well rewording OS's statements and removing the dramatization completely changes the analysis of my play. more importantly, being accurate about how i approached the game =/= my approach being scummy.
No it doesn't. It changes claims that OS was attempting to establish as truth
by means of his analysis, but it doesn't change the analysis itself. If he uses correlations and patterns A,B, and C as supporting evidence to reach his conclusion of D, if D is exaggerated (for example it may be a superlative or absolute claim like you "never" did something or you provided NO analysis, or you "always" do something, etc. as opposed to statements that would express trends not absolutes) then I may not agree with the LoA in its entirety because I have an issue with the syllogism as a complete. However, that does not mean that if I understand his original conclusions D as truly being more reasonable at their logical core, I can take that logic and complete the former syllogism with moderated E conclusions which much better fit the logic contain in the analysis of A, B and C.
Basically, it's not the stuff he pointed out that was inaccurate or problematic, but largely his conclusions that were overstretching their logical bounds.
Furthermore, whether or not being accurate about your approach to the game relates directly to accuracy about our "approach to being scum" matters very little. Your "approach to being scum" is something that should be game independent. If we knew your approach to being scum, then none of this discussion would matter; we would simply be comparing your approach in this game to the universal "Omni's approach to scum" understanding and concluding whether or not you were scum. You'd be the most transparent and boring mafia player on the planet if we could do this.
The point is that we analyze your approach to this game and break it down to figure out if it has scummy
intent. You can't just dismiss the important of breaking down someone's approach to a game as being void by pitching a line like "just because you know how I'm approaching this game doesn't mean you know how I would approach it as scum!". The fact of the matter is
we don't have to. You break down someones approach to a game to
figure precisely that out!
very indirect, sidestepping manner? no sir.
i was very precise and there was no sidestepping involved. what were you reading? what OS did was interpret actions of mine as scummy; then piggybanked on those scummy ideas to lead to more scummy actions. i then explained the intentions of my actions moreso repeating why i did what. for example: when i say my questions in the beginning of the game were not scummy but an attempt to the exit the RVS phase it's exactly what i said. so either you AGREE with what i call OS's misinterpretations of my play or you don't.
i am taking on OS's attack head on. i am correcting him and explaining my intentions of my actions. its actually very easy to put a anti-town spin on ANYTHING as well especially when you're doing a PBPA with an end of mine "you are scum" approach.
But there was. I'll show you:
failing to realize that it was an attempt (successful at that) to get out of the RVS.
Here you sidestep his accusation that you asked those questions in a way that was beneficial for you, but not that down. Your response is that "you helped get us out of RVS" with the implication that this is surely universally protown, but that's entirely fallacious. How does a bunch of people answering what I considered (and maybe some others) null-tellish, WIFOM questions a good way to exit RVS? How do I benefit from that, let alone the entire town? You don't explain any of this and just assume your values apply a priori, which is a logical sidestep.
suggesting that a person who's actively trying to get the game starting has contributed nothing. at this point, i've already began getting Zensei to talk and redirected my questioning of Zensei to you (Frozen) which was backed by Tom. actually contributing "little, if anything" = just about half of the cast at this point including OS himself. frozen, do you agree with this statement?
This is your response to OS accusing you of not really scum hunting and then
also not contributing anything. You only choose to tackle the accusation of "doing nothing" by calling into question his definition of what "contributing something is". Of course you contributed something, this is a blatant exaggeration of OS's, however, that's a contested claim that is easy to win. You do nothing to address the previous accusation that "by your own admission" you'd be doing little to no effective scum hunting. You may have proven you've contributed something to the game, but you dodged having to prove that you actually had been effectively scumhunting (or that you didn't admit that).
failing to realize that's near impossible to scumhunt when half the game decides not to talk AND the game is extremely early into Day 1. asking questions to exit RVS and stir up ANY kind of discussion, involving you (Frozen) in the mix about my interaction with Zensei, and putting placeholder votes on inactives to encourage them to start playing the game.
but i guess i could come in mid Day 1 and argue that someone hasn't "done anything" purposely ignoring that almost everyone has done nothing. what Overswarm thinks he finds me guilty of can be applied to a multitude of players however because he's only focused on me he attempts to paint it into a bad light and apply it to me.
again, finding it amusing that someone who hasn't done jackdilly is accusing someone else of also doing jackdilly.
Complete and utter sidestepping in the form of deflection and projection. Blaming the lack of effective scumhunting on the rest of the cast which you juxtapose which you building up your contributions toward getting the game to a point where you can allegedly scum hunt by your standards. Then you go on to build your case on OS tunneling (trying to make it seem like a big deal) by saying "plenty of other people have done what I've been doing but OS is only going after me".
Then you go on to simply pitch a "pot calling the kettle black" line with really no analysis to support the accusation.
See the pattern here? That's what I'm talking about. You just haven't taken on the LoA's head on. You just pick away at them from the sides trying to undermine them but you never actually addressed the core issues.
so you think my point on MetaKirby was weak and/or non-existent? it's pretty clear that MetaKirby's reaction was AtE. the exchange was not empty and i believe helped me to get a much better read on what kind of player MetaKirby is.
dont like that you didnt get much from that
No I did not say your point on MK was weak or non-existent. I said anything I'm getting read-wise from it was weak/non-existent. I agree that what MK had said was pretty AtE. The point is, that doesn't develop my read on him at all. Maybe from YOUR perspective, MK being pushed to AtE from what you had said help YOU figure out what his motives are. My point is, that I read that exchange and I can't figure out if you were trying to be provocative, whether it was intentional or unintentional, etc. That's why I don't get much out of it. You can say you "don't like it" all you want but all that sounds like to me is "I'm scum and I'll just say I don't like things without analysis to make it look like someone did something scummy just be virtue of another player having disdain for it".
i actually find scumarshy to be a lot more quiet and allow things to play themselves out while he coasts his way through the beginning of the game. think: indy play @ Final Fantasy Mafia.
I actually do somewhat agree with you here but I really don't feel like old mediocre meta on marshy will be very applicable in this game considering he's in a hydra AND he's having the time of his life squeezing every ounce of pleasure he can from taking rips at OS in a game setting.
I don't think you have the wrong idea (because based on what I know of marshy's past play I don't think your expectation is poor but I just don't think it'll be a strong gauge of marshy's alignment in this particular setting).
ok. which means he would fit your answer for #2, right?
I guess, but I honestly need to go over chaco more. He's been posting but I just feel like his presence in this game is exceptionally fleeting.
It’s just you. The cyan half did no parroting.
Um…care explaining how it’s lazy/scummy?
Oh, my bad. I misconstrued and barnacled SOOOO many cases.
Post 138 you directly parrot Chaco and he calls you out on it.
Post 143 you barnacle Omni using his principal arguements to join in in calling MK out for alleged AtE both offensively and defensively, as well as pointing out some contradiction. Then you go on to say that "all of those posts contain scumtells" (the ones your were refering to) as an ending statement as if it were a fact you had proven via analysis but in reality all you did was regurgitate abridged versions of old points and just slapped on the label of "scumtell" with no reasoning as to why those behaviors were exactly scumtells.
And that's all the Cyan.
I also find it curious that you are trying to make it seem as if what ClownBot said was irrelevant, as if it shouldn't be considered when judging your player slot, considering some of his posts also fall under the criticisms I originally listed.
Funny, I feel the same way about you. I know for a fact from previous experience that you are not dumb. So, why were you so off about your analysis of me? Intentional misleading imo.
Vote: Frozenflame
So let me get this straight. You say I'm not dumb. Then you say you disagree with my analysis of you. You then jump to the conclusion that I must be wrong and therefore being misleading because you disagree with that analysis
by virtue of that disagreement. You then implicity posit that because you disagree, which makes me "wrong", I am being "dumb" in this game which means I must be scum.
Am I the only one who sees flaws in this LoA? Even without it seeming like OMGUS to top it all off, your reason for voting me is essentially summed up by "frozen is not dumb, I think its dumb to suspect me in the way he did, therefore, he must be trying to mislead people and is scum".
Steller. /sarcasm
MK, do you think I would suggest a method of perhaps confirming town (whether it worked out or not) if I were scum?
LOL classic scum trying to buy credit for doing something that is easily accomplished by any player in this game regardless of faction. Trying to get town credit by acting like scum would refrain from pointing out an obvious potential way to clear people is just a classic attempt at grasping for townies points by trying to own a purely WIFOM scenario in the first place.
Why are just letting MK off the hook because he claimed Patriot, a superb role to provide as a safe claim (would prevent cults or recruiting town masons from trying to recruit him and thus reveal him being a mafioso, or would simply be unconformable if a game had no recruiting roles)? He hasn't done anything to quell my suspicions of him and the OMGUS nature of his attempts as well as just behaving like desperate wriggling scum hasn't exactly tipped him anywhere closer to town on my scumdar.
Can't wait for OS's explanation of his vote and the singling out of me when asking about song claiming, which I wouldn't be surprised to find to consist of anything more than LOL U TRAPPED or something along those lines.
Regardless both him and Omni are both epitomizing close to deadline wagon inflation. Trying to beat life into a desperate wagon by just shoveling on votes with little to no (in this case no) explanation whatsoever just to make the wagon seem like it has more merit (by virtue of popular approval) than it really does.
Let me tell you how fun it is to defend against wagoners who don't provide reasoning and have cases that amount to "frozen is giving me bad vibes/not liking frozen much". I get it you think I'm suspicious, but for as much as you might want me dead it'd be nice if you told me why so that I could ya know, maybe address some of those issues? Because honestly I don't think anyone has really discussed anything other than my activity.
So hopefully while you guys work on that, I'll get to work on developing my reads on the rest of the cast as per Marshy's request seeing as how my 2nd choice for today's play and beyond seems to be of popular interest (which I find ironic, since I've often been accused of being scummy for presenting TOO many potential candidates and now when I actually have a single, confident read everyone wants me to develop alternatives lol).
