Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 5, 2008 17:20:03 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Feb 5, 2008 17:20:03 GMT -5
<snip>Or are you just going to pester me repeatedly until I re-claim, Story? And if that's the case, then I want you to give me a DAMN good Townie reason for why I need to basically set myself up to die tonight. Because Pleo says you're lying.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 5, 2008 17:21:59 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Feb 5, 2008 17:21:59 GMT -5
Looking at the voting thing, the only thing that stands out to me is SantoRugger.
Who would you have voted for before the 24 hour deadline, Santo? As you don't vote before the 24 hour deadline, but you do pop in for the voting of Koldanar. I'd like to hear from you on your thoughts before the 24 hour deadline.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 5, 2008 17:22:57 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Feb 5, 2008 17:22:57 GMT -5
Because Pleo says you're lying. Whoa whoa whoa. Pleo is saying I'm lying about my abilities, i think. NOT the veracity of my Claim if I understand him.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 5, 2008 17:32:55 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Feb 5, 2008 17:32:55 GMT -5
Looking at the voting thing, the only thing that stands out to me is SantoRugger. Who would you have voted for before the 24 hour deadline, Santo? As you don't vote before the 24 hour deadline, but you do pop in for the voting of Koldanar. I'd like to hear from you on your thoughts before the 24 hour deadline. I don't really know. If I had a bead on somebody, I would have placed a vote for them. As it was, I was having too much fun drinking and riding my motorcycle between snowstorms (not at the same time!) to really develop a sense of who I thought was scum. I do have a feeling of who I think is town, and why, though, so I'd rather elaborate on that as soon as I gather some evidence to back it up.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 5, 2008 17:42:25 GMT -5
Post by sachertorte on Feb 5, 2008 17:42:25 GMT -5
Vote Count:
3 - RoOsh (storyteller0910, Pleonast, Santo Rugger)
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 5, 2008 17:47:29 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Feb 5, 2008 17:47:29 GMT -5
Because Pleo says you're lying. Whoa whoa whoa. Pleo is saying I'm lying about my abilities, i think. NOT the veracity of my Claim if I understand him. Well, if you're who you "claim" you are, and you're lying about your abilities, then the chaos and confusion you've caused in your wake are not at all pro-town, regardless of your alignment. If that's the case, at least three other people know you're not being truthful. Why should they not invoke the "lynch all liars" rule. If you are in the middle of some elaborate scheme to try and get some scum to false counterclaim now or down the line... then I don't know what to say. But I think you need to fess up now, because I agree that the mods wouldn't make such a toothless rule.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 5, 2008 18:09:56 GMT -5
Post by Hal Briston on Feb 5, 2008 18:09:56 GMT -5
Ok, back from playing my part in the baby's arrival, tending to my recuperating wife, bouncing off the fricking wall over the Giants winning the Super Bowl, and catching up on work.
Time for some Mafia! Sorry about being so absent yesterDay. Not sorry about advocating trying to pull one over on scum, however. It is, and always will be, a valid play. More as I catch up.
|
|
Death By Irony
FGM
The Former Mandate of Heaven/Current Gastard Night Mod
I'm my own mind-altering substance!
