Total posts: 4,140
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
Fair, but you can't really accuse people of malice or stupidity for misunderstanding a confusing comment.The correct response to confusion is to ask clarifying questions, not make **** up and strawman me
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Yet, a fair possibility a different arrangement of players with different mindsets and a different sequence of events could have done better.
True, but inactivity was the problem there.
Here Grey is lodging a complaint at, and to, all of Town except TUF. Yet here is TUF's response:
Grey said that Lunatic was MVP and had won. That is an accusation that he was mafia. I don't see anything wrong with Lunatic responding to that, nor do I see anything wrong with his response. GreyParrot was blaming the shepherd for the sheep following him.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
An SK loses if we lynch them. That's 1-in-12.There are two, so that's 1-in-6 of lynching an SK out right.An SK also loses if we lynch one of their targets. Each SK has two targets. So a 1-in-6 chance of lynching one of an SK's target.Two SK's so that's a 1-in-3 change of lynching an SK target.Combined, that's a 1-in-2 chance of lynching either an SK or one of their targets and voiding their win-con. Which, as the mod says, eliminates their ability to kill which helps everyone in the long run.
This seems to make a lot of sense.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Agreed. That would have at least bought an additional day phase, maybe even two.
That could have been good. On the other hand, it might also have ended with GP convincing people to lynch Lunatic and then having no real scum hunting for the rest of the game. I don't know. You could be right.
Yes, and he chose to mys-lynch people.
He didn't knowingly choose to mislynch people. You could be right that VTNL might have been better, but you are not right that he chose to mislynch people. You can say all you want about how he lynched town, but one fact remains: He didn't know they were town.
I'll admit that I'm just a bit irritated that I worked to get actual mafia lynched and that was used as a case to mislynch me,
It wasn't the fact that you were working to get scum lynched that got you lynched. It was that the method you chose with the obvious tunneling, high degrees of unwarranted certainty, and continual mudslinging made you look scummy.
but for some reason TUF mislynching 4 townies is a stroke of genius.
I never said it was, and he didn't know they were town.
Okay, well if you're just going to make those kinds of assumptions then I don't understand why we are having a conversation at all. You can just make up my side of the conversation yourself.
I apologize for making assumptions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@frenzy
There was one scum left in the game at that point. What were they supposed to do? Not try to lynch their strongest scum read? I think not.If they had operated that way you wouldn't have gotten lynched on DP1 because it was a "weak" case.
That's not at all what I'm saying. Lynching your strongest scum read is good. Refusing to consider any other possibility is not.
You are ignoring that Drafter and Wylted actually got scum lynched
I'm not ignoring that. That was before they were tunneling.
equating TUF's heroic effort to not get mislynched with quality play.
To some degree, it is quality play to save yourself when you're town. It doesn't catch scum, but it does prevent town from mislynching you.. just not from mislynching someone else.
TUF is awesome and the fact that he didn't just keel over and die is impressive but I don't think it's unkind to say that his reads were really off this game and that he was ultimately more of an asset to mafia than town despite his best efforts. Speed was literally buddying up to him for this very reason.
I don't disagree. What I'm saying was that, even though his reads weren't good, he didn't really have any better options. He was dealt a bad hand. Even though he played it decently, he just didn't have the info he needed to win. By all rights, he should have won in DP7 if it wasn't for the mod and max mess-up.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Except his reasons for thinking those people were scumming were trash and it would have been preferable to NL in those cases. His poor play is in continuing to push for bad lynches rather than not lynching at all.
Maybe, but no lynches don't catch mafia. By that logic, he should have VTNLed from DP4 onward because there was so little evidence against anyone.
Again, not in his failure to catch Speed.
It's impossible to separate the two. If he's not lynching Speed, then he is lynching town or no one. Also, it was logical to start bandwagons to avoid getting lynched himself and leaving town with a bunch of largely inactive players. Furthermore, if he had simply allowed a series of no lynches, I'm guessing that you would be just as hard on him for not even trying.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Again, I am not talking about his failure to catch Speed. Why do you keep bringing it up to the exclusion of what am talking about?
Because the two things are inseparable. Without any reason to suspect Speed, the only alternatives are mislynching or not lynching at all. Since there was so little against Speed, town players who looked somewhat scummy were more logical suspects. Even though the evidence against them was weak, the evidence against Speed was weaker still. Since Lunatic didn't know who was town, lynching the townies was more logical.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
If and when that happens, sure. But there is no benefit to considering multiple possibilities at the same time.
Yes, there is. You can only lynch one at a time, but it is still a good idea to discuss other possibilities so you have an idea of what to do when you're wrong.
And you're only viewing it through the lens of it being wrong. Sure, when you do that it looks like a bad thing.
Yes, but the point is that closing your ears to other ideas makes it more likely that you are wrong.
Okay? I didn't bring them up, you did.
I don't remember that, but it doesn't matter.
Then the definition has shifted as I know it. Or maybe I misunderstood the term. What I'm talking about is more in lines with this:
Okay, but if that was what you were doing, it looked indistinguishable from having tunnel vision.
Yes it is. The only worth of any tactic or strategy is if it actually works. And whatever tactic he was using failed. 4 times.I didn't say anything about this failure to catch Speed. I'm talking about him getting 4 townies lynched.
He failed because he had insufficient information. He had no reasons to think Speed was scum. Mafia is a very random game. Sometimes, you lose no matter how well you play. This time, there was next to no evidence on Speed. That was not a result of bad play on Lunatic's part. In this game, good tactics don't always work; they can help, but they can only help so much in the absence of good information. Failure to get good results is not always a result of poor play.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
What say do you have when she is removing a tumor and how to you determine the difference?
I know the difference between the tumor and the unborn because of this:
They have their own unique DNA that has already determined their hair color, eye color, bone density, fingerprints, etc. They are separate from the mother's blood system.
Tumors have none of those characteristics.
I know the difference between when she is removing an unborn child and when she is removing a tumor because of this:
Different procedures have different names, and people have to tell the doctors what procedure they're there for. No invasion necessary.
Oh that's right you have a greater right to a woman's bodily autonomy than she does.
I refuted that here:
People like you are one of the biggest reasons Trump was elected (Disclaimer: I don't support Trump). You disagree about abortion? You think women are second-class citizens who don't deserve the same rights as men! You want immigration to be legal? You're a racist! You don't think men can become women? You're a bigot! (I'm speaking in generalizations. I'm not saying that you believe any of these things, except the one about about abortion because you said that yourself, though in different words.)The point is that many people are sick and tired of self-righteous liberals who condemn everyone who disagrees as a bad person, rather than just a person with bad ideas. Pro-life people don't oppose women's bodily autonomy; they believe that the unborn is a different body entirely. Now, you can say, "That's nonsense! Fetuses are part of the woman's body!" or "It's in the woman's body, so it's her choice." Consequently, people who oppose abortion oppose bodily autonomy. However, that would only be true if they agreed with you on those things. Let me use an analogy to show what I mean.Suppose there was this guy who said the earth was flat, and someone accused him of lying. The flat-earther replied, "I'm not lying. I really believe the earth is flat." Even though he would be wrong, that would not make him a liar; he's just ignorant and misguided. If we pro-lifers are wrong, the same is true of us. We don't oppose bodily autonomy; we just mistakenly think that the unborn is a different body (assuming we're wrong for the sake of argument).Of course, you can refuse to accept this and desperately cling to your belief that those who disagree with you must somehow be sexist and hateful and oppose bodily autonomy. If so I have a simple question for you: according to gallup, 51% of women consider themselves to be pro-life.Do they oppose their own bodily autonomy and consider themselves to be second-class citizens? If not, then how can you logically maintain that men who oppose abortion do think those things? If you do think that pro-life women don't think they're second-class citizens but pro-life men do, then why does the difference in their chromosomes and genitals change the logic of the situation?
The very idea that you know what I believe and I don't is beyond ridiculous.
Now answer my question: Do the majority of women believe that they don't have the right to bodily autonomy?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@dustryder
Again, is this imaginary rubbish malice or stupidity?
None of the above. It was you making confusing statements.
Answer these questions- Is it ok to abort a 1st trimester baby?-Is it ok to abort a 2nd trimester baby?-is it ok to abort a 3rd trimester baby?-is it ok to kill a born baby?Yes to all of these. There are invariably going to be conditions where doing all of these is ok. Of course, such conditions become ever narrower and the moral considerations become ever higher.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Okay, if you want to compare while we were both alive, my record is better than his.
I don't dispute that, but it wasn't as bad as you were making it out to be.
There is no benefit to considering more than one person at a time if you already have scum.
Except that you didn't have scum. DP3 was a perfect example of why tunneling doesn't work. You focused entirely on one person, you were 100% certain, and you were wrong. Even when you think you're right, you still need to consider other possibilities in the event that you're wrong.
Yeah, Lunatic would have been mislynched and Town would have been better off for it.
I highly doubt it. It just would have been even more pathetically inactive.
How so?
If the known info was accurate, then Lunatic's DP7 actions would have won the game. Airmax would have been scum, and Lunatic would have caught him.
Who's "they"?GP and Wylted.Most of town sheeped Lunatic all the way to a loss.
That's poor play on the part of the rest of town, not Lunatic's. You can't blame the shepherd for the sheep's decision to follow him.
And tunneling isn't ignoring reason, it's focusing on someone to get them lynched.
Actually, it's confirmation bias.
"Confirmation Bias or Tunnel Vision is when a player becomes convinced by their own arguments by virtue of how long or how strong they hold them." https://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Confirmation_Bias
Also, I think you misunderstood my statement. I didn't mean "Tunneling = Not Listening to Reason." I meant "Tunneling =/= Listening to Reason."
You can't mislynch 4 times in a row and call it "doing well."
What evidence was there that Speed was scum? No, the results weren't "doing well," but that isn't a reflection on how Lunatic was playing. He lacked the necessary information to conclude that Speed was scum. You can't blame him for getting bad results when he had next to nothing to go on. The only person who found any evidence against Speed was ILikePie5 in DP1, and everyone had either forgotten or not paid attention in the first place.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I lead 1 potential mislynch. Lunatic led 1 potential mislynch and 5 actual mislynches. There is no comparison.
Lunatic lasted 4 DPs longer. When you died, he only had a potential mislynch and one mislynch. Yes, there is a comparison.
No it isn't. Tunneling is only as good or as bad as the initial read or logic. Tunneling itself is neutral.
Tunneling isn't neutral. Players need to consider more than one possibility.
And? Being wishy washy doesn't get anyone lynched. Being certain does.
Because it's impossible to be certain. If you'd had your way, Lunatic would have been mislynched. You were certain he was scum, even though he was town. Also, being wishy-washy is not the only alternative to certainty.
Then what is so brilliant about that plan that did absolutely nothing to help town improve its odds?
I concede that it wasn't brilliant, but it was still helpful. Had the known info been correct, it would have increased town's odds simply because no one else bothered to think about what Max being hated could mean.
The only people willing to listen to reason were Wylted and GP.
Drafter, you were wrong. You were 100 percent certain, but you were wrong. So were they. After they listened to you, they closed their ears to any other possibility. Tunneling is not listening to reason.
I'll admit my contribution and it would have probably been better to just ignore Lunatic's analysis for the drivel it was, but that doesn't make him MVP, nor does it make me (or anyone else) worse than him.So everyone else played worse, except for the people that didn't. Okay. Neither Press nor Pie pushed for 5 myslynches in a row. And I think you are completely ignoring DP1.
You missed my post in which I changed my my MVP to PressF. Also, what am I ignoring about DP1? I still think Lunatic did well after DP3. At least he didn't give up trying like many of the others did. When the going got tough, the TUF got going.
Created:
Posted in:
I just want to let you know that I won't have much time to post today.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
It was only desperation to break the sheeps up
If you want to do that, don't autovote and then ignore the rest of the DP. Make a case that you're right.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Lunatic was the most anti-town element in the entire game, including the Mafia. His reasons were shoddy, his argumentation methods deceptive and polarizing, and his reads and lynches worthless.I find it very surprising that anyone could nominate him MVP given this performance this game. You call him a "tragic hero" but all I see is "tragic." His reads weren't logical and scum hunting really only has value if you can actually do it well, which he showed he cannot.
You are literally accusing Lunatic of having incorrect reads when you yourself admitted that you never suspected Speed and had incorrect reads. It wasn't Lunatic's fault that he didn't catch Speed. It was that Speed didn't slip. Also, his read against you in DP3 was pretty logical. You were clearly tunneling, which is anti-town. You assumed that you had 100% certainty, or at least close to it. The only players that can get away with that are GP because he doesn't put much effort into it and Wylted, because he's Wylted.
His "plan" wasn't brilliant. Granting him the benefit of the doubt regarding airmax being hated at LYLO, his plan only had value if airmax was, in fact, scum.
Not so. If anyone else was scum, they'd already won anyway (at least based off the fact that town didn't know about airmax's non-hatedness at LYLO). The VTNL was a mistake, but the plan wasn't.
In which case, if the only way Town wins is if airmax is scum, then it would have simply been better to lynch him right then and there, mooting the entire plan.
That would also work only if airmax was scum and would not be an improvement.
It was less a "plan" than a realization of inevitable doom.
That's just it. Given the info that town had, doom was inevitable unless airmax was scum. They didn't have enough evidence to lynch anyone. By that point, they really had no path to victory.
I find it very surprising that anyone could nominate him MVP given this performance this game. You call him a "tragic hero" but all I see is "tragic."
The whole game was tragic. The tunneling that you, Wylted, and GP did in DP3 completely threw town offtrack. You made yourself look scummy in that toxic dogfight (granted, so did Lunatic and Wylted) and got lynched. Yes, Lunatic made some mistakes. The reason I nominated him for MVP was because everyone else played even worse, and the only players who played better (PressF and ILikePie) didn't make any positive impact for town. There is a good case to be made that PressF was MVP even though he ultimately failed, since he at least made fewer mistakes. But other than him and ILikePie5, who died in the first round, Lunatic was the only real candidate.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
You're right that he shouldn't have rushed. However, that was one mistake in one round that made little difference since Max had no good way to defend himself.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Max knew 6 (real) days earlier that he wasn't hated at LYLO and failed to tell anyone. At LYLO, it would have just looked like a cheap mafia trick.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Thou dost protest too much. Yes, he made mistakes, but I doubt anyone else would have done much better. Even if he'd waited for max to speak, it probably would have made little difference. Max knew 6 (real) days earlier that he wasn't hated at LYLO and failed to tell anyone. At LYLO, it would have just looked like a cheap mafia trick. Also, there wasn't a lot of evidence against Speed, so it would have been difficult for Lunatic to guess it was him.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
To get rid of an anti-town element. That's a good thing.
After DP3, Lunatic was very pro-town. Yes, he was wrong in his lynches, but it would have been very hard for him to catch Speed the way Speed was playing.
Right, but how did that cost Town the game? Town wasn't willing to listen to anyone but Luna.
It was less that he was the only one they would listen to and more that there was no one else talking.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Well, I'm leading at the moment. I doubt my lead will last.
Created:
Posted in:
1-0. Those horrible steelers paid for their crimes against the environment.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
@bmdrocks21
I second bmdrock's comment.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
I don't have time to respond fully right now, but I do have a question: what's <br> mean?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Right, I think it was the fact the town was mindlessly sheeping Luna that mostly made him a liability, not his gameplay.
Yes. Lunatic played ok after DP3. The problem was that no one else was really trying.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Of course not. You're a godist aren't you?
So you're capable of understanding religious people's objections, but they're incapable of doing that?
How do you determine what a woman is having removed from her body and why should you have a say in it?
Because in order for her to seek an abortion, she has to tell the doctor what operation she wants. I have a say in it for the same reason I have a say in outlawing other types of murder.
This question is as meaningless as it gets.
No. It refutes your accusation completely. Answer it.
BTW do you support the death penalty?
Irrelevant. I defend the innocent, not the guilty. There is no valid comparison between executing a murderer and saving the life of the innocent.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
I have answered: neither.
I am defending existing human life. I have presented a strong case that the unborn are alive and human? Why don't you refute it?
Stop avoiding my question.
If I oppose bodily autonomy for the sole reason that I oppose abortion, then by the same logic the majority of women oppose their own bodily autonomy. If they don't oppose their own autonomy, then I don't oppose it either. Which is it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
How do you know that said woman is seeking an abortion? If a woman uses a hospital how can you invade their body?
What do you do to decide that a woman is having a tumor removed, you deluded sub.
Different procedures have different names, and people have to tell the doctors what procedure they're there for. No invasion necessary.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Firstly, simply voting for a Mafia isn't a bus. A bus is actively pushing for another mafioso to get lynched.
Ok.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Answer the question or prove that you are a lying hypocrite.
If you're referring to the question about whether I oppose women's bodily issues or everyone's bodily autonomy, I have already answered it with neither. I have provided facts to prove it; you have merely repeated your baseless accusations and ignored my arguments.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
I don't need to invade their bodies to find out that they're trying to remove a child. The very fact that they're seeking an abortion tells me that.And how do you know that it's a fetus (not a living human being) and what gives you a right to invade a woman's body to make that determination?
You don't understand your objection to abortion and don't understand the patriarchal system in which all American women are suppressed.
I don't understand my own objection? The great part about being a conservative is that you don't have to know what you believe because liberals will tell you.
Stop avoiding my question.
If I oppose bodily autonomy for the sole reason that I oppose abortion, then by the same logic the majority of women oppose their own bodily autonomy. If they don't oppose their own autonomy, then I don't oppose it either. Which is it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I can't speak for other mafia, but we bussed each other. We were all on each other's lunches (except me because I was lynched first).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Do you support the death penalty?Did you support the American wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?
I defend the rights of the innocent, not the guilty.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Try again. What right do you have to know what growth is being removed from her body?
Because that "growth" is a living human being, and people don't have the right to kill innocent human beings.
If I oppose bodily autonomy for the sole reason that I oppose abortion, then by the same logic women oppose their own bodily autonomy. If they don't oppose their own autonomy, then I don't oppose it either. Which is it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
When did you guess it was Speed, and who did you suspect before that?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@frenzy
You're correct in all respects. PressF had us fooled for the first two rounds
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Tell me why you believe you have the right to deny all women their right to bodily autonomy, what they believe is irrelevant when compared to your desire to deny them that right.
It isn't irrelevant what they think because they completely refutes your accusation. If I oppose bodily autonomy for the sole reason that I oppose abortion, then by the same logic they oppose their own bodily autonomy. If they don't oppose their own autonomy, then I don't oppose it either. Which is it?
A blastocyst is not a baby, just stop lying
You have provided exactly zero evidence to believe this. They have their own unique DNA that has already determined their hair color, eye color, bone density, fingerprints, etc. They are separate from the mother's blood system. Thus, they are separate from the mother and are not just a growth as you falsely claim. They are neither dead nor inanimate, so they are alive. Therefore, they are a distinct living human. Since they are not adults, they are children. As a result, opposing abortion does not oppose women's bodily autonomy because the child is not her body, so it should not be her choice to kill it.
Now that I have answered your question, answer mine: Do the majority of women oppose their own bodily autonomy?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Refute what I said:
It is not a lie. You did not refute a single thing I said. Pro-lifers have never once argued that women don't have bodily autonomy, and I know that I don't have a right over women's bodies. Again:
People like you are one of the biggest reasons Trump was elected (Disclaimer: I don't support Trump). You disagree about abortion? You think women are second-class citizens who don't deserve the same rights as men! You want immigration to be legal? You're a racist! You don't think men can become women? You're a bigot! (I'm speaking in generalizations. I'm not saying that you believe any of these things, except the one about about abortion because you said that yourself, though in different words.)The point is that many people are sick and tired of self-righteous liberals who condemn everyone who disagrees as a bad person, rather than just a person with bad ideas. Pro-life people don't oppose women's bodily autonomy; they believe that the unborn is a different body entirely. Now, you can say, "That's nonsense! Fetuses are part of the woman's body!" or "It's in the woman's body, so it's her choice." Consequently, people who oppose abortion oppose bodily autonomy. However, that would only be true if they agreed with you on those things. Let me use an analogy to show what I mean.Suppose there was this guy who said the earth was flat, and someone accused him of lying. The flat-earther replied, "I'm not lying. I really believe the earth is flat." Even though he would be wrong, that would not make him a liar; he's just ignorant and misguided. If we pro-lifers are wrong, the same is true of us. We don't oppose bodily autonomy; we just mistakenly think that the unborn is a different body (assuming we're wrong for the sake of argument).Of course, you can refuse to accept this and desperately cling to your belief that those who disagree with you must somehow be sexist and hateful and oppose bodily autonomy. If so I have a simple question for you: according to gallup, 51% of women consider themselves to be pro-life.Do they oppose their own bodily autonomy and consider themselves to be second-class citizens? If not, then how can you logically maintain that men who oppose abortion do think those things? If you do think that pro-life women don't think they're second-class citizens but pro-life men do, then why does the difference in their chromosomes and genitals change the logic of the situation?
Tell me: do the majority of women believe they don't have bodily autonomy? Your accusations are blatantly ridiculous.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Ok, I looked back at your analysis. You did have the right reasons for me, your reason for Speed was ok, but there were others doing the same thing. I don't know about your reason for Supa because I don't feel like digging up his analysis to see if you described it accurately in your reads. I got lucky enough finding your analysis. I think I have to agree with you, though. You were much more perceptive than other players were.
Created:
Posted in:
I'm curious to see what everyone else thought. I want to hear how completely wrong and stupid my analysis was, and how they would have won if X, Y, and Z had happened instead.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@warren42
The full list of roles will be openly known. I will post it in the signups.
That sounds like a big plus and minus. I think I prefer the closed setup, but I can see how that could be good. It would just be different game dynamic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@warren42
(including spectators)
Can you tell us who and why they didn't suspect him, and who they suspected instead?
Created:
Posted in:
Press cop speed, speed kill press
That was in the nick of time.
Created:
Posted in:
oro watch press
I'm really glad Speed decided to kill oro first.
Created:
Posted in:
Hah! I get to post the first wall of text!
Victory is sweet, especially in the form of an epic comeback.
So what happened in this game that made a perfect start for town go completely off the tracks?
DP1:
I made a noob mistake by claiming vanilla with only 1-2 votes on me,and received exactly what I deserved. However, I was able to defend myself for 30+ pages before the inevitable consequences of my foolishness caught up with me. While I could not save myself, my defense did something with unpredictable consequences: it sold Lunatic on my innocence. Frankly, the case against me was weak. But as seven voters correctly recognized, it was still the best case available. But before that could happen, Lunatic launched a campaign to lynch A-R-O-S-E based on some legitimate but shaky behavioral analysis. This proved to have dire consequences for town.
NP1: ILikePie was killed. He had to die because his top three scum reads were myself, Supa, and Speed. He was right for the wrong reasons, but it wouldn’t save us simply because we got lynched for the wrong reasons.
DP2:
At the beginning of this DP, it looked like town was about to descend into chaos when, to the collective despair and horror of us mafia, Supa followed in my footsteps by making a horrible blunder. Once again, the inevitable happened. But once again, it did not end before Lunatic again shot himself in the foot by VTLing Supa after he was already lynched.
NP2: WaterPhoenix had been confirmed as town by PressF, so he had to die. At this point, the mood in the mafia chat was pretty low.
DP3:
Finally,the tensions within the town that had been simmering were unleashed. Since Lunatic had twice shot himself in the foot with the Arose campaign and the late VTL, he was nearly mislynched in an ugly dogfight with Wylted and drafterman. The amount of tunneling in this and all subsequent rounds was unbelievable. Drafter had launched himself into a kamikaze attack against Lunatic, making himself look scummy and leading to his own lynch.
NP3:
Since Wylted, as a tracker, was essentially a cop, he had to die.
DP4:
What happened here, town? A no lynch? Participation is not optional if you want to win.
NP4: Oromagi had to be killed because we couldn’t take the risk that he was watching when we killed the cop.
DP5:
Again,you do have to participate…
NP5:PressF had to die because he was the cop.
DP6:
At least town put some thought into the VTNL. Given that Airmax wasn’t hated at LYLO, this was the best possible option. However, town didn’t know that.
NP6:
GP had to go because, if anyone had bothered to look, Wylted had tracked him and town-confirmed him several days earlier. Also, since Lunatic didn’t know that max wasn’t hated at LYLO, we figured it would easy to persuade him to VTL max. In fact, he had already convinced himself (although, given the info he had, it was by far his best choice).
DP7:
Largely self-explanatory. However, it probably would have been smart to wait for Airmax to give a defense of himself. It probably would have made no difference in the end, but it would have increased town’s chances.
Players:
Wylted, drafter, GP: I don’t mean to be rude, but what were you thinking?You can never have 100% certainty based purely on behavior.
PressF4Respect: That role claim in DP1 was absolutely brilliant. It looked exactly like an inept PGO trying to trick us into Nking him. We didn’t figure it out till DP3, and then we had to kill Wylted and Oromagi first. You just got unlucky that you never copped Speed until it was too late. Also, I must congratulate you for not losing your mind. You were a voice of reason. However, you largely stayed silent. Activity is good,especially when everyone else is tunneling.
Lunatic: Lunatic was the tragic hero of the town. Throughout the whole game,he was logical and genuinely scum-hunting. However, he shot himself inthe foot early on with the Arose campaign, the late VTL, and the mudslinging with Wylted and drafter. In the last few rounds, he figured out a brilliant plan to catch the last scum. It was his best option. But in a sickening irony, it was also his doom, because he was missing the vital info that Max wasn’t hated at LYLO.
Airmax: When did you know that you weren’t hated at LYLO, and why didn’t you say so when you knew?
Everyone else: While you can get away with inactivity in DP1 when 6 players rack up 30+ pages, you can’t get away with it when those players are dead. You have to be active to win.
TownMVP: Lunatic, with PressF second.
MafiaMVP: Speed. (You didn’t think I would pick an idiot who claimed vanilla or a guy who misread a PM and got himself lynched, did you?)
Seriously though, Speed’s play was excellent throughout the game.
Overall, I think the balance was impossible to determine since two mafia, both with powerful roles, died in the first round. Both sides were highly or even over-powered.
It was unbalanced in a rather bizarre way. The power roles coincided with some of the most active players, so when they were killed, there were was only one really active player left.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Is a lie. The misnamed "pro-lifers" entire argument is that women do not have bodily autonomy, they are not permitted to have an unwanted growth removed from their body because some primitive ignorant superstitious savage makes absurd rules.You believe you have a right over women's bodies.Do you support the death penalty?Did you support the American wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?<br>
It is not a lie. You did not refute a single thing I said. Pro-lifers have never once argued that women don't have bodily autonomy, and I know that I don't have a right over women's bodies. Again:
People like you are one of the biggest reasons Trump was elected (Disclaimer: I don't support Trump). You disagree about abortion? You think women are second-class citizens who don't deserve the same rights as men! You want immigration to be legal? You're a racist! You don't think men can become women? You're a bigot! (I'm speaking in generalizations. I'm not saying that you believe any of these things, except the one about about abortion because you said that yourself, though in different words.)The point is that many people are sick and tired of self-righteous liberals who condemn everyone who disagrees as a bad person, rather than just a person with bad ideas. Pro-life people don't oppose women's bodily autonomy; they believe that the unborn is a different body entirely. Now, you can say, "That's nonsense! Fetuses are part of the woman's body!" or "It's in the woman's body, so it's her choice." Consequently, people who oppose abortion oppose bodily autonomy. However, that would only be true if they agreed with you on those things. Let me use an analogy to show what I mean.Suppose there was this guy who said the earth was flat, and someone accused him of lying. The flat-earther replied, "I'm not lying. I really believe the earth is flat." Even though he would be wrong, that would not make him a liar; he's just ignorant and misguided. If we pro-lifers are wrong, the same is true of us. We don't oppose bodily autonomy; we just mistakenly think that the unborn is a different body (assuming we're wrong for the sake of argument).Of course, you can refuse to accept this and desperately cling to your belief that those who disagree with you must somehow be sexist and hateful and oppose bodily autonomy. If so I have a simple question for you: according to gallup, 51% of women consider themselves to be pro-life.Do they oppose their own bodily autonomy and consider themselves to be second-class citizens? If not, then how can you logically maintain that men who oppose abortion do think those things? If you do think that pro-life women don't think they're second-class citizens but pro-life men do, then why does the difference in their chromosomes and genitals change the logic of the situation?
Tell me: do the majority of women believe they don't have bodily autonomy? Your accusations are blatantly ridiculous.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I aint playing another one with this crowd anyway.
Come on. You did well. Don't let inactive players drag you down. Just policy lynch them. ;)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I'm not sure town would have been able to do anything at all with both you and drafter dead.
Created: