Open Countdown! Mini 487! GAME OVER!

[Kinetic]

Bleh...

Just lost a long post >><<

Basically it boils down to this:

First: Heather, who was lurking all day day one, all of a sudden, after I presented a rather good case against her, is back with a vengeance. Her defense? OMGUS on a major scale...

Anyone who doesn't find that really suspicious and really suspect is blind.

Second: Everything that people have said they find scummy about me they have found scummy because they think I was mafia. The interactions day 1 between CKD/HQ, the erratic vote patterns (which I contend were not, but w/e). But when the alignments of HQ/CKD came up, a lot of people backed off that they though I was mafia.

But instead, they took these suspicions, and they dropped them on "Well he's scummy, so if he isn't mafia then he must be.... SK?".

That doesn't make ANY sense to me. SKscum and MAfiascum play extremely differently in my book. I'm not saying I can't be SK scum because I'm not lurking, or trying to say that a SK has to play a certain way.

What I am saying is there is no justification for saying, "Well I thought there was a high likelihood of him being mafia and a low likelihood of him being the SK, but when recent events showed that was highly unlikely, to justify my suspicions on him, he must be the SK."

I implore everyone, re-read Day 1. The town will LOSE if we do not use ALL the information we have available to us. The people who are just blindly voting today without doing their research are scummy as hell! Mainly because it seems to me they have their minds made up and are now, post-voting, trying to justify their suspicions.

[Mirth]

Actually, Kinetic, I reread Day 1. And I still think you're probably the SK based on what you have said. I attributed my suspicion of you mistakenly to you and CKD distancing, but your argument with him was genuine and thus even more disturbing. Your only defense of yourself seems to be "reread the thread." I've done that. I don't see it as defense.

[Mgm]

I attributed my suspicion of you mistakenly to you and CKD distancing, but your argument with him was genuine and thus even more disturbing.

A whole bunch of people found CKD suspicious. How is a genuine argument with a suspicious person scummy?

[Mirth]

The manner of the argument. Yes, CKD was suspcious. I too found him suspicious. But just because CKD was suspicious doesn't mean that Kinetic wasn't. Both of their arguments were suspicious.

[Mgm]

What was it? The argument can't have been genuine and suspicious at the same time.

[Mirth]

And why not? Can you explain to me why you think those two words are mutually exclusive?

[Mgm]

Have a look in a dictionary under the entry 'genuine'.

[Mirth]

Since you ask so nicely:

gen·u·ine
–adjective
1. possessing the claimed or attributed character, quality, or origin; not counterfeit; authentic; real: genuine sympathy; a genuine antique.
2. properly so called: a genuine case of smallpox.
3. free from pretense, affectation, or hypocrisy; sincere: a genuine person.
4. descended from the original stock; pure in breed: a genuine Celtic people.


sus·pi·cious
1. tending to cause or excite suspicion; questionable: suspicious behavior.
2. inclined to suspect, esp. inclined to suspect evil; distrustful: a suspicious tyrant.
3. full of or feeling suspicion.
4. expressing or indicating suspicion: a suspicious glance.

The two words are non-contridictory. Just because something that someone says is genuine (meaning that it is a sincere expression of their opinion) does not mean it cannot also be suspicious (i.e. to incite suspicion in others based on the motive that that opinion represents). I believe now that both of them meant what they said and the argument was really an argument of different philosophies. But the fact that it was a real argument and that those are really their philosophies by no means stops me from questioning the motivational factors behind the philosophies. (I'm also not trying to be snarky here, sorry if I come off that way, but the two words are not antonyms.)

[Kinetic]

Mirth, but that is what I am wondering still... If you originally found the arguments suspicious because you thought it was ingenuous, how can you so quickly after finding the argument genuine still find it suspicious? It seems to me this is a case of false justification. You are trying to justify your suspicions, but those suspicions don't make sense for the reason you originally made them, so you are trying to justify them instead of looking at the much more likely case: They are just not correct at this time...

I'm not trying to team up on you with MGM, and I realize this might look like that, but despite all this I still feel like you're not part of the scum group right now. And because of that I want you to help us find the real scum groups.

I mean, for most of the time you found your opinions and mine to be in line, that is why I'm so confused why during your reread this time you didn't feel that way again.

[Mgm]

As 3. shows. Genuine means sincere, which by my book also means honest. If you are being honest about your philosophy, then by definition you don't have any ulterior motives.

[Mirth]

Kinetic: Explain to me how I'm not helping? And I'm not retroactively justifying my suspicion of you. I did the reread by casting aside my opinions, and it came out that I still don't like what I'm hearing. I think you really did mean your argument with CKD, yes, but what you were argueing is what raises my suspicion, as well as your early references to the SK. My original theory actually ignored your earlier comments about the SK and focused more on your fight with CKD. I assumed, since I found you both individually suspicious, that you were working together based on the debate (which wasn't a very good assumption). That was wrong, but my suspicion of you has not been cleared.

MGM: I think he really believes a mafia kill would be better because he is the SK. Yes, he is honest, but honest doesn't mean all-revealing. You can be honest and still mislead someone based on things like presentation and omission. Or you could be honest about your opinion without revealing the motives for it. That is stil honesty. Perhaps I should clarify that I'm using genuine in the context of "real" and "authentic" overall, though.

[Kinetic]

It has been my opinion the entire game that we should not have wasted our time with all these no lynches. We gained no valuable information and the SK was just slowly biding his time, killing off inactive players and giving us NO information what so ever about his kills.

So when the town finally woke up I was there to push. I tagged HQ and CKD as my most suspicious people. Well guess what, HQ WAS scum and CKD WAS very suspicious. The SK killing him is also significant. The SK is no longer targeting inactive players and actually gave us a kill we can read into.

And the reason I'm so miffed is because in every game I have read with a SK in it, the SK was never lynched because people though he was the SK. Its easy for the SK to hide in a crowd because they can easily say "I'm not the most suspicious person, I'm only the second most, lynch the person who is most suspicious first". I have found the SK is never who you think it is, and since you have virtually cleared me of being mafia that means you only have a 1/7 chance of being right here. I personally much prefer the 3/7 chance of lynching someone who has a good chance of being the SK or Mafia, and that is what I think heather could be.

The main problem with your argument that I see is if you are wrong and I'm not the SK, and you're right and I'm not mafia, then we are hosed. You kill a townie and then you're hoping the SK hits a mafia.

I will say it again. Serial Killer, if I am inevitably lynched, you can gather from what is said here that I have a VERY low chance of being mafia. Target Heatherlou. I'm pretty sure she is mafia. I caught HQ, and I'm pretty sure I caught Heather. The fact that she has gone back to lurking AGAIN after failing to defend herself the first time is throwing even MORE credence to my theory. This is in your best interest to kill mafia, even if it also pushes forward a possible town win.

Mirth: By your attacks I feel like you are most likely not the SK. If you were the SK then there is no way you would push your attack on me as such. You would realize that I am most likely not mafia and not waste your time with this attack. As the SK you need to lynch mafia.

Now as a townie, I don't care if I get the mafia or the SK, but I want to lynch someone who I think has the best chance of being one or both. Heather is the play today, and I will argue that point until I'm blue. Lynch me, go ahead, but after I'm dead, look back at my arguments. You should be able to find the last remaining mafia and the SK by who the SK kills tonight.

[Stewie]

I got a prod. I don't know if you guys asked for it or not, but in case you did, read the V/LA. I'll try to contribute later tonight, but I think a post tomorrow afternoon is more likely.

[Kinetic]

We're sort of under a deadline, I realize V/LA is useful an all, but you would think a quick notice in this type of game would have been appropriate.

[Mgm]

Yesterday, we had just 8 posts, half of them from me.
At this rate, we're gonna lose guaranteed.

[Kinetic]

I know MGM... >> I'm trying, but the only people here are you me and Mirth. Raffles and heather's disappearance greatly disturbs me. I think the three of us need to decide between those two, pick one, triple vote them, and hope someone comes back in time to hammer hem.

[Mirth]

I have found the SK is never who you think it is

Then who do you think the SK isn't?

One point though: I'm not convinced that Heather is mafia. I'm not happy with her play, yes, but near-lurking and copycat play does not make a case for me. (I've run across innocent folks who happen to play like that. While its bad for the town, so is killing them.) I'm not saying I think Heather is innocent, as I don't know, but I would like to hear her at least try to defend herself. Also if I'm going to vote for a lurker, then my vote will probably go to Xyzzy. Yes, it is a crappy metagaming reason, but I don't like that he's active but just not here.

So then, Heather, I'd like to hear what you have to say to Kinetic's accusations. I'd like to hear just about anything from Xyzzy at this point, really.

[Raffles]

Well to be fair I couldn't be bothered to get into an heated argument of mutual exclucivity of genuine and suspicious... reading long posts.

[Kinetic]

I'd be more willing to go after xyzzy after heather. I thought I laid a decent case, but I'll be honest, I was only about 50% sure. After her defense, I'm like 85% sure now, so I would prefer her lynch more than anyone.

If I had to choose a second person, I would say Raffles is the second highest person on my list.

People who I don't think are the SK:

Mirth

People who I don't think are mafia:

MGM
Stewie

[Mirth]

Hmmm...that is an interesting thing to think about. It tempts me into the realm of process of elimination. (But that has gotten me nowhere before.) What the heck, I'll list mine, and see what happens.

People who I don't think are mafia:
MGM
Kinetic

People who I don't think are the SK:
Raffles

[Kinetic]

Yea, I would prob add Raffles to the not likely to be SK list, but he's on my most likely to be mafia list

[Mgm]

Well to be fair I couldn't be bothered to get into an heated argument of mutual exclucivity of genuine and suspicious... reading long posts.

There's plenty of other stuff to comment on. It's not a good reason to disappear for over 2 days.

Let's see if I can drum up some activity.

Unvote; vote: xyzzy

He clearly hasn't got the V/LA excuse Stewie mentioned, so I want to hear it from his own mouth why he isn't posting.

[Mirth]

Mod: can you please prod Xyzzy?

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

I prodded Stewie and Xzyyz at the same time a while ago.

[Kinetic]

I totally missed Raffles post.... lol