Mafiascum.net

You are so scum it is funny. I could make a case on you based just on what you posted since I replaced in:

↑ elleheathen wrote:

↑ Lone Ranger wrote:VOTE: I Love Fairies

Elle is my second choice. Riddleton, Cheetory, Davesaz, Corpses and maybe GreenCrayons are townreads.

Why are ILF and I scum?

What made ILF more scum than me - enough to start a new wagon on her instead of joining mine for an L-4?

Why are Riddleton and Corpses town?

Loaded question. Who gives a damn how many votes are on you or on ILF at this stage of the game? Deadline is more than two weeks away. If a need to compromise arises, it can be done. The way you frame this question is intended to make me look bad for voting someone with no votes on them as opposed to you. It also shows you giving off an air of "I don't care if you vote me."

↑ elleheathen wrote:Soooo 'RVS' and no reason whatsoever for other reads. Noted.

A pretty clear misrep. I called a post scummy. Never said anything about RVS. You correct this later but I'm not sold on it.

You assume I have no reasons because I don't give them. Have you never played with people who don't divulge reasons for their reads? Have you never had gut reads?

The "noted" at the end is the icing on the cake. It carries a tone of "I have proved my case" and attempts to manipulate bystander's view of our argument.

↑ elleheathen wrote:

↑ Lone Ranger wrote:No reason to.

Yeah, I suppose not - if you're scum.

The posturing here... my god. Do I need to explain this?

↑ Whatisswag wrote:This.

↑ elleheathen wrote:I just can't figure out if he's town that's just making himself look scummier by not giving a damn about what he posts or scum that just doesn't know how to not give himself away.

I'm not getting anywhere - ask away, Cheetory.

How do I not give a damn?

davesaz says it best:

↑ davesaz wrote:
Do you even realize that you couldn't do a better job of making yourself look scummier if you were trying to do that on purpose?

↑ Lone Ranger wrote:You are so scum it is funny. I could make a case on you based just on what you posted since I replaced in:

↑ elleheathen wrote:

↑ Lone Ranger wrote:VOTE: I Love Fairies

Elle is my second choice. Riddleton, Cheetory, Davesaz, Corpses and maybe GreenCrayons are townreads.

Why are ILF and I scum?

What made ILF more scum than me - enough to start a new wagon on her instead of joining mine for an L-4?

Why are Riddleton and Corpses town?

Loaded question. Who gives a damn how many votes are on you or on ILF at this stage of the game? Deadline is more than two weeks away. If a need to compromise arises, it can be done. The way you frame this question is intended to make me look bad for voting someone with no votes on them as opposed to you. It also shows you giving off an air of "I don't care if you vote me."

Do you typically like to wait until deadline to lynch - or just as scum?

You make yourself look bad all on your own. The way the question is framed is both to a) see why your read on ILF is stronger than your read on me, enough for you to start a new wagon and to b) taunt you into voting me - just to see if you do.

Your explanation 'wispy washy nonsense' vs 'gut read' doesn't actually justify why ILF was better. Crazy.

↑ Lone Ranger wrote:

↑ elleheathen wrote:Soooo 'RVS' and no reason whatsoever for other reads. Noted.

A pretty clear misrep. I called a post scummy. Never said anything about RVS. You correct this later but I'm not sold on it.

Actually, you called it 'wishy washy nonsense' - since we're being clear on things we were already clear on.

↑ Lone Ranger wrote:
You assume I have no reasons because I don't give them. Have you never played with people who don't divulge reasons for their reads? Have you never had gut reads?

Not that I can recall, no - definitely not in the scumtastic way you've displayed. You have them so why withhold the information when asked? And saying 'gut reads' doesn't negate the point of the lack of reasoning.

↑ Lone Ranger wrote:

↑ elleheathen wrote:

↑ Lone Ranger wrote:No reason to.

Yeah, I suppose not - if you're scum.

The posturing here... my god. Do I need to explain this?

Do you need to explain that I think you're scum for having 'no reason to' share these reads you supposedly have?

Nope, I think we're good!

I'll give you some time to fabricate some though.

↑ elleheathen wrote:Do you typically like to wait until deadline to lynch - or just as scum?

This is a completely nonsensical loaded question and misrepresenting my position. I didn't say I wanted to wait for deadline to lynch. I said there were two weeks left till deadline and it doesn't matter whether the person I'm voting seems like a viable lynch or not at this point in time. I voted who I suspected the most. At first, this was ILF. Now it's you. The "or just as scum" at the end is another loaded question that doesn't serve you any scumhunting purpose as town. It is pure rhetoric.

↑ elleheathen wrote:You make yourself look bad all on your own. The way the question is framed is both to a) see why your read on ILF is stronger than your read on me, enough for you to start a new wagon and to b) taunt you into voting me - just to see if you do.

a) Why are you interested in why one read is stronger than the other as opposed to the reads themselves? Brining up the number of votes that each of you have is a red herring. You could have simply asked why my read is stronger if you wanted to know. Instead you fabricated a reason why voting you would make more sense and accused me of not taking this "sensible" path.

b) It is interesting that you characterize my vote on you as a response to a taunt. It implies that it was part of your grand plan to get me to vote you and I fell into your "trap." This shows that you like being in control - or rather the illusion of being in control. I voted you because I want you lynched. Being a vote closer to a lynch gives you no control so nice try.

↑ elleheathen wrote:Your explanation 'wishy washy nonsense' vs 'gut read' doesn't actually justify why ILF was better. Crazy.

I wasn't trying to. It is a moot point now. My read on you is stronger.

↑ elleheathen wrote:
Not that I can recall, no - definitely not in the scumtastic way you've displayed. You

clearly

have them so why withhold the information when asked? And saying 'gut reads' doesn't negate the point of the lack of reasoning.

I will not explain my townreads because I don't believe it helps the town to do so at this point. If they appear to be getting lynched, I might.

All 1v1 I have seen in my four games of mafia are town vs town. This should be the same, unless...

I will try to read closely to see whose arguments are less logic based but that will take a moment.

Who's alt are you, Lone Ranger?

A replacement. Did you read?

You two are like completely into the details of argument and both of you are like raging. I have read and I believe you two are of the same alignment.

↑ Whatisswag wrote:A replacement. Did you read?

No, I mean who is Lone Ranger's main account? It's obviously not his first account here.

her, maybe

Swag wrote:I have read and I believe you two are of the same alignment.

So you think it's TvT then?

↑ Riddleton wrote:

Cheetory

, I meta'd Swag myself and I disagree with your conclusions on his playstyle. I'll post more later on, I'm eating now

O riddle why do you hide from me so?

Riddleton wrote:Who's alt are you, Lone Ranger?

Why doth thou ask questions to which LR will likely not answer?

↑ Lone Ranger wrote:

↑ elleheathen wrote:You make yourself look bad all on your own. The way the question is framed is both to a) see why your read on ILF is stronger than your read on me, enough for you to start a new wagon and to b) taunt you into voting me - just to see if you do.

a) Why are you interested in why one read is stronger than the other as opposed to the reads themselves? Brining up the number of votes that each of you have is a red herring. You could have simply asked why my read is stronger if you wanted to know. Instead you fabricated a reason why voting you would make more sense and accused me of not taking this "sensible" path.

Nice misrep! I ask why your read on ILF was stronger in my #366 - just because you didn't want to answer it or like that it was followed by why I thought it was strange doesn't mean I didn't ask.

↑ Lone Ranger wrote:

b) It is interesting that you characterize my vote on you as a response to a taunt. It implies that it was part of your grand plan to get me to vote you and I fell into your "trap." This shows that you like being in control - or rather the illusion of being in control. I voted you because I want you lynched. Being a vote closer to a lynch gives you no control so nice try.

I didn't 'characterize your vote on me as a response to the taunt' - you didn't vote me for the taunt, you voted me for a . I was looking for a reaction. Given your weak 'wishy washy nonsense (later amended to 'scummy') vs gut' reads you had between ILF and I, you voting me for the taunt would have made me think town because with 'reads' that weak, why be on the larger wagon? Yeah, what a that would have been to give you town points for.

↑ Lone Ranger wrote:

↑ elleheathen wrote:
Not that I can recall, no - definitely not in the scumtastic way you've displayed. You

clearly

have them so why withhold the information when asked? And saying 'gut reads' doesn't negate the point of the lack of reasoning.

I will not explain my townreads because I don't believe it helps the town to do so at this point. If they appear to be getting lynched, I might.

If you're town - this is a tvt - so we'd be clouding up the thread with this noise and helping scum, a situation that could have been rectified with just explaining these reads you have would have helped town. I can't see any reason as town to actually withhold the reads in the manner in which you have - only scum motivation.

↑ elleheathen wrote:Hey swag, 311/312 waiting for you.

↑ elleheathen wrote:Hey swag, 311/312 waiting for you.

↑ elleheathen wrote:Hey swag, 311/312 waiting for you.

/dentist

↑ Riddleton wrote:

↑ Whatisswag wrote:A replacement. Did you read?

No, I mean who is Lone Ranger's main account? It's obviously not his first account here.

Why does it matter?

What do you think on what's actually taking place thread?


Also this:

↑ Riddleton wrote:

Cheetory

, I meta'd Swag myself and I disagree with your conclusions on his playstyle. I'll post more later on, I'm eating now

↑ Whatisswag wrote:All 1v1 I have seen in my four games of mafia are town vs town. This should be the same, unless...

I will try to read closely to see whose arguments are less logic based but that will take a moment.

Now that you have read, what do you think? And do better than "you are both raging."

↑ elleheathen wrote:
Nice misrep! I

did

ask why your read on ILF was stronger in my #366 - just because you didn't want to answer it or like that it was followed by why I thought it was strange doesn't mean I didn't ask.

You did. My problem is way you phrased that question. You didn't directly ask why one is stronger. You pretended that voting the larger wagon is a better, more "pro-town" thing to do somehow. And then you asked me why I didn't do it.

↑ elleheathen wrote:
I didn't 'characterize your vote on me as a response to the taunt' - you didn't vote me for the taunt, you voted me for a

reason

. I was looking for a reaction. Given your weak 'wishy washy nonsense (later amended to 'scummy') vs gut' reads you had between ILF and I, you voting me for the taunt would have made me think town because with 'reads' that weak, why

not

be on the larger wagon? Yeah, what a

trap

that would have been to give you town points for.

Why would voting for the larger wagon in response to your "taunt" make you think town?

↑ elleheathen wrote:
If you're town - this is a tvt - so we'd be clouding up the thread with this noise and helping scum, a situation that could have been rectified with just explaining these reads you have would have helped town. I can't see any reason as town to actually withhold the reads in the manner in which you have - only scum motivation.

The noise is coming from you when you ask me for things that I've said I won't provide. You don't need to know why I have the townreads I do in order to read me. It is not something I can explain in a factual way. I read the thread. Some people felt town. Perhaps in later days, I can nail down precise reasoning but that is not the case now.

I kind of feel like you're changing gears here LR.
So your reasons for your townreads are gut? Why make such a big deal out of not giving reasons for townreads if it's just gut or how people look at this point?

↑ Cheetory6 wrote:I kind of feel like you're changing gears here LR.
So your reasons for your townreads are gut? Why make such a big deal out of not giving reasons for townreads if it's just gut or how people look at this point?

It is a "big deal" because Elle made a big deal of asking for them. I wasn't going to ignore her posts entirely. That's just rude.

No, I mean, why not just say "my reasoning is gut"? Instead, to me it looks like you kind of just roundaboutly answered her in a way that made it seem like you had really good reasons for keeping your reasons secret, but you're saying now that it's just gut? Why be difficult if you're willing to eventually explain it to her/everyone?

↑ Lone Ranger wrote:

↑ elleheathen wrote:
Nice misrep! I

did

ask why your read on ILF was stronger in my #366 - just because you didn't want to answer it or like that it was followed by why I thought it was strange doesn't mean I didn't ask.

You did. My problem is way you phrased that question. You didn't directly ask why one is stronger. You pretended that voting the larger wagon is a better, more "pro-town" thing to do somehow. And then you asked me why I didn't do it.

Did you really just recycle your original misrep by adding 'directly' to it as if it makes it so different?

↑ Lone Ranger wrote:

↑ elleheathen wrote:
I didn't 'characterize your vote on me as a response to the taunt' - you didn't vote me for the taunt, you voted me for a

reason

. I was looking for a reaction. Given your weak 'wishy washy nonsense (later amended to 'scummy') vs gut' reads you had between ILF and I, you voting me for the taunt would have made me think town because with 'reads' that weak, why

not

be on the larger wagon? Yeah, what a

trap

that would have been to give you town points for.

Why would voting for the larger wagon in response to your "taunt" make you think town?

This is actually answered in the exact thing you quoted...

↑ Lone Ranger wrote:

↑ elleheathen wrote:
If you're town - this is a tvt - so we'd be clouding up the thread with this noise and helping scum, a situation that could have been rectified with just explaining these reads you have would have helped town. I can't see any reason as town to actually withhold the reads in the manner in which you have - only scum motivation.

The noise is coming from you when you ask me for things that I've said I won't provide. You don't need to know why I have the townreads I do in order to read me. It is not something I can explain in a factual way. I read the thread. Some people felt town. Perhaps in later days, I can nail down precise reasoning but that is not the case now.

Cheetory beat me to it but - this would have actually been what I expected of a town response for not sharing your reads.

Something like: they're just early gut reads, just impressions I got while reading through the thread and I'd prefer interactions to verify, or I'll provide them when they become firmer... Etc.

Instead, it's 'I have and will not provide them' which eventually leads to a switch of you needing time to 'nail down precise ', indicating that you didn't actually have at all.

VOTE: Lone Ranger

The back down is just 'icing on the cake'.

↑ Cheetory6 wrote:No, I mean, why not just say "my reasoning is gut"? Instead, to me it looks like you kind of just roundaboutly answered her in a way that made it seem like you had really good reasons for keeping your reasons secret, but you're saying now that it's just gut? Why be difficult if you're willing to eventually explain it to her/everyone?

We have differing definitions on what is gut. Gut feelings are those that are hard to articulate in a presentable way. Yes, I have deeper reasons. They are not something I can describe factually at a surface level, hence gut. From my view, I don't differentiate between the two things you are describing.

That's not what I mean.
I'm asking why you didn't say your reasoning was gut right away in response to her.
A lot of her reasoning for jumping on you is for being so elusive with why you weren't explaining your townreads. Them being gutreads is a weird reason to be like "I'm not telling you why I'm townreading this person!" especially since you eventually spilled the beans anyway. It just feels like you kicked up a fuss for no reason and forced an argument and I want to know if I'm misunderstanding something along this train of thought.

↑ elleheathen wrote:Did you really just recycle your original misrep by adding 'directly' to it as if it makes it so different?

It does make it different. Asking why one of my reads were stronger than the other is a neutral question. Asking me why one read was so strong that I voted that read over a larger wagon makes a lot of rubbish assumptions i.e. votes on larger wagons are better and attempts to paint me as bad for not voting that larger wagon for no reason at all.

↑ elleheathen wrote:
This is actually answered in the exact thing you quoted...

If I could make heads or tails of what your argument was, I wouldn't have asked. Rephrase it.

↑ elleheathen wrote:
Cheetory beat me to it but - this would have actually been what I expected of a town response for not sharing your reads.

Something like: they're just early gut reads, just impressions I got while reading through the thread and I'd prefer interactions to verify, or I'll provide them when they become firmer... Etc.

Instead, it's 'I have

reasons

and will not provide them' which eventually leads to a switch of you needing time to 'nail down precise

reasoning

', indicating that you didn't actually have

reasons

at all.

VOTE: Lone Ranger

The back down is just 'icing on the cake'.

I'm town and I gave the response that I gave. You are making shit up right now about what town would do. Your long line of questioning and then voting me feels like you had agenda all along. It doesn't feel like you developed your read natural.

↑ Cheetory6 wrote:That's not what I mean.
I'm asking why you didn't say your reasoning was gut right away in response to her.
A lot of her reasoning for jumping on you is for being so elusive with why you weren't explaining your townreads. Them being gutreads is a weird reason to be like "I'm not telling you why I'm townreading this person!" especially since you eventually spilled the beans anyway. It just feels like you kicked up a fuss for no reason and forced an argument and I want to know if I'm misunderstanding something along this train of thought.

You are. "Gut" isn't a reason. It is a term I use to describe reasons that can't be clearly expressed. I said I didn't want to state my reasoning because some of them aren't easily describable and others I chose not to. If someone asks me for reasons for a read and I reply "gut," that's not an answer. I was partly "forcing an argument." It helps me get reads and in this case, it helped me deduce Elle as scum.

So, in a way, you were doing a reaction test with elle then? Is that what you're saying?