Only if you consider the ability to do simple math a power role.
Slow your roll, partner. We haven’t got that far. You have to understand one crumb at a time.
The first step to finding scum is not killing off Town unecessarily. Go back again until you that sinks in, then we can proceed to the next crumb.
I realize you hunger for knowledge, but you have to start slow.
It’s amazing how much this guy thinks he knows about me, given his wealth of personal knowledge of me.
It’s amazing how much this guy thinks he knows about recognizing sarcasm, given the wealth of it he missed.
The previous may or may not have been sarcasm. It’s no fun if you tell.
Post #845. Good to know you are carefully reading my direct answers to your questions about me, lest you vote against someone ill-informed.
It would be the former (with no other oddball rules). The latter would clearly be to Town’s advantage, since it is in effect skipping 6 nights.
NETA: You needn’t bother to come back with “oh, you were right but it doesn’t change my mind”.
I already know that, both parts of it.
Hey man, if you don’t know, I strongly suggest you stop dabbling in it.
OK, I acknowledge that you did ask the question before, and I apparently just missed it when I was reading. But I fail to see how it’s relevant for any point you were trying to make.
We’ll be here. Just let us know when you’re ready to answer the actual question.
Because, assuming Town would direct Cookies kill (a tricky assumption in and of itself), we were in effect performing 2 lynches.
Multiple lynches are only a positive for the town if you have good targets, not if you are basically rolling the dice and hoping you get Scum.
Thus, the 7 kills on Day One example, which I apparently unsuccessfully hoped would be a clear illustration of the problem. I didn’t realize this was up there with Monty Haul in complexity. Unecessary kills by Town - especially when information is scarce - is a negative for Town. The odds - going strictly by number - are against Town, that is the nature of the game.
I’m not sure why this point seems difficult to grasp. It’s not only intuitive, but quite easily demonstrated by simply writing out the possible outcomes.
In that particular post I was specifically addressing your question to me, “what did she actually do wrong?” among other similar related questions.
===
Further, let me note such reasoning does not apply to Scum (the numbers are in their favor), nor does it apply to some power roles. If one were the detective, for example, he certainly wasn’t shooting in the dark.
However, one can’t base an analysis on that because the power roles are unknown and ain’t talking (at the time of vote).
As an aside, this is what makes Cookies’ last missive to me suggesting that the logic only applies to Town Power roles all the more amusing - it certainly does not, as they may well be privy to information beyond simple mathematical analysis.
===
Even further, I feel I’ve beat this horse enough. The play was stupid beyond even the math analysis:
We were incredibly fortunate to get a Scum power role, else it could have been devastating. Yet, as is human nature, the result is being discussed as if it were a masterful stroke by Town, because no one wants to admit dumb luck.
Question was asked and answered:
Do you understand this? At this stage, I don’t mean agree/disagree. I mean do you understand how the mechanics of the language have come together to form point, and do you understand what that point is?
Do you agree or disagree? At this stage, I am inquiring if you cognitively have judged the point, that is do you think the point is true or untrue?
If you disagree, explain exactly what part eludes or confuses you. For example, you seem to think that pure mathematical analysis is only helpful for power roles, when in fact it is **less **relevant to them (than vanilla townies), as they are likely to have access to information that vanilla town does not.
Already we see that the implications of the point are lost on you, yet I perservere. It is only your education that I hold as the highest importance.
Once you fully understand this point, we can move to the next.
Until then, you have work to do back at Square One.
I’m not really interested in turning a simple and straightforward question back around into a coloring book instruction manual about how best to jerk you off with one hand while flagellating myself for being unworthy to be in your presence with the other.
I’m asking you who you think the Scum are and why, because I’m frankly sick and tired of listening to your ‘constructive criticism’ of how everyone else is playing. You want to tie the criticism to a case? That’s cool. But aside from suspecting me, inaccurately, that’s not what you’re doing. You’re talking shit about people just to talk shit about people and enjoying the sound of your own keystrokes.
So who…besides me…do you think is scum and why? What behavior…besides mine…do you find suspect and why?
I can’t unkill Chip. He’s dead. Read you loud and clear in annoying acerbic triplicate that you think it was a bad idea to target him or anyone at all. But it is done now, and there is a game to play beyond the tired rinse and repeat game of you just calling people stupid that you’re playing with yourself and, unfortunately, the rest of us who are stuck reading it while trying to sift out the game-relevant bits from the crap.
I don’t mean to boast, but jerking me off is a two-handed job. You’ll have to flagellater.
===
If you were interested in what I thought about other players, I think I went over every single player in #870. If you find my other discourse unsettling or irrelevant, then why not focus on that?
===
If someone questions me directly (as Chronos did), should I not answer him?
Note I was already balls-deep dealing with a half-dozen questions from Chronos when you chimed in. Who’s fault is that, then? You jumped in, I didn’t ask for your input (as I already know what it will be).
If someone misrepresents that argument (as Wolverine did), should I not address it? Note that you **again **jumped in here, no one asked for your input (guess why?)
For someone not interested in turning something into something you sure are jumping in unsolicited a lot.
===
Here’s a radical thought:
If you truly aren’t interested in what I have to say, then don’t ask me questions.
And if you don’t want snark back, don’t start none. Don’t get mad when you come with a sarcasm jalapeno and I come with a sarcasm habanero. If you don’t want to taste the chili, don’t suggest a cook-off.
Alrighty then, moving on.
Hey, um, Ushi?
I say this as somebody who’s defended you in the past, but could you maybe tone it down a bit? I’d really appreciate it. I’m sure you can make your points without the condescension.
ushimitsudoki, a question for you, if you will.
What are you trying to accomplish with your posts here?
And now, a lecture…
If I’m not mistaken, we’re playing a game of Mafia here. You claim to be Town in this game, so I would think that the intent behind your posts would be to help Town win this game. But that doesn’t seem to be the case.
You seem to have gotten sidetracked; instead of trying to ‘win the game’ you seem more interested in ‘showing everybody else how much smarter you are then them’. Many of the points you are making are technically correct, but I can promise you that you aren’t ‘teaching’ anyone anything. The only thing you are accomplishing with your abrasive posting style is to alienate your fellow players.
If your intent is to win this game for the Town, then you’re doing it wrong. Your strategy may be superior to anyone else’s, but you can’t win this game all by yourself. You need to work with the Town, not against it. Right now you are a liability because nobody wants to listen to what you have to say.
If you actually want to play this game, then you need to quit treating everyone else like they’re a bunch of Neanderthals. If, on the other hand, you’re only interested in proving your intellectual superiority, then by all means, carry on.
Your points are well-taken, yet I don’t think I can address your question properly without violating the Formal Warning I received.
Suffice it to say that in the context of a game, though I can do either, I prefer being polite over “playing rough” - take note of how I attempted to start the game, if you please - but it was made exceedingly clear to me that I was to be mocked as the fool for my naive goodwill.
There’s really no profit in discussing this matter further here, as I can not fully address it, you have my apologies this explanation is lacking.
Then please stop tiptoeing up to the line, as well. It’s just a game, man. We’re just trying to have fun.
OOG
Ushi, Let’s put everything aside for a second.
Dude, I have to get you playing Haggle.
I’m sure everyone else here, who has played Haggle can comment. [Digger, if you are reading from the grave?]
/OOG
Wow, stop with all of the talking, guys. Information overload. I can’t process all the talking that’s gone on today.
I’m currently phone browsing, so this is about the extent of my posting capabilities. After I get some new contacts and head home, I’ll see if I can’t whip up something nicer for you. 
Frankly, the vibe of the game has turned sour. It’s a bit hard to muster enthusiasm at the moment.
I don’t agree with most of what ushi has said toDay (I mean, I think he’s wrong on points, never mind tone), but he’s choosing to be so contentious about it that it’s hardly worth the conversation.
Astral’s case on Wolverine appears reasonable at first glance. Maybe a re-read of Wolverine is in order.
Back for more later.