2014-05-24, 11:00 AM
Does anyone have any reads outside of "oh X has/hasn't talked very much"?
We're not going to survive this if everyone just sits around saying "oh man we mustn't jump to conclusions" "we need food/water!" "oh the heat must be getting to everyone."
We need to take action, not act as nonfactors to let the Pirafia pick us off one by one. Even the admission of having nothing to say can be more than mindless filler.
I'm all for fishing for reactions (I'd like to think that's been Sega/Corn/MasPan's game thus far), and breadcrumbing one's role could be fine. But it helps when it's coupled with something else as well, especially in the latter case.
And to elaborate on what I was saying about Corn earlier:
We don't know the Pirafia's game. We don't know what they're capable of. Saying that one is "silent," doesn't really have any meaning for a few reasons.
1. Do we even know if "silence" does anything? He's still talking. He's still saying the exact same things he's been saying. There's nothing we're actually gaining from him saying that.
2. We have no context. We don't know if "silencing" people is even something the Pirafia can do. How do we know he's not faking it to make it seem as if he's been victimized?
3. IF it does do something, we have no idea of the extent to which something happens.
It's essentially a form of WIFOM (for those of you not familiar with the term, it is essentially ambiguity in the form of "an infinite regress of reverse psychology"). It would be a fallacy to assume that Corn's message makes him town OR mafia, because either side could be argued with no actual bias for one side.
I guess my point is that tl;dr: I don't agree with your vote, @Sega; .
We're not going to survive this if everyone just sits around saying "oh man we mustn't jump to conclusions" "we need food/water!" "oh the heat must be getting to everyone."
We need to take action, not act as nonfactors to let the Pirafia pick us off one by one. Even the admission of having nothing to say can be more than mindless filler.
I'm all for fishing for reactions (I'd like to think that's been Sega/Corn/MasPan's game thus far), and breadcrumbing one's role could be fine. But it helps when it's coupled with something else as well, especially in the latter case.
And to elaborate on what I was saying about Corn earlier:
We don't know the Pirafia's game. We don't know what they're capable of. Saying that one is "silent," doesn't really have any meaning for a few reasons.
1. Do we even know if "silence" does anything? He's still talking. He's still saying the exact same things he's been saying. There's nothing we're actually gaining from him saying that.
2. We have no context. We don't know if "silencing" people is even something the Pirafia can do. How do we know he's not faking it to make it seem as if he's been victimized?
3. IF it does do something, we have no idea of the extent to which something happens.
It's essentially a form of WIFOM (for those of you not familiar with the term, it is essentially ambiguity in the form of "an infinite regress of reverse psychology"). It would be a fallacy to assume that Corn's message makes him town OR mafia, because either side could be argued with no actual bias for one side.
I guess my point is that tl;dr: I don't agree with your vote, @Sega; .