Mini 738: The Town of Merrin - Game Over

[ting =)]

You wouldn't have to repeat yourself if you realized that I was not telling Zilla to kill herself. I was demonstrating to her (and to everyone else) that her statement "I am sure I have caught 2 or 3 scum" is incorrect.

Do you really think it is plausible that I am scum and was hoping I could convince town-Zilla to self-vote? Really?

How, exactly, were you demonstrating that it's incorrect? Show me. Your conditional for proving that 'zilla is sure' is that zilla kills herself. It demonstrates nothing, because either:

1. zilla doesn't kill herself.
2. zilla kills herself, which still proves nothing.

It doesn't demonstrate anything because your clause for her statement to be true is absurd, and unlikely to happen.

Do you really think it is plausible that I am scum and was hoping I could convince town-Zilla to self-vote? Really?

I think it's plausible you're scum making a pointless case that was meant to sound like it conclusively proved that zilla was unsure about her cases, when in fact, it doesn't demonstrate anything.

If you love chocolate so much, then why don't you marry it?

Funny I was about to post an analogy. Here's mine:

John and Joe, are from religion A and religion B. They've been arguing over who's religion is right for a while now. John says to Joe, "Alright, kill yourself. If your religion is right, you go to heaven. If it's wrong, you go to hell."

It's pointless, because either:

1. Joe doesn't kill himself. John (that's you), goes, "Aha! You didn't kill yourself. You're obviously not sure about your religion."
2. Joe does kill himself. It still doesn't prove religion B is right.

Also, sure, let's use your analogy too:

If you love chocolate so much, then why don't you marry it?

Can you really not see the fallacy? Let's try it in a conversation:

ting: I love chocolate.
gieff: No, you don't love chocolate.
ting: I

do

love chocolate.
gieff:

If you love chocolate so much, then why don't you marry it?

ting: That's a stupid argument. Your conditional for me to prove that I really

do

love chocolate is that I marry it? Really? So either:

1. I marry chocolate - you accept that I really, honestly love chocolate.
2. I don't marry chocolate, even though it's

obvious

that this was a perfectly reasonable conditional for proving my honesty. Since I don't marry chocolate, I obviously don't love chocolate - I was lying.

Yes, I'm obviously going to marry chocolate. It's not at all absurd to expect me to marry chocolate to prove I was telling the truth.

Basically,

Would you conclude that a child who asked the above question was really advocating for the chocolate-lover to marry chocolate?

I would conclude that the child who asked the above question just made a fallacy. Which is especially bad since said child used that fallacy to convince the other children in the playground that they should hang one of their number by a noose from the monkey bars.

---

ting and sensfan, how close are you to finishing your re-read? It would be ideal to decide on a lynch candidate today, so we can work out the claims and the actual lynch in the next three days.

I'm behind on several games ever since I've had more work in RL. Also, this particular game moves really fast. Still, I'll set time up in the weekend to finish this off.

---

And ting, THIS is why I wanted you to unvote. Dourgrim would have just accidentally hammered Panzer if your vote was still on.

I honestly doubt that.

---

Dourgrim, Sensfan, and ting; we still need your top 3.

I gave my tentative top 3 already. Go ahead and put them in your top 3 listing; if my top 3 changes after I'm done reading, just change them.

[Zilla]

Are we still at L-1 on Panzer?

Otherwise, I'm switching back to him... (investigating vote count)

[Zilla]

Okay, it appears I was counted on Panzer anyway.

unvote: Qwints
Vote: Panzer

I'm in for the claim pressure, and I think we need this claim regardless of where SensFan is in rereading. It's entirely possible Sens and Panzer are scum and all Sens has to do is refrain from "catching up." Heck, even if Panzer is clean, Sens could pull that move just to screw town.

[GIEFF]

1. Joe doesn't kill himself. John (that's you), goes, "Aha! You didn't kill yourself. You're obviously not sure about your religion."
2. Joe does kill himself. It still doesn't prove religion B is right.

