Mini 1397: War is Hell (Game Over)

[kanyeknowsbest]

yah scoobers is town i forget why i had him as town before but it doesnt matter nemore. ur wrong abt matt tho.

why do u think yos is scum scoobs?

[Xalxe]

I approve of drunkscoob's reads

Weirdly enough so do I on most counts.

[Kinetic]

Kinetic is trying to sweep things under the rug by ignoring part of the reason that I found his Xalxe vote strange. Namely,
In post 670, Zdenek wrote:
You indicate that you think that you found scum and that it has something to do with someone intervening on your behalf.

which he doesn't address at all.

So Kinetic, what were you thinking when you wrote that?

You think that is part of the reason you thought the vote on Xalxe was strange? I didn't realize that. As for why I wrote that, I was going over the timing on hurts and stuff, and I couldn't figure out why PV didn't hit me, and then it made sense, someone must have used some sort of ability on me. My initial reaction was that anyone who ws on CD probably couldn't use abilities, like how our rage works, but I wasn't sure. I dropped it because I wasn't sure if Xalxe had hurt before or after that ability though, and I don't know how that ability might work, so for now I was just going to wait and see if I could learn more. Also, I ignored your response because I didn't want to have to explain all that to protect the person who protected me. I didn't realize it was part of your reason for thinking the Xalxe vote was weird. I thought you just thought it was "scummy", and I was ok with looking a little scummy and avoiding it to protect that person, whoever it was.

[scooby]

I approve of drunkscoob's reads

Weirdly enough so do I on most counts.

VUT i SAID YTOU WER SCUM??

JUMMM???¿

[Xalxe]

I approve of drunkscoob's reads

Weirdly enough so do I on most counts.

VUT i SAID YTOU WER SCUM??

JUMMM???¿

And I said most counts, didn't I?

[scooby]

yah scoobers is town i forget why i had him as town before but it doesnt matter nemore. ur wrong abt matt tho.

why do u think yos is scum scoobs?

STRATEGIC POSTING, LURKINESS, EXCESIVE APOLOGIZING, HIS CASES SUCK DICK, NOT NORMLA TOWN YOSA, HE BUSSDE MATTP WHEN HE WAS HATED THEN SWTICHED TO SOME DUDE, ETC

[Kinetic]

Scoob: Charter was replaced by Xalxe. I had an inkling on him before Zd distracted me, what do you feel about Xalxe after he replaces charter?

[scooby]

Mon 26 Nov 2012 02:33:01

Catch up until 158.

Mon 26 Nov 2012 02:34:51

All caught up.

Nothing interesting happened on page 8.

THIS IS ALSO NOT TOWEN YOSAR

[Kinetic]

yah scoobers is town i forget why i had him as town before but it doesnt matter nemore. ur wrong abt matt tho.

why do u think yos is scum scoobs?

STRATEGIC POSTING, LURKINESS, EXCESIVE APOLOGIZING, HIS CASES SUCK DICK, NOT NORMLA TOWN YOSA, HE BUSSDE MATTP WHEN HE WAS HATED THEN SWTICHED TO SOME DUDE, ETC

... I'm getting an oddly reminiscent reminder of Yos in 24 Mafia...

[kanyeknowsbest]

yah scoobers is town i forget why i had him as town before but it doesnt matter nemore. ur wrong abt matt tho.

why do u think yos is scum scoobs?

STRATEGIC POSTING, LURKINESS, EXCESIVE APOLOGIZING, HIS CASES SUCK DICK, NOT NORMLA TOWN YOSA, HE BUSSDE MATTP WHEN HE WAS HATED THEN SWTICHED TO SOME DUDE, ETC

yah strategic posting was the 1 that triggered me b4 i think. ill have 2 read his iso again 4 the others 1s thanks m8.

[Zdenek]

You think that is part of the reason you thought the vote on Xalxe was strange? I didn't realize that.

You realize that you asked me why I thought it was weird, and I answered, and that was part of the reason. My life would be much easier if you would read.

Anyway, I agree with Yos being scummy and I could go that way. MattP could easily be scum, but I have reservations about that.

[Kinetic]

You think that is part of the reason you thought the vote on Xalxe was strange? I didn't realize that.

You realize that you asked me why I thought it was weird, and I answered, and that was part of the reason. My life would be much easier if you would read.

Anyway, I agree with Yos being scummy and I could go that way. MattP could easily be scum, but I have reservations about that.

I do read, I just missed the connotation -.-; It happens.

[Voidedmafia]

I think the reason that my actions don't make sense to you is because you feel, wrongly, that if you think someone is scum that nothing that they do can be correct. That just isn't true. Just because I think you're scum, and I do, doesn't mean that some things you say, or possible setup speculation you make might have value. Hell, your setup speculation may be even MORE valuable BECAUSE I think you're scum. However, I can understand how it wouldn't make sense if somehow you believed everything that a person who you believe is scum does is scummy. You're basically following the traditional "poisoning the well" fallacy, and my actions "don't make sense" to you because I am not.

You either think Zdenek is scum or you don't.

It's funny how you use the word "scum" here instead of scummy, as if you're certain Zdenek is an angel, and then you agree with his reasoning. You evidently think there's a SK or second scum group. Paranoid much?

...Seriously, how DID you get that?

1.) "pv is scum for posting votecounts" *proceeds to post votecounts*, her entire play around the pv wagon, 2.)her sentiments expressed in post 499 and general gutness.

1.) I believe this has already been dealt with before PV got killed.
2.) Um, practically everyone who hurt PV felt the same way. Why is she special?

Which of his points do you agree with?

Really, the points that neither of you haven't conceded yet.

That's not an acceptable answer.

Well, out of the points raised by Kinetic and contested by you, 2 have been conceded--one by you, one by him. For the rest I felt the arguments were going in his direction rather than yours.

I approve of drunkscoob's reads

Oh, he's drunk? that explains how atrocious his spelling is.

Interestingly enough, outside of possibly Zde, I like his townreads.

yah scoobers is town i forget why i had him as town before but it doesnt matter nemore. ur wrong abt matt tho.

why do u think yos is scum scoobs?

STRATEGIC POSTING, LURKINESS, EXCESIVE APOLOGIZING, HIS CASES SUCK DICK, NOT NORMLA TOWN YOSA, HE BUSSDE MATTP WHEN HE WAS HATED THEN SWTICHED TO SOME DUDE, ETC

Where's the third one, out of curiousity?

[Albert B. Rampage]

I think the reason that my actions don't make sense to you is because you feel, wrongly, that if you think someone is scum that nothing that they do can be correct. That just isn't true. Just because I think you're scum, and I do, doesn't mean that some things you say, or possible setup speculation you make might have value. Hell, your setup speculation may be even MORE valuable BECAUSE I think you're scum. However, I can understand how it wouldn't make sense if somehow you believed everything that a person who you believe is scum does is scummy. You're basically following the traditional "poisoning the well" fallacy, and my actions "don't make sense" to you because I am not.

You either think Zdenek is scum or you don't.

It's funny how you use the word "scum" here instead of scummy, as if you're certain Zdenek is an angel, and then you agree with his reasoning. You evidently think there's a SK or second scum group. Paranoid much?

...Seriously, how DID you get that?

Agreeing with the case someone you are convinced is scum means either 2 mafia teams or third party.

[quadz08]

I've only been sort of reading along as posts are made this evening, not paying a terrible amount of attention but

holy shit

I have to comment on ABR's post because it is so completely 100% wrong I can't even stand it. It's not a tell or an alignment thing or anything, it's just completely incorrect.

[Kinetic]

I think the reason that my actions don't make sense to you is because you feel, wrongly, that if you think someone is scum that nothing that they do can be correct. That just isn't true. Just because I think you're scum, and I do, doesn't mean that some things you say, or possible setup speculation you make might have value. Hell, your setup speculation may be even MORE valuable BECAUSE I think you're scum. However, I can understand how it wouldn't make sense if somehow you believed everything that a person who you believe is scum does is scummy. You're basically following the traditional "poisoning the well" fallacy, and my actions "don't make sense" to you because I am not.

You either think Zdenek is scum or you don't.

It's funny how you use the word "scum" here instead of scummy, as if you're certain Zdenek is an angel, and then you agree with his reasoning. You evidently think there's a SK or second scum group. Paranoid much?

...Seriously, how DID you get that?

Agreeing with the case someone you are convinced is scum means either 2 mafia teams or third party.

... That isn't what happened at all. What happened is, Zd mentioned something that could be scummy because of a reason that had to do with a previous similar set up. It is reasonable to believe at the very least this game is similar. That logic is sound.

I then took that logic, and applied it to a case on someone else, because even if someone is scum, logic is logic. Scum can make logical cases too, or use logic just as well as town.

That logic produced a suspect (Xalxe).

The issue is that Zd is both agreeing and disagreeing with me now. He agrees that, by his own logical argument, Xalxe is acting suspicious. He is backing off his own logical argument though, and saying that while Xalxe is suspicious, and the logic is sound, he now believes that it is less an indicator of scum than he did previously.

We aren't in agreement exactly, and it is frustrating me because

we should be

and that actually strengthens my scum read in him because something he SAID was scummy, that I caught someone doing else, he is now backing off of that scummy tactic. He gives lip service to the fact that what Xalxe did was scummy, but he then attacks me for pursuing it with a vote. I'd have been more inclined to think he was town if he didn't do that, but his attack on me going after Xalxe is frankly baseless, and it is at odds with his own previously mentioned, pre-PV views. To me, what Zd is doing is poisoning the well, a logical fallacy where no matter what the argument is, you disagree with it on principal based on who proposed it, even if you would have supported that same argument if someone else presented it. I, further feel, that is a position scum who have decided on a target to pursue to make them look town and look like they're scum hunting will take, when in fact it isn't scum hunting at all.

Where did you see that Zd and I agreed there?

Additionally, I never thought that if Xalxe and Zd were scum they'd be in different groups, I'm saying that either they are buddies and that is actually the reason for Zd's change, or that Xalxe is town, but Zd is trying to discredit my attacks, that should I pursue them, would lead to me leading a mislynch on a townie and Zd looking like the one who saw it coming, which would be a win-win for scumZd. Thus, while I'm suspicious of Zd, his actions make him the more likely scum in this scenario.

And Zd, we've already been over this at least twice in the last 4 pages, you don't have to respond to this, I'm laying it out for Albert (and I suppose everyone else who is confused), because I want Albert to explain to me where he is coming from because I still don't see how he saw what he claims to have seen.

[Voidedmafia]

Or, to be slightly tl;dr: Being scummy doesn't always mean bad logic?

[Mr. Flay]

MODTHING: Can you do something about Scooby?

ʯʘʉʼᴦɚ ɰөʆ¢ᴓӎз.

[Zdenek]

For the rest I felt the arguments were going in his direction rather than yours.

Which ones?

[quadz08]

Thanks thingmod.

[Zdenek]

I would love to not respond to this Kinetic, but since you keep misrepresenting me I have to.

The issue is that Zd is both agreeing and disagreeing with me now. He agrees that, by his own logical argument, Xalxe is acting suspicious.

The argument is not logical because we are unaware of the setup. It's speculative, but I think that it's reasonable.

He is backing off his own logical argument though, and saying that while Xalxe is suspicious, and the logic is sound, he now believes that it is less an indicator of scum than he did previously.

Quote where I said that I think that it is less of an indicator of scum than I thought previously or what is making you think that my mind has changed on this matter.

We aren't in agreement exactly, and it is frustrating me because we should be and that actually strengthens my scum read in him because something he SAID was scummy, that I caught someone doing else, he is now backing off of that scummy tactic. He gives lip service to the fact that what Xalxe did was scummy, but he then attacks me for pursuing it with a vote.

The fact that after all we have discussed you are still trying to suggest that my issue with your vote on Xalxe was that you voted him because of this is insane, and I have no idea why you are continuing to do it.

I'd have been more inclined to think he was town if he didn't do that, but his attack on me going after Xalxe is frankly baseless, and it is at odds with his own previously mentioned, pre-PV views. To me, what Zd is doing is poisoning the well, a logical fallacy where no matter what the argument is, you disagree with it on principal based on who proposed it, even if you would have supported that same argument if someone else presented it. I, further feel, that is a position scum who have decided on a target to pursue to make them look town and look like they're scum hunting will take, when in fact it isn't scum hunting at all.

I am not attacking you for going after Xalxe because of this case. My problem was with your vote on Xalxe in relation to the things that you were saying about me and the fact that you said that you thought you found scum somehow because of being protected. The vote seemed very out of place. More importantly, what I said was

Moreover, his vote on Xalxe, seems incongruent with the things that he has had to say about me recently.

In particular, I was not attacking your reasons for your vote.

Next, that is not what poisoning the well is, so fuck off with the rhetorical garbage. Poisoning the well is presenting information in a manner to produce a biased result.

[Kinetic]

I would love to not respond to this Kinetic, but since you keep

misrepresenting

me I have to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk

And that post was not me representing you at all. What it was, was MY perception of our argument/issues. It was MY argument for what you're doing. You may not agree with it, but your disagreeing with what I am arguing doesn't mean I'm misrepresenting you. That is why your response was unnecessary. The post was also not targeted or addressed to you.

A misrepresentation would be if I said something like: Zd claimed he was scum. That would be a misrepresentation because you never said anything like that. If I have a different interpretation for what you are doing, that isn't a misrepresentation. Misrepresentation is basically a legal equivilent to a bomb, no one in the legal profession throws it around willy nilly because if you accuse someone of misrepresentation and you cannot back it up with cold hard facts, you will end your legal career. It is often misunderstood by people who don't understand the weight of the accusation that they are throwing around and I would appreciate if you understood that difference.

in relation to the things that you were saying about me

This is irrelevant. You keep bringing it up. Unless you and Xalxe ARE scum buddies. Then in that case, what I say about you would have an effect on any case I present about him. I am not conflating the two, you need to stop doing so.

Next, that is not what poisoning the well is, so fuck off with the rhetorical garbage. Poisoning the well is presenting information in a manner to produce a biased result.

I always mix up my logical fallacies. What is the one where you disregard the argument but discredit the argument by attacking the person making the argument? Is that Ad hom too? I think it is now that I think about it. Basically its the association version of ad hom.

[Voidedmafia]

discrediting the arguer is ad hom. Given the circumstances it'd most likely be Ad hom Circumstancial (wherein the other person, which would be Kinetic from zde's PoV, has an ulterior motive for making certain claims).

[Yosarian2]

yah scoobers is town i forget why i had him as town before but it doesnt matter nemore. ur wrong abt matt tho.

why do u think yos is scum scoobs?

STRATEGIC POSTING, LURKINESS, EXCESIVE APOLOGIZING, HIS CASES SUCK DICK, NOT NORMLA TOWN YOSA, HE BUSSDE MATTP WHEN HE WAS HATED THEN SWTICHED TO SOME DUDE, ETC

What the hell are you talking about? I attacked Matt for a while, then I had doubts about my case and unvoted him because his play seemed too much like his play last time I played with him when he was town. (His behavior towards Zdenek, and his day 1 play in general, feels just like his behavior towards Rayfrot in this game; and so does his randomally flipping out. https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=23150. I still don't like it, I just have trouble calling it a scumtell with his meta.) I sure as hell haven't "lurked" this game, that's just pure bullshit and you know it, unless you mean not being able to post for a day at the start of day 2. As for my cases "sucking dick"; I've made two cases this game, Matt and PeregrineV; you apparently agree with my Matt case, and there's no way in hell you could think my PV case "sucked dick". And I don't know what "strategic posting" means, but I'm pretty sure that's bullshit too.

So, again; what the hell are you talking about?

[Lady Lambdadelta]

Right, so I, like Matt, have probably the most important Final of this term tomorrow and as such won't be posting anything today or tomorrow. I have skimmed the thread to make sure I keep up but I'll do a more complete read again when I get back on Friday.

A quick note however, if people have questions @ me they want answered they should compile them in a single post that they can reference to so I don't miss anything while I am busy.