Mafiascum.net

In post 370, copper223 wrote:(a)There is no misrep in stating that what you said about the players you were reading doesn't match the reads you came up with at the end (in fact you partially admit it yourself by later claiming that was not a "serious case" on someone, an accusation by the way which I never made in the first place).

My points about your catch-up are still the same:
(b)-You ignore GL although you end up voting for the same player.
(c)- You don't give me the impression you were scum-reading Jae.
(d)- What you cite with regards to Drealmer can only be interpreted as a joke but then you put him as top town.

(a) You can't be this dense are you? It was a dynamic read of the game, I posted the interesting positive and negative things I saw and then in the end I decided what I felt mattered more. And unlike you I'm not interested in selling my narrative to the exclusion of all else, I'm interested in truth so yeah, there are both positive and negatives for some people. And maybe it was a little under explained but that's because I hate long posts and because it was supposed to be the beginning of things, not the end-all be-all.

(b+c) GL had like two posts, they weren't especially interesting. I voted with him because it was the only serious vote placed on someone on my "willing to lynch" list see my "checking the vote count" line.

(d) Now you're getting it.

In post 373, copper223 wrote:This is what I was talking about wrt to the scumslip

In post 195, Accountant wrote:Sorry; I don't see the scum claim. Can you please elaborate why it's a scum claim, copper?

You claimed GuiltyLion was your top town-read because of his entrance (for reasons that are still pretty murky by the way), this post does not look like a reaction to someone claiming to have found a scum-slip on your top town-read.

why not

if I think someone is town and someone else says they're scum ofc I'm going to ask why

In post 375, Debonair Danny DiPietro wrote:(a) You can't be this dense are you? It was a dynamic read of the game, I posted the interesting positive and negative things I saw and then in the end I decided what I felt mattered more. And unlike you I'm not interested in selling my narrative to the exclusion of all else, I'm interested in truth so yeah, there are both positive and negatives for some people. And maybe it was a little under explained but that's because I hate long posts and because it was supposed to be the beginning of things, not the end-all be-all.

So why do you later claim those posts where there to help us understand where you were coming from?

Either it was a purely subjective mish-mash of posts you found entertaining/interesting and randomly placed them in there, and you are the one being dense thinking I should somehow divine this without being in your head, especially after claiming there was in fact logic behind them, or it's scum making stuff up and doing a bad job of it.

In post 376, Accountant wrote:why not

if I think someone is town and someone else says they're scum ofc I'm going to ask why

I already said so, I'd expect something more along the lines of: wtf are you talking about copper, that post from GL was super town, if that were the case.

Dragon, why aren't you voting copper?

In post 378, copper223 wrote:

In post 376, Accountant wrote:why not

if I think someone is town and someone else says they're scum ofc I'm going to ask why

I already said so, I'd expect something more along the lines of: wtf are you talking about copper, that post from GL was super town, if that were the case.

Why would I say that?

Specifically why do you believe I would say one but not the other if I townreaded GL?

Isn't that obvious? Are you claiming that's how you felt but you phrased it differently?

In post 381, Accountant wrote:Specifically why do you believe I would say one but not the other if I townreaded GL?

It's not impossible for you to say one instead of the other, it's a question of what is more likely.

The same goes with you strongly town-reading him but disagreeing with him about his Jae case and questioning him about it.

The same goes with claiming to want to sheep him but forgetting he was voting the wagon you did not like and had argued with him about.

The same goes with the reasons you give for the strong town read (you somehow divined that he would go for GM as scum and tonally he posted the same way as you are used to as town).

They are all not impossible, but if you sum up what is more likely it comes up heavily in favor of your read being bullshit.

In post 382, copper223 wrote:Isn't that obvious? Are you claiming that's how you felt but you phrased it differently?

what on earth makes you think I would go "wtf that post was so town" if I was townreading GL and you claimed he scumslipped

In post 383, copper223 wrote:

In post 381, Accountant wrote:Specifically why do you believe I would say one but not the other if I townreaded GL?

It's not impossible for you to say one instead of the other, it's a question of what is more likely.

The same goes with you strongly town-reading him but disagreeing with him about his Jae case and questioning him about it.

The same goes with claiming to want to sheep him but forgetting he was voting the wagon you did not like and had argued with him about.

The same goes with the reasons you give for the strong town read (you somehow divined that he would go for GM as scum and tonally he posted the same way as you are used to as town).

They are all not impossible, but if you sum up what is more likely it comes up heavily in favor of your read being bullshit.

Maybe, but I'm not the one at L-2. I have 0 chance of being lynched today because the people in the know know you're scum.

Changing angles again. Because that's what you must have felt when reading my post if what you said about your GL town-read is true.

In post 386, copper223 wrote:Changing angles again. Because that's what you must have felt when reading my post if what you said about your GL town-read is true.

That's a ludicrous assumption.

In post 377, copper223 wrote:

In post 375, Debonair Danny DiPietro wrote:(a) You can't be this dense are you? It was a dynamic read of the game, I posted the interesting positive and negative things I saw and then in the end I decided what I felt mattered more. And unlike you I'm not interested in selling my narrative to the exclusion of all else, I'm interested in truth so yeah, there are both positive and negatives for some people. And maybe it was a little under explained but that's because I hate long posts and because it was supposed to be the beginning of things, not the end-all be-all.

So why do you later claim those posts where there to help us understand where you were coming from?

Either it was a purely subjective mish-mash of posts you found entertaining/interesting and randomly placed them in there, and you are the one being dense thinking I should somehow divine this without being in your head, especially after claiming there was in fact logic behind them, or it's scum making stuff up and doing a bad job of it.

See here's the fundamental issue, everyone else "got" my post other than you. It makes me really skeptical that it was so confusing for you to understand. And instead of asking questions, like I'd expect someone who was interested in the truth to do if they didn't understand something, you went on the attack.

His whole case is built on bad interpretations & expectations of how people think and act

In post 385, Accountant wrote:Maybe, but I'm not the one at L-2. I have 0 chance of being lynched today because the people in the know know you're scum.

Very convincing argument.

That's the thing. I don't have to convince anyone or argue anything - that's why I'm so flippant in my responses. I'm not going to convince you, since you're probably scum - and I wouldn't be able to convince you if you're town, either. Nobody else believes you, so I don't have to convince . I don't see the need in spamming the thread any further.

In post 388, Debonair Danny DiPietro wrote:See here's the fundamental issue, everyone else "got" my post other than you. It makes me really skeptical that it was so confusing for you to understand. And instead of asking questions, like I'd expect someone who was interested in the truth to do if they didn't understand something, you went on the attack.

Nobody else who is active (many of which want me lynched) you about it, GM put you as unlikely 4th which should already tell you the issue is not clear cut.

But okay, let's see if none of the replacements asks you about it and if that's the case I'll be less salty if you in particular call me scum.

The going on the attack part is really annoying considering your attitude.

In post 391, Accountant wrote:That's the thing. I don't have to convince anyone or argue anything - that's why I'm so flippant in my responses. I'm not going to convince you, since you're probably scum - and I wouldn't be able to convince you if you're town, either. Nobody else believes you, so I don't have to convince

them

. I don't see the need in spamming the thread any further.

You are being flippant likely because you are having a hard time framing me with arguments.

Just writing in to say hello before I go start reading all 16 pages of this chatty, chatty group. I'll be back with thoughts as soon as I've caught up.

Hello Marian, and welcome! Sorry that you have to read sixteen pages of walls and pedantic arguing

In post 371, copper223 wrote:@Dragon
I don't think Accountant is town.

If you think he is, what do you make of the part where he says he sheeps his strongest townread GuiltyLion (who isn't voting for me) in reply to why he decided to join the wagon?

Did he say that? He probably confused GL with someone else or thought GL was voting for you, as I'm not sure why he'd say this as scum. Coming from someone as experienced as him, it's unlikely he'd make up a BS reason like this as scum - it's something I'd expect from a newbie. So he was probably mistaken.

In post 372, Accountant wrote:

In post 369, Dragonfire wrote:

In post 368, Accountant wrote:

This post illustrates why I think copper is town - the logic does not make sense; why would scum-copper randomly call out first GL, and then both GL and DDD as scum just like that? He would know it would draw attention to him. The fact that it seems out-of-character for copper makes me think that it was a reaction test, and he is town.

Because he was trying to look like cocky town.

Why don't you think it was a reaction test?

Because that's not what a reaction test looks like.

That's not the answer I was looking for. I'm kinda concerned that your play appears to have completely shifted from well-thought out cases and analysis to one-sentence answers and an absolute lack of explanation. Why is it not what a reaction test looks like? If you want to get me to vote copper, you're gonna need to bring some evidence in to convince me he's scum.

In post 379, Accountant wrote:Dragon, why aren't you voting copper?

Because I think he's town. Isn't that obvious?

In post 388, Debonair Danny DiPietro wrote:

In post 377, copper223 wrote:

In post 375, Debonair Danny DiPietro wrote: See here's the fundamental issue, everyone else "got" my post other than you. It makes me really skeptical that it was so confusing for you to understand. And instead of asking questions, like I'd expect someone who was interested in the truth to do if they didn't understand something, you went on the attack.

I didn't "get" your post. I would have been okay with it if you'd just pulled out some things you found interesting/funny etc, replied to them and then posted your reads on the various players. Instead you looked as if you were trying to use these posts as evidence to show why you had certain reads on certain players (case in point: drealmerz; in what way does his joke make you townread him? At first I thought you were joking yourself, but it seems as if you were being serious).

In post 396, Dragonfire wrote:Did he say that? He probably confused GL with someone else or thought GL was voting for you, as I'm not sure why he'd say this as scum. Coming from someone as experienced as him, it's unlikely he'd make up a BS reason like this as scum - it's something I'd expect from a newbie. So he was probably mistaken.

I'm sure that he was, but would he be more likely to make that mistake as scum inventing his GL read or as town when he claims GL is his strongest town-read and he had previously argued with him about the merits of the Jae wagon (the player GL was actually voting for)?

I'm kinda concerned that your play appears to have completely shifted from well-thought out cases and analysis to one-sentence answers and an absolute lack of explanation. Why is it not what a reaction test looks like? If you want to get me to vote copper, you're gonna need to bring some evidence in to convince me he's scum.

The reason for this is because I have . DDD and GM are on the same page as me, GL seems to understand why I want to kill copper, copper isn't going to be persuaded into voting himself - why should I put effort into convincing some hypothetical nobody?

But if you want reasons why you should vote copper:

- he is not trying to figure out who is scum. he's just making up stuff. that's why he keeps throwing frivolous accusations that get rebutted time and time again to the exhaustion of everyone involved.

- because he's not interested in participating in the game, pushing wagons or anything like that unless it's convenient to him, makes him look good or to rebut a wagon that's threatening him.

- because no matter copper's alignment, he's going to be 10x more helpful when he's at L-1 rather than wallfighting to cover up his lack of usefulness.

The above from Accountant is pretty crazy but not what I'd expect from scum.

In post 395, MaidMarian wrote:Just writing in to say hello before I go start reading all 16 pages of this chatty, chatty group. I'll be back with thoughts as soon as I've caught up.

I hope we are not scaring new players off by the way we are going at each other Marian, have fun playing!