Yes in the most simple terms I do. However your moronic way of putting it hardly justifies WHY I think that. Try reading the last sentence of my first paragraph in post #438 bucko.
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
No, they weren't presented equally, because I find my first idea to be more realistic. You're trying to make it seem like I'm 100% convinced that I think that's what happened, which clearly isn't true. It isn't likely for a doc to protect the mafia's target with so many people playing the game, or roleblock.No clue what I'm talking about? Sorry bro but just because two other possibilities of their doesn't mean they were presented equally. You first present the idea that the mafia did not nightkill as your conclusion. The other two possibilities are CLEARLY represented as an afterthought. THAT's what's suspicious. The way you worded that post it is clear that you favored for first proposition with no evidence to explain it. This supports my notion which you've managed to sweep to the side that such a decision could likely be reached as a result of direct involvement with night activity and the desire to dismiss such an activity immediately.
Seeing that I've now explained how it would work, there's nothing wrong with me presenting the idea. We shouldn't write it off.Furthermore, regardless of whether or not your language is overbearing, fierce, fiery, or passive, you're still presenting the idea. People read it and are perhaps convinced by it. Sure you weren't on the warpath or anything but that doesn't mean you didn't make the argument. If you define pushing as a more passionate argument then so be it, but frankly I don't give two ****s how you define it. The point is, and I'm clarifying my statement know, it's the mere fact that the idea was presented that constitutes a push, be it a "light' push at that. My point can't be discredited by semantic disagreement.
It doesn't matter if other people are still able to contribute. At the end of the day, the majority of the players should be posting to exchange ideas, question others, and, ultimately, lynch somebody. Like you said yourself, inactives reduce the information and opinion entering the game medium. That makes all the difference. Keeping inactives around to help the active people flounder around would only help the mafia. The less active the townies are, the less likely the town is to get something done.Inactives simply reduce the amount of information and opinion entering the game medium. How can they possibly directly detract from another player's ability to contribute, barring some kind of strange binding role?
Well now you see, we've reached an impasse. On this point it comes down to whether or not my belief is more convincing or yours is, to everyone else. Your reasoning that you present that idea because you believed it to be more realistic and my belief that you did it because, as GoldShadow so kindly restated for me, that you are privvy to mafiat information, are mutually exclusive. Neither or our stance can be disproved by the others. It's up to everyone else to decide which is more believable. And what do you mean by "write it off?" Dismiss it? I don't ever recall advocating the dismissal of your presented ideas. In fact, my entire argument has been bringing them to the forefront.No, they weren't presented equally, because I find my first idea to be more realistic. You're trying to make it seem like I'm 100% convinced that I think that's what happened, which clearly isn't true. It isn't likely for a doc to protect the mafia's target with so many people playing the game, or roleblock.Seeing that I've now explained how it would work, there's nothing wrong with me presenting the idea. We shouldn't write it off.
You've still got this wrong. I choose my words poorly when I said inactive "reduce" the amount of information in the game. What I should have said, is that their inactivity prevents the town from reaching its upward limit of potential commentary and feedback on any given day. In essence, inactives have no effect on the ability of others to contribute, they just don't contribute themselves which doesn't directly hurt the town, but it most certainly does not HELP. Where inactives DO hurt the town is in the night phase, during which they provide anti-town groups with easy, untraceable fodder, and by inflating the required number of votes to achieve lynch.It doesn't matter if other people are still able to contribute. At the end of the day, the majority of the players should be posting to exchange ideas, question others, and, ultimately, lynch somebody. Like you said yourself, inactives reduce the information and opinion entering the game medium. That makes all the difference. Keeping inactives around to help the active people flounder around would only help the mafia. The less active the townies are, the less likely the town is to get something done.
I really don't see what you're trying to tell me here. Again I must assume that by "written off" you mean dismissing your idea, the opposite of which I've been doing. I've never asserted that the ideas present by others should be dismissed either. My entire point has been it was YOUR passive dismissal of 2 of your 3 presented ideas that I found scummy.However, keep in mind that I'm not arguing that my idea is "better" or "more effective", as that wouldn't accomplish anything. I'm saying either one would've worked, and that they are both very possible. Suggesting alternative ideas to what happened last night. My point is, the idea I posted shouldn't be written off, nor am I saying that what other people have posted should be.
You're trying to make something out of nothing.
Guess we'll just have to wait for some more people to chime in before this gets anywhere.I can see where both sides are coming from. On the one hand, frozenflame brings up a valid point: that Marshigio seems to passively dismiss two ideas and favor one because he may have inside information about the Mafia's actions.
You totally missed the point. I never said that Marshigio said what the mafia did. I said that he passively dismissed two other viable possibilities for the night actions and favored one because he may have been privvy to mafiat knowledge. Whether that conclusion that he drew is what the mafia did, or not what they did is not the point.If Marshigio, being the experienced player that he is, was mafia, I really don't think he'd be telling us about what the mafia did, especially not if that is what they actually did. He just stated his opinion in a light, passive way. I don't find the Shigs suspicious for guessing the mafia's actions, nor do I find Frozenflame suspicious because of his attack.
You just haven't read anything and clearly have no idea what's going on.What Lom said basically. I throw out multiple ideas all the time, and I always have a favorite within. Stop trying to make something out of nothing (to steal words).
