[M][N] Mini Mafia: The (kinda) Vanilla Experience

On October 17 2015 13:13 iamperfection wrote:
/in

On October 20 2015 02:38 Koshi wrote:
Also can't marv just pussy out in that game as well and just give up? Or anybody else that is such a giant pussy and gives up start of N1? Who can we pressure?

On October 20 2015 04:46 Blazinghand wrote:
I strongly prefer seperate thread, because it is easier for hosts 100% of the time

On October 22 2015 07:44 marvellosity wrote:

which 2?

On October 22 2015 07:46 marvellosity wrote:

good, me too

but not ritoky

On October 22 2015 07:49 marvellosity wrote:
you'll forgive me if i don't take your word for it :>

On October 22 2015 07:54 Xatalos wrote:


Have you played with gumshoe before when he has actually... you know, played? :D

On October 22 2015 06:56 gumshoe wrote:


Theres no point to him trying to convince us to follow his lynch. RNG is viable when reads are shit, convincing town to rng lynch requires shit reads. The game has just begun therefore reads have not had the time to develop quality, which means bh does not yet posses his convince condition.

In the absence of the means to convince us to choose his method, all he can do is argue how his is truly random. Because a mafia player who argues for an actual rng lynch is forfeiting his ability to protect his teammates (and potentially himself) from rng. A competent scumer would usually have faith in his ability to sway town one way or another, which means he probably wouldn't risk an rng team kill. Basically there are only 3 kinds of players who would propose this strat.

1) a player who is so insecure about his play, he is honestly proposing to just roll the dice instead of play(at least on day 1). This player could be town or scum.

2) A town player who is just using this as a means to prove his innocence "why would I risk killing myself or my teamies as mafia? I must be town!" this works sorta because your odds are quite low of hitting yourself and if you do then you can always say "well I know I'm town, so I'll just disregard this result" -_-

3) A scummer who believes that town will not actually rng lynch because it is objectively a bad strat compared to a really solid case/read. He must hope for this, because to a scummer the rng lynch can actually just backfire, since mafia as an entity operate on a clear pool of lives as opposed to towns mist of health.

we can probally straight up rule out the first possibility (bh be goods not scrubs), which leaves 2 and 3. This whole thing seems pre written so hard to tell between them. Honestly best just to ignore the whole thing unless it gets to the point where our reads are so junk an rng lynch is actually more likely.

ether way, I dont think bh expects us to actually straight up rng lynch, this was probably just a way to look active early on without actually offering substance (though it might draw substance out of others, which is always good)

On October 22 2015 07:55 Xatalos wrote:


And how would you characterize his meta? My experience has been basically "scummy lurker as either alignment".

Would also like to know why you put ritoky as town as especially marv.

On October 22 2015 07:57 marvellosity wrote:

yes

somehow feels like gumshoe could easily post it as town though

On October 22 2015 07:59 marvellosity wrote:

that's getting a bit meta for me

On October 22 2015 08:00 Xatalos wrote:
I think I had some heuristic for reading marv before but I lost it :D In any case, I think he's skilled enough to beat a heuristic I would think of...

On October 22 2015 08:01 Vivax wrote:
Feels like Chrom didn't really enter the spirit of the game when he was around, or maybe he's just naturally too serious to engage with others when it felt to me like it was a good position to just post something for funzies.

Kind of a transcendent way for me to read him.

On October 22 2015 08:08 Xatalos wrote:
Hmm... Could be I guess... It's more a process of elimination than anything genuinely scummy though.

On October 22 2015 08:10 Vivax wrote:
I just realized how badly represented my country is on this forum, the brits, north americans and scandinavians have so many players with so much variety and the only thing I can bring to the table is the country of Fritzl, Hitler and Dandel Ion.

On October 22 2015 08:15 Vivax wrote:


I really hope for us that you aren't mafia with yamato or this is set to become a pretty sad game.

On October 22 2015 08:17 gumshoe wrote:


Rayns a big meanie, nothings changed. .

On October 22 2015 08:21 Xatalos wrote:
rayn how sure are you about gumshoe? I somehow have a light feeling he could be town. Mainly from his insistence about the random BH thing I guess? Even if it's pretty... nonsense.

On October 22 2015 08:18 raynpelikoneet wrote:

explain

On October 22 2015 08:33 marvellosity wrote:
I totally have tits

On October 22 2015 08:35 Xatalos wrote:


Nope? Not really a big follower of music/sports events.

On October 22 2015 08:34 Hopeless1der wrote:

3th?

On October 22 2015 08:24 raynpelikoneet wrote:

gumshoe please.

On October 22 2015 08:39 Hopeless1der wrote:

Is this not it?

On October 22 2015 08:44 marvellosity wrote:
I think you're blowing this out of proportion a little, rayn

On October 22 2015 08:46 gumshoe wrote:


historically you are usually wrong about my active play. That does and should make a difference in how people consider your inevitable/doomed and or scummy tunnel of me.

On October 22 2015 11:25 Chromatically wrote:
Bad or scummy? I think it's bad but not really scummy, especially since I feel like he has been very town otherwise.

On October 22 2015 11:32 Chromatically wrote:
I do think mafia would rather not townread him than townread him anyway though.

On October 22 2015 15:25 Alakaslam wrote:
You know I am unlynchable until Lylo

On October 23 2015 05:13 Onegu wrote:
Also rayn why do I get the feeling you going after BH is just because his RNG landed on you. Not sure if that makes you town or scum at this point but dont worry I will figure you out in the next 12 hours.

On October 23 2015 05:28 Blazinghand wrote:


He makes a perfectly reasonable set of statements.

