WebMafia Olympics: Bonus Qualification Round

[ghug]

I use to capitalize stuff for emphasis but bolding isnt that big of a deal even in a certain light you cant even see it

It's a schtick. I don't like schticks.

It may be my own fault that I am incapable of reading as if there were no boldness, bit alas it's how I am. If you were willing to talk like a normal person, that would be nice. If not, my priority may be removing the distraction so I can focus on solving.

So instead of solving you would rather vote for people who annoy you? Listen I find it helpful for me it centers on what I am trying to focus on, and its how I am talking with the voice in my head. Its not that big of a distraction, its just emphasis

You're entitled to do it.. You're not entitled to tell me how big of a distraction it is to me. Perhaps I'm the only one, but I doubt it. I'll have an easier time focusing on solving once you've stopped, whatever the reason.

[damo666]

Do you mean 1 scum within the top three wagons (Haze, Will, Flavius)? Or 1 scum voting on 1 of those 3 wagons (Bunny, Dip, Will, Haze, yourself, king, or Jamie)?

The former

No just gut. And the above is a classic example of totally redundant embarrassment.
Any further explanations you can give for this?

On phone. Messed up quote. Above becomes below.

[damo666]

Do you mean 1 scum within the top three wagons (Haze, Will, Flavius)? Or 1 scum voting on 1 of those 3 wagons (Bunny, Dip, Will, Haze, yourself, king, or Jamie)?

The former

Obviously
I bet you think the latter is simultaneously true though.

[ghug]

I posit that if Bunny were town, more people would want to vote for him.

The lack of interest proves he's scum. Thank you and good day.

[damo666]

Can anyone else validate my thinking here?

Will has outright said that he tried to set a reaction test trap for me, based on knowing that the Gambler's Role PM was different to the Gambler rules described in the Setup Document.

How can anyone know there would be a difference between those two things UNLESS THEY ARE SCUM?

Agreed. My vote stays on Will unless he comes up with an explanation. Makes no sense to me.

It just seems SO brazen of a thing for Will to do I dont think it makes sense to vote for him for this. I doubt there even IS a difference TBH

Ok ##vote Flav

[damo666]

The former

No just gut. And the above is a classic example of totally redundant embarrassment.
Any further explanations you can give for this?

* Emboldment

On phone. Messed up quote. Above becomes below.

[damo666]

No just gut. And the above is a classic example of totally redundant embarrassment.
Any further explanations you can give for this?

* Emboldment

On phone. Messed up quote. Above becomes below.

Grrrrr

[Jamiet99uk]

No no Jamie you’re misunderstanding

I don’t think you’re someone who doesn’t understand a setup

I was trying to check if the way you learned the gambler powers was from reading your role pm or by remembering the setup

Why do you think those two things would be different??

If I was the Gambler (which I'm not), why do you think my role PM and the setup would differ?

This only makes sense if you have seen the Gambler role PM and I think you might be the Gambler.

No Jamie I’m not saying that

I’m saying that they more than likely give the exact same info. So as scum you would not read the setup for details on your role

I am not saying I think they are different. I dunno if it is or isn’t but my assumption is that it’s the same

If they both contained exactly the same information, how would you be able to infer which source of information I was using?

[Jamiet99uk]

haven't noticed any particular issues yet. ##unvote since flav came back. chaqa seems to still be flying under the radar, surprisingly. ##vote chaqa. let's see if we can squeeze anything out of this...

Unvote here not necessary - the vote for Chaqa moves your vote to Chaqa, that's all that was needed.

[Jamiet99uk]

Ok.
Without hypocrisy, might I suggest we vote flaviusaetius because they're not participating?

I cannot UNDERSTAND why Flavius is NOT <<participating>>, can YOU? [In] the last _game_ HE was VERY active so this is NOT like HIM at ALL.

JAMIE!! Let the masters of emphasis use bolded words

YES, master.

[Jamiet99uk]

Was that really where you read it? Or was that in your PM from Sweet?

My Role PM didn't say anything about the Gambler, it only spoke about my amazing body.

Are you going to crumb every single role?

Bodybuilder is the default Vanilla Town role, Flavius.

[Jamiet99uk]

I don't like liars deliberately creating false narratives and I always tend to regard it as deeply scummy and anti-town to try to get town to expose themselves by lying about them.

He wasnt trying to create a narrative he was just discussing the game and made a mistake about the mechs like so what ? You are taking it somewhere where it didnt need to go

Flavius, it wasn't a mistake, because Will TOLD us that he did it ON PURPOSE.

[Jamiet99uk]

Can anyone else validate my thinking here?

Will has outright said that he tried to set a reaction test trap for me, based on knowing that the Gambler's Role PM was different to the Gambler rules described in the Setup Document.