Posts: 109
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 5, 2008 18:25:29 GMT -5
Post by Death By Irony on Feb 5, 2008 18:25:29 GMT -5
Since Sach has already covered the top-of-the-page vote count, here's the top-of-the-page character introduction!Wikipedia wrote:Liu Shan, (commonly mispronounced as Liu Chan[1]), (207 – 271) was the second and last emperor of the Kingdom of Shu during the Three Kingdoms era of China. As he ascended the throne at the young age of sixteen, Liu Shan was entrusted to the care of a group of veteran ministers, including the Chancellor Zhuge Liang and Imperial Secretary Li Yan. During Liu Shan's reign, many campaigns were led against the Kingdom of Wei, primarily by Zhuge Liang and his successor Jiang Wei, but to little avail. Liu Shan eventually surrendered to the Kingdom of Wei in 263 after Deng Ai led a surprise attack on the Shu capital Chengdu. He was quickly relocated to Luoyang, capital of Wei, and enfeoffed as Duke Anle. There he enjoyed his last years peacefully before dying, most probably of natural cause, in 271.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 5, 2008 18:45:49 GMT -5
Post by Pollux Oil on Feb 5, 2008 18:45:49 GMT -5
Thus, at this point, Pleo and Roosh are both claiming to have made an inquiry of the gods, and received different answers. I can thus think of no conclusion other than that either Pleo or Roosh is lying. (Well, I guess the mods could be giving different answers to different people, but that would be nonsensical). Okay, I'm going to take the ball you hiked and run the other way with it. You've given your analysis as to why you think Roosh is the one lying, and you believe that Pleonast's claim is more believable. Let me take a stab at the possibility of Pleonast being the one who is a liar. So here's the set-up. Roosh has suddenly just pulled a loophole out of his ass and successfully not-claimed after consulting the God-Mods upstairs. Pleonast, a scum (for the sake of argument here), sees this and goes "oh shit." You see, because if Roosh has found this loophole that allows not-doctors to not-claim and yet keep their not-powers, the scum have suddenly lost a huge advantage that they once had. So Pleonast puts on his top hat and monocle, harumphs a few times, and says "Well I've talked to the mods too, and I got a different answer than Roosh." Suddenly the veracity of Roosh's claim is thrown into question. In addition, Pleonast's 'I've talked to the mods' explanation is more believable than Roosh's because "the mods put these rules in place to begin with! Why would they make the rule to begin with if this could happen anyway?" Now I sort of see this as a bump-set-spike manuever like there is in volleyball. Pleonast puts out the bump by putting Roosh's not-claim into question, then fades into the background. Story then comes in with the set, having had a whole Night to stew over the possibility that Roosh is lying. (Note: Story's set is completely independent of Pleonast's bump. I am not implying they are in cahoots or anything like that. Simply Pleonast put the ball in the air for anybody to hit next, and story was the first one to get there.) Finally, the spike happens when enough votes pile onto Roosh and he ends up lynched. Now, in this scenario Roosh is telling the truth with his not-claim. His role is revealed, and suddenly everybody (read: all the townies) that jumped on him feels sheepish because they all just lynched a weak doctor who was a townie. Pleonast is in the clear because hey, look, it was storyteller who led the charge against Roosh to begin with and he was the one dogging on Roosh. Hey, maybe storyteller is scum! *insert more mob mentality here* Is this idea just as plausible as "Roosh is scum and lying"? I think so. Just because Roosh is the liar is simpler to explain (Roosh lied to keep himself from being lynched) than the above explanation for why Pleonast would lie, doesn't mean it's the right explanation. I used to apply Occam's Razor to Mafia, but I've learned that Mafia is anything but simple most of the time.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 5, 2008 18:59:19 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Feb 5, 2008 18:59:19 GMT -5
The only problem I see with that analysis, atarus, is the fact that it doesn't make sense for a scum to make that play, given that they're working with teams of two. If we had a traditional scum team it would probably be worth trading a scum for a limited doc, but...well, look at it this way. Roosh gets lynched toDay. We see he was telling the truth. We then lynch Pleonast as a liar the next day, and he turns up scum. His scum partner now has to hope to survive to endgame in order for his faction to win. Not an even trade at all, even if Pleonast is of the faction that Roosh protects from.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 5, 2008 20:14:36 GMT -5
Post by piratepete v2 on Feb 5, 2008 20:14:36 GMT -5
Guess you don't get to see my analysis after all. Bah! Go town!
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 5, 2008 20:26:13 GMT -5
Post by Boozahol Squid, P.I. on Feb 5, 2008 20:26:13 GMT -5
I've got to agree with drainbead, here. Roosh's play doesn't make any sense from a scum perspective: although he was in danger of being lynched, he wasn't the clear leader (koldanar was tied with him at that point), and in this game, a scum has to do whatever it takes to stay alive: the scum aren't looking at this game as having 6 scum, if they trade one for one with a townie, they're down to one player on their side.
I do see a contradiction in Pleo's interpretation of a mod-rule and Roosh's. However, after Mafia: the Conspiracy, and Idle Thoughts' total misinterpretation of a mod-PM, I don't necessarily believe we have outed a scum here, without a counterclaim by the real Zhang Bao (the second named single faction doc, whom I guess matches up with Shu). Honestly, I believe we have a town on town power role matchup here between Roosh and Pleo. (Pleo must be a power role, because the Mandate said the information about role reveals would only be given to said power roles) Hopefully, they're both mono-protection docs or the Vig, because I don't think either of them is going to live very long with the night kills flying about, and we can't afford to lose the real doc.
