So Void, maybe you're misinterpreting what I said in the first bit. I understand that you think Teia is scummy, or at least you are trying to convince us that she is. The "mistaken" quote was Teia saying she didn't think Iso was scummy any more. You seized on that and tried to show that she did still think he was scummy with later quotes, but that looked like a misinterpretation to me. For example, you said asking Iso about roleblockers = Teia thinks Iso is scummy, but I don't get that. Same with the comment where Teia said to look at hans's scum reads if he flipped scum - you tried to claim that meant she was saying "don't look at those players if he flips town," but that's blatantly misleading.
Second bit from Void - I did comment on your case, what are you talking about? KK has just waffled today, being content to say "oh good case" or "hey kaburi you did a scummy thing" but not to throw votes or really commit to any case.
Arcadic only really left two reads. Sure, he was wrong about hans, but we now know he had no ulterior motive in saying "Jay is town," I thought that was worth commenting on. But apparently only you can determine truth from dead townies:
With hansanator flipping Town we know that there could be, and more likely is, some truth in what he posted, but we have a Scum member right here in you, Teia.
Since Arcadic flipped Town we know one thing for fact: That Arcadic didn't know the alignments of anyone else. You giving Jay +Town points for Arcadic believing him to be Town makes no sense.
As for KK, saying that you suspected BV earlier doesn't mean you aren't scum, you could just be staking out your mislynches early. To clarify about kaburi, I agree with his read of Void but I don't like how timid his play is. It's pretty consistent with his town play in MM7, but he needs to commit or we aren't going to get anywhere. Sometimes it is legit to waffle
KK: Who are the scummy people that refuse to believe Jay is town (quotes plz), and why do you know he is town? Also, what person gained town points from hans's lynch?
As for KK, saying that you suspected BV earlier doesn't mean you aren't scum, you could just be staking out your mislynches early.
So you accuse me of picking a popular wagon to avoid scrutiny, but I'm still probably scummy when I prove you wrong #because_reach? Yep, that's a town mindset :nod:.
KK: Who are the scummy people that refuse to believe Jay is town (quotes plz), and why do you know he is town? Also, what person gained town points from hans's lynch?
I checked back on Arcadic, he only had 8 posts and they were pretty focused on hans, and also that he is sure that Jay is town. He wouldn't have any reason to lie about that as town himself, and he refused to answer when I asked why he specifically thought Jay was vanilla, but it seems like +town points for him.
You farm evidence toward his townie-ness, as if we need any more. This is less damning than these next two quotes, but still counts as not reading Jay as obvtown.
Jay, would you mind explaining this post? You hammered one of your "three most suspicious individuals" and then immediately started feeling guilty over a mislynch? You said that "without more information we're going nowhere," so if you were lynching him to gain information rather than because you thought he was scum, why feel guilty?
Teia actually goes after him at the beginning of day 2. Especially bad because apparently he's the only person she feels the need to scumhunt at all toDay. She's got no idea who to drive a wagon on.
Jay - Leaning scum, but I've not seen quite enough to incriminate him yet. 180 is some pretty hard distancing from hansanator though.
Talking about how strong someone's wagon is isn't distancing. The closest thing is where he says hans's arguments just make him look worse, which was both true and not even calling him scummy. The point being, BV sees Jay as scummy for lame reasoning at this time, when the only town points jay hadn't gotten yet were from hammering hans.
As for how we know he's town, just off the top of my head there was his willingness to hammer hans, which though later revealed was because he had an ability he thought would protect him, revealing that role information is not something I'd expect any noobscum to do. You'll note that any scum would not know for sure hans was lying, and certainly noobscum couldn't figure it out alone. Granted, this particular point could still make him scum with daychat, but I thought he was town long before this. Most of it will be hard to explain as it involves a fair amount of reading into tone, +not reaching for reasons to find like the BV one linked above and Teia saying that flavorgaming by a noob is a scumtell while handwaving another of Jay's town tells. That answers the question of who gained town points with hans's lynch as well.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll bet you wish you had a non-unglued/unhinged card that shared your first name.
Void's case relies too much on Teia saying she was "mistaken" about Iso; people are allowed to change their reads, and I didn't think any of the insinuations that she thought he was still scum after saying that held water. There is also his weird attempt to suggest that Iso saying Wheat could be a roleblocker somehow means that Iso is scum, which seems to be based on setup speculation that roleblockers are scum more often than town.
GM, if you mean this little portion here, then I'm expecting a lot more from you.
Can someone explain to me in some more detail why everyone is up on GM? Because I was confused from Day One why people were launching on him, it never really made sense to me.
In both cases, he hints at trying to start a wagon on BV, who some (including me) listed as a scummy candidate on Day 1.
Where did I accuse you of trying to "avoid scrutiny?" My argument against you is that you have pushed to call people scummy but failed to follow up with votes. I can pretty much excuse Day 1 since you were voting hans for a while, and he had pretty much dug his own hole by the time you jumped off to keep him at L-2. But what's happened Day 2? You gave us the Cliffs Notes for your BV case, but didn't vote him then because you had to wait for Void's approval? If you liked his Teia case so much, why didn't you vote her?
So your scumteam is me, Teia, and BV? Can you put the points against Teia in your own words?
I did a quick skim back and found some interesting stuff that I'll write up when I have the time.
Void - uh, ok...I made my main points, but if you require a detailed post breakdown I guess I can try to do that soon.
Void - uh, ok...I made my main points, but if you require a detailed post breakdown I guess I can try to do that soon.
It's not the length of the post, GM. It's how it sounds when you are reading it. It came across as you not believing what you were typing. It sounded very forced.
Here are the main points of the case:
1) Teia was calling Wheaties Scum for the majority of Day 1, if not, then all of Day 1.
2) After Wheaties claimed Teia makes a non-committal response to Wheaties claim.
3) Before Night falls Teia makes a post of "If hansanator is Scum, then scrutinize Wheaties/Void/2 other." But leaves out “If hansanator flips Town.” Since that information wasn’t given I took the initiative and took what it implied if hansanator flipped Town. Because there is no reason that hansanator flipping Scum would give information, but hansanator flipping Town wouldn’t give information.
4) Wheaties Role Ability has been proved by Night Actions lending him a good amount of Town Credit.
5) Teia comes out the gate Day 2 calling Wheaties Town despite everything about her play from yesterDay.
It's a complete behavioral change from Day 1. Teia is likely to be Scum this game. Now, GM, why are you coming in and defending Teia as you are? I can only think of one thing. You and Teia are Scumbuddies.
I also felt that Wheat was on the scummy side yesterday because of the points Iso brought up about how he was inconsistent in using meta arguments for people whose metas he did not know (myself and Teia). But he claimed he was a vig and that he was going to shoot Iso, then Night 1 came, Iso died and there was another night kill, and Wheat said he vigged Iso. As you said, this is new information that gives us reason to believe Wheat is town. Teia has revised her opinion of Wheat, and I have as well.
I am defending Teia here because her stance on Wheat makes sense and your attempt to make that look scummy does not. I literally have no idea why the points covered in your last post would lead to the conclusion that Teia is scummy.
I also felt that Wheat was on the scummy side yesterday because of the points Iso brought up about how he was inconsistent in using meta arguments for people whose metas he did not know (myself and Teia). But he claimed he was a vig and that he was going to shoot Iso, then Night 1 came, Iso died and there was another night kill, and Wheat said he vigged Iso. As you said, this is new information that gives us reason to believe Wheat is town. Teia has revised her opinion of Wheat, and I have as well.
I am defending Teia here because her stance on Wheat makes sense and your attempt to make that look scummy does not. I literally have no idea why the points covered in your last post would lead to the conclusion that Teia is scummy.
Let me get this straight, GM.
You're saying that Teia's behavior from yesterDay means little to nothing to you and for that you're reading Teia as Town.
But in Mafia we are taught to use Behavior Analysis to find scum. Yet you are looking at the behavior from Teia and excepting that a Townie would act this way. And since we are on the subject of Behavior Analysis, would you please explain how Teia's behavior from yesterDay and the start of toDay means that Teia is Town. Greatly apperciated, Scum.
I hadn't realized your behavior from yesterDay that well, but, then again, you weren't posting as much as Teia was yesterDay. But since you want to put it out there, yes, you and Teia acted in similar ways yesterDay. And now you are coming in to defend Teia for this reason. If you flip scum, which I suspect you will at this point, then I'm near certain that Teia will flip Scum as well.
So in a previous post I mentioned I wanted to scrutinize Teia, Kaburi, Ria and GM as being the remaining living people who voted for Hans, as it's very likely that at least one scum jumped on that bandwagon. Teia and GM have been scrutinized extensively by others, so I want to take a second to look at Kaburi and Ria.
Ria has only a small amount of posts, which is a bit concerning. However, [URL="http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=10505317&postcount=241"]Post 241[/URL] especially makes me think Ria is town. I'd need someone with more experience to comment, but unvoting to avoid a quick hammer doesn't seem like something scum would do, unless they are absolutely brilliant.
But stuff like [URL="http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=10505381&postcount=250"]this[/URL] seems like he's trying to look active without ever actually saying very much this game. But unless someone thinks 241 is a subtle play for town points, I'm thinking he's town.
Kaburi is almost in the same boat, both have less than 30 posts apiece. However, Kaburi has the excuse of having some extreme stresses the last few weeks from work, so I think his lack of posting is from that rather than an attempt to avoid making waves. [URL="http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=10513477&postcount=316"]This[/URL] is a pretty big town point to me, as there was no need for him to draw attention to himself. However, he does have a couple URL="http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=10506737#post10506737"]active lurking[/URL] posts of his own. Overall, I get a town read from Kaburi as well, but both Ria and Kaburi are only relegated to low priority rather than 'town'.
I don't have time today, but I'm going to scrutinize Teia and GM more soon, although I think they're a high priority for investigation, I'm not convinced either is scum, they are just more only likely scum candidates that anyone else as far as I'm aware right now.
Nice, the chain lynch attempt, +scum pts for Void. You yourself seem to recognize that changing opinions on Wheat based on night results is valid. Why is this a criteria for Teia (or me) being scummy?
