Mafiascum.net

I'm leaning that you're dumb hth tia

and I am leaning that you are being an arrogant ass hth, no need to thank me in advance

sheeping your read on slaander for now

VOTE: slaander

↑ Majiffy wrote:

↑ Slandaar wrote:Read the first page

There you go, proof its a scumtell; I knew from his first post he was scum.

Now you can explain why you think its not Majiffy.

Great sample size of (1) one occurrence involving a different scenario from a different player.
That really strengthens your argument.

And 348 isn't a scumtell because I've done it plenty of times myself

as town.

OK the short version on why Majiffy is scum;

Does it matter who is ultimately right? I am very sure I am but there is also no reason for him to lie here as either alignment. Now; when I linked this example I proved beyond doubt I play this way, however he is suggesting its scummy to do so when I have proven I do this as town.


So what is his argument? What actually is his argument here?

There is nothing wrong with people using scumtells that are not actually scumtells as long as they believe they are scumtells. See the defining factor? the belief part, the rest is nonsense. I have an example(yes for a reason I will get to later); is pot calling the kettle black a scumtell? No. Yet many people suggest it is. Are they scum for suggesting it? no. Its like when a lurker calls a lurker scum and the second lurker goes pot calling the kettle black. Well True; but the fact is that doesn't mean they are scum or wrong at all.

So, Majiffy is suggesting that by using something I believe is a scumtell as a scumtell It somehow makes me scummy when I have proven I use it as a scumtell.

This is an attack on playstyle. He is not looking for the belief which is the factor to do with alignment.

He is scum.

↑ Majiffy wrote:
Except you were calling Cryo also-scum because of it. And said "Cryo first". And you're voting Cryo.

So... looks an awful lot like it's part of the case* on Cryo.

I never made an actual 'here is the case' post (I am getting to this too) if I had this would have been at the bottom in a section saying something like 'And when Cryo flips scum Pirate is very likely his buddy'

I never said Cryo is scum because of Associative tells hes scum for the other reasons; Majiffy is just focusing on something I mentioned once when I saw it to expand on why I think Pirate is scum. Why is he doing this? because hes scum.

In fact I think it is fairly clear hes chainsawing.

Tell me Majiffy;
What do you propose I do when I see such things? I see you ignored this question earlier.

Ah right; I just ignore them so that when I get nked noone can see what I was thinking. Seems good.

↑ Majiffy wrote:
That's interesting. Your playstyle is always this piss poor? And it's always scum that attacks you for piss poor play? Well darnit, I must be scum then. Ya got me.

Is there a point to this?

↑ The Goat wrote:
I didn't. I thought that Slandaar was making his case against CN, and then turned around and stated that he wasn't trying to get them (CN) lynched. Slandaar is the one who then stated he was talking about you.

That bit a couple pages back where Slandaar and Majiffy got into it is a little hard to follow.

Well obviously I wasn't saying that.

I assumed he was talking about Pirate because that in my mind is who those posts (associative tells) incriminate. And its obvious I do because I subconsciously started talking about Pirate.

Yeah this isn't very short

Majiffys Case on Slandaar;

↑ Majiffy wrote:And to give you an idea of your "case" on Cryo up to the point where you suggested the 1v1:

↑ Slandaar wrote:[He says he's played with me before, he hasn't]

Proven wrong

This isn't part of my case, so what is it doing here?

↑ Majiffy wrote:

↑ Slandaar wrote:[Awkward phrasing]

Not a scum tell

I have talked enough about this.

↑ Majiffy wrote:

↑ Slandaar wrote:[WIFOM]

Because WIFOM arguments are winning arguments!

WIFOM accusation; Good Job. Doesn't actually argue the point; just tries to dismiss it as WIFOM.

↑ Majiffy wrote:

↑ Slandaar wrote:[unflipped player is bussing Cryo]

Because unflipped associative tells always work!

Eh I have spoken about this also. But the point is he doesn't argue the content; just that I shouldn't be pointing out these things? why? Never answered.

↑ Majiffy wrote:

↑ Slandaar wrote:Please lynch CryoNudist.

If I am somehow wrong lynch me tomorrow but there is no way I am.

And a 1v1.

This isn't part of my case either.

Majiffy actually ignored a few of my later arguments I assume because he had no witty remark for them.

More later.

