Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 1:31 pm
It was scummy in itself because that role would never exist. Now he's scummy for other reasons, but the claim still sucks.
Mafiascum.net
https://forum.mafiascum-staging.net/
NY 164: Maniacal Street Mafia (Anticlimatically finished.)
Page 15 of 266
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 1:33 pm
No.
Except I gave reasons. And it isn't "for no other reason" than them agreeing with me. Their posts in particular showed town motivation. Maybe you should go re-read my responseIn post 346, Cephrir wrote: I'm arguing with the part where you said Slandaar and AA9 are town for no other reason than agreeing with you, not because you refuse to give reasons. Though I can't say I'm especially a fan of that either.
very carefully.
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 1:34 pm
Do explain why you voted with reasoning.
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 1:34 pm
<<< The center of the town's debate continues to remain on whether they should talk about their professions and hobbies, or focus on hunting mafia.
Some argue that talking about jobs/hobbies will hurt the whole community, allowing the mafia to sabotage their efforts and also providing a distraction from focusing on a nice good lynch.
The others argue that talking about jobs/hobbies and coordinating what people can do in their spare time will end the mafia.
Regardless of what else might be going on, the tallies remain much the same:
Despite the debates raging on, two thirds of the citizens have yet to make their choice and things have slightly stagnated. >>>
Some argue that talking about jobs/hobbies will hurt the whole community, allowing the mafia to sabotage their efforts and also providing a distraction from focusing on a nice good lynch.
The others argue that talking about jobs/hobbies and coordinating what people can do in their spare time will end the mafia.
Regardless of what else might be going on, the tallies remain much the same:
Oversoul
still looks to be the favored lynch candidate, with the multiple-personality-disordered "BeautyAndTheBeast
" being a close second.Despite the debates raging on, two thirds of the citizens have yet to make their choice and things have slightly stagnated. >>>
Sixth Votecount
:(
AKA, the "OMG FLAVOR!!!" votecount
)Oversoul - 4 (Nachomamma8, CrashTextDummie, Nero Cain, Bulbazak)
BeautyAndTheBeast - 2 (Om the Destroyer, Cephrir)
Red Ryu - 1 (Oversoul)
Cephrir - 1 (BeautyAndTheBeast)
Not Voting - 16 (Mac, DLG, roflcopter, EddieFenix, Thor665, Red Ryu, Syryana, Desperado, Baby Spice, Slandaar, Seanald, ActionDan, fuzzybutternut, Rondar, Amethyst Kitty, ArcAngel9)
With
Deadline is on Monday, May 27th, @ 11:30 AM PST, which is in (expired on 2013-05-27 11:31:59).
mastin2, the moderator, is recovering from a broken-laptop-induced V/LA.
Searching for a roflcopter replacement.
24
players alive, it's 13
to lynch.Deadline is on Monday, May 27th, @ 11:30 AM PST, which is in (expired on 2013-05-27 11:31:59).
mastin2, the moderator, is recovering from a broken-laptop-induced V/LA.
Searching for a roflcopter replacement.
Spoiler: changes from last votecount
Spoiler: Player Vote History
Spoiler: Voting History
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 1:37 pm
I'm catching up via phone but your saying informed townie can't exist? I've seen this role and been it, why can't he be one. You seem dead certain he can't without asking a single question about his role.In post 350, Nachomamma8 wrote:It was scummy in itself because that role would never exist. Now he's scummy for other reasons, but the claim still sucks.
If he is scummy for other reasons tell me why?
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 1:40 pm
Informed townie where the piece of information given is "there are at least two killing roles" doesn't exist because it's completely fucking useless information. I seriously doubt that it would be involved in any information he was given, but am not sure.In post 354, Red Ryu wrote:I'm catching up via phone but your saying informed townie can't exist? I've seen this role and been it, why can't he be one. You seem dead certain he can't without asking a single question about his role.
Later.In post 354, Red Ryu wrote:If he is scummy for other reasons tell me why?
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 1:41 pm
Being town does not equal doing the smart thing nor that they have the right idea.In post 200, DLG wrote:If you're reading someone as Town, why are you working so hard to alienate that player?In post 125, Red Ryu wrote:Thor dumb town, posts to actionDan make this more apparent.
Why, if you're reading someone as Town, are you expending effort to marginalize their opinion?
"Dumb Town, or Scum" is an exceptionally scummy read to give out for myriad reasons.
This guy needs a noose. Can't wait for the game to "officially" start so we can "quick-lynch" scum.
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 1:50 pm
We are not mass claiming.
+1 B&B
+1 B&B
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 1:54 pm
"Largely based on" agreeing with you, plus:In post 322, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote:It's largely based on whether or not people agree with me, yes. Because I am town. Ergo if you agree with me, you're likely town.In post 320, Cephrir wrote:I realize you didn't ask me but I for one would like to hear what Slandaar and AA9 have done that makes them such shining beacons of towniness that they don't even get (weak)'s. As far as I can tell, it looks like your list is based entirely on whether or not people agree with you.
Slandaar's rather brief post including you and Fuzzy as scumreads and his strong stance against the massclaim make him town.
AA9's reaction to the Oversoul wagon makes her town.
Slaandar: A detailed description of what he agreed with you about. Great!
AA9: A reaction that I thought was scummy. Great!
@Nacho: I see what you're saying, but I'm not willing to rule it out entirely yet. I'm interested to hear his other information before we make such a decision, as it could make the role less pointless. If he does choose to reveal that there are multiple killing roles D1, though, it does potentially impact our lynch decision and therefore maybe isn't completely useless (for instance, "you aren't scumhunting" becomes a weaker argument).
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:03 pm
In post 332, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote:All of my reads have basis. Thanks for being an opportunistic little twit, scumbutt!
Town motivation comes before action, not the other way around. Your logic is flawed.
You're reads are based on the heavily flawed concept that town will agree with you and scum will agree with you. That's...not scumhunting.
What the fuck does that last statement have to do with anything? The action comes from town motivation, yes; agreeing with you is not necessarily something that comes from town motivation.
Your statement is not a refutation.
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:03 pm
I'm beginning to grok that you aren't very good at this game.In post 358, Cephrir wrote:"Largely based on" agreeing with you, plus:
Slaandar: A detailed description of what he agreed with you about. Great!
AA9: A reaction that I thought was scummy. Great!
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:04 pm
Multiple Personality disordered. LOL
VOTE: Oversoul
VOTE: Oversoul
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:04 pm
In post 337, Oversoul wrote:In post 323, Om the Destroyer wrote:UNVOTE:In post 321, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote:Papa don't roll that way. Don't want to be giving scumbutts like you legitimate reads to sheep reasons from.
VOTE: BeautyAndTheBeast
Well thanks for admitting it upfront that these reads have no real basis I guess?
And no, agreeing with you is not a basis and not necessarily town motivated, and I know you're a better player than that.
~People on this site need to get the fuck over this mentality that everything all at once has to be shared with them because it doesn't.In post 324, Cephrir wrote:Wow, that's a ridiculously self-centered viewpoint. By that logic anyone who suspects you is scum.
Welcome to my scumlist.
Actions like this definitely do not paint towards "omg scum!"
I asked him to prove his reads had basis.
He said what basically amounts to "lolnope".
Do you expect me to draw a different conclusion from this statement?
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:05 pm
you understand that your just jumping into an easy wagon, don't you?
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:05 pm
You understand that I don't care, don't you?
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:05 pm
That's not the be-all-end-all of my scumhunting. Or even a big part of it. Stop strawmanning.In post 359, Om the Destroyer wrote:You're reads are based on the heavily flawed concept that town will agree with you and scum will agree with you. That's...not scumhunting.
What the fuck does that last statement have to do with anything? The action comes from town motivation, yes; agreeing with you is not necessarily something that comes from town motivation.
Your statement is not a refutation.
Your statement seemed to imply that I was looking for actions first and placing town motivation behind it. That's not what I'm doing at all.
Your posting is bad.
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:06 pm
Yeah I lol'd at that, too.In post 361, fuzzybutternut wrote:Multiple Personality disordered. LOL
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:07 pm
Nero this "only voting" thing is not befitting of you. Stop it.
So are you calling me scum or backhandedly discrediting me?In post 344, Bulbazak wrote:In post 313, Om the Destroyer wrote: Majiffy's "oh you must not think highly of him then!" is a somewhat-subtle "yes thor is awesome go fuck yourself"
Om's recent posts are hilarious, because they either mean that they are not familiar with Majiffy's meta at all, or that they are scum trying to push for an early mislynch on a player that tends to look anti-town. The buddying accusation is my favorite, as Majiffy doesn't buddy up to anyone, except for Majiffy. I suggest watching this wagon closely, as I can see scum pushing it hard.
~
(as were my previous 2 posts)Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:08 pm
Oh the last two posts were you, HD?
Ok yeah you're pretty much confscum then.
Ok yeah you're pretty much confscum then.
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:09 pm
Oh trust me you're still a good vote, even after the Thor interaction.In post 347, Red Ryu wrote:It's like you didn't read anything in my interaction with Thor.In post 250, Om the Destroyer wrote:on page 4
VOTE: Red RyuIn post 73, Red Ryu wrote:Thor is likely scum, or stupid aggro town.
"Oh hey this is either scummy or playstyle IDFK so I'm going to vote Thor anyway!"
Opportunistic as fuck right there
-
Bad post.
You basically said Thor is being aggressive and this somehow makes him aggressive scum rather than aggressive town arbitrarily.
~
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:09 pm
SOB.
Nero is either conf town or trolling.
Nero is either conf town or trolling.
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:12 pm
Oh yes I'm totally strawmanning something youIn post 365, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote:That's not the be-all-end-all of my scumhunting. Or even a big part of it.In post 359, Om the Destroyer wrote:You'rereads are based on the heavily flawed concept that town will agree with youand scum will agree with you. That's...not scumhunting.
What the fuck does that last statement have to do with anything? The action comes from town motivation, yes; agreeing with you is not necessarily something that comes from town motivation.
Your statement is not a refutation.Stop strawmanning.
Your statement seemed to imply that I was looking for actions first and placing town motivation behind it. That's not what I'm doing at all.
Your posting is bad.
fucking said yourself
:So tell me, where's the strawman?In post 322, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote:It's largely based on whether or not people agree with me, yes.
And in a way, it
is
what you're doing; you're saying "Oh people that agree with me are more town than people that don't" based on...absolutely nothing.~
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:15 pm
And yet,In post 368, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote:Oh the last two posts were you, HD?
Ok yeah you're pretty much confscum then.
you aren't voting me.
Too scummy to be scum isn't working again, Majiffy.
~
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:19 pm
I'm not, but I appear to at least be better at logic than you, and none of that changes how scummy you are.In post 360, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote:I'm beginning to grok that you aren't very good at this game.In post 358, Cephrir wrote:"Largely based on" agreeing with you, plus:
Slaandar: A detailed description of what he agreed with you about. Great!
AA9: A reaction that I thought was scummy. Great!
I understand (albeit disagree) if you don't want to give all the reasons for your townreads, but you can't call someone 'confscum' without backing it up...
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 2:24 pm
You made the statement that all my reads were based off that. This is untrue and a strawman, as that statement is only about two reads.In post 371, Om the Destroyer wrote:Oh yes I'm totally strawmanning something youfucking said yourself:So tell me, where's the strawman?In post 322, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote:It's largely based on whether or not people agree with me, yes.
Also untrue. Town motivation -> Town thinking -> Town actions.In post 371, Om the Destroyer wrote: And in a way, itiswhat you're doing; you're saying "Oh people that agree with me are more town than people that don't" based on...absolutely nothing.
If the actions and the thoughts are the same, there's a good chance the motivations are the same.
I only have one vote.In post 372, Om the Destroyer wrote:And yet,In post 368, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote:Oh the last two posts were you, HD?
Ok yeah you're pretty much confscum then.you aren't voting me.
I should take the time to inform you that the two thoughts in this sentence don't make a whole lot of sense logically as they're not related - or if they are, it makes even less logical sense, as you've not posited an argument to support how poor logic -> scummyIn post 373, Cephrir wrote:I'm not, but I appear to at least be better at logic than you, and none of that changes how scummy you are.
Are you chainsawing HD now, or are you trying to defend yourself limp-wristedly here?In post 373, Cephrir wrote: I understand (albeit disagree) if you don't want to give all the reasons for your townreads, but you can't call someone 'confscum' without backing it up...