288 replies to this topic

[Electric Mango]

My pc was dead for two days and it looks like I've been dead for two days as well, it only seems appropriate. I also find it interesting that my death scene eerily reminds me of the death scenes in the Showtime series "Dexter" that I've been watching. The main character is a serial killer that also works as a blood splatter analysis for the Miami police dept. Eerie.

Anyway I'm dead, I'll so now it's time for the obligatory last words.

"Bah, I'm dead. Go town!"




I also edited my post because I can.

[Narsis]

Sorry my reasoning was 'weak' but that is the way that I word my arguements, I say stuff short and sweet. I really am too busy atm, but thought it was good to vote. If I had not put a reason I would have of been attacked and abused. But as it turned out I was anyway. I give up...

i am the same way with the short and sweet. however in this game you need to flesh out your reasoning a bit more, especially if you plan on being taken seriously...

[captain8track]

My thoughts on the remaining players so far:


Molestargazer- I think he's a druggie. I think he "pressure voted" Falzis in a genuine attempt to get everyone to focus on him, and I think he did that because he knew Falzis was scum. And he knew it because he's a druggie and knows who the mafia are.

KevinH- very insightful. Seems to be an experienced player. Seems like he hasn't posted that much, but he's made substantive points that really further the discussion. If he's scum, on either side, he plays it close to the vest. So far, the only reason I have to suspect him is because of how good of a job he's done at flying under the radar.

CanucksDynasty- also insightful. Posting possible game outcomes teaches newbies the mechanics and helps this game flow smoothly, as well as making future games more enjoyable. By posting that list of scenarios he seems like a trustworthy figure giving good advice. The advice was good. He may have posted it to gain credibility, to get above suspicion, and ride the game out.

Curufinwe- so far I think he's inexperienced. I haven't seen reason to suspect him as scum. He "changed" his vote to Mole, true, but his vote hadn't been on Falzis- it had been on me. When he switched it to Mole, he was the second vote there, and Falzis was already leading with a total of three votes- his wasn't the deciding (tie) vote. Seems like a possibly normal shift to me. Plus, that initial vote (on me) was, he admits, placed as a blind guess. So his first deliberate vote was on Mole, where he left it.

Narsis- again, like KevinH and CanucksDynasty, he makes good points but overall seems to be playing it close to the vest. Hard for me to get a read on him so far.


KevinH just made a good point:

If we choose to lynch one of the players that voted for Falzis, we have a 2 in 4 chance of getting a drug lord (reduced to 1 in 4 if a drug lord voted for Mole, which I doubt).

The following people voted for Falzis:
Electric Mango- dead.
Captain8track- I know I'm not a scum, so I know not to vote for me.
Molestargazer
KevinH
Narsis

I'm already suspicious of Mole as a druggie. So this logic would suggest I should focus on KevinH or Narsis as some type of scum.



(For the record: I shifted my vote from Mole to Falzis because KevinH pointed out that in the event of a tie, nobody is lynched. I did the math and realized we were at a tie. I felt confident that Mole and Falzis were scum, and I was comfortable with lynching either one. I changed my vote because, if I hadn't, neither one would have been lynched. Now that that's done, my focus is back on Mole).

[KevinH]

^^^Excellent posts by Captain8Track

So good, in fact, that I wonder if Mole was ghostwriting ...

Nevertheless, I'll put Mole at the top of my list of potential druggies, too. I'd like to see some discussion before I place a vote, though.

[Narsis]

sure it's your first game captain? it seems like you've gotten a pretty good read on people.

one thing i'd like to mention: if you are so sure mole is druggie...why go after me or Kevin? a druggie needs to die today if the town plans on winning. if you really really think that mole is a druggie then better to lynch him now so the town is guaranteed to survive with a good chance of winning.

[CanucksDynasty]

Mole would be the obvious choice to lynch. But I don't want to lynch him too quick without further discussion. Other than Mole, I think Narsis looks a little bit scummier than KevinH and captain8track. So...

