|
|
Post by quojova on Feb 1, 2021 5:59:17 GMT
Especially dont like the complete disregard of scorr as a player considering the overanalysis found here. do you think he doesn't believe what he's saying here, whatever the point he's trying to make is? do you think a complete disregard of scorr would be a problem for that post? |
|
|
|
Post by quojova on Feb 1, 2021 6:02:21 GMT
I always end up tring posts like these (az's) don't really want to say why though until later although I somewhat doubt it will be significant by then These r what we call "free d1 towncred" posts, where you put your hand in a bag and pull out a randomly selected mafia theory analysis to fit the game I'm more confident in this read than you might think like 3-5 percentage points below the default scumchance |
|
|
|
Post by OM~! on Feb 1, 2021 6:06:49 GMT
Especially dont like the complete disregard of scorr as a player considering the overanalysis found here. do you think he doesn't believe what he's saying here, whatever the point he's trying to make is? do you think a complete disregard of scorr would be a problem for that post? Its early positioning that feels disingeniously tacked on to the point - scorr's a pretty proven player with cards held tight, I don't see why one'd start discrediting him so earlu |
|
|
|
Post by OM~! on Feb 1, 2021 6:07:03 GMT
These r what we call "free d1 towncred" posts, where you put your hand in a bag and pull out a randomly selected mafia theory analysis to fit the game I'm more confident in this read than you might think like 3-5 percentage points below the default scumchance Hmmmmmmmm |
|
|
|
Post by AlmostZero on Feb 1, 2021 7:02:13 GMT
do you think he doesn't believe what he's saying here, whatever the point he's trying to make is? do you think a complete disregard of scorr would be a problem for that post? Its early positioning that feels disingeniously tacked on to the point - scorr's a pretty proven player with cards held tight, I don't see why one'd start discrediting him so earlu Not home yet, quick reply I'm sorry if I came off as if I'm disregarding scor, when I said "although I don't think they thought about this" I meant that they weren't thinking strategically when they did "!roll", and were just more or less randomly RVS'ing The issue I have however is that I don't see anything particularly wrong with "early positioning"; it's a game of mafia and strategizing and whatnot is just a part of the game? |
|
|
|
Post by AlmostZero on Feb 1, 2021 7:07:42 GMT
I always end up tring posts like these (az's) don't really want to say why though until later although I somewhat doubt it will be significant by then These r what we call "free d1 towncred" posts, where you put your hand in a bag and pull out a randomly selected mafia theory analysis to fit the game And at that point, the line between genuine strategizing and analysis and the "free d1 towncred" becomes extremely blurry. Although we really aren't going anywhere with this convo and this is getting subjective |
|
|
|
Post by ScorrchingTheaph on Feb 1, 2021 7:40:04 GMT
Oh hi quojova, we meet in another game Lynch quojova In all of the games I've been in with him, this person's been town I get what you mean, likewise he's been town in all the games I've been in with him Wow, would you look at these two posts! First off we start with a direct greeting from player AlmostZero to player quojova, aknowledging both of their simultaneous existences in both past and present games. Quite an impressive nod to the time-traveling theme of the current game. This initiation is noteworthy because it is AlmostZero's first post in the game; their one and only chance to make a first impression. AlmostZero chooses not to address the entire playerlist, which in reality is actually halved due to the unique mechanics of this unique dual thread no outside contact closed setup game hosted by the esteemed Forum Hero ForgotToFlush on the Pokemon Showdown! Mafia Forums, but instead addresses a singular player, quojova, in particular and temporarily casts aside the rest of the players in the game. After singling them out in such a fashion, AlmostZero pauses for a singular line, before proceeding to make a power play by doubling down and lynching quojova with the apparent intent of awarding them the power to switch places with or roleblock another player in the sister thread. Another pause for emphasis. Next comes AlmostZero's reasoning. At first glance it appears to be blatant Gambler's Fallacy, a somewhat common logical fallacy in Mafia games. This fallacy relies on misunderstanding of probability, that takes advantage of past events to make an assumption about a independent randomized event, as if it were somehow dependent on what happened previously. How could one person's past roles influence what their current role is? Of course it shouldn't. Every mafia game's roles and alignments are determened randomly, without regard to other games. This poses the question of whether or not this fallacy was committed intentionally. A deep-dive into AlmostZero's post history makes it obvious that they are a seasoned mafia veteran who would not be privy to making such mistakes. Ergo, this perfect example of Gambler's Fallacy must have been orchestrated with some specific purpose, thus eliminating the possibility of a naive AlmostZero making a sloppy read. Could it be that AlmostZero is scum that wants to protect their partner by planting a seed of towniness on quojova with the intention of pulling the wool over the townies' eyes by using