[Advanced/Experimental] Mass Effect I - Hydra Game - Game Over

[Ithillian Turambar]

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:19 PM, _CLOUD said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:13 PM, Turin Turambar said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:06 PM, Darthe said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:02 PM, Leelou said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:01 PM, Verbal32 said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 7:50 PM, Darthe said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 7:45 PM, Verbal32 said:

If I had to guess who pulled that trigger on the Executioner, I'd guess Clarthe.

I think I would have unvoted after doing it, but we four who were on the train are good options. Im not game for your plan of lynching everyone if we ignore people outside of it to do so btw. Thats a great way to pidgeonhole a group and make mistakes. However, it seems pretty clear that at least one was on it.

 

4 teams. If 1 of 4 is scum, my plan is reasonable (as we've already taken 1 down). If there are no scum in there, well.....my plan sucks.

 

Your plan sucks.

 

Hmph. Isnt it more likely that you have a read wrong? I think so and we all seem to have thought pretty well of one another up to this point. It was either a good scum play or a really dumb one but we cant know without putting some pressure on the area.

 

I would say Despo's posts prior to the event suggest he did have knowledge of what was going to happen.

 

 

Care to explain how his posts prior to the event suggest that he knew what was going to happen?

 

Care to explain why you think his posts didn't suggest that?

 

Why are you defending them so hard?

[Ithillian Turambar]

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:23 PM, Turin Turambar said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:15 PM, Darthe said:

Logic always works in mafia ithi. Your ruling with des applies to both of us as we were definitely around and had the opportunity to unvote. However, it also applies to thise we cant be sure were around which is why we cant seperate or point fingers at such a limited group. Thats not the point I was making anyways. Your post was a show at examining people and a way to hype negative reads in light of the event. It was fearmongering.

Are you afraid?

 

It was simply pointing out a fact. Those online at the time ate correctly labelled as suspects as they were at the scene of the crime. It would be similar to if a watcher saw all of you visit someone that was killed during that night. It is possible someone else did it but less likely.

 

Copycat.

 

Are you on a break?

[Turin Turambar]

Break over. Being good.

[_CLOUD]

Turin answer my question please.

[Ithillian Turambar]

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:21 PM, _CLOUD said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:17 PM, Pralaya said:

Correct me if I am wrong. The mafiascum link for executioner says that the executioner can kill a person who has half the votes on a given day. 6/2 = 3. Why are we assuming that the executioner needed 4 votes to kill?

 

Good point.

 

Well obviously because I thought someone (includes Despo & Darthe too now) didn't unvote on purpose and so 4 must have been the magic number.

 

 

It was probably Len what done it though.

 

He's been sneaky all game.

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

[Ithillian Turambar]

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:30 PM, _CLOUD said:

Turin answer my question please.

He can't

 

He drives a gigantic truck full of jet fuel for a living.

 

He needs to keep safe.

[Verbal32]

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:07 PM, Darthe said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:05 PM, Ithillian said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 7:12 PM, Darthe said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 6:53 PM, Ithillian said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 2:33 PM, _CLOUD said:

Hallia voted for J-TAG before they revealed to be the Cop.

OMG you dobber!!

 

Yes Hallia pushed it up to 4 votes @ 3.29 ... but Despo could have unvoted it back down to 3. Why didn't you mention that?

 

 

Darthe and Despo both question Turin's logic in changing our vote from J-Tag to YOLO - in their own special ways.

This implies foresight of the event. More Ithi implications. This + Turinflop - logical methodology = mafia

 

 

Pretty sure that is the technical definition of it.

I've just read this again and you're absolutely right. Foreknowledge of the event. I think that maybe Despo knew the executioner was something he could do - hence he would have foreknown.

 

Do you know that he didn't have foreknowledge?

Obviously not. You see my point though? The reasoning used is assumptive, sort of like tryi g to prove the lack of something existing.

 

 

I've had to mention that on more than one occasion thus far....

 

 

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:11 PM, Ithillian said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:07 PM, Darthe said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:05 PM, Ithillian said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 7:12 PM, Darthe said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 6:53 PM, Ithillian said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 2:33 PM, _CLOUD said:

Hallia voted for J-TAG before they revealed to be the Cop.

OMG you dobber!!

 

Yes Hallia pushed it up to 4 votes @ 3.29 ... but Despo could have unvoted it back down to 3. Why didn't you mention that?

 

 

Darthe and Despo both question Turin's logic in changing our vote from J-Tag to YOLO - in their own special ways.

 

This implies foresight of the event. More Ithi implications. This + Turinflop - logical methodology = mafia

 

 

Pretty sure that is the technical definition of it.

 

I've just read this again and you're absolutely right. Foreknowledge of the event. I think that maybe Despo knew the executioner was something he could do - hence he would have foreknown.

 

Do you know that he didn't have foreknowledge?

 

Obviously not. You see my point though? The reasoning used is assumptive, sort of like tryi g to prove the lack of something existing.

 

Well ... Cloud was pointing out that Hallia placed the 4th vote - so I said that it could have gone back to three. If I think that Despo is mafia then I would say that I think he didn't unvote on purpose.

 

Does everyone else have an absolutely Town read on Despo that they wouldn't think this could happen.

 

You're trying to be all Vulcan ice logic on me but it won't work.

 

The possibilities are endless.

 

 

*raises hand*  :-)

 

 

 

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:13 PM, Leelou said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:09 PM, Turin Turambar said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:02 PM, Leelou said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:01 PM, Verbal32 said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 7:50 PM, Darthe said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 7:45 PM, Verbal32 said:

If I had to guess who pulled that trigger on the Executioner, I'd guess Clarthe.

I think I would have unvoted after doing it, but we four who were on the train are good options. Im not game for your plan of lynching everyone if we ignore people outside of it to do so btw. Thats a great way to pidgeonhole a group and make mistakes. However, it seems pretty clear that at least one was on it.

4 teams. If 1 of 4 is scum, my plan is reasonable (as we've already taken 1 down). If there are no scum in there, well.....my plan sucks.

Your plan sucks.

How do you know there are no mafia.on that train?

 

I don't, just felt like telling Verbal his plan sucked to see what he would retort back to me. 

 

 

h8u

[Leelou]

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:33 PM, Verbal32 said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:13 PM, Leelou said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:09 PM, Turin Turambar said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:02 PM, Leelou said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:01 PM, Verbal32 said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 7:50 PM, Darthe said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 7:45 PM, Verbal32 said:

If I had to guess who pulled that trigger on the Executioner, I'd guess Clarthe.

I think I would have unvoted after doing it, but we four who were on the train are good options. Im not game for your plan of lynching everyone if we ignore people outside of it to do so btw. Thats a great way to pidgeonhole a group and make mistakes. However, it seems pretty clear that at least one was on it.

4 teams. If 1 of 4 is scum, my plan is reasonable (as we've already taken 1 down). If there are no scum in there, well.....my plan sucks.

Your plan sucks.

How do you know there are no mafia.on that train?

 

I don't, just felt like telling Verbal his plan sucked to see what he would retort back to me. 

 

 

h8u

 

h8u more

[Ithillian Turambar]

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:33 PM, Verbal32 said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:05 PM, Ithillian said:

Does everyone else have an absolutely Town read on Despo that they wouldn't think this could happen.

 

You're trying to be all Vulcan ice logic on me but it won't work.

 

The possibilities are endless.

 

*raises hand*  :-)

 

You don't count.

[Verbal32]

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:36 PM, Ithillian said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:33 PM, Verbal32 said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:05 PM, Ithillian said:

Does everyone else have an absolutely Town read on Despo that they wouldn't think this could happen.

 

You're trying to be all Vulcan ice logic on me but it won't work.

 

The possibilities are endless.

 

*raises hand*  :-)

 

You don't count.

 

 

My mom disagrees.

[Ithillian Turambar]

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:38 PM, Verbal32 said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:36 PM, Ithillian said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:33 PM, Verbal32 said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:05 PM, Ithillian said:

Does everyone else have an absolutely Town read on Despo that they wouldn't think this could happen.

 

You're trying to be all Vulcan ice logic on me but it won't work.

 

The possibilities are endless.

 

*raises hand*  :-)

 

You don't count.

 

 

My mom disagrees.