You obvoiusly didnt read my post and clearly dont understand me. I read everything and know what is going on.You just haven't read anything and clearly have no idea what's going on.
Even if he's mafia he might not be telling the truth. One possible scenario is that their hitman guy did get roleblocked. The mafia would be pretty much screwed if the roleblocker found their hitman the first night. So to distract the roleblocker they push the idea that the mafia simply chose not to kill, so that next night the roleblocker chooses someone else.If Marshigio, being the experienced player that he is, was mafia, I really don't think he'd be telling us about what the mafia did, especially not if that is what they actually did. He just stated his opinion in a light, passive way. I don't find the Shigs suspicious for guessing the mafia's actions, nor do I find Frozenflame suspicious because of his attack.
I'm not over complicating anything. The whole issue is very simple. I saw that Marshigio passively dismissed two viable potential explanations for the results of the night. I drew the conclusion that this could be a scum tell because such passive dismissal could be a result of being privvy to mafiat knowledge. Marshigio has defended himself by saying that he simply though that first idea to be "more realistic." Just because it's the simplest answer doesn't mean it's the right one, and if you think Occum's Razor is the ultimate authority here you're gravely mistaken.Moronic, heh.
One of the worst things you can do in a mafia game is to over complicate very simple things. I over simplfied to show you the other extreme which we both clearly saw was a very foolish way to look at things. Marshi's post I still don't concider very mafia-esce regardless but it is always strange to throw ideas out as though you know for a fact what is going on and what isn't.
In the end you are doing something very similar to what you accused Marshi of. Tunneling on a particular subject. Push for your points but widen your view; that is all I'm asking; playing similarly to you in pervious games would have cost me them (if they continued, lol)
Your wit is astounding. If you know what's going on, why don't you try addressing (or god forbid refuting) some of my points, as opposed to just copypasta-ing the points of the two posters ahead of you. I'd absolutely love to see a piece of trash like you try.You obvoiusly didnt read my post and clearly dont understand me. I read everything and know what is going on.
Well, Im sorry they posted first. And honestly, I dont care about your argument. It isnt a big deal to have more than one theory and prefering one. If you guys want to argue over something as stupid as that, go ahead and I will wait until you guys are done bickering so we can talk about something else.Your wit is astounding. If you know what's going on, why don't you try addressing (or god forbid refuting) some of my points, as opposed to just copypasta-ing the points of the two posters ahead of you. I'd absolutely love to see a piece of trash like you try.
Alright fine I don't argue with you but if I may I'd like to shed some light on the importance of the reasoning WHY Marshigio favors one idea over another. That's the central issue.OK, here's my input on the ongoing argument:
Frozenflame, who cares if Marshigio has several ideas and favors one? I DON'T. And don't argue with me because I won't respond!!!
They're not arguing because they believe it to be a pointless argument, not the reason you said. Besides, both players you mentioned have argued in the past.I really do despise the gameplay in this forum. Two people have come in and said "DON'T ARGUE WITH ME CAUSE I DON'T LIKE TO ARGUE"
Why do you guys keep preempting my deadlines?I am requesting a dead line.
I completely agree with Lombardi. I don't feel like I could add anything else and the only discussion is Frozenflame's accusation.I don't feel that I can add anything more here. Half the players are inactive, and the only discussion going on is about how Frozenflame is making something out of Marsh's minor slip-up with words.
Or, his reason for favoring the idea that the mafia chose not to kill is much more likely anyway than the other options he stated.It's also natural for people to favor one idea over another if they consciously are aware of information that would inform such a decision. People like different things for a REASON, and the idea I'm proposing is that that reason is one related to mafiat knowledge.
You are SO incredibly dumb. You've brought nothing new to the table.Or, his reason for favoring the idea that the mafia chose not to kill is much more likely anyway than the other options he stated.
The original post was this: "Guess the mafia went with the no nightkill route last evening, probably to let the town run around with as little info as possible. Or they were roleblocked or docblocked, but eh.
Sorry for the cult leader, one of the more interesting roles."
The idea that he didn't favor was that the mafia's kill was blocked by the doctor or roleblocker. Do you realize how unlikely that is? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume there are two roles in the game that could have stopped the nightkill. Both of those roles have 19 other players to choose from. They will each choose 1 out of 19, so that's 2/19. Then the mafia, assuming there are 4, to be fair, had 17 players to choose from. 1/17.
1/17 * 2/19 = 2/323. Simplified, that's a 1/162 chance that the mafia's kill was blocked. That's so incredibly unlikely that Marsh would have to be an idiot not to favor the other option! He made an educated guess on what the mafia did, and then mentioned that something else, while unlikely, could have happened.
If he truly was mafia and knew that the mafia didn't night kill, what reason could he possibly have for saying so? You are absolutely making something out of nothing. I agree to some degree that the significance of a scum tell is subjective to a certain degree, but if you get this extreme, it's rather ridiculous. What marsh originally said was almost completely normal, and somehow, around ten pages later, you think that because nothing else slightly suspicious is going on, that must be a scum tell. It isn't. You should just end it. Going by what you said, anything could be a scum tell! Your persistent attack on Marshigio could be a scumtell, since nothing else right now is.
We need to shift focus to what we should do about this deadline. Although I really don't see what we could accomplish in just a few hours. Unless activity picks up at an incredible rate, we're going to have a no-lynch automatically. Besides that, nobody is suspicious enough right now that such a speedy lynch could even take place.