The Godfather, Part 3 [Concluded]

What was the tally?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy

What was the tally?

---

I'm still alive... :wink:

ATPG is using invisible mode! HE HAS SOMETHING TO HIDE!!!

Now you are going to be accused by that in every single game you join :2thumbsup:

Tally:

Taka votes Reenk 1758
Beefy votes Reenk 1884
Andres votes Beefy 1921
Reenk Votes Beefy 1923

Reenk: 2 (Taka, Beefy)
Beefy: 2 (Andres, Reenk)

Is this what everyone else has?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quintus.JC

I do appreciate his anaylsis and hard work, but he does needs to cut down on some the unnecessary rants though.

---

I am going to spoiler all my posts from now on, unless the information is vital or it's a vote change.

And yes, I am now permanently on invisible mode, because all the cool kids are doing it.

I expected this game to be over... :no:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

When 2PM rolled around today, I breathed a sigh of relief. I thought to myself: Good, now I don't have to try anymore. They either listened to the evidence, and the testimonies, and watched the voting behavior and made the correct choice, or they did not.

:shrug:

It's no longer my concern or responsibility, and I can finally take a break after this massive game. But instead, I log on to find out if the Godfather smoked us all, and instead, we have a tie.
:laugh2:

Can I just ask... when Beefy didn't vote for himself, and tried to win the game for his side, which is town, why people questioned him for saving himself? And why was that question not proposed to Reenk Roink, who voted for everybody else last round to save himself? Double standard is all. One player seems concerned that town is going to win, and the other player seems concerned that he is going to live. That's my analysis, but I'm spoilering it because I understand people have had their fill of my opinion for one game... for any game.
:laugh2:

I would plead with the town... who among us doesn't admire how well Beefy played the game, if he were the Godfather? How many times did he self-vote? It was more than once. Let me get my notes...


Beefy187, post 408. Early game, no pressure on him really:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beefy187

In that case, I got more then enough time to defend my self don't I? (I am in Japan now. So Im GST +9 or something)

Vote:Beefy

I don't think Sasaki is guilty either so just to save him.

I am more then willing to defend my self. But I don't know where to start. Could you give me couple of questions I can answer?

---

Okay. Well, that seems reasonable enough. Didn't he vote for himself at other times, too?

And correct me if I am wrong, but Beefy was doing his University exam from the 23-25th. He had no posts here during that stretch. AT ALL. On the forum.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Quote:

---

02-25-2009, 03:44
Replies: 1,953
The Godfather, Part 3 (IN PLAY)
Views: 16,626
Posted By Beefy187
Re: The Godfather, Part 3 (IN PLAY)

In case for those who went to see who is on and saw my name, and preparing a case against as I speak as I'm online even though I said I won't be..

I was actually expecting this game to finish...

Forum: Gameroom 02-23-2009, 22:21
Replies: 1,953
The Godfather, Part 3 (IN PLAY)
Views: 16,626
Posted By Beefy187
Re: The Godfather, Part 3 (IN PLAY)

And thanks to this conversation, my place for the final lot of survivors is sealed..
"What about Beefy?"
"Leave him.. Lynch bait:yes:"

I'll hate to have another Kung Fu mafia situation :wall:...

---

He was not here to do the murder that night.

He's been passive and defending no one all game, pretty much. He's been kept alive as a scapegoat and a lynch victim. I read and read, but I could not find one compelling case against Beefy. Where is the case? Please give me a link. I want to read it.

I asked Reenk last round for a case against Taka, and he ignored me, but kept his vote on him. He changed his vote all over the place to save his own butt, but did not give a case, a real case, for why anyone but himself should be lynched.

If any townie, ANY townie, were to have behaved exactly as Reenk Roink has all game, he would have been lynched a long time ago. But everyone chalks it up to "Reenk being Reenk."

Well, Beefy is being Beefy! That's not a case, that's not even rational! Reenk would of course be Reenk as the Godfather, so would Beefy!