 

Who does your Mom think is Mafia?

[Hallia]

Ouch, I feel the need for ice!

[Darthe]

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:17 PM, Pralaya said:

Correct me if I am wrong. The mafiascum link for executioner says that the executioner can kill a person who has half the votes on a given day. 6/2 = 3. Why are we assuming that the executioner needed 4 votes to kill?

 

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:20 PM, Ithillian said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:15 PM, Darthe said:

Logic always works in mafia ithi. Your ruling with des applies to both of us as we were definitely around and had the opportunity to unvote. However, it also applies to thise we cant be sure were around which is why we cant seperate or point fingers at such a limited group. Thats not the point I was making anyways. Your post was a show at examining people and a way to hype negative reads in light of the event. It was fearmongering.

Are you afraid?

 

Are you worried that other people are afraid?

 

Do you really think that everyone else wasn't thinking it - but didn't want to be the one to mention it?

 

 

It seemed quite obvious to me that the timeline of events needed to be displayed.

 

Do you think it was someone who was not visible at the time the action went through and if so who? What time did this all happen in America btw? That would help me figure out if most of the USA were sleeping or not.

 

 

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:22 PM, Ithillian said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:15 PM, Darthe said:

Logic always works in mafia ithi. Your ruling with des applies to both of us as we were definitely around and had the opportunity to unvote. However, it also applies to thise we cant be sure were around which is why we cant seperate or point fingers at such a limited group. Thats not the point I was making anyways. Your post was a show at examining people and a way to hype negative reads in light of the event. It was fearmongering.

Oh lol - you were about as well and didn't unvote? I didn't even spot you on the lynch hahaha.

 

Why didn't you want to unvote then?

 

Is that why you didn't like my post? Dear me - I honestly thought it was Despo.

 

 

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:23 PM, Turin Turambar said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:15 PM, Darthe said:

Logic always works in mafia ithi. Your ruling with des applies to both of us as we were definitely around and had the opportunity to unvote. However, it also applies to thise we cant be sure were around which is why we cant seperate or point fingers at such a limited group. Thats not the point I was making anyways. Your post was a show at examining people and a way to hype negative reads in light of the event. It was fearmongering.

Are you afraid?

 

It was simply pointing out a fact. Those online at the time ate correctly labelled as suspects as they were at the scene of the crime. It would be similar to if a watcher saw all of you visit someone that was killed during that night. It is possible someone else did it but less likely.

 

 

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:31 PM, Ithillian said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:21 PM, _CLOUD said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:17 PM, Pralaya said:

Correct me if I am wrong. The mafiascum link for executioner says that the executioner can kill a person who has half the votes on a given day. 6/2 = 3. Why are we assuming that the executioner needed 4 votes to kill?

 

Good point.

 

Well obviously because I thought someone (includes Despo & Darthe too now) didn't unvote on purpose and so 4 must have been the magic number.

 

 

It was probably Len what done it though.

 

He's been sneaky all game.

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

ItV ithi.  Her play here is nothing except AtE and fearmongering, a sheer attempt to get under another players skin and make them slip up so that she can continue to ignore the points made against her.  Specifically, Ithillian has completely ignored the fact that she did indeed push information without consideration of the facts behind said information and she will not respond to the accusations made against her, instead preferring to pick at others for semantic and emotionally based reasoning.  Note that she is using things that happen on thred to justify her beliefs in PREVIOUS events.  Using the present to validate the past.  This is the definition of someone flopping when they attempt to play crowd control on thread.  

[Verbal32]

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:40 PM, Ithillian said:

Who does your Mom think is Mafia?

 

Prob my dad.

 

 

 

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:41 PM, Darthe said:

ItV ithi.  Her play here is nothing except AtE and fearmongering, a sheer attempt to get under another players skin and make them slip up so that she can continue to ignore the points made against her.  Specifically, Ithillian has completely ignored the fact that she did indeed push information without consideration of the facts behind said information and she will not respond to the accusations made against her, instead preferring to pick at others for semantic and emotionally based reasoning.  Note that she is using things that happen on thred to justify her beliefs in PREVIOUS events.  Using the present to validate the past.  This is the definition of someone flopping when they attempt to play crowd control on thread.

See, here is where I think you're going.  You've been against my 'lynch within the 4 on the J-Tag lynch' since I said it, albeit in a subtle way.  You keep saying you want to potentially lynch outside that pool.

 

This is your move - you're trying to now case WiFum and push the lynch there.  I think perhaps we can get 2 birds with 1 stone.

 

I don't think you both are scum - this wouldn't make sense.  As I want to lynch within the "4", and I now think one of your teams is scum, how about Clarthe is the lynch tomorrow?

[Ithillian Turambar]

If we don't want to care about the accusations then we don't have to care about the accusations.

 

You can't make us care about the accusations.

 

Whatever they were.

 

 

 

And this is how I post so ner.

 

If people want to lynch us because they think we mafia then you'll all have fun the next day going back and forth on posts and people's changing reads and all that jazz. We've had a hell of a lot of interaction.

 

We are Town though.

[Darthe]

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:47 PM, Verbal32 said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:40 PM, Ithillian said:

Who does your Mom think is Mafia?

 

Prob my dad.

 

 

 

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:41 PM, Darthe said:

ItV ithi.  Her play here is nothing except AtE and fearmongering, a sheer attempt to get under another players skin and make them slip up so that she can continue to ignore the points made against her.  Specifically, Ithillian has completely ignored the fact that she did indeed push information without consideration of the facts behind said information and she will not respond to the accusations made against her, instead preferring to pick at others for semantic and emotionally based reasoning.  Note that she is using things that happen on thred to justify her beliefs in PREVIOUS events.  Using the present to validate the past.  This is the definition of someone flopping when they attempt to play crowd control on thread.

See, here is where I think you're going.  You've been against my 'lynch within the 4 on the J-Tag lynch' since I said it, albeit in a subtle way.  You keep saying you want to potentially lynch outside that pool.

 

This is your move - you're trying to now case WiFum and push the lynch there.  I think perhaps we can get 2 birds with 1 stone.

 

I don't think you both are scum - this wouldn't make sense.  As I want to lynch within the "4", and I now think one of your teams is scum, how about Clarthe is the lynch tomorrow?

 

 

Verb, I already stated that I agree with your course of action I just don't intend to follow it exclusively.  That's distinctly different from hedging or distancing from it.  Staying exclusively in the four would be incredibly risky and I will not disregard everyone outside of it just because you want to.  Besides, I would have to be an idiot to ignore the below.  READ IT.  Ithi just said directly that she doesn't want to discuss the accusations brought against her and that she wants others to ignore them.  HOW can you explain that from a townie?  

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:48 PM, Ithillian said:

If we don't want to care about the accusations then we don't have to care about the accusations.

 

You can't make us care about the accusations.

 

Whatever they were.

 

 

 

And this is how I post so ner.

 

If people want to lynch us because they think we mafia then you'll all have fun the next day going back and forth on posts and people's changing reads and all that jazz. We've had a hell of a lot of interaction.

 

We are Town though.

[_CLOUD]

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:48 PM, Ithillian said:

If we don't want to care about the accusations then we don't have to care about the accusations.

 

You can't make us care about the accusations.

 

Whatever they were.

 

 

 

And this is how I post so ner.

 

If people want to lynch us because they think we mafia then you'll all have fun the next day going back and forth on posts and people's changing reads and all that jazz. We've had a hell of a lot of interaction.

 

We are Town though.

 

So you are mafia. Got it.

[Verbal32]

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:55 PM, Darthe said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:47 PM, Verbal32 said:

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:40 PM, Ithillian said:

Who does your Mom think is Mafia?

 

Prob my dad.

 

 

 

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:41 PM, Darthe said:

ItV ithi.  Her play here is nothing except AtE and fearmongering, a sheer attempt to get under another players skin and make them slip up so that she can continue to ignore the points made against her.  Specifically, Ithillian has completely ignored the fact that she did indeed push information without consideration of the facts behind said information and she will not respond to the accusations made against her, instead preferring to pick at others for semantic and emotionally based reasoning.  Note that she is using things that happen on thred to justify her beliefs in PREVIOUS events.  Using the present to validate the past.  This is the definition of someone flopping when they attempt to play crowd control on thread.