1. But no benefit would be gained by Joe killing himself. If she really is town, Zilla killing herself has the benefit of proving to everybody that she is town. That's the benefit. Joe could say "Yes, killing myself would prove my faith, but that's not enough to offset the cost of ending my life." But Zilla killing herself would do more than prove her faith, it would also catch two or 3 scum.

The whole reason I brought it up is that Zilla herself was trying to say that it was fine, because she's caught 2 or 3 scum on her wagon. I was just forcing her to put her money where her mouth was.

2. You are right that Zilla proving herself to be town would not mean the people she thought were scum are actually scum. And you are right that even if Zilla WAS confident she had caught 2 or 3 scum (which she was not), she should not martyr herself, for this very reason.

But Zilla did not mention this. She said she was considering martyring herself, but didn't want to do it yet because B_B was scummier, and had a similar number of votes.


You are taking the entire thing far too literally. I never wanted Zilla to self-vote or to martyr herself. Just like the kid saying "why don't you marry chocolate?" doesn't really want anybody to marry chocolate. And just like Joe doesn't really want John to kill himself.


And the fact that Zilla did not include either me or B_B in her top 3 proves that I was right. She said she had caught 2 or three scum, I told her that she didn't really think so, and she's verified that by only including one of the three in her lynch-list.


This was a minor point in my eyes, and not at all a significant part of the case against Zilla. Why do you find it so important?

-------

And Zilla, you should not get to decide who claims, no more than Panzer or B_B do. You are one of the top 3 candidates, so your views are biased. I think B_B should be the one to claim, and the one to get lynched. He has more pseudo-votes than anybody else.

[GIEFF]

Panzer really is at L-1 now, so no "accidental" votes.

[GIEFF]

8 BB (mykonian, GIEFF, militant, goat, Panzer, SL, qwints, Dour)
8 Panzer (mykonian, zilla, GIEFF, militant, SL, qwints, Dour, ting)
7 zilla (GIEFF, militant, goat, panzer, bb, qwints, Dour)
5 Qwints (mykonian, goat, Panzer, bb, GIEFF)
4 GIEFF (Panzer, bb, Dour, ting)
2 mykonian (zilla, GIEFF)
1 Goat (zilla)
1 Springlullaby (ting)

Actually, Panzer and BB are tied with ting's vote in there now. I think I agree with Zilla that it is time for Panzer to claim. I would prefer B_B, but they both have 8 pseudo-votes and Panzer is at L-1.

Goat, SL, mykonian, ting, militant, Sens, and Dourgrim; are you all OK with Panzer as the lynch-choice? If there is no opposition in the next 8 hours or so, I think Panzer should claim.

[mykonian]

I'm ok with it.

[GIEFF]

Actually, it's really just sens and goat we need to hear from; everybody else who isn't a top lynch candidate is already on the psuedo-wagon.

And I just re-read goat and saw that he wanted to put Panzer in his top 3 instead of Zilla, so that makes NINE pseudo-votes out of a possible 11. The only people not on his psuedo-wagon are B_B and Sensfan.

9 Panzer (mykonian, zilla, GIEFF, militant, SL, qwints, Dour, ting, goat)
8 BB (mykonian, GIEFF, militant, goat, Panzer, SL, qwints, Dour)
6 zilla (GIEFF, militant, panzer, bb, qwints, Dour)
5 Qwints (mykonian, goat, Panzer, bb, GIEFF)
4 GIEFF (Panzer, bb, Dour, ting)
2 mykonian (zilla, GIEFF)
1 Goat (zilla)
1 Springlullaby (ting)

Panzer is the choice.

Please claim, Panzer.

[mykonian]

I bet this is going to take some time...

[springlullaby]

Weekend V/LA notice

[Goatrevolt]

At this point, Panzer should claim.

[PJ.]

Can someone remove a vote, In case I'm a power role I don't want to claim at L-1. Claim will come right after Unvote if you guys allow me that priviledge.

[GIEFF]

No, just claim. If somebody hammers you as a PR, then we've caught a scum, which is worth more than any power role could be.

Unless you are a nk-immune cop-vig-doc.

[militant]

Goat, SL, mykonian, ting, militant, Sens, and Dourgrim; are you all OK with Panzer as the lynch-choice? If there is no opposition in the next 8 hours or so, I think Panzer should claim.