My top-candidate for today was going to be piratepete, but apparently he was a bad choice, and is no longer an option. I'm going to go back and see whom CatinaSuit and NAF might have been threatening yesterday, and I'm hoping one of them was bumped off for getting too close to the truth on someone.
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 5, 2008 20:33:14 GMT -5
Post by Gir! on Feb 5, 2008 20:33:14 GMT -5
I wonder if Roosh and Pleo could clarify exactly what they each asked the mods. It's entirely possible that they asked their clarifying questions differently enough that they got different answers. (Okay, so it's not likely, but what the hell is likely in this game anymore?)
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by RoOsh on Feb 6, 2008 0:35:26 GMT -5
Okay. So far I have S.Rugger as wanting me to Re-Claim. Without a really good explanation other than "my actions so far have not been pro-town". --To which I say, IGNORE what I've said than in all respects OTHER than my WangChung madness. Assume I am who i am, and then Ignore the babble that spews out of my mouth. Then you'll at least not have wasted a lynch, wasted time on me, AND not wasted a reclaim.
Kat- Wants to know clarifying questions. Ones that i feel would be pretty much equivilent to a Re-Claim. As I do NOT feel comfortable sharing those Qs unless i'm pretty much forced to re-Claim.
Storyteller: May want a reclaim, not sure. He currently has yet to respond to my question of give a good reason for a reclaim that justifies my death at night. --The easier thing I feel if you agree with SRugger- that i should be forced to reclaim simply because my Actions are "anti-Town" is, Why not just ignore what I've said then, it was a tricky time back yesterday, and I had time to think about it, and my positions are clearer now. And I also am not in a lying mood anymore, and I certainly will not be doing anything like that. I just needed to be Wang Chung, and then I wanted to leave it at that. There are only 10 Townies left in this game, there could be a freak chance that if all goes to hell that 4 more could die tonight, and if you lynch the one ONE sure thing, then you've just fucked it all to hell with 5 dead Townies, and you're all sitting around Tomorrow with your thumbs up your asses playing Atarus' scenario above.
Drainbead/Dio (since both of you seem to be agreeing though you've named diff names).- That's the best thing i can say. It may not make sense from a scum perspective. Unless they DON'T get caught. If they lynch a townie, and DON'T get lynched, then it's a genius and brilliant move. Right now there are 3 people voting for me. Can you accurately put the blame on ANY single ONE of them if I get lynched and show up Town? And what happens if you lynch one, and he turns out to be scum, just not the faction you were looking for? So though it may not make sense for scum to lose 50% to trade with one person, that's only if its a 1 for 1 lynch. And right now it doesn't look like that at all. There is no easy pattern. So sure, it may SOUND like "an unlikely scenario" but right now I think it's working, as all you've discussed is whether someone pro-town is really pro-town rather than trying to find the scum. This is really rather foolish, and I feel like we're being led around by someone here. And right now there are 3 people voting for me, and only 1's really had a chance to explain.
And Dio, I actually agree with your thoughts on Pleonast. I'm just worried that I'm getting a Power Role OR a Scum read from him. And I don't want to be wrong on mislynching him. That's why it sucks. Because either way, that means his time is shorter due to the fact that there are many groups.
But yeah, I've got 4 people telling me what to do. I wanna know then from others what do you want, because I do NOT want to dick around with this silly shit much longer, either you guys settle on an idea for what you want and JUSTIFY it very WELL, or you guys drop this issue. Because all you're doing is wasting time, and allowing people to get divided on a really stupid issue where it's possible to hide on BOTH sides of the issue (because right now, I'm really suspicious of Atarus and Hawkeye for defending me so well. I mean its nice, but jeez- really convenient when I turn up town). And Pleo? I just can't tell on him at all. That's why I worry.
But figure this out soon. Either tomorrow if I hear from the majority or so I'll figure out what to do, or hopefully we can move on by Friday. Because this is the stupidest lynch mob i've ever heard of for you 3 out there trying to lynch me.
I'd like specific reasons from each of you on why you want to lynch me. Not you Story. But the other two. Because right now it feels like:
Story- Look at what I have thought of! Pleo- Sounds good. I agree with Story's points. SRugger- Sounds Good. I agree with Pleo's points.
So I'd like to hear more from the latter.
Preview is your friend.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by RoOsh on Feb 6, 2008 0:35:49 GMT -5
Gah. Mods Can YOU fix the Bolding in the above post?
