Why Dyslexicon is a mafioso
Dyslexicon wrote: ↑Mon May 21, 2018 9:51 am
[VOTE:
Jimmeeeeeeeyyy] aubergine
On Day 1 there was a wagon on me that at one point reached 4 votes. If you assume for the sake of argument that I am a civilian, then it isn't hard to find room for opportunism in that. Dizzy's vote was either the third or fourth.
Dyslexicon wrote: ↑Mon May 21, 2018 8:31 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Mon May 21, 2018 11:46 am
[VOTE:
Dizzy] aubergine
Makes two nothing posts then hitches a ride on a wagon that threatens to mislynch the loudest civilian voice.
No.
We've been scum together, so you've seen my scum play, and this here is not it : p
I wanted to join a wagon, and especially your's since I love you so much, and then you could all gossip about it. You should know this. Don't you think you should know this?
In response to my initial criticism on that front, Dizzy was incredulous. He adopted a perspective that I wasn't getting something which ought to be obvious to me, or that I should be aware of already -- as though Dizzy's civilian designs behind dumping a wagon-building vote on me are clear from the start and shouldn't be questioned. That's silly.
[url=
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 21#p449621]POE list here is 7-deep, and really it ought to be called 9-deep. Even the middling civilian reads come with caveats. POE can't function when the vast majority of the living players are in the suspect pool, particularly when only two of them are mafia members.
Dyslexicon wrote: ↑Wed May 23, 2018 8:05 am
I was going to note some other things which I don't remember.
Quin is the only one defending the night kill as clever. Just sayinnnn.
If I'm Gladys Campbell, Floyd is a dentist.
This is a convenient claimed Gladys check. Using the ability on a non-poster is strategically agreeable, but that doesn't mean it's an honest effort to progress civilian activity -- Floyd is the least likely player to voice concern about this thing (if, for example, he is a Christian non-dentist) because he essentially doesn't exist.
I'll discuss the Night 2 check Dizzy provided here too for ease of understanding -- someone who was a non-dentist, but unnamed. This again ensures that no single individual who is subject to a claimed check can protest (because there
isn't an individual). This is ineffective cover
and can lead nowhere with regard to things like clears stemming from a Gladys death. There's no good reason to withhold this name
even in a cover effort, it's at best pointless. Even if a non-dentist cannot be conclusively identified as a Christian or as a mafioso, it is still
something -- and it can be particularly useful to the people who
are Christians. They have the best capacity to eliminate options and that information provides valuable data toward a total game view.
This is why I have suggested that of the two other players providing Gladys checks (Marmot and Dizzy) is a mafioso, Dizzy looks more likely to be malevolent in that effort (more than Marmot).
Dyslexicon wrote: ↑Sat May 26, 2018 7:50 pm
K, I’m not buying the Jimmey case at all. Will come back to this later.
What was the last game lapluie was scum in?
This was Dizzy's immediate response to the Day 3 pressure I felt, primarily from the case MP assembled against me. Dizzy's conclusion is correct, but it's also very frank -- wrong as he was, MP's case was well-conceived. I wasn't surprised after reading it that it caught on at least while I was unable to protest it. This is was the reason why my intuition suggested to me that someone defending me in spite of that case was bullshitting (which I have directly focused in Colin's direction, but can also apply to Dizzy). This also looms large later, and I'll explain why.
Dyslexicon wrote: ↑Sun May 27, 2018 4:09 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun May 27, 2018 11:38 amIt doesn’t logically fall apart. I am saying that if one of the people claiming Gladys Campbell checks is doing so dishonestly (neither for truth nor for cover), independent of other thread data, then you have that look. I don’t understand why you would say you checked a non-dentist without saying
who.
I don’t think the kills have your prints, so I am considering that. You’re not someone I want to lynch today. You’re a backburner concern.
I think nutella has looked quite authentic since she joined us. I have no gripes. Her vote is misplaced, but I don’t think she’s handled it in a way that is troublesome.
It does fall apart, because you start with an "if".
It's basically, if I'm scum, I'm scum. I don't understand you not understanding it. This role has one function, especially with the dentists dead. It can sort people into confirmed town and not confirmed town. The latter being worthless, as it's the same as what we all start with. So that's why I don't feel it's necessary to reveal, and again, I can talk more about this post game, but it isn't helpful now. It's basically a cop who only can confirm green results. When not having a green result, there's nothing to confirm. You not getting this actually gives me pause in regards to you. Even if what I said wasn't the case, why the quack would me not giving the name be any type of AI for me? You're probably right that I would do a cover thing if I was scum as well automatically when I saw you did it, cause I'm used to doing this. That makes it at worst NAI. And I don't think I should be all that hard to sort otherwise (but I'm biased etc).
It's funny, cause I had a twinge of paranoia for you not being paranoid of me at all earlier. But this just feels weird. Both this, and what you said regarding "someone defending me may engage in TMI" looks to me like plain unsound reasoning that I don't expect you engaging in. So me and Colin defended you from MP's accusations.
What's the point of stating that someone defending you may engage in TMI? Like, duh, if any of us are scum, yeah we are. It says nothing. It just creates doubt. Either you think I'm town/scum/unsure (same for Colin) or you don't. It's like both these arguments boils down to "if this person doing this thing is scum, then they are not doing it honestly". No shit, Sherlock.
Btw, I defended you from MP's accusations because I haven't felt disconnected to your behavior this game (apart from what's above now). And I don't know you as a player who would bus a teammate D1 like that. But maybe this is an exception. I don't know.
About Nutella - aight.
wolbre04 wrote: ↑Sun May 27, 2018 3:47 pm
Hey guys I'm a civ
<3
Dizzy, in protest of the concerns I raised about his Gladys check claims, begins to waver in their continuing defense of me. This is hard for me to take seriously. When confronted with a huge MP dogpee case against me, their immediate response was a total, abject dismissal. Then, when confronted with this relatively minor concern I expressed about them, they start to freak out. Moreover, that freakout is comprised of horrendous reductions of the logic I was presenting (highlighted in yellow). That is garbage.
There is no logical failure in this assertion:
"If there's a bad guy in Group of People Doing X, I am inclined to suspect Dizzy".
That is
not the same thing, or even close to the same thing, as "if Dizzy is scum, then Dizzy is scum". That is offensive nonsense and I will not stand for it.
The orange bit is even worse.
What is the point of stating that someone defending you may be engaging in TMI? --
WHAT? Allow me to translate:
What is the point of expressing a suspicion you have about a thing? "If the person doing this thing I find suspicious is mafia, then that person is mafia". This is the reduction being attributed to me, and it is
bullshit.
I acknowledge that this may all be miscommunication or something. So say your piece if you care to Dizzy, but for the moment this is the worst stuff in your post history to me.
Dyslexicon wrote: ↑Sun May 27, 2018 4:21 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun May 27, 2018 4:18 pm
Dizzy you don’t understand what I am saying and I don’t have time right now to explain it to you.
It doesn't really even matter to me right now lol.
I have to question then whether you cared about it in the first place.
Dyslexicon wrote: ↑Sun May 27, 2018 8:49 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun May 27, 2018 8:46 pm
Dyslexicon wrote: ↑Sun May 27, 2018 8:45 pm
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sun May 27, 2018 8:41 pm
Another angle to address while we're here and the wagons are split in two primary directions. Which one is more likely to be unlynchable? I understand it's difficult to tell, but I think it'd be prudent to try.
Lol what.
What?
How on earth can that be predicted in the very lucky case both are scum and why should we care. So, lol what.
Even if you don't know how to approach the concern I have presented, there's no good reason to shoot it down. I was trying to encourage thoroughness, and Dizzy shit on that.
Dyslexicon wrote: ↑Mon May 28, 2018 6:43 am
Jimmeey has been on a different planet since mid day 3. Just sayin.
What is your point?