yes, because I can realize a logic line of though and explain it in longer terms. It helps clarity, and I personally enjoy doing that.

- dismiss it again

That's where you misread.

Though I guess there's gripes even then but that's way too far into setup theoryspec for me to bother.

Refers to:

I don't think I need to explain why maflords wouldn't worry about this as much.

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

so basically, I'm an excellent paperblade parrot

Yeah what'cha gonna do. :J

Are Xin's posts commonly like this?

I would rather you not drop this kind of comment around. I find it in poor taste.

Unless you're trying to meta me, which I find unreasonable to try with me, considering I don't even play mafia often to begin with.

[Rapier]

I don't see what is so suspect about that, true. Paper made a similar (highly questionable) point about SB, though, and nobody's on him for it; instead zeroing in on Xin. Is that just because Paper's not here to elaborate on that, or is this a "pick on the new guy" kind of thing?

Xin is not a new guy. I remember he plays Mafia since the start of the year.

Paper made a point about SB, but Xin's lacks substance and looks slightly like parroting especially because he didn't expand on his motives. He just took one extreme ("Hey, I don't see much town content from what SB said, and I don't think the 'it could be a town or mafia thing' as a good excuse, so I'll go with the 'scum content' extremity) and left without further explanation. In my books, this is worse than Paper.

[Xinnidy]

Xin is not a new guy. I remember he plays Mafia since the start of the year.

Paper made a point about SB, but Xin's lacks substance and looks slightly like parroting especially because he didn't expand on his motives. He just took one extreme ("Hey, I don't see much town content from what SB said, and I don't think the 'it could be a town or mafia thing' as a good excuse, so I'll go with the 'scum content' extremity) and left without further explanation. In my books, this is worse than Paper.

Oh I think I get what you're trying to say now.

The 'it could be a town or mafia thing' refers to SB's defence on Vhaltz's vote.

I think that a defence based on uncertainty is the weakest from the posts provided so far, I do not accept it as valid considering it was thrown as a defensive point this soon.

[Rapier]

Rapier in charge of reading.

Read this as: I might have missed a "but" or "though" in my sentence forming. Try to read the first sentences you quoted again, and see if I supported SB's logic at any moment.

Actually, I missed the ' at the end. I got over that soon after, though. Anything to say about the rest of the points? Because replying "Yeah, I parroted, what are you going to do about that?" when someone calls you for it is terrible, you know.

[Xinnidy]

Actually, I missed the ' at the end. I got over that soon after, though. Anything to say about the rest of the points? Because replying "Yeah, I parroted, what are you going to do about that?" when someone calls you for it is terrible, you know.

I honestly believe I didn't parrot. I didn't strikethrough because I was being serious, I didn't emoticon because I was being serious, but I suppose that's acting smug.

Agreeing with somebody's points shouldn't be inherently scummy with the amount of content we have.

[Rapier]

I think that a defence based on uncertainty is the weakest from the posts provided so far, I do not accept it as valid considering it was thrown as a defensive point this soon.

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.

[Rapier]

I honestly believe I didn't parrot. I didn't strikethrough because I was being serious, I didn't emoticon because I was being serious, but I suppose that's acting smug.

Agreeing with somebody's points shouldn't be inherently scummy with the amount of content we have.

Agreeing with somebody's points isn't scummy as long as you don't limit yourself to that as you did back then. At least you're actually explaining it now.

[Vhaltz]

It was an attempt to meta, I don't know who plays or doesn't play often. I tend to make my posts too large so I'm trying to be concise this game and perhaps I'm overdoing it. Apologies if it offended you.

I never meant to imply any interactions read when it comes to SB/scorri btw. I just said they were guilty of the same thing.

Don't think I misread anything, if I did then I'm not seeing it.

If you're town, why would you let mafia know that?
I don't think I need to explain why maflords wouldn't worry about this as much.

This reads like you understand a possible line of suspicion being "town has something to lose from SB's first post because they're giving scum info but if he's scum he wouldn't worry because has nothing to lose doing that"

Though I guess there's gripes even then but that's way too far into setup theoryspec for me to bother.

This third line comes right after the other two, you point out that it refers to the line right above it but I was already considering that it was referring to that. It still reads like "dismiss because too much speculation".

