Total posts: 3,178
Posted in:
No no that's not the point, the point is he didn't say what he was, he claimed a townie and win with town. What his town role and name? That is what makes it scummy
No, this isn't scummy at all, even if it's not said for the intent of having something for an LD to check. Both a towny and a mafia would claim they win with the town. This is just absurdly poor logic, that is setting up a no-win situation. If a towny is truthful and says they win with the town, they're scummy? That doesn't make sense in the least.
This is some straight up presumption of guilt type stuff.
Created:
Posted in:
As I said, his behavior is relatively null.
To clarify this because there might otherwise be confusion, he reversed course on not hypothesizing as to potential mafia roles based upon analysis of the shows villains. This usually would be sus AF, because hypothesizing on mafia roles doesn't give mafia any more information than they already have. But his general overt paranoia in reasoning can more than account for the initial refusal.
He's still null, but the sus'ness of his behavior has been dispelled fmpov.
Also not sure why people are all over Dudz? His reasoning isn't all too good for why people are sus. But it wasn't from the get-go with being suspicious of standard "IWWT" statements. His further reasoning is only evidencing even further fmpov that he isn't faking the suspicions, rather he thinks they are valid to be suspicious of.
For example, him pointing out that his PM does not mention the connection in backstory between his claimed character and rationals claimed character.
If you helped through John's dad abuse, TUF would have mentioned that in my role background which he didn't
This otherwise ignores that mods do not have to, nor do they usually, minutely detail backstory in role PM's.
Indeed, if you take my claim as true, it's pretty obvious the justifications are loose ones, and provided backstory is general, not detailed, and otherwise is missing quite a bit. But that's usually the case anyways.
The more I read of dudz, the more im convinced he's a relatively noob town who doesn't quite have a solid grasp on what is, and what is not, scummy.
For example
Your hesitance to do claim this is the reason why I am voting you
Except, hesistance in claiming a main character is more than reasonable for a towny to exhibit. Main characters generally equal power roles. Claiming a main character puts a target on ur back. I would be hesitant to put a target on my back in the situation too.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheHammer
and the 100% chance we'd be cancelling his anti-town utility regardless
A utility lynch on someone who is from your point of view most likely town? Wow, are you trying to appear scummy, cause boy are you accomplishing it.
@Everyone- this is what contrived scumhunting looks like. Its seventh so it could just be him being, well, him. But as said, this is textbook contrivance of scumhunting.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheHammer
To answer Budda, I'm fine with lynching SupaDudz because his posts are giving me cancer.
Thats not proper justification for a lynch. I'm gonna need rational justification. "His posts give me cancer" is null. Town and scum are equally able to make "cancerous" posts.
Unvote VTL Hammer
For a full claim. It looks like Rational claimed the main character? Makes sense why he would otherwise want to hide that. As I said, his behavior is relatively null. He was acting sus in stalling claiming, but if he is main character, that would sufficiently explain why he was stalling and otherwise unwilling to claim.
Created:
Posted in:
Also just to note
When the occurrence is zero, and has been zero for all of human history.
I must have missed the part where human history was all there is to history... Heard it here first folks, the 13.8 billion years proceeding human history doesn't matter. And while we're at it, the only way probable conclusions are determined is through deduction and direct observation.
Just ignore that at one point Earth was inorganic, and then magically there was organic matter, and later on, life. No, that's certainly not indirect evidence life came from inorganic matter. After all, things come from nothing alllll the time, amirite? 😂😂
Created:
Posted in:
You make the same logical mistakes. I'll show you.
Lol, ah yes, such a paragon of logic. Holding that the ovservation of organic compounds such as proteins being produced from inorganic compounds isn't evidence of abiogenesis.
What stellar logic do you have for us next? That a tree being made of wood is not evidence it came(even if indirectly) from fauna such as a tree?
Moving on to your continued misunderstanding of foundational concepts in science.
For example, we don't conclusively know exactly why gravity works as it does.But gravity has been observed. Abiogenesis has not. Ever. Not even once. Not anywhere in the universe. Why is it a theory? Or given attention? Not because of science clearly.
First off, gravity has not, and cannot be directly observed. We observed it's effects, not gravity itself. Let
But this is an erroneous conflation of scientific law, and scientific theory. As it appears you lack an understanding of how they are differentiated:
Laws are observances of what is. There is a law of gravity, but gravity is also a theory. Why?
Because a scientific theory is roughly an explanation of how or why something "is", that has evidence to support it beyond any other hypothesis.
A hypothesis, which is synonomous the common use of theory, is just a speculation of how or why, with little to no evidence to support.
Why is abiogenesis a theory and not a hypothesis? Because it has evidence to support it.
1) Organic compounds such as proteins can result from inorganic compounds. As organic compounds are the foundation of life present in every living organism, it only makes sense that organism resulted from organic compounds.
You are more than welcome to argue that the foundations of what something is comprised of isn't evidence of it being produced by such foundations. But as you aptly pointed out, this doesn't happen in a vacuum. And you'd be discarding that every other thing in existence is a result of what it is foundationally comprised of, even if indirectly. This is the necessary and consequential nature of transitive series.
2) A transitive series of events is either infinite, or has a beginning, full stop. It cannot be both, it cannot be neither. As it's a de facto logical paradox for something to be both infinite and finite. Given that evidence overwhelmingly supports that the universe itself has a beginning point, this consequentially means evidence supports that life itself had a beginning as well. Life> Life is a transitive series, full stop.
3) If life had a beginning, that necessarily means at one point there was not life, then at another there was. That life had to result from something, ex: ex nihil, nihilo fit. From nothing, nothing comes.
4) Given there is evidence to support beyond that at one point Earth had zero organic matter present, then there was, you are left with two likely conclusions, abiogenesis and Panspermia. However, given premise 2, Panspermia itself still requires a beginning, a point where there was no life, then there was.
I think you obviously misunderstood my religious point as being crucial to what I'm saying. It wasn't at all. As a final point
Further, you must dismiss all the perfectly good science supporting life from life. Why would you do that?
1) as opposed to dismissing all the perfectly good science that illustrates the universe is finite and has a beginning?
2) Abiogenesis does not discard that life comes from life. How TF could it when a crucial component of the transitive series argument is that life does indeed result from life. Imagine that.
It's quite humurous that you would be aware such theories and hypotheses aren't made in a vacuum, they build upon previous theories, laws, and observances. And yet discard that by arguing against Abiogenesis, you are de facto arguing for the universe being timeless and consequentially inifinite, despite the overwhelming evidence that supports a universe that is both finite and has a beginning.
Concluding, say you are following "science" all you want, it doesn't make it true. And really, the more you speak more obvious it becomes you lack understanding of even basic scientific concepts, terminology, and principles. For example, discarding inductive reasoning as illegitimate when science does not exclude inductive reasoning from conclusions made, it still very much incorporates it, particularly in the realm of the "why" and "how" aka the realm of scientific theory.
Created:
Posted in:
Honestly, this makes me care even less about town PR's, and I usually discount results and focus primarily on behaviors anyways, caring very little for what roles town may or may not have at their disposal.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
A framer/godfather seems like a reasonable scum team. Given I'm an innoc child it makes more sense, as that affords scum reasonably opportunity to ML the inno child as opposed to being forced to use a NK to eliminate.
Are law enforcement characters in the show "dirty" in any capacity? Like John Rayburn. Being mafia detective would fit, i take it the characters profession is in law enforcement? We might have a game in which there is no cop, or the "cop" is mafia, hence an inno child to produce at least one conclusive result. As opposed to multiple inconclusive ones.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I read that post, that was a read on Rational. Conceding he is acting sus, but pointing out acting sus is his MO. I was looking for reads on others.
Why are dudz and hammer sus to you?
Created:
Posted in:
Furthermore, even in the Bible in Genesis it states God said to "Let the earth produce all kinds of animal life: domestic and wild, large and small”—and it was done.
This heavily implies either abiogenesis for life not including sea life and birds directly created by God, or evolution of various other forms of life already created by God. As God did not produce them, the Earth did.
So even from a religious standpoint, you have to either concede abiogenesis and/or macro-evolution as a consequence of that belief, or concede the biblical recounting of Genesis is false, full stop.
Created:
Posted in:
Urey-Miller was a failure. And when the experiment was corrected for early Earth atmosphere, it was again a failure
It was a failure in the sense that it didn't produce single-celled organisms. But both the original and follow up, again, created organic matter such as proteins, from inorganic matter. I think you have a fatal misunderstanding of the nuance of abiogenesis. It's not claiming it went from inorganic > single-celled. The claim is inorganic > organic > single-celled.
Furthermore, your insistence and whining that it's not been conclusively proven belies you really lack an understanding of science. Very few things in science are ever conclusively proven. Most are probabilistic determinations of accuracy aka "theory".
For example, we don't conclusively know exactly why gravity works as it does. However, I doubt you would be screaming to high heaven that the understanding we currently have is a flight of fantasy because it hasn't been conclusively proven.
Basically, you are in an uproar over something not being scientific, when you aren't really operating scientifically yourself. Not just because of the aforementioned, but also because you are setting up a false standard of deductive reasoning being the only valid rationale in determining that probability. When inductive reasoning as abiogenesis is in part via the KCM premise of transitive series of events having either a starting point, or not having one(infinite series.), is just as acceptable as evidence to such determinations.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Speaking of paranoia, I can't help but feel you are/were brown nosing me and/or handling me with kid gloves to fly under the radar.
What reads do you have?
Created:
Posted in:
Its important to stress that Rational is sus to me at this point, but he's still pretty much null from a non-vibe standpoint. His behavior fmpov cpuld reaaonably be coming from a town or scum. His pressure on those who are pressuring him, aka "omgus"("omg u suck") voting, is in line with his general behavior of retaliatory voting in response to people voting him.
His thematic post that was, at best, less than entirely relevant, could be a town player being overzealous with contributing show knowledge, even if that knowledge might not be totally relevant.
His paranoia of disclosing too much info to mafia by hypothesizing as to potential roles definite villain characters might be justified as having, though it doesn't make sense fmpov, is kind of in line with Rationals natural propensity towards such paranoia. Paranoia not to be taken in the negative sense, as townies should have a healthy dose of paranoia in acting.
This final point though, is what moves him into sus territory. Because as I pointed out, refusing to hypothesize only really benefits mafia, as they already know their roles. Being willing to acknowledge he could ultimately still be town, operating in a manner that is benefits exclusively scum, as illustrared by the final point, is more than sufficient reason for a claim.
Basically, the reason for claim is no longer exclusively him illustrating he is less than stellar at faking claims(beginners 1.2). We now have a sus behavior to back that up.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Earth
I think Hammer should be another target of pressure. As I pointed out earlier, him being ok with lynching dudz so early on, without justifying, is sus AF. At the least he should explain himself.
@Earth- reads hombre? Why are you going to need more of a claim from rational? What are your thoughts on others?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Honestly, you need to simmer down. This is a game of mafia, if you act or make posts that are sus and/or don't make sense, expect to be called out for it. Asking why the analysis post even matters, a post that was analyzing degree of evil between two characters, when both characters are definite villains, is a definite inconsistency in thinking.
Not to mention, your reason behind not hypothesizing on potential mafia roles is bunk. Mafia know what their roles are, town hypothesizing on what they may be is not at all affording mafia any information they don't otherwise already have. Ergo, there is zero sensible reason as town to otherwise stay quiet about it.
That quite literally only benefits mafia. You can choose to get ur panties in a twist over somebody calling you out on this. That's only honestly to be expected. It doesn't at all change the legitimacy of the point I'm making.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
(now that's using ur noggin 👏👏)
Created:
Posted in:
@everyone- thoughts on hammer? Rational? Dudz?
Any other reads? Everyone needs to be making reads, even if they're mostly null. Pointing out noteworthy posts can still be done, even if dispositions on affiliation may not yet be determinable at the present on such posts.
Created:
Posted in:
Yet to post
-Vaarka
-Danielle
I'm not sure if Danielle is even necessarily active. She hasn't been responsive to any messages regarding her own game she has signed up to mod.
Vaarka's silence could just be that he hasn't made it online yet. However, if the day passes and he still doesn't post, it's gonna be sus cause he was one of the players urging Lunatic(TUF) to start the game.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
The rest I will leave secret as it will help mafia trace char to role.
If mafia are these characters, exploring potential roles of these characters isn't going to afford anything mafia doesn't already have(their roles.) I'm gonna need you to actually start making sense.
On another note
"Definite villains: Robert Rayburn, John Rayburn."
So then what was the point of the thematic analysis? If both are definitely scum, then analyzing which character is more evil of the two is rather irrelevant to the game and really just fluff.
because of how he ends up becoming townsided by the end of the show.
Ok, why was this not a factor right away? As you have pointed out you know plenty about it. So fmpov this already should have been playing a factor in the initial read
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
As riveting as the analysis of the show was, im not seeing how it connects to the game? Are you proposing that blits more likely only one of them is scum?
Setting that aside, what potential scum roles would fit with those characters? (Not necessarily neatly, loosely fit would be possible too given my claimed role pm)
On an independent note, it seems like an interesting show based on that synopsis. Always had a penchant for things that explore the darker parts of the human psyche/condition.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Revealing characters helps mafia narrow down PRs more than it helps us.
Again, I've got to disagree. Two claims in and you got a TR and an SR from it. And it's the first place to start on discerning lynches beyond the random. Frankly though, as you pointed out, i'd rather mass character claim anyways.
Anyone, such as yourself, with in depth knowledge of the show would be suited to analyzing it for inconsistencies in patterns and/or theme that might help determine affiliation 💯
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
She's the daughter of the arguable truest villain of the show. He would NOT fake that
Ignoring that we both think he's town for independent reasons. Doesn't this just assume he has knowledge of the show to begin with?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
It's such an obscure character that has like 2 episodes of showtime I think. He wouldn't fake it unless an expert on the show
So? As scum if I'm gonna fake claim vanilla, I'm going to go straight to minor characters and picking exactly one of those kinds of characters.
However, I think you misunderstand what I mean by pointing out the character name is different than listed. Would indicate to me that he was just relaying what was in his PM, as opposed to crafting it from wikipedia or imdb. Ergo, adds more credence to him being town.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
You can't google jane rayburn via searching bloodline, she's a very minor character in the Rayburn family but my character who isn't so minor likes her from what I can tell.
I'm gonna have to disagree with this. Bloodline Wikipedia and ImDb both have "Jane" Rayburn in the list of cast under minor characters. It's interesting though that Wikipedia lists it as "Janie" Rayburn though, not Jane. Hrmmmmmm
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
That really doesn't narrow down much of anything to someone not familiar with the show. You flopped on a full claim in 1.2 with the whole "specific person" when nobody elses PM had one. So what is being sought here, at least by me, is your full claim.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Keep ur vote off though for now. Don't want anyone accidentally hammering and ending the DP early 👍
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Fmpov if you aren't willing to follow up pressure via votes with lynching if that pressure is refused, then you might as well not demand claims at all cause the incentive is no longer there to otherwise claim.
And then at that point, you may as well just VTNL DP1 from the get-go and not bother with it.
Btw, how about we not VTNL on DP1? It wastes a whole lynch, like always. 7 v 2? Lynch every DP and you have 2 lynches before LYLO. VTNL and you only have 1 lynch until MYLO.
DP1 lynch = 💯
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
(prime, and most importantly, "free" real estate 😏. This groups already a member of the land owning elite. We're moving up in the world quick, next thing you know we'll be nobles sitting in a royal court 😂)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
**Unofficial Vote Count**
Rational (3/5) - Buddamoose, Earth, Drafterman
Buddamoose (1/5) - Rational
_____________________
If I missed anything, sorry ahead of time 😂😂
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
(it's not like we don't have gold and other treasures to sell xD.)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Whelp...hope town has protective roles to keep Buddha alive for 3 days...
It would just be two, I'll be confirmed, as worded, come DP3.
Normally, I'm not one to argue against a guaranteed save either NP1 or NP2, depending on when maf decides to target me, but is that really the best choice? If doc can self protect, well, I think we can both agree that's the optimal play 👌💯
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
(don't be silly, we got paid in fantastic experiences and friendship 😏 😂)
Created:
Posted in:
It is also feasible to have an Innocent Child that is automatically revealed by the moderator at a certain point in the game (e.g. "If you are alive on Day 5, the moderator will publicly confirm your alignment.") This can be seen as a Night-Specific variant of Innocent Child.
Even on mafiascum they generally use the variant of inno child in which the player chooses when they are mod-confirmed, not the traditional one. Cause the traditional inno child is boring AF 😂.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Your role is not innocent child. Nolan isn't an innocent child type char at all, thanks for the slip and there's no such thing as a D3 innocent child.
Omg, a role that doesnt neatly fit with a character! That's like, never happened before! 😂.
Also, the traditional innocent child is at game start. On DDO it rarely was announced at that time however. Inno Child on DDO was typically the variant, as in, announced during a later day phase.
Neither of these two things are even remotely sus. I'm gonna say, you stalling on claiming and omgus'ing weakly in response to pressure is continuing to come across as more and more sus tho. Particularly because you claiming has nothing to do with whether or not I'm scummy. It really just looks like a diversion tactic...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
(I fear a trap awaits in the secret stairs 😐)
Created:
Posted in:
Abiogenesis being widely accepted fmpov is basically because we take that organic compounds can be created from inorganic. Then add in what Drafter is pointing out in that at one point there was no life on Earth, then there was. Throw in some inductive reasoning, and what you get is it being the most likely hypothesis to be true.
Panspermia is another hypothesis. But the issue you get with Panspermia is even if life started on another planet, where did that life begin? And so on(transitive series of events) until you are left with concluding either life came from non life(abiogenesis), or life always was, as Drafter astutely pointed out.
I'm pretty sure that is one of the premises of the KCM tbh
Created:
Posted in:
Every single experiment trying to simulate early Earth conditions, or set up conditions for abiogenesis, to see if life can start spontaneously, has failed miserably. All of them
I mean, it failed to produce a living organism, but... What is the Miller-Urey experiment? Asking for a friend...
Created:
Posted in:
(I sus that question so hardcore. We should take the stairs thru the attic imho)
Created:
Posted in:
On Supadubz
I'm getting overzealous but slightly noob town vibes from him. His claim of a vanilla may otherwise be a known scum safe claim, but a towny who is vanilla would be claiming the same so as to remain truthful, so thats ultimately null fmpov. What is towny was his suspicion regarding "IWWT" statements being made so as to give a potential LD something regarding affiliation to check, being scummy. Now, its true that the lack of awareness of that being a standard beginning of game statement isnt indicative of affiliation. I find it less likely though that he was scum being opportunistic, and more likely such suspicion derived from the natural suspicion one usually has when town.
Its a tentative town vibe, but a town vibe nonetheless.
On Hammer
His willingness to lynch Supadubz without justifying that early willingness is concerning to say the least. Its possible he could be an overzealous town so he still remains null. I def want to hear his reasoning for being willing to lynch superdubz though.
On Rational
Rational refusing to claim and omgus'ing in response to that pressure is right in line with how i would expect him to act regardless of affiliation. That he is stalling isn't necessarily indicative of affiliation, however the longer it persists, the more suspicious it becomes. As stated, he's illustrated in previous games he's not the best at fake claiming and nailing his claim down from the get-go, at least for now, is imho more than prudent and reasonable. That he chose to get his undies in a twist is dissapointing, but otherwise expected.
On Greyparrot
i'm a little wary of how he kept pressing for further breadcrumbs from what i said previous, but at the same time, fully understand such advisement generally appears scummy and would more than reasonably prompt such questions from both town and scum alike. So his posts still ring as null to me.
_________________________
These are about the only people that have done anything of true substance thus far, and all but Dubz are looking null. But so far fmpov there is plenty thats out for people to start giving observations on, reads, posts of note, etc. Its important we get everyone to weigh in on things so we have something we can look back on in later DP's and gauge consistency in the rationale of reads. That consistency being one of the crucial factors, fmpov, in determining whether scumhunting is genuine(towny) or manufactured and opportunistic(scummy).
Created:
Posted in:
Given I'm supposed to be confirmed DP3, I think it's likely we're looking at 7 town to 2 mafia, or 6 town, 1 tp, 2 mafia. Inno child seems pointless unless the game is intended to last at least to DP3(7 v 2 = 3 v 2 by DP3 assuming two ML's.)
Or I suppose to an outside observer i could be lying, but 6 v 3 would be rather unbalanced and well outside the 1/3-1/4 ratio near exclusively used.
Created:
Posted in:
Oh and being that I guess I outted everything else, my role is innocent child, I get mod confirmed start of DP3.
Summarized Role
I'm Nolan Rayburn, son of Danny. Dude kept my existence secret from the Rayburn family, but his death prompted me to return. I know the rest of the family is lying, though don't know about what, and im gonna find out. Thus I'm the innocent child, and will be confirmed DP3.
Like I said, innocent child fits, but loosely. Being that it seems Nolan is unaware of his father's seedy nature(that being what I take it they're lying to him about?) and "innocently" thinks his father was otherwise not a criminal?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
You gonna claim or you gonna make it obvious ur stalling?
Created:
Posted in:
That's what I get for not closely reading the PM and skimming it instead 😂.
Created:
Posted in:
I'll note, I asked about justification because my justification doesn't match all too well with the role. For example it says I know the family is lying about Danny(Nolan's father's) death, yet immediately follows that up with a different role than LD. I mean, the role fits, it just seems to loosely fit as opposed to closely fitting.
Created:
Posted in:
Sorry not Danny, Nolan Rayburn. I was confusing Danny(his father) as being my character. Per my role pm my existence was kept a secret by Danny. However after his murder, I returned to find out the circumstances of his death.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Actually, I just researched my character cause I haven't seen the show. It's prolly best i claim now cause he's a main antagonist apparently 😮. I'm Danny Rayburn.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
And that character is? Your role? As well as justification if any is present?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
You are absolutely right that you don't "owe" a claim anymore than anyone else. Perhaps you misunderstood that it's either claiming or death. You otherwise showed you aren't the best at fake claiming, hence why I want ur claim out early, because if you are scum, it would chances are otherwise be exposed that you are via that, even if not till later once more claims are out.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheHammer
Gonna need reasoning behind being ok with a lynch so early into the game...
Created: