oromagi

-->

@Crocodile

I wouldn't consider myself a noob,

certainly not if we're applying the less than three rule of noobness.

but I'm not as good as the likes of blahmonkey or Ragnar

blamonkey and join the club. My religion dictates that when I finally beat Ragnar I am instantly reborn into the 89th realm with perfect understanding and no desire to ever argue any point ever again.

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

I found an online guide. It reads this.

I'd like to see an all logical fallacy debate. All arguments must follow the form of at least one logical fallacy. All logical fallacies must be identified as part of the argument. VOTERS judge evaluate according to which debater made the most convincing invalid conclusion.

Created:

5 years ago

2

Posted in:

-->

@User_2006

I would debate this. I think F is still working out the main thrust of his complaint.

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@PressF4Respect

-> @oromagi
Before we continue, I must highlight a distinction between what you are talking about and noob sniping. What you seem to be implying with your response is that I believe that ALL Pro-Newbie debate interactions constitute noob sniping. This is not what noob sniping is, nor is it what I am arguing. It is paramount to note that, in regards to the learning process, there are two main parts to a debate. One is the debate itself, and the other is the feedback that the debaters receive after the debate (on what they did well, what they could improve on, etc). The interaction itself isn't what makes noob sniping bad. What makes it morally repugnant in my eyes is the lack of feedback that the new debater receives from the experienced one after they are finished. Instead of teaching the noob what they could improve on, the noob sniper will simply milk them for wins without providing any constructive criticism whatsoever. Just like having your face smashed into a locker by a bully doesn't teach you self-defence, noob sniping doesn't teach the noob how to properly debate. Instead, it turns them into the noob sniper's punching bag. This is the key difference between regular Pro-Noob debates and noob snipes.

Your re-defintion of "noob sniping," strikes me as a solely tactical attempt to reset terms. I have never before seen any indication that the term includes some pedagogic component. For example, the DDO Wiki definition you provided makes no mention that lack of feedback might be an essential element of noob snipe. That said, I'm not really one who keeps up with the complex intercontexts of social media jargon so perhaps you can provide a few prior examples where "noob sniping" was clearly defined as a question of training rather than merely critique of experience matching up vs inexperience. Right now, I'm thinking "oh, F just wants so new ground in which to plant moral objection" which then makes me think, "I guess that means he bought my argument in the last post or else he'd be continuing those arguments rather than looking for new ones"

The good news is that if you really meant this:

What makes it morally repugnant in my eyes is the lack of feedback that the new debater receives from the experienced one after they are finished.

Then as far as I can tell our website is fairly noopsnipe-free. I would say that experienced users on this site do a far, far better job at offering feedback than any other debate website I've visited. I count at least 13 times new users PM'd me for advice on good debating which I do a lot generally and sometimes specifically. Look at the beginning of this topic where I tried to give some practical advice about winning. Look at post #31 where our illustrious all-medal-er RationalMadman offers the benefit of his experience to a new user. Look at Ragnar's docs on format and Kritik, the way he gently nudges noob debate topics for clarity or falsifiability. If the moral concern here is truly lack of feedback (as you have newly posited) then I'm pretty encouraged by how little noob sniping can be found on this site.

Then what did you mean by:

The most relevant framework is the DebateArt.com Code of Conduct which places no restrictions on debates by relative experience. I can't think of any overarching moral principle that might prohibit such engagement or over-ride the CoC.

Just what I say. Perhaps it over-lawyerly of me to turn to the rulebook as a starting place for in-game moral questions but I start with the rulebook for all in-game questions, moral or otherwise. Then I note that one should think bigger picture than rulebooks before lauching into my pricipalistic approach to the question. You have mis-read the sentence to mean CoC=moral. Since I examine the moral question by four different criteria beginning in the very next sentence without any reliance on the Code of Conduct, I'll lay that misunderstanding at your door for correction.

You are the one making oughts here, right?

