Mafiascum.net

In post 373, Wimpy wrote:

In post 171, chamber wrote:

Vote: Wimpy

This was your only thing in that post so clearly you didn’t explain

You've since asked why. I've answered. I didn't say I explained at the time of the vote.

In post 370, chamber wrote:Meant to mean.

I felt like omgusing your rvs vote. I didn’t think your vote was anything other than rvs. I doubt anyone thought at the time it was serious

I don't believe you. You are just throwing more shit at the wall to try and gish gallop your way into a miss-lynch.

In post 372, chamber wrote:How about the fact that I never moved my vote to slimer as another reason to take it seriously?

I bet if you asked everyone. Nobody thought that vote on me was serious.

The fact you didn’t vote slimer is why we are in this mess. If your vote was serious you should have said so at the time. Saying it multiple pages later is too late

In post 375, chamber wrote:You've since asked why. I've answered. I didn't say I explained at the time of the vote.

Your answers still point to omgus tbh

In post 377, chamber wrote:I don't believe you. You are just throwing more shit at the wall to try and gish gallop your way into a miss-lynch.

I have no reason to lie about that. I’ve been an open book. Truthful and honest. Sadly you can’t say the same about yourself.

In post 377, chamber wrote:I don't believe you. You are just throwing more shit at the wall to try and gish gallop your way into a miss-lynch.

See, this is why RVS makes no sense. We're supposed to take it seriously while also do what we want?
I get you could just be trying to get one over on Wimpy, but it kinda makes no sense that you'd use RVS as evidence.

I'm genuinely not trying to say your logic is scummy, I'm just reeeaaally trying to follow what's going on here

In post 378, Wimpy wrote:

In post 372, chamber wrote:How about the fact that I never moved my vote to slimer as another reason to take it seriously?

I bet if you asked everyone. Nobody thought that vote on me was serious.

The fact you didn’t vote slimer is why we are in this mess. If your vote was serious you should have said so at the time. Saying it multiple pages later is too late

Also I don't tend to vote someone until I'm fairly sure they're scum. That might have been what they've been doing. But they've also said they were trying to question me into a scumslip, so that's another reason

In post 379, Wimpy wrote:

In post 375, chamber wrote:You've since asked why. I've answered. I didn't say I explained at the time of the vote.

Your answers still point to omgus tbh

As I said, some people have much broader definitions of OMGUS than I do. To me an OMGUS vote is voting someone purely because they are voting you. The notion that I could be OMGUSing with that kind of lag is nonsense to me. Voting someone thats voting for you because their attack on you is bad isn't OMGUS imo (and I wouldn't even reduce my vote on you to that)

I think this is a bad point to have at all though. Reducing things this complex to buzz terms doesn't serve anyone.

In post 380, Wimpy wrote:

In post 377, chamber wrote:I don't believe you. You are just throwing more shit at the wall to try and gish gallop your way into a miss-lynch.

I have no reason to lie about that. I’ve been an open book. Truthful and honest. Sadly you can’t say the same about yourself.

This is a good summation of why you suck. You haven't been an open book. You've been a dismissive asshole. You give yourself infinite charity and others none.

In post 383, chamber wrote:To me an OMGUS vote is voting someone purely because they are voting you.

Yeah. That’s basically why you voted me.

It's not.

In post 384, chamber wrote:

In post 380, Wimpy wrote:

In post 377, chamber wrote:I don't believe you. You are just throwing more shit at the wall to try and gish gallop your way into a miss-lynch.

I have no reason to lie about that. I’ve been an open book. Truthful and honest. Sadly you can’t say the same about yourself.

This is a good summation of why you suck. You haven't been an open book. You've been a dismissive asshole. You give yourself infinite charity and others none.

Don’t call me an asshole.

I have been an open book cause I’ve shared my thoughts about anything and everything. I was dismissive about one question that you asked that was impossible for me to answer and you knew it was impossible when you asked it. I did go on go answer it though as best I could

In post 386, chamber wrote:It's not.

It really is. You can keep denying it but that doesn’t make it less true

There were ~130 posts between when you voted for me and when I voted for you. I was already seriously voting for you during your initial vote for me. In that period I unvoted you and then revoted you. During that period I attempted to enage with you about why you were voting me until it became clear you weren't interested in changing your mind.

In post 389, chamber wrote:until it became clear you weren't interested in changing your mind.

And once it was clear. What happened?

You voted me. That’s still omgus

Almost like I think an unwillingness to change your mind when presented with counterfactuals is scummy.

What’s even worse. Is I backed off you and you doubled down. You tried to use that against me. You didn’t want me to change my mind. You want this 1v1 to happen.

In post 391, chamber wrote:Almost like I think an unwillingness to change your mind when presented with counterfactuals is scummy.

Except you didn’t provide counterfactuals

You also think it’s scummy to make 3 posts on page 1 without them being scum hunting posts (something you are guilty of)
You also think it’s scummy to not post in the neighborhood

Sorry if you are town, you are too experienced to actually believe any of these things are scummy

In post 392, Wimpy wrote:What’s even worse. Is I backed off you and you doubled down. You tried to use that against me. You didn’t want me to change my mind. You want this 1v1 to happen.

I didn't use it against you, that was you misreading something that was slightly ambiguously worded. I was just to lazy to correct it among everything else. the "others" there was "other points". When DrDolittle came out against your "this is chamber pretending to be a newb" argument, you brought up a bunch of other arguments.

I do want this 1v1 though, I have no interest in playing anything with you.

In post 393, Wimpy wrote:

In post 391, chamber wrote:Almost like I think an unwillingness to change your mind when presented with counterfactuals is scummy.

Except you didn’t provide counterfactuals

The unrefutable counterfactual is that DrDolittle nullified your argument about me 'playing like a noob'

on the topic of neighborhoods... (and a bit tinfoil)
what if wimpy and chamber are svs? scum agreeing to be fake neighbors could really disrupt the town

also i trust salamance and the turkey, i think they both have put good ideas forward and i trust their plans

In post 395, chamber wrote:I didn't use it against you

You did cause it was in your “reasons” for scum reading me.

Every single one i proved was false.

In post 398, Wimpy wrote:

In post 395, chamber wrote:I didn't use it against you

You did cause it was in your “reasons” for scum reading me.

Every single one i proved was false.

If you continue reading this post you pulled this quote from, you'll see that it wasn't.