NY 164: Maniacal Street Mafia (Anticlimatically finished.)

[EddieFenix]

tbch, the amount of posting in this game is driving me batshit crazy and is fucking up my reads. I want to hear the rest of your reads, though.

I'd like to see your reads, Fuzzy. Since a good portion of other reads have cropped up.

[fuzzybutternut]

Tbh, Eddie, I don't have anything but gut reads atm.

Gut says B&B is town.
Gut says AK is town.

Scum is probably in the inactive.

[Nero Cain]

yuck. I have a nulltown from you and my company is with Nacho, AK and Fenix? I fucking hate you, Cephir.

[Nero Cain]

@Nero:
4/13 - I don't see it as a huge wagon. You are flipping out over stupid shit. You are trying to sling mud yet you don't call out Bacade for his 5th vote ON Nacho?

I'm pretty sure that Bcade was actually like the first to vote Nacho + while no scum tell is 100% the 3rd/4th votes are a slight scumtell.

Whats this point that Mollie has made? All I see is Mollie yelling and screaming like an immature newbie.

[EddieFenix]

Tbh, Eddie, I don't have anything but gut reads atm.

Gut says B&B is town.
Gut says AK is town.

Scum is probably in the inactive.

Ok. It's a start with B&B and AK. But, if you don't mind, I'd like a short/full list please.

[Nero Cain]

Tbh, Eddie, I don't have anything but gut reads atm.

Gut says B&B is town.
Gut says AK is town.

Scum is probably in the inactive.

Ok. It's a start with B&B and AK. But, if you don't mind, I'd like a short/full list please.

Did I join a newbie game by accident?

[fuzzybutternut]

Perhaps tomorrow, Fenix.
I have AP exams, and should probably be asleep right now, but, eh.

[EddieFenix]

Perhaps tomorrow, Fenix.
I have AP exams, and should probably be asleep right now, but, eh.

Just get me a list.

[Desperado]

Post More

Desperado

I have a scum read on one of your town reads, have defended one of your scum reads, and have a pretty extensive interaction with your A#1 scumread. What more do I need to do to get a read from you?

[Cephrir]

Post More

Desperado

I have a scum read on one of your town reads, have defended one of your scum reads, and have a pretty extensive interaction with your A#1 scumread. What more do I need to do to get a read from you?

Okay, I guess 'post more' isn't fair. Somehow your posts haven't been very memorable for me and I didn't realize there was actually a substantial number (and thus didn't bother to iso you). Not too surprisingly, I still don't have a strong opinion about you. I don't agree with your case on DLG obviously (for one thing, towntells are a step towards scumhunting, and he's has a scumread or two iirc) but I could see it coming from town. I assume you're saying you defended AA9, but the relevant post doesn't really read like that much of a defense to me (maybe a chainsaw against DLG more than an actual defense of AA9). I don't think your interaction with B&B is actually very extensive or telling. I'd put you in the null category. Like with Red Ryu, even though we've seen a fair number of posts from you I still want to see more before making a judgment.

[Bulbazak]

Going to try to keep this as short as possible and skip the non-important bits:

>implying this could be anything but purposeful

You did this for

the entire fucking case.

There is

no conceivable way

it could be an accident. And yes,

this was your entire point.

You literally said "Oh, Majiffy had no interactions with Thor on Page 6, HD must be lying!"

The page 6 thing was an honest mistake, but it was in no way the main point there. The main point was the second thing I covered, which I did more in depth, and that was your buddying accusations. Focusing the attention on the page 6 thing, which was incidental, and blowing it up to be the crux of the case is a blatant strawman.

EXCEPT THERE IS EVIDENCE OF HIM BUDDYING

IN THIS VERY THREAD

I addressed everything you quoted. Shouting it loud enough will not make your point true.

And yes, he DID ignore it, that's my point. If Thor didn't find it insulting, why should anyone else think it to be insulting and interfere? There's no real reason to do so!

Thor shrugged it off and asked Rofl to answer his question, much in the same way you'd ignore scummy mud slinging and ask a scum read the same thing. It does not mean that he didn't find it insulting. It just means that he was focusing on scumhunting.

Besides, if I was scum, I'd just kill him when it's opportune like I did last time I played scum against him. And I consider what you said an insult; you disputed his competency with that comment.

*snip*

If both parties of the Flowchart are voting it, you know it's probably scum.

Like seriously, nothing about that quote suggests they are connected except they are both buddying.

But yet you purposefully cut out the middle section of their quote when you presented it. There was no other reason to do that, unless you were implying that both ends of the post were connected and referring to the same thing, which they were not. You used this to build a case, and when I called you out on it, you denied that you were doing it. As I've shown, there is no way that this choice is not purposeful, which makes your statements on it blatant lies.

Argumentum ad nausem doesn't change the fact that you're completely fucking wrong and that

I disproved your point by showing you exactly what Majiffy said

.

You didn't disprove anything. You ignored my original point, which was pointing out how you called Majiffy's explanation inconsistent and incorrect, bolded text from the Cephrir quote to prove it, yet ignored the sentence before the bolded quote, which asked about the 2 reads that Majiffy said the entire exchange was about, thus proving you wrong. You essentially hand picked a couple phrases, twisted them to fit your meaning, and then quoted them for truth (i.e. misrep).

@Fenix:

So what did you learn after catching up? Because voting him without giving reasons or thoughts is quite -

well scummy as hell.

Then you call out Nero for doing the same thing. >.>

Scummy as hell.

Kitty asked Eddie what he had learned, and said that voting someone without reasonings is scummy. She never called Eddie scum.

Oh, well if you can play semantics...so can I.

She said "Because voting him without

giving

reasons or thoughts is quite - well scummy as hell."

Guess what he did? 3 guesses, first 2 don't count.

Saying that an action can be construed as scummy does not mean that the person is scummy. Kitty was explaining that Eddie's action could be seen as scummy, yet she is clearly asking for clarification before deciding if he's a scumread or not. It's not playing semantics. It's reading the game.

Leaning scum

, because

I don't think you're that stupid

.

Yes because calling someone out on doing something scummy is definitely

stupid and scummy

.
Mmm hmm.

Nice strawman.

I called you scum

, because

I don't believe you to be stupid

. The 2 were never connected.

Misrep Tally: 12

Calls on word semantics to call this a strawman; counting this as 2.

You called the action scummy or stupid. This therefore implies I am scummy or stupid.

You saying that calling it scummy or stupid isn't a connection is fucking ridiculous.

Yes, I originally said that you were either scummy or stupid. You turned that around to be me calling you scummy AND stupid, which was not what I said at all.

I called you out on it, and you say I'm misrepping you, saying you said "scummy or stupid", which is not the case.

I didn't say I said scummy or stupid.

My point was that you're resorting to semantics by saying I said "and" instead of "or" to call me scummy as if I'm making some sort of false connection.

Do I really need to say more? You are contradicting yourself like crazy here.

Also I'd kinda like to know why I'm definitely scum compared to OS when:

According to you, I'm scum because: Useless posting and attacking someone you think is town for meta reasons.
According to you, OS is scum because: Bad knee-jerk reaction to RVS vote, backpedaling, contradicting claims, suspicions on trying to use claim to gain townie status and he hasn't said very much at all.
(Note: I don't exactly support the OS wagon right now (nor do I entirely oppose it), this is just my interpretation of his reasons for suspecting either of us)

Like seriously wtf? If you're going to attack OS for a bad knee-jerk reaction to a vote then I'm pretty much going to do the same for you, only in your case there wasn't even a vote before you started reacting terribly (as evidenced by your P-EDIT).

~Pertayter

Explained why this was bad. Tries to deflect attention off them and onto OS, who they have repeatedly called town.

Misrep Tally: 16

Calls this a deflection of attention to OS when Om

specifically says

he isn't particularly interested in the OS wagon. He's also calling this a deflection when Om is clearly using OS as an example of Bulbazak being hypocritical and NOT as wanting to wagon OS.

You (or your partner in this case) were trying to deflect attention away from your hydra by saying that I have no reason to attack you over OS, who I had already built a case on. This is essentially saying that I should look at the more scummy slot rather than your slot, which I pointed out at the time. It's essentially, "I'm not scummy. They're scummier than I am!".