I'm fine with it.

[PJ.]

I am the Cop. This explains why I was so interested in self preservation.

[GIEFF]

It COULD explain why you were so interested in self preservation.

[mykonian]

If there is no cc, I don´t support this lynch anymore.

vote BB

to start something, in case people think we should go for the second place in pseudovotes. We don't want to lynch Panzer just because nobody has a different idea anymore...

and for people that want a case, I have posted it somewhere. Probably posted it just before posting my top three.

[Zilla]

What do we do now, wait for counterclaims?

You know though, that's also a sticky situation, since it would draw out a real cop if he was fake claiming just to guage reaction...

However, since Panzer isn't even my first choice, I'd personally not risk a cop when I have "better" targets to pursue.

unvote: panzer

As of now, I'm suspect of Mykonian (I still feel his answers to flipping around on panzer are totally unsatisfactory) and BB. Neither of the two have been hunting scum, at all. Almost half the game is pretty passive on this front as well. Qwints and Militant haven't really questioned anybody.

BB's latest post also rubs me the wrong way; just because panzer was accumulating the solid votes, he acts like he has nothing to worry about.

If I could, I'd vote both Mykonian and BB. We're very close to deadline, however...

vote: Mykonian

As for Goat, it seems he hasn't been using the same scummy tactics since his disengage with me. He still has his shady history with Panzer and Mykonian, so if either of them flips scum, there would be reason to suspect goat's motives.

[Zilla]

preference: panzer/qwints, then BB.

goat, this is going to take forever, if everybody should send another in. GIEFF, I can vote Panzer too.

What happened to Qwints? You also said nothing about BB. You didn't post a case on him at all, and you should have no trouble recounting it if you are serious about it.

[PJ.]

Great catch Zilla although but I think that is in light of Qwints being there and him being your buddy.

[GIEFF]

This was mykonian's case on BB:

BB next: His Panzer vote wasn't strong. I don't know why he keeps the pressure on GIEFF, while Panzer made clear that GIEFF didn't lie, and therefor GIEFF must have acted protown.

He's scum because he's attacking the same player mykonian attacked for 30 pages. That doesn't make any sense. And the Panzer vote was fine, it was the unvote that was odd.

to start something, in case people think we should go for the second place in pseudovotes.

This is a very weird thing to say, too. What do you mean in case people think we should do it? Why don't you do what you want to do?




As people read, can they claim "not-cop" so we're sure there isn't a CC, and that a potential real cop just hasn't seen Panzer's claim yet? Right now, Zilla, mykonian, and GIEFF are the only three who have claimed not-cop.

[Zilla]

^ If you're clean, you sure don't show it.

I don't even understand what it is you're trying to say there, the closest I can come up with is "I accused mykonian of flaking on qwints because qwints is by scumbuddy."

Yeah, right.

[GIEFF]

Great catch Zilla although but I think that is in light of Qwints being there and him being your buddy.

Why did you feel the need to answer this question for mykonian? I thought you found him scummy? Shouldn't town-Panzer want to see how a player he finds scummy reacts before jumping to his defense?


And what do you mean it's in light of qwints being there? Being where? And what does qwints being Zilla's buddy have to do with why mykonian ignored qwints?

[Zilla]

That was for Panzer, not GIEFF.

[mykonian]

BB is looking much more scummy then, his attention goes to the people that are already voted. Bit bandwagony, then. What he brings up against GIEFF makes me think that I could be right about GIEFF, and he has a reason to go that way, in case GIEFF is going to be lynched.

That was what I was referring too. It doesn't include his wrong vote, and early lurking accusations.

Qwints is high on my list, but doesn't seem to be high enough on the list of the other town. I thought BB would be the most useful vote for that reason, even if he is not my top choice. I believe that a town that has discussed makes more often the right decision then the individual (this has been proven), and I'm not against a bb-lynch, so I can't see what is wrong about this vote. I made that top-three count exactly for the reason that we can get to a decision, so that we are not too dispersed, and then I should follow my intention if I can agree with the lynch.