Total posts: 6,549
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
I'm personally a fan of more policy-based topics, though I'm open to other options. I'll think about adding to the list, but for now, I like most of these (the portion I like is listed below). Not sure how we're arranging who gets to be on what team, but probably best to randomize it between debates so that we get experience debating with different people as often as possible. Also, I'll volunteer to sit out the first debate unless someone is really nervous/uncomfortable and wants to take a backseat for the first one.
- Resolved: In a democracy, voting ought to be compulsory.
- Resolved: Developing countries should prioritize environmental protection over resource extraction when the two are in conflict
- Resolved: The United States should end its economic sanctions against Venezuela.
- Resolved: The European Union should join the Belt and Road Initiative.
- Resolved: The United Nations should grant India permanent membership on the Security Council.
- Resolved: The United States federal government should impose price controls on the pharmaceutical industry.
- Resolved: The United States ought to replace the Electoral College with a direct national popular vote.
- Resolved: The United States should replace means-tested welfare programs with a universal basic income
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
Clearly, she's too terrified to wade into this discussion. She knows we would crush/cut/cover(smother?) her at rock/paper/scissors, and thus that she stands no chance against us.
...But yeah, would be nice to get this going with the remaining claims.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
Then it's on.
Also, much as I'm having fun with this, don't want to flood this thread with our thing, so time to wait on those claims from Danielle and warren.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
You're on. I shall pick the battlefield and time: Discord, later today. Bring your second and be prepared to get your steps in because we're doing 10 paces.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
Ah, and at last the Waifu wars have come to DA. Nerd rage triggered.
Now, how do you want to do this? Slap fight or impotent, way too detailed debate over female anime characters that we would marry like Krieger from Archer?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
I mean, you're welcome to your wrong opinion, though I too am a history buff, hence the shared attraction.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
I do love Robin and Vivi. If I had to pick a favorite from One Piece (no easy task) it would be Robin as well, though if we're talking about ultimate Waifus, my personal choice is a dead heat between two characters who are also probably not in here: Yoko Littner from Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann and Kurisu Makise from Steins;Gate for almost ridiculously opposite reasons.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Pretty sure I don't have a vote up for anyone atm. The vote on warren is from Ragnar.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
IKR? Nami or Robin would have been easy choices, though personally I’d love to see a TP Boa Hancock with a Charmer role. That would be insane.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
That was pretty amazing, though One Piece in general is comedy gold. Watching Luffy try to push that zombie back into the ground at Thriller Bark had me in stitches.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
Yeah, I like her look better when she's older.
And I have two words for why you watched the filler: Ninja Ostrich. Soon as I saw that, I knew I'd reached peak filler. Pretty sure I cycled through the ending of 2001 A Space Odyssey like I had just glimpsed the goddamn monolith, giant space baby and all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Hey now, don’t speak ill of Hinata. She’s part of the “cute waifu” group.
Created:
Posted in:
Here are my reads up to now.
As I see it, MisterChris leans pretty heavily town. It's a strange claim, I agree, but it's no odder than the NP3 Bride we now know was in this game, and it would be a very strange claim. Meanwhile, we know that he visited Speedrace in NP1, which he validated. I didn't think he was the Oracle at that time (I had my suspicions that he was the Cop - Chika professes herself to be the "love detective" of the series and I thought that Supa might have been a bit cheeky), but it's not far off, and I find it hard to believe that he used a non-RB or -NK action to visit Speed that night. If someone has a role that would fit that MO, please let me know, but this is what I'm going off of for now.
I similarly am leaning town on Pie. I was pretty suspicious of him in the previous DP, but him coming up empty on NP2 indicates to me that he's not just the mafia NK. He could be playing this coyly, but he's clearly not the one who performed the NK unless he's the Ninja. I leave that open as a possibility, but it's at least as likely that his claim was accurate.
Very little to say about Ragnar. I'm still largely null on him. The Asuna character claim with the Motivator isn't the strangest thing we've seen so far, and there's little else to go on.
I'm still reading WP as town up to this point, though it's a very slight read. I have more trouble reconciling his actions over the past 2 NPs with someone who is actively trying to subvert town, though at the same time, the decision not to act NP2 could have been orchestrated to make him look less sus.