Vote: Narsis

Reasons for voting Narsis already given in previous posts.

@Narsis - captain8track voted for mole already (see previous page).

[molestargazer]

Me: "That's what a druggie would do."
You: "Doesn't prove I'm a druggie."

No. No it doesn't. But it is evidence.

No. No it isn't. Saying "That's what a druggie would do" is WIFOM again. We don't know what the druggies would do. They could do anything to throw us off guard.

No. That's not true. You voted for Falzis with your "pressure vote." You went right to him. Your "pressure vote" was right on the money. That's either luck, or *exactly* what a druggie would do. I don't think you're that lucky.

My pressure vote was just that, a pressure vote. I had NO, ABSOLUTELY NO intentions of going for Falzis until his responses with bag logic made me pick up on him.
I have stated this over, and over, and over, and over again.
I thought he was scummy from his responses. I used scumhunting, and I was right.
I am NOT a druggie.

My focus was split between you and Falzis last round. I went with him, and he turned out to be mafia. I think you're a druggie.

You went with him? Why? You think his logic was better?
Or are you just aligned with him?

So, your logic is, because I scumhunted well, and killed a mafia member, I'm against the town?

[captain8track]

You engage in ad hominem attacks. You attack me, rather than my logic. That's what someone would do when they want to distract others.
Before you say, "no, I never levelled any ad hominem attacks against you," here you go:

You went with him? Why? You think his logic was better?
Or are you just aligned with him?

That's ad hominem. It's about the game, yes, but it's still ad hominem. It in no way refutes my logic. It simply casts baseless aspersions on me.

Meanwhile, I suspect you for a logical reason. Your first vote, which you claim was just a pressure vote, just happened to be for a mafia. Like I said, it could be luck. But it's also exactly what a druggie would do. You acted just as you would have if you were a druggie. That's evidence. Feel free to say "no" all you like. It still is.

If you want to tell the others here they can't judge you by your actions, fine. I'm not sure it will make you seem any more credible. But go ahead.

No. No it isn't. Saying "That's what a druggie would do" is WIFOM again. We don't know what the druggies would do. They could do anything to throw us off guard.

Yes, they could do anything. But it's when they do something deliberately in their own interests that they attract attention. You attracted just such attention. I think you're a druggie.

So, your logic is, because I scumhunted well, and killed a mafia member, I'm against the town?

No. My logic is, your "random" vote was right on the money, and led to the lynching of a mafia. That is exactly what a druggie would want to do. I don't think your "random" vote was random at all. I think you knew Falzis was mafia because you're a druggie, and druggies know who the mafia are. Now, I think you're protesting loudly and emotionally (rather than logically) because you don't have logic on your side.

[molestargazer]

You went with him? Why? You think his logic was better?
Or are you just aligned with him?

That's ad hominem. It's about the game, yes, but it's still ad hominem. It in no way refutes my logic. It simply casts baseless aspersions on me.

That isn't ad hom.
Granted, it's aggressive. I am asking you why you went with him though. Just want an answer.

Meanwhile, I suspect you for a logical reason. Your first vote, which you claim was just a pressure vote, just happened to be for a mafia. Like I said, it could be luck. But it's also exactly what a druggie would do. You acted just as you would have if you were a druggie. That's evidence. Feel free to say "no" all you like. It still is.

It was luck.
There's not much I can say to prove otherwise, but that's what it was.

Yes, they could do anything. But it's when they do something deliberately in their own interests that they attract attention. You attracted just such attention. I think you're a druggie.

And I know you're wrong.
You are, of course, entitled to your opinions.

No. My logic is, your "random" vote was right on the money, and led to the lynching of a mafia. That is exactly what a druggie would want to do. I don't think your "random" vote was random at all.

It wasn't random.
It was a pressure vote using all the information I had at the time.

I think you knew Falzis was mafia because you're a druggie, and druggies know who the mafia are. Now, I think you're protesting loudly and emotionally (rather than logically) because you don't have logic on your side.

