Dome Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 28 minutes ago, SwAg said: For what it’s worth, Dome, I think you’re making the right argument right now. Care to elaborate? 30 minutes ago, SwAg said: Just don’t know how persuasive it is when you’re fighting from a point of game vulnerability, rather than thread vulnerability. Care to elaborate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwAg Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 Not really. It's hardly cryptic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 7 minutes ago, SwAg said: Not really. It's hardly cryptic. I didn't ask you to explain it, I asked you to elaborate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwAg Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 1 minute ago, Dome said: I didn't ask you to explain it, I asked you to elaborate. I don't know. When there is what seems like 1v1 WIFOM going on, I tend to abstain from getting too involved. The amount of arguments that could effectively be made right now is fairly limited. Squire and Rick opened James internal thought process to scrutiny, which James elaborated upon. The detailing of the thought process that resulted in James targeting you is not the most sound based upon the other thread information. It's naturally a weak aspect of the accusation that is related, but not necessarily essential, or even contradictory to the principle claim. Thus, it's attacking the claim in the most effective manner, but it's not necessarily inherently effective because the arguments are in separate lanes. It's attacking a game argument with a threadplay argument. Yeah, it can be effective, but it's also a fallacy to require one for the other to be viable. This sentiment is particularly prevalent when the issue is inculpatory, but not necessarily the focus when exculpatory, but the propositions involved are generally similar (if the not the same). I also think it could be persuasive for other people, but I don't know that it does much for me. It shifts the inquiry to the process rather than the result, and in certain circumstances I think that is more valuable (and more effective), but I do not think this is one of those scenarios. Plus, I understand the thought process behind targeting you (or a handful of other people) for "no reason." But James can elaborate on that (or not). Just not sure it's an appealing counter to me, but it's the best and most rational argument available, and you didn't use the arguments that would make me think you're howling. So, that counts for something. I'll actually be around during phase shift and the day, so I'll sleep on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 Its weird the claimed tracker wasn't hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 Just now, Dome said: Its weird the claimed tracker wasn't hit. two nights in a row. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwAg Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 6 minutes ago, Dome said: Its weird the claimed tracker wasn't hit. 6 minutes ago, Dome said: two nights in a row. This guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwAg Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 Dome, be real with me, I won't tell them: You trying to get me to out people (and their targets) to limit the pool of who could be responsible for certain night actions, and thus fulfilling some final use for your faction before your death? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwAg Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 16 minutes ago, Dome said: Its weird the claimed tracker wasn't hit. Actually, I don't know if you meant to, but I'm having a Jimmy Neutron brain blast right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 10 minutes ago, SwAg said: Dome, be real with me, I won't tell them: You trying to get me to out people (and their targets) to limit the pool of who could be responsible for certain night actions, and thus fulfilling some final use for your faction before your death? No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 9 minutes ago, SwAg said: Actually, I don't know if you meant to, but I'm having a Jimmy Neutron brain blast right now. Oh yeah? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theuntouchable Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 Look at you dome, trying to outwit this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 Here is where I am on the James red lettering Dome situation. I think it is fair to put aside the reasoning behind why James choose to investigate Dome. It will have some merit at the end, so we can revisit it then. To me, looking at the results needs to be a starting point from a probability perspective. @Whicker you are a card player, so calculating odds when making decisions is something you should be familiar with. @SwAg I believe you are a big numbers and odds calculator when it comes to end of game situations (or at least I recall you looking at that a good amount in some of your first games here). Every one else is certainly should weigh in as well. 50% chance the results are good/true 50% chance the results are bad/false. Within this, why it would be false is worth parsing out. 1. James is scum and faking an invest 2. James report is tainted by some process (framed, crazy invest (breakfast club mafia). Not sure if there are any other real scenarios So the % True - 50% false due to faked invest - 25% false doe to tainted invest - 25% Now each of us can move those numbers around as to how we feel on the rationale, typical James game play (would he fake an invest), chance of a tainted result being in the game, etc. As on now, I am going with the higher probability play. Dome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malfatron Posted January 8, 2019 Author Share Posted January 8, 2019 pointing guns: dome - 4 (james, touch, whicker, squire swag - 1 (dome didn't decide yet: Pickle Rick - Miss Fuchsia bcb123 (replaced ET) - Mr. Cyan Swag - Mr. Gold Nazgul - Mr. Magenta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 2 hours ago, theuntouchable said: Look at you dome, trying to outwit this. Trying to show you knuckleheads why you shouldn’t lynch the MFer that lolcleared himself d1 lmao surprised you forgot that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(8).thumb.jpeg.57d74dc8edba37505fe32ce610d23a22.jpeg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.