I don't have the time or mental fortitude to put it into words right now, but this is a reminder here to myself to
a) Explain to Slardaar why his 'defence' is fucking awful
b) reread his ISO to see if the rest of his posts have been this awful
c) Remind HIM to put up the case he insisted was coming on me
d) Try and work out whether this actually is multiball or there are just so many VIs it feels like it

OK

Disecting Cryo's content to show Majiffy is scum due to impartiality note: I do not think anything said here makes Cryo scum (I actually like this post its the only one decent in their whole ISO) it makes Majiffy scum for 'reading' them town when the exact type of case he made on me can be made on them observe;

↑ CryoChemist wrote:

AP's reads like he is unsure about our alignment but has a gut read on us as town. He wants to pursue other avenues and actually lynch someone he has scum reads on, but will ultimately vote us as compromise.

Reading into how something is worded.

So, if wording can be used as a towntell it can also be used as a scumtell obviously.

so; Majiffy View: this is not a towntell.

↑ CryoChemist wrote:
AN's reads like they are very sure about AP being scum, but ultimately know nobody is going down that road today so in order to end the day, they are willing to kill Cryo instead of someone they think is scum. No need to further pursue the case on AP since lynching us is just as good of a mislynch as mislynching AP.

Same thing as above.

↑ CryoChemist wrote:
AP's post still includes questions that lead to better reads and making people post and not tunnel. AN's is simply 'let's get today over with so we are willing to join someone we think is scum in lynching Cryo'.

Same thing again

↑ CryoChemist wrote:
Lastly, and it's minor we know, look at the words used to talk about our death. AP says "lynch" and AN says "kill". It's highly a psychological argument and alone doesn't mean much, but combined with the other thoughts, we think it's more telling than not of each of their mindset's.

Awkward wording is a scumtell. (Majiffy: This is not a scumtell)

Then we have this post;

↑ CryoChemist wrote:
Fact: You most certainly sheeped AP and voted ANG. You voted yourself as well before that. Everyone I listed you have voted for, myself and ANG included

They voted all those people. So what? Voting all major wagons?

This is not a scumtell.

↑ CryoChemist wrote:
Fact: You only voted Jiffy AFTER KoC voted them. Please show us the post where you think you were calling Jiffy scum before the KoC vote...cuz...uh...we don't see it. You called him dumb as rocks at one point but...that's about it.

Ehhhhhhhhh

I want to say Proven Wrong. But I am not entirely convinced about this. There is some (minor) suspicion to be read in the post however so it is plausible.

↑ CryoChemist wrote:
Fact: Calling out someone for a bad hop onto us while doing the exact same thing (hopping poorly onto us) is the Pot calling the Kettle black.

Not a Scumtell (explained earlier)

↑ CryoChemist wrote:
Fact: "And I was actually the first to point out AP's bad wagon hop before Jiffy" is a straight up lie. Let us show you....

It is a 'lie' but why would scum lie about something provable? doesn't make much sense. More like they just misremembered events; Misremembering events is ; Not a scumtell.

So in all that there is one point that is fine.

Majiffy is scum because of the way he tried to dismantle my case when he can make the exact same arguments of Cryo if he wanted who he says he reads as town so why my content not Cryo's?

The main part is where Cryo is talking about wording which Majiffy adamantly tells me cannot be used; But his super town read Cryo uses it? Oh.

KoC you want a case?
KoC is scum for implying he can't be scum unless there is a case on him.

↑ Slandaar wrote:KoC you want a case?
KoC is scum for implying he can't be scum unless there is a case on him.

...I... you... what.

Pirate: How much do you know about GOW?

↑ Knight of Cydonia wrote:

↑ Slandaar wrote:KoC you want a case?
KoC is scum for implying he can't be scum unless there is a case on him.

...I... you... what.

Its a logical fallacy to suggest you can't be scum unless there is a case showing you are.

OK...back from v/LA. I have a lot of catching up to do in all my games and will try to get to them all asap.

↑ Slandaar wrote:

↑ Knight of Cydonia wrote:

↑ Slandaar wrote:KoC you want a case?
KoC is scum for implying he can't be scum unless there is a case on him.

...I... you... what.

Its a logical fallacy to suggest you can't be scum unless there is a case showing you are.