Which is still exactly what I said earlier so my point still stands.

Poly also fails to explain why you're scum, Rapier, do you have any reason to hold Xin and Paperblade as priorities over him?

[Xinnidy]

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.

Very well, can you be 100% certain I'm trying to get a quicklynch and was parroting paperblade because I'm lazyscum?

If no, then you shouldn't vote me.

^this is not a line of thought I agree with.

Promoting discussion by applying pressure where pressure is due is what I found to be the a workable way to handle an early game with this level of content. We're building cases and getting reactions out of people, if I didn't get on SB's case for that, I wouldn't get any reaction out of him, and could be stuck with less to think about people.

This is also ultimately what's resulting in you pressuring me about my points, which is natural at this point. So I find your argument contradictory.

[Da Bear]

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.

Paper specifically said that he found SB defensive, how is that a failure to give reasons?

I'm going to look bac at Xin's post because I didn't really see much wrong with it at first.

More when on a computer.

[Xinnidy]

It was an attempt to meta, I don't know who plays or doesn't play often. I tend to make my posts too large so I'm trying to be concise this game and perhaps I'm overdoing it. Apologies if it offended you.

That's fine. I just wanted to make sure about the tone of the sentence, which I was unsure about.

I never meant to imply any interactions read when it comes to SB/scorri btw. I just said they were guilty of the same thing.

I read their interactions and find that scorri is less likely to have scum intention on her post than SB. It is why I disagreed with your point.

Don't think I misread anything, if I did then I'm not seeing it.

This third line comes right after the other two, you point out that it refers to the line right above it but I was already considering that it was referring to that. It still reads like "dismiss because too much speculation".

Which is still exactly what I said earlier so my point still stands.

I am dismissing the risks that scum have from outing that information early. From possible roles like a suspicious vig or harmful ITP.

[MRDRHAWK]

@Vhaltz: It was an RVS vote, bro. Nothing more, nothing less.

Speaking of which:

##Unvote

##Vote: Paper

I feel like his trying to make that point about SB's defensiveness fails to make a lot of sense, then proceeds to not explain in any way how exactly SB's behaviour was defensive to him. Moreover, he had an actual dislike of Vhaltz' point, so why didn't he call him on it more than he did? It seems like lazy scumhunting on his end.

[Rapier]

Poly also fails to explain why you're scum, Rapier, do you have any reason to hold Xin and Paperblade as priorities over him?

Poly is just kidding. We've been slapping each other since N0, though I decided to get more serious and go after Xin after I saw the opportunity. He's also getting more serious, as he made a good question about my reasoning.

Point taken. I want to know if Poly has any other legit reasons to stay his vote on me at this point.

Very well, can you be 100% certain I'm trying to get a quicklynch and was parroting paperblade because I'm lazyscum?

If no, then you shouldn't vote me.

^this is not a line of thought I agree with.

Promoting discussion by applying pressure where pressure is due is what I found to be the a workable way to handle an early game with this level of content. We're building cases and getting reactions out of people, if I didn't get on SB's case for that, I wouldn't get any reaction out of him, and could be stuck with less to think about people.

This is also ultimately what's resulting in you pressuring me about my points, which is natural at this point. So I find your argument contradictory.

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.

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.

My argument doesn't contradict itself at any point.

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.

[Xinnidy]

I am dismissing the risks that scum have from outing that information early. From possible roles like a suspicious vig or harmful ITP.

Not to say the examples I gave are something I want to start assuming now. Again, I stress that I feel that takes a ridiculous amount of speculation.

[Paperblade]

Rapier's posts bother me for some reason

[Refa]

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

[Rapier]

That said, since Xin at least explained himself or herself, I never figured it out and made an interesting reasoning, it's time to switch to Paper.

Unvote

##Vote: Paper

Basically, it is the same reasoning I used against Xin. He doesn't explain his thoughts, instead he limits himself to "I don't like Vahlz's points. I find SB too overdefensive, so I'll vote him for that". Now he addressed me with a "I don't like Rapier's posts, for some reason". Discussing and expressing one's thoughts is essential in Mafia, especially in D1. Why are you being so secretive? This is too anti-town for me.

[MRDRHAWK]

Rapier's posts bother me for some reason

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

snrk