Last edited by HumanDawn; 18th January 2013 at 01:49 PM.
I did not feel she had adequately addressed his question - rather than wait for further banter between the two, I supplied an explanation. She is, of course, welcome to correct my explanation if I have failed to appropriately address her narrative.As well as that, why did you post to reply whenever she had already replied to Beck?
No negative light was intended to be cast. Incidentally, how much negative light do you think she should be painted in? Since you suggest I have overshot what you felt was appropriate.It looks to me like you're trying to paint her in a more negative light than, in my opinion, she should be painted in.
Duly noted. On that note, is there something I've done that you feel I was, "inherently doing to town detriment?" If not, perhaps we should, "continue on from this."She hasn't done anything wrong, per se, but you're all putting her under scrutiny because of a fairly valid claim, as well as claiming to have her post being restricted (and perhaps because she voted Akuraito, but that's hardly anything to blame anybody for, considering it was D1). The point is that there's absolutely nothing proven wrong in what she's saying, and I'd say that, so long as her story stays consistent, we can assume that she's telling the truth until such time wherein there is something she's inherently doing to town detriment or wherein somebody has caught her out, through use of a power role or whatever. I don't see the use in investigating her when she is technically not at fault for anything, so I'm going to continue on from this.
You admit it is baseless, yet still float the idea - immediately after lamenting all of the "'supposing' and 'maybes' floating about?"For now, I'm sick of all the 'supposing' and 'maybes' floating about. Supposing anything about what went on with the voting yesterday will not get us anywhere, and there was probably no motivation to kill Akuraito other than she MAY have been one of the only town players in the tied-vote situation (if supposed secret voter is mafia), but that's a completely baseless assumption which gets us nowhere.
Pick away!There's a difference, however, between what Human was doing in questioning Zima, and what Master Mew was saying when he was questioning her. I just want to pick a little at this:
Claiming that if you are lynched it will reflect poorly on those who voted for you is a poor defense - it communicates nothing of note, and the same can be said by any player. Saying it doesn't make her scum, but it was not a valid defense.1. Yes, lynching her does reflect poorly on whoever advocates it, assuming she's town. That's only natural. Anyone who normally votes on a town lynch is inevitably considered a little more scummy than they previously had been, merely because they helped to lynch a town member, and this applies especially to anybody who LEADS a town bandwagon, which is why mafia generally would stay away from leading a town bandwagon in earlygame (probably something i should've caught onto to try to prevent that mislynch). I don't see how it doesn't make sense, and trying to poke at Zima, claiming that it "doesn't make sense", is specious, rather than substantial, which again is an attempt to paint her in a more suspicious light.
I was at that point operating under the parameters she had provided - which I do not agree with. I am aware that roleclaims are not the be-all end-all of scumhunting, but she suggested that if she roleclaimed she would be lynched, and I operated within that suggestion to point out that, if true (which it wasn't), it would not be any more true than if she had just claimed her role outright. The reality is that her role was not actually a role the Town would immediately leap to lynch, but she assumed that it was and it is generally helpful when attempting to discern intentions to operate with the assumptions being made by the individual you are assessing.2. A roleclaim is not the be-all and end-all of how suspicious somebody is, and nor should it really be the deciding factor in a lynch (barring actual proof that they're not what they claim to be or suchlike). Besides, she didn't actually say that her role made her suspicious -- just that a lot of mafia claim it (although I've never actually seen a commuter fakeclaim before), and that she'd probably get lynched for claiming it, both of which do not mean that she's saying that her role makes her suspicious. Again, you're being specious in trying to accuse her of inconsistency (and of being mafia, I guess).
Not being inconsistent, as I said above I was operating under the assumptions she provided. At no point did I express or imply agreeing with them. At the point where I, "go on to doubt what she says anyway," I have stepped outside of her assumptions to make my analysis.3. See 2. Besides that, you say that, "with the latter we at least learn what your role is", yet you go on to doubt what she says anyway, which means that, frankly, you're being inconsistent.
Softclaims are more useful to the Mafia than the Town, because they communicate more concrete information to the Mafia. The Mafia already know the answer to the key question the Town is trying to answer: Is this person Town- or Scum-aligned? If she is Town-aligned, then the Mafia are more inclined to believe her claim than the Town. The Town still has to sort out if she is telling the truth, an area in which the Mafia have a headstart.Additionally, saying what she did communicates nothing to the mafia that the town won't pick up on -- you're saying that ONLY the mafia will learn she has a power role (which isn't even true: mafia don't always claim power)... and what of the town? Could they not also deduce that she may have a power role, or are we unable to get that idea from what she points out? I guess you modified that by saying "anything useful", but the fact that she is a power role is just as useful to town as it is to mafia: not very. The mafia probably wouldn't kill based on the fact that somebody may have a power role, so it's not like it gives them anything. Anyway, you make this point more from a mafia point of view than a town point-of-view, as you don't seem to realise that what she said did have some import for the town. As well as that, trying to out a claim on Day 1? Yeah. I'm aware that she offered, but you don't need to take her up on it, especially given that it apparently is "only useful to the mafia".
Because you didn't like my questioning of Sputnik? While I disagree with your analysis of my post, if I were to agree with it I would still point out that Townies are just as inclined, if not moreso, to ask faulty questions as Scum are.With that, I'm going to Vote: Master Mew.
Perhaps I've missed it, but I fail to see where you have outlined scum-motivation in my post.
For the record (since there seems to be doubt) I have Townreads on Zima and Buoy at the moment. As for Human's earlier question:
3DS Friend Code: 2595-1198-0821
I will be on a church retreat until Sunday. So I will be absent until then.
Credit for the Banner goes to Pyradox. Link to URPG stats
Mafia Win/Lose Tally | My Fanclub
Winner of LOST mafia, My Little Pony: Friendship is Mafia 2, Bloons Tower Defense 5 Mafia, Fos Ro Mafia, Legendary Pokemon Mafia, War Room Mafia 5, Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn Mafia, Pokemon Movie Mafia and more
back and better than ever >:I
@Midorikawa; Since we've seen something from Master Mew now, what are your thoughts?
That's good enough for me. UNVOTE: Master Mew
It's now a tie again, though.