Open 713: Jungle Republic [Game Over]

[BuJaber]

And the answer to your second question is in my ISO. Laser pointed out that by isolating 2 scum between those 6 players that leaves 3 scum in the remaining 5 (6 minus me). So it's statistically better to go for one of them.

[Thor665]

@thor - pronoun discussion is irrelevant to the game I ignored it.

So you started to read it, realized what it was, skipped it, and then forgot about it?

[wilky]

@thor - pronoun discussion is irrelevant to the game I ignored it.

@wilky - the difference is basically this: Espeo picked NM for lurking. I picked a lurker who happened to be NM.

I literally wanted to vote a lurker, went to the first page to look at list of players alive and NM was the first name in the list that I didn't remember seeing in the last few posts I read. So if the mod had ordered the list differently it would have been someone else.

This is nonsense, regardless of how you came to the conclusion you both voted NM for lurking.

And the answer to your second question is in my ISO. Laser pointed out that by isolating 2 scum between those 6 players that leaves 3 scum in the remaining 5 (6 minus me). So it's statistically better to go for one of them.

you're actually going through with that?

Basically what you are saying is that you sorted everyone into 3 groups, 2 of the groups you find scummy and the other group is the rest. After that you have went nah fuck it, lets not lynch from these groups that I have narrowed my lynch pool down too and lynch someone from the rest.

[skitter30]

Don't facepalm me - there is *ZERO* in your first post that makes that clear.
Feel free to show how it's clear there and I'll immediately apologize - but you ARE changing your words.
There's a reason you had to admit that

conflict was inherent

.

You opened with I forced a conflict.
You've changed that to I turned a conflict into a (by some degree) bigger conflict.

No,the crux of my argument is the latter statement, and has been since the beginning of this.

/'hīˌlīt/ - verb - 'pick out and emphasize'.

You can't 'pick and out emphasize' something that isn't there, yeah? When I said 'highlight' I meant 'magnify and emphasize something that already exists'. 'Highlighting conflict' -> 'magnify and emphisize conflict that already exists'. So the notion that you were making an existing conflict bigger has been a fundamental part of my argument this entire time.

So now the issue isn't that I created a conflict,

it's that I made it somehow bigger than I needed to

, when I could have created a smaller conflict?
Do I have that right?

Yes, the versions that I wrote inherently imply that there's disagreement and conflict too. Your version

highlights

and frames that conflict

I think that you're deliberately forcing/

highlighting

this conflict

Like the fact that the conflict already existed has been an implicit part of my argument since the very beginning. My argument is that you higlighted it in that you made it bigger than it needed to be.

----------
bigger than it needed to be -> he didn't have to -> unnecessary

For starters, what you italicized and I bolded is *already a change from your last answer*.

A: he highlighted a conflict

when he didn't have to

I'm arguing that you highlighted the sides/conflict

when you didn't have to

.

I don't know if 'unfair' is the right word. Like it isn't that I think it was *unfair* of you to frame it like that, so much as I think it was

unnecessary

. Like if the two of you are having this discussion, it'll play out and people will think whatever. It might become a thing, or it might blow over.

The 'unecessary' idea has also been there in each iteration of this argument, so again, how did I change my answer?

--------

I've been saying the same thing this entire time.

At this point I don't know if I'm not articulating myself well or if you're purposefully not understanding me. You're like splitting hairs on my diction and that's the entire basis of 'I changed position'. Yeah I may have slightly reworded my point if I thought doing so would clarify what I was trying to say. That's a completley different animal than changing my position, which I haven't done.

Like if you're arguing that the notion of 'making the existing conflict bigger' hasn't been in my argument this entire time you're basically telling me that you don't think that the phrases 'highlight conflict' and 'making an existing conflict bigger' encapsulate the same idea. Or if you think I suddenly introduced the idea that 'he didn't have to,' you're telling me that you think 'unnecessary' and 'didn't have to' don't encapsulate the same idea. Like is that really what you're going with?

You either don't understand what I'm saying or you're purposefully not understanding me.

----------

And again, you're saying I changed my position from 'instigating a conflict' to 'making an existing conflict bigger'. And I'm saying this is a misrep because the notion of 'making an existing conflict bigger' has always been an implicit assumption of my argument. I can't mid-argument have changed my position from X to Y if Y has been a fundemental part of my argument since the very beginning.

I want that apology now, thank you very much.

--------

Please do.

I think this is going to be another *really* long post that's going to involve like going through our dual ISOs post by post which are kinda dense and like rereading the entire game, so I'm going to hold off sinking the time into writing this until after my midterm tomorrow, cool?

(Which because of weekend v/la might not be until Saturday night. I'm saying that me not posting it immediately doesn't mean I'm ignoring you, just that I'm giving a realistic timeframe on when I'll actually have the time to sit down and write it).

-------

I can't sustain an argument like this when I know I'm bullshitting; literally the last time I tried, it was against Thor, and I gave up after like two half-hearted rounds because I can't make up stuff to holistically satisfy that kind of sustained questioning.

For me to be scum here, he's positing that scum!me decided it would be a good idea to pick a fight with him after that because .... ? And given that game, the fact that he actually believes scum!me would do that and that scum!me can/would keep the argument up like this is kinda implausible imo?

Are you like ignoring this or ...?

--------

There is a claim I'm misrepping - by quoting a post of hers where she's explaining the case and bolding the opening line to the explanation.
Yet Skitter also claims she's never changed her story about what her case is.

I can't even parse what you're trying to say here. I *think* you're saying that you quoted me and I bolded my own words to indicate that you misrepped me?

So now the issue isn't that I created a conflict

, it's that I made it somehow bigger than I needed to, when I could have created a smaller conflict?
Do I have that right?

I quoted this, in which you claim to paraphrase the latest iteration of my argument after quoting it; I agree that you accurately paraphrased that. In this quote, ie with the bolded words, you also claim that it differs from what I said originially. I'm saying that the bolded words here are a misrep because you aren't accurately representing my original argument - the original argument is the same as the version in 182 because I haven't changed my position.

she's straight up lying in a wall and hoping people will buy it (which I believe she's doing).

Also I resent this on like a personal level because I'm not fucking lying.

[LaserGuy]

laser:

Why couldn't I be scum and also honestly consider you a valid policy lynch?

Can you explain why you think Beefster is worth a policy lynch? I've never played with him before, but I'm getting Town vibes from him at the moment.

Do you care explaining yourself?

Beef's tone was (and still is) very townie.

@Thor: If it's a T v T, some scum might egg it on sure but I feel like scum are more likely to try and not get too involved with it Day 1,

given that a mislynch is generally pretty likely anyway first day.

In

this

setup? Mmm... This comment bothers me.

Why does it bother you?

Pretty sure I already talked about this. tl;dr is that mislynch is actually, compared to typical mafia games, much less likely, so it is very strange that somebody from Town would not recognize this. It makes more sense coming from scum, who might be mentally lumping the other scum team in with Town in their internal calculations.

[Thor665]

I think that you're deliberately forcing/

highlighting

this conflict

What did you mean by the forcing part of the quote then?

[LaserGuy]

@skitter, @thor

I think you are both Town, but I am seriously contemplating pushing for a policy lynch on one of you at this point in time just so we won't have to put up with you bickering for the rest of the game. You are aren't getting anywhere and are making the thread more difficult to read and keep up with. Please move on.

[Thor665]

Like if you're arguing that the notion of 'making the existing conflict bigger' hasn't been in my argument this entire time you're basically telling me that you don't think that the phrases 'highlight conflict' and 'making an existing conflict bigger' encapsulate the same idea. Or if you think I suddenly introduced the idea that 'he didn't have to,' you're telling me that you think 'unnecessary' and 'didn't have to' don't encapsulate the same idea. Like is that really what you're going with?

Pretty much, yes - but I wait for you to answer the above before I go further into it.
You assuredly wasted a lot of air getting away from the "highlight" if that was your original crux.

I want that apology now, thank you very much.

What do you think I did that was rude and needing an apology for?

Are you like ignoring this or ...?

Well, I can address it, but I don't see a lot of value to it; but okay;

You offer an example of me catching you as scum - I was very clear and repetitive of what I found you scum over (indeed, I *ahem* even maybe forced a conflict with you, yeah?)
You, as scum, tried to duck me - and it didn't work.

Now your argument is apparently something along the lines of "if I was scum, I would try the same failed strategy that I am highly aware of even though i know it doesn't work" If you're claiming that, you owe yourself an apology - my crime is presuming you would learn.

Also, frankly, you showing a game where you are HIGHLY AWARE THAT I'M CONFRONTATIONAL AS TOWN and then also having your current case on me?
Makes me want to flip you more, not less.

I quoted this, in which you claim to paraphrase the latest iteration of my argument after quoting it; I agree that you accurately paraphrased that. In this quote, ie with the bolded words, you also claim that it differs from what I said originially. I'm saying that the bolded words here are a misrep because you aren't accurately representing my original argument - the original argument is the same as the version in 182 because I haven't changed my position.

How do you define misrep? I want to make sure we're discussing the same thing.

Also I resent this on like a personal level because I'm not Smurfing lying.

I resent you doing either a fake AtE or being confrontational about something you have to be aware that I have no actual ability to verify other than having a conversation about it - and noting that you're not backing up your claims.
I note that I still lack this "list of misreps".
I figure you're ducking that or lying at the moment, prove me wrong by giving me the list?

[Thor665]

@skitter, @thor

I think you are both Town, but I am seriously contemplating pushing for a policy lynch on one of you at this point in time just so we won't have to put up with you bickering for the rest of the game. You are aren't getting anywhere and are making the thread more difficult to read and keep up with. Please move on.

We are getting somewhere.
Also, what else would you like to see addressed?

[Thor665]

viewtopic.php?p=9587277#p9587277
viewtopic.php?p=9590644#p9590644

@Skitter - like those are my first two posts in a game where you know I was town.
Please describe how those are not like the "highlighting" I did here and if your answer makes even 50% sense I'll drop the case on you till at least tomorrow.
I'll even let Laser be the judge of "sense" in this case.

If you can't, then people should start voting you now.

[Montosh]

I think Buj's frustration with beef and his desre to not be lynch just because no one cares is very genuine. Townreading him for it.

Skitter - what I don't understand is that you're immediately attacking Thor for making something binary and being able to win an argument. Can you please explain your thought process behind that?
Aside from that, I don't think I have much to contribute. Life is hitting me hard.

Eh, scum can just as easily be frustrated with a wagon. I don't get this fascination with frustration as a towntell that some people seem to have, everyone has differing emotional tolerances. And survivalism is most certainly not a towntell at all. Scum do not want to be lynched, often more than town, since it better furthers their win condition.

I feel you on life. However, thor has made essentially the exam same argument and posed the exam same question to skitter on multiple occasions I believe. Why do you feel the need to repeat what's already been gone through? I feel like we ought to be leaving the thor vs skitter clusterfuck behind imo.

Somebody asked me about the wolf accusation and not generic scum. It's because scum don't have NK they don't have anything to hurry for.

Scum usually want to hurry. Night kill or no a quick lynch benefits scum because:

a) It tends to hit town, unless there are compelling reasons to lynch someone based on night actions or something
b) Town gain less info from the shorter day

I agree that, on the whole, werewolves probably have a greater incentive to end the day quickly, but it's certain by no means unique to them, even in this setup.

Also, I'm going to do this;

VOTE: skitter

Until he can describe how he isn't calling me scum for scumhunting.

Not even that far into catching up and I stumble upon this scumclaim. Too easy.
VOTE: Thor665

Umm... what? Where's the scumclaim?

She did call out BuJabar for saying that exactly one of the two of you is scum in 181, which is a similar sort of thing.

I can agree very loosely with that - but *literally every debate in the game is about people having a disagreement over something*.
Like, just now this second, you and I are disagreeing.
She and I are disagreeing.
BuJaber and you are disagreeing.
If this is an actual scumtell she has she should be hitting reactions off of it literally constantly.
That's why she had to reinvent it to 'you did it in a certain more forceful way' to try to distance from the reality I had pointed out about this.

Does that not twig you at all?
It's twigging the hell out of me, and I don't see any way I'm reading it wrong.

it had more to do with your reaction to people's surprise.

Can you quote my reaction and maybe explain why it's strange?

Half of the posts in this game have essentially been you going after people hard for every single post. First with Paradox and to a greater extent, and more annoyingly due to the sheer length of it, with skitter. Like, you seem intent on just keeping this going on and on. You two are just arguing for the sake of arguing, but it doesn't feel like either of you have said anything new since the first few pages, yet this has eaten up a good portion of the game despite the fact that I really don't think there's anything here.

This is not just directed at you, skitter ought to have probably let this cool down for a bit by now and get on to other things. But you're the worse culprit because you just keep going. The only time anything seems to be moving in a different direction was those few days when you weren't posting, but while you're here it gobbles most of the attention up.