How can anyone know there would be a difference between those two things UNLESS THEY ARE SCUM?

Agreed. My vote stays on Will unless he comes up with an explanation. Makes no sense to me.

And yet, he has not properly explained it, and yet, you moved your vote.

[Jamiet99uk]

I posit that if Bunny were town, more people would want to vote for him.

The lack of interest proves he's scum. Thank you and good day.

I think Ghug might be on to something here.

[Jamiet99uk]

Situation:

The Gambler gets a N0 action and not all players have noticed that this is the case.

This information is contained in (a) the Setup Document, and (b) the Gambler's Role PM.

In both (a) and (b) the information is assumed to be word-for-word identical.


The 'Test':

Will noticed that I was aware of the fact that the Gambler gets a N0 action.

Will claims he set up a reaction test, to try to discover whether I read this information in (a) the Setup Document, or (b) the Gambler's Role PM. (Since if the answer is (b), then I am scum).


The flaw in this 'Test':

If the information is EXACTLY THE SAME in both sources, then why would I respond differently to the test in case (b), compared to case (a)??

Will, please explain why Scum!Jamie, who is in possession of the Gambler Role PM, would react totally differently, in your test, to Town!Jamie who has read the EXACT SAME WORDS in the Setup Document.

What was the scum reaction that you were looking for, in the even that your test would have caught me as scum?

[ghug]

Situation:

The Gambler gets a N0 action and not all players have noticed that this is the case.

This information is contained in (a) the Setup Document, and (b) the Gambler's Role PM.

In both (a) and (b) the information is assumed to be word-for-word identical.


The 'Test':

Will noticed that I was aware of the fact that the Gambler gets a N0 action.

Will claims he set up a reaction test, to try to discover whether I read this information in (a) the Setup Document, or (b) the Gambler's Role PM. (Since if the answer is (b), then I am scum).


The flaw in this 'Test':

If the information is EXACTLY THE SAME in both sources, then why would I respond differently to the test in case (b), compared to case (a)??

Will, please explain why Scum!Jamie, who is in possession of the Gambler Role PM, would react totally differently, in your test, to Town!Jamie who has read the EXACT SAME WORDS in the Setup Document.

What was the scum reaction that you were looking for, in the even that your test would have caught me as scum?

I think it likely that Will, regardless of his alignment, just didn't think this through very carefully.

[Jamiet99uk]

I mean like, what, did he expect scum!Jamie to say "No, that's wrong, because I'm scum and my role PM proves that you're mistaken, Will!"..??

[Jamiet99uk]

Situation:

The Gambler gets a N0 potato and not all players have noticed that this is the case.

This information is contained in (a) the Potato Document, and (b) the Gambler's Role Potato.

In both (a) and (b) the information is assumed to be spud-for-spud identical.


The 'Test':

Will noticed that I was aware of the fact that the Gambler gets a N0 potato.

Will claims he set up a reaction test, to try to discover whether I read this information in (a) the Potato Document, or (b) the Gambler's Role Potato. (Since if the answer is (b), then I am scum).


The flaw in this 'Test':

If the information is EXACTLY THE SAME in both sources, then why would I respond differently to the test in case (b), compared to case (a)??

Will, please explain why Scum!Jamie, who is in possession of the Gambler Role Potato, would react totally differently, in your test, to Town!Jamie who has read the EXACT SAME WORDS in the Potato Document.

What was the scum reaction that you were looking for, in the even that your test would have caught me as scum?

I think it likely that Will, regardless of his alignment, just didn't think this through very carefully.

Maybe.

I guess there are two scenarios:

a) Will is scum, who has noticed some small discrepancy between the Gambler Role PM and the words used in the Setup Document, and who got so over-excited at noticing this, that he posted a fake post directed at me, without thinking properly about what he was doing;

or

ii) Will is dumb town and just fucked this whole thing up.

Which one are you, William?

[kingofthepirates]

I think it likely that Will, regardless of his alignment, just didn't think this through very carefully.

Agree.

What was the scum reaction that you were looking for, in the even that your test would have caught me as scum?

That being said I think this information would be nice to hear. At least it’ll finally clear everything up, and we can move on.

[damo666]

Can anyone else validate my thinking here?

Will has outright said that he tried to set a reaction test trap for me, based on knowing that the Gambler's Role PM was different to the Gambler rules described in the Setup Document.

How can anyone know there would be a difference between those two things UNLESS THEY ARE SCUM?

Agreed. My vote stays on Will unless he comes up with an explanation. Makes no sense to me.

And yet, he has not properly explained it, and yet, you moved your vote.

Yes, Flav was annoying me. I may move back. We''ll see.