Why is that exactly? (I dont believe in metas, btw)
-.-
You really expect me to bottle-feed you? Seriously, try and pull some of your own weight here please. I'll give you a clue. Reading MY play in that game might prove insightful. Especially my entry and interaction with Thesp.
also, how the hell can you not believe in metas. Thats like saying I dont believe in Football. It's not something you 'believe in'. It's there whether you like it or not. You dont have to respect it, but in actuality, it's hard to see why you would declare yourself against meta analysis. Except possibly laziness.
Battle Mage wrote:also, how the hell can you not believe in metas. Thats like saying I dont believe in Football. It's not something you 'believe in'. It's there whether you like it or not. You dont have to respect it, but in actuality, it's hard to see why you would declare yourself against meta analysis. Except possibly laziness.
BM
Or maybe I've been burned by it before? Meta points to what you have done in the past. doesn't mean you'll act the exact same way in the future. Trying to use meta to justify your play in this game is poor logic because everything is situational. Thesp is not in this game. I could throw a link at you and say "look at how I played when I was scum with Thesp" but I would sure as hell hope you wouldn't base my play in this game on that. Different dynamic, different people, different set up.
@BM: As I believe I've said before, in this thread, I have a pretty strong scum meta of you acting pretty much the same way under pressure as scum. And accusing someone else of laziness for not trusting your own hand-picked meta of yourself, when you yourself said you tended to be lazy as scum, is sort of counterintuitive.
You should have a pretty good meta of me as town, BM, and yet you're not relying on that in this game, despite your comments. Why is that?
@Mirth: It's ouchy, but pretty controlled by the pain meds at the moment. Hence the posting
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."
Battle Mage wrote:also, how the hell can you not believe in metas. Thats like saying I dont believe in Football. It's not something you 'believe in'. It's there whether you like it or not. You dont have to respect it, but in actuality, it's hard to see why you would declare yourself against meta analysis. Except possibly laziness.
BM
Or maybe I've been burned by it before? Meta points to what you have done in the past. doesn't mean you'll act the exact same way in the future. Trying to use meta to justify your play in this game is poor logic because everything is situational. Thesp is not in this game. I could throw a link at you and say "look at how I played when I was scum with Thesp" but I would sure as hell hope you wouldn't base my play in this game on that. Different dynamic, different people, different set up.
You clearly haven't read it have you. Maybe if you read, you might learn something. I hope you'll excuse me if i dont listen to you try to lecture me, when you clearly aren't open-minded enough to give anything i have to say a chance.
The fact is, there are 'tells' in mafia. They arent foolproof, but it can be good to have an overview of them. It's never bad to have another way in which to catch scumbags. It's people like who you allow scum to fall into these traps- people who preach that trends mean nothing.
BM
@Bookitty - its a meta of how i, as scum, have behaved in the same situation as Porochaz was in. I'm not looking to persuade anyone of anything at this point. I'd just like this game to end already, because it's really grating on me.
I have read it, I see what you're getting at, but I'm not buying it because it posting it in this thread looks completely staged. "Hmmmm I'm going to try this gambit about asking him to claim, and if he doesn't right away he is automatically scum because that's how I played as scum in that one game." Him being scum does not clear you from being scum.
Mirth wrote:I have read it, I see what you're getting at, but I'm not buying it because it posting it in this thread looks completely staged. "Hmmmm I'm going to try this gambit about asking him to claim, and if he doesn't right away he is automatically scum because that's how I played as scum in that one game." Him being scum does not clear you from being scum.
Wait, so its a gambit with the purpose of getting him lynched, because he is my buddy who i have until now, been decidedly against bussing? This is too stupid even for words... 0.o
But not for emoticons!
I give. This game has been going nowhere for ages, and nobody is gonna learn anything until we're all dead.
Ive made 2/3 posts in this game yet, you think Im scum because of a meta you have against yourself. Cause lets face it, thats what it is. Meta's can be unreliable so using a meta from yourself to put on to someone else seems ludacris to me.
Also my reread has taken a hit cause Im in exam territory. But it will happen and I feel the stuff in the last 10 pages or so will give me a grasp of this game until Im able to give this game proper attention. My final exam ends Tuesday. I hope thats ok currently and Ill get to the full reread presently.
Finally who else is in the game me, bookie, bm, mirth and ???
Mostly retired. Unless you ask or it's something interesting.
Porochaz wrote:Ive made 2/3 posts in this game yet, you think Im scum because of a meta you have against yourself. Cause lets face it, thats what it is. Meta's can be unreliable so using a meta from yourself to put on to someone else seems ludacris to me.
Also my reread has taken a hit cause Im in exam territory. But it will happen and I feel the stuff in the last 10 pages or so will give me a grasp of this game until Im able to give this game proper attention. My final exam ends Tuesday. I hope thats ok currently and Ill get to the full reread presently.
Finally who else is in the game me, bookie, bm, mirth and ???
Reading the last 10 pages makes me want to pull my hair out. BM goes from scummy to townie in a flash, Elmo kinda hiding, the Mirth/Bookie mason pair... unlike my predecessor I think we can confirm your what you say you are by the lack of kills suggesting otherwise. However, sorry if Im retreading over trodden ground but you are both confirmed town, right?
Mostly retired. Unless you ask or it's something interesting.
Porochaz wrote:Reading the last 10 pages makes me want to pull my hair out. BM goes from scummy to townie in a flash, Elmo kinda hiding, the Mirth/Bookie mason pair... unlike my predecessor I think we can confirm your what you say you are by the lack of kills suggesting otherwise. However, sorry if Im retreading over trodden ground but you are both confirmed town, right?
We say we are, yes. BM doesn't want to believe us. I think the fact that this game is still ongoing despite the fact that both Kitty and I posted multiple times after Elmo's vote is enough to make the rest of you finally believe us.
Okay, I have a couple of questions and a comment. Comment first.
If I were certain you were scum, BM, I'd have voted you by now. If I were scum myself, voting for you would win the game for me (since I don't think you're arguing that a townie is pretending to be a mason with a scum, that implies two scum). So I think that ought to clear us both as town.
BM, do you still think Mirth and I are scum? Why, if so?
If not, then that leaves a number of possibilities. If there are two scum, then it must be you/Porochaz, you/Elmo, or Elmo/Porochaz. You've made several attacks against Elmo, but you haven't actually backed any of them up. Why do you think Elmo is scum?
If you no longer think Mirth and I are scum, and you are town, then the scumteam must be Elmo/Porochaz -- so why have you been so fixated on Elmo and rather defensive of Porochaz (as UA)? If you are town and you still think Mirth and I are scum, then voting for anyone else loses the game just as surely as your own lynch would if there are two scum, yes?
You were rather abrasive about my lack of certainty, but I don't have a vote placed yet. You have expressed rather more uncertainty, moving your suspicions around pretty freely and basically expressing distrust of everyone. Why is your lack of certainty less dangerous than mine, when you are putting a vote down and I am not?
What is your case against Elmo, BM? Do you have one?
Still waiting for Porochaz to finish reading. Thanks for replacing, Chaz.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."
Bookitty wrote:Okay, I have a couple of questions and a comment. Comment first.
If I were certain you were scum, BM, I'd have voted you by now. If I were scum myself, voting for you would win the game for me (since I don't think you're arguing that a townie is pretending to be a mason with a scum, that implies two scum). So I think that ought to clear us both as town.
BM, do you still think Mirth and I are scum? Why, if so?
No. But, it doesnt really matter.
Kitty wrote:
If not, then that leaves a number of possibilities. If there are two scum, then it must be you/Porochaz, you/Elmo, or Elmo/Porochaz. You've made several attacks against Elmo, but you haven't actually backed any of them up. Why do you think Elmo is scum?
Process of elimination. Youve summed it up yourself above.
Kitty wrote:
If you no longer think Mirth and I are scum, and you are town, then the scumteam must be Elmo/Porochaz -- so why have you been so fixated on Elmo and rather defensive of Porochaz (as UA)? If you are town and you still think Mirth and I are scum, then voting for anyone else loses the game just as surely as your own lynch would if there are two scum, yes?
Because we all know Porochaz is scum. My job is not to state the obvious, but to contribute by ensuring that Elmo is lynched too.
You were rather abrasive about my lack of certainty, but I don't have a vote placed yet. You have expressed rather more uncertainty, moving your suspicions around pretty freely and basically expressing distrust of everyone. Why is your lack of certainty less dangerous than mine, when you are putting a vote down and I am not?
Kitty wrote:
If not, then that leaves a number of possibilities. If there are two scum, then it must be you/Porochaz, you/Elmo, or Elmo/Porochaz. You've made several attacks against Elmo, but you haven't actually backed any of them up. Why do you think Elmo is scum?
Process of elimination. Youve summed it up yourself above.
Kitty wrote:
If you no longer think Mirth and I are scum, and you are town, then the scumteam must be Elmo/Porochaz -- so why have you been so fixated on Elmo and rather defensive of Porochaz (as UA)? If you are town and you still think Mirth and I are scum, then voting for anyone else loses the game just as surely as your own lynch would if there are two scum, yes?
Because we all know Porochaz is scum. My job is not to state the obvious, but to contribute by ensuring that Elmo is lynched too.
But that's the thing. We don't all know that Porochaz is scum. We don't know if its one scum left or 2. So how is it stating the obvious?
Mirth wrote:But you don't actually know this, and you don't actually know Porochaz is scum. Yet you still were only focussing on Elmo
well, 1 of them is clearly scum. You claim to be confirmed town. To that end, i have to get 1 of them lynched. You arent making a whole lot of sense here
You're the one not making sense. Again, if Kitty and I were scum, this game would have been over about 2 weeks ago. Now then if you claim you're not scum and you're using process of elimination, you know that at least one of them must be scum. But you don't know which one if there is only one. So why do you choose to focus primarily on one and not the other?
Mirth wrote:You're the one not making sense. Again, if Kitty and I were scum, this game would have been over about 2 weeks ago. Now then if you claim you're not scum and you're using process of elimination, you know that at least one of them must be scum. But you don't know which one if there is only one. So why do you choose to focus primarily on one and not the other?
Because 1 is obviously scum, and doesnt even require comment. The other, is somebody who others are doubting the case on, hence i am arguing it. Jesus, it feels like we're going round in circles here.
If you say Porocha is obviously scum, then why not try to start a wagon on him earlier. Because you don't know for a fact there are 2 scum. So rather go for the one you're sure about then risk it on an anomaly that has a chance of being town. You do not make sense yet.
Mirth wrote:If you say Porocha is obviously scum, then why not try to start a wagon on him earlier. Because you don't know for a fact there are 2 scum. So rather go for the one you're sure about then risk it on an anomaly that has a chance of being town. You do not make sense yet.
im pretty sure there are. as such, it makes sense to fight the case on the less certain one today, in order to ensure that we have a shot at the 2 consequtive good lynches.