Now maybe what bothers me about you is that I just can't get a ping off of you. I can imagine a town motivation to be thorough and explore every thread of info, and I can see a scum motivation to deliberately obfuscate and prevent any meaningful reads from being parsed out, at least while people try avoid this whole clusterfuck of an argument, which seems to be the majority approach. Given your level of play, I don't believe either play is beyond you.

Given that, maybe just back off from this? Like seriously, are you going to get anything more from this thing with skitter right now?

@Fanta - considering your personal vote count, why did you get off a wagon with 4 votes to get on one with 1 vote? What's your current BuJabber take?

Actually, Fanta wanted to stay on BuJaber but I kinda stole our vote from them, so.

Mostly because the BuJaber wagon has built really quickly on a really flimsy "case" and I don't find any of his posts particularly scummy, so.

Also, I vote who I think is scummy, not who's most likely to get lynched. Only scum would want to stay on big flimsy wagons and hope they get to Lynch.

My only concern with Bujaber is how quickly the wagon developed, which normally makes me feel like scum involvement on day 1. But given the multiball nature of the setup, that doesn't really say much about Bujaber being town or not.

I think given his series of pretty bad posts and behaviour, it's not the worst lynch right now.

[Thor665]

Half of the posts in this game have essentially been you going after people hard for every single post. First with Paradox and to a greater extent, and more annoyingly due to the sheer length of it, with skitter. Like, you seem intent on just keeping this going on and on. You two are just arguing for the sake of arguing, but it doesn't feel like either of you have said anything new since the first few pages, yet this has eaten up a good portion of the game despite the fact that I really don't think there's anything here.

This is not just directed at you, skitter ought to have probably let this cool down for a bit by now and get on to other things. But you're the worse culprit because you just keep going. The only time anything seems to be moving in a different direction was those few days when you weren't posting, but while you're here it gobbles most of the attention up.

Now maybe what bothers me about you is that I just can't get a ping off of you. I can imagine a town motivation to be thorough and explore every thread of info, and I can see a scum motivation to deliberately obfuscate and prevent any meaningful reads from being parsed out, at least while people try avoid this whole clusterSmurf of an argument, which seems to be the majority approach. Given your level of play, I don't believe either play is beyond you.

You're covering a lot of ground here, so I'm going to hit them up in a roughly chronological order;

1. I note that you, despite writing three paragraphs, didn't actually explain what I'm doing that is strange in my reaction to 'people's surprise' - want to take another swing at that?

2. If you read our debate you will note that actually neither Skitter nor I are arguing for the sake of arguing,a nd are being very focused on assessing each other's scumminess with reasoning offered by both. That does require you to do more than skim it, but...

3. Why do you think there's nothing there considering there are 5 scum, we could be TvM, TvW, MvW, or even WvW or MvM. What makes you end up at TvT? Both you and Laser have said this now, and I kind of feel he was foolishly innocent to suggest it, but you just feel sheepy to his idea.

4. I'm sorry that me being gone makes the game feel like it's progressing to you - I would suggest that whatever you were doing then you could still be doing even when I'm here. What other conversations would you like to see at the forefront?

5. You then (after spending two paragraphs complaining about my play) admit that it could be good town play, and admit you can't get a clear read (despite making a few crass generalizations about what the conversation is about which shows me that you're skimming the debate and not even reading my short blurbs about it, which makes me sad as I'm doing that and even Skitter is tossing in tl:drs at the end of posts). If you'd like to try to figure out if it's obfuscation or scumhunting, i would suggest the best solution is to read it and see if it is indeed flim flam or if there is meat to the debate. If that isn't something you're willing or able to do, the next best option is offered in my #4 - direct some conversations yourself, or even in my #1 answering a conversation I also appear interested in that is not about Skitter.

[skitter30]

@skitter, @thor

I think you are both Town, but I am seriously contemplating pushing for a policy lynch on one of you at this point in time just so we won't have to put up with you bickering for the rest of the game. You are aren't getting anywhere and are making the thread more difficult to read and keep up with. Please move on.

I feel like we ought to be leaving the thor vs skitter clusterfuck behind imo.

This is not just directed at you, skitter ought to have probably let this cool down for a bit by now and get on to other things.

K, I'm done. I think we've been going around in circles for days now and I don't think this is going to end by either of us agreeing with the other so I'm just going to stop responding. And like this is warping my perception of the game because I've been tunneled so hard that I've been having trouble like focusing on anyone/anything else.

@everyone: sorry for making the game super long/argumentative/difficult-to-read.