Jay, you can repost (edit by way of double post, EBWODP) to correct the link if you want, but I think there's enough there that we can figure it out.
Nice, the chain lynch attempt, +scum pts for Void. You yourself seem to recognize that changing opinions on Wheat based on night results is valid. Why is this a criteria for Teia (or me) being scummy?
I am not chaining lynches. I said that Teia was a near certainty for me. That does not mean that I am chaining lynches. That means that I will be looking at Teia as more likely Scum come Tomorrow, should you flip Scum. You don't excatly seem to be arguing against that though. You've been defending Teia.
Teia was in the process of changing her read on Wheaties during Day 1.
I’ve already said why this is criteria for Teia and you to be Scum. It’s called Behavioral Analysis. It’s what everyone, in this Mafia subforum, is taught to catch Scum. Some pick it up better than others. You are completely ignoring Teia’s behavior from yesterDay and saying that Teia calling Wheaties Town toDay is perfectly normal when it is not. Normal Town behavior would consist of looking at Wheaties posts and trying to find the Town mindset/behavior for Day 1. Teia simply changed her opinion because of a claim and supportive evidence that Wheaties is speaking the truth which in turn would make Wheaties a strong Town read.
Do you see the differences here? Once you do you will realize why I believe Teia to be Scum. Of course, you’re in that boat now, as well, except that you jumped in to defend Teia and in the process twisted a thing or two.
Something came to while I was reading this post about how GM is responding. I’m not sure how much weight this holds since I have not seen it used before. But, normally when someone is defending from and case and the other someone is calling the defender Scum you would see a “No, I’m Town” kind of bit in a post. Looking below I posted all of GM’s posts since he was voted by KK and I and I do not see him stating anything like that.
So Void, maybe you're misinterpreting what I said in the first bit. I understand that you think Teia is scummy, or at least you are trying to convince us that she is. The "mistaken" quote was Teia saying she didn't think Iso was scummy any more. You seized on that and tried to show that she did still think he was scummy with later quotes, but that looked like a misinterpretation to me. For example, you said asking Iso about roleblockers = Teia thinks Iso is scummy, but I don't get that. Same with the comment where Teia said to look at hans's scum reads if he flipped scum - you tried to claim that meant she was saying "don't look at those players if he flips town," but that's blatantly misleading.
Second bit from Void - I did comment on your case, what are you talking about? KK has just waffled today, being content to say "oh good case" or "hey kaburi you did a scummy thing" but not to throw votes or really commit to any case.
Arcadic only really left two reads. Sure, he was wrong about hans, but we now know he had no ulterior motive in saying "Jay is town," I thought that was worth commenting on. But apparently only you can determine truth from dead townies:
With hansanator flipping Town we know that there could be, and more likely is, some truth in what he posted, but we have a Scum member right here in you, Teia.
Since Arcadic flipped Town we know one thing for fact: That Arcadic didn't know the alignments of anyone else. You giving Jay +Town points for Arcadic believing him to be Town makes no sense.
As for KK, saying that you suspected BV earlier doesn't mean you aren't scum, you could just be staking out your mislynches early. To clarify about kaburi, I agree with his read of Void but I don't like how timid his play is. It's pretty consistent with his town play in MM7, but he needs to commit or we aren't going to get anywhere. Sometimes it is legit to waffle
KK: Who are the scummy people that refuse to believe Jay is town (quotes plz), and why do you know he is town? Also, what person gained town points from hans's lynch?
In both cases, he hints at trying to start a wagon on BV, who some (including me) listed as a scummy candidate on Day 1.
Where did I accuse you of trying to "avoid scrutiny?" My argument against you is that you have pushed to call people scummy but failed to follow up with votes. I can pretty much excuse Day 1 since you were voting hans for a while, and he had pretty much dug his own hole by the time you jumped off to keep him at L-2. But what's happened Day 2? You gave us the Cliffs Notes for your BV case, but didn't vote him then because you had to wait for Void's approval? If you liked his Teia case so much, why didn't you vote her?
So your scumteam is me, Teia, and BV? Can you put the points against Teia in your own words?
I did a quick skim back and found some interesting stuff that I'll write up when I have the time.
Void - uh, ok...I made my main points, but if you require a detailed post breakdown I guess I can try to do that soon.
I also felt that Wheat was on the scummy side yesterday because of the points Iso brought up about how he was inconsistent in using meta arguments for people whose metas he did not know (myself and Teia). But he claimed he was a vig and that he was going to shoot Iso, then Night 1 came, Iso died and there was another night kill, and Wheat said he vigged Iso. As you said, this is new information that gives us reason to believe Wheat is town. Teia has revised her opinion of Wheat, and I have as well.
I am defending Teia here because her stance on Wheat makes sense and your attempt to make that look scummy does not. I literally have no idea why the points covered in your last post would lead to the conclusion that Teia is scummy.
Hold on now, you're changing your case. All I see in 401, where you first laid out the case, is "Teia thought Wheat was scum Day 1, but now on Day 2 she thinks he is town." The only quote you have that purports to show Teia waffling on Wheat's alignment Day 1 is where you read extra implication into her post that we should look at the people hans listed as scum if he flips scum, and you even admit that you are stretching. There is nothing strange about Teia revising her opinion on Wheat in light of the night results. The main case on Wheat was about how he was trying to apply meta knowledge inconsistently as a basis for scumhunting, but that's not incontrovertible evidence of any kind. Are you suggesting that everyone who listed Wheat as possible scum on Day 1 should still hold that opinion now, despite the night results?
I like how you're lecturing me like I don't know how to play Mafia, and then making sly aside comments like "look, he has never said he's town!" Any player with half a brain understands that they have to prove they are town through actions, not by simply stating that they are town.
The way you are grasping at straws and slinging mud just looks like scum desperate to start a wagon.
Teia's word choice is there. "I was mistaken". There is no doubt in those words. Teia KNEW she was mistaken. That is what my case is built up on.
My words were "apparently I was mistaken" (emphasis added), implying far less certainty than you're ascribing to me. You're deliberately manipulating the facts to fit a desired conclusion rather than deriving your conclusion from the facts.
Unvote Vote: Gerrad's Mom
This is OMGUS, plain and simple. GM goes after you, and you respond by leaping at him.
We can deal with Teia later. I am certain that GM is scum this game.
Wasn't a lack of doubt supposed to imply scumminess according to you?
Aside: I'm loling at the correlation between the scummy players and their inability to see Jay is obvtown right now.
"Obvious" is a tricky thing, especially when there's legitimate cause to doubt Jay's townieness. He engages in WIFOM, he flavour-games, he implies he immediately knew hans was a mislynch... it's not nearly as cut and dry as you think.
Teia actually goes after him at the beginning of day 2. Especially bad because apparently he's the only person she feels the need to scumhunt at all toDay. She's got no idea who to drive a wagon on.
Jay was the only one of my strong scum reads at the end of day 1 not to be cleared in some fashion (hans flipping town, Wheat's claim checking out). Why wouldn't I go after him while I finish rereading the game?
As for how we know he's town, just off the top of my head there was his willingness to hammer hans, which though later revealed was because he had an ability he thought would protect him, revealing that role information is not something I'd expect any noobscum to do. You'll note that any scum would not know for sure hans was lying, and certainly noobscum couldn't figure it out alone.
He's stated multiple times that he's played Werewolf and other similar games, and has claimed that his major stumbling point is making the transition to online play. With his experience, there's no guarantee he's as naive as you're painting him.
3) Before Night falls Teia makes a post of "If hansanator is Scum, then scrutinize Wheaties/Void/2 other." But leaves out “If hansanator flips Town.” Since that information wasn’t given I took the initiative and took what it implied if hansanator flipped Town. Because there is no reason that hansanator flipping Scum would give information, but hansanator flipping Town wouldn’t give information.
This, right here, is a good illustration of the faults in your case. Your approach to all this is extremely rigid—if something isn't one way, then it must be another. I didn't clearly communicate the town outcome, so in your mind I must have meant what you thought I meant (i.e. that those players shouldn't be scrutinized). Then you take such unfounded premises and centre your case around them. It looks good on paper, but it's all just sophistry in the end. It's very misleading, and it's not town behaviour.
5) Teia comes out the gate Day 2 calling Wheaties Town despite everything about her play from yesterDay.
Wheat claimed vig. There were two kills overnight. Then Wheat claimed he shot Iso. There were no counterclaims. Are you suggesting that I should somehow cling to a scum read?
Now, GM, why are you coming in and defending Teia as you are? I can only think of one thing. You and Teia are Scumbuddies.
There are any number of possibilities. We could be buddies, or I could be town and him scum with the intent of buddying up to me, or we could both be town and he simply sees the problems with your argument. Here, you imply you aren't even considering other possibilities, and you're immediately leaping to the conclusion that we're scum.
To recap:
- Your arguments place the conclusion above the evidence.
- You manipulate evidence to support a desired conclusion.
- You engage in OMGUS, leaping at someone for coming after you while claiming certainty of their alignment.
- Your arguments are disingenuous and sophistic, relying heavily on supposition and leaping to conclusions.
- You imply you don't consider the full range of possibilities when proposing theories.
This isn't town behaviour, but individually I could chalk those elements up to bad play. In aggregate, however, they suggest that your goal is justification, not investigation. Given each faction's goals (town seeking to identify scum, and scum seeking to drive mislynches), the reasonable conclusion is that you're scum.
Teia's word choice is there. "I was mistaken". There is no doubt in those words. Teia KNEW she was mistaken. That is what my case is built up on.
My words were "apparently I was mistaken" (emphasis added), implying far less certainty than you're ascribing to me. You're deliberately manipulating the facts to fit a desired conclusion rather than deriving your conclusion from the facts.
Void even types out "apparently I was mistaken" twice in this post, & then tries to make a case of Teia feeling out Iso past that statement. That right there shows she wasn't solid in her read, & I don't see how anyone in their right mind expects another player (much less one with a handful of completed games) to read Iso with confidence anyway.
Void is dancing around trying to shoehorn Teia's posts into what he wants to see.