You don't have it on your side any more than I do.
I'm not a druggie. It was luck. You can't prove that any more than I can.

[captain8track]

That isn't ad hom.

Yes it is. Here's the definition of ad hominem.

Don't feel like following the link? Fine:

Main Entry: ad ho·mi·nem
Pronunciation: \(ˈ)ad-ˈhä-mə-ˌnem, -nəm\
Function: adjective
Etymology: New Latin, literally, to the person
Date: 1598
1 : appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect
2 : marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made

What was it you said again?

You went with him? Why? You think his logic was better?
Or are you just aligned with him?

Did that appeal to anyone's intellect? Was it an answer to any of the contentions I made?
No.
Did it appeal to prejudices, or attack my character, by simply inferring I'm scum?
Yes.


Why would I spend so much time focusing on this?
Because this entire game, to one degree or another, is WIFOM.
Someone says something. Then someone else says what the first guy said means he's scum. Guy1 says "Nuh-uh." Guy2 says "yeah-huh." Guy3 chimes and says Guy2 was a little too quick with that accusation on Guy1, and then suspicion shifts.
That's WIFOM. It's all WIFOM, to at least a small degree. That's the game.
Until you can prove somebody is lying. But nobody can read minds. So we can never tell if someone's lying. All we can do is judge people by their actions. Like we do in everyday life.
When you catch someone in a lie, you're really just catching them in a contradiction. Unless you get them to admit they're lying, all you're left with is the fact that they said/did something that's at odds with what you know the truth is.
This entire post so far has been about you being caught in a contradiction. You say it wasn't an ad hominem attack, but it was. It's not necessarily a lie. Because nobody can read your mind.
But we can all judge your actions. You said it wasn't ad hominem. But it is. It's textbook ad hominem. It's right out of the dictionary. You're caught in a contradiction. From the outside, it looks like you're lying.

Granted, it's aggressive. I am asking you why you went with him though. Just want an answer.

I was suspicious of the two of you because it seemed like you were driving the conversation. And I figured that meant you were trying to guide it.
I also considered that you might be experienced players, and you wanted the game to be fun, rather than lame. And that you were simply trying to get it going.
But there's no definitive evidence either way. And when you get out in front, sometimes you wind up getting shot in the back.
Like I posted when I changed my vote from you to Falzis: I was focused on the both of you. Now he's gone, and my focus is on you.

It was luck.
There's not much I can say to prove otherwise, but that's what it was.

I'm not a druggie. It was luck. You can't prove that any more than I can.

I completely agree with these statements: that you can't prove anything in this game.
But this game isn't about proof. There's no proof in this game. There's suspicion, and deductive reasoning. Let's follow a classic syllogism here:

1. Druggies know who the mafia are.
2. Druggies want to kill the mafia.
3. Molestargazer was the first to truly focus the attention on Falzis.
4. Falzis was found to be a mafia.
5. Therefore, Molestargazer is a druggie.

Does that necessarily follow? No. You could be a townie. A lucky, lucky townie. A lucky, lucky townie who went right to the mafia. A lucky, lucky townie who went right to the mafia, claiming to have been suspicious of him based on the handful of posts already made. A lucky, lucky townie who went right to the mafia, claiming to have been suspicious of him based on the handful of posts already made, and now is arguing vociferously (rather than logically) about his own innocence. It's all possible.
That doesn't mean it's probable.

That's why I think you're a druggie.

[molestargazer]

Did it appeal to prejudices, or attack my character, by simply inferring I'm scum?
No.

Saying "you're scum" doesn't mean it's an attack on your character.
Mafia sometimes gets heated. It's how it happens.

I was suspicious of the two of you because it seemed like you were driving the conversation. And I figured that meant you were trying to guide it.

Yes, I was trying to drive it.
I thought Falzis was scummy, so I pushed the lynch. It worked. He was scum.

