Posting Rules For Round 1

I believe it is quite unfair not to require users to post AT LEAST once a day. How else are we able to evaluate the players' response to the current situation in accordance to how they normally act? If there is no interaction between players, it is nearly impossible to accurately accumulate an idea of who may be the wolf. All we would be doing is postulating randomly, hoping that our lack-of-evidence guesses will be correct.

There are so many players who are not willing to post or chat on xat in order to not stand out either as a loud player that can potentially be the wolf or as the loud player that the wolf wants to kill; there are so many who are quiet that it's too hard to tell under these circumstances who's innocent and who's not.

I thought there was a rule that Leroy posted up before that required users to post at least once a day during Round 1, or the Preliminary Round. Was I mistaken?

MonkeyBoy wrote:I believe it is quite unfair not to require users to post AT LEAST once a day. How else are we able to evaluate the players' response to the current situation in accordance to how they normally act? If there is no interaction between players, it is nearly impossible to accurately accumulate an idea of who may be the wolf. All we would be doing is postulating randomly, hoping that our lack-of-evidence guesses will be correct.

There are so many players who are not willing to post or chat on xat in order to not stand out either as a loud player that can potentially be the wolf or as the loud player that the wolf wants to kill; there are so many who are quiet that it's too hard to tell under these circumstances who's innocent and who's not.

I thought there was a rule that Leroy posted up before that required users to post at least once a day during Round 1, or the Preliminary Round. Was I mistaken?

Although I agree with you somewhat, if you are totally clueless with what to do because of the current situation then perhaps this competition may not be suited for you. Perhaps it would be best to try and find out who the wolves are with what we are given, and with what we can provide for ourselves...

What are we given?
In a room full of 13 players, with 3 players who are actively posting and 10 players who haven't posted since the round started and/or don't post often in general, the wolf can just lurk in the shadows. Heck, he doesn't even have to do ANYTHING for a whole day. All he's required to do is kill a person once every two days (every other day, a random sheep would die).

What clues are we left then? The wolf would just start off by killing all 3 loud players and doesn't have to do any thinking in order to kill the quiet people since THEY WILL STAY QUIET FOREVER. They're not going to call doubt on anyone. They won't participate in conversations. Heck, they can just go on vacation to Alaska for all the wolf cares.

MonkeyBoy wrote:What are we given?
In a room full of 13 players, with 3 players who are actively posting and 10 players who haven't posted since the round started and/or don't post often in general, the wolf can just lurk in the shadows. Heck, he doesn't even have to do ANYTHING for a whole day. All he's required to do is kill a person once every two days (every other day, a random sheep would die).

What clues are we left then? The wolf would just start off by killing all 3 loud players and doesn't have to do any thinking in order to kill the quiet people since THEY WILL STAY QUIET FOREVER. They're not going to call doubt on anyone. They won't participate in conversations. Heck, they can just go on vacation to Alaska for all the wolf cares.

In case you hadn't noticed, all the other groups have the same situation. If those quiet players stay quiet and get killed, that's their fault for being weaker than the wolves. Every other group has already created strategies to determine the wolves, while you are still here complaining. And for all you know, being quiet could be the strategies of those people for whatever reason. It's not so much about what we've been given, but about what we can make.

I know that every group is faced with that situation. That was the whole reason of me stating that hypothetical scenario. I did not say anything that isolated just Group B as the victims of this problem.

I find it quite insulting that you just clearly implicated that I was an incompetent fool. I was not complaining. I was informing the dealers that I think it would be more appropriate to take away the disadvantage the sheep have. And just for your sake, you should be glad you're not in my group. I would be glad to take you on and crush you. :'D

MonkeyBoy wrote:I know that every group is faced with that situation. That was the whole reason of me stating that hypothetical scenario. I did not say anything that isolated just Group B as the victims of this problem.

I find it quite insulting that you just clearly implicated that I was an incompetent fool. I was not complaining. I was informing the dealers that I think it would be more appropriate to take away the disadvantage the sheep have. And just for your sake, you should be glad you're not in my group. I would be glad to take you on and crush you. :'D

It's fairly obvious that even if I was in your group, you wouldn't be able to crush me at all. You won't listen to reason, so maybe the dictionary shall set you straight; you were complaining. Your first sentence was "I believe it is quite unfair not to require users to post AT LEAST once a day." How is that not a complaint already? The dictionary's definition of complaint is "to express dissatisfaction". I believe that your whole first post was about you expressing disatisfaction, or, if I'm wrong then you're satisfied with the game layout, meaning that the whole meaning of your post is futile. Clearly, you must be BELOW average in terms of potential intelligence if you do not understand the meaning of what you are saying.

"I would be glad to take you on and crush you." Clearly you're finding it difficult to deal with the first round; I and many others, on the other hand, are not finding it as difficult as you are. Clearly this already demonstrates your inability to adapt to difficult situations and your inferiority to me. You constructing a "professional-sounding post/argument" does not make you the best at anything, let alone better than me at anything.

What a fallacious argument. You talk about reasoning and then you quote from the dictionary? There are quite a few fallacies seen at that point, more particularly quoting from the red herring fallacies. Your appeal to belief and appeal to authority implicate how you try to justify by something that can so easily be debated about.

I had previously stated that

I believe it is quite unfair not to require users to post AT LEAST once a day. How else are we able to evaluate the players' response to the current situation in accordance to how they normally act?

I had no idea that my beliefs were on par with the definition of a "complaint" based on your supposed definition, quoting from dictionary.com, a widely used source that many people use just because it's there. My perspective on how I state things are too complex for the understanding of a man such as yourself. If I believe something is unfair, it doesn't mean that I am discontent. I believe the world is unfair; life is unfair, but I am not discontent with my life or the world. And this is only to contradict your "dictionary definition" of a complaint. I was merely speculating the situation. I have been talking on Xat and people were agreeing with my thoughts, so I thought that I could take the chance to make a thread about the situation.

I request a change; is that a complaint?

You said

I believe that your whole first post was about you expressing disatisfaction, or, if I'm wrong then you're satisfied with the game layout, meaning that the whole meaning of your post is futile.

Other than the fact that I disproved your notion that I was expressing dissatisfaction, which you spelled incorrectly, my post was not futile at all. I was merely stating my opinions. Don't people post their opinions and beliefs on a forum? That's exactly what I was doing.

Then you explicated how you think that

you must be BELOW average in terms of potential intelligence if you do not understand the meaning of what you are saying.

The meaning of what I'm saying is that I think the dealers should make an alteration to the rules of the round. I understand what I'm saying; I don't think YOU are, though. Unless, of course, you came to the conclusion that the MEANING of my POST was COMPLAINT...? If that even makes sense. Your illogical conclusions confuse me, Stav.

You deduced that

Clearly you're finding it difficult to deal with the first round

Have I ever expressed something that indicated I was distressed with the first round? This game is much like a game called Cry Wolf that I played several years ago. I loved that game. If it was difficult to deal with, I wouldn't be dealing with it. Not to mention, I moved groups just so I could play. I'm just providing suggestions as to improve the game play.

Clearly this already demonstrates your inability to adapt to difficult situations and your inferiority to me.

I never said this was a difficult situation. I have already adapted; actually, I'm a veteran at this game. I have played this so many times, I can do it in my sleep, so in reality, YOU'RE the one that's inferior to me in terms of experiencing this game first hand. Your grammar usage, at the same time, is not even on par with that of an elementary student.

An example of such is seen here:

You constructing a "professional-sounding post/argument" does not make you the best at anything, let alone better than me at anything.

It's "your constructing" not you constructing. That's an ad hominem fallacy; you're attacking me (as a person), not my actions in this argument, when obviously you meant to criticize what I was doing.

Learn to educate yourself on how to write when you're trying to argue with someone of my intellect. (:

I shall not waste my time further by arguing with you. Clearly someone who writes a post that long has no life outside of the LG.

Nah, it took no effort to write something as simple as that.

I like your acceptance of your loss.

(:

THE GAME: You lose.

Oh, just one last thing, since you're probably going to look at this anyways.

Stavros XIII wrote:No, me not replying is actually my win.

Love the irony of that sentence. Thanks for contradicting yourself. <3

wow, monkeyboy owned that.

and i agree with u as well, people that lose interest cause damage to the game, theres gotta be away around that.

O.o, the posts were too long... 2sentence posts please. I read the whole thing and all i remember are quote boxes and the word "complain"

remaining silent is a good way to help the wolves win, you need to tell your fellow sheep not to allow this. I'm sure that the people who dont speak will be more suspected of being a wolf than those who do speak anyways.

Glass wrote:remaining silent is a good way to help the wolves win, you need to tell your fellow sheep not to allow this. I'm sure that the people who dont speak will be more suspected of being a wolf than those who do speak anyways.

a rare post from glass...

lol, ya i mostly hang out in the chat because i feel like im actually talking to a person there.