Mini #553: Over!

[ting =)]

Fair enough.

*waits patiently while eating a cookie.

[Sethaniel]

what kind of cookie is it?

[destructor]

LOL. I was going to ask that too.
Actually, I don't think he's eating a cookie at all.

[ting =)]

OH NOES!

My lie.

You sees through it.

[destructor]

Lynch all Liars?

[ting =)]

That's it! I've

HAD IT

with you!

VOTE: DESTRUCTOR.

just kidding. ; )

unvote

Bab should be back in less than a week.

[destructor]

Lol. That post would screw with anyone analysing this game with that Gemelli's thread distillery thing.

We should probably stop spamming up the thread. It is fun, though.

[Sethaniel]

What's Gemelli's thread distillery?

I mean, since we're waiting for bab and all.

[Guardian]

Regrettably I still have no constant internet access. I can't even remember what I thought was BS about destructor's long post, which is good and bad, I guess.

I'll try to reply ASAP...

[ting =)]

Gemelli's thread distillery.

I've never tried it out yet though, so I don't know how useful it actually is.

[Guardian]

Superstrawman strikes again? =P

Uh, where? What are you talking about?

See below.

My point was that massive explicitly stated that:

No one targeted him.

He's an experienced player and I believe it's reasonable to assume that if he'd received 'no result', both as a response or by lack of PM from the mod, he would have asked for clarification and certainly would

not

have said "no one targeted' Khelvaster.

You were trying to say that massive receiving 'no result' and a

result

that said "no one targeted Khel" to be the same thing.

I'm saying he could have interpreted either the same way depending. Or maybe his role got nerfed and he was no longer a watcher.

What if his role PM said something like 'you will receive a PM if the person you protect was targeted by anyone other than yourself' and he received no PM?

This is illogical, completely ignores what I said in the text you quoted and is pure speculation to boot. massive explicitly stated that no one targeted Khel. Again, based on his experience, I'd say that he would have informed us if his night result was as specific as you're suggesting.

Speculation about why he didn't get the correct result is perfectly reasonable here. 'wtf?'

Where's ting?

Desperately hoping that my biggest detractor from yesterday comes back and gets me out of a jam?

:roll:
Or, wondering where one of the more active players from the last few days is.

Whatever. Note who ting has supported.

And does anyone besides Matt_S have a reason to suspect me besides Guardian's claim?

Sure: lurking.. There's a reason lurking is scummy. You've constantly prioritized other games over this one during the game's course. It is harder for scum to get caught when they don't post a lot.

Sure, but I'm hardly the only player who lost interest in this game at some point. Would I be less suspicious if I decided to flake instead?

Yes, assuming your replacement had normal participation. Lurking IS scummy, for a reason, and you aren't going to talk your way out of that.

Sorry. I don't have regular internet access.

Considering the way the game has gone, is there any chance that Shaka may have forgotten to inform massive about Imat targetting khelvaster?

I didn't think my opinion of shakaa could have gotten lower.

So are we going to entertain that Guardian's defence against evidence posted by massive which directly contradicts his claim comes down to mod-error? Sure, it's possible, but I'd ask this game be abandoned immediately if that was the case.

What if massive was told by talitha that his role had been changed and he forgot? What if talitha has no way of knowing at this point?

Too many what ifs and maybes. I don't think trusting shakaa to have done his job right is at all reasonable given what we know, and you're acting like it is.

But that is straying so far from the point. Short of the presence of some redirecting role (which I would NOT expect in a mini normal) I

know

Guardian is lying because I didn't target Empking last night. And let's not forget who he hammered: a claimed doc.

Let's not forget why I hammered him -- massive most strongly appeared to be lying. :roll:

I need to reread the previous day. The idea that the town had a cop and a doc and a vig

and

a tracker... doesn't quite sound right. Like guardian said though, we could have a scum roleblocker, that might make the game balanced, but that's a pretty ridiculous amount of power roles in a mini. That means that less than half the players are standard townies/goons. Has there ever been that kind of game in a mini normal before?

In a mini, sure. Not sure about a mini normal. Although, this didn't really start off as a mini normal...

My recollection of the 'untheming' was that shaka's problem was purely flavour.