1. Druggies know who the mafia are.
2. Druggies want to kill the mafia.
3. Molestargazer was the first to truly focus the attention on Falzis.
4. Falzis was found to be a mafia.
5. Therefore, Molestargazer is a druggie.

Does that necessarily follow? No. You could be a townie. A lucky, lucky townie. A lucky, lucky townie who went right to the mafia. A lucky, lucky townie who went right to the mafia, claiming to have been suspicious of him based on the handful of posts already made. A lucky, lucky townie who went right to the mafia, claiming to have been suspicious of him based on the handful of posts already made, and now is arguing vociferously (rather than logically) about his own innocence. It's all possible.
That doesn't mean it's probable.

Oh, please. I was MOST suspicious of him on the posts made. Doesn't mean it was a lot.
I've stated that so many times I'm starting to go blue in the mouth.

I perfectly understand why you think I'm a druggie.
Sorry, but you're wrong.

[Narsis]

Mole would be the obvious choice to lynch. But I don't want to lynch him too quick without further discussion. Other than Mole, I think Narsis looks a little bit scummier than KevinH and captain8track. So...

Vote: Narsis

Reasons for voting Narsis already given in previous posts.

@Narsis - captain8track voted for mole already (see previous page).

oh hey i must've missed that.

look...if mole seems to be the most likely to be a druggie...why not kill him? we need to kill a druggie. better to kill the one that has the highest chance of being a druggie then to kill the one with less.

also...care to give us some good old fashioned logical reasoning/example posts of why i seem scummy? i haven't really seen any real reasoning/logic from you as to why i would be in previous posts as you claimed.

[CanucksDynasty]

After reading everything the mole/Falzis debate...I think this is the most probably situation.
That Mole is the druggie and Falzis is mafia.

Mole placed the 2nd vote of Falzis over something that was (from what I could see) minor.
Perhaps trying to influence the town to vote for Falzis?

Falzis became overly defensive (kinda odd reaction).
If Mole is druggie...then it stands to reason that Falzis is mafia.

KevinH and EM posting don't tell me much but I'm leaning towards townie.
However, Narsis posts seem to side with Mole's arguement without actually placing a vote on Falzis.
Perhaps Mole's druggie partner (cuz in Mole's post...he mentioned something about druggies wouldn't necessarily vote like that)?

Meh...just my thoughts...I could be totally wrong.

In any case we have 2 people attracting the most attention.
With a 50% chance a hitting a scum...I'm good with lynching either one.

CD.

@Narsis - in the previous post you made against Falzis...you were the most vocal in support of Mole's theory that Falzis was druggie. You voted for Falzis...then unvoted cuz he was L-1...then revoted him when Mole was at 4 votes. The flip-flopping of votes just seems to me that you wanted to make it look like your townie. Plus your original RVS was on Mole (I think...I apologize if it wasn't)...perhaps a distance vote? Plus Mole stated to KevinH (I think) that druggies may not necessirly vote mafia right away...perhaps a suggestion to his druggie partner (assuming they can't talk outside the game)? There are alot of little things. Am I confident you are druggie...NO. But outside of Mole...you would be my next choice.

As for not lynching Mole...as I stated...I want more discussion. There's an outside chance that Mole is a townie (doubt it) and if so...then that would leave you (Narsis), KevinH, and captain8track as possible druggies. If that was the case...then you'd be my primary suspect.

Another thing is that you said "if mole seems to be the most likely to be a druggie...why not kill him?"...if that is the case...why haven't you voted for him? Possibly that he is your drug buddy and you are waiting for someone to slip up and try to lynch that person instead of Mole.

CD.

[KevinH]

I have the most suspicion on mole as being a druggie.

I'm not voting for him yet because I like to see more discussion.

It will be significant for our next vote in terms of who lynches or defends him.