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Feb 6, 2008 1:09:51 GMT -5
Why the heck do you bother to post all kinds of stuff you later ask us to ignore?
Just because I didn't articulate specifically that I didn't like the way your claim played out, doesn't mean that I wasn't uneasy about it, and here's why:
I think that the loophole of using a homonym to claim was to large to exist. Therefore, I think the powers would have been lost anyway. Since that's the case, I don't understand why it needed to be claimed in a roundabout way.
Furthermore, why the heck were you in a lying mood yesterday???
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by RoOsh on Feb 6, 2008 1:20:05 GMT -5
I think that the loophole of using a homonym to claim was to large to exist. Therefore, I think the powers would have been lost anyway. Since that's the case, I don't understand why it needed to be claimed in a roundabout way. Furthermore, why the heck were you in a lying mood yesterday???So to clarify: You THINK I am Who I AM; You just have issues with the fact that I may or may not have lied? So your issue isn't with the Claim, but the abilities? --As for the lying mood comment. I wasn't in a lying mood. I don't believe I lied. Just as Storyteller is allowed to revise his "trust all role claims policy" I'm allowed to revise my policies. And I have changed my positions on some of the issues, however, I still feel what I did was the right course of action for myself and I don't see anything wrong with it because it DOES NOT HURT THE TOWN. See my stance on the "lying" sorta thing is best explained by my play in FireFly Mafia. What i did there could be construed as lying (Making up a Power Role where i threatened that Night killing me resulted in a 50% of death for the attacker). That claim I felt was harmless and a "good lie" because it DOES NOT hurt The Town. It only affects those who can Night kill. It Forces the Scum to deal with the choice of NK-ing the role, and it was meant as a warning for the Vig to not to VIG me. And it allowed me to survive long enough to activate my role of Backup Cop and allow me to check up on people through the game. That's the sort of "lying" that i feel is beneficial to the town. I believe in lying if it does NOT hurt the town in any way really. And I feel my "lies" (not that I made any such things) did not hurt the Town in any way. I am who I am, I've explained myself, and to suddenly nitpick on abilities and that sort of thing, is NOT the sort of discussion I expect from Townies. They should only focus on the Role Claim, and then MOVE ON. There is no need to get into the Lies or not because as far as they're concerned, I shouldn't be a suspect. Period. The only way it would cause problems with a person is if they were Scummy and had problems not with the Role claim of Wang Chung, but the abilities of Wang Chung. Unless someone out there points out that I have LIED about being Wang Chung, I will not budge on this sort of thinking, because so far I have clearly demonstrated I am Town. Anything else is really unnecessary to get into and really problematic, and I really would rather avoid it.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Feb 6, 2008 1:34:12 GMT -5
<snip> The only way it would cause problems with a person is if they were Scummy and had problems not with the Role claim of Wang Chung, but the abilities of Wang Chung. Unless someone out there points out that I have LIED about being Wang Chung, I will not budge on this sort of thinking, because so far I have clearly demonstrated I am Town. Anything else is really unnecessary to get into and really problematic, and I really would rather avoid it. Here's what I'm going to do, so we can end this argument after this post. Pleonast says you're lying. I'm going to assume that he's counterclaiming you as long as his vote remains on you. If you are lying about this "Wang Chung", and the real "Wang Chung" counter"claims", they've lost their power, and you've helped your scumside. End of discussion.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by RoOsh on Feb 6, 2008 1:45:19 GMT -5
Alright then S.Rugger. That's a valid enough reason (even if I believe it to be wrong).
Pleo. Are you Counter Claiming Me as Wang Chung the man who hates footwear?
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by RoOsh on Feb 6, 2008 1:54:42 GMT -5
Alright then S.Rugger. That's a valid enough reason (even if I believe it to be wrong). Pleo. Are you Counter Claiming Me as Wang Chung the man who hates footwear? Edited to Add: I don't actually believe Pleo is counter-claiming me. But then again I've misread his post earlier. But I think Pleo has issues with again, not my Role/roleclaim but my methods about going about with the Roleclaim. But since S.Rugger has used this as the brunt of his reasoning to level a vote against me, I feel a clarification is necessary from ya, Pleo.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Feb 6, 2008 6:34:35 GMT -5
Let me ask you this, Roosh:
Should everyone in the game get to pick and choose which aspects of what they say will "count," or is that your right only? Why do you keep insisting that we should pay attention only to those of your statements that you want us to pay attention to? The game doesn't work like that.
More from me when I get to work.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Feb 6, 2008 9:29:31 GMT -5
atarus - You are absolutely right; it is possible that Pleonast is the one lying about the Mod's directives. There's no direct evidence either way. I continue to believe that of the two, Roosh is more likely to be lying about this particular thing (this does not mean that Pleo is non-scum, just that his description of the mod's intent is more likely to be true). This is for two reasons: (1) Roosh, with his coy responses and cautious wording, has not exactly admitted that he was lying about his conversation with the mods, but he's certainly suggested that he might have been. (2) I simply think that Pleonast's description of what he was told better fits a good game design; having recently designed a game with sachertorte, I consider it more likely that he'd disallow a loophole of this sort than that he'd allow it. Unfortunately, it is becoming increasingly evident that even if I'm right about Roosh's lie, I'm only at about 50%-50% regarding his alignment, because apparently townies lying for their own purposes is an acceptable play to Roosh. I think I'm tilting at a windmill here, but just to illustrate in real-world terms why I strenuously object to this approach, note drainbead's analysis below: Roosh gets lynched toDay. We see he was telling the truth. We then lynch Pleonast as a liar the next day, and he turns up scum. His scum partner now has to hope to survive to endgame in order for his faction to win. Not an even trade at all, even if Pleonast is of the faction that Roosh protects from. In a game where townies could be trusted to tell the truth (if not, as mhaye notes, the whole truth), this would be spot on. Either Roosh or Pleonast lied about their conversation with the Mods. If Roosh is revealed to be a Townie, we assume that he was truthful, and that Pleonast is a liar. Boom! Scum caught. But in this game, even if Roosh dies and is revealed as a Weak Doctor, he has made it clear that he feels free to be dishonest with us. Roosh knows best, after all. So even if he dies and his alignment is revealed as pro-town, the veracity of everything he's ever said remains in doubt. We can't trust a word, so we can't base any further decisions on it. Honestly, Roosh, if you are pro-town, and you honestly believe that the way you've gone about deceiving the town hasn't hurt us, then you're not reading very carefully. We've been trained by multiple iterations of this game to try to pick up on lies, misdirections, prevarications, dissemblings. You've thus made it so that people who are honestly searching for scum will pick up on your own lies and misdirections, and pursue you. They waste time and analysis on you (again, assuming you are pro-town). If you are lynched and turn out to be pro-town, suspicion will turn on me. As I am not scum, this would then waste a second Day's worth of discussion. Meanwhile, the real scum can hide behind legitimate suspicion of you, because you are lying, after all. And for what? What's the big benefit of all of this? I'm really frustrated right now. If the townies are going to lie as much as the scum, then I am at a genuine loss as to where to go next.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 6, 2008 11:32:08 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 6, 2008 11:32:08 GMT -5
Roosh, my dear, sometimes I do not get you at all.
In typical Roosh fashion, you make a spectacle of yourself on Day 1, with an elaborate "role claim" in a game in which such claims are forbidden by the rules. (You're not going to convince me that such a play was your only option, but that is beside the point.) Then you take issue with people discussing you...
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 6, 2008 12:15:04 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Feb 6, 2008 12:15:04 GMT -5
My conversation with Death leads me to believe that any statement by a player even implying she has a non-Peasant role will invalidate any powers that she may have. There's no slippery slope, there's a bright line in the sand. And Roosh's claim easily crosses that line.
So, there are three cases: 1) Roosh is a Peasant and has gone rogue. Not likely; he's a better player than that. 2) Roosh has a pro-Peasant power role. Or, he did, since he has clearly violated the do-not-reveal-thyself rule. Possible, everyone makes careless mistakes from time to time. This would be a big one, though. 3) Roosh has a Faction role. He was not aware of the pitfalls of the pro-Town power roles and falsely claimed in a way that would violate the rules.
I think case 3 is the most likely. Hence my vote.