See, here is where I think you're going.  You've been against my 'lynch within the 4 on the J-Tag lynch' since I said it, albeit in a subtle way.  You keep saying you want to potentially lynch outside that pool.

 

This is your move - you're trying to now case WiFum and push the lynch there.  I think perhaps we can get 2 birds with 1 stone.

 

I don't think you both are scum - this wouldn't make sense.  As I want to lynch within the "4", and I now think one of your teams is scum, how about Clarthe is the lynch tomorrow?

 

 

Verb, I already stated that I agree with your course of action I just don't intend to follow it exclusively.  That's distinctly different from hedging or distancing from it.  Staying exclusively in the four would be incredibly risky and I will not disregard everyone outside of it just because you want to.  Besides, I would have to be an idiot to ignore the below.  READ IT.  Ithi just said directly that she doesn't want to discuss the accusations brought against her and that she wants others to ignore them.  HOW can you explain that from a townie?  

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:48 PM, Ithillian said:

If we don't want to care about the accusations then we don't have to care about the accusations.

 

You can't make us care about the accusations.

 

Whatever they were.

 

 

 

And this is how I post so ner.

 

If people want to lynch us because they think we mafia then you'll all have fun the next day going back and forth on posts and people's changing reads and all that jazz. We've had a hell of a lot of interaction.

 

We are Town though.

 

Bold:  correct....it is you playing both sides of the fence.  Even worse.

 

 

Re: Ithi, meh....I've seen the nonchalant defense from both townies and scum.  Null.

[Verbal32]

oops....I ended up putting that inside the quote with the toggle switch....you can see what I mean, though.

[Verbal32]

^ my comments are the last 2 lines

[Ithillian Turambar]

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:55 PM, Darthe said:

Besides, I would have to be an idiot to ignore the below.  READ IT.  Ithi just said directly that she doesn't want to discuss the accusations brought against her and that she wants others to ignore them.  HOW can you explain that from a townie?  

 

 

  On 4/4/2014 at 8:48 PM, Ithillian said:

If we don't want to care about the accusations then we don't have to care about the accusations.

 

You can't make us care about the accusations.

 

Whatever they were.

 

 

 

And this is how I post so ner.

 

If people want to lynch us because they think we mafia then you'll all have fun the next day going back and forth on posts and people's changing reads and all that jazz. We've had a hell of a lot of interaction.

 

We are Town though.

 

I don't remember saying everyone else should ignore you or whatever it is you're trying to say. Did I type that bit in invisible? Also I said we DON'T CARE. Not that we wouldn't discuss.

 

If I understood what it was you wanted to discuss - that I haven't already discussed.

[Darthe]

You've been playing long enough to know better than that.  You are saying

 

"I AM NOT LYNCHING OUTSIDE OF THESE FOUR PEOPLE"

 

That's a crap argument and unless the entire remaining scum team is on that train it *100%* LOSES us the game.  

 

With 9 slots left that is 4 lynches which means 8 total deaths coming out to a mafia victory.  

 

I am arguing that we cannot ignore the 5 people outside of the train.  They get lower priority, yes, but we CANNOT afford the risk taken in your course of action.

[Verbal32]

Huh.

 

Clarthe:  flailing to get something to stick on WiFum.

 

WiFum:  looking more town by the minute as a result.

 

 

 

 

@Clarthe - don't you realize I want WiFum to be scum?  Don't do this to me.

[Ithillian Turambar]

  On 4/4/2014 at 9:04 PM, Darthe said:

You've been playing long enough to know better than that.  You are saying

 

"I AM NOT LYNCHING OUTSIDE OF THESE FOUR PEOPLE"

 

That's a crap argument and unless the entire remaining scum team is on that train it *100%* LOSES us the game.  

 

With 9 slots left that is 4 lynches which means 8 total deaths coming out to a mafia victory.  

 

I am arguing that we cannot ignore the 5 people outside of the train.  They get lower priority, yes, but we CANNOT afford the risk taken in your course of action.

We weren't on the Lynch. Are you giving us lower priority now?

[Darthe]

whatever dude.  you're blinded by your own idiotic biases