And finally, there's Draft. I've already made clear what I think about his claim and its timing. It is based largely on a hunch about what he was angling to do, but in general, I don't buy the story he's giving. I think he deliberately waited out the lynch after voting, and then used the opportunity to claim another role that seemed safe based on That1's role. I read him as scum, though it's not as strong a read as I'd like to have at this stage. I was considering tracking him in the last NP, and now I wish I'd gone that route.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
I can confirm that Chris visited Speedrace during NP1, so he's telling the truth there. Recall as well that Speed was able to use his Dreamer that NP, meaning that he was not role blocked. I'm trying to think of what other roles scum might use, but this made me read MisterChris as town.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Alright, I'll wait. Like I said, based on his choice of target and his character claim, I believe I know his role.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Excuse me, I misread. No, I don't think it's because you didn't unvote. I'm saying it's because you didn't provide support for That1's claim, which became the turning point for many of us on the lynch.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Basically, yeah. That's what I said in my initial post. I'm sure you'll have an excuse for why you weren't on over that period of time, so I can't prove that you were waiting out the lynch, but I believe that that's what happened.
Created:
Posted in:
I'll unvote for now to prevent an as yet uninformed hammer by mafia, though I still hold to my suspicions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I already said that I don't believe that you spent the entire period in between your last post in DP2 and the end of DP2 without checking in on the claims made. In effect, I'm basing this on a strong hunch, both built on the timing of your claim and assumptions (that I admit, could be inaccurate) about your activity yesterday.
As for clarifying what I said, I said that my being a tracker means that I have pointed out where two people were, one on NP1 and one on NP2. They can independently validate that I provided accurate reports. The only way to validate your claim is to lynch you because, if you were town, you almost certainly are not going to be the target of an NK now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I have two people who can verify based on their circumstances during those two nights, particularly MisterChris, though the absence of a second NK provides at least some confirmation that my tracking of Pie is accurate. You can't provide any verification until you are lynched (which, again, you seem to be eager to use a role claim to protect yourself from) or NK'd, and at this stage if you were town the latter won't happen unless mafia thinks you're lying to cover for a power role.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Because I find your claim to be opportunistic and don't buy it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I suppose it's possible that, since you didn't hop on after the Bride claim, you simply didn't see the claim. However, I see a post from you 8 minutes beforehand where you put down the vote on That1. Not saying you're sus for voting, but I am saying that it's oddly convenient that you just happened to take off at that point and not revisit the page at any point in the next 7+ hours because, if you had hopped on at any point during that period with the role claim you've given, you would have almost certainly called off the lynch. It seems incredibly opportunistic to use her role claim as a means to validate your own at this stage.
Your character claim makes sense and your role fits with it, but they're both coming so late that they could easily have been crafted carefully to achieve that. So, at least for now,
VTL Draft
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
@WaterPhoenix
I won't wait to be pushed.
I am Hinata Hyuga from Naruto. I wield the Byakugan (if you aren't familiar, it affords individuals a near-360 degree field of vision around themselves), which fits my role pretty well as I'm the tracker. I tracked two people:
MisterChris visited someone NP1.
ILikePie did not visit anyone last night.
I have thoughts about both of these results. The fact that Pie didn't visit anyone does alleviate some of my suspicions of him since this does eliminate the possibility of him being either the scum with the NK or the Serial Killer. As for MisterChris, yes, I am not divulging who he visited. I'm not necessarily looking for a role claim from him, however. Instead, I'd just like confirmation of who he visited and, assuming that the information he garnered then and probably on NP2 is important, I will push for a claim.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Username
@MisterChris
Thanks to both of you for your clarifications.
For me, blocks are pre-prepared responses to various arguments. They're good because without them you'll have to do all rebuttals to cases by thinking on your feet or cross-applying your own questionably relevant evidence, and so debaters will always be at a disadvantage on defense because offense will usually be the side with cards
See, I disagree here as well. That applies to canned, well-researched cases, but not to the cases generated in the kind of debate I'm talking about in this case. Con isn't at a disadvantage because they've had the same amount of time to prepare for the case that Pro is likely to run. That does make the use of canned cases really difficult for Con, but even then, I see a balancing act at play. Canned cases also come with canned rebuttals. Both sides have the same amount of time to prepare, so it's relatively balanced, but that partially depends on the topic.
All this being said, I'm still good with doing a single topic, I'm just suggesting an alternative that I'd prefer.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Username
I guess that could work but if you only have a bit of prep time you can't have any blocks and stock cases will probably be the only viable options. In addition I feel like a unified topic allows for a variety of perspectives on each and ability to prep for various opponents based on the cases that they're running
I think we have different ideas for what a "block" is in the context of a debate (my experience with a block is two speeches from the same side back-to-back, which I'm guessing is not what you're referencing here), so I can't speak to that. A lot of people do run stock cases, though there are easy work-arounds that prevent that kind of behavior (pick debate topics that aren't absurdly common and aren't too vague) and I've only rarely struggled to come up with a case on the fly.
