Mini 989 - Disgaea Mafia Episode 2 (Game Over!)

[Kise]

Bad reasons?

Hmm. Maybe. "Adell's Dad" is much more likely to be the adoptive one (who has no name apart from that) than the biological one (who is Masked Man or Shura most of the game).

On the other hand,

the 3 obvious scum, if dram was really follow-canon about it (he was in DG1), is FakeZenon, biodad, biomom.

So maybe it's at least worth mentioning.

The part that I found more suspicious tbh is that you claimed your role result out of nowhere. O.o

See, I could see TBM as scum just because the Kise-lynching is more hardcore than what I saw last game

; it's like ABR-tier.

And I could see Adell's Dad as a fakeclaim for Shura, too.

But I couldn't see DTM getting "Adell's Dad" on Shura after a rolecop at all (unless Shura were an omni-GF, which implies that the woman isn't in the game, which is kinda sexist, etc).

So, I think TBM is town unless he's scum with DTM hoping to play on the kind of /outguess Kise is already putting forward after TBM flips. DTM would probably also have to have some kind of weak rolecop, too.

So, given a handful of flavor assumptions, the circumstances where TBM are scum are very specific and unlikely to be in play as I see them.

Does you or don't you agree? Quit the fencesitting; cut the speculating; get to the money on how you feel and leave it at that. It lessens the confusion as well. I'm not attacking you for finding TBM town; I'm making mention of how you keep vouching for people with certainty in your tone, yet and still managing to throw out unneeded possibilities.

Buttons, who else do you see as the other scum besides me?

[Iecerint]

Dude, that is INCREDIBLY selective bolding. Yes, your initial flavor speculation was better than your later ones. Then it got worse (alternate ending spec, not factoring in the context of DTM's claimed rolecop).

Let me rebold that second quote for you:

See, I could see TBM as scum just because the Kise-lynching is more hardcore than what I saw last game; it's like ABR-tier. And I could see Adell's Dad as a fakeclaim for Shura, too.

But I couldn't see DTM getting "Adell's Dad" on Shura after a rolecop at all (unless Shura were an omni-GF, which implies that the woman isn't in the game, which is kinda sexist, etc).

So, I think TBM is town unless he's scum with DTM hoping to play on the kind of /outguess Kise is already putting forward after TBM flips. DTM would probably also have to have some kind of weak rolecop, too.

So, given a handful of flavor assumptions, the circumstances where TBM are scum are very specific and unlikely to be in play as I see them.

This is a bit nuanced, but it is NOT fencesitting.

The first bit before the semicolon in the second post that you bolded I agree with, but I don't think you've mentioned that at all. (Or the other part you bolded, either?) It's new AFAIK.

[vollkan]

So, the obvious reason to vote Kise based on that is that Kise was whining about the game not going ("PM me when the jokes are over"). The disconnect is that if he really wanted to get to scumhunting and all that, he could do it himself. He's either scum that doesn't want to scumhunt and is trying to get points for calling out people for being lazy, or he is himself just lazy.

My guess is that the same post ("PM me when the jokes are over") is the bit people interpret as Kise not liking RVS ("the jokes").

Ah okay. In that case, my points will stand, though for a different reason: namely, that the accusation is seriously overegged. To elaborate, it was prsented as if Kise had been acting contradictorily, when in reality it was just that he appeared to be refusing to participate in the jokey stage. It warrants further questioning, maybe, but it doesn't warrant suspicion.

Continuing where I left off...

Page 4

Iec says that it should have been obvious what the basis of the vote was. I can't see what the point of this is. Missing something which is obvious (and I don't think it is obvious), isn't scummy +1 UK better move on to actual content soon, rather than this pointless debate with MOI about whether possible future WoT from MOI will be bad or not. Really not liking Iec linking KTB to Kise by a shared accusation of inconsistency over the supposedly "obvious" thing +1. DTMaster's post to my predecessor employs craplogic - there is nothing wrong at all with a neutral read, but DTM describes it "you're not willing to commit to a read", which is just putting a very negative spin on what is natural (especially for a newbie, as DTM clearly acknowledges my predecessor to be). +1. Nacho makes a gutty vote for Iec based on the non-joining of the wagon; not point-scummy, but I don't like. Iec continues the weird parallel Kise and KTB cases, saying both show a disconnect bw words and actions. It's a bad case in relation to Kise (because Kise's implicit position on RVS doesn't imply that he should be pushing some altenrative means), but it's absolute crap in relation to KTB (KTB didn't do ANY "action". It's justhow Iec et al are spinning what was a legitiamte question) +1. And now Jarti says that KTB has faked "half-cluelessness"; aside from the fact that I'm not sure what the hell "half-cluelessness" is, there's absolutely no reasoning to back up it apparently being fake. +1

Page 5

Spam for most of this page...Jarti describes KTB as "obvscum". Hyperbolising a crappy case doesn't make it better and only makes you look scummy. +1

Page 6

KTB makes the good point that the case on him would apply equally to Foobert. I missed that. Another +1 for Iec. I do like KTB's defence here pointing out that the case against him is being applied inconsistently (not a town-tell, but just good reasoning). at Iec's response that he missed Foobert but that Foobert is "clearly aping" KTB. Yet more exaggeration. +2. RBT chimes in with a completely useless post, saying that Foobert is his "focus", no explanation or anything, and that since hsi top is not in the top 2, "I don't really have an answer for that right now". Makes no sense; if he wanted to justify not posting, he could do so; this isjust giving the appearance of attention without actually having any. +2. KTB's vote post for Iec reeks of OMGUS - "not paying attention" is a tired cliche (non)scumtell, and accusing Iec of "fence sitting", when he wasn't doing that is weak. +2 I'll -1 from that for his later post where he raises tunnelling; that's more valid than "not paying attention", but I can see how he could mix the two. Only the fence-sitting bit bugs me now. MOI raises Iec's "misunderstood sweetie" false dichotomy. I didn't pick up on that, and it gets a +1 for Iec.

Rankings

Riceballtail

52

MagnaofIllusion

52

Kise

50

Nachomamma8

50

Jarti

54

Iecerint

59

UncertainKitten

50

The Buttonmen

50

foobert

50

Kthxbye

51

DTMaster

51

[Iecerint]

^ Dude, it was page 2. You work with what you've got and revise as necessary. Or that's how I do it. I guess your ranking system departs from that. Also, it's lame for you to give me -like points for that and not TBM.

Does not compute that someone voting the player you think is scummiest at a given point (Nacho gut-voting me) is something you don't like.

You are totally misrepresenting KTB's vote for me. It was a good vote. Hell, you even say that it's good reasoning before you call it OMGUS, and afterward.

You and MoI share a failure to know the definition of false dichotomy. Something that includes all possibilities in the universe is not a false dichotomy.

Also, I post like gillions more than anyone else, so your EXTREME preference for +s over -s so far is going to artificially inflate my "points."

[vollkan]

Dude, it was page 2.

Yup. If it was any later, your ranking would be even higher. Early game justifies pressuring and excessive questioning. It doesn't justify outright crap logic.

Also, it's lame for you to give me -like points for that and not TBM.

Hmm?

Ah. I was under the impression that TBM's vote for Kise was just a random nonsense vote. However, reading with your question in mind, I see that he accused Kise of "cognitive dissonance". I'll give him +5 for that.

Does not compute that someone voting the player you think is scummiest at a given point (Nacho gut-voting me) is something you don't like.

I have a certain notoriety here for my hatred of gut votes. Basically, to summarise my position:
1) Town players should vote for whom they think is scum
2) Town players should think that other players are scum for good reasons
3) Therefore, town players should vote for other players for good reasons
4) Town benefit from being able to collectively consider good reasons
5) Scum are disadvantaged by having to justify votes with good reasons
6) Thus, votes should be backed up with good reasons

You and MoI share a failure to know the definition of false dichotomy. Something that includes all possibilities in the universe is not a false dichotomy.

Pedantry. The point is simply that it is not the case that KTB is either sweet and innocent or outright scum, as was represented.

Also, I post like gillions more than anyone else, so your EXTREME preference for +s over -s so far is going to artificially inflate my "points."

Yes. The points do disadvantage frequent posters. It's a problem I am concious of, and if I see an unacceptable distortion, then I will accomodate. However, you are my scummiest read so far, so even if your score is off by a few points, it's not a significant inaccuracy.

[Iecerint]

1. It's not crap logic. You even say that the argument itself is OK in your previous post, if exaggerated (which, I mean, by that logic, ANYTHING just out of RVS could be "exaggerated"):

In that case, my points will stand, though for a different reason: namely, that the accusation is seriously overegged. To elaborate, it was prsented as if Kise had been acting contradictorily, when in reality it was just that he appeared to be refusing to participate in the jokey stage.

It warrants further questioning, maybe, but it doesn't warrant suspicion.

Also, your last sentence here makes little sense. You generally question someone because they do something worthy of suspicion. (Yeah, there are *ahem* "pedantic" exceptions -- someone makes a neat claim that you want to clarify or whatever -- but that clearly wasn't in play here.)

2A. I offer my interpretation of KTB's behavior, and allow for whatever else he wants to give. It is NOT pedantry to call out a misrep when it happens.

2B. Also, even if I WERE making something other than an X/(1-X) dichotomy -- what the hell is false about it? IT'D STILL BE TOWN/SCUM! Are you arguing that I should have thrown Survivor or SK in for kicks? Should I have added "NOT misunderstood and/or NOT sweet town" as another explicit option to make my "scummy technique" less subversive?

3. Carry on.

[Iecerint]

EBWOP: Don't give me crap about the not of X/(1-X) being the universe of false dichotomies. You know what I mean.

[vollkan]

1. It's not crap logic. You even say that the argument itself is OK in your previous post, if exaggerated (which, I mean, by that logic, ANYTHING just out of RVS could be "exaggerated"):

No. I said:

Ah okay. In that case, my points will stand, though for a different reason: namely, that the accusation is seriously overegged. To elaborate, it was prsented as if Kise had been acting contradictorily, when in reality it was just that he appeared to be refusing to participate in the jokey stage. It warrants further questioning, maybe, but it doesn't warrant suspicion.

Prior to this, as I said, it just made no sense at all. In the above, I am saying that I can now see the argument, but I think it is crap. "Overegged" in this context does not mean that you've made a valid point but just trumped it up too much; it means that you have taken something (which I previously couldn't see) and worked into spinning it into something scummy.

Also, your last sentence here makes little sense. You generally question someone because they do something worthy of suspicion. (Yeah, there are *ahem* "pedantic" exceptions -- someone makes a neat claim that you want to clarify or whatever -- but that clearly wasn't in play here.)

No. Kise implied he wasn't going to participate in RVS. There is nothing scummy about that, but it's perfectly legitimate to then question him for the purposes of drawing out scumminess, eg:

Questioner: So, Kise, why shouldn't we all just shut up right now? If it's okay for you to skip RVS, why can't everybody?
Kise: {answer}

It's about drawing out scumminess, even though the initial action itself isn't scummy.

2A. I offer my interpretation of KTB's behavior, and allow for whatever else he wants to give. It is NOT pedantry to call out a misrep when it happens.

You said:

To have people say whether KTB is a misunderstood sweetie or what.

Yes. Technically and pedantically it isn't a false dichotomy. But you're very obviously positioning the choices available by sarcastically calling him a "misunderstood sweetie". You are resorting to the literal semantics of what you said, rather than the meaning it conveyed (which is that it is ridiculous to think he was anything other than scummy)

2B. Also, even if I WERE making something other than an X/(1-X) dichotomy -- what the hell is false about it? IT'D STILL BE TOWN/SCUM! Are you arguing that I should have thrown Survivor or SK in for kicks? Should I have added "NOT misunderstood and/or NOT sweet town" as another explicit option to make my "scummy technique" less subversive?

No. You simply should have asked whether people think his failure to understand the reasons behind the vote was reasonable, rather than presenting the choice in a slanted way.

[Iecerint]

Fair enough about me not knowing what the hell "overegged" means. I thought it was a colloquial alteration of "overexaggerated."

I dispute the bit about Kise's whining about the game not starting (yes, I know you don't like the word "whining" @ Kise) + not starting it being null. I've played in games where scum have been caught for just the "null" bit you trivialize (refer to Hoopla on page 2). Also, there's a difference between indicating "I don't like RVS" and indicating "gosh guys this is going nowhere see how concerned about activity I am?" (YES, THIS IS A CARICATURED, SIMPLIFIED VERSION OF WHAT HAPPENED. I AM DOING THIS TO EMPHASIZE A DISTINCTION THAT YOU ARE MISSING/IGNORING.)

The other is bullshit IMO, because the point of the game is to find scum, not "unreasonableness" per se.

[Iecerint]

EBWOP: Refer to

Hoopla

Boxman on page 2. Hoopla replaced him N1 and was summarily killed upon killing the Town Bomb.

[Iecerint]

[Off-topic -- An excellent way to fix your system, for the times when you replace in as town, would be to multiply points different from the mean by the fraction of posts a player has contributed to the total posts in the game (plus a certain measure of punishing subjective vacuity). You'd still have a hard time giving points to lurkers, but at least your system would produce something informative.

You can even do it in this game! Don't worry; I only lose a little under 2 points (owing to being 20% of the thread), so I'm still ahead.]

[UncertainKitten]

I've mostly skimmed the walls that occured in my absence. Vollkan has an interesting system. Anyway, after I take my shower and do a couple things, I can do the promised ISOs.

