Print

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

[Witherweaver]

Well in that case it would still be equivalent to lynching me. Which you think is a good idea.

[ashersky]

Would that be the best thing?

If day continues, yes.  If it goes immediately to night (and you are town), then no.

Is /outing for strategic purposes cheating?

I am firmly of the belief that it is not, and is a great town strategy.  However, from previous discussions on f.ds, I'm in the minority.

[ashersky]

Well in that case it would still be equivalent to lynching me. Which you think is a good idea.

But the majority doesn't.  And lynches require the majority.  That's the checks and balances part of this game.

[Witherweaver]

In a generic game. No one. In this game, where we get a REWARD, it makes 100% sense.

[ashersky]

In a generic game. No one. In this game, where we get a REWARD, it makes 100% sense.

Put another way, you are arguing (I think), that this is equivalent to at the start of D4:

WW:  "hey guys, as our reward for killing the witch, I was granted 1-shot cop power last night.  I investigated BA, he's town."

BA:  "hey guys, weird, as our reward for killing the witch, I was also granted 1-shot cop power last night.  I investigated WW, he's town.  What a coincidence."

And that makes 100% sense and is belieable and not at all suspect.

[liopoil]

Wait, I can just /out then I'm mod killed, flip, and BA is confirmed?

town breaking the rules should always hurt town. It is up to the mod's discretion what the penalty is, and I assume Jimmmmm would choose something that would hurt town. So don't break the rules if you are town.

[Witherweaver]

In a generic game. No one. In this game, where we get a REWARD, it makes 100% sense.

Put another way, you are arguing (I think), that this is equivalent to at the start of D4:

WW:  "hey guys, as our reward for killing the witch, I was granted 1-shot cop power last night.  I investigated BA, he's town."

BA:  "hey guys, weird, as our reward for killing the witch, I was also granted 1-shot cop power last night.  I investigated WW, he's town.  What a coincidence."

And that makes 100% sense and is belieable and not at all suspect.

Except our targets were chosen for us.  But nice attempt at twisting things again.

[ashersky]

In a generic game. No one. In this game, where we get a REWARD, it makes 100% sense.

Put another way, you are arguing (I think), that this is equivalent to at the start of D4:

WW:  "hey guys, as our reward for killing the witch, I was granted 1-shot cop power last night.  I investigated BA, he's town."

BA:  "hey guys, weird, as our reward for killing the witch, I was also granted 1-shot cop power last night.  I investigated WW, he's town.  What a coincidence."

And that makes 100% sense and is belieable and not at all suspect.

Except our targets were chosen for us.  But nice attempt at twisting things again.

Okay, then:

WW:  "Hey guys, as our reward for killing the witch, I was randomly told the alignment of one player.  BA is town!"

BA:  "Hey guys, wierd, as our reward for killing the witch, I was also randomly told the alignment of one player.  WW is town!  What a coincidence."

Better?  Still ridiculous.

[Witherweaver]

Wait, I can just /out then I'm mod killed, flip, and BA is confirmed?

town breaking the rules should always hurt town. It is up to the mod's discretion what the penalty is, and I assume Jimmmmm would choose something that would hurt town. So don't break the rules if you are town.

Yeah, got it.

[Witherweaver]

In a generic game. No one. In this game, where we get a REWARD, it makes 100% sense.

Put another way, you are arguing (I think), that this is equivalent to at the start of D4:

WW:  "hey guys, as our reward for killing the witch, I was granted 1-shot cop power last night.  I investigated BA, he's town."

BA:  "hey guys, weird, as our reward for killing the witch, I was also granted 1-shot cop power last night.  I investigated WW, he's town.  What a coincidence."

And that makes 100% sense and is belieable and not at all suspect.

Except our targets were chosen for us.  But nice attempt at twisting things again.

Okay, then:

WW:  "Hey guys, as our reward for killing the witch, I was randomly told the alignment of one player.  BA is town!"