The italicized (and parts after it) says "Your case on us sucks, why the hell are you voting us over Oversoul, the person you've been pushing on a stronger case?" Which actually makes sense,

considering your case on us sucks.

(Although I personally think OS is a bad example since the case on him is bad too)

So your admitting to him trying to deflect my attention from him to Oversoul?

The bolded says

he's basically attacking you for the same reasons you're attacking OS

. You still haven't even made a note of that, instead focusing on painting the first part as scummy.

Except my vote wasn't a knee-jerk reaction. I thought my vote through before I posted it, as I felt that you were scummier than Oversoul. Just because you repeatedly shout that I have no reason to vote you, does not make your assertion true.

and outright lying.

Misrep Tally: 20

This deserves special mention.

Nowhere in Bulbazak's case does he state that we are outright lying about anything.

This counts as two since he misrepped us AND his own case.[/spoiler]

I never outright stated it, but I did imply it. You completely mangling quotes to get them to say what you wanted is not a simple misrep, as it is not seeking to simply twist what is being said, but instead it is a complete fabrication. What you did with #288 was especially noteworthy and could not have come from town. You then further lied in your response,

the most noteworthy example being your play on semantics over the phrase "scum or stupid" in which you originally said the opposite as an attempt to strawman.

See? You're making up shit as you go.

You'd like town to believe that, wouldn't you?

"#288 cannot come from town" is a complete fabrication because a) you know it can because you're scum and I'm town and b) there isn't anything actually scummy about it!

So you admit there was nothing scummy with #288? Which means that you blatantly misrepped B&B and lied about what they said. Thanks for slipping.

The bolded is hilarious considering YOU ARE THE ONE USING SEMANTICS TO CALL ME SCUM WITH THIS POINT.

No, I've simply been pointing out contradictions in what you said.

He literally just said what you're pointing out isn't scummy, Because it isn't. I'm completely amazed you can even call this a deflection, because this is a solid observation.

I had pointed out several scummy things at this point. All your partner is doing here is just discrediting me. Saying that I'm wrong, without explaining why is essentially useless, and in this instance, is scummy.

Attacking someone who is easily perceived as anti-town doesn't even say why the fuck we're scum. If someone is perceived as anti-town, you'd vote them, otherwise you won't get anywhere.

Because scum like easy mislynches, and players with playstyles that are perceived as anti-town are easy lynches.

Yeah but you haven't even been able to explain your supposed townread on B&TB, so calling it an easy mislynch is ridiculous.

This is fucking white knighting at it's finest folks.

The implied question was why would scum attack someone who "is easily perceived as anti-town". The answer was because it is an easy mislynch, which is what scum like. You can scream "white knight" all you want, but I was asked a question in an attempt to discredit me (which you are trying to do btw), and I answered it. Simple as that.

What?

Words cannot express how bad this statement is. They can't.

Nothing about this appeals to the probability of getting a scum Role PM.

None if it.

It says that, just like everyone else, anti-town playstyle players have a chance of getting scum Role PMs.

This is a horrid misrep.

Just because they have a history of looking anti-town doesn't mean they aren't scum.

Except your partner is implying that B&B

are

scum

because

they have a history of looking anti-town. You are right that it's not Appeal to Probability. I was having a hard time finding the right logical fallacy, and picked the closest one. It's actually a Gambler's Fallacy, as the underlying assumption is that Majiffy is more likely to have a scum role since he tends to look anti-town.

Um, no, yours was the Argumentum Ad Nauseum. We refuted all your misreps, but you kept on screaming "OM IS SCUM B&TB IS TOWN RAWRGH".

Actually, you've done nothing of the sort. You are quick to call something a misrep, but you never take the time to explain why the point is wrong. Your method is one of beating down an argument, instead of actually discussing its flaws and merits.

MAKING AN OBSERVATION ABOUT HOW YOU ARE SCUMMY IS NOT A DEFLECTION

It is if it's in a post about how you're not scummy ("I'm not scummy. You're scummy.").

[Red Ryu]

@Kitty if I wasn't going to dead sue to me being up 48 hours and on sleeping pills I would.

fuck insomnia.

[Desperado]

OK, thank you for clarifying. I saw myself lumped in with Thor, rondar, seanald, and baby spice, whom I have more posts than combined (since the game actually started, granted), and I was kinda floored.

I think my main issue with DLG's "townhunting" is that he isn't actively doing anything even when he's doing that, even as he accuses AA9 and B&TB of not actively scumhunting. Can you show me which of his posts are "designed to find scum", or even town? I don't see purpose when DLG posts, I see commentary. This happened, and then that happened, and they are both probably town anyway so why don't you guys just move on, yeah?

When he does get a townread on someone, it's for an extremely weak reason (like "he really believes what he's saying"). So if he's not actively helping find scum, and the townhunting that he is doing is limited by the viability of his tells, then what is he doing? More to the point, which alignment does doing nothing and getting weak townreads on two players who are fighting serve?

[Desperado]

And the Om/Bulba argument has now become both a literal and figurative spiral into oblivion. Continuing this argument looks bad for both of you, so if you are town I suggest you stop it and start pursuing something else.

[Om the Destroyer]

Do I really need to say more? You are contradicting yourself like crazy here

You act like contradictions are a scumtell.
Really the only purpose contradictions serve in this game is to get nitpicked on by people struggling to find things to attack.
~Pertayter

[Om the Destroyer]

Also don't worry, I'm working on controlling HD when it comes to the argument.
~Pertayter

[Nero Cain]

You act like contradictions are a scumtell.

They can be though.

[Oversoul]

His suggestion to mass-claim seems genuine IMO and Nacho has done far more scummier stuff other then the mass-claim anyway

It's alignment neutral.

CTD did it in the recently finished invitational NY game as scum traitor. However, he did do much more in my opinion here to try and get mass claim to occur than in that game.

Are you following that thread in MD stating that Nacho's summary is a scumtell?

Following it? I made that thread. why? what's the reason for you posting this, I'm obviously aware of the tell otherwise I wouldn't have brought it up and neither would have Mala. I also wouldn't have brought up stats if I didn't know about it...

-Mara

I thought Mala posted that post?

She posted the post right before so it was weird when you guys said that and it was apparently coming from another head.

[Nero Cain]

dear nero,

stop being a colossal douchebag and focus on the game cos otherwise you are putting on the hypocritical tighty whities cos what you are doing is anti-town right now if you are indeed town which I am leaning on

for the love anything holy, leave me the fuck alone

Except what I was asking about was completely game relevant. There was no need for you to get annoyingly self righteous and act like a little kid.

I don't care if you are town, I'm still gonna fucking shoot you.

and this is why you read as indie. you don't care if you fuck over town

I would think scum would be less blatant about but hai there is always a lesson to be learned

I'm going to be the bigger person here. I putting you on my foes list 'cause A.) Trying to have a intelligent discussion with you is next to impossible and B.) the chance that you or Jiffy say anything useful this game is slim to none.

[Bulbazak]

If you're going to argue the meta point (the fact that people not being familiar with meta being a scumtell anyway is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard of btw) then maybe I should give

my

opinion on the meta tells from B&B.
Majiffy is playing just like Majiffy plays. mollie is the one I'm feeling bad about. If you think the slot's all Majiffy, and you're basing your reads off that, you're playing this game all wrong.

First, the meta thing was just something that made me raise my eyebrow and look at your play closer. I would never build a case solely on that. Second, I think Mollie is tempering Majiffy enough to make the hydra readable. Without that, I'd probably have not gotten the strong town read from the slot on d0.

It's kinda funny when you look at Bulb's case and so many of the points are "OMG DEFLECTION SCUM LYNCH NOW PLZ PLZ PLZ."
I seriously couldn't even get halfway through that case because I was laughing too hard. Please, learn the definition of deflection before you use it. Right now you sound like a more aggressive version of my very first scumgame.
/inb4hetriestocallusscumfordiscreditinghim yeah, nice try, you can only cry wolf so many times before no one listens.

~Pertayter

Discrediting future claims of being discredited. Interesting.

Do I really need to say more? You are contradicting yourself like crazy here

You act like contradictions are a scumtell.

Okay, need to sleep and think about things more.

[Oversoul]

I will comment on other points of discussion tomorrow when I should have time to do more than skim thanks to the holiday, and I will likely move my vote to B&B, although Oversoul really should be voted to oblivion for persistently ignoring this question:

Why did you want to soft-claim pre MC-suggestion, Oversoul?

People have been asking about the case against him. It has been repeatedly pointed out what the scum motivation is behind a claim like his, and he has so far provided zero town motivation for doing it. I really struggle to think of any.

He is also guilty of soft-claiming, which in general is shady at best and a common scum tactic, and the appropriate course of action is to force a full claim.

Hmm. Ok.

I ignored it again because I wanted to see your reaction to me ignoring it and whether or not you would expand beyond just suspecting me.

My claim was a gambit. I am not an informed townie. I made that claim because I wanted to see the reactions and judge whether or not anyone would jump down my throat to get me lynched for it and so far only Nacho really committed that crime.

As to why I contradicted myself, I did because I legitimately wasn't thinking when I answered the first time. I kept being vague or outright not answering the question because I wanted more people to react to my claim and unfortunately only a handful of players did.

CTD's analysis of the mass claim tell looks very town motivated and the fact that he is moving forward with his scumreads when I figured he would sit by and wait for me to respond or try to further a case against me seems very town. I am happy to call him town in this game.

Yes, my Informed Townie claim was a gambit. I do not have any special information about the setup. My extra tid bit of "I have more information" was to further the gambit more until more people had commented on it.

[Om the Destroyer]

It's kinda funny when you look at Bulb's case and so many of the points are "OMG DEFLECTION SCUM LYNCH NOW PLZ PLZ PLZ."
I seriously couldn't even get halfway through that case because I was laughing too hard. Please, learn the definition of deflection before you use it. Right now you sound like a more aggressive version of my very first scumgame.
/inb4hetriestocallusscumfordiscreditinghim yeah, nice try, you can only cry wolf so many times before no one listens.

~Pertayter

Discrediting future claims of being discredited. Interesting.

Can you seriously be any more predictable?

Do I really need to say more? You are contradicting yourself like crazy here

You act like contradictions are a scumtell.

Contradictions come from town too, just in case you haven't heard. It's so easy to forget things in the heat of the moment. Maybe if you look at the context you'd understand.
~Pertayter

[Nero Cain]

OM, bulb. shutup. lets lynch Nacho scum.

[Bulbazak]

Yes, my Informed Townie claim was a gambit. I do not have any special information about the setup. My extra tid bit of "I have more information" was to further the gambit more until more people had commented on it.

Explain this:

There are at least *2* killing roles in this game.

[Desperado]

I will comment on other points of discussion tomorrow when I should have time to do more than skim thanks to the holiday, and I will likely move my vote to B&B, although Oversoul really should be voted to oblivion for persistently ignoring this question:

Why did you want to soft-claim pre MC-suggestion, Oversoul?

People have been asking about the case against him. It has been repeatedly pointed out what the scum motivation is behind a claim like his, and he has so far provided zero town motivation for doing it. I really struggle to think of any.

He is also guilty of soft-claiming, which in general is shady at best and a common scum tactic, and the appropriate course of action is to force a full claim.

Hmm. Ok.

I ignored it again because I wanted to see your reaction to me ignoring it and whether or not you would expand beyond just suspecting me.

My claim was a gambit. I am not an informed townie. I made that claim because I wanted to see the reactions and judge whether or not anyone would jump down my throat to get me lynched for it and so far only Nacho really committed that crime.

As to why I contradicted myself, I did because I legitimately wasn't thinking when I answered the first time. I kept being vague or outright not answering the question because I wanted more people to react to my claim and

unfortunately only a handful of players did.

CTD's analysis of the mass claim tell looks very town motivated and the fact that he is moving forward with his scumreads when I figured he would sit by and wait for me to respond or try to further a case against me seems very town. I am happy to call him town in this game.

Yes, my Informed Townie claim was a gambit. I do not have any special information about the setup. My extra tid bit of "I have more information" was to further the gambit more until more people had commented on it.

Can you quote and comment on each of these?