Diffusion of Power (Open 478) over

[Wisdom]

You are anti-town because nearly all of your posts are void of any content. The content that you do actually post is either impossible to understand or not at all useful. You also do not go very in-depth on your reads, and instead call your scum-reads names, suggesting you don't actually have any reason to suspect them in the first place.

So what makes her anti-town is the "lack of content"?
Awesome - tell me how slimer, The Puck, Siveure, kmd have posted any more content than mollie. By your logic, they're all anti-town.
The content that she posts is impossible to understand? I disagree, I understand everything she has said. If

you

cannot understand, that doesn't mean it's impossible to understand. Same goes for the usefulness.

No, that doesn't make her anti-town. That's a playstyle. And the longer you keep taking "mollie is anti-town" as a given, the more it will look like you're scum and you're misrepping on purpose. Because that's bullshit - mollie is not being anti-town.


inb4 "omg Wisdom defended mollie again". Yes, when I read bullshit I will respond, regardless if the post is addressed to me or not.

[Disturbed_One]

Yes, you're taking several things that are

your own interpretations

as facts, and I call that misrepping. Like for example that "I defended people" while I defended nobody (because I don't count pointing out that bullshit accusations are bullshit as defending), or that mollie is unreadable (I still dont understand how on earth you came up with this).

We have different opinions of what is "anti-town", because I don't consider mollie's play anti-town. She's scumhunting in her own way. Same goes for slimer. Each person plays differently. They might be criticized at first but once you play with them and become familiar with them you understand that's their normal play.

I do not understand where you pulled "mollie is unreadable" out of. This is your claim, and you should be the one to prove why she is. I don't have any obligation to prove why she isn't unreadable because simply, by default, players are not unreadable. You're the one who suddenly came up with "mollie is unreadable". And now you say you have not played with her. This is bullshit, and probably scummy too.

That's not misrepresenting you, that's calling it how I see it. Perhaps I'm wrong, but that's my opinion. I am quite thankful to have one, actually. Your misrepresentation is in fact greater, because you are putting words in my mouth that I never said.

However, it's not an opinion that you defended mollie and others, though. What you did is the definition of defending someone. Feel free to disagree with the universal definition to defending someone, but by that definition you are guilty of defending others.

Think about it. If an accusation is made, it is up to the accused to defend that accusation. By attacking that accusation, you are thereby robbing them of that responsibility and taking it on as your own responsibility.

You can tell me I'm wrong, but I'm not. And I'm confident others will see it that way as well.

I still say Mollie is unreadable and have factual evidence as to why she is that way. Unless you have counter-evidence, you do not have a point. It's that simple really. Honor my request and find a scum game she plays differently, and then we'll talk.

If you believe Mollie is scum-hunting, you are mistaken. What she does is not called scum-hunting. You're a fool if you believe throwing out baseless accusations and using "this player is dumb" as a point constitutes scum-hunting.

I have more than adequately expressed my views on Mollie and do not need to prove anything. You claim she can be read. Until you back up that statement, you do not have a point. You're attacking my point, if you want your attack to have any validity, then you need to back up your statement.

My request is not unreasonable. By not abiding to it, you have proven you cannot back up your statement. Your argument is completely invalid and baseless.

Furthermore, answer my question this instant about why you directly cut out part of my post. I'm tired of you dodging it and I'm not even considering unvoting until you explain why you did that. You ignored a question that was directed at Mollie's defenders, which include you. You chose to respond to my post, but not the question. Why is that?

I am done arguing with you about Mollie. Prove your statements or I will not accept them as valid. Show me one of Molly's scum games. As you said, townies are supposed to look for meta anyway, so go fetch me that meta where Molly plays a scum game differently than how she plays her town game.

[Disturbed_One]

So what makes her anti-town is the "lack of content"?
Awesome - tell me how slimer, The Puck, Siveure, kmd have posted any more content than mollie. By your logic, they're all anti-town.
The content that she posts is impossible to understand? I disagree, I understand everything she has said. If

you

cannot understand, that doesn't mean it's impossible to understand. Same goes for the usefulness.

No, that doesn't make her anti-town. That's a playstyle. And the longer you keep taking "mollie is anti-town" as a given, the more it will look like you're scum and you're misrepping on purpose. Because that's bullshit - mollie is not being anti-town.

Lack of content and putting forth no effort towards a cohesive thought regarding scum-hunting, other than "HD is stupid". Yes, that is what makes her anti-town.

I have expressed that I feel similarly about slimer, but he's actually been able to express some cohesive thoughts, unlike Mollie. For example, his vote on you was clearly reasoned in comparison to any post Mollie has ever made.

"Lack of posts" does

not

equal "lack of content." Mollie has a decent post count, but the content within the posts is what is lacking.

I can understand most of what she says, but some of her posts I find difficult to read. You're right, that is a personal thing, it still doesn't change the fact her posts are generally void of content.

Yes, it does make her anti-town. Simply stating it is not does not make it so.

[Disturbed_One]

Even Mollie thinks you are defending people. You aren't fooling anyone.

On the contrary, it is you who looks scummier with every post, denying something that is obvious that you did.

[Wisdom]

@401
I have nothing to prove to you - players are not unreadable by default, and same goes for mollie. It's extraordinary to say someone is unreadable in the first place, so you should be the one to back that up with meta and whatnot. You have not backed it up - your reasons for why mollie is "anti-town" are invalid. You are attacking playstyle, nothing more.

Also I don't know what question you are referring to, please quote it.

@402
Her posts are fine, if you don't like them/ don't understand them it's your own problem. Saying she is anti-town because of that is bullshit - saying she is unreadable is even bigger bullshit. You're merely attacking playstyle.

@403
I don't care who thinks what. I simply respond to whatever I feel is invalid. If you want to take it as defending, fine.

[Disturbed_One]

That said, I asked a reasonable question which you completely chose to ignore, and seeing as you choose to defend Mollie this means that you are in fact dodging a question that is directed at you. Why did you cut that part of my post out, Wisdom?

If Mollie plays this way every game, then why should we keep her alive? How are you going to know if she got a scum role in this game? I don't care if she plays this way as town, how are you going to figure out her alignment if she's scum?

If you can't read her, then she's just a liability and needs to go. End of story.

[Wisdom]

Yeah, I have answered that. We will read her as any other player. I don't see what makes her so special.

[Wisdom]

Funny how you said that I "ignored" this question when I in fact addressed it in my first posts after the post that had the question.
Another misrep. Keep going.

[Disturbed_One]

@401
I have nothing to prove to you - players are not unreadable by default, and same goes for mollie. It's extraordinary to say someone is unreadable in the first place, so you should be the one to back that up with meta and whatnot. You have not backed it up - your reasons for why mollie is "anti-town" are invalid. You are attacking playstyle, nothing more.

Also I don't know what question you are referring to, please quote it.

@402
Her posts are fine, if you don't like them/ don't understand them it's your own problem. Saying she is anti-town because of that is bullshit - saying she is unreadable is even bigger bullshit. You're merely attacking playstyle.

@403
I don't care who thinks what. I simply respond to whatever I feel is invalid. If you want to take it as defending, fine.

You don't? That's interesting, you've spent quite a lot of time attempting to do just that.

You are correct that my statements are essentially opinions. What makes yours any different? If I have to prove my statements using meta, than so do you. It is illogical to think you have a point here.

I could say that you thinking her posts are "fine" is "bullsmurf", but I won't, because that's not even a valid argument. Her posts lack content, it's a fact. Anyone that ISOs her (except for you, apparently) should be able to figure that out.

[Disturbed_One]

Funny how you said that I "ignored" this question when I in fact addressed it in my first posts after the post that had the question.
Another misrep. Keep going.

You think this constitutes "addressing" a question? http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 5#p4723475

You cut out the question and did not directly address it.

Keep going.

[Wisdom]

Yup, that constitutes addressing a question. That's all I felt for your question because it was calling mollie unreadable and proposing her as a policy lynch, which was completely out of place.

[Wisdom]

You don't? That's interesting, you've spent quite a lot of time attempting to do just that.

You're asking for proof that she isn't unreadable - that's out of place really. Why would anyone have to provide such proof? It's like saying "the sky is not blue, it's red" and accusing me of not being able to prove it's not red. Again, all players are by default readable. The only unreadable players are those experienced ones (Thor comes to mind) that have developed a playstyle that makes it hard to read them. Is mollie such a player? No. She's definetely not easy to read, but saying she's unreadable is a stretch.

You are correct that my statements are essentially opinions. What makes yours any different? If I have to prove my statements using meta, than so do you. It is illogical to think you have a point here.

Yup, but you're the one calling a player unreadable. I am simply saying something absolutely normal, that she's not unreadable but just a regular player. As said above, that does not need proof. You are the one who needs proof, because you're claiming something out of the ordinary.

I could say that you thinking her posts are "fine" is "bullsmurf", but I won't, because that's not even a valid argument. Her posts lack content, it's a fact. Anyone that ISOs her (except for you, apparently) should be able to figure that out.

Is lacking content (which I don't think they do to the extend you want to present it) enough to call her scum/anti-town/unreadable? Yes, she has not posted as much content as others, but again, that's simply a playstyle matter. You're calling someone scum/anti-town/unreadable based on playstyle, that's what you have to understand.

[Disturbed_One]

Yup, that constitutes addressing a question. That's all I felt for your question because it was calling mollie unreadable and proposing her as a policy lynch, which was completely out of place.

Why did you cut the question out of your post, then?

[Wisdom]

Why did you cut the question out of your post, then?

I responded to the part of the question that stuck out the most. What difference would it make if I quoted the whole question anyway?

[Disturbed_One]

Mollie doesn't play like a "normal" player plays this game, don't try to act like she does. There's nothing normal about her play-style or theslimer's playstyle. I am not any more obliged to prove my statements than you are.

Not posting content 15 pages into the game is simply not a "playstyle thing."

[Wisdom]

Then you have played with very few people if that's your belief. There are different people and different playstyles, deal with it.

[Disturbed_One]

I responded to the part of the question that stuck out the most. What difference would it make if I quoted the whole question anyway?

Because quoting indicates that you have read and are responding to something. You did not so.

Also, I was not satisfied with a response. A question demands an answer, not another question. That is because you did not actually address the question.

[Disturbed_One]

*with your response, I mean.

[Wisdom]

Because quoting indicates that you have read and are responding to something. You did not so.

Also, I was not satisfied with a response. A question demands an answer, not another question. That is because you did not actually address the question.

I did quote part of your question so apparently I did read it. "You did not do so" is wrong.
A question demands an answer when the question is logical. I did not deem it necessary to answer to you "why mollie isn't unreadable" because this is not logical since she isn't. All your question did was make me raise an eyebrow at you for wanting to policy lynch mollie for such a stupid reason. And I believe that's evident by what I answered.

[Disturbed_One]

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 5#p4723475

Show me where you quoted any part of my question in this post.

[Disturbed_One]

I fully believe you read it, you just chose not to answer it, going as far as to cut it out of the quote of your post to do so.

[Wisdom]

This is your question:

@ everyone defending Mollie, riddle me this:

If Mollie plays this way every game, then why should we keep her alive? How are you going to know if she got a scum role in this game? I don't care if she plays this way as town, how are you going to figure out her alignment if she's scum?

If you can't read her, then she's just a liability and needs to go. End of story.

This is my post:

If you can't read her, then she's just a liability and needs to go. End of story.

I strongly dislike this. What, are you proposing a policy lynch on mollie now? Who said that nobody can read her?

You have three guesses to find what part is in both posts.

[Disturbed_One]

I've made my case. It's obvious you're lying and it is ridiculous for you to try and deny it.

[pirate mollie]

Calling players dumb does two things:

1. It actually makes you look dumber than the people who are actually making valid points.

those points are not valid when he should have somewhat of a meta-base for them. and no, those are not always legitimate scumtells so let's just shoot that argument out of the water. nor are they anti-town. I am starting to think you have no idea what that means.

2. It illustrates how you don't have a point in the first place, because if you had one, you'd be making it instead of calling other players names.

I am assuming you are referring to this:

cos they are really dumb.

I did not call hd dumb I was calling his argument dumb. but sweet misrep there you should continue this trajectory it will totally score you points. like scum points cos it is a sophisticated form of buddying which you have already applied to prohawk.

I'm glad you agree that Wisdom is defending people, because you know he says that he doesn't. It's a very pro-town thing, to do one thing and say another, right?

Hmm... why aren't you voting Wisdom again?

cos I do not want to

I think HD's arguments were and still are valid. Prove how they aren't, preferably in reasoning that doesn't consist of "because he's dumb."

I never said he was dumb, his arguments are. I already disproved his arguments cos they are not that hard to disprove. what he is listing are not actual across the board scumtells and you know it and I know it so why the "smurf" are you trying to push this agenda? explain the motivation behind it and you may just talk your way out of it.

You are anti-town because nearly all of your posts are void of any content. The content that you do actually post is either impossible to understand or not at all useful. You also do not go very in-depth on your reads, and instead call your scum-reads names, suggesting you don't actually have any reason to suspect them in the first place.

third time I am dispelling that DUMB FREAKING ARGUMENT that I am calling people names. his arguments are dumb. whether or not they are scum motivated is something I am trying to determine.

Interesting... so HD is wrong, and that makes him scum? Seeing as Wisdom was unable to answer this question, maybe you can answer it for me. Show me one of your scum games and illustrate how it is any different from the one you're playing now. HD knows how you play as scum? I don't know how you play as scum, why don't you tell me?

erm...the burden of proof is on you cos you are the one who is trying to say that I am anti-town and is pushing my lynch without saying I am scum. I am not going to feed you. find your own damn data.

I don't know how you made the connection that because I call you "anti-town" that I somehow know your alignment. Frankly, I don't care either, as it's a bunch of malarkey.

cos you are not pushing a scumread you are pushing what you think is an anti-town read. you haven't called me scum this is like mafia 101! \o/

I honestly cannot understand the rest of your post, it's seemingly gibberish. Something about how my play "reeks", once again not for any discernible reason other than the fact you disagree with me.

Case in point, you don't actually have any valuable scum-reads. That's probably because you're not actually scum-hunting.

lol

I responded to your previous post how you are anti-town. I will

not

repeat myself.

oh...sweet. let's have a discussion of redundancy...like...I think we should talk about how you keep pushing the same dumb case that I personally do not think you even believe in anymore. <--------hey guess what, I did not call you dumb here!

The thing is, I'd be comfortable lynching you based on your behavior alone. Your behavior has been "anti-town" in my opinion, and I'd be fine lynching you for it. The only thing that keeps me from voting you this very instant, is the fact you seemingly play this way every single game. I can and

have

read you as anti-town, I would lynch you if not for the fact you always play this way.

you still have yet to list what is "anti-town" about my play except to say that you have trouble comprehending what I am saying. it sounds like a personal problem to me and not indicative of my alignment nor "anti-town" activities.

No one has said they can read you. I've asked for specific examples from your pal, Wisdom, but he has been unable to answer that question other than saying that we'll somehow be able to figure it out from your play. I don't agree, because if you always play in an anti-town fashion, there's no way you can slip-up anymore than you are already doing.

win condition <<< motivation for posts <<< reflects alignment

so far you are pushing bad cases for bad reasons and sucking up to players who may not realise they are being manipulated. SCUUUUUUMMMMEH

Do you play pro-town as scum or something? Unless you do, then there is no way to read you. I have requested you to illustrate how your scum game is different from your town game. Until you do, I am forced to believe there is not a difference.

Actually, I can totally say almost everything you've done in this game is anti-town, using that exact criteria. As I said, the only thing keeping me from voting based on this information, is that it is normal play for you.

Interesting theory. I was previously unaware one could be "fixated" while pursuing another read entirely and voting for that read. I'll be sure to note this for the future, thank you for enlightening me!

yw

ftr it is cos of the reasoning you are using to go after wisdom that I think you are "fixated". like it still centers around me which I find strange. but hey it is okay if you develope a crush on me, I will feel flattered.

[Wisdom]

I've made my case. It's obvious you're lying and it is ridiculous for you to try and deny it.

lolwut
Where am I lying?