You think MeMe would have come out and said "remove flavor, and change massive's role"? 'wtf'?

I also strongly doubt we have three investigative roles in this game.

If we have a mafia roleblocker and serial killer and a lotr theme and a doctor and a vig, what difference does one more role make? THis game was swingy as anything, and I think shakaa just wanted as much power as possible.

I've got to say, I really expected ting=) to attack me wholeheartedly here. His not doing so gives me think someone else is destructor's partner.

Who might that be?

I think it is ting =) at this point. Sethaniel and BAB have outside chances, but ting =) is looking like the best bet. His vote then unvote of you was just classic scum bullshit.

This is why I didn't want to reply. I mean, I can type paragraph after paragraph with the best of them, but it is just bullshit back and forth between me and destructor at this point: he says "omg that doesn't make sense" I say "omg it does", and its up for the other townies to figure it out.

Something messed up in the setup happened that caused massive to believe he got no result. All I know is I tracked destructor to a dead body, and he must be scum.

It is up to you figure out who to believe, and hearing destructor go on about how im scum and me about how he's scum isn't helpful.

If you have any specific relevant questions ask, and maybe I'll answer, but it is mostly up to you at this point. I've laid out why destructor is scum, and defended myself largely. Read the thread and figure it out.

[ting =)]

Hmm, thanks for finally answering.

I'm saying he could have interpreted either the same way depending. Or maybe his role got nerfed and he was no longer a watcher.

No. I believed at the start of the day, and still do, that either you're lying, or Shaka screwed up.

While the latter is possible, I believe the game would have been halted by talitha if that was the case.[/gaming the mod]

Whatever. Note who ting has supported.

Ting thought you were scum since

yesterday.

I've backed off with the long posts because there's no point making long posts if you're going to ignore them anyway, and since you made an appeal to emotion that I was sucking the fun out of the game for you. While I do understand the feeling, I still think you're scum.

His vote then unvote of you was just classic scum bullshit.

Come

on.

That's the most ridiculous reach I've ever heard. If it helps, I'll put [/joke] on random posts from now on.

[Matt_S]

Why is ting higher up on your scum list than Sethaniel? That makes no sense.

[ting =)]

Yeah, weren't you strongly suspicious of Seth?

[Guardian]

ting =) is pretending to be open minded whereas sethaniel is actually being open minded.

[ting =)]

So... I'm less willing to believe you and so I'm scum?

[Guardian]

You are not taking both sides into consideration. You appear to be pretending to, and that's what is suspicious.

[ting =)]

More suspicious than a person you actually made a case on?

You haven't done anything to

convince

me to believe you. Your day 3 arguments basically boil down to, 'Look, I have a guilty on him, so nah!' You haven't said anything to make me doubt your connection to coolbot either.

Destructor, likewise is mostly just going, 'I'm town, so that's obviously a lie, nah!'

Before either of you start accusing me of strawmanning, that really is essentially the core of all the day 3 arguments - both of you asking the rest of us who we trust more.

You'll also notice that I've been calling for destructor to claim. I'm not going to lie - I'm more inclined to believe him over you right now, but that's not to say I'm not suspicious of him. I'm suspicious of you both, just him less so.

[destructor]

Guardian, you evaded the beef of what I was saying. Your defence against evidence that contradicts your claim is, more and more, becoming speculation about what has happened with the setup, to the point where I think most would agree the game should have been abandoned by such a mod-error.

Also, in the post of yours I quoted when I asked who you thought my scum buddy was, you had just said you thought it

wasn't

ting.

[Guardian]

More suspicious than a person you actually made a case on?

You haven't done anything to

convince

me to believe you. Your day 3 arguments basically boil down to, 'Look, I have a guilty on him, so nah!'

He lurked. Lynch all lurkers. Win games.

Lurkers post less, and ergo have less chance to look suspicious. Scum want to be less suspicious. Ergo, lurking is a scum tactic. Ergo, lurking is scummy.

You haven't said anything to make me doubt your connection to coolbot either.

Then you aren't reading my posts.

Destructor, likewise is mostly just going, 'I'm town, so that's obviously a lie, nah!'