Alright, the final has passed and I'll have a little more free time. I'll catch up sometime this weekend, hopefully tonight but for sure by the end of the day Sunday.
In both cases, he hints at trying to start a wagon on BV, who some (including me) listed as a scummy candidate on Day 1.
Where did I accuse you of trying to "avoid scrutiny?"
Being facetious does not count as a counter-argument. What was the point of bringing up that other people found BV scummy if not to claim that I was trying to get aboard a safe wagon?
My argument against you is that you have pushed to call people scummy but failed to follow up with votes. I can pretty much excuse Day 1 since you were voting hans for a while, and he had pretty much dug his own hole by the time you jumped off to keep him at L-2. But what's happened Day 2? You gave us the Cliffs Notes for your BV case, but didn't vote him then because you had to wait for Void's approval? If you liked his Teia case so much, why didn't you vote her?
I clearly said I was deciding which one I want to lynch. That's both a fair question to be asking and not the language someone trying to push cases without committing uses.
As for liking Void's case on Teia, I more liked it that he found some evidence because all I had before that was meta.
So your scumteam is me, Teia, and BV? Can you put the points against Teia in your own words?
Well, none of the cases are robust enough that I'm calling scumteam right now, but you are my top suspects. I'll put the points against Teia in a separate post to keep this from getting into wall territory.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll bet you wish you had a non-unglued/unhinged card that shared your first name.
It's all very wordy and I haven't gotten the mental focus to slog through them yet, at least not enough to understand them completely. (Except for rian's. I didn't understand his point at all in his latest post, but tried rereading a couple of times because it was short. It didn't help.)
Anyway, Town Void has never been known for strong cases or perfect logic. See the latest clan contest mafia that just ended for an example. My first reading of the counter-arguments told me void's accused of pulling a relationship out of no where and anally sticking to it like fact and participating in confirmation bias. Both of these are firmly within Void's town meta.
And while he's going after the people I find scummy, I find little reason to delve into text walls. Especially when his detractors are arguing he's bad at arguing rather than actually finding scum motivation behind his arguments.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll bet you wish you had a non-unglued/unhinged card that shared your first name.
And while he's going after the people I find scummy, I find little reason to delve into text walls. Especially when his detractors are arguing he's bad at arguing rather than actually finding scum motivation behind his arguments.
- Your arguments place the conclusion above the evidence.
- You manipulate evidence to support a desired conclusion.
- You engage in OMGUS, leaping at someone for coming after you while claiming certainty of their alignment.
- Your arguments are disingenuous and sophistic, relying heavily on supposition and leaping to conclusions.
- You imply you don't consider the full range of possibilities when proposing theories.
This isn't town behaviour, but individually I could chalk those elements up to bad play. In aggregate, however, they suggest that your goal is justification, not investigation. Given each faction's goals (town seeking to identify scum, and scum seeking to drive mislynches), the reasonable conclusion is that you're scum.
"In aggregate, however, they suggest that your goal is justification, not investigation. Given each faction's goals (town seeking to identify scum, and scum seeking to drive mislynches), the reasonable conclusion is that you're scum."
Tell me how that's not finding scum motivation behind his behaviour. I make similar arguments elsewhere in my quoted post, but I quoted the tl;dr to make it easier. All the same, though, your argument reads like you're just trying to be dismissive for the sake of being dismissive, rather than dismissing an argument on actual merits (or demerits as the case may be).
So, reasons I think Teia is scum: She's been playing to her scum meta. Playing passively, joining wagons in progress or trying to quietly mudsling if a wagon wasn't already in progress. The only player she's consistently scumhunting is Jay, and only for things he couldn't be experienced enough to understand with his rl werewolf games such as WIFOM and flavorgaming.
- KoolKoal: Saying that Arcadic's first vote was serious is pretty weak, but what really raises a red flag for me is how he handled his mistaken vote for hans. He voted hans for not knowing how RVS tells work, despite later saying that, "I don't think RVS tells are very reliable, but they catch scum once in a while and give us a good jump-off point to get into the real meat of the game." This is what's known as special pleading: He's acknowledging the general case that RVS tells aren't reliable, while not giving justification to the claim that this case is exceptional—he restates his premises at one point, but he doesn't make the connection to how hans' lack of voting isn't a null tell. Oh, and the whole "laughing at tinypic" thing reeks of deflection. He looks very much like scum who got caught making a bad case and is now fumbling around trying to justify it.
Vote KoolKoal
She jumps onto my wagon with horrible reasoning, following Wheat's suspicion and my exchange with Iso where I didn't answer his question. I think we can agree I look vulnerable at this time.
But I go on to argue her off successfully and then she wagon hops to the flailing hans which is to say, joins me on hans's wagon.
Kind of deflective ("no, you're the one attacking someone for ignoring posts!"), definitely defensive, still not contributing actual content of your own. This easily makes you my strongest scum read.
Unvote, vote hansanator
Without ever removing me as a scumspect, she gets on the same wagon I've been pushing. (She also slowly drops my counter-arguments that she can't answer, but doesn't admit she's wrong about anything, she just stops talking about it and runs to another wagon.) This is another popular wagon, she'd have been the 4th player voting him except that Jay had just moved his vote to Iso.
- "Serious vote" on GM. He then tunnels GM pretty hard but in a shallow way for a little while
- Votes me without any reasoning. The reason I ignored this vote was because it seemed like he was just trying to get reactions from people by throwing an intentionally bad vote onto me.
- Switches back to GM. Reasons include supposedly feigned surprise about being nathed, and only focusing on the KK situation (with specific mentions of a Teia "wagon" that was only ever two votes). Then after arguing the GM issue a bit, he goes and says he's going to lurk for a few days.
So yeah, tunneling someone with specious reasoning, switching votes only to start a "wagon" (his term) on someone else for basically no stated reason. I'm leaving my vote on hansanator, though, so FOS Iso.
She seems to pull the FOS out of nowhere here (I don't see her points as all that worthy of Iso voting at least) and she basically took the thoughts from BV, yet she doesn't join in the discussion when Iso argues against this same points from one of BV's posts. She sits back and then FOS's Wheat for using an exaggeration (100% scum), semantics of chart using/not using, because scum sometimes can be low-hanging fruit (<- strawmanning the point, which was about going after exclusively easy targets), and for trusting a source that Wheat couldn't explain because it referenced an on-going game (not a bad reason to be distrustful, but not exactly a scummy thing either, and not worth suspecting Wheat IMO. Plus she's just jumping on a piece of an argument Iso was already making.) Basically: she uses terrible reasoning to show interest yet another wagon, except without a vote because hans has been flailing hard all Day.
There were two kills overnight, which means that one was likely a vig shot. I don't know what to make of the fact that Wheat claimed vig and wasn't killed (as one would think the scum would go after an un-counterclaimed PR), and it's hard to speculate without slipping into WIFOM. As it stands, the most straightforward answer is that Wheat's claim was genuine and that he's actually town.
On one hand Teia says Wheat is probably town because of the night action, but she backhandedly throws some distrust his way, saying if he was really a town PR he'd be NK'd by now. But not so outright as to earn any attention, she tries to subtly hint at it to get other people wondering and maybe even start a wagon.
With all this, I'm happy leaving GM for later, my Teia case is a lot stronger than I thought. unvote, vote Teia Rabishu
And gee Teia, turns out I am dismissive of a case built on pointing out someone's general meta rather than scumminess. Especially when the case builder is lying scum. Who'd have thought it?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll bet you wish you had a non-unglued/unhinged card that shared your first name.
So, reasons I think Teia is scum: She's been playing to her scum meta.
As opposed to? There's no real town meta to compare my scum meta to. You're drawing a conclusion from blatantly incomplete data points.
The only player she's consistently scumhunting is Jay
Void doesn't count?
On one hand Teia says Wheat is probably town because of the night action, but she backhandedly throws some distrust his way, saying if he was really a town PR he'd be NK'd by now. But not so outright as to earn any attention, she tries to subtly hint at it to get other people wondering and maybe even start a wagon.
You're doing the same thing as Void here and implying that, when presenting a case, only evidence in favour of the conclusion should be presented. Presenting evidence for and against a specific conclusion isn't scummy. It's basic persuasive writing, because you're acknowledging the points against your case and showing that they don't change the final conclusion.
Also the whole "get other people wondering maybe even start a wagon" thing is unfounded conjecture bordering on WIFOM.
And gee Teia, turns out I am dismissive of a case built on pointing out someone's general meta rather than scumminess. Especially when the case builder is lying scum. Who'd have thought it?
You're also dismissing my request to back up your claim of me not finding scum motivation behind Void's actions despite me showing that my vote was based on his aggregate play showing a scum mindset. You're also displaying an aggressive "I've made up my mind, don't confuse me with the facts" mentality behind your case on me. Why do you feel the need to press me so strongly and dismiss my counterarguments out of hand, as if to imply that you think your case is beyond reproach? You did the same thing when you talked about Jay being "obvtown," and it stuck out just as much there as it does here.
There's no real town meta to compare my scum meta to. You're drawing a conclusion from blatantly incomplete data points.
I was in your only town game. I was the person on Clan Flamingo that showed Prophy he needed to watch you and brought up points why you were scum. Unlike Iso, I don't find it likely that you've suddenly made your town meta match your scum meta. Your town play from that single game had a lot of notable facets, but they all stemmed from over-aggressiveness and paranoia. You can change the symptoms but its a lot harder to change the causes. Especially since, after only one game, you're unlikely to even be aware of them.
The only player she's consistently scumhunting is Jay
Void doesn't count?
The word consistently doesn't envelop something brand new. Nice job ignoring my point about how your reasons for pushing Jay are things he couldn't have experience with from RL play.
And then you blatantly ignore all the rest of my post until the final point. Don't have a defense, Teia?
On one hand Teia says Wheat is probably town because of the night action, but she backhandedly throws some distrust his way, saying if he was really a town PR he'd be NK'd by now. But not so outright as to earn any attention, she tries to subtly hint at it to get other people wondering and maybe even start a wagon.