And I want to reiterate: I really dislike rules that prohibit free discussion. If Roosh is scum, then we caught him with hook he had no chance of avoiding. If he is not, then the rules have screwed the Town. Unfair either way. Players should be caught by their own actions, not legalisms.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 6, 2008 12:57:53 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Feb 6, 2008 12:57:53 GMT -5
But in this game, even if Roosh dies and is revealed as a Weak Doctor, he has made it clear that he feels free to be dishonest with us. Roosh knows best, after all. So even if he dies and his alignment is revealed as pro-town, the veracity of everything he's ever said remains in doubt. We can't trust a word, so we can't base any further decisions on it. What discussion are you trying to base off of what I've said so far??? I've only had one thing to point out: My Claim. That's IT. Everything else, I've left in the open. If i die, you don't need to DEBATE what I've said, because I've said NOTHING. Honestly. Since I've claimed, all that's happened is the discussion has been Solely on ME. AND NOT BY MY CHOICE. I warned you about this, Story at the VERY Start, yet you honestly kept attacking me and forcing the Town to take a discussion that it had NO need to go down. So damn right the guilt should be coming down at you. I TOLD you over and over to not worry about me, as I am town, and I have not said anything about ANY Player (Hell, I've gone over every one of my Day 1 actions in the previous Day explaining where I actually was on the up and up and where I wasn't! So what's this analysis of me that needs to be done?? ) All you need to Know is that I'm Town. And that I had a different style than you, but I've accepted the differences. But I'm lying or anything like that right now. I'm just what I am, and there should NOT be any debate over THAT. Now if we could just move on from THERE, it'd be nice to try to focus on finding out who the Scum are.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 6, 2008 13:03:43 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Feb 6, 2008 13:03:43 GMT -5
My conversation with Death leads me to believe that any statement by a player even implying she has a non-Peasant role will invalidate any powers that she may have. There's no slippery slope, there's a bright line in the sand. And Roosh's claim easily crosses that line. My claim did not quite cross that line, Pleo. However, I REALLY wish you didn't have to mention this. Please dont' say any more if possible. I know you're not Zhang Bao. But I don't want to know what you are. So PLEASE PLEASE do not go any further with this line of discussion. If you have an issue, I'd rather you convey it through me rather than you have to be forced to draw anything in the sand for yourself. On the other hand. I don't think you're scum. In typical Roosh fashion, you make a spectacle of yourself on Day 1, with an elaborate "role claim" in a game in which such claims are forbidden by the rules. My claim was NOT forbidden by the Rules. I checked on that. If he is not, then the rules have screwed the Town. Unfair either way. Players should be caught by their own actions, not legalisms. I agree with this. If You do not believe me, and you do not unvote within 24 hours, I'll Re-Claim and just set myself up for execution because this game is REALLY fucking frustrating only because I KNOW what I did was legit and on the up and up. But if I can't convince you of that (Yes, Pleo, I knew about the Implicit and explicit points) then I'll reclaim so that you guys can quit wasting your fucking time on trying to lynch a Claimed Role.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 6, 2008 13:06:53 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Feb 6, 2008 13:06:53 GMT -5
What discussion are you trying to base off of what I've said so far??? I've only had one thing to point out: My Claim. That's IT. Everything else, I've left in the open. You have said other things, Roosh. You can back away from them now, but you have said them. You've made strong implications knowing full well that the people reading would read into them. To claim that when you responded to Pleonast's assertion regarding his discussion with the moderators in the way I quoted above, you were not making an implicit statement is just profoundly disingenuous. Oh, well, that's the end of the discussion, then! No scum would ever use the phrase "I am town." So you saying it, in spite of the multiple holes in and problems with your story to date, should end the discussion. Sarcasm aside, can you think of any reason why you saying "I am town" should end the discussion? EVERYONE IN THE GAME would say the same thing. Some of them are lying. That's where the discussion starts.
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 6, 2008 13:09:24 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Feb 6, 2008 13:09:24 GMT -5
Roosh, here's a simple question, and the last one I'll ask you:
Is it your position that what you posted, had it been posted by someone with a power role, would not have resulted in a loss of powers?
Yes or no?
|
|
|
Day Two
Feb 6, 2008 13:10:57 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Feb 6, 2008 13:10:57 GMT -5
Holy crap, that question had so many double negatives in it that even I don't understand it on re-read.
New version:
Roosh, if a Weak Doctor with the power to defend against Shu attacks made a claim identical to the one you made, do you think that player would have lost his powers? Yes or no?
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Feb 6, 2008 13:12:35 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Feb 6, 2008 13:12:35 GMT -5
Is it your position that what you posted, had it been posted by someone with a power role, would not have resulted in a loss of powers? If someone Else had posted my claim. They would not have lost their powers. This is true.
|
|