395: Big Lebowski -- game is dead :(
Forum rules
-
-
big_kahunia Intimate Stranger
-
- Intimate Stranger
- Intimate Stranger
- Posts: 1073
- Joined: February 9, 2004
- Location: Tacoma, WA
I don't know where you're from, but calling someone an idiot is a personal attack. You said, "bk's ... idiocy." I don't appreciate this. Don't say that you're attacking the argument; because, your words clearly state what you mean. I stated my rationale for posting that argument.
My flesh and my heart may fail, but God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever.
Psalms 73:26 (NIV)
Psalms 73:26 (NIV)
I was thinking and I don't think this arguement proves any facts, the reason for me not posting is because it doesn't seem like the discussion is on the scum, as much as it is on the rules and personal attacks.
Fircoal strikes me more like an awful fake claim that gets you lynched in under 25 posts. - Kelly Chen
- Colonel Kurtz
- Colonel Kurtz
-
Colonel Kurtz
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 272
- Joined: June 11, 2006
- Location: Oberlin
While, philosophically, I agree with you that personal attacks have no place in mafia, I think that I have yet to make one.
I don't know where you're from, but clearly not somewhere where they teach you how to read.
You see, THAT was a personal attack. Or if I were to say that your contribution so far this game has been shoddy and therefore your opinion doesn't matter, that would also be a personal attack. However, if ALL that I say is that an argument is not valid, I am NOT making a personal attack. Calling an argument invalid, or nonsensical or idiocy is all the same thing; you can't decide that one word out of four that describe the same thing is vulgar. Shit, feces, solid animal waste and poo all describe the same crap; ironic that I keep coming back to this theme, isn't it?
Calling it idiocy wasn't a Freudian slip or a way to insult big_kahunia without saying 'ohhh you're a stupid stupid little man', I simply was choosing another word that meant the same thing as "bad". The fact that you're trying to read *that* much into what I'm writing just shows me that you're trying to find a reason to say I'm scummy while the pot still has my buttprint in it. Why you're doing this, I don't know; you probably just don't like me. Frankly, I don't blame you, but I think you should find a way to try to make me look bad other than wagging your finger at me for using abrasive language.
Can we get on with the game, please?
As you can see, calling a statement idiocy is not calling the person who made it an idiot. For example, Bill Clinton's 'depends on what the definition of "is" is' speach was idiocy, but he was not an idiot because he said that. Saying that someone's action was idiocy is not the same as calling a person an idiot.dictionary.com wrote:id·i·o·cy
Pronunciation[id-ee-uh-see]
–noun, plural -cies. 1. utterly senseless or foolish behavior; a stupid or foolish act, statement, etc.
I don't know where you're from, but clearly not somewhere where they teach you how to read.
You see, THAT was a personal attack. Or if I were to say that your contribution so far this game has been shoddy and therefore your opinion doesn't matter, that would also be a personal attack. However, if ALL that I say is that an argument is not valid, I am NOT making a personal attack. Calling an argument invalid, or nonsensical or idiocy is all the same thing; you can't decide that one word out of four that describe the same thing is vulgar. Shit, feces, solid animal waste and poo all describe the same crap; ironic that I keep coming back to this theme, isn't it?
Calling it idiocy wasn't a Freudian slip or a way to insult big_kahunia without saying 'ohhh you're a stupid stupid little man', I simply was choosing another word that meant the same thing as "bad". The fact that you're trying to read *that* much into what I'm writing just shows me that you're trying to find a reason to say I'm scummy while the pot still has my buttprint in it. Why you're doing this, I don't know; you probably just don't like me. Frankly, I don't blame you, but I think you should find a way to try to make me look bad other than wagging your finger at me for using abrasive language.
Can we get on with the game, please?
Load your program
I am your self
I am your self
- Colonel Kurtz
- Colonel Kurtz
-
Colonel Kurtz
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 272
- Joined: June 11, 2006
- Location: Oberlin
I can't let this one slide either, sorry. Sorry about the double post, too.
