Mafiascum.net

In post 1048, WhemeStar wrote:I don't think lurker scum does something like placing 4 naked votes.

er, why not?

Ftr I was suspicious of Rock not for his inactivity but because his four posts were terrible.

In post 1050, petapan wrote:

In post 1048, WhemeStar wrote:I don't think lurker scum does something like placing 4 naked votes.

er, why not?

I just don't think lurker scum wants to bring attention to themselves they just want to lurk. Placing 4 naked votes is bringing attention to yourself.

Mush the issues you have seem to be mostly semantic or stylistic. Yes, "it is not possible" is an exaggeration, however Cakez' continued representation of that post as a "hard defense" of Norfolk (Dunnstral is another person who has categorized it as such, I've noticed) is just so massively off-base that I would rather believe he didn't read it at all (or at least very selectively) than that his reading comprehension is so hopelessly poor. Imperium goes out of their way every time to make it abundantly clear that they are not taking a town stance on Norfolk. Any time they've mentioned a possible scenario where Norfolk is town, they consider the opposite as well, and that his early pushers were bussing.

I disagree with your assertion that I'm projecting nonexistant connotations. I'm not sure how to explain myself properly to you in that regard, but looking for dictionary definitions mean you are looking at the words too literally.

My hope when presenting a case on a scumread is that players will read it in full and take away whatever impression they get out of it. If you agree with many of my points but disagree with others, then for me I don't really care about accidentally weakening my argument by oversaturating the "good" points with the "bad". I've shown what I saw to come to that conclusion, and I can't reasonably expect everyone to follow every single train of thought I had when reading. I of course cannot stop you or anyone from changing your read of based on my posts, but I hope that disagreeing with some of my points doesn't make people completely disregard the parts they do like.

I've never heard of those concepts by name but they seem to align with my own views of separate perceived realities. I am always aware of the language I'm using. I don't claim to be some expert communicator, and I'll take my own stylistic preference over clarity and precision in most cases. I am not a college-educated person. If you feel the language I used was too assertive then there's usually a good chance I had originally typed something along the lines of "I feel like..." before consciously deciding to go with language that is more persuasive and sure of itself.

In post 1042, SirCakez wrote:I will say I think Duchess drafting up this old argument between Imp and me and developing an "extremely confident" scumread after just having a mega fail on their Lotus read seems very unnatural

Should I slink away and give up on scumhunting after just one wrong read then? What is unnatural about it? What does a natural progression look like to you in this case? Did you want me to bumble around aimlessly for a bit before continuing to play the game?

In post 1053, Duchess wrote:If you feel the language I used was too assertive then there's usually a good chance I had originally typed something along the lines of "I feel like..." before consciously deciding to go with language that is more persuasive and sure of itself.

Forgot to mention, I also spent a decent amount of time during the day yesterday reading the passages in question and convincing myself more and more of Cakez being scum, so the forceful language could also be indicative of my potentially biased mindset going into typing that post.

In post 1054, Duchess wrote:

In post 1042, SirCakez wrote:I will say I think Duchess drafting up this old argument between Imp and me and developing an "extremely confident" scumread after just having a mega fail on their Lotus read seems very unnatural

Should I slink away and give up on scumhunting after just one wrong read then? What is unnatural about it? What does a natural progression look like to you in this case? Did you want me to bumble around aimlessly for a bit before continuing to play the game?

You seem extremely confident for someone who just completely missed on another read you were very confident on
I'd expect you to take a step back and reevaluate because obviously you were off-track
Instead you just moved on to the next SR in your old pool.

In post 1053, Duchess wrote:Mush the issues you have seem to be mostly semantic or stylistic. Yes, "it is not possible" is an exaggeration, however Cakez' continued representation of that post as a "hard defense" of Norfolk (Dunnstral is another person who has categorized it as such, I've noticed) is just so massively off-base that I would rather believe he didn't read it at all (or at least very selectively) than that his reading comprehension is so hopelessly poor. Imperium goes out of their way every time to make it abundantly clear that they are not taking a town stance on Norfolk. Any time they've mentioned a possible scenario where Norfolk is town, they consider the opposite as well, and that his early pushers were bussing.

I disagree with your assertion that I'm projecting nonexistant connotations. I'm not sure how to explain myself properly to you in that regard, but looking for dictionary definitions mean you are looking at the words too literally.

My hope when presenting a case on a scumread is that players will read it in full and take away whatever impression they get out of it. If you agree with many of my points but disagree with others, then for me I don't really care about accidentally weakening my argument by oversaturating the "good" points with the "bad". I've shown what I saw to come to that conclusion, and I can't reasonably expect everyone to follow every single train of thought I had when reading. I of course cannot stop you or anyone from changing your read of

me

based on my posts, but I hope that disagreeing with some of my points doesn't make people completely disregard the parts they do like.

I've never heard of those concepts by name but they seem to align with my own views of separate perceived realities. I am always aware of the language I'm using. I don't claim to be some expert communicator, and I'll take my own stylistic preference over clarity and precision in most cases. I am not a college-educated person. If you feel the language I used was too assertive then there's usually a good chance I had originally typed something along the lines of "I feel like..." before consciously deciding to go with language that is more persuasive and sure of itself.

This is a good response. I'll explain if/when I have time/energy. Short version: this is not persuasive; this is mildly surprised, bit indignant, kinda dismissive. Good.

In post 1051, SirCakez wrote:Ftr I was suspicious of Rock not for his inactivity but because his four posts were terrible.

In post 1052, WhemeStar wrote:

In post 1050, petapan wrote:

In post 1048, WhemeStar wrote:I don't think lurker scum does something like placing 4 naked votes.

er, why not?

I just don't think lurker scum wants to bring attention to themselves they just want to lurk. Placing 4 naked votes is bringing attention to yourself.

anyone claiming any read at all off those posts is highly suspect

SirCakez wrote:

In post 1054, Duchess wrote:

In post 1042, SirCakez wrote:I will say I think Duchess drafting up this old argument between Imp and me and developing an "extremely confident" scumread after just having a mega fail on their Lotus read seems very unnatural

Should I slink away and give up on scumhunting after just one wrong read then? What is unnatural about it? What does a natural progression look like to you in this case? Did you want me to bumble around aimlessly for a bit before continuing to play the game?

You seem extremely confident for someone who just completely missed on another read you were very confident on
I'd expect you to take a step back and reevaluate because obviously you were off-track
Instead you just moved on to the next SR in your old pool.

why does someone being wrong on one read mean their other reads have to be wrong? this isn't good logic

In post 601, Duchess wrote:

In post 526, RLotus wrote:

In post 523, Duchess wrote:You are missing what I am saying. I saw your explanation. I am not near satisfied. Read my words. You called him LAMIST. I called it an act. These are the same thing. This makes me scummy, and it makes you...?

These are not the same thing at all. I said that the things that he said are what I would consider LAMIST, but not that he had scummy intentions behind them or that he is being deceitful in some way. You said that he is specifically saying these things as if he is faking something. I seriously doubt that you can't see a difference after I already explained.

If that's so then I think that is an incredibly scummy early stance to take on a player with as much LHF potential as Wheme. I also think your incredulity at my disapproval towards your answers is completely overblown.

???

In post 617, Imperium wrote:

In post 616, SirCakez wrote:

In post 603, Imperium wrote:Luckily I'm pretty sure town!Cakez is the only person in this playerlist bad enough to shoot us and I'm not yet entirely convinced town!Cakez is a thing.

Also c'mon I know you're above insulting me like this as town
Not good AtE

I'm not a perfect person

THERE'S MANY THINGS I WISH I DIDN'T DO

In post 621, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 613, Netflix and Chill wrote:Why does everyone townread Mush?

It's a high effort = town sort of read from me.

I do think she made some good points. There's a lot of stuff I admittedly haven't read because it started getting wordy and into analysis I really wasn't interested in

what good points has she made lol

Listen.

I really do think Cakez is town. The argumentative process he gets in with people is at such a slight that I can't imagine he wouldn't at least be self-aware as scum. The lack of care in that department makes me think he's a townie who is just strongly defiant, getting into a back+forth like Imperium because of his beliefs. Even the minor squabble with Duchess/MUSH as well. I struggle to see ulterior motive with pushing the issue so incessantly that Tammycho breaks out and tells him to stop misrepping. I mean, at that point..what have you exactly won? What does Cakez gain as scum to keep pushing and pushing and pushing at this point. The read he has on Imperium feels almost personable at this point. Like it's gone beyond merely 'I scumread you' and more like Cakez wanting to convince Imperium that they're scum lol. A foolhardy choice, but this itself makes me think the intent is pure. Let me get it clear: I don't think Cakez is incapable of faking this or even building a narrative around his own absurdity. I just believe he'd be more precise with it and if it come at the expense of himself (and how others read him), he'd be using that to greater effect. We've seen it before and I've seen a defiant scum cakez, where as scum the issue is not disagreement of (read), rather disagreement of (himself).

In post 1058, petapan wrote:

In post 1051, SirCakez wrote:Ftr I was suspicious of Rock not for his inactivity but because his four posts were terrible.

In post 1052, WhemeStar wrote:

In post 1050, petapan wrote:

In post 1048, WhemeStar wrote:I don't think lurker scum does something like placing 4 naked votes.

er, why not?

I just don't think lurker scum wants to bring attention to themselves they just want to lurk. Placing 4 naked votes is bringing attention to yourself.

anyone claiming any read at all off those posts is highly suspect

SirCakez wrote:

In post 1054, Duchess wrote:

In post 1042, SirCakez wrote:I will say I think Duchess drafting up this old argument between Imp and me and developing an "extremely confident" scumread after just having a mega fail on their Lotus read seems very unnatural

Should I slink away and give up on scumhunting after just one wrong read then? What is unnatural about it? What does a natural progression look like to you in this case? Did you want me to bumble around aimlessly for a bit before continuing to play the game?

You seem extremely confident for someone who just completely missed on another read you were very confident on
I'd expect you to take a step back and reevaluate because obviously you were off-track
Instead you just moved on to the next SR in your old pool.

why does someone being wrong on one read mean their other reads have to be wrong? this isn't good logic

For the first thing - why?
For the second - that's not what I said...

I'm willing to back off Imperium for the moment but I keep getting scum pings from them and I am extremely paranoid about the tactics they have used to approach me

In post 1047, petapan wrote:you should know better than to think scum are always going to pick an easy target

Context matters here though, maybe MUSH isn't belting out the hardest logic to break down, but you're still eating through a wall at this point. I can't imagine scum wanna break their teeth in the process. Plenty of lowballing slankers to lazily say they're scum. STT isn't townie for it as I mentioned, and without repeating myself looking at their wall I probably rescind the initial read I had on him, but I digress

In post 1064, SirCakez wrote:I'm willing to back off Imperium for the moment but I keep getting scum pings from them and I am extremely paranoid about the tactics they have used to approach me

Like I said probably 20? pages ago. Make a concise effort and compile some evidence if you feel strongly. Do you? Is your Imperium read like eating at you or is it just exasperated paranoia that you keep expressing?

In post 1063, SirCakez wrote:For the first thing - why?
For the second - that's not what I said...

1. because those posts were effectively nothing, claiming to have a read off them feels more
2. your argument is that duchess coming back in after one of their reads was wrong and pushing confidently on a secondary read is scummy, because it's unnatural or w/e, and you mentione reevaluating, with the obvious implication that they shouldn't be continuing to scumread you, but that's just not logical at all

In post 658, SirCakez wrote:I think Rockhopper is flying way under the radar here.
They put up a lot better stuff in the Micro I played with them then they have here.
Norfolk pointed this out too.

what game was this, because the only completed micro of his i see is a scumgame where he posted plenty, although it looks like his posting style is pretty minimal as either alignment, and he's flaked from a game as town before after doing very little (i hate that i am doing meta on a player whose alignment i know, but i can't let this go)

In post 1067, petapan wrote:

In post 1063, SirCakez wrote:For the first thing - why?
For the second - that's not what I said...

1. because those posts were effectively nothing, claiming to have a read off them feels more
2. your argument is that duchess coming back in after one of their reads was wrong and pushing confidently on a secondary read is scummy, because it's unnatural or w/e, and you mentione reevaluating, with the obvious implication that they shouldn't be continuing to scumread you, but that's just not logical at all

1. Ok
2. That's not what I said. Reevaluation doesn't mean having to change your reads but it does mean going and looking "ok where did I go wrong SRing Lotus"

In post 1068, petapan wrote:

In post 658, SirCakez wrote:I think Rockhopper is flying way under the radar here.
They put up a lot better stuff in the Micro I played with them then they have here.
Norfolk pointed this out too.

what game was this, because the only completed micro of his i see is a scumgame where he posted plenty, although it looks like his posting style is pretty minimal as either alignment, and he's flaked from a game as town before after doing very little (i hate that i am doing meta on a player whose alignment i know, but i can't let this go)

Ok this was a total brainfart for some reason I remember he was town there
Scratch my meta

today is zero posting from me from now until maybe late at night and more likely till tomorrow, please save any questions until you see me post again or tomorrow because i will very probably not see a damn thing

In post 789, unwnd wrote:

In post 787, Dunnstral wrote:I'm not really seeing a progression from Unwnd here, for example.

Where in any of my posts did it say that I thought he was scum, all I mentioned that is that the shot would be 'interesting'

bruh

In post 793, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 791, unwnd wrote:

In post 790, Dunnstral wrote:There were people egging that shot on.

...Like who?

You and Imperium.

You because of what you wrote, Imperium because they suddenly brought up nacho's suspicion on rtlotus right when Netflix and Chill was saying they were thinking about shooting

dunn saying what i was thinking here

actually, scratch the stuff i said earlier about norfolk, just had a thought

In post 812, MUSHSHAGANA wrote:Because now we know all of Lotus's interactions were genuine, this gives us meat to dig into their interactions with and see if the other side of them looks genuine as well. Stop being deliberately obtuse.

did this ever happen or is it just a thing you made noise about