Mafiascum.net

In post 396, humaneatingmonkey wrote:

In post 393, Seanzie wrote:Why did you leave out the part of this where I actually talk about the progression? You have a helluva lot of agenda about you right now.

Ahh so you hate me for quoting walls but now I'm FULL of agenda for making my quotes efficient.

You have a helluva lot of agenda about you right now

I have no problem with walls. I have a problem with a wall of quotes with little to no analysis between them.

You're also not just making your quotes efficient, you are removing parts that don't fit your narrative. When I gave an analysis on a progression, then you quote the progression but not the analysis and ask me what I think of the progression as if I hadn't already given some thoughts, that is not okay with me. Do you have questions about my analysis or do you just want me to repeat it for you?

In post 400, Seanzie wrote:You're also not just making your quotes efficient, you are removing parts that don't fit your narrative. When I gave an analysis on a progression, then you quote the progression but not the analysis and ask me what I think of the progression as if I hadn't already given some thoughts, that is not okay with me. Do you have questions about my analysis or do you just want me to repeat it for you?

So what did I leave out that made it conform to me agenda then? Tell me.

Also, include your answer — because you dodged the question

ok I find this interesting. Boxy trying to put the monkey in the box. On to different note . I feel between boxy monkey and Sean there is one scum here. Which one is hard to tell. Will have to reread and find out

Sean seems to misrepresent monkey

Didn't realize this started until today, woops.

Anyways, hello everyone! I am semi-new but I played one game already (I was scum there) and read a bunch of games before. The game in question: https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=86642

In post 401, humaneatingmonkey wrote:

In post 400, Seanzie wrote:You're also not just making your quotes efficient, you are removing parts that don't fit your narrative. When I gave an analysis on a progression, then you quote the progression but not the analysis and ask me what I think of the progression as if I hadn't already given some thoughts, that is not okay with me. Do you have questions about my analysis or do you just want me to repeat it for you?

So what did I leave out that made it conform to me agenda then? Tell me.

How about the concluding sentence that I color-coded to make clear was part of the rest?

This is your post to me:

In post 382, humaneatingmonkey wrote:

In post 380, Seanzie wrote:Boxxy's progression in the quoted posts:

#149: Monkey is a scumread.

#151: trolling is anti-town.

#172: Anti-town is more likely to flip scum. I don't like trolls.

#222: I didn't vote Monkey, but I said I support a policy elim on them.

You think this is a reasonable progression? He said that he thinks I will flip scum, but recants that he wasn't actually thinking that I was scum — only a troll? And then townleans me out of nowhere?

Here is the color-coded part that was clearly all one unit in my original post:

In post 380, Seanzie wrote:

Boxxy's progression in the quoted posts:

#149: Monkey is a scumread.

#151: trolling is anti-town.

#172: Anti-town is more likely to flip scum. I don't like trolls.

#222: I didn't vote Monkey, but I said I support a policy elim on them.

The only post there that pings me is #222 because Boxxy never said anything about a policy elim earlier. The rest is fine.

Do you see how you left out that last sentence where I clearly said there was some issue with the progression, but the rest is fine? Then you post asking me if I think the progression is reasonable as if I didn't say anything about it already? I am willing to work with you, but only if you cut this crap. You are putting words in my mouth and other people's mouths and cutting words in bad ways, and it is minimally highly anti-town.

Monkey if you vote box I'll hammer at this point, seen enough now.

It's a progression. It's a sudden flip on a series of reads that he made. One thing making it bad does not make it fine.

Cropping that out barely changed my point.

ssbm, I want to see Almost50. I /ined to the game for him.

In post 398, Seanzie wrote:

In post 392, boxxy wrote:monkey you're tunneled bro. You argument continues to be "why did he one person when he also said somebody else could be scummy." From now on I'll try to talk about only one thing at a time so you don't get confused okay?

FTR, you are definitely not out of the ballpark with me, even if I have shut down some bad casing of you. Monkey's case had issues, but that doesn't clear you.

Tell me about your early Monkey read. Why did you switch from "Monkey scum" to "Monkey is a policy elim" the way you did.

I didn't switch. I started with troll is anti-town and monkey is trolling, therefore monkey is anti-town. Anti-town goes in the scumbox for me.

ssbm brought up policy in 164 saying that "anti-town is not the same as scum."

I said I support policy elim of troll only posters.

I appreciate the intent and I will flashlynch as soon as everyone has posted.

boxxy, if you can, claim

In post 402, humaneatingmonkey wrote:Also, include your answer — because you dodged the question

I'm assuming you mean my answer to this:

In post 382, humaneatingmonkey wrote:

In post 380, Seanzie wrote:Boxxy's progression in the quoted posts:

#149: Monkey is a scumread.

#151: trolling is anti-town.

#172: Anti-town is more likely to flip scum. I don't like trolls.

#222: I didn't vote Monkey, but I said I support a policy elim on them.

You think this is a reasonable progression?

He said that he thinks I will flip scum

,

but recants that he wasn't actually thinking that I was scum — only a troll?

And then townleans me out of nowhere?

Since I already told you I didn't think it was reasonable, I will address your points one at a time.







I'm not even saying you're necessarily wrong, but the way you are casing is bad. You are subjecting everything to a narrative that doesn't necessarily exist. You insert your own strengthenings when it suits you to strengthen and ignore tonal doubt when it doesn't suit you.

Seanzie, he townleaned me out of nowhere from #222. My posts before #222 were horseshit.

In post 404, cyrus62 wrote:Sean seems to misrepresent monkey

How so, flame fanner?

In post 413, Seanzie wrote:I'm not even saying you're necessarily wrong, but the way you are casing is bad. You are subjecting everything to a narrative that doesn't necessarily exist. You insert your own strengthenings when it suits you to strengthen and ignore tonal doubt when it doesn't suit you.

Stop projecting.

In post 414, humaneatingmonkey wrote:Seanzie, he townleaned me out of nowhere from #222. My posts before #222 were horseshit.

Give me a second to look to see if I agree with your assessment of your own posts.

In post 417, Seanzie wrote:

In post 414, humaneatingmonkey wrote:Seanzie, he townleaned me out of nowhere from #222. My posts before #222 were horseshit.

Give me a second to look to see if I agree with your assessment of your own posts.

Okay, yes #222 was before you actually started posting game-related content. I agree that him switching to a townread there is bad.

Apology accepted.

Forcing a claim this early with a trash case. gg no re.

I'm a roaming detective, so if we have any sort of doc protection tonight would be appreciated, assuming i make it that far.

In post 416, humaneatingmonkey wrote:

In post 413, Seanzie wrote:I'm not even saying you're necessarily wrong, but the way you are casing is bad. You are subjecting everything to a narrative that doesn't necessarily exist. You insert your own strengthenings when it suits you to strengthen and ignore tonal doubt when it doesn't suit you.

Stop projecting.

In post 420, boxxy wrote:Forcing a claim this early with a trash case. gg no re.

I'm a roaming detective, so if we have any sort of doc protection tonight would be appreciated, assuming i make it that far.

can you explain the mechanics of your role?

i knew it was gonna be some bullshit like this

hahahahahaha what was that Seanzie

Do you not know what a detective is?