"Blazinghand has a meta of using RNG as town"

"...however, this doesn't mean we should automatically assume BH is town. BH is a tricky fucker, and is notoriously a tricky fucker. He has done all kinds of things as scum that nobody thought scum would do, like pretend to get dumped, be depressed, death in teh family, and so on. He will do anything as scum to win, he's so sexy and good at this game. BH, you are so cool. This is known by all people"

These are both reasonabl eand true statements

On October 23 2015 05:39 Blazinghand wrote:


well, not towards me. You're actually being a little more gentle with me, compared to normal. Normally I'd expect you to end up TRing ritoky for that on your own. Maybe it's been some time since we played together, or my edge is getting dull, but I recall you being pretty good at noticing people's motivations.

On October 23 2015 05:42 Blazinghand wrote:
Wait does rayn actually want to lynch me? I'm like P sure he hasn't voted me or tried to call me scum but I might have missed it

brb dinner

On October 23 2015 05:40 Onegu wrote:
Rayn you still havent responded to why your yamato read changed.

On October 23 2015 05:50 Xatalos wrote:


Really? Well, I guess we'll see as the game goes on. I'm relatively sure I got the right impression, and more so with some of BH's more recent posts.

On October 23 2015 05:54 Xatalos wrote:


You mean I could have tried to pocket him by giving him an easy townread as scum? Well, I can't deny I haven't done stuff like that as scum. I guess we'll just have to see that's not the case here.

On October 23 2015 05:56 Xatalos wrote:


Oh yeah, I'd also like to know how this read came to be btw

On October 22 2015 07:26 Blazinghand wrote:
"would you have done this if you were mafia?" --> the answer to this question is always "yes". I'm willing to lie, cheat, steal, doctor photographs, put items in boxes, fake plane tickets, pretend to have depression, a death in the family, etc, whatever it takes to win regardless of alignment. I'm one of the few players that does not pull punches as mafia. So yes, as mafia, I'd be fully willing to RNG if I percieved it to be a good idea (which it isn't; I've outlined why RNG is pro-town this game)

On October 23 2015 06:12 Xatalos wrote:


So? He didn't even seem to realize that RNG-stuff was a "towntell" for him until after we started discussing the topic. What's more, even if he did, it wouldn't be so easy to fake the whole push and argue about it with that kind of conviction if he thought it was counter-productive for his faction (as scum). And well, he has just generally been active and producing posts I like. I don't really feel there's any reason to think he's null, let alone scum.

On October 23 2015 06:14 Xatalos wrote:
Truthfully I'd be more interested to understand your incomprehensible reads on yamato and Hopeless....

On October 23 2015 06:27 ritoky wrote:


depending on the setup of the game and the structure of PRs, yes.

On October 23 2015 06:34 Xatalos wrote:


Well, read my last post.... Also, like I said, even if it might sound good in theory, he hasn't done that so far in his scumgames and it wouldn't probably be as easy in practise ESPECIALLY if the RNG hit his teammate.

On October 23 2015 06:37 Xatalos wrote:


Well, you did react a bit when you entered the thread. I think someone less experienced could well fall into panic as scum. In my first Mafia game there was a random vote pile on my teammate and he basically revealed himself by reacting weirdly.

On October 23 2015 06:38 ritoky wrote:


it's actually equally as likely, so i disagree with your premise entirely.

Mafia players are lynched 26.0% of the time on day one.
Random lynching would result in a mafia lynch 25.2% of the time.
Mafia players are lynched only 16.4% of the time in newbie games on day one, so excluding these games brings the overall day one lynch percentage up to 28.1%!

On October 22 2015 07:08 ritoky wrote:


generally speaking he doesn't rng as mafia, but i wouldn't put it past him to break meta.

On October 23 2015 06:44 ritoky wrote:


2.9% is within the margin of error to where it is negligible. also those statistics include the RNG user including themself in the RNG rather than excluding.

On October 23 2015 07:05 yamato77 wrote:

No, it makes him suspicious.

On October 23 2015 07:13 marvellosity wrote:

i thought you told me ritoky was town?

On October 23 2015 07:16 yamato77 wrote:
Ritoky, slam, bh, onegu all likely mafia? I disagree on at least one. Your last paragraph of townreads is fine but meh, I can't agree with you too much here.

On October 23 2015 07:17 ritoky wrote:




respond.

On October 23 2015 07:20 yamato77 wrote:

I disagree on ritoky and I don't have a solid read on any of BH, slam, or Onegu.

Yes I would swap in GB

Notably missing from your post is Xata. Obviously he's been an active player but his stances are meh and I don't really think he's put himself out much. What do you read him?

On October 23 2015 07:21 ritoky wrote:


y'know, gonna be honest here. you're the most underwhelming player that people tell me is good on these forums. i just don't see it; maybe i am the one who is so bad i can't comprehend your greatness; but i don't think that's the case.

On October 23 2015 07:31 Hopeless1der wrote:

rayn, was this your turning point on ritoky? They're right when saying that ritoky posted nothing between "(rayn thinks) ritoky is town" and "POE lynch list include ritoky".

On October 23 2015 07:32 Vivax wrote:


Come on man you can give something more definitive than this.

On October 22 2015 06:45 ritoky wrote:


at start of game mafia more likely to re-read and edit their post than town is. town more prone to be natural. the lines at the end, the changes between capitalizing and not capitalizing, and some other aspects shows he read and edited the post.

On October 23 2015 07:44 marvellosity wrote:

This is what worries me tbh. Not that I'm saying he isn't a levelheaded person, but I'm kinda struggling to place him in the game which I don't like

On October 23 2015 07:49 Vivax wrote:
Bothers me how first GB goes from "Vivax mafia cause tone" when most people agreed that it's my town tone, and then thinks of another reason to scumread me for and switches over to saying that he's suspicious of my townreads cause he doesn't know how they're formed.

So um yeah, either my tone sucks but then my townreads don't have anything to do with it, and when confronted with other people's opinions (marv was hitting that with a pneumatic hammer) he abandons it and starts looking for another reason to bitch about my alignment, so he asks me some fancy questions "why do you townread these dudes" when it's a question he could ask anyone without having to scumread them first.

On October 23 2015 07:48 marvellosity wrote:

I don't know how to explain and it may be nothing

like I know he's been on ritoky and stuff. but with most other people i can remember who they argued with, or standing out in particular for some reason, or meta stuff when I think about them.

so for me Chromatically is kinda just *there*. tbh right now i'm not even sure i'm suspicious of him for it,not filtered him or anything, i'll do that tomorrow. so he can go about his business ^^

On October 23 2015 07:55 marvellosity wrote:

kinda reminds me of your Shining townread d1 last game though.

On October 23 2015 08:00 Xatalos wrote:
Hm... rayn, you stopped responding to me because you understood my point about the RNG things, but I'm "dumb" anyway? Why am I "dumb" even if you thought I ultimately had a point? Or did you talk about it with me because you initially put / painted me as scum and then dropped interest when it didn't go anywhere?

Well, I guess you did answer some of it indirectly in your other posts anyway. I was still left hanging especially with how you gave GB/Hopeless such easy town passes (for almost nothing) and why ritoky became scum for... basically disagreeing with you about some RNG statistics?

On October 23 2015 16:01 GlowingBear wrote:
I seriously don't understand why I'm being scumread.

Could you please enlighten me?

On October 23 2015 19:17 marvellosity wrote:

It feels to me like he decided to scumread rayn and then is kinda just picking out posts to make it happen.

On October 23 2015 23:43 marvellosity wrote:
Xatalos is gonna have like 11-12 pages filter after d1, he's just gonna be town rayn

On October 23 2015 23:45 marvellosity wrote:
well that'll be productive

On October 23 2015 19:28 marvellosity wrote:
the funny thing is, one thing that makes me unsure about GB being mafia - both rayn and I stated pretty early that Vivax was town and I think it was kinda obvious we were serious about it. So I guess GB-mafia in that instance somehow decides to go against both me and rayn and push a very weak meta case? it's practically suicidal. maybe he's just town and believes it... dno right now

On October 23 2015 23:50 marvellosity wrote:
but he's town

On October 23 2015 23:50 marvellosity wrote:
i'll probably choose between GB/Slam if rayn's meta point on Chrome holds up

On October 24 2015 00:03 GlowingBear wrote:


I was at my night class when the game stared and I'm playing two games - when I've got the time I read the whole thread and gave my impressions on all players.

On October 24 2015 00:06 Xatalos wrote:
Apparently rayn mentioned Slam as a PoE suspect at one point but... why is he the lynch of choice suddenly? Over me who's 100% scum, or GB similarly?

On October 24 2015 00:14 marvellosity wrote:

i'm not ignoring everything he says afterwards. i liked some of his longer posts.

you're coming at this in a really, really shallow way.

like I can answer your question about rayn's play.

rayn thinks GB could be mafia, but he has nagging meta/tonal reasons that he might be town
rayn thinks you are mafia because of your shit read on him, but he knows he cannot push a lynch through on you at all with me opposing it today
rayn recognises that me and him both agree on Slam, this is a good shot of being mafia and if he hits mafia he gets more cred to go after you.

On October 24 2015 00:16 marvellosity wrote:

curses

why not him instead of Slam then?

On October 24 2015 00:21 Xatalos wrote:


Do you honestly think he believes I'm scum based on that? I made an extremely similar push last time I was town and he was scum, and he similarly immediately scumread me for the push. It's actually unbelievable how similar his gut reaction is.

And it's very odd how his PoE possibility of Slam being scum suddenly became the best lynch. Even though he's pushed GB for the recent times. And how is PoE even a valid reason for his lynch choice when he has several actual scumreads and overall his reads are nothing consistent? His reads have changed in so many directions that how is Slam still in a similar PoE position? I think he just saw an easy way out of getting lynched today and went for the easy route of sheeping you, even though there's still like 5-6 hours time left.

On October 24 2015 00:29 Xatalos wrote:


So how am I 100% scum because of this push if it wouldn't surprise you that I made this push as town?

On October 24 2015 00:36 GlowingBear wrote:


I'm not commiting suicide, I'm getting angry that such shitty scum read on me based on a read that I find very reasonable and I'm having a hard time believing good players can't possibly see I'm town.

On October 24 2015 00:41 GlowingBear wrote:


I
HAVE
READ
THE
THREAD

I KNOW YOU "YOLO'ED" AND CALLED ONEGU TOWN FOR NO REASON
I KNOW YOU META'ED HOPELESS AND CALLED HIM TOWN
I KNOW MARV AND YOU HAD TWO INITIAL TOWNREADS - XATALOS AND VIVAX
I KNOW YOU FUCKING HAD GUMSHOE AS MAFIA THEN FLIPPED YOUR READ

WHY CAN'T I BRING WHAT I THINK ABOUT PLAYERS AND ASK YOU TO COMMENT ABOUT WHAT I'VE BROUGHT INSTEAD OF SAYING "OH OKAY RAYN SAID THESE GUYS ARE TOWN SO THEY ARE"????!?!??

JESUS CHRIST

I mean.... Your merits this game are defending rayn (who's played exactly according to his scumgame so far, and made many unfathomable logical jumps) based on something that never really happened at the start, and some vague "nice posts" he's made. And attacking Slam for posts that I actually really liked about ritoky/rayn.

On October 24 2015 01:16 Xatalos wrote:


Well, it is OMGUS. It literally went like "Xatalos is prolly just town" -> "oh wait, he scumreads me?" -> "100% scum" in like... a couple of minutes. Your reads ARE very weird and especially their progression. You've pretty much went against anyone currently "under fire" regardless of your previous stances on them. Whenever thread sentiment turns against someone, you conveniently find some scummy post that you forgot about him earlier and vote for him. The same thing repeated with ritoky, GB and me... Town -> scum because of thread sentiment / OMGUS, not because anything actually changed in reality.

On October 24 2015 01:21 Xatalos wrote:
Well, you just said it like it is... Hard defense -> heavy scumread based on thread sentiment, while finding some sort of justification (a single bad post or something) in their filter. It's just too drastic and the timings are too convenient. Slam has been a PoE read, conveniently always staying in the Poe regardless of all the shifts, and now it's OMGUS.

On October 24 2015 01:24 Xatalos wrote:


I just said it shifted to an OMGUS read after he started scumreading you.

On October 22 2015 15:25 Alakaslam wrote:

I was lampshadinf this idea.

There is no case in the post chroma made.

Also Rayn, you throwing your vote away is suspicious. You know I am unlynchable until Lylo, why are you parking your vote on LHF?

On September 04 2015 06:19 Alakaslam wrote:
I will be universally town read:

All game if town

Until day 2 if scum

On October 23 2015 16:14 Alakaslam wrote:

Rayn, you are filling your "everyone else is so scum j can't decide" scum meta

On October 23 2015 16:19 Alakaslam wrote:

Opinion all over the place

On October 23 2015 16:30 Alakaslam wrote:

See you don't do this stuff as town

On October 24 2015 01:39 Xatalos wrote:
Tbh my current scumteam would be rayn/marv/Chromatically, but I'm pretty sure I'm wrong on at least one. There are too many people who have done barely anything (Onegu/Hopeless mainly I think, and several others haven't done much later in the day). It's pretty likely there could be scum among that group.

On October 24 2015 01:09 Xatalos wrote:


I guess that makes sense... Your argument I mean. I'd happily jump on Slam if I was scum GB.

On October 24 2015 04:07 GlowingBear wrote:
I don't want to lynch chromatically. Especially now that Vivax is voting him.

And I've been putting thoughts on Rayn. His flip one is bad. He said it was very unlikely I was scum and that I was very level headed with my read in Vivax.

Then Vivax said something about me scum reading him before asking questions, and Rayn agreed and called me scum over the same posts he called me "very unlikely to be mafia". It doesn't make sense.

I'm voting rayn

On October 24 2015 05:03 Blazinghand wrote:
Ok, finished up with the day post in Newbie mafia, so this game has my full attention for the next hour. I'm almost caught up, just pushing through the 50s now. right now I've got my eyes set on Chrom and Gumshoe, though I'll be paying attention to the Slam case as I catch up. Let me know if you have any requests for reads now, since we're getting close to deadline and I don't have much time

On October 24 2015 05:05 Xatalos wrote:


Whatever happened with rayn? You were still talking about the RNG on him a while ago and him being otherwise scummy, but now he's not an option anymore?

On October 24 2015 05:21 Xatalos wrote:
How should I know that marv has been not playing as scum in his last games? I haven't seen those games. I don't see how me not being all-knowing of recent games makes me not worth listening to at all.

On October 24 2015 05:26 ritoky wrote:


i am glad i live in your fantasies. only 1 other person has told me that before and i married her and knocked her up.

On October 24 2015 05:31 marvellosity wrote:

i'm not quite sure what you're saying but i think i like it

it looks non-routine

On October 24 2015 05:40 marvellosity wrote:
where is Slam anyway?

On October 24 2015 05:42 Xatalos wrote:


Yes, but I forgot that post as we got into the argument between me/rayn/Slam. Or before that really, while I was doing exams and thinking about other stuff. I never wanted to lynch you anyway. It just disturbed me how you defended rayn for non-existent/vague reasons, ran out of arguments and told me to just sheep you quietly, and had many of your reads opposite of me.

On October 24 2015 05:42 Blazinghand wrote:


HISTORICALLY IT HAS WORKED AT LEAST ONCE OK

On October 24 2015 05:48 Blazinghand wrote:
[Seriously though, don't you think 1gu is more likelyt o flip scum than slam? Let's mve some votes on him and just see how things look.

On October 24 2015 06:04 marvellosity wrote:
Slam why couldn't you post that 10 minutes earlier?

On October 24 2015 06:18 Xatalos wrote:


You mean the pressure? Get used to it. It's a part of playing Mafia.

On October 24 2015 06:18 Onegu wrote:



Ok rayn I will play more serious for you my friend.

But is it not fun because you cannot fake claim this game?

On October 24 2015 06:24 Vivax wrote:
i feel bad for slam but otherwise pretty relaxed

On October 24 2015 07:25 Xatalos wrote:
I still think Vivax is town. He didn't do much later on in the day, but he was still constantly involved and talking. What I've seen of scum Vivax is total apathy towards the thread.

I guess marv has to be town since he doesn't even play as scum anymore (it's a pretty sad reason, but it is what it is).

Blazinghand I still think is town. He was active around the deadline and trying shenanigans, even if scum should have been content with the way things were going.

gusmhoe is... town? It's not completely certain, but I think this is the best performance I've ever seen out of him. It would be nice to see more detailed analysis by someone who knows his "active" meta.

GlowingBear could be town. I liked some of the things he did later on D1. I think his alignment is rather strongly tied with rayn's. If rayn is scum, he's almost certainly not scum. If rayn is town, he has a decent chance of being scum. Especially considering his switch to rayn when things got heated at the end. Hard to see him doing that as scum with rayn.

Hopeless is... what? No idea. Some people said he was sure town, but it's hard to believe that without any evidence. Null.

rayn is probably scum. At least I really hope so. His play in this game has been focused on trying to push forward mislynches (me + Slam for certain, plus others with varying probability), OMGUS and unnatural read progression (not dependent on game events, but rather what's convenient for survival/mislynches).

Onegu is ?

Chromatically could well be scum. Like someone said, he's been kind of mechanical and detached. There's no... real thread presence. Just posting some stuff from time to time.

ritoky is town? It felt like he kind of disappeared later on. At least his initial posts were nice.. Hopefully he'll come back in force. If not, I'll reconsider.

Dunno about yamato yet. Many people seem to consider him obvtown, but I haven't yet seen anything definitely townie. He's been this inactive as both town/scum in my experience, and usually he's only more active as town. Maybe he will make a grand entrance at some point.

On October 24 2015 07:45 Xatalos wrote:
It's also a great misrepresentation to say that Slam was trolling this game. I think there were many insights of value from him. All the better since he's confirmed town.

On October 24 2015 07:04 Xatalos wrote:


Well, we'll see. I won't say that there couldn't be scum among the lurkers.

On October 24 2015 06:01 Alakaslam wrote:
Last thoughts:

Marv can be town. Discuss flipping Rayn, if he is green Marv is green and will be a better credit to town. He won't die tonight because I think he actually sucks this time around.

Yamato is town, but lazy. His voting me late is nai.

Rayn is almost certainly scum, which would implicate Marv.

Gunshot is town.

Ritoky is town.

Blazinghand is difficult to read, he is the foil enigma style to mine. Don't lynch him day 1, lynch him if he survives too long.

Onegu doesn't have much time irl. Don't lynch him based on activity, read him. It's short and easy. Put in a little time.

I think Marv is right on chromatically. Chrom is making long winded posts and yet not drawing conclusions on me in my most clear and un-chupazic game to date. Like, really? Not wanting to lynch me or defend me by now because I "worry" him?? No.

Glowingbear could actually be scum. But since I think Yamato is town I don't think he is.

Rels is totes 3P planar dragon, and hts makes great bbq (more on that in my death post)

If Marv has that much power, I am going to pull a VayneAuthority on him. He can have VA every game instead of me.

On October 23 2015 23:47 GlowingBear wrote:


Ok, I swapped Onegu with Hopeless in my mind for some reason. Still, what do you think of this?

Well, although you may be right on the second paragraph, I think this isn't the case on Chrom.

On October 22 2015 06:24 Blazinghand wrote:
The Post count for my RNG declaration post was 23757725

24999098 mod 13 = 7

7th player is rayn

##vote raynpelikoneet

rayn, your lynch has been determined by RNG. SUBMIT YOURSELF UNTO DEATH.

On September 30 2012 08:35 Coagulation wrote:
Even as I sit here, I can't believe I'm writing this. I've never been one to voice my opinions in such a public manner. But after learning that Caller wants to create a desolation and call it peace, I felt I at least had to set a few things straight. To start, he wants to spread rumors, gossip, and stories that are certainly false. Who does he think he is? I mean, the really interesting thing about all this is not that his accusations leave much to be desired. The interesting thing is that it's unfortunate that he has no real education. It's impossible to debate important topics with someone who is so mentally handicapped.

Caller's clear-cut demonstrations of gross moral turpitude have led me to believe that I, speaking as someone who is not a stuporous usurer, am fed up to the back teeth with Caller's uninformed jibes. But the problems with Caller's long-term goals don't end there. As a consistently mortified observer of Caller's snow jobs, I can't help but want to restore the traditions that Caller has abandoned. Honor means nothing to him. Principles mean nothing to him. All he cares about is how to bribe the parasitic with the earnings of the productive.

In spite of the fact that Caller's claims are pure tripe, many people have witnessed him pamper confused mumpsimuses. Caller generally insists that his witnesses are mistaken and blames his nasty objectives on meretricious, dour passéists. It's like he has no-fault insurance against personal responsibility. What's more, if it weren't for Caller's double standards he would have no standards at all. Hence, it's utterly a waste of time even to address Caller's hypocrisy. That's why I'll state merely that he has been known to say that we ought to worship philopolemical, self-deluded racketeers as folk heroes. That notion is so malign, I hardly know where to begin refuting it. In summary, savagism revolves in a fixed orbit around all of Caller's noxious opuscula. Is anyone listening? Does anyone care?

I don't intend to discomfit my readers, but I do need to point out that Caller's real enmity against us comes through in his positions, which he uses to emphasize the negative in our lives instead of accentuating the positive. To begin at the beginning, he has conceived the project of reigning over opinions and of conquering neither kingdoms nor provinces but the human mind. If this project succeeds then judgmental jargonauts will be free to work hand-in-glove with the worst sorts of pudibund, moralistic anarchists there are. Even worse, it will be illegal for anyone to say anything about how that fact is simply inescapable to any thinking man or woman. "Thinking" is the key word in the previous sentence. Caller is an expert at calming his adversaries with sweet inversions of the truth. In case you don't believe me, consider how he has managed to convince an alarming number of people that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what's true and what isn't. He does this even though he knows full well that he's convinced that people everywhere have a deeply held love of despotism. I profess that if Caller held a rally in support of despotism, no more than two people would show up—one if you exclude the local street vendor who just happens to be peddling his wares in the vicinity. The reason, obviously, is that Caller has called people like me spleenful demoniacs, sanctimonious criticasters, and pea-brained, moonstruck litterbugs so many times that these accusations no longer have any sting. Caller certainly continues to employ such insults because he's run out of logical arguments. I suppose an alternate explanation is that one can usually be pretty sure when Caller is lying. Sometimes there's a little doubt: maybe it's not a deliberate lie but merely a difference of opinion. But when Caller claims that his adages are intelligent, commonsensical, and entirely consonant with the views of ordinary people, there's no room for ambiguity: he's lying.

Caller's dupes have been waxing stridently about miserabilism, Caller's double standards, and why Caller should break down traditional values. Meanwhile, I have been setting the stage so that my next letter will begin from a new and much higher level of influence. What do I hope to achieve by doing such a thing? I hope to achieve widespread recognition that I've managed to come up with a way in which Caller's essays could be made useful. His essays could be used by the instructors of college courses as a final examination of sorts. Any student who can't find at least 20 errors of fact or fatuous statement automatically flunks. Extra credit goes to students who realize that Caller's wrongheaded, confused game of chess—the jaundiced chess of mercantalism—has continued for far too long. It's time to checkmate this invidious loblolly and show him that he is not only immoral but amoral.

If anything, by allowing Caller to weave his cruel traits, hidebound exegeses, and power-drunk ploys into a rich tapestry that is sure to represent Heaven as Hell and, conversely, the most wretched life as paradise, we are allowing him to play puppet master. He has not increased our safety, security, or happiness by putting a pestilential, sappy spin on important issues. All he's increased by doing that is the girth of his bloated ego. From a public-policy perspective, I once read an article about how Caller wants nothing less than to transform our little community into a global crucible of terror and gore. It was the powerful and long-lingering momentum of the impressions received on that occasion, more than any other circumstance, that gave definite form and resolution to my purpose of substituting movement for stagnation, purposive behavior for drifting, and visions of a great future for collective pettiness and discouragement.

To say that Caller has a close-to-perfect existence that's the envy of the sniffish opportunists around him is sleazy nonsense and untrue to boot. One might think that his claims about dogmatism form a perfect continuum of infinite leaps to vaguely defined conclusions that will rapidly collapse into a singularity of unreason from which no sense can escape, and this is, not surprisingly, the case. If I had to choose between chopping onions and helping him scapegoat easy, unpopular targets, thereby diverting responsibility from more culpable parties, I'd be in the kitchen in an instant. Although both alternatives make me cry, the deciding factor for me is that if Caller believes that our unalienable rights are merely privileges that he can dole out or retract, then it's obvious why he thinks that he understands the difference between civilization and savagery. Although I agree with those who aver that he is becoming ever more audacious in his unappeasable hatred of us, nevertheless, I cannot agree with the subject matter and attitude that is woven into every one of his unforgiving, oligophrenic practices.

Isn't it interesting which questions Caller dodges and what tangents he goes off on? Those dodges and tangents make me think that I've never bothered Caller. Yet Caller wants to confuse the catastrophic power of state fascism with the repression of an authoritarian government in our minds. Whatever happened to "live and let live"? He unmistakably believes that my bitterness at him is merely the latent projection of libidinal energy stemming from self-induced anguish. Unfortunately for him, that's all in his imagination. Caller needs to get out of that fictional world and get back to reality, where people can see that this is a lesson for those with eyes to see. It is a lesson not so much about his anti-democratic behavior but about the way that I am tired of hearing or reading that "metanarratives" are the root of tyranny, lawlessness, overpopulation, racial hatred, world hunger, disease, and rank stupidity. You know that that is simply not true.

My next point will be so cogent that even Caller will be able to understand it. Specifically, Caller has nothing but contempt for responsibility, duty, and honor. Still, I recommend you check out some of Caller's threats and draw your own conclusions on the matter. The dominant characteristic of his canards is not that they sugarcoat the past and dispense false optimism for the future, but that, in the bargain, they erode constitutional principles that have shaped our society and remain at the core of our freedom and liberty. I do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with him. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I fight the warped, distorted, misshapen, unwholesome monstrosity that Caller's policies have become. I challenge Caller to point out any text in this letter that proposes that he possesses infinite wisdom. It isn't there. There's neither a hint nor a suggestion of such a thing.

Caller screams and cries whenever he's prevented from causing riots in the streets. I, not being one of the many sullen, obscene derelicts of this world, warrant that if he stopped acting like such a big baby, maybe then he'd see that his mottos are based on hate. Hate, Stalinism, and an intolerance of another viewpoint, another way of life. I avouch we should knock down his house of cards. By "house of cards," I'm referring to the fragile, highly unstable, and renitent framework of lies on which Caller's popularity is based. Without that framework, people everywhere would come to realize that Caller has somehow managed to get the media to pay rapt attention to his pretentious prognoses. I don't know what sort of Jedi mind control he's been using to pull that off, but I do know that by Caller's standards, if you have morals, believe that character counts, and actually raise your own children—let alone teach them to be morally fit—you're definitely a stubborn calumniator. My standards—and I suspect yours as well—are quite different from his. For instance, I insist that it's debatable whether Caller's intellectual dishonesty, mismanagement of facts, and outright lies make the most mentally deficient zobs I've ever seen seem ready for sainthood, in comparison. However, no one can disagree that the provision of evidence rebutting his claims is merely fuel piled on the bonfire of his insanity. Hence and therefore, Caller is guilty of at least one criminal offense. In addition, he frequently exhibits less formal criminal behavior such as deliberate and even gleeful cruelty, explosive behavior, and a burning desire to flout all of society's rules.

I need your help if I'm ever to shatter the adage that if Caller kicks us in the teeth we'll then lick his toes and beg for another kick. "But I'm only one person," you might protest. "What difference can I make?" The answer is: a lot more than you think. You see, Caller believes it's perfectly okay to mollycoddle slatternly libertines. More than anything else, such beliefs shed light on Caller's moral values and suggest incontrovertibly that he wants us to think of him as a do-gooder. Keep in mind, though, that Caller wants to "do good" with other people's money and often with other people's lives. If he really wanted to be a do-gooder, he could start by admitting that it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt. Let me rephrase that: His propositions turn the stomachs of those who know even a little about the real world. But what, you may ask, does any of that have to do with the theme of this letter, viz., that he has a different view of reality from the rest of us? Well, I asked the question so I should answer it. Let me start by saying that whenever he's presented with the statement that he is a confirmed liar—a conscious, deliberate, bald-faced, shameless liar—he spews out the hackneyed excuse that it is better that a hundred thousand people should perish than that he should be even slightly inconvenienced. Ironically, such screwball logic is likely to convince even more people that Caller's opinion is that he is able to abrogate the natural order of effects flowing from causes. Of course, opinions are like sphincters: we all have them. So let me tell you my opinion. My opinion is that to someone whose eyes are open, Caller's constantly repeated mantra that one can understand the elements of a scientific theory only by reference to the social condition and personal histories of the scientists involved is an insanely meddlesome notion. By way of contrast, consider my personal mantra that the one thing that's central to all of Caller's ungrateful denunciations is a desire to make emotionalism socially acceptable. I call this the New Terrorism. The old terrorism was concerned only with making bribery legal and part of business as usual. Although that was bad enough, it would be downright brain-damaged for Caller to deface property with racially and sexually derogatory epithets and offensive symbols. I put that observation into this letter just to let you see that he is guided by the ignis fatuus of ageism. Well, that's another story. To get back to my main point, I ought to mention that I think I know why so many vexatious, postmodernist ditzes prop up corrupt despots around the world. It's because Caller has whipped them into a blind frenzy by telling them that the most valuable skill one can have is the ability to lie convincingly. Unfortunately for Caller, the ground truth is that his histrionics are a veritable dictionary and synonymicon of Oblomovism. That said, let me continue.

One other thing: Caller contends that we're supposed to shut up and smile when he says haughty, ignominious things and that, therefore, taxpayers are a magic purse that never runs out of gold. This bizarre pattern of thinking leads to strange conclusions. For example, it convinces daft gauleiters (as distinct from the parvanimous profiteers who prefer to chirrup while hopping from cloud to cloud in Nephelococcygia) that Caller is a spokesman for God. In reality, contrariwise, if Caller thinks that anyone who disagrees with him is ultimately unreasonable then maybe he should lay off the wacky tobacky.

When I was little, my father would sometimes pick me up, put me on his knee, and say "I'd like people who use 'pressure tactics'—that's a euphemism for 'torture'—to coerce ordinary people into allowing federally funded research to mushroom into a scabrous, grossly inefficient system, hampered by mad gumps and unholy varmints to find themselves behind bars, looking out." Even though Caller insists that unfounded attacks on character, loads of hyperbole, and fallacious information are the best way to make a point, I claim that anyone with eyes and a brain can tell that if you were to tell him that his hypnopompic insights are fatally fissiparous, he'd just pull his security blanket a little tighter around himself and refuse to come out and deal with the real world. He really struck a nerve with me when he said that "the norm" shouldn't have to worry about how the exceptions feel. That lie is a painful reminder that Caller's confreres merely present their allegations as though they were true, a technique known as a "conclusory" or "Kierkegaardian" leap. So what's the connection between that and Caller's ramblings? The connection is that we must always be looking towards the future while keeping the past in mind. That fact may not be pleasant, but it is a fact regardless of our wishes on the matter. Caller's crusades have grown into the world's greatest enslavers of human minds. That's too big of a subject to get into here so let me instead discuss how many people are incredulous when I tell them that he intends to extirpate the things that I cherish. "How could Caller be so flippant?", they ask me. "It doesn't seem possible." Well, it is decidedly possible, and now I'll explain exactly how Caller plans to do it. But first, you need to realize that if we foreground the cognitive and emotional palette of his feebleminded, neurotic indiscretions rather than their pathology we can enter vitally into Caller's world. Why do we want to do that? Because if you think that this is humorous or exaggerated, you're wrong. Finally, any one of the points I made in this letter could be turned into a complete research paper, but the conclusion of each would be the same: It is honestly not the intention of Heaven to let Caller crush the remaining vestiges of democracy throughout the world.

Caller's vassals all look like Caller, think like Caller, act like Caller, and shift our society from a culture of conscience to a culture of consensus, just like Caller does. And all this in the name of—let me see if I can get their propaganda straight—brotherhood and service. Ha! I surely want to protect the interests of the general public against the greed and unreason of iscariotic, logorrheic bloodsuckers, but I can't do that alone. So do me a favor and lend support to the thesis that we must use our minds and spirits to halt Caller's efforts to lure the loathsome into Caller's coven. That'll show him that many, many people have been hurt by him for daring to ensure that we survive and emerge triumphant out of the coming chaos and destruction. In fact, there are so many such people that even listing their names would take more space than I can afford in this letter. In their honor, though, I will say that the point is that if everyone spent just five minutes a day thinking about ways to burn away social illness, exploitation, and human suffering, we'd all be a lot better off. Is five minutes a day too much to ask for the promise of a better tomorrow? I hope not, but then again, the justification Caller gave for interfering with my efforts to lead him out of a dream world and back to hard reality was one of the most silly justifications I've ever heard. It was so silly, in fact, that I will not repeat it here. Even without hearing the details you can still see my point quite clearly: Caller is a lamebrained liar. Let's list some of Caller's more deluded lies: First, he claims that the Queen of England heads up the international drug cartel. Second, he insists that the more paperasserie and bureaucracy we have to endure, the better. And third, he wants us to believe that it's okay if his suggestions initially cause our quality of life to degrade because "sometime", "someone" will do "something" "somehow" to counteract that trend. I presented that list to get you to see that Caller recently made the astonishing claim that he answers to no one. Stripped of all its hyperbole, this statement is really just saying that Caller likes to argue that he is a master of precognition, psychokinesis, remote viewing, and other undeveloped human capabilities. Admitting the apparent correctness of this morally crippled argument, we may prove the contradictory of its conclusion by an unassailable argument of our own, which is called an elenchus. My elenchus begins with the observation that if Caller had lived the short, sickly, miserable life of a chattel serf in the ages "before technocracy" he wouldn't be so keen to put the public peace perpetually in danger. Maybe he'd even begin to realize that he has been confusing, befuddling, and neutralizing public opposition. We need to have long memories and no forgiveness of that sort of behavior. Instead, we must investigate Caller's contumelious principles, ideals, and objectives.

I suggest that we dispense justice. This right and truthful proposition, practically established, will help us overcome the obstacles that people like him establish. While the concept of broad-based peace and social justice coalitions remains desirable, there is an alternative to lying down passively for the executioner. The alternative is to reveal the truth about Caller's homilies. In particular, he never stops boasting about his generous contributions to charitable causes. As far as I can tell, however, Caller's claimed magnanimousness is completely chimerical, and, furthermore, life isn't fair. We've all known this since the beginning of time, so why is he so compelled to complain about situations over which he has no control? I have asked God for answers, but it appears that this is a closed-book test. Let me simply suggest, therefore, that we've all heard Caller yammer and whine about how he's being scapegoated again, the poor dear.

It's easy to tell if Caller is lying. If his lips are moving, he's lying. Caller says that he is a martyr for freedom and a victim of fanaticism. That's a stupid thing to say. It's like saying that Comstockism is a be-all, end-all system that should be forcefully imposed upon us.

Contrary to the impression that stubborn brutes offer "new," "innovative," and "advanced" ideas, there is little new in their shell games. We need to stick to the facts and offer only those arguments that can be supported by those facts. Why? Because of what's at stake: literally everything. Now the surprising news: I condemn Caller's gross and systematic violations of human rights. I'm not just talking about the arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, torture, and summary executions but also about my previous observation that Caller's emissaries have learned their scripts well and the rhetoric comes gushing forth with little provocation. More often than not, I'm at loggerheads with Caller on at least one important issue. Namely, he argues that trees cause more pollution than automobiles do. I take the opposite position, that I know more about conspiracism than most people. You might even say that I'm an expert on the subject. I can therefore state with confidence that if Caller is victorious in his quest to bring discord, confusion, and frustration into our personal and public lives, then his crown will be the funeral wreath of humanity.

I have a dream that my children will be able to live in a world filled with open spaces and beautiful wilderness—not in a dark, morally corrupt world run by brassbound, judgmental racketeers. Better, far better, that Man were without the gift of speech than that he use it as Caller does. Better that Man could neither read nor write than have his head and heart perverted by the bilious and hidebound tommyrot that oozes from Caller's pen. And better that the cut of Man's coat and the number of his buttons were fixed by statute and enforced by penalties than that Caller should arouse the hostility and excite the cupidity of gormless rampallions. When you reflect upon this, you'll realize that his viewpoints are more than slovenly. They fill me with a sense of despair. More than anything else, they make me realize that since their emergence on the stage of history, amoral common criminals have been a parasitic growth on the stem of true citizens. If you doubt this, just ask around.

Although Caller wants to enable tetchy, unmannerly rumormongers to punch above their weight, if we fail to straighten out our thinking and change the path we're on, then we have no one to blame but ourselves. He demands absolute and blind obedience from his advocates. If he didn't, they might question his orders to pit people against each other. This unrelenting demand of obedience also implies that Caller swears that he acts in the public interest. Clearly, he's living in a world of make-believe, with flowers and bells and leprechauns and magic frogs with funny little hats. Back in the real world, Caller used to maintain that he has the mandate of Heaven to deny citizens the ability to become informed about the destruction that he is capable of. When he realized that no one was falling for that claptrap, he quickly changed his tune to say that lewd, malignant quiddlers are easily housebroken. Caller is clearly a mudslinging liar, and shame on anyone who believes him.

If we don't soon tell Caller to stop what he's doing, he will proceed with his unconscionable, jaded ruderies, considerably emboldened by our lack of resistance. We will have tacitly given Caller our permission to do so. Caller, who prides himself on being open-minded and who likes to brag about it, refuses to consider my position that I must ask that his adulators restore the traditions that he has abandoned. I know they'll never do that so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to have a serious destabilizing effect on our institutions. His lickspittles claim to have no choice but to use threats of fiscal harm to coerce vengeful malevolent-types into testing another formula for silencing serious opposition. I wish there were some way to help these miserable, recalcitrant megalomaniacs. They are outcasts, lost in a world they didn't make and don't understand.

Was Caller just trying to be cute when he said that everything he says is entirely and absolutely true? I sure hope so because to someone whose eyes are open, his constantly repeated mantra that his faith in solipsism gives him an uncanny ability to detect astral energy and cosmic vibrations is an insanely presumptuous notion. By way of contrast, consider my personal mantra that I try never to argue with Caller because it's clear he's not susceptible to reason. He ignores the most basic ground rule of debate. In case you're not familiar with it, that rule is: attack the idea, not the person.

For the first time ever, a majority of nettlesome widdifuls have been questioning their role in helping Caller gain a respectable foothold for his noisome commentaries. I feel that we should take advantage of this historic opportunity and promote Caller to an elevated status in history as an archdemon of Oblomovism. In a tacit concession of defeat, he is now openly calling for the abridgment of various freedoms to accomplish coercively what his deceitful sallies have failed at. Caller accuses me of being a liar. The only proven liar around here, however, is Caller. Only a die-hard liar like Caller could claim that my bitterness at him is merely the latent projection of libidinal energy stemming from self-induced anguish. The truth, in case you haven't already figured it out, is that the reason he wants to rot our minds with the hallucinatory drug of alarmism is that he's totally humorless. If you believe you have another explanation for his complacent behavior, then please write and tell me about it. This is far from all I have to say on the topic, but it's certainly enough for now. Just remember one thing: Caller gnaws away at the pillars of our society as if he were a termite chewing on wood.

On October 25 2015 05:56 Xatalos wrote:
I hope ObsQT won't make me facepalm.

On October 25 2015 06:00 Xatalos wrote:
Thanks for the insider info?

On October 25 2015 06:13 Xatalos wrote:
hmmmm

rayn, I'm a bit on the fence if you would kill marv after he was pretty pro-you during D1. I mean, it generally makes sense regardless of the scumteam thanks to his status, but you wouldn't be the most likely suspect for going for his kill.

Let's play a game. Who do you think are scum right now, and how have your reads changed after Slam's flip and the posts of the night?

On October 25 2015 06:23 Xatalos wrote:
I really don't get it. Do have some people have such fragile egos that they can only resort to insulting other people recklessly, then when they're under a bit of scrutiny they just stop playing completely?