Before either of you start accusing me of strawmanning, that really is essentially the core of all the day 3 arguments - both of you asking the rest of us who we trust more.

I won't accuse you of straw maning at all -- I only ask WHY you wanted me to continue it by replying to destructor. I totally agree that that is what day 3 has come down to. Why such insistence that I reply to destructor's "I'm town, so that's obviously a lie, nah!"?

Why was it so suspicious that I didn't?

You'll also notice that I've been calling for destructor to claim. I'm not going to lie - I'm more inclined to believe him over you right now, but that's not to say I'm not suspicious of him. I'm suspicious of you both, just him less so.

You're also telling him you'll vote me instantaneously after he claims. How in heck does that make any sense?

[Guardian]

Guardian, you evaded the beef of what I was saying.

There was no beef to evade.

Your defence against evidence that contradicts your claim is, more and more, becoming speculation about what has happened with the setup, to the point where I think most would agree the game should have been abandoned by such a mod-error.

Obviously there is some setup speculation, how else could it be explained. And I've also offered idea of a mafia role blocker, which makes a lot of sense, all things considered. Massive getting no result night 1, Khelvaster not killing night 2...

Also, in the post of yours I quoted when I asked who you thought my scum buddy was, you had just said you thought it

wasn't

ting.

I did. Then ting=) showed that he'd really already made up his mind. I thought he hadn't... but his posts following seem to be trying to appear open minded while single-mindedly subtly guiding towards a me-lynch.

[Matt_S]

Guardian: Do you think there's some reason why your claim should be super believable? Because I don't see how out skepticism is surprising.

[ting =)]

Then you aren't reading my posts.

I

did

. I didn't buy your points. So I replied. But you blatantly said you did not read mine. This is a circular argument.

I won't accuse you of straw maning at all -- I only ask WHY you wanted me to continue it by replying to destructor. I totally agree that that is what day 3 has come down to. Why such insistence that I reply to destructor's "I'm town, so that's obviously a lie, nah!"?

Why was it so suspicious that I didn't?

Because I thought you'd reply with something other than a 'nah!' post of your own.

You're also telling him you'll vote me instantaneously after he claims. How in heck does that make any sense?

I'll reply when he claims.

I did. Then ting=) showed that he'd really already made up his mind. I thought he hadn't... but his posts following seem to be trying to appear open minded while single-mindedly subtly guiding towards a me-lynch.

So your reason for thinking I was town for a while is that I was not on your case. Your current reason for thinking that I'm scum is that I

am

on your case. How is this not omgus?

Before you make another

You appear to be pretending to, and that's what is suspicious.

argument, I replied to that in 792 btw.

[destructor]

Guradian, I'm pretty sure we've already been over all of that.

I don't have much else to say. Still waiting on Bab. And then it's really into the hands of ting, Seth, Matt and Bab.

[Guardian]

Then you aren't reading my posts.

I

did

. I didn't buy your points. So I replied. But you blatantly said you did not read mine. This is a circular argument.

no u

I won't accuse you of straw maning at all -- I only ask WHY you wanted me to continue it by replying to destructor. I totally agree that that is what day 3 has come down to. Why such insistence that I reply to destructor's "I'm town, so that's obviously a lie, nah!"?

Why was it so suspicious that I didn't?

Because I thought you'd reply with something other than a 'nah!' post of your own.

How was I supposed to reply to a "nah you're scum" post with anything other than "nah I'm not"? There was no substance to respond to.

You're also telling him you'll vote me instantaneously after he claims. How in heck does that make any sense?

I'll reply when he claims.

Uh, that really, really doesn't cut it.

I did. Then ting=) showed that he'd really already made up his mind. I thought he hadn't... but his posts following seem to be trying to appear open minded while single-mindedly subtly guiding towards a me-lynch.

So your reason for thinking I was town for a while is that I was not on your case. Your current reason for thinking that I'm scum is that I

am

on your case. How is this not omgus?

Before you make another

You appear to be pretending to, and that's what is suspicious.

argument, I replied to that in 792 btw.

And I replied to that reply. Your faked even-mindedness is what is suspicious. If you want me to explain further, tell me what's unclear.