BA:  "Hey guys, wierd, as our reward for killing the witch, I was also randomly told the alignment of one player.  WW is town!  What a coincidence."

Better?  Still ridiculous.

It's not at all. Because nobody is countering us with a "real" reward.  And you know this.

[ashersky]

Also, if your argument is that the "reward" from Council in your scenario is that town gets two ICs out of it, why the psuedonyms?  Explain how that makes any sense?  So IF scum is part of the neighborhood, they can't choose to kill one of you?

Except, that's better since it confirms the claim the next day.  As it is, we have two claimants with no confirmation instead of one claimant with confirmation.

Psuedonyms, hiding identities, it's for scum.

[ashersky]

In a generic game. No one. In this game, where we get a REWARD, it makes 100% sense.

Put another way, you are arguing (I think), that this is equivalent to at the start of D4:

WW:  "hey guys, as our reward for killing the witch, I was granted 1-shot cop power last night.  I investigated BA, he's town."

BA:  "hey guys, weird, as our reward for killing the witch, I was also granted 1-shot cop power last night.  I investigated WW, he's town.  What a coincidence."

And that makes 100% sense and is belieable and not at all suspect.

Except our targets were chosen for us.  But nice attempt at twisting things again.

Okay, then:

WW:  "Hey guys, as our reward for killing the witch, I was randomly told the alignment of one player.  BA is town!"

BA:  "Hey guys, wierd, as our reward for killing the witch, I was also randomly told the alignment of one player.  WW is town!  What a coincidence."

Better?  Still ridiculous.

It's not at all. Because nobody is countering us with a "real" reward.  And you know this.

It seems no one knows the real reward, because you and BA screaming up and down that you are town is not a reward given to the town by the mod.

I can at least see some sense in scum being forced into a QT under fake names as being bad for scum.  I do not see how scum suffered at all from what you claim, nor do I see how town has in any way been rewarded.

[Witherweaver]

Also, if your argument is that the "reward" from Council in your scenario is that town gets two ICs out of it, why the psuedonyms?  Explain how that makes any sense?  So IF scum is part of the neighborhood, they can't choose to kill one of you?

Except, that's better since it confirms the claim the next day.  As it is, we have two claimants with no confirmation instead of one claimant with confirmation.

Psuedonyms, hiding identities, it's for scum.

Give any possible explanation how that's a town prize.

[ashersky]

Also, if your argument is that the "reward" from Council in your scenario is that town gets two ICs out of it, why the psuedonyms?  Explain how that makes any sense?  So IF scum is part of the neighborhood, they can't choose to kill one of you?

Except, that's better since it confirms the claim the next day.  As it is, we have two claimants with no confirmation instead of one claimant with confirmation.

Psuedonyms, hiding identities, it's for scum.

Give any possible explanation how that's a town prize.

I just did.  The prize is either "good for town" or "bad for scum."  Scum stuck in a QT under fake names is bad for scum.

What you are claiming is neither good for town or bad for scum.  All of your actions today have been good for scum.

[Witherweaver]

Town has a reward if the town players start acting reasonably.  If you're town (which I think extremely unlikely) then you're actively trying to make our reward hurt us.

[Witherweaver]

Also, if your argument is that the "reward" from Council in your scenario is that town gets two ICs out of it, why the psuedonyms?  Explain how that makes any sense?  So IF scum is part of the neighborhood, they can't choose to kill one of you?

Except, that's better since it confirms the claim the next day.  As it is, we have two claimants with no confirmation instead of one claimant with confirmation.

Psuedonyms, hiding identities, it's for scum.

Give any possible explanation how that's a town prize.

I just did.  The prize is either "good for town" or "bad for scum."  Scum stuck in a QT under fake names is bad for scum.

What you are claiming is neither good for town or bad for scum.  All of your actions today have been good for scum.

Okay.  I don't post in QT.