[Narsis]

@Narsis - in the previous post you made against Falzis...you were the most vocal in support of Mole's theory that Falzis was druggie. You voted for Falzis...then unvoted cuz he was L-1...then revoted him when Mole was at 4 votes. The flip-flopping of votes just seems to me that you wanted to make it look like your townie. Plus your original RVS was on Mole (I think...I apologize if it wasn't)...perhaps a distance vote? Plus Mole stated to KevinH (I think) that druggies may not necessirly vote mafia right away...perhaps a suggestion to his druggie partner (assuming they can't talk outside the game)? There are alot of little things. Am I confident you are druggie...NO. But outside of Mole...you would be my next choice.

As for not lynching Mole...as I stated...I want more discussion. There's an outside chance that Mole is a townie (doubt it) and if so...then that would leave you (Narsis), KevinH, and captain8track as possible druggies. If that was the case...then you'd be my primary suspect.

Another thing is that you said "if mole seems to be the most likely to be a druggie...why not kill him?"...if that is the case...why haven't you voted for him? Possibly that he is your drug buddy and you are waiting for someone to slip up and try to lynch that person instead of Mole.

CD.

why haven't i voted for mole yet? why would anyone wait to vote for anyone? simply, they want more discussion. they want to see how arguments play out. you never know what might come up...

(note: am i the only one tired of the "more discussion" argument? it seems to come up in almost every game several times)

also...so i seemed to side with mole before. c8t...kevin...even EM seemed to agree with it. so i happened to voice my opinion on the matter a little more...that was because out of all the arguments in the day his seemed best. better i make my voice heard then play it really close to the vest(the way you did day 1). the town can only benefit from that kind of play.

secondly...is it just me or is your reasoning full of WIFOM? yes there's WIFOM in mafia...but your argument seems to be more based of off WIFOM/speculation then on actual facts/reasoning. if you were a druggie then this makes sense and thus you are a druggie...classic circular reasoning.

[CanucksDynasty]

why haven't i voted for mole yet? why would anyone wait to vote for anyone? simply, they want more discussion. they want to see how arguments play out. you never know what might come up...

(note: am i the only one tired of the "more discussion" argument? it seems to come up in almost every game several times)

also...so i seemed to side with mole before. c8t...kevin...even EM seemed to agree with it. so i happened to voice my opinion on the matter a little more...that was because out of all the arguments in the day his seemed best. better i make my voice heard then play it really close to the vest(the way you did day 1). the town can only benefit from that kind of play.

secondly...is it just me or is your reasoning full of WIFOM? yes there's WIFOM in mafia...but your argument seems to be more based of off WIFOM/speculation then on actual facts/reasoning. if you were a druggie then this makes sense and thus you are a druggie...classic circular reasoning.

You wanted my reasons...I gave them. You can say whatever you want but what you posted doesn't make me change my mind about you. As I have said...I believe 2 druggies voted for Falzis. And I believe them to be Mole and you (Narsis). Unless you can make a case against KevinH and captain8track...my vote still stands.

CD.

[KevinH]

We need a bit more activity here.

Unless I get persuaded otherwise, I will soon vote for Mole.

[Sir Jesus]

I'm sending our prods if activity does not pick up.

Official Vote Count
1 - molestargazer (captain8track)
1- Narsis (CanucksDynasty)

[molestargazer]

I don't know how I can persuade you otherwise. Everything I can say to defend myself has been said.
It's very likely that even if I survive today, suspicion on me will still be high.

HOWEVER.

I'd like to offer the town a deal which will be one last chance to save my skin. Today, I'll read through and make a case on the person who I most believe to be one of the two druggies. If the town follow through with this, and we lynch a druggie, I'm in the clear. If not.. you can lynch me tomorrow.

Thoughts?

[CanucksDynasty]

I don't know how I can persuade you otherwise. Everything I can say to defend myself has been said.
It's very likely that even if I survive today, suspicion on me will still be high.

HOWEVER.

I'd like to offer the town a deal which will be one last chance to save my skin. Today, I'll read through and make a case on the person who I most believe to be one of the two druggies. If the town follow through with this, and we lynch a druggie, I'm in the clear. If not.. you can lynch me tomorrow.

Thoughts?

Sure...go right ahead.