IS: You don't give noobs feedback

OUGHT:You ought not to noob snipe

Have I suggested some ought in this exchange? Hume's Is-Ought Guillotine has no application to my defense.

Aren't you obligated to explain how lack of feedback amounts to some moral fault?

Yes, but you do understand how to build a debate in a way that benefits you, as you stated here:
If you are making a debate, always define terms, concepts and BoP to your advantage.

So, you've shifted your moral hockey puck to "lack of feedback" and then you've chosen to quote from a fairly long piece of advice I gave to fellow debaters just a few months back. Feedback by me that you've obviously read. Maybe you ought to stick that puck another meter by changing your complaint to "not enough feedback, morally speaking"

Your argument here is entirely contingent on circumstance, as well as your desire to have 100 debates. This does not make noob sniping morally okay.

IS: Your argument is selfish and circumstantial

OUGHT:You ought not to noob snipe

Hume would ask, "What is the source of this knowledge? How are we determining what's morally ok?" Aren't you obligated to explain how setting goals and modifying approaches according to circumstance amounts to some moral fault?

This is an argumentum ad populum. Just because most of the highly ranked debaters did that doesn't automatically make it okay.

Not automatically and that's hardly the whole of the argument but I think it 100% appropriate to be sensitive to site culture. Learning and reinforcing site norms is an essential part of society building in the social media sense.

I agree. When noobs can learn something from the debates, they will know how to improve their arguments. That, in turn, will improve the community as a whole and raise the site's reputation.

So you concede the benefits of noob sniping as I described. By non-response, you also seem to agree that noop-sniping does not violate noob autonomy. You also seem to agree that the harms are minor since the worst consequence you've identified so far is that a new user might not return to the site. Of course, new users drift away the site pretty regularly, weekly at least, few of whom have ever engaged in a debate with an experienced user. The harm is so minor that we can't really discern the spiping harm from the background radiation of ennui.

Please explain how acting selfishly in the context of this issue is moral, even if the motivation is tainted.

I already have POST #27. You agreed that self-improvement and elevation of site quality were positive moral benefits. This debater believes that practice and self-improvement in nearly any skill set is a positive moral benefit.

The problem with this is that in most cases, we aren't talking about noobs who only fall prey to noob sniping once. Rather, we are talking about cases where it happens over, and over, and over again. At some point, anyone in that situation would find it to be too much and leave the site.

I defined noobs as <3 debaters which you have not protested. So by the time the user gets to that third "over again" she is no longer a noob. I have never seen a persistently poor debater who also demonstrated some interest in improving debate skills or even good faith engagement with the argument.

How would noob sniping, as defined in the first paragraph of this post, improve the site (especially when weighed against the negatives)?

I have objected to the addition of "lack of feedback" as an important aspect of noob-sniping. Further, I have argued that "lack of feedback" is less of a problem on this site than any other similar forum. Again, I addressed the morality of noob-sniping in POST#27. I have shown that the harms are minor and individual while the benefits are greater and collective.

Yes, but there would still have to be a legitimate concern in DDO for the Wiki to say that unless the Wiki author is completely lying.

Nope. You'd have to show that Ore_Ele's wiki entry

This is speculative.

Yes. I identified those sentences as speculation by beginning both sentences with "I think" We know that DDO tacitly permitted noob-sniping because DDO added a 25 pt advantage to instigators as a counterweight to noob snipes and by placing many active noob snipers at the top of the leaderboard. The ranking system was literally modified to accommodate noob sniping rather than any prohibition or exclusion or condemnation of the practice.

No, it's not. See paragraph #1 of this post.

...and my dismissal

When noobs can learn something from the debates, they will know how to improve their arguments. That, in turn, will improve the community as a whole and raise the site's reputation."

You are re-iterating my principle benefit from POST #27.

Genuine feedback.

I think post #6 is a pretty good example of genuine feedback. I think your new complaint is merit-less.

Sure. But with noob sniping, the noob doesn't gain practical experience.

POST #34 refutes you.

I don't know, because that isn't my point.

It's not your new point in post #34 (lack of feedback) but it was your main point in #28:

"There is also a very good case for not pitting a beer league hockey team against an NHL one."

I do have a plan, namely, having the pros tell them how they can improve.

Not a PRO. POST #6.

Yes, but the newcomers learn as time goes on. The same can't be said for the victims of noob sniping.

POST #34 refutes you.

Also, movies are scripted so where's the morality in that?

Film is often intended to appeal to and connect with human emotion. Movies can arouse aesthetic or moral feelings, and can be understood as a way of communicating these feelings. Sports movies in particular are usually grounded in some moral concern. Doug the Thug learns persistence. Rocky learns he can be more than just another bum from the neighborhood. Danny LaRusso learns to balance pride with restraint and fortitude. Yes movies are mostly scripted and most scripts promote some moral value to those with the ears to hear it.

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@User_2006

--> @oromagi
So, one reason my ranking was below 1500 was that I debate with good debaters like Fauxlaw and RM too much?

Sure, but you are already twenty times better at debating than you were 8 weeks ago. I am confident you will kick all our asses in the future.

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@PressF4Respect

Are you saying that because noob sniping isn't expressly stated as immoral in the CoC (or any other overarching principle that would supersede the CoC), it shouldn't be considered immoral?

no

Here's the problem. Many newbies don't know how to properly define expectations, rules, and definitions in a way that closes any potential loopholes (which predatory debaters [not naming names here] would be more than happy to exploit).

I don't know how to define a debate in a way that closes any potential loopholes either. I guess that puts me and the newbies in the same basket.

It can also set a bad precedent for those on the receiving end of this, as they could possibly develop the psyche that in order to win, they must target those lower than them and squish them like bugs in their arguments. They could go on to base their debate strategy entirely around hunting for noobs instead of debating those who can actually provide a good argument. This wouldn't benefit the debater at all. Rather, crushing lowlier debaters would only inflate their ego and give them a sense of false intellect. I don't doubt the educational benefits and high expectations that it can provide, but we cannot ignore the potential downsides that noob sniping could incur.

Figurative language aside, there is no other way to climb the leaderboards.

Of the 307 debaters who have participated in at least one debate, only 105 have a winning record (>1500)

Of these, I have debated 14, more than any other user except RM (who I have debated 3 times)
12 have been banned and further 43 have fewer than 3 debates

I don't want to spend all day counting, so let's take the top 30 debaters on the leaderboards and eliminate the 12 who have not initiated or accepted any debates in 2020.

Of these 18, I've already debated six, let's take those off the table
Of the remaining 12, there are six debaters who are so much better than me that I give myself almost no shot to beat, let's take those off the table

The remaining six have generated a total of 17 debates in 2020, 7 of which are truisms, god exists or abortion debates.
That leaves an avg of one debate every 16 days. Let's assume that half of those get accepted before I have a chance to see them- one debate every 32 that I have an opportunity to accept. Of these, let's generously offer that 1 in 10 are on a topic that is interesting to me and that I can think of a solid argument against. That's gives me one debate a year.

So, if I just stuck to the top 30 debaters at 2020 activity levels, I'd probably be accepting about one debate per year.

I accept way more debates than I make but every debate I've made on this site has had a rating minimum of 1500+ or better. That is, I've never allowed a user with a losing record to accept a debate I've made. New users (who start at 1500) are welcome, even encouraged but I'm not going patronize a new user with softball arguments.

Personally, I'd like to hit 100 debates this years. I'm going to try for 100-0 but I think the odds of getting there are almost nil. Its just a natural dynamic that the longer the winning streak, the greater the number and momentum of factors resist. If I just stick to top 30 debaters, I'm something like 20 years out from 100 at present activity levels. If I just stick to winning debaters with more than 3 debates, I'm something like 10 years out.

If we call <3 debates a noobie, 195 users (64%) are noobies

The 30 lowest ranked debaters have participated in 625 (52%) of all debates on this site.

I just can't reconcile being an active, winning debater on this site with also being a debater who only sticks to talented and experienced debaters.

You are essentially asking me to substantially reduce my activity level and also to pursue a losing strategy to set a better example for noobies but I want noobies to be active, winning debaters

which means selecting opponents that you are more likely to beat

which means accepting a fair number of crap debates and new user debates

The more activity this site has, the less valid this argument becomes but even on DDO (as we discussed above), most of the highly ranked debaters took on plenty of crap debaters and noobs.

I'll accept the inflated ego and false intellect critiques as warranted.

Using lofty arguments and flexing your intellectual might doesn't benefit them in the slightest,

Disagree. As I said above, I think setting a higher level of expectation encourages debaters to improve performance and improves the reputation of this site beyond the usual debate site standard- which effectively amounts to "mostly trolls howling past one another"

and extracting personal benefit from that is selfish by definition.

Agreed but not all selfish acts are immoral and many selfish acts are also moral, even if the motivation is tainted.

There is a chance for real harm. If someone created debates just to have them noob sniped, then they would begin to wonder what the point of creating a debate is. That could turn them away from DART, and potentially away from debating as a whole.

Sorry, I am not a "safe spaces," participant trophy kind of guy. I want my fellow debaters to be able to take a punch without quitting and I don't mind helping to weed out those who can't.

In fact, this was explicitly listed as a concern by the DDO Wiki.

I don't think its not a legitimate concern individually, I just don't think the weight of that concern is greater than improving the site overall.

Let's note:

DDO wiki was not DDO.
I think 9SpaceKing is the founder of that Wiki (he is certainly one of the 5 admins and the one who wrote the welcome page and promoted it on DDO), so I think the proper context is less about any authentic concern and more about Ore_Ele trolling a fellow top debater.

I agree that winning is the product of greater effort if the person exerting that effort knows how to do so properly, which, being new to the site, you wouldn't expect them to do.

So your plan is to teach newcomers that low effort can win debates by isolating lower efforts from higher efforts. What are the benefits in your plan? What will motivate newcomers to improve their efforts using your plan? Personally, I have seen a greater proportion of good effort arguments from first time debaters than from experienced debaters, many of whom prefer to drop any serious challenge.

Does this mitigate the advantage of actually knowing how to properly debate online? No.

Nor should it. If people who know how to debate don't have an appreciable advantage over people who don't know how to debate then wtf is the point of practicing to gain experience? What is the advantage of insulating a group of new users who don't know how to debate from loss? Your answer seems to be that they'll stick around longer but you don't seem to have a plan for teaching them how to 'properly' debate. Again, you seem to be arguing for degradation of quality and decreased engagement.

There is also a very good case for not pitting a beer league hockey team against an NHL one.

Sure, but we are all in one small beer league here. None of us are being paid and most of us are drunk. Should the Angry Beavers abstain from playing the Beached Whalers just because the Beavers were undefeated last year and the Whalers are new? If the Whalers only play other new teams when do they learn what level of effort and talent is needed to beat the Beavers? In the best sports movies, the newcomer always gets slapped down by a top team before discovering what they need to do to overcome and achieve victory.

With your plan, the Halifax Highlanders hire an enforcer who already knows how to skate and Doug the Thug stays a bouncer.

With your plan, Apollo Creed fights Frazier and Rocky remains a debt collector.

With your plan, the Cobra Kai sticks to black belts and Danny LaRusso never learns the crane technique

Where's the morality in that?

F

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

confession

-->

@skittlez09

welcome back! I never guessed

as pinkfreud08 used to say, "that's poor conduct" lol

I did the same thing on DDO years back. Went away for 4 years and came back as Levi_Smiles for a while. As long as you're not voting for yourself or deceiving people I think its mostly fine. Wylted reincarnates regularly but he can't conceal his most offensive impulses for very long

I hope you dumped that abusive old bf and found an upgrade by now.

Created:

5 years ago

2

Posted in:

-->

@PressF4Respect

Okay, but do you think noob sniping is ok, morally?

Well, yes. The most relevant framework is the DebateArt.com Code of Conduct which places no restrictions on debates by relative experience. I can't think of any overarching moral principle that might prohibit such engagement or over-ride the CoC.

Lets examine the question via the four principles

AUTONOMY

Does accepting a debate from a newbie constitute undue coercion or pressure? No. In most cases, the new member has initiated the debate and had the chance to set the rules of engagement. I try hard to follow the initiators rules even if I think those rules are unwarranted. Likewise, if I initiate the debate, I define my expectations and any acceptance of the debate should include acceptance of those terms.

BENEFIT

Beyond the obvious educational benefits, I think early engagement between experienced and inexperienced debaters sets a higher level of expectation for effort and quality argument here than on other sites. Obviously, there's no enforcement of this dynamic- just a gentle promotion of the idea that if you're just going to create debates to fuck around, users like RM and myself will work to extract personal benefit while giving a slacker or troll as little satisfaction as possible.

MALEFICENCE

Considering that the entire enterprise is practice & exercise, I see little chance for real harm. All practice, all exercise in any skill set is generally beneficial

JUSTICE

Are the costs and benefits distributed equally? In the long term, yes. Nobody has an equal right to win here nor should they. Yes, more experience and greater effort provide an advantage in debate and a newbie might not have the same appreciation for those advantages but that appreciation is usually born out of defeat and seldom gained by an easy win. Besides, there is always the balancing benefit of the underdog effect and the disadvantage that familiarity breeds contempt for long time players.

In most competitions, we have little moral problem with matching rookies vs. veterans. A good argument might be made for making baseball like minor leagues but in a such a hypothetical, this minor league debater would never have made it to the higher rungs.

I take it that you think there is some moral dilemma here. Care to make that case?

F

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@PressF4Respect

--> @oromagi
Wasn't noob sniping generally frowned upon in DDO?

also, was anything ever generally frowned upon on DDO? One could post instructions for making a homemade atomic detonator on that site and still be unlikely to merit a comment.

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@PressF4Respect

nope. bsh, ragnar, imabench, etc had no problem with shredding me to pieces in my early day on that site. On this site, if I only debated non-noobs I wouldn't get to 100 debates for decades.

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

The debate system however does suffer from the very voting system itself. A vote in favor of an argument neither validates nor informs its credibility

Nor should it. We are practicing at debate, not reinforcing our own personal bias. If I had to vote by validity alone I'd often vote against my own arguments. As I say above, we don't even have to win the argument to win the debate under the present system. I'd like to see a vote system that rewards cogent formatting and excellence in composition. I'd also like to see a degree of difficulty modifier.

I'd point out that AKmath is a very smart debater who just doesn't seem to care much about completion. Mharman has many excellent debates on DDO so I'm lucky he gave up when he did.

I am also well aware of your excellence as a debater so in principle I ought not to consider a debate vs. you without some major advantage in argument- an advantage which I doubt you'd accept. In practice, however, talented debaters are more fun to fight. I like my position on all three of the debates you mention although my arguments could use some improvement (for which I'm sure you'd provide motivation). My mom died last week and I have a few busy weeks of arrangements and packing up her things etc. ahead but let's try to find something to debate in July.

I value the respect you offered, thanks for it.

Created:

5 years ago

1

Posted in:

Napoelon was the good guy in the napoleonic wars

I call Napoleon more of a second Caesar than a proto-Hitler although there are inevitable parallels. I tend to sympathize with Beethoven’s point of view who first saw Napoleons career as the greatest modernizing influence in European history and after he marched on Russia the greatest monster. Undeniably brilliant, romantic, quintessentially French in spite of not being a Frenchman.

Wikipedia:

British historian Andrew Roberts states: "The ideas that underpin our modern world—meritocracy, equality before the law, property rights, religious toleration, modern secular education, sound finances, and so on—were championed, consolidated, codified and geographically extended by Napoleon. To them he added a rational and efficient local administration, an end to rural banditry, the encouragement of science and the arts, the abolition of feudalism and the greatest codification of laws since the fall of the Roman Empire".

Created:

5 years ago

2

Posted in:

-->

@Christen

I accept the crap debates argument although none of us are gonna make 100 debates unless we pick up the gimmes when they present themselves. Even then, type1/sparrow proved to he could play the minefield with his game of thrones and smarter chimps debates. I think you are too dismissive of some these debates. Keep in mind RM was the top debater and I was the newbie when we did that autonomous vehicle debate and he made me WORK. He sort of threaded a few good arguments with a few throwaways and forced me to totally lay out his arguments so I could refute. I never should have accepted that Ali/Holyfield debate because he had a real perspective and I was reduced to quoting sports illustrated. I really lucked out that he had so many debates going that pulled out. I am fortunate that fauxlaw was new to the site when we debated IF and you might notice I haven’t taken him on since tho he has offered several times. I choose debates as much by topic as person but as I’ve said before the only way I maintain my streak is by knowing my betters and studiously avoiding them

Created:

5 years ago

3

Posted in:

-->

@User_2006

I agree. Christen shouldn’t underestimate the intimidation factor of being new to the site and having the top guy jump your debate- I thought User aquitted himself well

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Vader

I agree although I still think antifa is 90% FOX News histrionics and 10% Berkeley lesbian teenagers from 3 years ago

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@fauxlaw

Thanks, fauxlaw. I consider that high praise.

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

Themeless Mafia 1 - Day 3 & ENDGAME

-->

@Lunatic

I dont mind your objections. Its reasonable to promote more activity in a game even if less activity is clearly the better scum strategy. I have a hard time getting into games when theres nothing to figure out and the whole job is just to bicker and hope for some genuine scum slip. I am convinced that the best strategy for games without themes is to lay low, scum or no. The fighters tend to go down first. I think themeless games should be much shorter than themed games.

My mom died on Sunday morning and Ive been out with family visits, phone calls and getting as drunk as possible since. I had two debate args due today and I barely remember

but setting that aside I think you're right that I get shyer as scum and policy lynch in future is prob justified

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

Themeless Mafia 1 - Day 3 & ENDGAME

-->

@sui_generis

I think I’ve been blinded by Dani’s reasoning

VTL DANIELLE

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Lunatic

--> @oromagi
I'm not sure I think the case against Zaradi is sufficient
Feel free to offer why you think it isn't sufficient, proving you actually read it ;-)

Zaradi suggests power role in DP1 "hardclaiming"

Zaradi(Speedrace) now claims VANILLA

Zaradi did not hard claim, so not really caught in a lie but sus

town vanillas do sometimes hint at PRs tactically

If scum, Zaradi's motivation for hint is hard to credit

so I'm on the fence. I don't have high confidence Speed is scum(or town) but I don't think we are likely to see progress on any other front

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

im here. I'm not sure I think the case against Zaradi is sufficient but looking at the collapse of activity it may be the only lever for progressing the game.

Speed taking over increases my willingness but not for any rational cause. It's just that every time I play with Speed he is always scum and he always wins

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

Warren42 AMA

-->

@warren42

identify one favorite song

state your most prominent memory associated with that song

offer a short critical analysis of why that song great

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Danielle

Thx 4 repeating. I am sold that Zaradi is claiming something

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Danielle

Thx. So u r theorizing “if I get shot” = PR/ doc. Yes?

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Lunatic

Never mind I found where you think it was a breadcrumb

I still want post#.

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

Also no scum would ever make this claim

DP1 i blocked pie, pie died

DP2 i blocked ragnar, ragnar died

I’m making myself vulnerable to show I am town

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@PressF4Respect

Please explain what the connection is between this:

broke rouged lemon larch

and this:

umgah drone roleblocker

Already did- anagram. The point is to obscure the claim but also make it so there’s no possibility I was claiming something else at the top of game. I have been claiming umgah drone & RB since post #5

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@PressF4Respect

--> @oromagi
I'm voting for speed because speed's meta is rapidly becoming speed is always scum speed always wins
That is a pretty flimsy argument, ngl.

Flimsy but yet also the only argument anyone’s making

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@PressF4Respect

my species is known for practical jokes on other races, particularly the Spathi. therefore roleblocker because the pranks are rough on victims,

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Lucky

hi all

put my Mom in hospice tonight,

family is flying in so availability is going to be sketchy at best

Lucky can replace me if he wants but that may be tricky and I'll try to keep in

we're not allowed to be with her now and I could use the distraction

Ragnar's actions DP1 totally mystify me. Does anybody understand what he hoped would happen?

I have no super strong reads but I'm right now I'm down for lynching the argumentatives- TUF or coal

I just discovered tonight there is a spaceship themed cartoon app of mafia for kids called "amoung us"

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@PressF4Respect

I claimed fifth post of the game:

broke of all bad habits

rouged and coiffed up for the ball

lemon essence sensed by sinners

l'arch de triomphe conquers all

take the first word of each sentence and anagram

broke rouged lemon larch

umgah drone roleblocker

DP1 i blocked pie, pie died

DP2 i blocked ragnar, ragnar died

I'm voting for speed because speed's meta is rapidly becoming speed is always scum speed always wins

put my Mom in hospice today, she will likely pass tomorrow

All my family's flying in so availability is highly sketchy

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

VTL Speed

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

Joe Biden says that if you don't vote for him then you are not black

-->

@Vader

switch to Trump

drink yer bleach

Created:

5 years ago

1

Posted in:

-->

@Lunatic

Yeah, I guess it does lol. It's cover art for the Stand, the King book I am currently reading and loving.

fucking love the Stand. I know Boulder well- the house where Abigail lived, the bandshell, Chautauqua, etc Perfect book to be reading rn

"Cibola! My life for you!"

(boom)

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Lunatic

Your profile pic looks like luke skywalker fighting my profile pic

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@coal

It's only a handful of posts, you can read it for yourself.

The game is a bit stagnant.
I was absent there yesterday as well.
We are at MYLO.
I think Ragnar is obv scum who lynched a claimed BP at the moment this game started because he thought town was distracted.
The rest of town is unconvinced and
we're trying to decide whether to VTNL

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Lunatic

Also please for the love of god stop blindly following the post leader coal. Just because he has more time to post and is on virtually every page of the game doesn't mean what he is saying and doing is right. This will be clear when I flip, but think for your god damn selves. I am mostly referring to Oro and sui here. Ya'll straight turned into sheep at the end of this phase.

For me, coal & TUF are playing the same game- generate a lot of conflict and hope for revealing responses. I'm not crazy about his approach because it generates a lot of fluff and unsubstantiated allegation and internecine conflict with very little payoff. I like data. Right now, the only real data we have is that Ragnar claims that mafia must be x or y and we've made a lot of unconfirmed presumptions based on that one claim. Nothing that comes after Ragnar's claim improves Ragnar's claim which is suspicious but I'm not antagonistic to TUF's argument that PRs should remain quiet.

I want data and Ragnar has some. He can either convince us what he say is true or help confirm some thing by getting lynched. If anybody, I feel like I'm following Danielle rn because she is staying focused on the same data I am.

Created:

5 years ago

2

Posted in:

Star Control Mafia DP TWO

-->

@PressF4Respect

I honestly hope your mom gets better soon

Thanks for the kind thoughts. She's got heart failure, lung failure, kidney failure blind, senile, sepsis and too weak to feed herself. Somehow she doesn't have coronavirus although her nursing home and now hosptial have much coronavirus. I don't really think she'll get better. I mostly just hope she finds some peace soon

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

Star Control Mafia DP TWO

Doesn't look much has changed. I'm still high confidence lynch on Ragnar based on his ridiculous turn on User DP1.

VTL Ragnar

(un)Official Vote Count

Ragnar (4/4) - oromagi, oromagi, oromagi, oromagi

VTNL (1/4) - speed

oromagi (1/4) - pressF4

Speedrace (1/4) - cookie

Cookie (2/4) - ragnar, supa

and also VTL ragnar in the other game, too

Created:

5 years ago

1

Posted in:

Star Control Mafia DP TWO

-->

@PressF4Respect

--> @Ragnar
Wherever you are, I hope you're ok.

Also you should know that the mod confirmed you to be a commie bastard.
*OROMAGI QUIT THE SITE AND CRIED IN THE CORNER AFTER BEING BRANDED A COMMIE BASTARD*

Sorry guys. Sick mom makes my time very unpredictable. I am half Irish and a poet so I really have no defenses vs. commie bastard claims.

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

UNVOTE

VTL Ragnar

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4218/post-links/174856

Ragnar's roleblocker post:

Too much to get caught up on right now. I left at page 16, and we're on page 21.

Mafia is working to keep me at L-1, and I don't foresee that going away by pointing out the flawed logic on why this wagon was formed.

When I left, people were focusing on the question of whether or not Lucky assigned roles at random. It was random, I can say that with absolute certain.

Further, if mafia have a power role, it's blocker. Of course by saying this, I'll be dead by morning. I suggest voting for someone who has actually made scum slips.

Meaning that ragnar has ruled out column B based on his role which could only be Mason because Mason is the only role that doesn't iterate in Column B

That suggests two possible setups.

Column A & Row 3: Mafia Roleblocker, Mafia Goon, Town Mason x2, Vanilla Townie x 5

Column C & Row 3: Mafia Goon x 2, Town Mason x2, Vanilla Townie x 5

But the major utility of Mason is to form a town core.

If Ragnar was a mason, he would have discussed his decision with his partner and they together must have realized they'd have to come out together or stay in together.

Lack of confirmation definitely weakens Ragnar's claim

What was the value of claiming any PR yesterday?
Scum might like the idea of claiming mason, since a scum partner can claim confirmation

butt then again, where is Ragnar's scum partner?

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Danielle

--> @oromagi
Anybody want to give a summary while I read up?

Ragnar soft claimed mason but no one is confirming him. If you are a mason just respond by saying so ASAP so we can move on.

I am not Mason. I breadcrumbed my role early on & will reveal on demand from town. I saw Ragnar's scum must be roleblocker comment and wondered as much.

But that was yesterday. I wonder what about the utility of soft-claiming mason without confirmation but maybe that's addressed as I catch up

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

Hi, I'm here. I take care of my sick mom who's been in hospital for a month. In theory, I'm only allowed to visit one hour/ day and have little else on my schedule. In practice, every few days there's some new crisis and I try to spend as much time with her as I can get away with. I should have the rest of today for myself to sit at computer which is how long it may take me to catch up but no guarantees.

Anybody want to give a summary while I read up?

Created:

5 years ago

1

Posted in:

-->

@Lunatic

--> @oromagi
Well, he's usually pretty impervious to pressure although one game he crowed before the official vote count and gave away the game if I remember right....
???

I only partially remembered. January seems like a long time ago now.
Cap America- you were T'Challa Third Party lyncher.

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/3593/post-links/153481

Out of context that makes me sound really noobie, when in actuality, in 99% of games I would have met my win condition and won in that same scenario. I played to town's wincon after that fail though.

You totally had me on that train

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/3593/post-links/153626

-->

@Danielle

Remarkably, in that same Capt. America game I noticed that you get mentioned. ILikePie5 asking Singularity(Wylted) if he is you.

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/3593/post-links/153656

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in:

-->

@Lunatic

As far as Oromagi goes, I literally have never seen him play mafia. I've been playing mafia here since October, and his luck at not being mafia in any of the games is astronomical.

It is weird. However, I was scum briefly this week when I took over for WaterPhoenix the same night Wylted copped me. So I think that makes like 4 times now in maybe 45 games or so.

Created:

5 years ago

0

Posted in: