Mizzy wrote:You haven't really proved that my logic is crap, just that you don't agree with it, but my real reasons (note the plural) for thinking Fuzz is scum are quite valid.
I've noted the plural, and also noted that all except one relies on bad "reasoning." That said, if you want to leave your original assertions as self-explanatory against my criticisms, far be it from me to say otherwise.
Mizzy wrote:I hate the majority of scumtells because they are often used as excuses to pull bad plays. Scum can cry "scumtell!" just as much as town can and quite frankly, scumtells can point to town just as much as they point to scum. Better to use cold, hard evidence than to just shout "scumtell!" and expect me to agree.
Now, see, this is a great rhetorical sentence to throw out in a Mafia Discussion thread, but this is an actual game. With actual examples and "cold, hard evidence." We're not talking about theory, we're talking about application. I didn't just shout "scumtell!" as you're attempting to rewrite the thread. I pointed out action I found suspicious in and of itself, and then inquired if anyone else noted a parallel to a scumtell. Whether or not the parallel exists (though it does, in my opinion), the action was scummy. The scumtell parallel just sealed the deal for me in marking it up as a scummy action.
Mizzy wrote:I hope this helps, let me know if I missed anything else.
The abundant hypocrisy and frightening rhetoric spewed forth in post 47 as noted in the last half of my post 49.
corp wrote:i dont have to tell every thought i have. like the fact crywolf does make me uncomfortable since he appears to be lurking. but obviously it didnt make me uncomfortable enough to rush to point that out yet.
This rubs me the wrong way. And you're right: no, you don't
have
to tell the town all your thoughts, but sharing your thoughts with the town enables us to use our best and most reliable tool in catching scum: ourselves in open discussion. So, if you're a towns person, I don't know why - outside a highly selective few scenarios - you would want to hold back if you have suspicions against another player. Especially on day one. The last half of the quote I pulled is a horrible basis of reasoning: it didn't bother you that crywolf is apparently actively doing the thing you're accusing/admonishing Mizzy of/for doing, but with no indication that she's actually doing it you're all about getting your panties in a twist that Mizzy might be lying about external circumstances.
(Side note, since I'm writing these points as I read through the thread: post 129 doesn't explain this bad logic, it just sort of reiterates it. Still not buying it.)
(Second side note: in post 129 corporate says, "im not using double standards i have a fos for cry wolf as well" I did a quick skim of the thread and didn't see where this FOS against crywolf was. Did I just miss it or is this a blatant lie?)
simpor wrote:Also when canyon argues against her post...
Crayons. Not canyons.
simpor wrote:Ether:
After voting Mizzy and having some pressure on her, he turns and defends Mizzy
Ether's a lady.
corp wrote:vote ether
Care to throw some reasons around with that vote?