false evidence to discreetly sway the town? Or could it be that they be a scum member that is attempting to pocket a town quojova with that statement, in the hopes of establishing a relationship of mutual trust where AlmostZero is actually working against quojova's goals? Or could it be that AlmostZero is a townie that is attempting to lure a scum quojova into a false sense of security which would make them more prone to slipping or making careless mistakes? Or could it be that AlmostZero and quojova are both Masons and they want to establish a public fail-safe interaction where either one can fall back on in case the other dies? What might be more likely is that AlmostZero is not only aware of their usage of Gambler's Fallacy, but also aware that everyone else will be capable of noticing and deducing that AlmostZero is aware that they know that he knows they know. This further clouds the meaning which leaves us with simply too many possibilities to list. Next we have quojova's genius response. It may seem like he just reitterates what AlmostZero says, even copying the use of third-person speech even though he is talking about himself, but the meaning has actually been drastically altered. AlmostZero stated that in all previous games that AlmostZero and quojova have been in, quojova has been town. quojova states that in all previous games that quojova and quojova have been in, quojova has been town. Both of their statements can be fact-checked if one so desires, but their legitimacy is not too important. Even without looking into quojova's game history, it is incredibly unlikely that they have never played a single scum game in their life. Surely this has to be a lie. It is possible that such an inaccuracy could be an aknowledgement towards the understanding of AlmostZero's use of Gambler's Fallacy. This would mean that quojova has some ideas as to what AlmostZero could or could not be planning, which is further confirmed by the start of his sentence: "I get what you mean." The alteration of the original message also shows that he is still on his toes and is not willing to believe everything that AlmostZero has to say. The lack of any straightforward pressure or resistance means that he is willing to accept AlmostZero's vote to reward, meaning that he thinks that he himself is a decent candidate to use any powers, if granted. This can be interpreted in multiple non-exclusive ways such as quojova thinking highly of themselves as a player, quojova being afraid of power being placed in another player's hands, quojova desiring such powers to establish control over the game, quojova lacking trust in other players, and/or quojova being mostly indifferent to gaining powers for one night. quojova must also be aware that other players are capable of noticing the intricacies of his post so he chooses to say no more than needed, beginning and ending his post with a singular line. It is quite impressive how much these two players were able to say with so little words. Such brilliance, I think I will increase both of their town probabilities by half a percentage. You may not like it, but this is what peak mafia looks like. |
|
|
|
Post by AlmostZero on Feb 1, 2021 7:42:18 GMT
what the fuck
|
|
|
|
Post by Snaq ◢ ◤ on Feb 1, 2021 7:51:55 GMT
Hellooo people, it's cool to be playing a game with y'all again. Gonna be somewhat inactive today / tomorrow though due to exam week, but from Thursday on I should be relatively free.
Rewarding someone huh, Lynch Alex, pls carry with your 1000s of mafia leaderboard points that are the best indicator of skill in any mafia community
|
|
|
|
Post by OM~! on Feb 1, 2021 8:51:27 GMT
Its early positioning that feels disingeniously tacked on to the point - scorr's a pretty proven player with cards held tight, I don't see why one'd start discrediting him so earlu Not home yet, quick reply I'm sorry if I came off as if I'm disregarding scor, when I said "although I don't think they thought about this" I meant that they weren't thinking strategically when they did "!roll", and were just more or less randomly RVS'ing The issue I have however is that I don't see anything particularly wrong with "early positioning"; it's a game of mafia and strategizing and whatnot is just a part of the game? It's not the early positioning that's the issue, it's the discredit and the disingeniousness of it |
|
|
|
Post by OM~! on Feb 1, 2021 8:52:23 GMT
These r what we call "free d1 towncred" posts, where you put your hand in a bag and pull out a randomly selected mafia theory analysis to fit the game And at that point, the line between genuine strategizing and analysis and the "free d1 towncred" becomes extremely blurry. Although we really aren't going anywhere with this convo and this is getting subjective I'm saying two things about the same post because they both apply - it's not rlly so much a blurred line as the same one |
|
|
|
Post by OM~! on Feb 1, 2021 8:54:05 GMT
y'all did this to yourselves |
|
|
|
Post by AlmostZero on Feb 1, 2021 12:25:01 GMT
Not home yet, quick reply I'm sorry if I came off as if I'm disregarding scor, when I said "although I don't think they thought about this" I meant that they weren't thinking strategically when they did "!roll", and were just more or less randomly RVS'ing The issue I have however is that I don't see anything particularly wrong with "early positioning"; it's a game of mafia and strategizing and whatnot is just a part of the game? It's not the early positioning that's the issue, it's the discredit and the disingeniousness of it Alright man, I apologize for my words and withdraw them, I didn't think it'll be that much of an issue |
|
|
|
Post by quojova on Feb 1, 2021 15:16:16 GMT
I get what you mean, likewise he's been town in all the games I've been in with him Wow, would you look at these two posts! First off we start with a direct greeting from player AlmostZero to player quojova, aknowledging both of their simultaneous existences in both past and present games. Quite an impressive nod to the time-traveling theme of the current game. This initiation is noteworthy because it is AlmostZero's first post in the game; their one and only chance to make a first impression. AlmostZero chooses not to address the entire playerlist, which in reality is actually halved due to the unique mechanics of this unique dual thread no outside contact closed setup game hosted by the esteemed Forum Hero ForgotToFlush on the Pokemon Showdown! Mafia Forums, but instead addresses a singular player, quojova, in particular and temporarily casts aside the rest of the players in the game. After singling them out in such a fashion, AlmostZero pauses for a singular line, before proceeding to make a power play by doubling down and lynching quojova with the apparent intent of awarding them the power to switch places with or roleblock another player in the sister thread. Another pause for emphasis. Next comes AlmostZero's reasoning. At first glance it appears to be blatant Gambler's Fallacy, a somewhat common logical fallacy in Mafia games. This fallacy relies on misunderstanding of probability, that takes advantage of past events to make an assumption about a independent randomized event, as if it were somehow dependent on what happened previously. How could one person's past roles influence what their current role is? Of course it shouldn't. Every mafia game's roles and alignments are determened randomly, without regard to other games. This poses the question of whether or not this fallacy was committed intentionally. A deep-dive into AlmostZero's post history makes it obvious that they are a seasoned mafia veteran who would not be privy to making such mistakes. Ergo, this perfect example of Gambler's Fallacy must have been orchestrated with some specific purpose, thus eliminating the possibility of a naive AlmostZero making a sloppy read. Could it be that AlmostZero is scum that wants to protect their partner by planting a seed of towniness on quojova with the intention of pulling the wool over the townies' eyes by using false evidence to discreetly sway the town? Or could it be that they be a scum member that is attempting to pocket a town quojova with that statement, in the hopes of establishing a relationship of mutual trust where AlmostZero is actually working against quojova's goals? Or could it be that AlmostZero is a townie that is attempting to lure a scum quojova into a false sense of security which would make them more prone to slipping or making careless mistakes? Or could it be that AlmostZero and quojova are both Masons and they want to establish a public fail-safe interaction where either one can fall back on in case the other dies? What might be more likely is that AlmostZero is not only aware of their usage of Gambler's Fallacy, but also aware that everyone else will be capable of noticing and deducing that AlmostZero is aware that they know that he knows they know. This further clouds the meaning which leaves us with simply too many possibilities to list. Next we have quojova's genius response. It may seem like he just reitterates what AlmostZero says, even copying the use of third-person speech even though he is talking about himself, but the meaning has actually been drastically altered. AlmostZero stated that in all previous games that AlmostZero and quojova have been in, quojova has been town. quojova states that in all previous games that quojova and quojova have been in, quojova has been town. Both of their statements can be fact-checked if one so desires, but their legitimacy is not too important. Even without looking into quojova's game history, it is incredibly unlikely that they have never played a single scum game in their life. Surely this has to be a lie. It is possible that such an inaccuracy could be an aknowledgement towards the understanding of AlmostZero's use of Gambler's Fallacy. This would mean that quojova has some ideas as to what AlmostZero could or could not be planning, which is further confirmed by the start of his sentence: "I get what you mean." The alteration of the original message also shows that he is still on his toes and is not willing to believe everything that AlmostZero has to say. The lack of any straightforward pressure or resistance means that he is willing to accept AlmostZero's vote to reward, meaning that he thinks that he himself is a decent candidate to use any powers, if granted. This can be interpreted in multiple non-exclusive ways such as quojova thinking highly of themselves as a player, quojova being afraid of power being placed in another player's hands, quojova desiring such powers to establish control over the game, quojova lacking trust in other players, and/or quojova being mostly indifferent to gaining powers for one night. quojova must also be aware that other players are capable of noticing the intricacies of his post so he chooses to say no more than needed, beginning and ending his post with a singular line. It is quite impressive how much these two players were able to say with so little words. Such brilliance, I think I will increase both of their town probabilities by half a percentage. You may not like it, but this is what peak mafia looks like. I admire this commitment to making a point I have actually been town in all previous (forum) games I have been in, which was the meaning I was going for You can meme the percentage point gameplay but I think essentially most meaningful early game play is about arguing over small amounts percentage points to get into discussions which involve larger amounts of percentage points. The only difference in my gameplay is that I explicitly state my small amount of confidence in a early game read so it's easy to track how my confidence fluctuates throughout the game. I don't think stating that significantly reduces the impact/pressure of those discussions; at the end of the day we either flip our bottom town or reward our top town and if our best guess is only 5% away from the default it's still who we flip. |
|
|
|
Post by quojova on Feb 1, 2021 15:35:08 GMT
Its early positioning that feels disingeniously tacked on to the point - scorr's a pretty proven player with cards held tight, I don't see why one'd start discrediting him so earlu Not home yet, quick reply I'm sorry if I came off as if I'm disregarding scor, when I said "although I don't think they thought about this" I meant that they weren't thinking strategically when they did "!roll", and were just more or less randomly RVS'ing The issue I have however is that I don't see anything particularly wrong with "early positioning"; it's a game of mafia and strategizing and whatnot is just a part of the game? have you played with scorr before in forums btw |
|
|
|
Post by quojova on Feb 1, 2021 15:41:55 GMT
Not home yet, quick reply I'm sorry if I came off as if I'm disregarding scor, when I said "although I don't think they thought about this" I meant that they weren't thinking strategically when they did "!roll", and were just more or less randomly RVS'ing The issue I have however is that I don't see anything particularly wrong with "early positioning"; it's a game of mafia and strategizing and whatnot is just a part of the game? It's not the early positioning that's the issue, it's the discredit and the disingeniousness of it I don't really get what you are putting down here. What did AZ do to discredit scorr? I also don't see why to discredit someone makes you more likely to be scum did you mean the: "..although I highly doubt that question mark had thought about this before making the rvs"? If so I don't how you can disagree with that statement |
|
|
|
Post by quojova on Feb 1, 2021 15:43:09 GMT
It's not the early positioning that's the issue, it's the discredit and the disingeniousness of it Alright man, I apologize for my words and withdraw them, I didn't think it'll be that much of an issue do you just have no interest in contesting him on it |
|
|
|
Post by quojova on Feb 1, 2021 16:17:59 GMT
Alright man, I apologize for my words and withdraw them, I didn't think it'll be that much of an issue do you just have no interest in contesting him on it or is he correct? were you being disingenuous/discrediting scorr here? |
|
|
|
Post by OM~! on Feb 1, 2021 16:22:24 GMT
It's not the early positioning that's the issue, it's the discredit and the disingeniousness of it I don't really get what you are putting down here. What did AZ do to discredit scorr? I also don't see why to discredit someone makes you more likely to be scum did you mean the: "..although I highly doubt that question mark had thought about this before making the rvs"? If so I don't how you can disagree with that statement Why can't I? It was already proven that scorr was thinking a bit more than you thought (i.e not randomized), so why shouldn't I think there's more? |
|
|
|
Post by Animal Midwife on Feb 1, 2021 16:28:05 GMT
I get what you mean, likewise he's been town in all the games I've been in with him Wow, would you look at these two posts! First off we start with a direct greeting from player AlmostZero to player quojova, aknowledging both of their simultaneous existences in both past and present games. Quite an impressive nod to the time-traveling theme of the current game. This initiation is noteworthy because it is AlmostZero's first post in the game; their one and only chance to make a first impression. AlmostZero chooses not to address the entire playerlist, which in reality is actually halved due to the unique mechanics of this unique dual thread no outside contact closed setup game hosted by the esteemed Forum Hero ForgotToFlush on the Pokemon Showdown! Mafia Forums, but instead addresses a singular player, quojova, in particular and temporarily casts aside the rest of the players in the game. After singling them out in such a fashion, AlmostZero pauses for a singular line, before proceeding to make a power play by doubling down and lynching quojova with the apparent intent of awarding them the power to switch places with or roleblock another player in the sister thread. Another pause for emphasis. Next comes AlmostZero's reasoning. At first glance it appears to be blatant Gambler's Fallacy, a somewhat common logical fallacy in Mafia games. This fallacy relies on misunderstanding of probability, that takes advantage of past events to make an assumption about a independent randomized event, as if it were somehow dependent on what happened previously. How could one person's past roles influence what their current role is? Of course it shouldn't. Every mafia game's roles and alignments are determened randomly, without regard to other games. This poses the question of whether or not this fallacy was committed intentionally. A deep-dive into AlmostZero's post history makes it obvious that they are a seasoned mafia veteran who would not be privy to making such mistakes. Ergo, this perfect example of Gambler's Fallacy must have been orchestrated with some specific purpose, thus eliminating the possibility of a naive AlmostZero making a sloppy read. Could it be that AlmostZero is scum that wants to protect their partner by planting a seed of towniness on quojova with the intention of pulling the wool over the townies' eyes by using false evidence to discreetly sway the town? Or could it be that they be a scum member that is attempting to pocket a town quojova with that statement, in the hopes of establishing a relationship of mutual trust where AlmostZero is actually working against quojova's goals? Or could it be that AlmostZero is a townie that is attempting to lure a scum quojova into a false sense of security which would make them more prone to slipping or making careless mistakes? Or could it be that AlmostZero and quojova are both Masons and they want to establish a public fail-safe interaction where either one can fall back on in case the other dies? What might be more likely is that AlmostZero is not only aware of their usage of Gambler's Fallacy, but also aware that everyone else will be capable of noticing and deducing that AlmostZero is aware that they know that he knows they know. This further clouds the meaning which leaves us with simply too many possibilities to list. Next we have quojova's genius response. It may seem like he just reitterates what AlmostZero says, even copying the use of third-person speech even though he is talking about himself, but the meaning has actually been drastically altered. AlmostZero stated that in all previous games that AlmostZero and quojova have been in, quojova has been town. quojova states that in all previous games that quojova and quojova have been in, quojova has been town. Both of their statements can be fact-checked if one so desires, but their legitimacy is not too important. Even without looking into quojova's game history, it is incredibly unlikely that they have never played a single scum game in their life. Surely this has to be a lie. It is possible that such an inaccuracy could be an aknowledgement towards the understanding of AlmostZero's use of Gambler's Fallacy. This would mean that quojova has some ideas as to what AlmostZero could or could not be planning, which is further confirmed by the start of his sentence: "I get what you mean." The alteration of the original message also shows that he is still on his toes and is not willing to believe everything that AlmostZero has to say. The lack of any straightforward pressure or resistance means that he is willing to accept AlmostZero's vote to reward, meaning that he thinks that he himself is a decent candidate to use any powers, if granted. This can be interpreted in multiple non-exclusive ways such as quojova thinking highly of themselves as a player, quojova being afraid of power being placed in another player's hands, quojova desiring such powers to establish control over the game, quojova lacking trust in other players, and/or quojova being mostly indifferent to gaining powers for one night. quojova must also be aware that other players are capable of noticing the intricacies of his post so he chooses to say no more than needed, beginning and ending his post with a singular line. It is quite impressive how much these two players were able to say with so little words. Such brilliance, I think I will increase both of their town probabilities by half a percentage. You may not like it, but this is what peak mafia looks like. -50 village points since I wasn't name-dropped. |
|
|
|
Post by Alexander489 on Feb 1, 2021 16:39:21 GMT
vote to reward someone? huh?
|
|
|
|
Post by Alexander489 on Feb 1, 2021 16:39:56 GMT
wonder what that could be.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alexander489 on Feb 1, 2021 16:40:48 GMT
anyways **vote scorch**
|
|
|
|
Post by Alexander489 on Feb 1, 2021 16:41:03 GMT
oops i am a forum noob mb vote scorch8.5.7 |
|
|
|
Post by quojova on Feb 1, 2021 16:44:56 GMT
I don't really get what you are putting down here. What did AZ do to discredit scorr? I also don't see why to discredit someone makes you more likely to be scum did you mean the: "..although I highly doubt that question mark had thought about this before making the rvs"? If so I don't how you can disagree with that statement Why can't I? It was already proven that scorr was thinking a bit more than you thought (i.e not randomized), so why shouldn't I think there's more? You are extracting an argument here which is not there. After the misunderstanding regarding the "!roll 7" was cleared up no one was arguing that scorr couldn't have thought more about his rvs vote than just a semi-random pick. I might personally disagree with the idea that there was much thought put into that but that wasn't what you responded to. The post you responded to az to with the phrase, "..although I highly doubt that question mark had thought about this before making the rvs" was specifically in regard to whether scorr thought about the intricacies of making a "lukewarm" or "not lukewarm" vote. That is such a random thing to think about for your rvs vote that the natural assumed conclusion is obviously that it wasn't considered. You looked at this and read it as trying to discredit scorr. Why? |
|