I'm just generally not as big of a fan of a unified topic. That's almost certainly a result of my experiences, but I've generally found that unified topic debates can get pretty repetitive between rounds. That's not to say that there's no room for creativity and variety, but I've definitely had tournaments where there was great creativity and ones where there wasn't so much. You also run the risk of that single topic being Pro- or Con-slanted, which is, of course, a concern if you have multiple topics as well, but isn't as all-encompassing of a problem in that instance.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Username
Personally prefer changing up the topic between rounds and having short prep periods, but I'd consider doing a single topic.
Created:
Posted in:
I have a decent amount of experience in coaching debate as well. If people are interested in using this to prepare for tournaments or learning about various formats, I’d be happy to facilitate.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
My experience is almost all NPDA and BP (British Parliamentary debate - 4 teams of 2, 2 sides - it sounds complicated, but it's a lot of fun) with some small experience in Congress, Oratorical Interp, Duo and Impromptu speech. I've also judged PF, LD (did a couple of online debates in this) and Policy, so I'm familiar with the formats.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
PF, Parli or even Policy if people are up for it (that last one is not my cup of tea, personally, but to each their own). And yeah, that would require at least 4. A BP round would require 8, so I'm not going to suggest that unless we get a flood of interest.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
Could even do some team debates if people are interested. Haven’t found a good way to do them via text, but works perfectly fine live.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
I’d be down. Super rusty myself, could use the practice.
Created:
Posted in:
Look, wasn't going to say anything because I wasn't in this tournament... but I'd totally be the Bear Jew.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@That1User
I did all of this in an effort to being killed, and I end up being killed anyway, the push for me to claim from you and Speed brought me down, maybe don't randomly claim pressure next time
Yes, because Speed and I are responsible for you making a false claim that absolutely did not fit your character claim. We’re to blame when you could have refused to claim at all, a tactic that Draft used this very DP. We’re to blame for repeatedly contradicting yourself under pressure, for a soft claim that didn’t come across clearly at all, and for your repeatedly jumping ship to new lynch targets at the drop of a hat, often with little or even obviously contradictory statements to support them.
If you want to blame us for pushing on you, go right ahead, but that’s mafia. The game would be nothing without pressure. I’m not sure what you expected given your own behavior in response to that pressure, but getting flustered and pushing pretty much everyone ahead of you onto the chopping block is not the method to prevent yourself from getting lynched.
Created:
Posted in:
Well, it’s been fun having this conversation, but I can’t see any other choice being reasonable here. At most, I’m seeing some light scum leans from a couple of other people based on behavior, but the evidence against That1User is so much clearer. If she does flip town, then she played this very poorly, and I still won’t regret my decision. It’s the only reasonable one to make, esp. given that any scum haven’t used the obvious opportunity to hammer. Maybe scum are already on the vote, but frankly, even if they are, this was a given hours ago.
So, let’s end it.
VTL That1User
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
If Supa tells people they've been redirected then I feel like redirector is either a town role (because it doesn't help mafia at all), or I agree with you that mafia knows their targets will be informed of the redirect and can use that to their advantage somehow. Did WP clarify that he knew ahead of time his targets would be informed? (That doesn't necessarily reveal his affiliation - I'm curious though for my assessment.)
Yeah, I had those same thoughts about the utility of the role, though that makes me lean harder into thinking he's town. It seems to me that admitting that he was the redirector is just unnecessary and something that his scum partner(s) almost certainly would have advised him against. And no, WP did not clarify, though I very much doubt that he knew.
FWIW I just remembered that Pie had only claimed vig after someone said "if there's a vig claim now or I'll assume you're hostile TP" which is one of the reasons I put him in my willing to lynch pile. Still think that1user is the best option to lynch. I just remembered that.
I've generally been surprised that so many people have town read Pie, especially after that move. I'm more concerned with Draft in some ways, but I'm on the same page as you here as well. Don't think anyone should rule out Pie as scum or TP.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
Nvm scratch that my analysis about WP stands. It's helpful that he would redirect a kill from Speed, but in looking up the role it doesn't only apply to kills. What if a Tracker had targeted Speed but was redirected to Croc who didn't visit anyone, and Speed claimed in the DP that he had visited someone the night before. The Tracker might call it out as a lie. So I feel like interfering at all is very risky unless you're confident you're gonna redirect a NK.