Oh, and for the record, none of this is a personal insult
Oh, and for the record, none of this is a personal insult
I don't know what the two parts of that sentence had to do with each other, but ok! I agree, calling someone an idiot is a personal attack, even if they are being an idiot. Name-calling has no place in a game of serious discussion, such as this.big_kahunia wrote:I don't know where you're from, but calling someone an idiot is a personal attack.
Yes and no. This is...yet again, a fallacious statement! Here's why:big_kahunia wrote:You said, "bk's ... idiocy."
Why is this quoting out of context? Because this is what I said:Wikipedia wrote:The practice of "quoting out of context", sometimes referred to as "contextomy," is a logical fallacy and type of false attribution in which a passage is removed from its surrounding matter in such a way as to distort its intended meaning. Quoting out of context is often a means to set up "straw man" arguments. Straw man arguments are arguments against a position which is not held by an opponent, but which may bear superficial similarity to the views of the opponent.
You see, 'idiocy' is referring to '"he waited to confirm so he must be scum"', not "big_kahunia". Quotation marks are not the same as parenthesis, you actually have to apply what is inside of the quotation marks to the sentence. Try this sometime, like now, for instance.I wrote:the scummiest thing that's gone on so far is big_kahunia's 'he waited to confirm so he must be scum' idiocy, but at least it will be different crap.
Thanks for sharing.big_kahunia wrote:I don't appreciate this.
Yes, this is why I choose them carefully. I think your argument is poorly thought-out and not logically sound in any way, which is why I described it as "idiocy". You see, grown-ups know that when you disagree with someone, it doesn't mean that you think they're a poopie-head, it only means that they disagree with you. The only adults I know who think that disagreeing with something they say means that you have insulted them are religious fundamentalists. Are you a religious fundamentalist? If not, please stop acting like one.big_kahunia wrote:Don't say that you're attacking the argument; because, your words clearly state what you mean.
And the mod stated why your argument was completely invalid. Just because you have a "rationale" does not mean that you are right. That pretty much applies to everything you've said in this game.big_kahunia wrote:I stated my rationale for posting that argument.
Load your program
I am your self
I am your self
- PlaysWithSquirrels
- PlaysWithSquirrels
-
PlaysWithSquirrels
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 500
- Joined: June 22, 2006
- Location: Missouri
I apologize to all of the people in this game along with the moderator, but I am unable to continue with the game. I just don't have the free time right now that this game deserves to have paid to it. Between my studies, rush week for my fraternity, and preparing for a pro tour of magical cards, this game is a luxury I can't afford right now. I hope that the replacement process isn't too much of a burden on the moderator and the rest of the players. Again, I sincerely apologize to everyone involved and good luck to you guys.
Oh hai.
While Colonel Kurtz may have a rather abrasive posting style, he has a point - and hasn't made any direct personal attacks. Don't think that little aside was of much use, as CK says, lets get on with the game. Just one question CK - when did the mod state that BKs argument was completely invalid?
Sucks that PlaysWith Squirrels is out - if nothing else because I was hoping we could get something from his stalling. Hurrah for the return of Atticus, I look forward to some new input there.
Lets try and get things moving. Fircoal - you have been unbelievably wishy washy so far. I know that you are new, and this is one of your first games, but even so you seem to have so far produced placeholder posts so people know you are there and don't ask you anything.
e.g.
Sucks that PlaysWith Squirrels is out - if nothing else because I was hoping we could get something from his stalling. Hurrah for the return of Atticus, I look forward to some new input there.
Lets try and get things moving. Fircoal - you have been unbelievably wishy washy so far. I know that you are new, and this is one of your first games, but even so you seem to have so far produced placeholder posts so people know you are there and don't ask you anything.
e.g.
It's day one, we have approximately nothing to go on. I don't really see how we are supposed to be discussing 'the scum' - we are just trying to generate some discussion in order to have something to go on. Discussions on personal attacks and the rules are generally just a means to an end - and not contributing to the discussion does not help the town. What are your thoughts on what has happened so far - and why were you so quick to jump off your first vote on Masterchief?Fircoal wrote:I was thinking and I don't think this arguement proves any facts, the reason for me not posting is because it doesn't seem like the discussion is on the scum, as much as it is on the rules and personal attacks.
- chaotic_diablo
- chaotic_diablo
-
chaotic_diablo
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2134
- Joined: September 15, 2003
- Location: Sidewalk
I've also been getting the wishywashy vibe from Fircoal, but it doesn't seem quite right to really call it wishywashy.
It's clear (or unclear) in his posts that he thinks some points are (ir)relevant, such as post 67, 89, and 101.
We still haven't heard from Lazarusmouth.
It's clear (or unclear) in his posts that he thinks some points are (ir)relevant, such as post 67, 89, and 101.
67 wrote:Colonel Kurtz brings up a goint point, it might not be a fault of a scummy trick, but because of forgetfullness, or laziness, or lack of internet connection
89 wrote:This game though, seems to more be about if one can talk in the pre-game.
From here, we can slightly see that he's not in favor of BK's argument, or that's what I think.101 wrote:I was thinking and I don't think this arguement proves any facts
We still haven't heard from Lazarusmouth.
"Miracles of Science" or "Freaks of Nature"?
Carp Logic. I'm so totally using that at some point.~ Mr. Flay
Carp Logic. I'm so totally using that at some point.~ Mr. Flay
Done.
So here's my thoughts on the game so far.
The huge opening of Big_kahunia's opening post has lasted a long time, when basically, it's just facts pieced luckily together, to prove to the lazy mind that two people are likely to be scum. I like it because it stirs up the people, makes us think, "hmm, what were they doing" but at the same time, I hate it. We are focused on the fact of whether or not this proves two people scum. I hate it because it is the only tree to stare at, because every post in this game is yet another branch, on the same one.
Fircoal's response to this is to say irrelevant things once in a while, to avoid the pressure of the game. I don't think him scummy for it, but I don't think him unscummy either.
Big_kahunia's been the leader of the conversation. Leads a large attack based on cofirmation time. Many currently follow it, looking for the conclusion, or hanging on for the ride. He's stirred up discussion: Townie. But stirred it up over offish points: Scummish.
Masterchief, Lazurusmoth, PlaysWithSquirrels, warpdragon, kirbyphreak (if you include me, this is half the people in the game) : The silent ones, I'll wait to judge them.
Colonel Kurtz has been defending himself adamantly with the subject of whatever excretions may come out your rear end, and some reasonable points. And I agree with those points, mainly. That big_kahunia's attack on them couldn't be proven and that he had good reason not to be confirming. But in almost every game I've played in as scum, we were allowed to talk before game, as b_k suggests is so in this game. So I'm curious as to why Colonel and willows would think it is only after each day, that one could talk.
Chaotic_diablo's avatar annoys me, but aside from that, he has defended himself from b_k and questions him, among others, on certain subjects which are reasonable to ask about. I see nothing much of note in him.
My first impression of riktus was that he would be a supporter of big_kahunia, but after looking back, I don't know why I thought that, other than the fact the he start at CK for posting a weird fact. And he appears to have stayed just there, on Colonel Kurtz.
Willows_weep comes off as a strong neutral in b_k's arguments. and that's pretty much it, I count 3 posts aside from pregame, 2 arguing that discussion should be made aside from b_ k's suspicions, and 1 as a response to chaotic_diablo. Hmmm.
Who's left!?!? Oh, ah, no one. Shame. Y'know, not a lot of voting seems to be occurring in this game, it's all heated discussion. So let's add an extra vote for some extra sizzle,
So here's my thoughts on the game so far.
The huge opening of Big_kahunia's opening post has lasted a long time, when basically, it's just facts pieced luckily together, to prove to the lazy mind that two people are likely to be scum. I like it because it stirs up the people, makes us think, "hmm, what were they doing" but at the same time, I hate it. We are focused on the fact of whether or not this proves two people scum. I hate it because it is the only tree to stare at, because every post in this game is yet another branch, on the same one.
Fircoal's response to this is to say irrelevant things once in a while, to avoid the pressure of the game. I don't think him scummy for it, but I don't think him unscummy either.
Big_kahunia's been the leader of the conversation. Leads a large attack based on cofirmation time. Many currently follow it, looking for the conclusion, or hanging on for the ride. He's stirred up discussion: Townie. But stirred it up over offish points: Scummish.
Masterchief, Lazurusmoth, PlaysWithSquirrels, warpdragon, kirbyphreak (if you include me, this is half the people in the game) : The silent ones, I'll wait to judge them.
Colonel Kurtz has been defending himself adamantly with the subject of whatever excretions may come out your rear end, and some reasonable points. And I agree with those points, mainly. That big_kahunia's attack on them couldn't be proven and that he had good reason not to be confirming. But in almost every game I've played in as scum, we were allowed to talk before game, as b_k suggests is so in this game. So I'm curious as to why Colonel and willows would think it is only after each day, that one could talk.
Chaotic_diablo's avatar annoys me, but aside from that, he has defended himself from b_k and questions him, among others, on certain subjects which are reasonable to ask about. I see nothing much of note in him.
My first impression of riktus was that he would be a supporter of big_kahunia, but after looking back, I don't know why I thought that, other than the fact the he start at CK for posting a weird fact. And he appears to have stayed just there, on Colonel Kurtz.
Willows_weep comes off as a strong neutral in b_k's arguments. and that's pretty much it, I count 3 posts aside from pregame, 2 arguing that discussion should be made aside from b_ k's suspicions, and 1 as a response to chaotic_diablo. Hmmm.
Who's left!?!? Oh, ah, no one. Shame. Y'know, not a lot of voting seems to be occurring in this game, it's all heated discussion. So let's add an extra vote for some extra sizzle,
Vote: big_kahunia
because aside from the lurkers he occurs to me as the most scumy, mainly for his adamant pursuit of "They are scum because they waited to confirm""There is nothing more exhilarating than to be shot at without result." - Winston Churchill
I think the arguement is irelevant, and I favor Colonel Kurtz's arguement more, but I think it's more irrelevant. I was really meaning a discussion more relevant. I was so quick to jump off my Mastercheif vote, because it was a random vote, and they shouldn't stay for long, and I didn't like the OMGUS vote. Even if it was only one.riktus wrote: Lets try and get things moving. Fircoal - you have been unbelievably wishy washy so far. I know that you are new, and this is one of your first games, but even so you seem to have so far produced placeholder posts so people know you are there and don't ask you anything.
e.g.It's day one, we have approximately nothing to go on. I don't really see how we are supposed to be discussing 'the scum' - we are just trying to generate some discussion in order to have something to go on. Discussions on personal attacks and the rules are generally just a means to an end - and not contributing to the discussion does not help the town. What are your thoughts on what has happened so far - and why were you so quick to jump off your first vote on Masterchief?Fircoal wrote:I was thinking and I don't think this arguement proves any facts, the reason for me not posting is because it doesn't seem like the discussion is on the scum, as much as it is on the rules and personal attacks.
- Colonel Kurtz
- Colonel Kurtz
-
Colonel Kurtz
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 272
- Joined: June 11, 2006
- Location: Oberlin
Atticus wrote:But in almost every game I've played in as scum, we were allowed to talk before game, as b_k suggests is so in this game. So I'm curious as to why Colonel and willows would think it is only after each day, that one could talk.
Based on your join date, I would say it has to do with the fact that you started playing after Newbie games started. I haven't been mafia in a while, but in every game I've ever been in as mafia, the mafia *couldn't* talk pre-game. Checking the wiki, I noticed that it only says that mafia can talk at night, so I assumed this was still, for the most part, true. To me, only in an 8 or 9 player setup does it make sense for the mafia to be able to talk pre-game, so I think that being allowed to talk pre-game is a rule that new moderators have started using because they saw it in their newbie game and brought it over.
Load your program
I am your self
I am your self
- willows_weep
- willows_weep
-
willows_weep
- willow, the mafia slayer
- willow, the mafia slayer
- Posts: 1387
- Joined: November 7, 2003
- Location: On a chair in which I used to sit, took a pencil and I wrote the following on it...It's dark in here
- Contact:
Heya,
I've been away having comp issues, and then proceeded to forget about the game.
Sorry about not notifying any of that.
Oh, the reason I did not think it a natural option (to have mafia talk before day 1 when game starts with day 1) is because I've never played like that. That's all.
Why haven't I posted too much other than saying 'meh' to b_k's argument, or that it would be great to see the thread talk about something other than wordage:
Because that's all that's been going on, even after me missing some days of convo, I see we're learning to take things in stride and in proper context.
Not necessarily that someone is scummy, or has odd vibes.
Now, purposeful lurking. I can take that as something to chat about.
Right now Fircoal just seems odd to me. Not scummy. Just odd.
I've been away having comp issues, and then proceeded to forget about the game.
Sorry about not notifying any of that.
Oh, the reason I did not think it a natural option (to have mafia talk before day 1 when game starts with day 1) is because I've never played like that. That's all.
Why haven't I posted too much other than saying 'meh' to b_k's argument, or that it would be great to see the thread talk about something other than wordage:
Because that's all that's been going on, even after me missing some days of convo, I see we're learning to take things in stride and in proper context.
Not necessarily that someone is scummy, or has odd vibes.
Now, purposeful lurking. I can take that as something to chat about.
Right now Fircoal just seems odd to me. Not scummy. Just odd.
What is the point of using foul language, downright rudeness, slurs, etc on a gaming site? This is really distasteful.
Forum rules and guidelines (letter and spirit folks)
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=14372
Forum rules and guidelines (letter and spirit folks)
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=14372
-
-
big_kahunia Intimate Stranger
-
- Intimate Stranger
- Intimate Stranger
- Posts: 1073
- Joined: February 9, 2004
- Location: Tacoma, WA
CK, I see this is more your posting style as opposed to attacks. You hint this in post 58. That’s the way you play; I’ll get used to it. I understand that you didn’t make direct personal attacks at me; but rather, posted your logic in a way that I interpreted as a person attack.
As for me being a religious fundamentalist? I don’t know. Just look at my sig. .
As for me being a religious fundamentalist? I don’t know. Just look at my sig. .
The mod’s edit was for players to not talk about the game during pre-game, in addition to night. Rule 8 states that for some roles the earlier rules may not apply. The possibility remains that the mafia could talk during pre-game. Everyone has posted examples of mafia not being able to talk in PG and mafia being able to talk in PG. In the end, it depends on the mod, I ‘pose we won’t know for certain until after the game.CK wrote:And the mod stated why your argument was completely invalid. Just because you have a "rationale" does not mean that you are right. That pretty much applies to everything you've said in this game.big_kahunia wrote:I stated my rationale for posting that argument.
I was adamant in my pursuit to get the game going and provide discussion. I address this point in post 88. If you want me to go further, I will upon being asked.Atticus wrote:Vote: big_kahunia because aside from the lurkers he occurs to me as the most scumy, mainly for his adamant pursuit of "They are scum because they waited to confirm"
My flesh and my heart may fail, but God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever.
Psalms 73:26 (NIV)
Psalms 73:26 (NIV)
If your pursuit was to provide discusiion only, why is your vote still on CK?big_kahunia wrote:I was adamant in my pursuit to get the game going and provide discussion. I address this point in post 88. If you want me to go further, I will upon being asked.Atticus wrote:Vote: big_kahunia because aside from the lurkers he occurs to me as the most scumy, mainly for his adamant pursuit of "They are scum because they waited to confirm"
"There is nothing more exhilarating than to be shot at without result." - Winston Churchill
-
-
big_kahunia Intimate Stranger
-
- Intimate Stranger
- Intimate Stranger
- Posts: 1073
- Joined: February 9, 2004
- Location: Tacoma, WA
heh. Atticus, you might want to read post 90 (or all my posts for that matter). For the record, I have never voted CK this game, only CD and Laz. I can see why ppl might think so because of our disargeements, but I have never voted him.
My flesh and my heart may fail, but God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever.
Psalms 73:26 (NIV)
Psalms 73:26 (NIV)
- willows_weep
- willows_weep
-
willows_weep
- willow, the mafia slayer
- willow, the mafia slayer
- Posts: 1387
- Joined: November 7, 2003
- Location: On a chair in which I used to sit, took a pencil and I wrote the following on it...It's dark in here
- Contact:
Wow, I had a dream that b_k was a mafia helper (one that the mafia doesn't know about). Atticus and someone with a name starting with a P was mafia.
It was an interesting dream.
It was an interesting dream.
What is the point of using foul language, downright rudeness, slurs, etc on a gaming site? This is really distasteful.
Forum rules and guidelines (letter and spirit folks)
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=14372
Forum rules and guidelines (letter and spirit folks)
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=14372
- Colonel Kurtz
- Colonel Kurtz
-
Colonel Kurtz
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 272
- Joined: June 11, 2006
- Location: Oberlin
unvote big_kahunia
I've been reading over. And I'm not sure what Fircoal is trying to ...say. I'm really not sure. Is he scummy? Is he writing his posts in a different language and using Babelfish to translate it to English?
Dunno that it makes him scum, though.
I support a no lynch, because I really don't feel that we have anything to go on at this point. I think if we lynch big_kahunia, we'll find that he was an overzealous townie, and he has posted the most scum-esque stuff by far.
vote No Lynch
Load your program
I am your self
I am your self
For everyone's information, this is what I think is the current vote count - Sherlock, could you confirm?
Colonel Kurtz- 2 (lazarusmoth, warpdragon)
lazarusmoth- 2 (big_kahunia, chaotic_diablo)
big_kahunia- 1 (Atticus)
Fircoal- 1 (Masterchief)
No Lynch- 1 (Colonel Kurtz)
Not voting (5): kirbyphreak, PlaysWithSquirrels, riktus, Fircoal, willows_weep
7 to lynch.
Will post an actual response in a minute ...
Vote Count
, powered by The Count-Counter 2000Colonel Kurtz- 2 (lazarusmoth, warpdragon)
lazarusmoth- 2 (big_kahunia, chaotic_diablo)
big_kahunia- 1 (Atticus)
Fircoal- 1 (Masterchief)
No Lynch- 1 (Colonel Kurtz)
Not voting (5): kirbyphreak, PlaysWithSquirrels, riktus, Fircoal, willows_weep
7 to lynch.
Will post an actual response in a minute ...
Firstly, I'd like to request an extension on the deadline. Its a good idea to try and get things shifting, but when beyond confirming we still have only 3 posts about the game in total from kirbyphreak, lazarusmoth, PlaysWithSquirrels, masterchief and warpdragon (3 posts between 5 players, nearly half of the game) I think it just penalises the people who are actually playing. Let us know how the prods and replaces are going, and give us a couple of days to try and get things moving?
Failing that, I think I am going to have to follow CKs example and
With only 24 or so hours to deadline, I would urge anyone else who gets on to vote No Lynch, as taking anyone out now is effectively picking a name out of the hat.
Failing that, I think I am going to have to follow CKs example and
vote: No Lynch
. Its horrible, effectively making it the same as if we started at night (how deliciously ironic), but with so little information I don't want to risk handing two town deaths to the mafia before we get any real discussion. Of the two possible lynchees at this time, I would choose lazarusmoth for his unexplained vote on CK - but he hasnt been anywhere for a fortnight so it is unsuprising he hasn't defended himself.With only 24 or so hours to deadline, I would urge anyone else who gets on to vote No Lynch, as taking anyone out now is effectively picking a name out of the hat.
I argee with the no lynch part, but no I'm writing my posts in english, but sometimes my grammer is bad.Colonel Kurtz wrote:unvote big_kahunia
I've been reading over. And I'm not sure what Fircoal is trying to ...say. I'm really not sure. Is he scummy? Is he writing his posts in a different language and using Babelfish to translate it to English?
Dunno that it makes him scum, though.
I support a no lynch, because I really don't feel that we have anything to go on at this point. I think if we lynch big_kahunia, we'll find that he was an overzealous townie, and he has posted the most scum-esque stuff by far.
vote No Lynch
Vote: No Lynch
Though, I usually wouldn't do this, it's just it's better then giving off a random lynch.