...no. No it isn't. If you accuse someone of scum, there is a burden of proof on you to provide evidence. Otherwise Mafia would be... well, a game of just throwing around random call-outs/OMGUSes. Kinda like the way you play it. Badly.

So; if X is scum; Y says they think X is scum but has no case gut etc; X can't be scum?

I see.

...I'm genuinely not sure if you're wilfully misinterpreting me at this point or just stupid.

Very much like Slandaar vote for pretty much just #904 which is so dodgy; Majiffy is pointing out illogical play from Slandaar, and honestly the fact that Slandaar's got "You probably do believe what you say" (implying Majiffy is town?) and then later "Majiffy is scum" in the same exact post is just no. That's not to mention his rebuttal to Majiffy's first point (which contains empirical evidence) is essentially is "la la la I'm not listening it's a scumtell"

I don't care about the OMGUS aspect of it; I think Majiffy's points are good in the post Slandaar quotes (I agree about unflipped associative tells), and to try and make an amalgamation of Majiffy is wrong/Majiffy is scum in the same post as a response is just not believable for me.

VOTE: Slandaar

I want to reinforce that I still think AP is scum (I'd lynch either him or Slandaar but the AP wagon is stalled as hell) and reiterate the argument I made since AP just pulled a Thor and snarky smileyfaced his way out of addressing it and no one else commented --

1) #592 AP thinks CN's play is anti-town regardless of alignment [presumably for suggesting a 1v1 with Messiah] (I agree)
2) AP thinks CN is scummy enough to vote at the point of #595 (I agree)
3) I'm wasn't initially thrilled with the ~632 area where he tries to shift attention to me, although after the emotional reaction subsided I think this is more trying to imply that Majiffy is scummy for suggesting a double standard for me/AP. Majiffy did kind of move the goalposts a bit when he clarified defending me. I think ultimately I don't take issue with AP's behavior here. I'll talk more about how that affects my Majiffy read in a later post.
4) 725. This is my problem. It references cryo's 713 where cryo basically just says AP's super town and not much else. This is apparently reason for AP to do a total 180 on Cryo, but the reasons he gives essentially, to me, are that Cryo's actions in 713 aren't optimal play for either alignment therefore it's more likely to come from town? Why's AP suddenly susceptible to bullshit anti-town WIFOM from Cryo when he wasn't before?

Anyway I know AP's got his hard defenders out there. I'd like to hear from them regarding this.

I'll have a more breadthy post in a bit.

↑ borkjerfkin wrote:Very much like Slandaar vote for pretty much just #904 which is so dodgy; Majiffy is pointing out illogical play from Slandaar, and honestly the fact that Slandaar's got "You probably do believe what you say" (implying Majiffy is town?)

What is illogical in my play? Which of his points did you find actually good?

X thinks tunnel is a scumtell
X: This guys tunnelling its scummy!
If X is scum: He believes that tunnelling is scummy hence he can (and probably will) argue it; afterall hes not going to say 'Tunnelling isn't scummy' when someone could look into his meta and see otherwise (not always possible but the point remains) hes not just going to lie about it; scum don't just go about lying all the time; they don't leave huge clues for you to find them; they will try to argue things they think are right.

So, no, I implied nothing of the sort.

He provided empirical evidence that X is NOT a scumtell (by showing you when he did it as town) and you ignored it. Then you tried to pin him as scum for saying
"associative tells pre-flip are not useful" which even if you disagree with (I agree with it) fails to be any sort of legitimate segue into a proclamation of Majiffy-scum.

No he didn't

I showed the evidence showing it is.

Slandaar wrote:they don't leave huge clues for you to find them; they will try to argue things they think are right.

And they will do this while playing toward a scum wincon, ergo with scum motivation. Where is that here?

Read my post on why hes scum.

↑ Slandaar wrote:No he didn't

I showed the evidence showing it is.

My mistake; for whatever reason I thought it was him who was linking his own games. But still, tunneling is really obviously not a tell either way.

↑ Knight of Cydonia wrote:...I'm genuinely not sure if you're wilfully misinterpreting me at this point or just stupid.

...

↑ Slandaar wrote:
Its a logical fallacy to suggest you can't be scum unless there is a case showing you are.

↑ Knight of Cydonia wrote:
...no. No it isn't.

↑ Slandaar wrote:So; if X is scum; Y says they think X is scum but has no case gut etc; X can't be scum?

I see.