Next lame explanation

[Witherweaver]

Or I don't use pseudonym.  Or I just post normally.  How is this harmful?

[liopoil]

Also, if your argument is that the "reward" from Council in your scenario is that town gets two ICs out of it, why the psuedonyms?  Explain how that makes any sense?  So IF scum is part of the neighborhood, they can't choose to kill one of you?

Except, that's better since it confirms the claim the next day.  As it is, we have two claimants with no confirmation instead of one claimant with confirmation.

Psuedonyms, hiding identities, it's for scum.

Give any possible explanation how that's a town prize.

I just did.  The prize is either "good for town" or "bad for scum."  Scum stuck in a QT under fake names is bad for scum.

What you are claiming is neither good for town or bad for scum.  All of your actions today have been good for scum.

Scum stuck in a QT under fake names is not bad for scum

What Witherweaver is claiming is good for town.

[ashersky]

Your definition of "acting reasonably" is "believe everything I say."  That's my definition of acting unreasonably.

This is a game of mafia.  Scum lie.  Ergo, if you are scum, you are lying.  I can't just rule that out, and you've done nothing to help rule it out.

I am town.  How about an avatar bet?  If I am scum, you can select any image as my avatar on the forum.  When you see I'm town, I get to set yours to whatever I want.

[ashersky]

Also, if your argument is that the "reward" from Council in your scenario is that town gets two ICs out of it, why the psuedonyms?  Explain how that makes any sense?  So IF scum is part of the neighborhood, they can't choose to kill one of you?

Except, that's better since it confirms the claim the next day.  As it is, we have two claimants with no confirmation instead of one claimant with confirmation.

Psuedonyms, hiding identities, it's for scum.

Give any possible explanation how that's a town prize.

I just did.  The prize is either "good for town" or "bad for scum."  Scum stuck in a QT under fake names is bad for scum.

What you are claiming is neither good for town or bad for scum.  All of your actions today have been good for scum.

Okay.  I don't post in QT.

Next lame explanation

Forced to post.  Next lame attempt to derail.

[Witherweaver]

I post ".".  Or what i said before

[ashersky]

Or I don't use pseudonym.  Or I just post normally.  How is this harmful?

We don't know that the pseudonym was optional.  We don't know anything you say is true.  You don't get that, do you?  WE CANNOT SEE YOUR QT, NOR ANYTHING POSTED THERE.  WE ARE NOT PSYCHIC.  YOU MAY BE LYING.

[ashersky]

I post ".".  Or what i said before

And then the others know you are scum, and it creates ICs by marking a clear separation between psuedonym'ed players and real ones.

[liopoil]

Also, if your argument is that the "reward" from Council in your scenario is that town gets two ICs out of it, why the psuedonyms?  Explain how that makes any sense?  So IF scum is part of the neighborhood, they can't choose to kill one of you?

Except, that's better since it confirms the claim the next day.  As it is, we have two claimants with no confirmation instead of one claimant with confirmation.

Psuedonyms, hiding identities, it's for scum.

Give any possible explanation how that's a town prize.

I just did.  The prize is either "good for town" or "bad for scum."  Scum stuck in a QT under fake names is bad for scum.

What you are claiming is neither good for town or bad for scum.  All of your actions today have been good for scum.

Okay.  I don't post in QT.

Next lame explanation

Forced to post.  Next lame attempt to derail.

"Forced to post"

that's just absolute nonsense.

[Witherweaver]

Or I don't use pseudonym.  Or I just post normally.  How is this harmful?

We don't know that the pseudonym was optional.  We don't know anything you say is true.  You don't get that, do you?  WE CANNOT SEE YOUR QT, NOR ANYTHING POSTED THERE.  WE ARE NOT PSYCHIC.  YOU MAY BE LYING.

Jimmy clarified in the council QT that pseudonym use was only allowable if given permission.  I believe his wording, and BAs immediate admission of pseudonym use optionality in his very first post. Makes this clear.

Next.