I have my misgivings about WP, too, though I will note that, at least within the context of this game, if a Tracker had been redirected, they would have known about it. Supa clarified that anyone who had their role redirected would be alerted to said redirect. That being said, it's extremely likely that WP did not have that information before he redirected this night action, so that information should not inform any perception of WP's choice to redirect in NP1.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@That1User
Look, you clearly want to make a point that has no basis in this decision. You want to challenge Speed on his perception of this as a risk? Go ahead. It's not going to accomplish anything beyond possibly calling out a likely unimportant behavioral read from Speed, while it makes you look pedantic and defensive. He's not the only one who is suspicious of you, and you should know by now that he's not going to change his mind about this. The most you stand to gain from this is to put some suspicion on Speed, which may be important for later DPs, but not this one.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@That1User
By Speed's own logic, he doesn't consider this a risk, and therefore not a gambit. You can claim that there's a risk, but you can't just assume his mindset to suit your point.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@That1User
There's a point past which being antagonistic just makes us think we're progressively more justified in lynching you. Saying that Speed is scum because he persists in a vote that 3 other people share isn't a particularly persuasive argument to begin with, especially when there are yet more people waiting in the wings to lynch you now. Not saying there's a whole lot you could do to prevent a lynch at this point - I feel that boat has already sailed - but Speed is just going to laugh at this. You're not going to convince him to rescind his vote just because it potentially implicates him and the 5 other people who end up voting to lynch you. Even if it ends up being the case that you have been telling the truth, if your goal is to vindicate yourself, then you're backsliding.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
I'll need to check that out. My experience with Sci-Fi isn't particularly prolific, but I'm enjoying reading Ready Player Two right now (the first book is amazing, don't let the movie taint your perception).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Absolutely will talk about this with you sometime, sounds like we'd have some fun swapping recommendations.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
I’ll check it out. Enjoyed everything Brandon Sanderson, Robert Jordan, George R.R. Martin and Garth Nix, always interested to pick up a new fantasy epic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
1/3 of Empire of Storms, all of Tower of Dawn, and all of Kingdom of Ash
Hadn't heard of the Throne of Glass series before I looked this up. I take it because you're on the 5th book that it's a good read?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
Point taken. I'm also just generally finding no reason to reduce my suspicions of anything from this claim. If That1 really had this role, she would have posted more of the justification to support it. As it is, she just seems to be jumping to whatever makes her claim make more sense, and this was a misstep. If she had claimed Lover, I would be very inclined to shift my vote because that's what I thought she was when she said "i love icecream". This claim of Bride, especially NP3 Bride, makes no sense in that context. If this was her trying to sell a soft claim as town, she did a really poor job of it, and I can't fathom why she wouldn't have come clean on this sooner. She's not an NK target this early regardless (if her ability really didn't activate until NP3, they'd be in no rush), and the lynch is a far more proximal threat. Like Danielle, I'm just interested in seeing how people respond to it at this point, but the defenses that That1 is giving are just making it all the clearer for me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@That1User
But I really don't get this. You're outright telling us you CANNOT CONFIRM UNTIL NP3. You're asking who we want you to confirm, but any choice we make won't matter until the next NP. Essentially, you're asking us to have faith that you are the Bride until then, and since it's now happening as part of the NP rather than the Twilight Phase, it's entirely possible that whoever you choose will be NK'd during that phase, making the choice moot. So, even if our goal was to try to uncover someone, telling you who to target will only make that person a target.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@That1User
This soft claim was only supposed to make sense to Speed as dreamer
...Who hadn't used his role to target you in the previous NP, by his own admission. So, for some reason, you wanted Speed to target you in NP2, but also wanted to make a soft character claim that could be and was very easily misunderstood? Yeah, that makes sense.
I said protective in reference to sexual protection
...Wtf? Seriously, I have no clue what you're talking about here. It doesn't even align with your role. This would make more sense if you were talking about the Lover (and even then, it's a weird thing to say that has absolutely no bearing on the game), but you didn't claim Lover. Seriously, pick a lane.
I really, really did not want to claim bride and held it off for as long as possible to avoid being mafia NKd, that was my mistake
I'd say so. Yes, if that's your actual role, that's something you'd want to keep under your hat. But did you really expect to keep it a secret through two DPs of pressure?
Or scum already voted for me
Yeah, you've been pretty inconsistent on that. I'm still not entirely sure who you think is scum because there are so many on your scum tell list.
No, upon refusal it would be made known that they refuse the proposal, I have no idea why it would go into effect NP3, I guess it takes awhile for Rias to fall in love?
See, it's the NP3 thing that sets me on edge. You haven't given us information in your justification that says anything about her taking a while to fall in love. There's no indication for why this is here whatsoever, and I've never heard of an ability that activates that late beyond JOATs getting additional abilities as the game progresses. Again, maybe that's just me being uninformed, but this is so weird.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
At this point, if there is enough steam behind it, I'm willing to at least push Draft to L-1 to get a claim, though I think you're right that there isn't enough support for that. I'm still suspicious of Pie, though I don't have enough to go on there yet. Right now, my pick is still That1, and I do think a lynch is possible, though I still want more insight from others about the NP3 Bride claim.
Created: