Total posts: 5,653
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
No. If Biden believes what he says is irrational, but it is otherwise observed as objective by others, it is Biden who is subjective, not objective. But I'm sone with this end of the string.
You said Biden believes what he says is rational, not irrational. You can't seem to keep things straight.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Joe Biden claiming he will beat Joe Biden is rational to somebody?Joe Biden claiming participation in a Harris administration is rational to somebody?Joe Biden claiming little children like rubbing his hairy legs is rational to somebody?You're kidding, right? How many witnesses make irrational objective?
If he believe it's rational, but it's objectively irrational, then he is misspeaking.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
So it's just irrational in your opinion, not objectively so?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
It is saying something he believes is perfectly rational that absolutely is not, such as "I'm running for US Senate" when a presidential candidate, reference to "the Harris administration" when he's te presidential candidate, "I will beat Joe Biden" when he is not running against Joe Biden, or, in the media's apology for "beating," he is to have said "I will be Joe Biden," which is a worse statement, because if he wasn't Joe Biden when that was said, who was he? Or confusing his wife with his sister. or talking about kids rubbing his hairy legs. Or..., or...., or....
But if he thinks it's perfectly rational but it's not, then what he is saying something other than he intends which is misspeaking. You've clearly said he isn't misspeaking, so you can't go down that route. Either he believes it is irrational and is saying it anyway, or he believes it's rational and it is. Which is it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
If it's not misspeaking, then what makes it a gem. When you say "Joe Biden did it again" what "again" are you talking about?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Ok, I didn’t say anything about “merely” misspeaks, just misspeaks, no qualifier. Do you think he misspeaks? As a reminder, misspeaking is when you say one thing but mean another. Does Biden do this?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
You literally are the person that started it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
You don't know? Your answer is not satisfactory. You seem to be convinced Biden misspeaks.
You're not?
You've answered you own question to your satisfaction. You will dismiss any other answer as I have dismissed yours.By the way, the answer, of course, is two. Failed anatomy?
I haven't dismissed anything. I just want to know if you believe Biden misspeaks.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
I don't know the answer to the question because it's nonsensical.
So, I answer your question, now answer mine.
Did Biden misspeak or not?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
You didn't answer the question. Did Biden misspeak or not?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
What I know is that you apparently root your sense of security by assuming strangers on the internet are less informed than you are.
Created:
Posted in:
Well it was released on October 29th, so that's a big clue as to what it was intended to be.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
You seem to be contradicting yourself, so I felt it was safest to just ask. The question stands.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Spoken like a true apologist. The problem, my friend, is that Hidin' Biden misspeaks more than he can offer a clear, concise sentence. His mind is missing spokes.
Wait, do you believe he misspoke or do you not believe he misspoke?
As for presidential pardons, I suggest you look at the record of the placeholder, Oba'a
And I suggest you look at what the current President is doing right now because, you know, that's what actually matters.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Dude I have an open invitation to explain to you why your play was bad that game that you won't take me up on.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
I love the idea of an all or mostly JOAT gane
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
I agree that all vanilla games are boring. I like themes and such. I just brought it up to show that Mafia can go from one extreme to the other. All vanillas are probably fun in-person (as when mafia was invented) but plays poorly online. At the other extreme we have role madness with elaborate PMs and arcane theme.
And everything in between. I agree that there are different ways to play and mod and design.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
I don't consider your Vigging of Supa to have been anti Town. He was Cult third for crying out loud.
Thirds are always a problem for Town because they quite often need to be eliminated (as with Cult, for instance) but killing them helps Mafia numbers-wise.
At worst it is the equivalent for a mislynch which, given the NL DP1, shouldn't have been that negative an impact for Town.
Town basically lost on two miskills in a 12p game.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
I 1,000% disagree with this. The next time I'm scum without a fake claim I probably won't even bother trying to look for one and che sera sera. It is so annoying that most games are primarily broken by theme analysis and character claims. Take last game for example. I don't know dick about anime so right off the bat I'm at a disadvantage. But suppose one of us scum was pressured to claim early on DP1.
I disagree that it's as broken as much as you think it is. More to my point is, why do we push for claims at all, then? Why do we treat later claims as more suspicious than earlier claims? Why do we put value in counter-claims?
If mafia is given fake claims as a matter of course then claims mean nothing. It makes pushing for claims a waste of time, it makes popcorn claiming completely pointless, and it eliminates the possibility of counter claims which are quite a big part of mafia.
I could have claimed a TV anime character only for people to realize on DP2 the town is all movie characters. Therefore I could have been found scum for no other reason than I picked a wrong character right off the bat. That's not scum hunting. That was town getting lucky.
I think that's part of the challenge of being mafia is that you have to figure out what the theme break is and find a claim. I think the game should be designed so that there are viable and believable fake claims for mafia, but I think they have to work to figure out what they are.
There should be a balance between claiming early and risking being counter claimed or making a bad thematic claim, but being town read if you claim successfully, versus waiting and seeing how the theme plays out to make a safer claim but having it not as strongly accepted by town. It is a trade off that players get to choose and adds a level of strategy.
You eliminate that entire decision making process by giving Mafia fake claims. It's helping them blend in with town in a game where their primary challenge is how well they can blend in with town.
It's stupid and barely even qualifies as the game of Mafia IMO,
Totally wrong. Mafia started out as only vanillas. There weren't things such as roles or characters and it was entirely a behavioral game. There was nothing to claim let alone fake-claim.
The Cop and Doctor roles came in to add some variation, but then games were all completely Open. There was nothing for Mafia to fake claim except Vanilla unless they wanted to out the Cop and/or Doctor and be counter claim. And indeed that was a big strategy. If doctor was dead, it would be fairly common for a Maf to claim cop to out the real cop and town has to decide which is which. In either event, the cop dies (either they mislynch them or mafia Nks them). Point is: no fake claims for mafia.
And while open setups are not unheard of in the role madness we have today, they exist and are not too uncommon and Open Setups, by design, prevent any fake claiming since all the roles are known in advance. Maf has to claim among them and risk being counter claimed. Usually the setup is designed so this isn't disastrous (either by having sufficient vanillas, or roles that inhibit the ability to test CCs, or make it unwise to mass claim).
The issue we have here are characters, justification, and fluff. Town gets so hyper about specific wording and justifications and such. I agree that the game should not turn on these but the solution is for mods to stop turning player PMs into snippets from their latest fan fiction and just make it simple.
Your character is CHARACTER.
Your role is ROLE. This is what it does.
Period.
That's why I have an entire spreadsheet with role PMs so it is impossible for my games to turn on specific wording and I have stopped providing justifications at all.
but that's how the majority of (especially early) lynches are decided. I think with a wide theme like Christmas scum probs shouldn't have been given fake claims, but really including a Hated was my big mistake. I honestly don't think you guys would have won if she wasn't Hated :P
I'd say it was the vote thief rather than the hated.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
@Lunatic
@Bullish
Am I off base with the above criticism?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@LikeMagic
As I said before, I’m not aware that it’s SOP to claim hated and it was your role that allowed us to win early. We were able to play as recklessly as we did because we knew your role.It is SOP.
I've been playing this game for almost a decade on this site and have never seen it SOP to claim it immediately.
and you played a role in the loss by not being able to get support for your point of view. Reads mean nothing if you can’t turn them into lynches and you failed to do so. It is a positive requirement on your part, as an unconfirmed player, to convince people to lynch your scum reads.I literally have asked for constructive feedback on how to better present my reads.
Every time I provide it, you say I'm insulting you. As I said, the first stop is to actually admit that your play wasn't perfect and to be open to the criticism you've receive. You ask for it, then when you get it, you become argumentative and defensive.
Instead I am being told my reads were baseless and to the extent they were right it was luck and not at all a reflection of a skill in scum hunting.
And it's impossible for that statement to be correct?
Instead you called people assholes.I only called you an asshole in response to a specific, unnecessarily antagonistic specific post
My post was completely in line with the tone of your post that it was in reply to. Tournabout is fair play.
And you claimed 100% accurate reads here:I was responding to something lunatic said about my "reads" on whiteflame. I have acknowledged multiple times that my read on Pie was almost full town. lIKE pie was top 3 townie in my analysis.
Ok, fair enough.
As a scum in this game, I’m perfectly happy with your play and was completely unphased by you scum reading me because you were unable to do anything with it. Not sure why you think I’m annoyed at that.Again, this is a very insulting thing to say and an absolutely unnecessary attempt to diminish me and make me feel small. It speaks more to your character that you feel the need to keep doing this, than it does to my actual quality and impact on the game.
It isn't an insult. You keep saying about how "nervous" and "annoyed" you made/are making me. I'm simply repudiating these claims. I was neither made nervous by you in the game nor am annoyed by you now. What does it say about your character that you feel the need to assert what negative feelings you believe you are inducing in them?
I fully believe your antagonistic and defensive behavior contributed to the inability of Town to form a cohesive entity in order to properly pressure and lynch people. Mechanically, I am not sure there was a path to a win here but you failed to adequately bond with people to form a voting bloc - including people who were willing to lynch the people you wanted to lynch! You took everything as an insult (as you are now) and were more worried about defending yourself and arguing your point of view then actually lynching scum.
And at the end of the day that's what counts: you're ability to get scum lynched. And that requires Town to go on the offensive. Rather than go on and on about why you're right and everyone else is wrong, find the common ground with people whose votes you need to get the people you want lynched, lynched. And you didn't do that.
That is your constructive criticism:
- Don't be so argumentative - you'll alienate the people you're arguing with and everyone else will just tune you out;
- Don't be so defensive - you're not being attacked nearly as much as you think you are and it puts focus on you, taking it away from other people;
- Stop giving a shit about being right - this is a game where a it's a job of a significant part of the player base to undermine you. Stop taking everything as a personal insult and move on.
- Find common ground - If you want scum lynched you need help from other people. So instead of acting like a person that has it all figured out and everyone should just follow your infallible lead, act like a person that needs help from other people. Because you do and you can't win without it.
- Remember that it is a team game - You're on a team, part of an affiliation. You win as a team. You lose as a team. Coming out and saying nothing was your fault and it was everyone else is being a poor team member and is poor sportsmanship.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WaterPhoenix
Because we saved her for the free game win on DP2
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@LikeMagic
It’s not ego to note that you did not, like you claim, make me nervous. You keep saying you want constructive feedback but are unwilling to even acknowledge that you might be wrong about something. Well, that’s the first step.
My second pointer to you would be to stop calling people assholes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@LikeMagic
As I said before, I’m not aware that it’s SOP to claim hated and it was your role that allowed us to win early. We were able to play as recklessly as we did because we knew your role. and you played a role in the loss by not being able to get support for your point of view. Reads mean nothing if you can’t turn them into lynches and you failed to do so. It is a positive requirement on your part, as an unconfirmed player, to convince people to lynch your scum reads.
Instead you called people assholes.
And you claimed 100% accurate reads here:
As a scum in this game, I’m perfectly happy with your play and was completely unphased by you scum reading me because you were unable to do anything with it. Not sure why you think I’m annoyed at that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@LikeMagic
So you want me to lie to soothe your feelings? You called me scum, sure. But you didn’t have me scared because I could see that your abrasive tone was counter productive to turning those reads into lynches, and it’s lynches that count. I was scared when Lunatic pressured me because he can gain a following. And did.
You can’t expect a warm reception when you literally blame the loss on everyone but yourself and basically imply you were perfect and everyone else was shit for not listening to you.
What reason did you give people to listen to you?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@LikeMagic
Your arrogance and inclination to disrespect is fascinating.
I would clarify someone saying that everyone except them deserves credit for the loss, falsely claiming 100% accurate reads, and then calling others assholes for disagreeing is arrogance and inclination to disrespect.
But I suppose an expert would be best in noticing it in others.
Created:
Posted in:
To the discussion at hand, I was a bit taken aback when Lunatic came out of left field and started pressuring me here:
I thought I would have to do some quick thinking.
I wouldn't say that Magic derailed the wagon on me, it just collapsed. It never really had any cohesion to begin with.
Created:
Posted in:
Even with less than 10 minutes left in the DP1, I was sweating that whiteflame was going to get lynched.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I basically just skated by the past two games as scum because I had to do 0 work. Supa didn't have a theme break and we were drowning in fake claims in this one. All I had to do was literally just not die.
I mean, in Supa's, I was practically begging town to lynch me and nothing happened.
Mafia inarguably has it too easy.
Created:
Posted in:
We had a boat load of realistic fake claims, so I wasn't entirely too worried about being pressured. Part of the reason Mafia shouldn't be given fake claims.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
He mispoke. You know, as people do. He meant a "one-trick pony."
Meanwhile Trump just pardoned 20 of his criminal lackeys. But yeah, let's focus on a slip of the tongue.
Created:
Posted in:
I find the KCA to not only be invalid, but unsound.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Crocodile
Sadolite neither knows nor cares what incubation periods or asymptomatic presentations are.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bullish
Only when we chose to use ninja . We had a strongman that we didn't know was useless.
Created:
Posted in:
I predict Magic will scumread me for the next 10 games out of principle.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
You did what you should have done. No accounting for legit mistakes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@LikeMagic
Setting aside the fact that you can be right for the wrong reasons, reads mean zilch if you can't convince anyone else of them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@LikeMagic
It's a complete wonder that Town didn't flock to your side.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
What would have happened if Supa actually recruited oro?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@That1User
Sure she did. But it was already over by then.
Created:
Posted in:
I forgot to mention that you should lynch a hated if there is a vote thief. My bad.
Created: