• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Kasimir last won the day on October 23 2019

Kasimir had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,602 Most Ancient

About Kasimir

  • Rank
    메뚜기 游侠

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

11,950 profile views
  1. quest

    Yes, you should enjoy your birthday. Sorry to hear, hope things clear up in your favour!
  2. quest

    D'oh. Sorry, I think you've clarified it before Lower taxes on Breath Sales – Kindsmile [X] For [X] Abstain [X] Against I am actually going back and forth on this one. I feel this one is especially a position Songbearer could ethically be comfortable with, depending on our various assumptions. In interests of a simple majority though, and by metagaming Kindsmile...yeah. Against. Let's bite the bullet and make it clear who we stand with before we indicate opportunity. Create an insurance system for Dockworkers – Songbearer [X] For [X] Abstain [X] Against It would be very trollish to introduce our proposal then vote against it But okay, yes, voting for.
  3. quest

    It seems to me that you're suggesting we could be wrong in our read of the room But let's put that aside for the moment. I'm just really asking about what happens in Council if we abstain and the vote splits 50-50. A) What are the likely ways in which people might respond to that, including Kindsmile, and B ) Practically-speaking, what happens to a vote that is split 50-50? Does the proposal pass or does it not?
  4. quest

    Oooh. I like Coinspender more and more - I'd say a likeable barve, at any rate. Which is a fun way to see the character. I wonder about wrangling him with Firesoul, but we're just not that good at playing the game just yet. I also like your Susebron. I find him believable given canon parameters plus whatever position he was in by the end of Warbreaker. @Wyrmhero- a question while I consider our move. What impact would abstaining have, both practically on the votes, as well as in the eyes of the bloc? (I'm thinking we can try to weasel out a bit by saying we're not comfortable making a decision on the issue with the current information, potentially, but of course I bet we'd need charm to sell it. Then again, we have a reputation as a bookish lad...) To be clear, I'm asking specifically about Kindsmile's.
  5. quest

    Aight, then add my vote to [X] Find out where the other gods stand on the other two proposals
  6. quest

    Cheers, good to know! I'm happy to do that, my only concern is if we're splitting our actions too thin. ( @Wyrmhero, any possibility you could comment on that? Are we asking to do too much at once?) I think we could ask Hera eventually but the issue is we only have one action for the next cycle. I do agree with you the box should wait, though!
  7. quest

    Oof. Haven't been here for a bit - RL's been more of a pain than I expected, but I'm enjoying the thickening plot here I feel like we have two options and I'll vote on it later: 1. We can go canvass another likely ally - try to get more support for our proposal. [On this front: @Wyrmhero, do we also have a stats gain if we fail a challenge, or do we gain if we pass a challenge or...? I'm just trying to understand what our Charm currently is and how we can improve it beyond Augury boosts.] 2. We can also try to find out more about the mysterious box we are supposed to have, potentially by asking our priests. While I'm inclined towards #2, it feels irresponsible to go haring off after the box and abandon our proposal Also, 3. We could perhaps get a sense of where the other gods stand on the other two proposals. We don't want to offend an ally we've just solicited to vote on ours, potentially.
  8. Mm. I don't like intervening in these debates outside a philosophy classroom for many reasons that I've mentioned previously in the Discord and various docs That being said, one thing I'd point out that tends to be (but is not always so) at stake in free will debates is moral responsibility. That is to say, we don't seem to think that people could be morally responsible for their actions if they lack free will. (This likely stems from the same intuition as "if I take your money from you and donate it to charity on your behalf, you certainly shouldn't be morally credited with donating to charity.") I'll note that the classical argument we give students in Philosophy #101 is actually a dilemma argument: that is to say, whether the world is deterministic or truly random, we lack free will. Contextualised within such a maneuver, the true randomness v. effective randomness distinction in effect does become toothless - but it becomes toothless because it can't salvage free will! Either way, the disturbing problem with effective randomness is just that it's not clear that free will resulting from effective randomness is any kind of thing that can result in moral responsibility. And if it can't, then the question is: sure, we've salvaged a model of free will, but at what cost? Have we simply thrown the baby out for the sake of the bathwater? One final note is that the argument from neurology is not taken to be especially convincing at the entry level because it relies on certain problematic premises. Tim Lewens' The Meaning of Science is a great look into the limitations of the argument, though I believe Lisa Bortolotti has also written on the matter in her introductory textbook to the philosophy of science. (Of course, once we get into the actual cutting edge research, that's a different story.) Anyway, I'm not going to further engage with this topic for my own sake No one @ me please. Thanks!
  9. Oooh! What is your favourite nib size, then?
  10. Actually, not really. If Striker flipped Good, I would have read you as attempting to bluff me off the Striker vote, so I'd have been suspicious - just not suspicious/paranoid enough to flip the table and to try to get voted in >>;; The issue/context I think is that Striker was unanimously (at least among those I talked to) considered Village, so any resistance there wouldn't have seemed quite right to me. Of course, you could try to press me on the issue by reminding me that I had questioned the Rath lynch too, which I think might have made me hesitate, but ultimately I'm not sure how much ground I would have given there, since Striker had a better voting pattern than Rath did. I think for me, on that penultimate cycle, the real question was me wasn't if you were evil - your voting pattern and what Fifth was doing stood out so much to me it'd have taken a lot more to shift me to someone else. The real question in my mind was what you were trying to do by bringing the Striker thing up, and what Fifth was trying to do by asking us to talk about the semi-actives (I didn't communicate this well either, but my guess was either an attempt to smuggle a semi-active Eliminator into the lynch, or to force a hurried ill-considered "oh well we talked about the semi-actives and focused on them but sorry we gotta vote actives anyway so let's just throw hasty votes" situation.) Anyway, thanks for GMing El, and I definitely hope to see this format return, as it's more Avalon than my Avalon game I myself have some ideas for this, if time permits in the future.
  11. quest

    Cheers, Chief, all the best with the move! Looking to getting a few other votes/perspectives in this game, meanwhile! But okay: to clarify - when I say visit the Thief, I don't mean visit and leave, I mean let's try to find out what the heck they were doing and so on
  12. Good game to the Eliminators and Village Looks like inactivity was the bane (foe-hammer?) of both sides, though it's never quite that easy to balance for it beyond certain measures. Great write-up, El - I loved the anti-climatic ending, and Rath, the first Villager on the Fellowship, grabbing the Ring and saving everyone is hilariously brilliant With the Corrupted arriving late to the scene. I probably have had some strategic thoughts here and there/comments, but I think I've inflicted them enough on El and the spec doc by now Special thanks goes to @Fifth Scholar - I had rethought my position on PMs but he definitely persuaded me during Elan's MR to make better use of them, and I think I saw some of it in action across both iterations of El's MR, in terms of gaining trusts, and collecting information and just data for me to analyse and work out my suspicions. I do think the one-on-on format of the PMs really helped me convince other Villagers of my suspicions, though not always. (As I said, Bard was right - I was being paranoid ) I think what interested me was how little analysis it took to convince Bard of Wonko: I literally just shot him a one-line question asking him for his thoughts of Wonko's and Coda's vote on Fifth during Aman's election. It probably helped Bard was already suspicious of Coda, and that it's Bard I was talking to, but also, just - I find it an interesting reminder that sometimes you don't need to write long arguments to convince people. Asking an Armour Piercing Question or finding a Silver Bullet can work too
  13. [OOC: Well. Striker. So, out with it. Confirmed Villagers can be wrong. This is true. I may be wrong. But nevertheless, I will finally stop being coy, and hinting, and leaving you with my suspicions. My suspicions are not bedrock. I can make mistakes. Treat them with caution. Find the flaws in my arguments. If you cannot find them, then reason accordingly. I think the Eliminator team includes Fifth and Wonko. I am less certain about Bard and Striker, but this would be my guess. Striker is either a Villager who is doubling down, or an Eliminator who refuses to turn on a teammate. Bard is either an excessively overparanoid Villager, or an Eliminator. If Striker is not an Eliminator, then suspicion should turn to Coda. Avoid voting them unless you must. I have taken a chance on Burnt, but I acknowledge she would have behaved the same either Village or Eliminator. I am more confident of Aragorn and Peji, as they sealed a vote on Ada, against Fifth, my strongest suspect. Wonko and Coda had tied the vote 2-2 last cycle - we know Ada is a confirmed Villager, and we don't know about Fifth. Such a movement should be suspicious. Everyone was asking, "Where is the Eliminator action? Oh, they must be inactive." Why postulate that? The answer is right there: they tried to get Fifth voted. They failed because of Aragorn and Peji. As such, I have a modicum of trust in them. My strongest suspicion is Fifth. Why do I suspect Fifth? A few reasons. Then there's the Wonko issue: For Striker: The one place my theories don't account for: why did Fifth and Wonko vote me? I am not certain. I admit, this could be the flaw in my argumentation. But it could be the IKYK, or it could be just to silence me and dominate the discussion and voting, if I am right about the composition of the Eliminator team. (Bard's 30% odds at #2 doesn't work out - the obvious answer is to vote for someone who isn't any of the above-mentioned, including Striker. And as I'm Village, the Village now just has to get it right one more time. One person out of the entire game pool who isn't compromised. Please, try to manage that And as I have said, I may be wrong. I played a little coy with my suspicions. But I voiced them more explicitly to Bard and to Burnt, and later to Peji as well. ] Aranmir packed the last of his belongings and prepared for a long journey. He hardened his heart against the song of the Ring. Isildur had fallen. Centuries and centuries later, Aranmir would not fail. There was a cloth-wrapped bundle, slightly longer than his arm, resting on the bed. He hauled it up, the cloth slipping free as he did so. He looked at it for a very long time. It was time to go to war.
  14. Interesting, since Bard chose the vote. He was the literal first player to vote on Striker I just happened to agree with him for separate reasons and to support him. But thank you for your response - you have confirmed my suspicions of the Eliminator team That's because I haven't explained myself and I don't intend to, as I'm not campaigning for Striker to be voted in by everyone. I haven't campaigned since Day 1. I don't intend to spell out my reasoning as I want more discussion, and more players to explain where they stand. Doesn't seem like I'm going to get it at this stage, though. Unfortunate.