Total posts: 3,773
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
That you can figure out how that would work, exemplifies why I fully expect to lose as town any time you’re mafia.
Granted, you could have been lying about the visit, trusting that PGO is too rare... And you were never demo confirmed... I wouldn’t be able to make it convincing.
By the way, would you mind sharing your night actions?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Lmao is he really defending that as a vote? Case closed guys. Rationalmadman is more of a lunatic then myself.
You laughing at him doesn't "in any shape or form have weight in defying" the quality of that lengthy series of votes; to which the automated system even gave him a shiny!
...
Technically awful quality is still a scalable level of quality, so my above statement is true, even while being a satirical use of his own words.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
You bullied me most recently on a threat you made claiming you erroneously were the second to earn the Professional Voter medal.How are users starting threads which do not name certain other users, bullying them?People can read the thread and see you bullying me.
Your delusions that threads which don't make any mention you are somehow bullying you, is your problem. As for you going into such a thread and repeatedly requesting to be mocked; you've already said that to not do as you request would be to cyberbully you. So which would you prefer?
Again, your best recorded evidence of me cyberbullying you before I was on the moderation team (as you put it "You won't like the posts I link to as it will show the real you and how rude you were pre-mod."), were recent activity by another user that in no way involved you, long after I joined the moderation team... This is how you choose to exemplify your cognitive skills, and yet you wonder why things don't go your way.
That you think spammed votes of "Kiss my goddamn ass" are how people should be voting, and are complaining of votes which rise to a higher quality.I did the former to get a loophole in the rules patched. Even if I was morally inconsistent, it wouldn't matter. What you just wrote is incoherent; you said 'That', yet you probably meant to say 'It is very ironic that'... It still wouldn't in any shape or form have weight in defying what I said.
Anyone else understands what I wrote just fine. However, the manner in which you are standing by your former choice to sexually harass countless members, actually does lower my opinion of you. Congrats!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
@Speedrace
@SirAnonymous
Thanks for a good and quick game of this.
I do hope my conceding at the end didn't spoil the fun. From any casual glance, Drafter was a safe town bet... I don't think I was half as scummy as Lunatic, but he had killed himself, and out of respect for SirAnon I was not going to pretend I could trick him into thinking Drafter (whose night-zero activity was to visit but not murder him) was somehow against all probability scum.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SirAnonymous
Also I genuinely missed that footnote at the start of DP2. Granted that day happened so fast I did not see anything while it was live.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SirAnonymous
Not out of my mind. Ensuring maximal entertainment value.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
@SirAnonymous
GG. Town wins. SirAnon is a roleblocker, and the scum is identified. Therefore scum cannot kill. The only thing that remains is opting for a path of peace or more violence. https://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=...and_they_all_lived_happily_ever_after
So yes, I am scum, and asking for my life to be spared. What I did, was for the good of the town. Further, my mind is a useful asset to the town if we're going to rebuild.
Regarding Lunatic: I am actually in disbelief he is not the scum. He lied about me insisting SirAnon is the werewolf, when what I actually did was suggest the mere possibility that Drafter could be a third party #25, accurately predicted SirAnon was lying about the modified roles #27, and spoke out against the likelihood of SirAnon being the werewolf #62 (the exact opposite of what Lunatic said I did). Further, Lunatic refused to give up the possibly of not killing someone in DP1, to try to kill SirAnon with the roll of the dice (pretty sure that's what happens when voting is left tied between options, it's randomly determined which goes through), which could have cost town the game.
That he considers Mafia killing him to be a noob mistake for Mafia due to how bad he is for town when actually town, is hilarious enough that I am chuckling again as I write this. He was the true scum of this town.
That said, I'm a watcher. I saw Press and Lunatic conspiring together at night. Given that Lunatic arose from the dead, I think he may have been a Dracula, who had turned Press into a Renfield! After you all got done lynching him yesterday, I personally went into his crypt, put a stake through his heart, and cut off the head. He stayed dead this time.
There were loses, but together we've saved the town from the undead menance. Please, let us not be bloodthirsty like them.
VNTL
Created:
If he will be removed from office, is another question.
I am still amazed by the level of deep thought some members from each side gave the matter, and similarly at the level of vileness others from both sides displayed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Whoever led the lynch on me was an idiot
I had to do a little digging, but it seems you were lynched for least activity (starting at #212). If lynching is to be done, that's not a bad way to do it on day one.
Graveyard:
Pie - Vanilla - DP1 - Lynched (Drafter, Oro, Supa, Ragnar, Grey, Lunatic)
Speed - Vanilla - NP1 - Killed by vig
Oro - Vanilla - NP1 - Killed by Mafia
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
That is not you bullying me. You bullied me most recently on a threat you made claiming you erroneously were the second to earn the Professional Voter medal.
How are users starting threads which do not name certain other users, bullying them?
I worry about vote integrity and consistent vote moderation even when the debate doesn't directly involve me.
That you think spammed votes of "Kiss my goddamn ass" are how people should be voting, and are complaining of votes which rise to a higher quality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
How about we clear up here and now who lies about who and who bullies who? You won't like the posts I link to as it will show the real you and how rude you were pre-mod. I don't lie about you, you lie about yourself...
Let's review your evidence:
- I did not delete a tied vote, on a debate to which you did not take part: Nothing to do with you.
- Lazarous placed a vote, again, on a debate to which you did not take part: First, nothing to do with you; second, I am not Lazarous.
- You complained: So what?
Please explain how anything Lazarous does is me bullying you?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
Unofficial Vote Count
SirAnonymous - 1/3 - Drafterman,
VTNL - 3/3 - SirAnonymous, PressF4Respect, Ragnar
Ragnar - 1/3 - Lunatic
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
@PressF4Respect
@SirAnonymous
@press
I hope you're right, and willing to roll the dice against the low probability of SirAnonamous being a werewolf (I don't buy his claim, but why maintain this standoff another couple days?). 4 of us, instead of 3 of us being alive tomorrow, does sound preferable.
I hope you're right, and willing to roll the dice against the low probability of SirAnonamous being a werewolf (I don't buy his claim, but why maintain this standoff another couple days?). 4 of us, instead of 3 of us being alive tomorrow, does sound preferable.
@SirAnonamous
Good luck, whatever you really are.
Good luck, whatever you really are.
@Speed
Unvote,
Unvote,
VNTL
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
How about we clear up here and now who lies about who and who bullies who? You won't like the posts I link to as it will show the real you and how rude you were pre-mod. I don't lie about you, you lie about yourself and I am peaceful enough to let you do it. If you want to run around talking shit about me and not even having the guts to name me, best you be reminded who has the actual evidence of the other being a really disrespectful cyber bully before he thought he'd have a modship to defend against losing.
Please start your list with my vote (or votes? I don't care about you enough to keep lists of all your delusions) which only you can see the source point allocations on, because within reality they did not occur, but you complained about those source allocations all the same. Then go into the comparative behavior between us during the RO; remind me exactly how many hours did each of us last before taking part in debates specifically about the other?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
Give me a few minutes to think that over. I might join you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Yes, fake PGO claims do strike me as scum. How do you suppose that him lying proves he is third party as he claims?
If you really believed it, you could have VNTL by now, ending the day phase.
If you really believed it, you could have VNTL by now, ending the day phase.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Additionally, a user may request that an RO be placed between them and another member.Can we change this rule please? It seems a bit strict, and the punishment kind of unjust.
To be clear, the need for an RO must be justified. User X might dislike all members of political affiliation Y, but such will not be sufficient grounds for an RO against said members (or a cluster of ROs as that would call for).
I would also argue that it's not meant as a punishment. I certainly hope they don't deeply enjoy engaging with each other.
Why can't a user just not respond to an individual who upsets them?
In cases where they're both willing to do that, probably they'll settle down before things get to the point of an RO. Even then, when a moderator talks to them, the RO time can be adjusted downward, and possibly not even formalized.
There's a user here (they shall not be named) who repeatedly lies about me. I am capable of not responding, and mostly avoid reading anything they post. While I have the thick skin for this, I don't expect the average user to handle it so well; nor should anyone have to.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
Would you mind explaining that? Especially given that there's a third party playing, and we don't know what it is.Town basically wins if we VTNL
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Someone says they're the PGO with zero reason to do so, it's a pretty clear choice what to do. Granted, Drafter could be some role that needs to lynch people, but we can't just not lynch people because it makes sense to do so.Ragnar's post 25 seems a bit opportunist, eager for a lynch. Drafter is probably town for catching the slip. I suppose we can let Sir live today and try to take the nurses role.
You believe we should lynch people if they believe we should lynch confirmed fake PGOs... Noted.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Before I begin, thank you for the response in the CoC Revisions thread (we've had people start new threads for replies to things in the AMA when it was new; I'm still confused as to why).
As you can probably guess, I have a thing against RO's being issued but not enforced.Why's that?
In short: I hate lame double standards.
At length: So back on DDO this one creeper kept going thread to thread to commit off topic lies about my factual statements, then refused to just debate me when he outright asked me to initiate the challenge (he even got his friends to post in one of those about how unfair it was that I used objective reality against him; felt like high school dating drama), etc etc., eventually an RO was implemented. When the guy started blatantly violating it, first I tried messaging the moderator who was overseeing it, and when it continued unabated, I pointed to the RO as the reason for my silence (as opposed to him being right as he was inferring), I was told off by the moderator for violating it.
RO's are of course not a first or second option. Even for slip-ups banning is not the first resort. I'm big on telling people to chill out, and remind them of the CoC.What is an example of how far an argument would have to go for a restraining order?
User X follows User Y around (not merely thread to thread, but forum to forum), explicitly to bring up the same old argument, no matter how off topic it is; add on a healthy dose of vile insults against their family members...
Just to be clear, any RO is going to be discussed by the moderation team prior to implementation. They are not done on impulse.
It's not. The very nature of this site is all about the criticism of ideas.With how few RO's we've had, it's not that many less posts from avoided flamewars.The criticism of ideas can often lead to flame wars. Flamewars aren't necessarily a bad thing though, if it brings activity and discussion to a topic. I mean if someone starts doxxing someone over a dis-agreement, might be time to do something. But I don't see the harm in them otherwise.
I'm not someone who minds if discussions of a topic get heated, or if the people choosing to engage in the discussion aren't nice enough to each other. But let's say outside a mafia game we're discussing mafia game theory, and we both start just insulting each others families for whole pages of the topic. At least to me, the actual topical discussion is dead. Maybe someone could revive it, but with each repetition of Yo Mamma, such seems less likely.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Who implemented this dumb crap,
I don't know who implemented the first online RO... In our little sub-culture, there were some on DDO, but to my knowledge were not actually enforced. When the previous administration wrote the CoC and such, is probably what we're copy/pasting; but again, they did not seem to be enforced. As you can probably guess, I have a thing against RO's being issued but not enforced.
RO's are of course not a first or second option. Even for slip-ups banning is not the first resort. I'm big on telling people to chill out, and remind them of the CoC.
and where can I petition against this?
Were I in your shoes, I'd write a better policy and relevant related material, and post it in the CoC Revisions thread.
Why is debateart some large safe space?
It's not. The very nature of this site is all about the criticism of ideas.
I am totally understanding why this site is dead now lol.
With how few RO's we've had, it's not that many less posts from avoided flamewars.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
Thanks. He was a good choice as someone involved in this thread, who is unlikely to over-react to being named.Fan of the low-key call out.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SirAnonymous
Thank you for taking the time to do that analysis.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I know nothing about the context of his RO violation I am sure that when he returns he will have the maturity to acknowledge this, possibly make some thread on it.
Him making a thread about an RO violation, would until the end of the RO, in itself be an RO violation.
So standard RO's here look like this:
When that starts, you must not refer to, talk about, talk with, mention, PM, or communicate with [USER] on the DART or Discord domains. Doing so well result in a harsher punishment. [USER] will be held to the same standard regarding you.
To me the general intent of the RO is to force some time apart, and get the users in question to stop thinking about each other so much. I've had a couple in my day, and disliked when moderators did nothing about wanton violations.
Not every RO violation is equal. Someone under an RO can of course still say 'I don't like some users,' but if they go deep into describing a certain user, clearly they're thinking about them too much. As an example, let's say Franklin and I have an RO, I could still say 'I hate forum spam' or even 'I hate users who make forum spam,' but a violation of the RO would be 'I hate users who start First Post threads in forums I just finished emptying for their deletion.' The first two statements imply no general target of thought, Franklin would be acting very sensitive if he made that connection to him; whereas the third statement describing what he did today, would be clearly crossing the line.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SirAnonymous
Please put yourself in our shoes, and do the analysis on SirAnonymous' actions.
Created:
Posted in:
FYI, I don't think Speed is likely to be using modified roles, he was pretty clear on what the pool of roles he would choose from would be.
Relavent role claims:
- DRAFTER: You are the DEMOLISTIONIST. Each night you may visit another player. For that night, that player will act as a BOMB
- You are the BOMB. If you are killed (other than by lynching), the person who killed you will die.
- SIR: You are the AMNESIAC. Once per game you may visit a player in the graveyard. You will assume their character, role, affiliation, and win condition.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
@SirAnonymous
Someone says they're the PGO with zero reason to do so, it's a pretty clear choice what to do. Granted, Drafter could be some role that needs to lynch people, but we can't just not lynch people because it makes sense to do so.
VTL SirAnonymous
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WaterPhoenix
As was announced previously, some posts would be moved as part of the forum restructuring. This was one of them.
Created:
Posted in:
If I understand the setup properly, there are 4 town, 1 mafia, and 1 other.
This means there is one player who has a third party role:
Alien
Fool
Serial Killer
Amnesiac
Lover
Siren
Angel
Lyncher
Hider
Cupid
Monk
Werewolf
Fool
Serial Killer
Amnesiac
Lover
Siren
Angel
Lyncher
Hider
Cupid
Monk
Werewolf
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Damn. Made the wrong choice.
What choice was that?
Created:
Posted in:
Money in circulation creates a cool multiplier effect while it changes hands. Poor people of course spend a greater percentage of any extra money they get.
Of course yes, inflation is where my mind goes to risk factors on these things. Some inflation is inevitable, but we do need to be careful to avoid hyperinflation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@PressF4Respect
So what exactly did the vanilla town PM say?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
Intuition can be a powerful thing.
One thing I did find odd was that it got argued me not VTLing you in response for that was scummy, but the next day someone casting an OMGYS vote was also scummy. It seems like a bit of a continuous Rorschach test, of people seeing what they want to see.
FYI, I genuinely did believe you. Warren had doubts. Either way, killing the an exposed vig in NP1 would not be beneficial (it would not have saved my life, and you being confirmed town would not guarantee future wise kills).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
I called Ragnar as Mafia!!!!! I'm so proud of myself
Anything that actually gave it away, or like my lynch the last to arrive thing nearly catching Warren, was it a lucky guess?
Created:
Posted in:
Mafia does not win yet:
With 3 players alive, it takes 3 to lynch
Press needs to vote for Press, otherwise we have to wait until nighttime, at which point Mafia might or might not enact a night kill. 😃
Oh course with me now scum confirmed, Press and Drafter could VTL me, but they would need to convince me to join that motion. 😁
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
@drafterman
@PressF4Respect
DP1:
Kinda weird re-reading these, as the hindsight messes with how it flows. Also weird reading Supadudz and Drafter as the same person, but also as not the same person. Like I want to ask Supa why he did this or that, but Drafter can only make an informed guess at his motivations (I'm finding some of the interaction between him and Speed very interesting).
So day 1 Warren starts posting at #66 (2nd the last to show; feels a bit nice that I almost had scum in my random net). At post #81 I feel a bit of pressure from Press to go through with VTLing Water (last to show).
At the same time, while I want to ignore it, Grey keeps vouching for Supa...
I still don't buy the validity of Pie's reasoning against Press at #291
Supa made me wonder if he might be the vig at #303 (insisting there's no way the Mafia would kill anyone but Speed if they have a brain... just seems more like town trying to peer pressure mafia into limiting the damage), then to make a weird statement at #317 when during the previous game I played with him this was confirmed and reconfirmed; yes, vig and mafia can shoot each other, both kills will occur (initially, this made me really think he was the vig trying to cover it, but now Lunatic is the confirmed vig... I'm confused what that was about).
DP2:
The interaction between Grey and Lunatic at the start is neat to re-read (so many insults without purpose...). I feel shameful for how the day ended, but glad I delayed the mislynch (#64); out of curiosity, was my questioning killing Grey really suspicious as Warren said, or was he just picking on me as a new player? Either way, I don't see how I was pulling a counterwagon, when I offered no votes. It later got Supa to unvote, which aborted the thing... After a lot of back and forth, it gets under way again. At #196 Supa tags me and others to encourage VTLing Grey. At #198 Press joins with some analysis. At #204 I VTL (technically the hammer). At #212 Warren shifts blame to me and Press (while apparently also outing himself to Lunatic). Starting at #222 the Supa/Warren conversation picks up...
DP3:
Guess it's just Supa and Press to look at now... The day ended in 6 hours, during which I did not manage to post anything.
Lets see Supa calls me an L-1 Pusher (I'm assuming a sports term?), gets into a fight with Water during which he focuses a lot on that I was the hammer on Grey. #45 Supa goes through a personality shift and leans town on both Press and I, and swiftly repeats it at #47...
Press gets on at #54 and does some theory analysis.
Conclusion:
Supa
- If scum: Tried to get Speed to shoot me. Incredibly well coordinated. Toward the end he leans town on both Press and I, then kills Lunatic. By this logic, Press and I should both vote against him...
- If town: Tried to get Speed to shoot me. Possibly tried to mis-identity himself as Vig to me in case I was scum?
Press
- If scum: A lot of lurking. Tried to get me to VTL Water. Pie detects him in DP1 based on a lucky guess, he still doesn't join in VTLing Pie (because he knew Pie was innocent and it would look bad? Or just just AFK?). Warren tried to assign blame to him for camouflage?
- If town: A lot of lurking. Tried to get me to VTL Water. Warren tried to assign blame to him for future mislynch.
So there's a few reasons. I don't see enough from Press to think scum, but I've seen enough from Supa to firmly think town. I can't envision his actions quite fitting with knowing who is really naughty or nice. Press, being a mostly inactive unknown quantity, I'm open to the possibility...
VTL PressF4Respect
Created:
Posted in:
Upgraded Graveyard:
Pie - Vanilla - DP1 - Lynched (Oro, Supa, Drafter, Ragnar, Grey, Lunatic)
Speed - Vanilla - NP1 - Killed by vig
Oro - Vanilla - NP1 - Killed by Mafia
Grey - Vanilla - DP2 - Lynched (Lunatic, Drafter, Supa, Press, Ragnar)
Drafter - Vanilla - NP2 - Killed by Mafia
Warren - Mafia - NP2 - Killed by vig
Water - Vanilla - DP3 - Lynched (Water, Drafter, Lunatic)
Lunatic - Vig - NP3 - Killed by Mafia
Yes, I am of course assuming both that the Vig was truthful on his kill claims, and that he did not get depressed...
Created:
Posted in:
Finished an analysis of DP1, I'll share later, but so far nothing conclusive... However, I need to go walk and feed dogs for a friend. I'll try to tackle the remaining days when I get back.
I wonder if I can systematize a search to find interactions between each set of users.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DynamicSquid
I suggest using a Google Doc, and of course some good advice for both sides can be found within: https://tiny.cc/DebateArt Actually, a copy of that might be a decent place to start building your arguments
Having done a group debate, I'll suggest any sources be done as [http://whatever] wherever appropriate inside the argument, and only when you get to the proof reading stage do you convert them to a numbered list at the end.
Having done a group debate, I'll suggest any sources be done as [http://whatever] wherever appropriate inside the argument, and only when you get to the proof reading stage do you convert them to a numbered list at the end.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Thanks for the analysis. No I'm not mafia, but without a lie detector my word doesn't prove anything.
I just finished handling some site moderation issues. I'll get re-reading the previous days shortly.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DynamicSquid
would it be possible to do a 3v1 debate in any way?
Easily.
- The description will clearly state the users involved on each side.
- One user will have to be selected to take point, ideally whomever you know will have time, not get banned, and decent or good at formatting. (or otherwise ask for special permission for a team account to be made...)
- The team coordinates on a shared document, and the point-man posts it when ready (ideally at least 12 hours early, due to the homework deadline dilemma).
Created:
***
A series of unprovoked personal attacks were brought to the attention of the moderation team. Users involved have been talked to directly. Please don't emulate the obviously problematic behavior.
As a reminder, violations to the Personal Attacks section of the CoC are punishable as outlined in the Consequences section.
As a reminder, violations to the Personal Attacks section of the CoC are punishable as outlined in the Consequences section.
-Ragnar, DM
***
Created:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Are you allowed to change the forum topic after 25 days?
Yes, as was even explained within some of what you copy/pasted: "This will be edited by any moderator (probably Ragnar, but all have my permission), so new members joining the discussion need not wade through everything to understand the current state of the proposal." Also of note, that post was added on November 1st, with references to it being updated as late as November 26th.
When recently moving all the mafia games to their new home, I had to edit posts from as far back as August 2018.
Created:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Responding to #3:
Your reading comprehension is doing you no favors.
It took him more than a month to say he is acting on it incrementally
In order to get user feedback I had to modify the proposal, then wait for user feedback. That I was not going to sit on the computer continually refreshing the page, should be obvious.
The only thing that changed was there was an extra section which was archived.
The first draft had 9 forums, the final had 14. You want to make a fool of yourself by saying all 5 of those were just the single archive, I really can't stop you.
He didn't take criticism seriously so I don't see the point entertaining a discussion.
From 9 forums to 14, based on me implementing various criticisms into the proposal.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Again, this is the wrong thread. So I'll keep this short...
1) Actually provide evidence on how you got to ranking conclusions
2) Critique the points I clearly laid out above
I responded over a month ago, and you chose to drop them. You proceeded to complain that my suggestions to Mike were not then finalized faster, with those points actively dropped. And now you're complaining that points you dropped were not a part of the recommendations... Basically you're complaining that I did not give you enough reason to complain.
3) Then ask me to respond when I have the data you created or you know don't give me and expect me to trust you on blind faith. If it wasn't clear I am not Religious so that isn't a thing that I do.
The numbers on the forum listing, and basic math skills. Heck, you might even do it better than me, given that you have a different qualifier for what counts as a user using a forum (you've previously complained that members using forums should not be confused with those members using said forums; we apparently can't just assume that them using forums means they used the forums...).
Created: