Total posts: 3,159
Posted in:
But I don't think it's worth it to waste an entire DP (especially this one, arguably the one where we can glean the most info off of DP1 and NP1).
Game immediately proceeds to die off
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
I think that if it comes down to it, then we should VTNL.
But I don't think it's worth it to waste an entire DP (especially this one, arguably the one where we can glean the most info off of DP1 and NP1).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
If there are two townies and two scum left, will the game automatically end?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@truthbomb
That sounds like you would base it on somebody's subjective feelings of how disgusting something is, correct me if I am wrong.
It's not just basing it on someone's subjective feelings. It is based on the opinions of multiple mods, each with their own backgrounds and opinions to contribute. While it is true that there will be a subjective element to this, it won't at all be based on the whims of just one person/group of people.
Honestly, I think there is a lot of value in being exposed to radical belief systems (If they are well supported anyway), it allows you to either strengthen parts of your own ideology you have not fully fleshed out, or change your mind on something you happen to be incorrect about.
I agree, but there is a difference between having an opinion and attacking and maligning others for who they are.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
The oldies think there so much better than us.
Those BOOMERS
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@truthbomb
It would depend on the magnitude and context of the offence, and of the situation as a whole.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
How did so many people die during the night? Is there a vigilante?
Warren was a hider, and he probably hid behind Pie during the night.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
How is it MYLO? There are 6 people remaining
Created:
Posted in:
The one thing to take away from the "hate group" rule is that context is the most important factor. Different situations call for different responses. This issue isn't black and white, and there will more often than not be some ambiguity involved, which could and should be dealt with by the community as a whole.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@truthbomb
I have not been a part of the community long enough to vote on this
Anyone can vote on this (on the official thread).
but I think the problem would be for potential to abuse the definition, and not neccessarily intentionally.
I actually agree. It's not that I think the mods are going to abuse the definition (they certainly seem well-intentioned), but that we're human, and that sometimes we allow our subconscious biases to get the better of us (and this goes for everyone).
Particularly in a debate site, you atleast want some members who are willing to advocate for not just mildly offensive things, but for extremely offensive things.
What do you mean by "offensive"?
If a member of greenpeace wants to come here and debate that commercial fishermen should be physically attacked it should be welcomed.
It depends on the context. You certainly don't want a Greenpeace member to be verbally attacking a commercial fisherman on this site.
You want a chance to attack certain radical ideologies anyway, before they become strengthened by having the premises go unchallenged, because once somebody has enough confidence in their beliefs, that is when they will act on them. (right or wrong).
I didn't think I would find myself saying this, but I actually agree with what you said here 100%.
I also wonder if the rule would apply to me.
It depends on what you do, and whether or not your actions would constitute deliberate hate.
For example if that rule is implemented, should I leave the site?
That's your decision to make. No one is going to pre-emptively force you off this site just for who you are.
I also wonder if the rule would be appliedd evenly.
It should.
It just won't be a succesful site or even interesting if outliers who take extremist positions are excluded because that is considered "advocating for a hate group".
Taking extremist positions doesn't necessarily mean advocating for a hate group.
Created:
Posted in:
Also, I gotta say, damn...
The other mafia game going on right now already has more posts than DP1 and DP2 of this one combined, despite this one having a two-day head start.
(just goes to show how little activity there is, I guess)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
@Vader
@oromagi
@Speedrace
@skittlez09
ping pong
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
THEY CAN NEVER BE KINGS
Not true. Just ask Agamemnon.
Created:
-->
@Athias
The pope is the most "powerful"--or to be more apt, "influential"--"living thing in the history of the universe."
Current pope, or historical?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Swagnarok
But who do you classify as a hate group based on that definition
That definition isn't meant to be a grocery list of hate groups. It's supposed to act as a benchmark for the mods on a case-by-case basis.
It's broad enough that a number of non-hate groups could be defined as hate groups.
It's intentionally broad to prevent offenders from slipping through the cracks. As I have stated previously, there are many types of hate crimes, and hate groups that perpetrate them. That definition is meant to be a guideline, not a rule in itself.
Who decides which entities fit the mold?
My guess would be either the mods or the community.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Swagnarok
We are talking about the definition the SPLC provided, not the SPLC itself. I said that the definition was fair, and that if you disagree with it, then by all means, provide an alternative one.
Created:
-->
@Vader
Sure.
WE ALL KNOW THANOS DID NOTHING WRONG
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@truthbomb
This sure doesn't seem like "socialism" to me
Unless...
Oh no...
Better warn Poland
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Swagnarok
No. Take this one out. "Don't advocate genocide" is fair, but for one thing nobody can really agree on what a hate group is
The SPLC defines a hate group as "an organization that – based on its official statements or principles, the statements of its leaders, or its activities – has beliefs or practices that attack or malign an entire class of people, typically for their immutable characteristics." [1]
I think this is a fair definition to use, and if there are any objections to it, then please, by all means, present an alternative. But the one thing that shouldn't be happening is saying, "oh well, too vague" and leaving it at that.
Also, according to the FBI [2], a hate crime is "a committed criminal offense which is motivated, in whole or in part, by the offender’s bias(es) against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender, or gender identity." With this definition in mind, genocide is only a specific type of hate crime, and there are many other hate crimes that don't involve advocating genocide (eg. using racial/ethnic/sexual slurs and obscenities in a deliberately insulting fashion).
and also it unreasonably limits the parameters of open debate.
How so?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
You already revealed your species, which took most of the pressure off you.
By further claiming to be BP (if that is your real role), you're actually being detrimental to town.
The whole point of being BP is luring mafia into NKing you, thereby wasting their NK.
Mafia obviously won't do that now since you completely blew your cover.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lucky
Wh... what?
You know there's a signup, right?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
If you're actually BP, the one thing you don't want to do is claim BP.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Melcharaz
I didn't see any direct or personal attacks against you, nor did I see him mock your views of God.
Please explain how that's an example of a block-worthy post.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
First an early vanilla claim from Supa, then this?
If you are indeed bulletproof, then you utterly failed at your job.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Melcharaz
2: religious views. This is probably the biggest reason, its not that i hate you or anything, you just simply disregard and/or mock my views of God. If there is a desire for you to learn about God, ill do what i can to help nuture that. But these people simply dont care about God and tend to do DA or PA against me (DA direct attacks, PA personal attacks) or use fighting words.
Any examples?
Created:
-->
@Barney
This is to say that at some point, even without misspelling anything, legibility is harmed such that it becomes painful to try to read someones case.
That's subjective. (But then again, voting IS based on one's own thoughts of the debate at hand, so...)
Created:
1. Yes. It looks good, except for a few bits here and there that can be hammered out better later.
2. Yes. Only people who are hiding something in PMs should be scared of this.
3. No. The current S&G rules are sufficient. The organization of an argument does not affect its content (which is ultimately what should determine the outcome). As long as an argument is legible, the way that someone structures their argument (header format, essay format, etc.) doesn't matter.
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
Just curious, do you know what OMGUS is?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
The first annual zoomer zoom conference, to be specific
Created:
Posted in:
You aren't. There are grandparents who are just 38 or even younger because both generations have been smashing girls in high school.
Good to know o_o
Based on your birthday, which is in 2002, you are not a boomer.
Yes, I'm very aware I'm a zoomer, zoomer
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
1. VTL =/= LynchSorry. The wrong term used.
That's ok. Also, FYI, there are reasons why you would VTL someone without wanting to lynch them.
2. How do you 100% know he is town?The only evidence presented with relevance to this topic agrees with my claim. Unless you can disprove that claim which you can't.
True, his early claim does support his towniness (which I stated previously). However, this does not mean he is 100% town. In fact, the only way you'd be able to 100% know someone is town on DP1 is if you are mafia.
I think he is most likely town because he said it, and there is maybe no reason to lie.
If you're mafia, there is a huge reason to lie. True, it is a risky approach, but fakeclaiming Vanilla Townie as mafia could pay off massively (and this has been done before, sometimes with great success).
3. I find it funny how you are reacting way more strongly towards the VTL than Supa is.This is DArt, and I usually switch off my sense of humor unconsciously because I think debating is supposed to be serious. In fact, I don't know about the rule, and if Pressf's vote is serious, then I will 100% keep my vote on Supadudz.
The VTL on Supa was mostly a joke, but it does serve a practical purpose.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
The meme sadly died for some reason and Press is like the old parent who is always behind in the memes
That's the first time anyone's ever called me a boomer, lol
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
If this guy is lynching someone who is openly town, then he is on my opposing side. I am town.
1. VTL =/= Lynch
2. How do you 100% know he is town?
3. I find it funny how you are reacting way more strongly towards the VTL than Supa is.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
I am well aware, but he is known for doing that both as town and mafia. Right now I have him as "neutral".
Created:
Posted in:
Correction:
WVAPBZ TVYP XBHT MVLKHYP 7 --> WVAPBZ TVYP XBHT MVLKHYP -7
Created:
Posted in:
Reads so far (in no particular order):
warren42: Provided testable role, can be verified during the night. Also helping out noob man here.
SupaDudz: Looks like town so far, has claimed early.
iLikePie: Seems in line with his previous town roles (from experience)
Oromagi: Too inactive to tell (only one post, which was fluff)
Speedrace: Only fluff posts so far
User_2006: Looks like he is actually trying, and has an established line of logic. Plays like town.
Cookie: Only one post so far, but it is a meaningful RVS (albeit with not the best strategy)
Ragnar: Hasn't provided role yet, but is playing like town so far
Created: