Mafiascum.net

In post 622, DkKoba wrote:Point in case ^^^^^^^^ can't even rebut anything. All he has is "you're wrong" while putting his fingers in his ears refusing to accept criticism why are you shying away from taking a hard stance on your reads?

You didn't rebut any of my point either

just ignored them and spammed the thread with 50 posts of garbage nonsense and now you're trying to pretend you're the reasonable one and I'm bad for ignoring you.

and somehow I'm the one gaslighting? lol ok kid

I just find it strange why you, who claims to be trying to gamesolve, didn't even question why I had the reads I have also fr! you keep using he/him despite there being no indication of my gender being remotely male!


you're framing a 1 dimensional attack on me on why you think I'm scum. 0 analysis.

I just read a couple of your previous games and its sad that I think you could be town here with a penchant for tunneling people who come out and want to lead because your precious ego feels threatened

I proposed my own original coalition and you overreacted by saying that I was "scum" for it and I reacted in kind bc what kind of BS read is that?

Your theory is full of holes because the assumptions you made come from conf bias and being unwilling to change your reads.

I do suggest if you wish to improve(you've been playing since 2003 and are still like this!! why????) that YOU engage people in good faith when they want to know why they read you the way they do.

and my assertion is backed up by your refusal to engage and answer my questions. I am trying to guide you through logic. it is my style. I push people to see things the way I do or I adjust my reads based on the logic they present to me.

Tell me, would you be willing to sit by and have a coaliton without you on it without at least fighting to get on it? And if you scumread someone on the coalition would you want them on it? It is only logical for me to push that. You immediately jumped to "zomg this must be all town and scum is trying to get on it" while ignoring the lack of resistance beforehand because you just want to conf bias. the more I type this the more I feel you are just really bad town and its sad.

what a troll post lol

Yeah its crazy I'm able to townread someone shitpushing me because I can analyze your intentions and know its town.

Something you clearly arent able to do after 17 years

Goodnight.

I'm not going to be convinced by you unvoting me

votes are meaningless anyway we're in the coalition phase

Its ok I believe in you, you can reach the correct conclusion on my alignment someday.. even if its in the post game <3

In post 626, DkKoba wrote:you're framing a 1 dimensional attack on me on why you think I'm scum. 0 analysis.

it's not a 1 dimensional attack - I analyze your POV from the assumption that you are town entering the game finding himself off-coalition and with a strong suspicion of my slot and conclude your actions after that fact do not make sense.

In post 634, DkKoba wrote:Its ok I believe in you, you can reach the correct conclusion on my alignment someday.. even if its in the post game <3

this kind of emotional manipulation tactic where you attack the target wildly and then slowly recede into more reasonable territory in order to try to get reciprocity will only work on noobs.

You're assuming something that did not actually happen
I read the game independently of whoever everyone chose. I made my own reads. I'm not a sheep. perhaps you can acknowledge that people aren't going to think the same way as you everytime? I'm still flabbergasted you still don't want to discuss my coalition suggestion! Do you think everyone I suggested is town? Since obviously since I'm mafia I must have put my scumbuddy off coalition.

I don't need to analyze your coalition because your actions have already revealed my coalition is clean to me

And when its not clean you'll let me lead right?

pooky. ignore them. its not productive.

In post 632, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:I'm not going to be convinced by you unvoting me

In post 633, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:votes are meaningless anyway we're in the coalition phase

In post 635, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:

In post 626, DkKoba wrote:you're framing a 1 dimensional attack on me on why you think I'm scum. 0 analysis.

it's not a 1 dimensional attack - I analyze your POV from the assumption that you are town entering the game finding himself off-coalition and with a strong suspicion of my slot and conclude your actions after that fact do not make sense.

In post 636, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:

In post 634, DkKoba wrote:Its ok I believe in you, you can reach the correct conclusion on my alignment someday.. even if its in the post game <3

this kind of emotional manipulation tactic where you attack the target wildly and then slowly recede into more reasonable territory in order to try to get reciprocity will only work on noobs.

I just find it hilarious that i can just hear the gears whirring trying to conf bias your way into keeping your scum read of me

if it goes thru and doesn't win the game right away I'm gonna stop playing and proxy my vote off to you

In post 610, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:did you even read the conversation I had with Koba?

Yeah I read it bruh

How about you stop dodging questions and actually explain your coalition

In post 623, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:Explosive? Sure. Emotional? You betcha, but no real content or any real rebuttal to the substance of my case.

You're conveniently ignoring post 492.

In post 623, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:He didn't actually explain - just continued attacking me with more emotional appeals - used a false dilemma logical fallacy and then a strawman logical fallacy, when I called him on those he began peppering me with all sorts of questions in order to deflect from the original topic of discussion.

Can you cite specific examples of these?

---

Koba, why are you suddenly townreading Pooky?

can you read aloud to yourself what you just typed and tell me you are playing pro-town?

In post 640, votato wrote:pooky. ignore them. its not productive.

I know I need to stop being so easily baited by the troll =[

In post 643, Alduskkel wrote:How about you stop dodging questions and actually explain your coalition

I explained my coalition when I put it together.

It's kinda fustrating when people don't read the game and just keep asking you the same dumb questions over and over.

In post 643, Alduskkel wrote:

In post 610, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:did you even read the conversation I had with Koba?

Yeah I read it bruh

How about you stop dodging questions and actually explain your coalition

In post 623, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:Explosive? Sure. Emotional? You betcha, but no real content or any real rebuttal to the substance of my case.

You're conveniently ignoring post 492.

In post 623, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:He didn't actually explain - just continued attacking me with more emotional appeals - used a false dilemma logical fallacy and then a strawman logical fallacy, when I called him on those he began peppering me with all sorts of questions in order to deflect from the original topic of discussion.

Can you cite specific examples of these?

---

Koba, why are you suddenly townreading Pooky?

because I just can't read their tone as scum here even though they are playing incredibly bad and anti-town. but I'd still avoid putting them on a coalition as they likely won't be cooperative even if they were to come around to reading me as town.

In post 643, Alduskkel wrote:You're conveniently ignoring post 492.

Which line in that post rebuts my case?

They ask you the same question because you actually havent answered the question! crazy how that be pooky.