@Thor: I think I'm just going to ignore you for a bit, no offense.

[BuJaber]

@thor yes. I saw that it was a pronoun discussion so I skipped over it and forgot the names being discussed.

@mod I'd like to be replaced please. I'm sorry.
Clearly there is a language barrier that I can't penetrate or wilky is being intentionally thick.

[wilky]

Replacing out because of one person? Where's the language barrier?

Did you vote someone for lurking? Yes
Was that person NM? Yes

Did espeo vote NM? Yes
Did he vote him for lurking? Yes

[BuJaber]

Yes I am. I'd rather replace than suicide and I just don't want to play this game anymore because I can't continue explaining the same things over and over and over again. It's not even an argument of what is scummy or not anymore as you can see. We're arguing on what the fuck my words actually mean.

[wilky]

I'd argue that it is an argument of who's scummy as you're calling someone scum for doing something you did yourself just in a slightly different way.

[Dr Fanta]

To be honest if you two are gonna have such wildy conflicting opinions it's gonna be tough for us to keepp you around.

We talked about this decision off-site before making it, I'm confident with Peppers scumreads (that is why we created this hydra after all, she's very good at reading people and I'm not so much.)
I stand behind her choices and reasoning, don't worry :>

Also sorry but it's nearly 4am and I've been out all day, I'd write longer but this is all I have energy for right now.
-Fanta

[Thor665]

@Thor: I think I'm just going to ignore you for a bit, no offense.

I don't take offense at thing sthat aren't offensive.

That said, i do think you owe me an answer to my very reasonable, direct, and clearly alignment indicative question of how you differentiate my play in this game from how you are well aware of how I play town in the game I caught you in that you linked - because you are clearly aware that I play aggressively and yet are calling me scum for being overly aggressive and I'd like to hear how you see the two as different levels of aggression. One - that you know is town level, and this one, that you believe is scum level.

Do that and we can drop everything else, even though I will consider it a strategic drop on your part.

To be honest if you two are gonna have such wildy conflicting opinions it's gonna be tough for us to keepp you around.

We talked about this decision off-site before making it, I'm confident with Peppers scumreads (that is why we created this hydra after all, she's very good at reading people and I'm not so much.)
I stand behind her choices and reasoning, don't worry :>

Also sorry but it's nearly 4am and I've been out all day, I'd write longer but this is all I have energy for right now.
-Fanta

When Pepper gets back I'd love to hear my question last asked of your slot answered - how did he consider the wagon fast without counting his own slot's vote? And if he did count his own slot's vote - how does that make the wagon scummy fast?


If BuJabber actually replaces out I'm calling that slot even a stronger townread and would like to see the wagon dissipate.

[mutantdevle]

- BuJaber has requested replacement. He'll be replaced as soon as a replacement is available and has confirmed their role.

[Korina]

I'm on V/LA until Monday @devle

- noted.

[TheGoldenParadox]

OKay then. I'm sorry guys, I haven't been keeping up with the thread (I have been reading tl;dr's) but I'd appreciate it if people kept long posts spoilered and then included an unspoilered tl:dr at the end, it would really help.
I'll try to make a post over the weekend to accurately reflect my thoughts. However, I might not be able to finish.
I agree that Skitter and Thor are both probably town. I don't want to Pl them, because if they can keep argumentative long posts spoilered with tldr's, that's fine with me.

[mutantdevle]

- Almost50 replaces BuJaber.

[Almost50]

Hi!
I was following the game since it started with the intention to sub-in whenever possible, but only to carry on with my "you were killed on N1" series.

Btw, I only unsubscribed the thread yesterday after I got bored with how slow this was going. I believe I was at page 9.

From what I can remember I had Beef as my top TR. I also had Town leans on Thor, N_M & TGP.

I only had two Scum leans, and -funnily enough- my own slot was one of them. The other one is Korina.

Because of my Scum lean on BuJaber I have had Town leans on Espeo. Fanta, wilky & Montosh, but now they're all back to null.

Any questions? None? Good!

[Thor665]

So, my entire thing about that, is that I honestly have never seen town trying to set up arguments where they know the exact outcome. It seems like something mafia/wolf would do.

How would I know what the outcome would be?
You're, like Skitter, accussing me of being a mindreader/master manipulator with zero evidence to support said claim, and then acting like it's a valid call.

@Korina - I knew the outcome would be you missing the question, but let's go with this a second time.

@Korina - third time's the charm?