Cookie Thread Act 3: The Cookie Strikes Back

So its about how a problem that was considered more before than now which is as said, problem of universals. Then the flavor describes that like what that is such as properties. And then it mentions the the scostic position.

2 Likes

Did you lose access to your faction channel when you were in the Rift?

so there’s a book in the name of every role channel. what color is your book?

2 Likes

to be able to understand what’s going on here you have to spend an unreasonable portion of your life reading through countless shitposts

4 Likes

Yeah, I was just doing that to figure out if that thing between you and tutuu was real :ayaya:

3 Likes

It’s not it was a joke :joy_cat:

I feel like maybe doing a massping of everyone who liked that post

2 Likes

Okay! Sunbeams response.

First of all calling us cringe is incredible cringe, I’ll have you know that we as a team are EXCEPTIONALLY Pog and demand to be referred to as such.

“They left messages which framed teams’ actions as reasons to be suspicious without taking responsibility for the actual conclusions drawn from that”: Okay, so, that is fine and valid response if the suspicions we were giving were any more than early estimations and significant beyond vague guesses. Which they were. As all the guesses day 1 were. I was shaky on supporting the suspicions especially because while I will openly make suspicions, the suspicions were shaky. It is not unreasonable to be approaching the game, especially day 1 where we have exactly 0 usuable information for making real and present decisions, thus not drawing conclusions and just suggesting suspicion. Because we had only the suspicion and not conclusions at that point.

“Posting a screenshot of the vote totals on the revoke poll”: This was a joke. We were heckposting. As many teams have been doing. Heckposting has been incredibly common here, and has been said by many teams that it is not an indication of alignment, it is oddly suspicious that we are the only team that the flowers have been calling out for heckposting, which is inkeeping with their very aggressive manner to point fingers at us, the main people who have been criticising them.

“Raising the possibility that the MTs are a jester, “padded” with uncertain language”: Day 1. We were uncertain. Everyone was uncertain because we were working with very incomplete information. We’re still uncertain which is why we haven’t come out with a hard conclusion despite this increasingly aggressive attack on us by the Flowers, but again, uncertainty is a valid and reasonable attitude to a situation with very little information.

“Further “padding”, throwing suspicion on the Flowers as a joke repeatedly”: Most of this was in fact not a joke. The Flowers have pushed very aggressively towards us specifically and we are responding in kind as we feel the levels of focus we have felt from them were both not justified and suspicious.

“When they did take responsibility for the conclusions, they often backed down fast as to avoid seeming too aggressive”: Or maybe we are dealing with incomplete information and as such take a malleable stance that can be convinced otherwise, or back down because we have no concrete information, especially on day 1 as I’ve stated a number of times here, and I’m actively happy to change votes based on this as we view suspicion and votes in these early stages as relatively light and not a big deal.

“From what I’ve seen, Luquos appears to be experienced with forum mafia (correct me if I’m wrong)”: Mostly in-person Mafia, actually, not Forum.

“so it feels odd to me that they would be so immediately suspicious of someone pushing the Random Voting Stage”: Ah, see, the thing here is that it’s important to have someone actively criticing and pushing the teams establishing themselves as community leaders and especially active, lest those teams build enough trust to be viewed in that light by the other teams automatically. You’ll notice almost every action I’ve taken specifically has been against the teams pushing the most action with the least information - And then, today, the team that was actively telling us to ignore information.

"Later, they did go bolder and voted to revoke the Wings ": We were more sure at that point, yes. As I’ve said, all of this was on very slim reasoning and we responded based on the information we had at the time, which was not very much.

"But very soon after that, when the Lift bandwagoned on the Wings, they switched to voting the Lift as soon as the Steaks did as well ": We felt that the Lift’s actions were more suspicious than the Wings. It was not that we felt the wings weren’t suspicious, but that the Lift bandwagoning was more so than the Wings’ actions. A vote is not a “Condemn” it is a “This team is most supicious right now” and we are treating it as such.

“but they chose not to maintain that vote once the voting channel was created” : Okay tbh I thought the previous vote carried though and then it was late enough that we were like “eh, new vote’ll happen soon”.

“Their reaction to being pushed has been defensive and strange - at first, they just dismissed the claims and said some stuff about Wild Low solidarity, but later”: Wild Low solidarity is a significant heckpost, much like Tigerbeams Forever or the FFs-Beams rivalryflirting. We pushed for you specifically because you’re deeply suspicious and continue to be.

“They seem to be trying to discredit our reasons for pushing them - which is natural - but in a way that to me feels subtle and just weird.”: This is entirely vibes which like, valid, but I can’t reasonably respond to vibes. You just going “It’s weird and suspicious” carries about as much weight as me going “The Breath Mints are clearly levil”. None at all.

"Another line of reasoning which feels really odd to me is that they have been saying our use of specific mafia terminology is intentionally mudding the waters ": Yes. It is. Intentional use of meta terminology is significantly muddying the waters and leading to explanations and discussion that could be cleared up by you guys just using a full sentence to describe what you mean by said terminology. You’re also using it wrong a lot of the time (IIoA being an EXCELLENT example, which hasn’t been applied correctly once so far and is only tenuously applicable in the early stages of the game anyway), and continuing to do that even when on Day1 we as the Beams raised the point that maybe you could be explicit in your meaning and many people agreed, which is why I especially have continued to push for it because I fully believe that using the meta terminology is trying to make yourselves look smart and at the same time distracting from the actual merits of any point you’re making by drowning it in acronyms.

2 Likes

ok

5 Likes

jesse

3 Likes

This is one of the best sentences anybody has ever said in mafia

1 Like

i cannot state enough that people have fallen for this TWICE

1 Like

This was posted by a jester. BTW.

The second time was fantastic because the guy was being warned about it by his mafia teammates, and he didn’t realize it because he was backreading and didn’t get to the “hey, this is the oldest trick in the book” part until it was too late.

Chair of deception 2
And LFoL I guess

@May

IMG_2639

5 Likes

image

3 Likes

is that may from the flowers?

3 Likes

Yeah that’s May from the Flowers

2 Likes

may…

3 Likes

True!

1 Like