You're doing the same thing as Void here and implying that, when presenting a case, only evidence in favour of the conclusion should be presented. Presenting evidence for and against a specific conclusion isn't scummy. It's basic persuasive writing, because you're acknowledging the points against your case and showing that they don't change the final conclusion.
lol, yes you added a backhanded comment out of a desire for completeness when you've been ignoring people talking about you unless they demand you respond all game long.
No telling us your opinion on Wheat does not require you to mix the message. Throwing doubt his way was not only scummy, but your point against him was entirely illogical.
And gee Teia, turns out I am dismissive of a case built on pointing out someone's general meta rather than scumminess. Especially when the case builder is lying scum. Who'd have thought it?
You're also dismissing my request to back up your claim of me not finding scum motivation behind Void's actions despite me showing that my vote was based on his aggregate play showing a scum mindset.
I literally said you were arguing that void's argument was bad rather than void was scummy, and you just keep re-quoting the point where you said void's bad arguing makes him scummy. I'm telling you that town void is bad at arguing, so you're going to need more than that to prove he's scum, especially when he's arguing on the right side of the issue.
You're also displaying an aggressive "I've made up my mind, don't confuse me with the facts" mentality behind your case on me. Why do you feel the need to press me so strongly and dismiss my counterarguments out of hand, as if to imply that you think your case is beyond reproach? You did the same thing when you talked about Jay being "obvtown," and it stuck out just as much there as it does here.
I've given valid reasons for dismissing your counter arguments, while you simply ignore large pieces of my case rather than even attempting to dismiss them.
And I later provided reasoning for Jay's obvtown when asked, so I don't know how you benefit from bringing it up here like I haven't. If you disagree with my points on Jay, you're supposed to bring them up directly not pretend they don't exist
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll bet you wish you had a non-unglued/unhinged card that shared your first name.
It all boils down to the points I mentioned: Groundless conjecture, selective information processing, and willful ignorance of anything contrary to your case.
I was in your only town game. I was the person on Clan Flamingo that showed Prophy he needed to watch you and brought up points why you were scum.
That was my second game. This is my fifth. You think that I'll play this game like I did that trainwreck of a town game? You think I haven't improved my town play at all since then?
The word consistently doesn't envelop something brand new. Nice job ignoring my point about how your reasons for pushing Jay are things he couldn't have experience with from RL play.
WIFOM doesn't apply to real life play? Flavour-gaming doesn't apply to real life play? The names might be different, but the concepts are absolutely applicable to any game involving persuasion.
No telling us your opinion on Wheat does not require you to mix the message. Throwing doubt his way was not only scummy, but your point against him was entirely illogical.
That you disagree with the logic does not make it illogical.
Really? Then tell me why a townie would waffle on telling us that Wheat is probably town in such a non-committal way.
I was, and am, committed to my town read on What as a result of his claim checking out without a counterclaim. Your argument here is a strawman.
I literally said you were arguing that void's argument was bad rather than void was scummy, and you just keep re-quoting the point where you said void's bad arguing makes him scummy.
I'm not sure how this is so difficult to follow. Scum want to drive mislynches, so their arguments are designed to indict townies with sophistry. That's exactly what Void's doing, therefore it's reasonable to conclude that he's scum as a result of his overly scummy actions.
I'm telling you that town void is bad at arguing, so you're going to need more than that to prove he's scum, especially when he's arguing on the right side of the issue.
I'm more interested by the absolute certainty you're peppering your arguments with. Again, it's the same thing Void's doing: You're so absolutely convinced of your conclusion that you won't entertain thoughts to the contrary. That's not townie behaviour, because Mafia's ultimately a game about the informed minority (scum) versus the uninformed majority (town). Town, by definition, has less information available than scum, and therefore absolute certainty is detrimental. Healthy skepticism is a good thing for town. Considering opposing evidence and theories is necessary to ensure that you're not missing anything. Scum, however, knows everyone's alignment for certain, so they can act safely in that knowledge. What I'm seeing from you (and Void) is a lack of skepticism, a lack of consideration for opposing viewpoints. That behaviour is notably scummy.
Void/KK/Jay scumteam? It'd make sense given how scummy Void and KK are acting, and how KK is defending Jay so speciously (compare GM defending me not because I'm "obvtown" but because of Void's scumminess).
I've given valid reasons for dismissing your counter arguments, while you simply ignore large pieces of my case rather than even attempting to dismiss them.
Your words: "And gee Teia, turns out I am dismissive of a case built on pointing out someone's general meta rather than scumminess. Especially when the case builder is lying scum."
If you want to get nitpicky, it's valid (the conclusion follows from the premises), but unsound (the premises are false). At least, assuming that dismissing someone's case out of hand follows from someone being scum, which is absurd because such information can still be useful. Regardless of that, though, you even said that you "find little reason to delve into text walls" and that you don't understand the counterarguments completely. Recent posting has not shown any deeper understanding of the counterarguments presented, so why do you feel fit to argue something of which you keep willfully ignorant?
It all boils down to the points I mentioned: Groundless conjecture, selective information processing, and willful ignorance of anything contrary to your case.
LOLOLOLOLOL
You think your obvious nitpicking of which parts of my post you respond to will help you defend yourself? You ignored a huge chunk of evidence I gathered on your scuminess only to defend against my transitional statements. And you haven't even done a good job of that.
That was my second game. This is my fifth. You think that I'll play this game like I did that trainwreck of a town game? You think I haven't improved my town play at all since then?
So you edit out the part of my statement where I give hard reasons why I believe your meta hasn't changed this much. Hope no one notices :afoot:!
Not to mention this whole "You don't know my meta!" is a strawman. I'm not asking people to lynch you because I know your meta. I gave examples of scumtells that are universal in my post about you. Examples that you skipped over in favor of grasping at strawmen like this.
The word consistently doesn't envelop something brand new. Nice job ignoring my point about how your reasons for pushing Jay are things he couldn't have experience with from RL play.
WIFOM doesn't apply to real life play? Flavour-gaming doesn't apply to real life play? The names might be different, but the concepts are absolutely applicable to any game involving persuasion.
WIFOM doesn't come up in RL play often because play groups are rarely debating for long periods of time. Plus the WIFOM you are talking about doesn't seem to have any underlying scum motivation that anyone has pointed to. And flavor gaming doesn't show up in RL play because most RL groups don't bother with changing flavor or even set ups. So no, there's really no reason to believe Jay should be aware of these concepts. (Not that either of them are even strong scum-tells.)
No telling us your opinion on Wheat does not require you to mix the message. Throwing doubt his way was not only scummy, but your point against him was entirely illogical.
That you disagree with the logic does not make it illogical.
I never said the fact that I disagree is what makes it illogical it just is (thanks for putting words in my mouth btw, more scummy behavior makes this all the easier). Tell me why you think Wheat was a logical choice for a night kill.
Really? Then tell me why a townie would waffle on telling us that Wheat is probably town in such a non-committal way.
I was, and am, committed to my town read on What as a result of his claim checking out without a counterclaim. Your argument here is a strawman.
Hm, lets repeat what we said here: I said you used a scum tactic to make Wheat look bad while acting as if you thought he's town. You said I was bordering on WIFOM, which implies you believe that there are legitimate explanations for what you said no matter the alignment. I asked you what town motivation there was for the action. You proceed to handwave the question as strawmanning. I think we can all see who is strawmanning and dodging questions here.
I literally said you were arguing that void's argument was bad rather than void was scummy, and you just keep re-quoting the point where you said void's bad arguing makes him scummy.
I'm not sure how this is so difficult to follow. Scum want to drive mislynches, so their arguments are designed to indict townies with sophistry. That's exactly what Void's doing, therefore it's reasonable to conclude that he's scum as a result of his overly scummy actions.
I love how you constantly ignore my point and dry-hump this part of the conversation. I know that's a possible scum tell. I also know that void is capable of doing it as town. I also know that I'm not suspicious of the fact that void finds you scummy. This all adds up to not worrying about void's bad arguments at this time. Understand yet?
I'm telling you that town void is bad at arguing, so you're going to need more than that to prove he's scum, especially when he's arguing on the right side of the issue.
I'm more interested by the absolute certainty you're peppering your arguments with. Again, it's the same thing Void's doing: You're so absolutely convinced of your conclusion that you won't entertain thoughts to the contrary.
You haven't given me anything to think about on the contrary since I laid the case on you. You've ignored facts I've brought up against you in favor of handwaving and strawmanning the non-essential parts of my posts. You need to act like a townie for me to even consider taking your case seriously.
That's not townie behaviour, because Mafia's ultimately a game about the informed minority (scum) versus the uninformed majority (town). Town, by definition, has less information available than scum, and therefore absolute certainty is detrimental. Healthy skepticism is a good thing for town. Considering opposing evidence and theories is necessary to ensure that you're not missing anything. Scum, however, knows everyone's alignment for certain, so they can act safely in that knowledge. What I'm seeing from you (and Void) is a lack of skepticism, a lack of consideration for opposing viewpoints. That behaviour is notably scummy.
In case you haven't noticed, I've only been mildly suspicious of you until we hit this exchange. Your constant scumminess in response to my case on you is what brought on this certainty. The fact that you've tipped your hand with this awful defense doesn't suddenly make me scummy because I've cottoned on.
Enjoy being lynched.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll bet you wish you had a non-unglued/unhinged card that shared your first name.
It's all very wordy and I haven't gotten the mental focus to slog through them yet, at least not enough to understand them completely. (Except for rian's. I didn't understand his point at all in his latest post, but tried rereading a couple of times because it was short. It didn't help.)
Teia's word choice is there. "I was mistaken". There is no doubt in those words. Teia KNEW she was mistaken. That is what my case is built up on.
My words were "apparently I was mistaken" (emphasis added), implying far less certainty than you're ascribing to me. You're deliberately manipulating the facts to fit a desired conclusion rather than deriving your conclusion from the facts.
Void even types out "apparently I was mistaken" twice in this post, & then tries to make a case of Teia feeling out Iso past that statement. That right there shows she wasn't solid in her read, & I don't see how anyone in their right mind expects another player (much less one with a handful of completed games) to read Iso with confidence anyway.
Void is dancing around trying to shoehorn Teia's posts into what he wants to see.
Oh, for some reason I never read the posts you quoted with the rest of your post :confused:. I don't know how I made such a stupid mistake but the post makes sense now.
I add your vote of Void to the list of people voting Void because he's bad at arguing his point rather than for reasons he's scum. Like I said before: He makes bad logical leaps when making cases as town too, and while he's pointed at my top scumspect, I'm not inclined to find him scummy for what is a null tell with him.
I would appreciate it if you would set it out straightfowardly, without all the LOLOLOL antagonism & quote wall.
And I'd appreciate it if you read what I wrote, despite any mistakes of tone I may have made from adrenalin caused by the argument. Everything I've intended to say is there if you'll just read it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll bet you wish you had a non-unglued/unhinged card that shared your first name.
There were two kills overnight, which means that one was likely a vig shot. I don't know what to make of the fact that Wheat claimed vig and wasn't killed (as one would think the scum would go after an un-counterclaimed PR), and it's hard to speculate without slipping into WIFOM. As it stands, the most straightforward answer is that Wheat's claim was genuine and that he's actually town.
On one hand Teia says Wheat is probably town because of the night action, but she backhandedly throws some distrust his way, saying if he was really a town PR he'd be NK'd by now. But not so outright as to earn any attention, she tries to subtly hint at it to get other people wondering and maybe even start a wagon.
I don't agree with Void's read. I see Teia's thought process being 'this is suspicious but leads into madness; the simple answer is Wheat is town'. Saying that is casting suspicion on Wheat is stretching; Wheat had plenty of suspicion based on his Day 1 play. There is something more here that I am not going to go into, as I'd like to see someone else pick up on it, but it strikes me as a point to Teia's towniness.
And I'd appreciate it if you read what I wrote, despite any mistakes of tone I may have made from adrenalin caused by the argument. Everything I've intended to say is there if you'll just read it.
I'm trying to break this down but there is a lot of talking past eachother & disingenuous language, & I've been at it for two hours already. Feels like losing the forest for the trees, so I am going to leave off for the moment. I would like Teia to address your 450 post, as well.
Appeal to ridicule. Laughing at my case doesn't strengthen yours, nor does it weaken mine.
You think your obvious nitpicking of which parts of my post you respond to will help you defend yourself?
I'd rather this not get mired in minutiae. It's a problem that faces any argument that goes on for long enough. I'm picking the parts of your posts that best illustrate your overall points, rather than going after each and every tiny thing you say. It's too easy to lose focus otherwise.
So you edit out the part of my statement where I give hard reasons why I believe your meta hasn't changed this much. Hope no one notices :afoot:!
You stated that you advised Prophylaxis to watch me and brought up points I was scum that you haven't elaborated on here. You think my town game is necessarily marked by over-aggressiveness and paranoia. You think that I'm not aware of the causes of my behaviour. These are not hard reasons. They're inferences and speculation. Let's leave meta arguments for when I have an established town meta rather than a single trainwreck as far as completed town games go.
I gave examples of scumtells that are universal in my post about you.
I'm seeing a lot of emphasis placed on being on the hans wagon, my FOSing people, and my day 2 read on Wheat. None of those are particularly strong tells, and they're only "universal" and immediately damning because you seem intent on indicting me with whatever arguments you can make fit your seemingly predetermined conclusion.
So no, there's really no reason to believe Jay should be aware of these concepts. (Not that either of them are even strong scum-tells.)
They're a starting point. Then the whole thing with you and Void going after me hit and that fell by the wayside.
I never said the fact that I disagree is what makes it illogical it just is (thanks for putting words in my mouth btw, more scummy behavior makes this all the easier). Tell me why you think Wheat was a logical choice for a night kill.
You gave no reasons for why you thought my argument was illogical. You simply stated it along with your disagreement. I'm not going to go into WIFOM about this subject any more than I already have, though, because there aren't enough facts to derive solid conclusions. Wheat claimed vig, wasn't counterclaimed, and survived the night. Those are the facts. Do with them what you will. Personally, I don't think my aside mitigates the evidence in favour of Wheat being town, and it definitely isn't cause for suspicion.
Hm, lets repeat what we said here: I said you used a scum tactic to make Wheat look bad while acting as if you thought he's town.
What I did was establish that something stuck out at me, but wasn't enough to change my overall read on him. Acknowledging opposing viewpoints and evidence to the contrary is simply intellectual honesty. It's not "waffling" given that I'm confident in the conclusion that he's town. You're the one ascribing waffling and being non-committal to my post, when neither trait is actually present. That's what makes it a strawman—you're asking me to defend actions I'm not taking.
I love how you constantly ignore my point and dry-hump this part of the conversation. I know that's a possible scum tell. I also know that void is capable of doing it as town. I also know that I'm not suspicious of the fact that void finds you scummy. This all adds up to not worrying about void's bad arguments at this time. Understand yet?
You're free to disagree with me. What I take exception to is the attempt to frame my argument as something it's not, in this case stating that I'm not finding scum motivation behind Void's actions.
Also you never did answer my question of how you feel fit to argue something you don't want to read in detail and don't fully understand.
You think your obvious nitpicking of which parts of my post you respond to will help you defend yourself?
I'd rather this not get mired in minutiae. It's a problem that faces any argument that goes on for long enough. I'm picking the parts of your posts that best illustrate your overall points, rather than going after each and every tiny thing you say. It's too easy to lose focus otherwise.
(my emphasis)
If its a problem that comes from having a long argument, why did you start doing it immediately?
And you aren't ignoring minutia, you're ignoring me pointing out your scummy actions.
You stated that you advised Prophylaxis to watch me and brought up points I was scum that you haven't elaborated on here. You think my town game is necessarily marked by over-aggressiveness and paranoia. You think that I'm not aware of the causes of my behaviour. These are not hard reasons. They're inferences and speculation. Let's leave meta arguments for when I have an established town meta rather than a single trainwreck as far as completed town games go.
Fine I'll stop talking about your meta that my case isn't even built on.
Your meta that you've been defending as a strawman to my case. Which is something I pointed out in my last post, but you've cut out of the quote and just repeated to strawman. => SCUM
I gave examples of scumtells that are universal in my post about you.
I'm seeing a lot of emphasis placed on being on the hans wagon, my FOSing people, and my day 2 read on Wheat. None of those are particularly strong tells, and they're only "universal" and immediately damning because you seem intent on indicting me with whatever arguments you can make fit your seemingly predetermined conclusion.
Here's an idea: Actually respond to my points in that post rather than doing a poor job of rehashing them, and then defending yourself against the incorrect version of my case you made up.
There was little emphasis to you being on the hans wagon, or the fact that you FOS'd people. It was all about the way you did these things, not simply because you did them.
I never said the fact that I disagree is what makes it illogical it just is (thanks for putting words in my mouth btw, more scummy behavior makes this all the easier). Tell me why you think Wheat was a logical choice for a night kill.
You gave no reasons for why you thought my argument was illogical. You simply stated it along with your disagreement.
Right, I gave no reason yet you felt justified assuming I had none. How is that a town mindset?
I'm not going to go into WIFOM about this subject any more than I already have, though, because there aren't enough facts to derive solid conclusions. Wheat claimed vig, wasn't counterclaimed, and survived the night. Those are the facts. Do with them what you will. Personally, I don't think my aside mitigates the evidence in favour of Wheat being town, and it definitely isn't cause for suspicion.
You're forgetting/ignoring the fact that Wheat claimed 1-shot vig and made it extremely clear that he was planning to use his single shot on Iso, who was town. So the scum knew Wheat was very likely to help them with his ability and then turn himself into almost a vanilla. Plus wheat was considered the most scummy player yesterDay, meaning the scum probably left him alive hoping they could drive another mislynch on to him. Which is what I'm accusing you of attempting with your backhanded remark about how he should have been nk'd.
Hm, lets repeat what we said here: I said you used a scum tactic to make Wheat look bad while acting as if you thought he's town.
What I did was establish that something stuck out at me, but wasn't enough to change my overall read on him. Acknowledging opposing viewpoints and evidence to the contrary is simply intellectual honesty. It's not "waffling" given that I'm confident in the conclusion that he's town. You're the one ascribing waffling and being non-committal to my post, when neither trait is actually present. That's what makes it a strawman—you're asking me to defend actions I'm not taking.
Fine, you claim its a null tell, I claim its a scum tell. We're not going to say anything new at this point and there's enough info out there for the other players to make up their minds for themselves. I'll let it drop.
I love how you constantly ignore my point and dry-hump this part of the conversation. I know that's a possible scum tell. I also know that void is capable of doing it as town. I also know that I'm not suspicious of the fact that void finds you scummy. This all adds up to not worrying about void's bad arguments at this time. Understand yet?
You're free to disagree with me. What I take exception to is the attempt to frame my argument as something it's not, in this case stating that I'm not finding scum motivation behind Void's actions.
I'm not saying you're scummy for this. I'm saying your case on Void (along with GM's and rian's) isn't as good as you think it is because it fits right into Void's town meta. For other people the case could be indicative of alignment. For Void, it isn't.
So it's a clear tactic that whoever the scum are, they're trying to obfuscate the real issues by focusing on semantic mistakes rather than much that's legitimate. I'll take a closer look at toDay soon, but I think the above vote count speaks for itself. I find it very odd that 3 of the remaining 5 individuals who helped train Hans have leapt on Void. All things equal, I think we're seeing at least one (if not more) of our scummies right here.
When I get a better read of toDay, I'll be back with a vote (probably tomorrow). Wheat_Grinder? Your thoughts right now would be appreciated, because not only did skip the Hans train, but you've proven yourself to be my strongest Townie. Kaburi, I'd like to hear your thoughts, too, as you are my second strongest town read.
Right now, Void. The more I reread his arguments against Teia, the scummier he looks to me. I thought I was just put off by his posting style, but the more I've sat back and watched the two of them argue, the more I'm convinced that it's a legitimate scum read. The way he's getting so pedantic with his case, the way he's blatantly stretching his interpretations of her words...yes, I believe Void is scum.
THIS IS ME HAVING A CHANGE IN MY OPINION BASED ON NEW EVIDENCE, VOID. THIS IS ALSO ME FORMALLY ACCUSING YOU OF BEING SCUM.
(Again, felt like I needed to shout that so as to avoid being called out for semantics.)
I don't know about KK right now. I thought he was town earlier. He's picked up on Void's wagon against Teia and pushed it pretty damned hard. He wants to come across as legitimately thinking Teia's scum, but it seems disingenuous to me. I need to read his posts in that argument more in depth, and I need to look back as his actions yesterDay to narrow my read down. I'd put him neutral for now, but he's looking scummier with every post.
BV is an interesting case. I had a weak scum read on him yesterDay, because I was reminded of his play at the end of MM7. I get that he's v/la right now, but I still see shades of his lurktastic scum game. He's on my short list, but I really haven't seen enough to nail that read down.
Those are my main scum reads right now: Void is the main scum read I have, with suspicions of KK and BV.
I would vote Void right now, but he's already at L-2 and I don't want to hand him the knife.
So Void, maybe you're misinterpreting what I said in the first bit. I understand that you think Teia is scummy, or at least you are trying to convince us that she is. The "mistaken" quote was Teia saying she didn't think Iso was scummy any more. You seized on that and tried to show that she did still think he was scummy with later quotes, but that looked like a misinterpretation to me. For example, you said asking Iso about roleblockers = Teia thinks Iso is scummy, but I don't get that. Same with the comment where Teia said to look at hans's scum reads if he flipped scum - you tried to claim that meant she was saying "don't look at those players if he flips town," but that's blatantly misleading.
Second bit from Void - I did comment on your case, what are you talking about? KK has just waffled today, being content to say "oh good case" or "hey kaburi you did a scummy thing" but not to throw votes or really commit to any case.
Arcadic only really left two reads. Sure, he was wrong about hans, but we now know he had no ulterior motive in saying "Jay is town," I thought that was worth commenting on. But apparently only you can determine truth from dead townies:
As for KK, saying that you suspected BV earlier doesn't mean you aren't scum, you could just be staking out your mislynches early. To clarify about kaburi, I agree with his read of Void but I don't like how timid his play is. It's pretty consistent with his town play in MM7, but he needs to commit or we aren't going to get anywhere. Sometimes it is legit to waffle
KK: Who are the scummy people that refuse to believe Jay is town (quotes plz), and why do you know he is town? Also, what person gained town points from hans's lynch?
Well You farm evidence toward his townie-ness, as if we need any more. This is less damning than these next two quotes, but still counts as not reading Jay as obvtown.
Teia actually goes after him at the beginning of day 2. Especially bad because apparently he's the only person she feels the need to scumhunt at all toDay. She's got no idea who to drive a wagon on. Talking about how strong someone's wagon is isn't distancing. The closest thing is where he says hans's arguments just make him look worse, which was both true and not even calling him scummy. The point being, BV sees Jay as scummy for lame reasoning at this time, when the only town points jay hadn't gotten yet were from hammering hans.
As for how we know he's town, just off the top of my head there was his willingness to hammer hans, which though later revealed was because he had an ability he thought would protect him, revealing that role information is not something I'd expect any noobscum to do. You'll note that any scum would not know for sure hans was lying, and certainly noobscum couldn't figure it out alone. Granted, this particular point could still make him scum with daychat, but I thought he was town long before this. Most of it will be hard to explain as it involves a fair amount of reading into tone, +not reaching for reasons to find like the BV one linked above and Teia saying that flavorgaming by a noob is a scumtell while handwaving another of Jay's town tells. That answers the question of who gained town points with hans's lynch as well.
Please quote the post where you commented on my case.
GM, if you mean this little portion here, then I'm expecting a lot more from you.
Can someone explain to me in some more detail why everyone is up on GM? Because I was confused from Day One why people were launching on him, it never really made sense to me.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
KK, I said this:
Where did I accuse you of trying to "avoid scrutiny?" My argument against you is that you have pushed to call people scummy but failed to follow up with votes. I can pretty much excuse Day 1 since you were voting hans for a while, and he had pretty much dug his own hole by the time you jumped off to keep him at L-2. But what's happened Day 2? You gave us the Cliffs Notes for your BV case, but didn't vote him then because you had to wait for Void's approval? If you liked his Teia case so much, why didn't you vote her?
So your scumteam is me, Teia, and BV? Can you put the points against Teia in your own words?
I did a quick skim back and found some interesting stuff that I'll write up when I have the time.
Void - uh, ok...I made my main points, but if you require a detailed post breakdown I guess I can try to do that soon.
It's not the length of the post, GM. It's how it sounds when you are reading it. It came across as you not believing what you were typing. It sounded very forced.
Here are the main points of the case:
1) Teia was calling Wheaties Scum for the majority of Day 1, if not, then all of Day 1.
2) After Wheaties claimed Teia makes a non-committal response to Wheaties claim.
3) Before Night falls Teia makes a post of "If hansanator is Scum, then scrutinize Wheaties/Void/2 other." But leaves out “If hansanator flips Town.” Since that information wasn’t given I took the initiative and took what it implied if hansanator flipped Town. Because there is no reason that hansanator flipping Scum would give information, but hansanator flipping Town wouldn’t give information.
4) Wheaties Role Ability has been proved by Night Actions lending him a good amount of Town Credit.
5) Teia comes out the gate Day 2 calling Wheaties Town despite everything about her play from yesterDay.
It's a complete behavioral change from Day 1. Teia is likely to be Scum this game. Now, GM, why are you coming in and defending Teia as you are? I can only think of one thing. You and Teia are Scumbuddies.
I also felt that Wheat was on the scummy side yesterday because of the points Iso brought up about how he was inconsistent in using meta arguments for people whose metas he did not know (myself and Teia). But he claimed he was a vig and that he was going to shoot Iso, then Night 1 came, Iso died and there was another night kill, and Wheat said he vigged Iso. As you said, this is new information that gives us reason to believe Wheat is town. Teia has revised her opinion of Wheat, and I have as well.
I am defending Teia here because her stance on Wheat makes sense and your attempt to make that look scummy does not. I literally have no idea why the points covered in your last post would lead to the conclusion that Teia is scummy.
Let me get this straight, GM.
You're saying that Teia's behavior from yesterDay means little to nothing to you and for that you're reading Teia as Town.
But in Mafia we are taught to use Behavior Analysis to find scum. Yet you are looking at the behavior from Teia and excepting that a Townie would act this way. And since we are on the subject of Behavior Analysis, would you please explain how Teia's behavior from yesterDay and the start of toDay means that Teia is Town. Greatly apperciated, Scum.
I hadn't realized your behavior from yesterDay that well, but, then again, you weren't posting as much as Teia was yesterDay. But since you want to put it out there, yes, you and Teia acted in similar ways yesterDay. And now you are coming in to defend Teia for this reason. If you flip scum, which I suspect you will at this point, then I'm near certain that Teia will flip Scum as well.
Ria has only a small amount of posts, which is a bit concerning. However, [URL="http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=10505317&postcount=241"]Post 241[/URL] especially makes me think Ria is town. I'd need someone with more experience to comment, but unvoting to avoid a quick hammer doesn't seem like something scum would do, unless they are absolutely brilliant.
But stuff like [URL="http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=10505381&postcount=250"]this[/URL] seems like he's trying to look active without ever actually saying very much this game. But unless someone thinks 241 is a subtle play for town points, I'm thinking he's town.
Kaburi is almost in the same boat, both have less than 30 posts apiece. However, Kaburi has the excuse of having some extreme stresses the last few weeks from work, so I think his lack of posting is from that rather than an attempt to avoid making waves. [URL="http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=10513477&postcount=316"]This[/URL] is a pretty big town point to me, as there was no need for him to draw attention to himself. However, he does have a couple URL="http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=10506737#post10506737"]active lurking[/URL] posts of his own. Overall, I get a town read from Kaburi as well, but both Ria and Kaburi are only relegated to low priority rather than 'town'.
I don't have time today, but I'm going to scrutinize Teia and GM more soon, although I think they're a high priority for investigation, I'm not convinced either is scum, they are just more only likely scum candidates that anyone else as far as I'm aware right now.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
Also, in the above post I meant to say 'besides me' when talking about the last living voters for Hans.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
Jay, you can repost (edit by way of double post, EBWODP) to correct the link if you want, but I think there's enough there that we can figure it out.
I am not chaining lynches. I said that Teia was a near certainty for me. That does not mean that I am chaining lynches. That means that I will be looking at Teia as more likely Scum come Tomorrow, should you flip Scum. You don't excatly seem to be arguing against that though. You've been defending Teia.
Teia was in the process of changing her read on Wheaties during Day 1.
I’ve already said why this is criteria for Teia and you to be Scum. It’s called Behavioral Analysis. It’s what everyone, in this Mafia subforum, is taught to catch Scum. Some pick it up better than others. You are completely ignoring Teia’s behavior from yesterDay and saying that Teia calling Wheaties Town toDay is perfectly normal when it is not. Normal Town behavior would consist of looking at Wheaties posts and trying to find the Town mindset/behavior for Day 1. Teia simply changed her opinion because of a claim and supportive evidence that Wheaties is speaking the truth which in turn would make Wheaties a strong Town read.
Do you see the differences here? Once you do you will realize why I believe Teia to be Scum. Of course, you’re in that boat now, as well, except that you jumped in to defend Teia and in the process twisted a thing or two.
Something came to while I was reading this post about how GM is responding. I’m not sure how much weight this holds since I have not seen it used before. But, normally when someone is defending from and case and the other someone is calling the defender Scum you would see a “No, I’m Town” kind of bit in a post. Looking below I posted all of GM’s posts since he was voted by KK and I and I do not see him stating anything like that.
I like how you're lecturing me like I don't know how to play Mafia, and then making sly aside comments like "look, he has never said he's town!" Any player with half a brain understands that they have to prove they are town through actions, not by simply stating that they are town.
The way you are grasping at straws and slinging mud just looks like scum desperate to start a wagon.
My words were "apparently I was mistaken" (emphasis added), implying far less certainty than you're ascribing to me. You're deliberately manipulating the facts to fit a desired conclusion rather than deriving your conclusion from the facts.
This is OMGUS, plain and simple. GM goes after you, and you respond by leaping at him.
Wasn't a lack of doubt supposed to imply scumminess according to you?
"Obvious" is a tricky thing, especially when there's legitimate cause to doubt Jay's townieness. He engages in WIFOM, he flavour-games, he implies he immediately knew hans was a mislynch... it's not nearly as cut and dry as you think.
Jay was the only one of my strong scum reads at the end of day 1 not to be cleared in some fashion (hans flipping town, Wheat's claim checking out). Why wouldn't I go after him while I finish rereading the game?
He's stated multiple times that he's played Werewolf and other similar games, and has claimed that his major stumbling point is making the transition to online play. With his experience, there's no guarantee he's as naive as you're painting him.
This, right here, is a good illustration of the faults in your case. Your approach to all this is extremely rigid—if something isn't one way, then it must be another. I didn't clearly communicate the town outcome, so in your mind I must have meant what you thought I meant (i.e. that those players shouldn't be scrutinized). Then you take such unfounded premises and centre your case around them. It looks good on paper, but it's all just sophistry in the end. It's very misleading, and it's not town behaviour.
Wheat claimed vig. There were two kills overnight. Then Wheat claimed he shot Iso. There were no counterclaims. Are you suggesting that I should somehow cling to a scum read?
There are any number of possibilities. We could be buddies, or I could be town and him scum with the intent of buddying up to me, or we could both be town and he simply sees the problems with your argument. Here, you imply you aren't even considering other possibilities, and you're immediately leaping to the conclusion that we're scum.
To recap:
- Your arguments place the conclusion above the evidence.
- You manipulate evidence to support a desired conclusion.
- You engage in OMGUS, leaping at someone for coming after you while claiming certainty of their alignment.
- Your arguments are disingenuous and sophistic, relying heavily on supposition and leaping to conclusions.
- You imply you don't consider the full range of possibilities when proposing theories.
This isn't town behaviour, but individually I could chalk those elements up to bad play. In aggregate, however, they suggest that your goal is justification, not investigation. Given each faction's goals (town seeking to identify scum, and scum seeking to drive mislynches), the reasonable conclusion is that you're scum.
Vote Void
Void even types out "apparently I was mistaken" twice in this post, & then tries to make a case of Teia feeling out Iso past that statement. That right there shows she wasn't solid in her read, & I don't see how anyone in their right mind expects another player (much less one with a handful of completed games) to read Iso with confidence anyway.
Void is dancing around trying to shoehorn Teia's posts into what he wants to see.
Vote: Void
(And this time I actually mean it)
I clearly said I was deciding which one I want to lynch. That's both a fair question to be asking and not the language someone trying to push cases without committing uses.
As for liking Void's case on Teia, I more liked it that he found some evidence because all I had before that was meta.
Well, none of the cases are robust enough that I'm calling scumteam right now, but you are my top suspects. I'll put the points against Teia in a separate post to keep this from getting into wall territory.
OMGUS requires that I vote someone back without reason. It would be beneficial to you to read up on the terminology for our subforum.
I will respond to you more later today when I have time. Same goes for GM.
And you have no opinion on the counterarguments?
Anyway, Town Void has never been known for strong cases or perfect logic. See the latest clan contest mafia that just ended for an example. My first reading of the counter-arguments told me void's accused of pulling a relationship out of no where and anally sticking to it like fact and participating in confirmation bias. Both of these are firmly within Void's town meta.
And while he's going after the people I find scummy, I find little reason to delve into text walls. Especially when his detractors are arguing he's bad at arguing rather than actually finding scum motivation behind his arguments.
Reading is tech.
Why do you think reposting you accusing him of being bad at arguing = therefore scum is going to change that?
Reading is tech indeed.
Tell me how that's not finding scum motivation behind his behaviour. I make similar arguments elsewhere in my quoted post, but I quoted the tl;dr to make it easier. All the same, though, your argument reads like you're just trying to be dismissive for the sake of being dismissive, rather than dismissing an argument on actual merits (or demerits as the case may be).
Examples: She jumps onto my wagon with horrible reasoning, following Wheat's suspicion and my exchange with Iso where I didn't answer his question. I think we can agree I look vulnerable at this time.
But I go on to argue her off successfully and then she wagon hops to the flailing hans which is to say, joins me on hans's wagon.
Without ever removing me as a scumspect, she gets on the same wagon I've been pushing. (She also slowly drops my counter-arguments that she can't answer, but doesn't admit she's wrong about anything, she just stops talking about it and runs to another wagon.) This is another popular wagon, she'd have been the 4th player voting him except that Jay had just moved his vote to Iso.
She then FOS's Iso after Jay and BV vote him, She seems to pull the FOS out of nowhere here (I don't see her points as all that worthy of Iso voting at least) and she basically took the thoughts from BV, yet she doesn't join in the discussion when Iso argues against this same points from one of BV's posts. She sits back and then FOS's Wheat for using an exaggeration (100% scum), semantics of chart using/not using, because scum sometimes can be low-hanging fruit (<- strawmanning the point, which was about going after exclusively easy targets), and for trusting a source that Wheat couldn't explain because it referenced an on-going game (not a bad reason to be distrustful, but not exactly a scummy thing either, and not worth suspecting Wheat IMO. Plus she's just jumping on a piece of an argument Iso was already making.) Basically: she uses terrible reasoning to show interest yet another wagon, except without a vote because hans has been flailing hard all Day.
And here's the part of Void's case that I liked. On one hand Teia says Wheat is probably town because of the night action, but she backhandedly throws some distrust his way, saying if he was really a town PR he'd be NK'd by now. But not so outright as to earn any attention, she tries to subtly hint at it to get other people wondering and maybe even start a wagon.
With all this, I'm happy leaving GM for later, my Teia case is a lot stronger than I thought. unvote, vote Teia Rabishu
And gee Teia, turns out I am dismissive of a case built on pointing out someone's general meta rather than scumminess. Especially when the case builder is lying scum. Who'd have thought it?
As opposed to? There's no real town meta to compare my scum meta to. You're drawing a conclusion from blatantly incomplete data points.
Void doesn't count?
You're doing the same thing as Void here and implying that, when presenting a case, only evidence in favour of the conclusion should be presented. Presenting evidence for and against a specific conclusion isn't scummy. It's basic persuasive writing, because you're acknowledging the points against your case and showing that they don't change the final conclusion.
Also the whole "get other people wondering maybe even start a wagon" thing is unfounded conjecture bordering on WIFOM.
You're also dismissing my request to back up your claim of me not finding scum motivation behind Void's actions despite me showing that my vote was based on his aggregate play showing a scum mindset. You're also displaying an aggressive "I've made up my mind, don't confuse me with the facts" mentality behind your case on me. Why do you feel the need to press me so strongly and dismiss my counterarguments out of hand, as if to imply that you think your case is beyond reproach? You did the same thing when you talked about Jay being "obvtown," and it stuck out just as much there as it does here.
I was in your only town game. I was the person on Clan Flamingo that showed Prophy he needed to watch you and brought up points why you were scum. Unlike Iso, I don't find it likely that you've suddenly made your town meta match your scum meta. Your town play from that single game had a lot of notable facets, but they all stemmed from over-aggressiveness and paranoia. You can change the symptoms but its a lot harder to change the causes. Especially since, after only one game, you're unlikely to even be aware of them. The word consistently doesn't envelop something brand new. Nice job ignoring my point about how your reasons for pushing Jay are things he couldn't have experience with from RL play.
And then you blatantly ignore all the rest of my post until the final point. Don't have a defense, Teia?
lol, yes you added a backhanded comment out of a desire for completeness when you've been ignoring people talking about you unless they demand you respond all game long.
No telling us your opinion on Wheat does not require you to mix the message. Throwing doubt his way was not only scummy, but your point against him was entirely illogical.
Really? Then tell me why a townie would waffle on telling us that Wheat is probably town in such a non-committal way.
I literally said you were arguing that void's argument was bad rather than void was scummy, and you just keep re-quoting the point where you said void's bad arguing makes him scummy. I'm telling you that town void is bad at arguing, so you're going to need more than that to prove he's scum, especially when he's arguing on the right side of the issue.
I've given valid reasons for dismissing your counter arguments, while you simply ignore large pieces of my case rather than even attempting to dismiss them.
And I later provided reasoning for Jay's obvtown when asked, so I don't know how you benefit from bringing it up here like I haven't. If you disagree with my points on Jay, you're supposed to bring them up directly not pretend they don't exist
It all boils down to the points I mentioned: Groundless conjecture, selective information processing, and willful ignorance of anything contrary to your case.
That was my second game. This is my fifth. You think that I'll play this game like I did that trainwreck of a town game? You think I haven't improved my town play at all since then?
WIFOM doesn't apply to real life play? Flavour-gaming doesn't apply to real life play? The names might be different, but the concepts are absolutely applicable to any game involving persuasion.
That you disagree with the logic does not make it illogical.
I was, and am, committed to my town read on What as a result of his claim checking out without a counterclaim. Your argument here is a strawman.
I'm not sure how this is so difficult to follow. Scum want to drive mislynches, so their arguments are designed to indict townies with sophistry. That's exactly what Void's doing, therefore it's reasonable to conclude that he's scum as a result of his overly scummy actions.
I'm more interested by the absolute certainty you're peppering your arguments with. Again, it's the same thing Void's doing: You're so absolutely convinced of your conclusion that you won't entertain thoughts to the contrary. That's not townie behaviour, because Mafia's ultimately a game about the informed minority (scum) versus the uninformed majority (town). Town, by definition, has less information available than scum, and therefore absolute certainty is detrimental. Healthy skepticism is a good thing for town. Considering opposing evidence and theories is necessary to ensure that you're not missing anything. Scum, however, knows everyone's alignment for certain, so they can act safely in that knowledge. What I'm seeing from you (and Void) is a lack of skepticism, a lack of consideration for opposing viewpoints. That behaviour is notably scummy.
Void/KK/Jay scumteam? It'd make sense given how scummy Void and KK are acting, and how KK is defending Jay so speciously (compare GM defending me not because I'm "obvtown" but because of Void's scumminess).
Your words: "And gee Teia, turns out I am dismissive of a case built on pointing out someone's general meta rather than scumminess. Especially when the case builder is lying scum."
If you want to get nitpicky, it's valid (the conclusion follows from the premises), but unsound (the premises are false). At least, assuming that dismissing someone's case out of hand follows from someone being scum, which is absurd because such information can still be useful. Regardless of that, though, you even said that you "find little reason to delve into text walls" and that you don't understand the counterarguments completely. Recent posting has not shown any deeper understanding of the counterarguments presented, so why do you feel fit to argue something of which you keep willfully ignorant?
You think your obvious nitpicking of which parts of my post you respond to will help you defend yourself? You ignored a huge chunk of evidence I gathered on your scuminess only to defend against my transitional statements. And you haven't even done a good job of that.
So you edit out the part of my statement where I give hard reasons why I believe your meta hasn't changed this much. Hope no one notices :afoot:!
Not to mention this whole "You don't know my meta!" is a strawman. I'm not asking people to lynch you because I know your meta. I gave examples of scumtells that are universal in my post about you. Examples that you skipped over in favor of grasping at strawmen like this.
WIFOM doesn't come up in RL play often because play groups are rarely debating for long periods of time. Plus the WIFOM you are talking about doesn't seem to have any underlying scum motivation that anyone has pointed to. And flavor gaming doesn't show up in RL play because most RL groups don't bother with changing flavor or even set ups. So no, there's really no reason to believe Jay should be aware of these concepts. (Not that either of them are even strong scum-tells.) I never said the fact that I disagree is what makes it illogical it just is (thanks for putting words in my mouth btw, more scummy behavior makes this all the easier). Tell me why you think Wheat was a logical choice for a night kill.
Hm, lets repeat what we said here: I said you used a scum tactic to make Wheat look bad while acting as if you thought he's town. You said I was bordering on WIFOM, which implies you believe that there are legitimate explanations for what you said no matter the alignment. I asked you what town motivation there was for the action. You proceed to handwave the question as strawmanning. I think we can all see who is strawmanning and dodging questions here.
I love how you constantly ignore my point and dry-hump this part of the conversation. I know that's a possible scum tell. I also know that void is capable of doing it as town. I also know that I'm not suspicious of the fact that void finds you scummy. This all adds up to not worrying about void's bad arguments at this time. Understand yet?
You haven't given me anything to think about on the contrary since I laid the case on you. You've ignored facts I've brought up against you in favor of handwaving and strawmanning the non-essential parts of my posts. You need to act like a townie for me to even consider taking your case seriously.
In case you haven't noticed, I've only been mildly suspicious of you until we hit this exchange. Your constant scumminess in response to my case on you is what brought on this certainty. The fact that you've tipped your hand with this awful defense doesn't suddenly make me scummy because I've cottoned on.
Enjoy being lynched.
Void (3): Gerrard's Mom, Teia Rabishu, rianalnn
Gerrard's Mom (1): Void
Teia Rabishu (1): KoolKoal
With 9 alive, it's 5 to lynch!
& check your tone, guy. This isn't MM6.
Can you boil down Void's case in your own words please?
Every point of mine against her is a legitimate scumtell; no matter who it came from I'd say it was scummy.
What can I clarify?
I would appreciate it if you would set it out straightfowardly, without all the LOLOLOL antagonism & quote wall.
Oh, for some reason I never read the posts you quoted with the rest of your post :confused:. I don't know how I made such a stupid mistake but the post makes sense now.
I add your vote of Void to the list of people voting Void because he's bad at arguing his point rather than for reasons he's scum. Like I said before: He makes bad logical leaps when making cases as town too, and while he's pointed at my top scumspect, I'm not inclined to find him scummy for what is a null tell with him.
And I'd appreciate it if you read what I wrote, despite any mistakes of tone I may have made from adrenalin caused by the argument. Everything I've intended to say is there if you'll just read it.
Appeal to ridicule. Laughing at my case doesn't strengthen yours, nor does it weaken mine.
I'd rather this not get mired in minutiae. It's a problem that faces any argument that goes on for long enough. I'm picking the parts of your posts that best illustrate your overall points, rather than going after each and every tiny thing you say. It's too easy to lose focus otherwise.
You stated that you advised Prophylaxis to watch me and brought up points I was scum that you haven't elaborated on here. You think my town game is necessarily marked by over-aggressiveness and paranoia. You think that I'm not aware of the causes of my behaviour. These are not hard reasons. They're inferences and speculation. Let's leave meta arguments for when I have an established town meta rather than a single trainwreck as far as completed town games go.
I'm seeing a lot of emphasis placed on being on the hans wagon, my FOSing people, and my day 2 read on Wheat. None of those are particularly strong tells, and they're only "universal" and immediately damning because you seem intent on indicting me with whatever arguments you can make fit your seemingly predetermined conclusion.
They're a starting point. Then the whole thing with you and Void going after me hit and that fell by the wayside.
You gave no reasons for why you thought my argument was illogical. You simply stated it along with your disagreement. I'm not going to go into WIFOM about this subject any more than I already have, though, because there aren't enough facts to derive solid conclusions. Wheat claimed vig, wasn't counterclaimed, and survived the night. Those are the facts. Do with them what you will. Personally, I don't think my aside mitigates the evidence in favour of Wheat being town, and it definitely isn't cause for suspicion.
What I did was establish that something stuck out at me, but wasn't enough to change my overall read on him. Acknowledging opposing viewpoints and evidence to the contrary is simply intellectual honesty. It's not "waffling" given that I'm confident in the conclusion that he's town. You're the one ascribing waffling and being non-committal to my post, when neither trait is actually present. That's what makes it a strawman—you're asking me to defend actions I'm not taking.
You're free to disagree with me. What I take exception to is the attempt to frame my argument as something it's not, in this case stating that I'm not finding scum motivation behind Void's actions.
Also you never did answer my question of how you feel fit to argue something you don't want to read in detail and don't fully understand.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Void is at L-2. Shouldn't there be some sort of a claim from him now?
@_kaburi_ on Twitter
Special thanks to Serrot_29 for Catbug'mrakul!
(my emphasis)
If its a problem that comes from having a long argument, why did you start doing it immediately?
And you aren't ignoring minutia, you're ignoring me pointing out your scummy actions.
Fine I'll stop talking about your meta that my case isn't even built on.
Your meta that you've been defending as a strawman to my case. Which is something I pointed out in my last post, but you've cut out of the quote and just repeated to strawman. => SCUM
Here's an idea: Actually respond to my points in that post rather than doing a poor job of rehashing them, and then defending yourself against the incorrect version of my case you made up.
There was little emphasis to you being on the hans wagon, or the fact that you FOS'd people. It was all about the way you did these things, not simply because you did them.
Admitting that your reasons for scumhunting Jay are weak, and he was your only scumspect before you got to omgus Void and I.
Right, I gave no reason yet you felt justified assuming I had none. How is that a town mindset?
You're forgetting/ignoring the fact that Wheat claimed 1-shot vig and made it extremely clear that he was planning to use his single shot on Iso, who was town. So the scum knew Wheat was very likely to help them with his ability and then turn himself into almost a vanilla. Plus wheat was considered the most scummy player yesterDay, meaning the scum probably left him alive hoping they could drive another mislynch on to him. Which is what I'm accusing you of attempting with your backhanded remark about how he should have been nk'd.
Fine, you claim its a null tell, I claim its a scum tell. We're not going to say anything new at this point and there's enough info out there for the other players to make up their minds for themselves. I'll let it drop.
I'm not saying you're scummy for this. I'm saying your case on Void (along with GM's and rian's) isn't as good as you think it is because it fits right into Void's town meta. For other people the case could be indicative of alignment. For Void, it isn't.
I felt my previous point of "you're proving his town meta which doesn't make him scum." summed up my answer to this question already.
So it's a clear tactic that whoever the scum are, they're trying to obfuscate the real issues by focusing on semantic mistakes rather than much that's legitimate. I'll take a closer look at toDay soon, but I think the above vote count speaks for itself. I find it very odd that 3 of the remaining 5 individuals who helped train Hans have leapt on Void. All things equal, I think we're seeing at least one (if not more) of our scummies right here.
When I get a better read of toDay, I'll be back with a vote (probably tomorrow). Wheat_Grinder? Your thoughts right now would be appreciated, because not only did skip the Hans train, but you've proven yourself to be my strongest Townie. Kaburi, I'd like to hear your thoughts, too, as you are my second strongest town read.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
Right now, Void. The more I reread his arguments against Teia, the scummier he looks to me. I thought I was just put off by his posting style, but the more I've sat back and watched the two of them argue, the more I'm convinced that it's a legitimate scum read. The way he's getting so pedantic with his case, the way he's blatantly stretching his interpretations of her words...yes, I believe Void is scum.
THIS IS ME HAVING A CHANGE IN MY OPINION BASED ON NEW EVIDENCE, VOID. THIS IS ALSO ME FORMALLY ACCUSING YOU OF BEING SCUM.
(Again, felt like I needed to shout that so as to avoid being called out for semantics.)
I don't know about KK right now. I thought he was town earlier. He's picked up on Void's wagon against Teia and pushed it pretty damned hard. He wants to come across as legitimately thinking Teia's scum, but it seems disingenuous to me. I need to read his posts in that argument more in depth, and I need to look back as his actions yesterDay to narrow my read down. I'd put him neutral for now, but he's looking scummier with every post.
BV is an interesting case. I had a weak scum read on him yesterDay, because I was reminded of his play at the end of MM7. I get that he's v/la right now, but I still see shades of his lurktastic scum game. He's on my short list, but I really haven't seen enough to nail that read down.
Those are my main scum reads right now: Void is the main scum read I have, with suspicions of KK and BV.
I would vote Void right now, but he's already at L-2 and I don't want to hand him the knife.
@_kaburi_ on Twitter
Special thanks to Serrot_29 for Catbug'mrakul!