Kise and MoI, I believe.

[Kise]

Of course it's selective. If you said something I found pro-townish, I'd highlight it, but it wad not dur. So I highlighted the parts I disfavored. Now, the main point I was trying to make is that you have this "either-or" thing going on... You say it's possible for this, but on the other hand it's also possible for that... Like... get to the money.

Unvote

No L-1ing you because I know someone will hammer (there's more than enough legit reasons to). Our precious pet wants to do some iso, so we should honor that.

RE: "should everyone else have skipped RVS?"
We could have got to the nitty gritty; hell yeah. If I didn't give the community something to talk about, I'm sure we could have eventually gotten past the kidding around and found something to do to really start the game. For instance............... .......... ahem, for instance.........

BRB.





OH, well we could have built a wagon on someone and- nuuh, nevermind. I can't name an orthodox way to end the jokey intro part of Day 1. The whole out-of-game questionaire never really does anything except help players get to know each other (that is, if all players are being truthful). Perhaps later down the line you'll catch someone in a lie, but I don't imagine anything immediate [Day 1].

Iece, what's your favorite color?

[TheButtonmen]

Of course it's selective. If you said something I found pro-townish, I'd highlight it, but it wad not dur. So I highlighted the parts I disfavored. Now, the main point I was trying to make is that you have this "either-or" thing going on... You say it's possible for this, but on the other hand it's also possible for that... Like... get to the money.

Unvote

No L-1ing you because I know someone will hammer (there's more than enough legit reasons to). Our precious pet wants to do some iso, so we should honor that.

You dumb son?

You were the only one voting me, not exactly L-1.

Eager to unvote and move on once you see your strictly flavour case wasn't complelling anyone?

OH, well we could have built a wagon on someone and- nuuh, nevermind. I can't name an orthodox way to end the jokey intro part of Day 1. The whole out-of-game questionaire never really does anything except help players get to know each other (that is, if all players are being truthful). Perhaps later down the line you'll catch someone in a lie, but I don't imagine anything immediate [Day 1].

Iece, what's your favorite color?

Oh hey it's Kise doing everything in his power to avoid talking about the game.

[Iecerint]

Gosh, vollkan/MoI complain that I'm too black-and-white, you complain that I vacillate to much. Can't win.

A great way to end the jokey bit is to make a real vote. TBM did it first this game.

Green.

[Iecerint]

@ TBM, I think he's doing the "unvote with implicit intent to vote iece but ima hold off until people finish their isos so he doesn't freak out and claim prematurely" thing.

You'd think he could either ask me things that actually have to do with my alignment -- like evaluating my exchange with vollkan, or anything from before -- or someone else, but what can ye do.

[Iecerint]

Yo Kise, do you have any comment about the fact that I can bold the post differently to totally void your assertion that fencesitting is happening? Cuz you didn't really give one.

[Iecerint]

EBWOP-2: too*

[UncertainKitten]

Ah, god dammit, I only feel like doing one ISO, so it's going to be Kise. Then I'm going to do random shit, and if the mood strikes me tonight, I'll do MoI. Otherwise I'll do MoI tomorrow assuming I'm not being social.

[UncertainKitten]

Admittedly, I am not sure what to make of the Kise ISO. Pretty useless early D1, but early D1 is pretty useless itself until later game.

I guess what bugs me the most is the oscillation between jokes and serious, and being more jokey than anything. But...I...guess I just don't sense scum intent from Kise at this time.

Let's try this again. What am I LOOKING for from Kise, again?

[TheButtonmen]

Sigh, your not looking for anything in specfic.

Thoughts on the jostling back and forth between wanting serious posting and him continuing to joke post?
Thoughts on him pushing flavour?
Thoughts on him and Iec?

Pretty useless early D1, but early D1 is pretty useless itself until later game.

Lies! Slander! Slanderous Lies!

[UncertainKitten]

Well, I think he's right on Iec. I think that, for the time being, flavor is slightly town. I want him to produce more of substance as the day goes on though.

It's just...he doesn't read as trying to screw the town, I guess.

[TheButtonmen]

Bah.

@Mod:

KTHX, RBT and Foobert off having a party and they didn't invite the rest of us?

[Riceballtail]

@Mod:

KTHX, RBT and Foobert off having a party and they didn't invite the rest of us?

I can't speak for the other two, but I am still around. KTB's absence bothers me though, especially after a failed wagon push on me.

[TheButtonmen]

..Helpful.

Now that your here do you want to join in a discussion and start sharing your opinions?