|
On March 26 2014 09:21 Palmar wrote:
This is where we disagree. Read the initial question again, it says "why robik over anyone else". Because I am not rayn I assumed that was actually what he was asking, ie, for you to explain why you hadn't picked me, or marv, or someone else, and I couldn't think of a response that would make your seemingly random choice any scummier or townier.
I did not consider that rayn was fishing for the nature of your reaction.
The whole point of the question was it was a loaded one, which gave gumshoe an "out" which was not really an out but a bait instead - in case he got scared. 
|
I think the confusing part here is that gumshoe assumes/says Palmar thought i was scummy for my question and therefore questioned me. Not that Palmar was trying to get a read on me.
gumshoe how do you ended up to this conclusion in the first place?
|
On March 26 2014 09:39 gumshoe wrote:[...] Show nested quote +If rayn does not have an explanation to his question it makes the question pointless and thus rayn more likely to be mafia. He found you scummy because of your question, he wasnt just trying to find out your intent. Point is, I dont see how he could have anticipated the intent you chose to reveal bieng scummy. Therefore the only likely outcome of the question is that you both come to an understanding.
No gumshoe. That's saying "if he didn't have an intention behind the question i would find him scummy".
|
Like the same thing as my question to you:
"A variety of answers are null, but there is a possibility of scummy one."
Why did you figure that out from my question but not from Palmar's?
|
On March 26 2014 09:44 gumshoe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2014 09:41 raynpelikoneet wrote:On March 26 2014 09:39 gumshoe wrote:[...] If rayn does not have an explanation to his question it makes the question pointless and thus rayn more likely to be mafia. He found you scummy because of your question, he wasnt just trying to find out your intent. Point is, I dont see how he could have anticipated the intent you chose to reveal bieng scummy. Therefore the only likely outcome of the question is that you both come to an understanding. No gumshoe. That's saying "if he didn't have an intention behind the question i would find him scummy". He said he could not think of a reason, therefore he thought you were scummy. Which is bull cause theres no way he couldnt think up a reason, therefore he is not genuine for whatever reason.
Can you point out where he says this?
|
On March 26 2014 09:43 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2014 09:36 Palmar wrote:On March 26 2014 09:30 gumshoe wrote:On March 26 2014 09:26 Palmar wrote:
Also regarding genuine, no matter my alignment I would always be genuine right now. There is a reason I asked rayn the question, and that reason exists whether or not I am mafia or town. So why do you say I am not genuine? I agree with you, a reason does exist, when the reason is some other than "Asking this question of rayn because I think hes scummy" I consider it not genuine and I'm forced to consider other reasonings other than the prefered default. As for why your not literally genuine, 2 reasons 1) I dont believe you couldnt come up with a reason for him asking me that question. 2) Going by the first bit. I dont understand why youd ask that question knowing how easy it is to answer. 3) Your quick acceptance indicated your confusion was meh, possibly non existant. If the bolded is true I am mafia for asking that question, no matter what. The only answer you accept as genuine can not possibly be given at that point in the thread because it's completely unreasonable to think rayn is scummy at that point. Thus by your own definition I must be mafia for asking that question and there is no need for you to follow up on it, as any answer I give will always make me mafia in your eyes. ##Vote gumshoe Looks like you made a case on yourself and then voted someone else, Palmar. Tsk.
marv why this crappycrap?
|
On March 26 2014 09:49 gumshoe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2014 09:46 raynpelikoneet wrote:On March 26 2014 09:44 gumshoe wrote:On March 26 2014 09:41 raynpelikoneet wrote:On March 26 2014 09:39 gumshoe wrote:[...] If rayn does not have an explanation to his question it makes the question pointless and thus rayn more likely to be mafia. He found you scummy because of your question, he wasnt just trying to find out your intent. Point is, I dont see how he could have anticipated the intent you chose to reveal bieng scummy. Therefore the only likely outcome of the question is that you both come to an understanding. No gumshoe. That's saying "if he didn't have an intention behind the question i would find him scummy". He said he could not think of a reason, therefore he thought you were scummy. Which is bull cause theres no way he couldnt think up a reason, therefore he is not genuine for whatever reason. Can you point out where he says this? Show nested quote +The point being that I did not see how any answer I expected could possibly have revealed anything about your alignment.
Okay so we obviously disagree about the meaning of that post. I think i am right given Palmar's earlier posts which point towards me being right.
|
Do you think gumshoe is mafia?
Also why don't you understand Palmar's post, it's pretty clear?
|
On March 26 2014 09:53 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2014 09:52 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Do you think gumshoe is mafia?
Also why don't you understand Palmar's post, it's pretty clear? I have to assume this is directed at me, but nowhere did I indicate I did not understand Palmar's post. Read again.
meh okay, you're just weird.
but do you think gumshoe is mafia?
|
Palmar must be the most trapped person in mafia.
|
gumshoe, here is how i see it:
On March 26 2014 08:29 Palmar wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2014 08:27 raynpelikoneet wrote:
gumshoe why Robik over anyone else? Do you think you will get an answer from gumshoe that has any chance of moving your read on him forward? If so, what kind of an answer would make you lean one way or the other?
On March 26 2014 08:38 Palmar wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2014 08:32 raynpelikoneet wrote:On March 26 2014 08:29 Palmar wrote:On March 26 2014 08:27 raynpelikoneet wrote:
gumshoe why Robik over anyone else? Do you think you will get an answer from gumshoe that has any chance of moving your read on him forward? If so, what kind of an answer would make you lean one way or the other? Over-explained answer could be indicative of scumshoe. He tried to over-explain shit last game (geript's PYP) as mafia and it backpedalled quite hard. He also knows i am a tunnely guy and he also knows my questions have motive behind them so therefore he knows he must answer to me. Joke is a joke, but gumshoe getting possibly scared as scum was worth a try. There is no reason for him not to answer you as any alignment, but I guess it is actually reasonable to think there is a small chance of panic and overexplanation.
On March 26 2014 08:53 Palmar wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2014 08:41 gumshoe wrote:On March 26 2014 08:38 Palmar wrote:On March 26 2014 08:32 raynpelikoneet wrote:On March 26 2014 08:29 Palmar wrote:On March 26 2014 08:27 raynpelikoneet wrote:
gumshoe why Robik over anyone else? Do you think you will get an answer from gumshoe that has any chance of moving your read on him forward? If so, what kind of an answer would make you lean one way or the other? Over-explained answer could be indicative of scumshoe. He tried to over-explain shit last game (geript's PYP) as mafia and it backpedalled quite hard. He also knows i am a tunnely guy and he also knows my questions have motive behind them so therefore he knows he must answer to me. Joke is a joke, but gumshoe getting possibly scared as scum was worth a try. There is no reason for him not to answer you as any alignment, but I guess it is actually reasonable to think there is a small chance of panic and overexplanation. Scum can be reasonable as well : P and this game is pretty stacked, mistakes this early on are not to be expected. I'm curious Palmer, what kind of reaction were you looking for out of Rayn, knowing farily well hed have an easy time answering your question as either alignment? If rayn does not have an explanation to his question it makes the question pointless and thus rayn more likely to be mafia.
On March 26 2014 08:54 Palmar wrote:
The point being that I did not see how any answer I expected could possibly have revealed anything about your alignment.
Let me make myself Palmar for a second:
"I don't get why you are asking gumshoe that shit. I can't think of a reason but maybe there is one. Let's see if there is a reason or not. Otherwise rayn is probably mafia. Okay he told me the reason, hmm.. seems reasonable, no need to pursue this further." Everything after that is explaining the motivation behind the original question.
Now why is this not an acceptable scenario given the posts i quoted? I mean of course it's possible Palmar was just lazy scum who was not thinking at all and asked useless shit but is it more likely?
I can't tell based on these relevant posts so i consider this a null-tell. So if you have some awesome evidence i have missed which proves Palmar was just making shit up for no reason please elaborate.
|
Why do you leave out the post where he contributes to my answer?
There is no reason for him not to answer you as any alignment, but I guess it is actually reasonable to think there is a small chance of panic and overexplanation.
Why are you selectively quoting posts and not taking account the whole conversation?
|
|
|
Hi guys i have a funny game gimme a sec
|
|
|
oops that's supposed to say "two truths and one lie".
|
On March 26 2014 14:14 Holyflare wrote:
point 3 is obviously a lie
incorrect.
|
On March 26 2014 14:14 thrawn2112 wrote:
rayn do you think you look townie?
yes
|
On March 26 2014 14:16 thrawn2112 wrote:
why?
because i have found many townies.
|
On March 26 2014 14:17 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2014 14:14 raynpelikoneet wrote:On March 26 2014 14:14 Holyflare wrote:
point 3 is obviously a lie incorrect. well then you are bad because he said you looked town for a "town claim" that wasn't a town claim inherently and then when i said it was null he said "he looks town for other reasons too" so either in the first instance he was lying or the second instance he was lying so no rayn, why are you being so bad? point 2 has to be the lie then
That's not what he said. You are interpreting the post in a way it's not meant. That's absolutely not what Robik says.
2 is incorrect too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