:wall:

Is there anyone here, anyone, who can tell me why Beefy is the better lynch. I'll look at Reenk's posts and Andres posts and respond if I can. If there is anyone here who can please point me to those cases, it would save me a lot of time.


I just think our final lynch choice, whatever it may be, should be based on logic and evidence, not "bah, Reenk is always this way."

Maybe I am oversimplifying, and I apologize. Frankly, at this point, I am almost inclined to vote for Beefy when and if the dead can vote. Why not? He earned it if he can do the things that he did all game and escape the final lynch. Point blank, town was divided on the final vote, and so therefore there was no majority to lynch the Godfather.

So, in my mind, the Godfather wins. He killed all of you, all this time, and still managed to convince about half of you that he was innocent. So, let him win. You wanted sportsmanship? You wanted it to be about fun? Reenk made it fun, and he escaped your wrath, so he should win.

I'm not angry or bitter, indeed I congratulate Reenk for his success. I certainly could never have acted anywhere remotely like that and survived. Heck, one round after I presented SkyNet, I was lynched for trying to help, when most of you thought I was innocent.

If Reenk can blatantly vote for anyone who votes for him, can accuse people without evidence, can not look for viable suspects all game, if he can defend scummy people and have scummy people defend him (TevashSzat, Sasaki Kojiro, Lord Winter maybe), then what's the point? Reenk Roink could be the Godfather, beefy could be, taka could be, Andres could be... but if you don't vote based on the odds, the evidence, the actions, the suspects, the defenses, everything together, then I don't see why you can THEN turn around and question Beefy for trying to win the game as a townie by finally voting for Reenk, reluctantly.

It's a double standard. Everyone in the game should be held to the same standard, if you're going to vote based on scummy behavior. Hey, I don't mind! Call it what it is; a more or less random vote based on intuition.

Well, I can't say that, I have to go look at the cases presented against Beefy. Some help in that matter would be appreciated.

This post is long winded and spoilered for your protection.

I need help finding the case against Beefy, if anyone could send me links, thank you!

:bow:

Time to deal the killing blow to another version of "rational" analysis! :charge:

I bet 50 trillion dollars of my winnings from ATPG on that the mafia consists of:

Beefy - Godfather
ATPG - Grunt
Lord Winter - Grunt

Voting patterns may say otherwise but I'm rich and don't care! :clown:

oh, and 100000 trillion dollars to each of the 3 others if they are the Godfather :bow:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

I think there is considerably more pursuasive power on the anti-beefy side. Plus, people would rather lose to a ballsy mafioso than a standard mafioso.

---

People would rather win than lose. Why have you been trying to convince the town to be suicidal, to tie, and otherwise "let Reenk have it"? It's interesting testimony, from someone who was vigilante'd. However, since I am now getting into a credibility argument, and since I've made bad accusations this game, I won't go there. That's not the point. The point is, if you're a townie, you have a duty to try to get the town to win the game, even in a halfhearted fun-loving fashion. I don't see even a little effort to win from Sasaki, not if it involves killing Roink.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reenk Roink

Are you freaking kidding me? You just didn't see how basically my hand was forced? :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

I'm beginning to think taka is the Godfather after all. I don't believe you would have ever changed your vote.

Let me make a list of dead voters:

Voting for Reenk: Atpg, Chaotix, khaan, White eyes(?), Ichigo(?)
Voting for Beefy: Sasaki, TinCow, shlin, Aries(?)

Then we have the people who haven't said much, and those are who I'm most worried about.

Edit: taka, here is the test for you:

Unvote: Beefy

---

No case against Beefy here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reenk Roink

This is almost as unfair as saying I was trying to sabotage the town... :undecided: :sad:

I mean, I think it's pretty clear with the accusations made against me that I was in a damned if you do damned if you don't situation from the start, and I doubt I could look any less scummy so that my detractors would give me a break. I would guess they are the reason taka has been on my case.

This game is starting to take an unpleasant turn again, and although I really don't like my hand forced, I don't want to be called a spoiler, no matter how unfair the charge is...

Unvote: taka
Vote: Beefy (sorry Beefy :bow: you will probably get the dead support though)

I'm pretty sure I will get lynched if I leave it to the dead, but hey, I'm in that same hard place again. :shrug: :uneasy:

It's up to some of you to now change the image of me that you have presented.

---

No case against Beefy here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andres

Ok, if my deceased team mates want us to continue this as it is supposed, then trying to lynch the GF we will :bow:

You may be dead, but you're still part of the town team, so your voice should not be ignored.

Reenk, Beefy187 and taka, please forget about your "pact". Your loyalty should be with your team, the townies (well, this goes for 2 of you, one of you probably prefers to stick to this "pact")

Unvote : no lynch
Vote : Beefy187

Let's end this today.

---

No case against Beefy here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reenk Roink

Well Beefy is the Godfather. However, I will stay true to my pact (plus I don't want the dead to come in where it is certain death for me). :bow:

My thoughts on all that transpired: Atpg's case was pretty unconvincing on the whole just like throughout the game, he essentially preached to the choir (Chaotix). Then there are the others who came to conclusions about me by themselves (like seireikhaan). Dunno why taka voted against me, at first I thought he was Godfather. I came to the conclusion that it was Beefy after this post:



It seemed throughout the entire conversation last night, Beefy wanted me to go against Andres. I think Beefy wanted to spare me the final lynch because he is such a nice guy (and maybe also because I defended him). Sure enough though, when he saw my stance on ties and taka wouldn't change, he made that post to then follow up with an actual vote, easing to the jarring of a vote on me, which he earlier said he would never do because he thought I was innocent.

Then he did follow it up with an vote. I don't think Beefy thinks me guilty at all (he is Godfather, but even in his townie act). But for some reason, taka has been on my case for some reason (I pray not Atpg's refuted cases), and remains stubborn, willing to throw his own life at risk as well.

Well, taka, here is the plain case against Beefy. I don't know if it will change your mind or not, but just remember, I won't bbe acting against Beefy, so if you want to lynch the Godfather, you know what to do. :yes:

I of course will keep my vote on you because you voted against me and I cannot let that go unpunished. :bow:

---

Here's the case: Beefy voted for Reenk Roink, after being reluctant to do so all game, and so therefore ipso facto he must be scum.

Oh, and my case against Reenk Roink was refuted where exactly? :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andres

That's not my point.

My point is that those who have voted W_E are almost certain to be innocent. So you and Beefy187 are left.

Personally, I think it's Beefy187, but if it has to be a tie, then I would very much prefer a tie between you and Beefy187.


EDIT: GAH! There goes the theory of W_E must have been scum:



I still believe Reenk is innocent though.

---

No case against Beefy here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Beefy. Dearest Beefster. You have been on my "hmmmmm" list since very early in the game. Despite what others have said, and you have claimed, about your activity level, you just seem so much more "present" in this game than in any other I can recall. All of your posts seem genial and reasonable -- yet you frequently allude to gentleman's agreements etc. as your rationale for votes and pursuits. All in all, you have been involved, informed, reasonably responsive when prodded, but have not EVER gone after someone, pushed for information, or really taken point on anything. It's almost like you're a politician at a party which hasn't been "polled." Everyone will recall you were there, nobody will think you were doing something offensive, but nobody can really point to anything you did or said except to say that you seemed to be enjoying yourself.


All in all, if I were the one to pick, I'd probably vote Beefy. It's close, as I find taka a goodly bit and Reenk somewhat suspect as well. If its Andres, then he's bested me here. Still, in the final analysis, I'd say its 187Beefyz by a steer's nose.

---

The case against Beefy: He is "present", even though he was absent on the 24th, and the 23rd.

And Beefy never went after anyone, except Reenk Roink, and only then, reluctantly. And Beefy's crime is that he's having fun, but Reenk isn't?

Please, feel free to point out to me the case, because I am having trouble finding it.
I know, I know, I know that SOUNDS like sarcasm, but honestly, truthfully, I'm still having fun and I'm happy, I'm happy, I'm happy.

Where is the case, though? Is it bad to ask? Am I breaking a rule?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy

Okay. Well, that seems reasonable enough. Didn't he vote for himself at other times, too?

---

I actually found this suspicious because he wasn't putting himself ahead or tied in the vote and he specifically asked how much time was left to make sure he would have time to remove it.

Quote:

---

And correct me if I am wrong, but Beefy was doing his University exam from the 23-25th. He had no posts here during that stretch. AT ALL. On the forum.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

He was not here to do the murder that night.

---

Godfather doesn't do the murder until he's th only one left.

Quote:

---

He's been passive and defending no one all game, pretty much. He's been kept alive as a scapegoat and a lynch victim. I read and read, but I could not find one compelling case against Beefy. Where is the case? Please give me a link. I want to read it.

---

If no one has made a compelling case, then how would he be a scapegoat? On the contrary he's still alive even though no one suspected him much.

Quote:

---

If any townie, ANY townie, were to have behaved exactly as Reenk Roink has all game, he would have been lynched a long time ago. But everyone chalks it up to "Reenk being Reenk."

Well, Beefy is being Beefy! That's not a case, that's not even rational! Reenk would of course be Reenk as the Godfather, so would Beefy!

:wall:

---

This is wrong. People are saying that beefy isn't acting like beefy. Saying that someone is acting like themself is perfectly legitimate.

Quote:

---

Is there anyone here, anyone, who can tell me why Beefy is the better lynch. I'll look at Reenk's posts and Andres posts and respond if I can. If there is anyone here who can please point me to those cases, it would save me a lot of time.

---

Many people have made many posts.

Quote:

---

It's a double standard. Everyone in the game should be held to the same standard, if you're going to vote based on scummy behavior. Hey, I don't mind! Call it what it is; a more or less random vote based on intuition.

This post is long winded and spoilered for your protection.

---

I think the fact that your upset about the "double standard" might be biasing you against reenk.

Quote:

---

Please, feel free to point out to me the case, because I am having trouble finding it.
I know, I know, I know that SOUNDS like sarcasm, but honestly, truthfully, I'm still having fun and I'm happy, I'm happy, I'm happy.

Where is the case, though? Is it bad to ask? Am I breaking a rule?

---

What? Go back over the last few days and read all the posts.

Quote:

---

People would rather win than lose. Why have you been trying to convince the town to be suicidal, to tie, and otherwise "let Reenk have it"? It's interesting testimony, from someone who was vigilante'd. However, since I am now getting into a credibility argument, and since I've made bad accusations this game, I won't go there. That's not the point. The point is, if you're a townie, you have a duty to try to get the town to win the game, even in a halfhearted fun-loving fashion. I don't see even a little effort to win from Sasaki, not if it involves killing Roink.

---

Seriously? I explained it four times and now that you have proof that the godfather didn't switch his vote at the last second you still think a tie was suicidal?

I've also made dozens of posts trying to get white_eyes and beefy lynched. Because they are mafia.

This line is the only one I will respond to (again):

Quote:

---

I just think our final lynch choice, whatever it may be, should be based on logic and evidence

---

Firstly, "logic" in the broadest and technical (most important) sense is concerned with syntactical form.

Let's go ahead and assume that logic is a good way of moving forward (very debatable). My voting for others based on say retaliation is clearly a valid form:

If someone votes for me, then he is guilty
Someone voted for me
----------------------------------------
He/she is guilty

This reasoning form is modus ponens, it is the epitome of "logical" reasoning. Do you now see how weak a tool logic is? Logic does not concern itself with truth Atpg.

As to your "logical" cases against me, they have been proven on several cases to have inconsistencies both internal and external (you never responded to these charges). How can you justify your system as logical if you violate the most important primitive axiom of logic - the law of non contradiction?

Now to "evidence" all of it has been construed on cliches and presuppositions of what is and what isn't good townie behavior. I don't think I even need to bother refuting that which I can just dismiss. :wink:

Case against Beefy:

1. He is abnormally active.

2. His self-votes DID not actually endanger him.

3. He seemed rather desperate to survive the final round but not being too desperate about it.

That's all I can think of in 1 minute :bow:

and a trillion or two for my awesomeness? :clown:

Maybe a few million... not a trillion though, I do have to live in luxury in a tropical island after all :book:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shlin28

I bet 50 trillion dollars of my winnings from ATPG on that the mafia consists of:

Beefy - Godfather
ATPG - Grunt
Lord Winter - Grunt

Voting patterns may say otherwise but I'm rich and don't care! :clown:

oh, and 100000 trillion dollars to each of the 3 others if they are the Godfather :bow:

---

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

HAHAHAHAHAHHAAAA!!!!

YES I AM THE SCUM!!! YES, YES, I AM THE SCUM!!! I've been a scum all this time.

:laugh4:

I give up, you win. And Beefy is the Godfather, yes, you are correct. And Lord Winter is the grunt. Sooooo right.

How did you know?

:laugh4:

I was hoping I'd be able to win my money back for my bet that you were the Godfather. I was wrong about you, I admit it. I am sorry. You know, as others have argued all game, townies make mistakes.

Seriously. If you think I am the mafia, at this point, I honestly don't know what to say, except hold your applause until the end of the game, and start writing the check.

I am not the issue here. And my defense of Beefy, now, on SOUND reasoning, whereas Reenk defended Beefy all game FOR NO REASON, only to betray him in the last round to save his hide? Where are your standards, or do you have two of them?

:laugh2:

I'm having fun, no disrespect, how ya doin'. :shakehands: ~:grouphug: :heart:

I find I have to do that so people will realize I'm allowed to be serious and not be mad or anything at the same time. Is it wrong to ask questions, on the most critical vote of the game, specifically the ones about what is the case against Beefy, and why are we ignoring, totally ignoring and giving a pass to Reenk Roink, and all the scummy things he's done this game?

:shrug:

Hey, if anyone wants me to shush, I will just sayyyyyyyy the word. Seriously, even I am tired of hearing myself talk.

If someone votes for me, then he is guilty
Someone voted for me
----------------------------------------
He/she is guilty

This isn't logic... or i guess it could be called somewhat twisted logic

more logical would be....

I am innocent
X voted for me
X voted for an innocent so is more likely to be guilty

Saying X is guilty because he voted you is no kind of logic at all...

Still excited!

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reenk Roink

This line is the only one I will respond to (again):



Firstly, "logic" in the broadest and technical (most important) sense is concerned with syntactical form.

Let's go ahead and assume that logic is a good way of moving forward (very debatable). My voting for others based on say retaliation is clearly a valid form:

If someone votes for me, then he is guilty
Someone voted for me
----------------------------------------
He/she is guilty

This reasoning form is modus ponens, it is the epitome of "logical" reasoning. Do you now see how weak a tool logic is? Logic does not concern itself with truth Atpg.

As to your "logical" cases against me, they have been proven on several cases to have inconsistencies both internal and external (you never responded to these charges). How can you justify your system as logical if you violate the most important primitive axiom of logic - the law of non contradiction?

Now to "evidence" all of it has been construed on cliches and presuppositions of what is and what isn't good townie behavior. I don't think I even need to bother refuting that which I can just dismiss. :wink:

---

Interesting that Reenk Roink tries to use a logical argument to argue against logic, which is a self-defeating thing to do. I don't even need to do a rebuttal. And you never made a case against Beefy.

Sasaki's rebuttal was, in summary, "go look for the case". There were no links.

What about my short and succint version of the case against Beefy? :book:

LittleGrizzly, formalize the argument to this

p -> q
p
therefore q

Again, logic is concerned with forms, put anything you want in p and q, and it's logical.

Askthepizzaguy, you blatantly misrepresented my post saying I used logic to argue against logic when I went ahead and assumed logic was good for the time being (and if someone really wanted to use logic to criticize logic, it would be ok, as he is demonstrating an argument to someone who presupposes the use of logic - his own argument against logic could be logic sucks). Why don't you try and read the post, and try responding to the charges against your own contradictions of your cases?

I am pointing out the flaws with using buzzwords like "logic" and "evidence" to prop up a weak case.


...
I keep asking myself why I continue, and then I remember, let's pass Capo I! :laugh4:

Alright, y'all. Quiet down, peeps. I don't wanna have to sift through 5 pages of jabbering when I get back from my Business Statistics midterm... :whip:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy

Sasaki's rebuttal was, in summary, "go look for the case". There were no links.

---

That's a lie, and if you're too lazy to go read the last two days you have no business posting so much :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

That's a lie, and if you're too lazy to go read the last two days you have no business posting so much :laugh4:

---

You do misrepresent a lot of things Atpg. I think it's unintentional, you overwhelm yourself with information which leads to that, along with inconsistencies.

I've clearly made a case against Beefy and a case against taka is also there, more implicit.

Ya know what?

I had fun. Let Reenk win. Good game. :medievalcheers:

As for shlin28, I have a rebuttal for you here, but it doesn't matter. I tip over my king and shake hands and say good game. :shakehands:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I will not be returning to this thread until it is conclusively, exhaustively, and finally OVER. And I will not be casting a vote against Reenk Roink when the dead can vote, because there was never any case against Beefy except

1. He is abnormally active.

Prove it. And why are we punishing Beefy for being ACTIVE when Reenk Roink is just as active?

2. His self-votes DID not actually endanger him.


No, but, self votes do tend to get people to suspect you and try to lynch you. See: any time I have voted for myself. See: YLC's self vote. Etc.


3. He seemed rather desperate to survive the final round but not being too desperate about it.

Yeah, because he doesn't care about losing the game! He's calm and relaxed. Unlike Reenk Roink, who was freaking desperate to lynch ANYONE BUT HIMSELF.

DOUBLE STANDARDS. DOUBLE STANDARDS. DOUBLE STANDARDS. That's all.

No case against Beefy. None! So what's the point of defending him, if there is nothing to defend him against?

Vague intuition? Gut feeling? Tarot cards? Fortune cookies? Tell me, how did you glean that Beefy was guilty? And did the tea leaves say anything about Reenk Roink?

I'm just saying. And I'm having fun, and I don't mean this in a disrespectful way. I like all of you guys. I just have the right to point out silly things.

Reenk Roink, you are a character. Never change, my friend. You deserve this one, because town has failed to properly explain why you aren't a legitimate suspect on evidenciary and logical grounds, and why Beefy is a suspect on no grounds.

:medievalcheers:

I am not angry, please, do not think so. I do admit a little, little bit of frustration, and I'm not taking it out on any of you. And since we aren't having a discussion about evidence or reasoning, then, there is no reason why I should give evidence or reasoning, and I'm afraid that's all I know how to do... I don't want to gamble the game on a hunch. But, I've asked for a case to give a rebuttal to, and I couldn't find one myself, and none was presented.

As such, my services are no longer required, I've made all my points, and they were never refuted! Reenk Roink argued that it is illogical to use logic.

Quote:

---

Do you now see how weak a tool logic is? Logic does not concern itself with truth Atpg.

---

Sasaki failed to present a case. Everyone has failed in that regard, when it comes to Beefy. And because Beefy is such a nice guy, he would never, ever try to defend himself this much, and so I am breaking my cardinal rule of defending people, just for him. Because Reenk Roink was allowed to do it all game and not get called on it, nor get called on turning his back on him. :shrug:

It's just... ironic... that everything that can be tossed against beefy can be easily turned aside, and since none of the arguments against Reenk Roink can be turned aside, they are... ignored? What's a better word? Discarded, rejected, you name it. But everyone is entitled to their opinion.

I am just, at the last, pointing out that everyone has opinions, but not everyone has reasons.

God bless. (I'm not even religious)

I love you guys. I will miss you if any of you leave, and I am still very sorry if I offended any of you or annoyed you. God I wore out my welcome a long time ago here... I just wanted to do my best, that's all.

:bow:

Quote:

---

Vague intuition? Gut feeling? Tarot cards? Fortune cookies? Tell me, how did you glean that Beefy was guilty? And did the tea leaves say anything about Reenk Roink?

---

You speak of intuition as well as other things as if they have less epistemic merit than your system of "rationality" (which is really questionable according to its own standards anyway). I like intuition, it serves well, and even has a practical streak similar to analytical methods.

Atpg, you seem somewhat upset that I get away with PERCIEVED BEHAVIOR that you THINK OTHERS WOULDN'T get away with, am I correct?

Why is this such a big deal?

If it makes you feel better (though I still don't understand why you would) do you know how many times I've been lynched early game due to my behavior and reputation?

You win some and lose some, you get away sometimes and get caught others. Big deal. :shrug:

You again misrepresented my statements about logic by the way.... :undecided:

Can we just stop having these 'last posts' just keep posting (preferably). Im happy for the analysis, but maybe if you could make it a little shorter and concise... or if you could spoiler minor points of your cases against people so its easy to read the short version. Or the overview considering how much there is to remember...

Again, logic is concerned with forms, put anything you want in p and q, and it's logical.

I don't know if were thinking differently on the word logic, but i basically see logic as reasoned thinking. So without logically thinking of who to vote, we are voting randomly or going on some kind of gut instinct (which occasionally has logic behind it anyway). If you are simply disregarding the logic the person is using (the reason to thier reasoned thinking) thats ok but it seemed to me you were disregarding logical thinking as a way to vote... ?

Enough.

Tally/writeup started.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

Can we just stop having these 'last posts' just keep posting (preferably). Im happy for the analysis, but maybe if you could make it a little shorter and concise... or if you could spoiler minor points of your cases against people so its easy to read the short version. Or the overview considering how much there is to remember...

Again, logic is concerned with forms, put anything you want in p and q, and it's logical.

I don't know if were thinking differently on the word logic, but i basically see logic as reasoned thinking. So without logically thinking of who to vote, we are voting randomly or going on some kind of gut instinct (which occasionally has logic behind it anyway). If you are simply disregarding the logic the person is using (the reason to thier reasoned thinking) thats ok but it seemed to me you were disregarding logical thinking as a way to vote... ?

---

I think of logic as the (many) formal system(s) of inference. I just don't like it when Atpg says that his cases are "logical" when they only are such a thing in a weak, colloquial sense (and the same can be said about any other case to be frank).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy

I've made all my points, and they were never refuted!

---

Yes they were.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy

Reenk Roink argued that it is illogical to use logic.

---

Not in this thread. :laugh4:

This statement clearly is not what you attribute to me as mentioned several times:

"Do you now see how weak a tool logic is? Logic does not concern itself with truth Atpg."

The first sentence is a (rhetorical) question. The second sentence is correct.

Ah, just get the voting done deaders. :bow:

23 more posts til 2000, keep spamming people :P :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shlin28

I bet 50 trillion dollars of my winnings from ATPG on that the mafia consists of:

Beefy - Godfather
ATPG - Grunt
Lord Winter - Grunt

Voting patterns may say otherwise but I'm rich and don't care! :clown:

oh, and 100000 trillion dollars to each of the 3 others if they are the Godfather :bow:

---

We have a deal Shlin :yes:

The day dragged on and on. Despite the desperateness of the situation facing the town, the remaining villagers of the Gameroom appeared to have accepted their fate one way or the other. Very few of their votes seemed to be based on who they actually thought was the mafia. As a matter of fact, it would seem that the reasons why they case their votes were actually quite petty, or more likely deeper, beyond face-value comprehension.

No matter the reason, they voted. And when Chief of Police Reenk Roink called time, the villages presented him with a tie. Of course.

"SO," The Wanax proclaimed. "AFTER ALL OF THE EXTRA TIME I HAVE GIVEN YOU PEONS TO MAKE A FINAL, DECIDING VOTE, YOU PRESENT ME WITH THIS." Even in the black, expressionless void where his face should have been, The Wanax still brought forth the impression of anger and rage. The force emanating from his person was so that the villagers, even by now dulled to every event, all soiled themselves in fear.

Popping a grape off his hat and examining it, The Wanax continued to speak, calming down slightly. "I suppose this was to be expected," he said, taking out the phasgana and examining it thoughtfully as well before putting it away. "Here we have four separate villagers, each with their own individual motivations and beliefs, values and fears. Naturally, as the number of voters and choices whittle down, the probability that the outcome will result in a tie increases."

Plopping the grape into the area of the void where his mouth should have been, he suddenly pointed a quivering finger out in the crowd. "AUDIENCE!!!" he boomed, causing the other villagers to shiver with fear. "WE HAVE BEEN PRESENTED WITH A TIE VOTE. HOW MANY OF YOU BELIEVE THAT I WILL JUST KEEP YOU HERE FOREVER UNTIL ONE OF YOU EVIDENTLY CRACKS AND SWITCHES YOUR DECISION?"

Slowly, everybody raised their hands.

"Of course you would," The Wanax mused. "After all, that has always been the outcome of this particular scenario in the past, has it not?" Again, slowly, all the villagers nodded after casting their minds back to the few times the vote had ended in a tie in the past.

The Wanax continued. "YOU," he said, pointing at Beefy187. "IS IT LOGICAL TO BELIEVE THAT THE LAWS OF PHYSICS WILL HOLD FOR AN INDEFINITE AMOUNT OF TIME INTO THE FUTURE?"

Beefy paused, clearly not expecting this line of questioning from The Wanax. "Uh, well," he stumbled, "I suppose, yes. I mean, after all, were the laws of physics to not hold, then surely the universe as we know it would cease to exist."

"A perfectly reasonable and expected answer coming from such an unenlightened person as yourself," The Wanax replied, and Beefy wasn't sure if he was being complimented or not. "Clearly, your basic level of education has served you well, for you knew that if physics stopped making sense then the universe itself would no longer be. HOWEVER!" he yelled, and everybody jumped, soiling themselves again. "HOW CAN YOU BE CERTAIN?"

There was silence.

Plucking another grape from his hat and popping it into the area of the void where his mouth should have been, The Wanax continued. "What we are presented with here is the basic problem of induction, as outlined in Hume's An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding. Just because we are aware of a particular phenomenon always happening in one particular instance does not mean that that phenomenon happening in that instance is always the case. For example, if you were a woman, raised solely by a woman, and in your entire life had only ever come into contact with other women, then it would be reasonable to hypothesize that the species Homo Sapiens only had one gender. However, this is of course incorrect, as we all know that humans have more than one gender. Likewise with the physics problem I presented to you earlier. Just because they have held throughout our comparably short existence does not mean that they will cease to do so at a later point in time."

"But how does this relate to the vote" somebody asked.

"I WAS GETTING TO THAT!!!" The Wanax thundered, and his voice was so full of quick anger that everybody soiled themselves for a third time. "The problem of induction relates to this instance quite well. Just because you have all been used to ties being broken in one particular way does not mean that this is the only way. For instance... I could do this instead."

Everybody watched as, one by one, The Wanax plucked the remainder of the grapes from his hat. However, instead of consuming them, he this time threw them all on the ground. A great purple mist engulfed everything, until a second later when the Gameroom Square was finally repopulated. Along with the living villagers, there stood their 24 dead comrades, re-animated and sentient once again. However, they were transparent, their insides being a smoky purple mist.

"I HAVE DECIDED TO LET THE DEAD TEMPORARILY ASSIST YOU IN THIS FINAL TASK. THEY SHALL DISAPPEAR ONCE THIS IS COMPLETE. YOU ALL MUST VOTE FOR EITHER BEEFY187 OR MY HOST, REENK ROINK. THEN WE SHALL END THIS, ONCE AND FOR ALL. I WILL BE WAITING."

Day 12 tally:

Beefy187: 2 (Reenk Roink, Andres)
Reenk Roink: 2 (taka, Beefy187)

~~~~~~~~~~~

So it all comes down to this. All players, dead and living, must vote for either Beefy or Reenk. Voting will close in precisely 24 hours. Best of luck to everyone once again. :bow:

Reenk, I hope I did The Wanax justice. :bow: