Bay 12 Games Forum

Quote from: hector13 on July 15, 2018, 01:47:03 am

You're asking RGU to ignore his guaranteed sane night result. How is what he's doing any different to what you're doing?

I would ask anyone to not ignore but reflect on a night result (on anyone) before lynching someone based on it in any game in which night results are not certain, eg, this one. If I were trying to convince him that he was mafia and he knew he wasn't, that would be one thing, but I am trying to convince him that his evidence is insufficient, while he is trying to convince me that the GM lied to me in my setup PM. Those are different things.

He's not trying to convince you of anything, he's telling you the things you are saying don't gel with the things he has been told. He's being foolish telling you to stop defending yourself, but hey, we're not all perfect.

Quote from: hector13 on July 15, 2018, 01:47:03 am

You quoted Arthur Conan Doyle up there, but I would suggest that requires all the facts. In this instance, that would mean knowing all the roles in play and what action they took during the night. Given we don't have that, and even if everyone claimed both, we know there are at least two players obfuscating that knowledge,

The quote from Holmes applies to me here, not you. For me, it is impossible that I am scum, therefore I must assume that some other thing is the truth. Obviously you don't know that I'm not scum, that's the point of the game, so for you the situation naturally differs. In that paragraph I was explaining my perspective.
But,

Quote

thus necessitating we fall back on good ol' Occam's Razor: the hypothesis requiring the fewest assumptions - that RGU's guaranteed sane cop investigation is correct - is likely true.

Occam's Razor has never been all it's cracked up to be, honestly.

Notably in a situation in which you fall foul of it.

Quote from: hector13 on July 15, 2018, 01:47:03 am

b) you have postulated various scenarios in which RGU gets an accurate result while you remain town, but you don't seem to be postulating that RGU is gambiting scum. Why not? Is that situation less feasible than him being redirected to actual scum, or the second framer/fourth falsifying-investigation role targeting you the same night? What makes you give that answer?

Not at all (less feasible); I just can't prove or disprove whether he is scum, so I see no point arguing it, it would be no more clarifying than him arguing that I am. Besides, my gut isn't really telling me that he's scum. Maybe he is, it wouldn't be the first time scum has felt third-party to me or vice-versa, but as of right now that isn't my default position.

Can you prove or disprove anything you've said so far? What's the point of arguing those positions?

Quote from: hector13 on July 15, 2018, 01:47:03 am

c) do you think there's a simpler explanation that could convince us that you're right and RGU is wrong? Is there a simpler explanation that could convince us that you're both right?

Define "simpler". And don't give me any crap about 'fewer assumptions', I am already assuming that other humans have consciousness, that causality and logic and mathematics actually work as defined, that everything I think I see and remember is not just a single momentary frame-capture out of an endless roiling chaos which will be obliterated in the next moment (even now as I finish typing this parenthetical!) (the trick is that, once i finished typing it, my memory of having typed it was part of that momentary structure, preëxisting and equally false) and replaced by some other fleeting structure; from where I'm standing the assumptions look infinite on every side.

But yes, I can name other arguments if you like, though, again, I just woke up, I don't want to put too much effort into it. Maybe RGU is just lying, made a too-ballsy move and now can't safely walk it back, or is even counting on the audacity of it to make everyone believe 'there's no way he would've done that on purpose!'; I know I've certainly done that last thing before, many times, relying on the refrain of "do you really think I'm stupid enough to have thought that would work?" to make it work. (It usually works.) Maybe RGU is scum, maybe you're scum, maybe we're all scum. Sorry, that one actually doesn't make sense, I think I nodded a bit there. Maybe I'm a miller and don't know it, or do know it and don't want to say it for some dumb reason, or can't say it. Maybe Fallacy has been lying all along and this is actually the most bastard of bastard games, lord knows I wouldn't put it past him. Do you know he keeps trying to make catpeople? The man's clearly beyond redemption. Maybe there isn't even any mafia, maybe this is a town-vs.-third-party game with abilities designed to mislead us into thinking there's a mafia. (That would actually be hilarious.) Maybe I was just framed, wait, no, that's not "simple" enough in your worldview, never mind. Maybe I'm even actually scum and there really is still another framer in the game, I guess that would technically make us both partially right. Maybe I'm just a lowly fruit vendor and this whole thing is an illusion created by MM's practical-joke JOAT powers or TM's "totally not scum" JOAT powers. Maybe RGU doesn't even really exist, maybe this whole game is a, er, right, supposed to be taking this seriously, never mind. Maybe I need to go back to bed. For like a week. Or forever.

At what point should we continue thinking you have the town's benefit at heart when you decide the best way to answer a simple question is a bizarre rant that you accept this isn't some solipsistic fever dream?

Achshually IIRC bourbon is a specific subset of whiskey made in a specific place and way, much like Scotch *Hans retches a bit* but less foul and offensive than Scotch.

you fuckin’ what mate

MaxSpin

Quote from: randomgenericusername on July 14, 2018, 07:46:34 pm

Well, there's many things. Things like the excessive use of emoticons and nonserious comments like jokes or calling out players as "rude" for mentioning his broken logic [...] He's saying that my arguments are "dumb" and "bad" without really addressing why.

Bro, that is just how I talk.

Quote

He says that millera could mess with this result, but he isn't a miller. The framer is also dead. The only explanation is that he's scum.

I basically guarantee you that there is another framer. Just because everyone is convinced that there is no second framer, I feel completely confident that there must be one. And I am going to be so smug if it turns out there is one. Of course, you could also have been redirected, or any number of other things.

Your basically guaranteed framer turns into an if very quickly here.

Let's put it this way, again, with a little bit extra: we have 1 confirmed ability that changes an investigated alignment (Moony the inventor) and you and Tric have claimed abilities that change alignment. This is 3/11, 27% of the town. You are asking us to believe that there is another framer out there, meaning that 4/11 (36%) of the town can falsify investigations. We also have one claimed redirector, meaning 5/11, or 45% of the town could feasibly mess-up investigations.

As a counter to that, we have 1 claimed alignment cop, that can only use that ability on alternating nights. There may be another alignment cop in the game that could investigate on even nights to balance that out. Thus, you're asking two cops who don't know each other's alignments or targets to not target the same people on their respective nights, and to avoid hitting the target that 36% of the town may hit, 'cause you'd be silly to investigate a Miller claim.

If you were designing a beginner-friendly Mostly Vanilla game, how would you balance out that 45%, knowing that one alignment cop is working on alternate nights?

What you're not getting is that I am starting from the presumption that I am town, so whatever you perceive as "improbable situations" are just my best efforts to propose a scenario in which you could still be telling the truth, knowing that I am town. It's not scummy to... not be scum. Am I supposed to just go "well, you got me, I fold"? I can't, because you didn't get me. When you have eliminated the impossible (such as me being scum, which I know I'm not), whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

You're asking RGU to ignore his guaranteed sane night result. How is what he's doing any different to what you're doing?

Finally...

Quote

emotions to have others pity him

This continues to concern me. When did I do this? I don't think I ever did this. That's not trolling, or subversion, or whatever. I'll even put it in greentext to prove it's neutral even though it makes no sense as advice, if you want: I don't think I ever made an emotional argument to attract pity or for any other reason in this game. What even is an emotional argument in mafia? "Don't lynch me because it would make me sad"? I don't even understand what you're saying conceptually. All I've done that is remotely emotional is... state my reactions to things, mostly facetiously? I guess stating your reactions to things is implicitly using pathos by inviting the reader to empathise, but the alternative is, what, not stating a true (though often exaggerated because that's part of my dialectical style) fact because it's not the kind of thing you want to hear? Let's not forget that pathos is one of the three core forms of rhetoric, there's nothing wrong or invalid about it.

One example of the appeal to emotion is suggesting that accepting a guaranteed sane night result is dumb and bad play.

You quoted Arthur Conan Doyle up there, but I would suggest that requires all the facts. In this instance, that would mean knowing all the roles in play and what action they took during the night. Given we don't have that, and even if everyone claimed both, we know there are at least two players obfuscating that knowledge, thus necessitating we fall back on good ol' Occam's Razor: the hypothesis requiring the fewest assumptions - that RGU's guaranteed sane cop investigation is correct - is likely true.

Considering this, there's a few things I need to ask:

a) what use would a SK get from having an alignment investigating ability?

b) you have postulated various scenarios in which RGU gets an accurate result while you remain town, but you don't seem to be postulating that RGU is gambiting scum. Why not? Is that situation less feasible than him being redirected to actual scum, or the second framer/fourth falsifying-investigation role targeting you the same night? What makes you give that answer?

c) do you think there's a simpler explanation that could convince us that you're right and RGU is wrong? Is there a simpler explanation that could convince us that you're both right?

---

Probable town pool: RGU, blueturtle, IcyTea, Starver

Probably scum: MaxSpin, Tric

leaning scum on MM, can't quite remember why, it's frickin' 2am guys sue me.

juicebox is nonexistent.

MaxSpin flipping scum does not clear RGU as confirmed town.

Monday.

Amended claims, seein' as how I wrote it at bedtime.

MaxSpin: doctor lawyer
RGU: odd-night cop
MM: cheeky JOAT - has claimed a redirect, used on Tric
Tric: investigative JOAT (basically Batman) - claimed 1-shots: watcher (claimed use on Starver, delayed due to MM) tracker, gunsmith, vig, also Miller.
hector: lol
Starver: lexical
blueturtle: one modifier
IcyTea: cool refreshing beverage
juicebox: MISSING

Pretty much halfway to a mass-claim.

The lack of discussion, at least prior to the weekend, is disturbing.

I hope it’s not your wedding, man.

notice me senpai

Alrighty, sorted. Probably.

WITHC HUNT!