Diffusion of Power (Open 478) over

[Wisdom]

You have yet to tell me where I lied though.

[BeautyAndTheBeast]

Sup.

I won't actually read anything until at least Tuesday on account of busy weekends and other games and commitments.

Till then, I'm sure Mollie can handle herself.

[N]

mcqueen replaces fuzzybutternut

Vote Count 1.8

Disturbed_One

( 0 )

Mitillos

( 0 )

kmd4390

( 0 )

Siveure DtTrikyp

( 0 )

ProHawk

( 0 )

mcqueen

(replaces fuzzybutternut)

( 0 )

theslimer3

( 0 )

BeautyAndTheBeast

(pirate mollie)

( 1 ) kmd4390

Wisdom

( 3 ) Human Destroyer , ProHawk , Disturbed_One 

zabriel

( 0 )

CF Riot

(tigerzone)

( 1 ) The Puck

The Puck

( 3 ) Wisdom , zabriel , Siveure DtTrikyp

Human Destroyer

( 2 ) mcqueen , Mitillos

Not voting:

CF Riot , theslimer3 , BeautyAndTheBeast

With 13 alive, it takes 7 to lynch.

Deadline is in

(expired on 2013-02-28 20:30:20)

zabriel is V/LA until 28th of Feb

[Disturbed_One]

You have yet to tell me where I lied though.

What would be the point of that? You'd just disagree.

I outlined that lied about cutting out part of my post in order to evade a question. I won't argue with you about it, instead we shall see what the other players make of it.

[Wisdom]

Oh, sure thing.

[Mitillos]

@Disturbed: To be honest I don't see it. You say he hasn't addressed your question. The thing is, I said you were pushing for a PL on mollie. The same thing Wisdom said. That's exactly addressing your question, in what I consider a pro-town manner. We shouldn't lynch mollie (or anyone) for being too hard to read, because that would be a PL and PLs are generally bad. Now mollie is in a hydra (which makes reading her harder) with Majiffy (who is also quite difficult to read). Should we lynch them for that, irrespective of their actual alignment? No, that's a very anti-town thing to do.
I take Wisdom's response to be a perfectly valid answer and my read on him is town.

[mcqueen]

/confirm replace.

Just pulled an all-nighter, so I'm tired as fuck, but I'll start reading.

[mcqueen]

How exactly is tiger an easy lynch?

A policy lynch is pretty much by definition an easy lynch. Why? It lynches someone for playing in an anti-town fashion, so people will agree with it. So how is

he

not pushing an easy lynch?

Sigh. Incorrect.

A PL is a lynch based on disliking an aspect of another player's playstyle, not necessarily because they are playing in an "anti-town fashion."

[mcqueen]

Well I didn't, because townies can't slip.

Technically, this is incorrect as well.

[mcqueen]

Yeah but mollie hasn't done anything scummy - while I have "slipped", which should surely be scummier. Shouldn't you vote me?

What the hell is this?

Btw, sorry for multi-posts. I hate using Q+ when I'm reading through for the first time.

[mcqueen]

MY FUCKING GOD YOU AREN'T LISTENING

I DIDN'T MAKE A CLAIM, THEREFORE I HAVE NO REASON TO GO PROVE IT FOR YOU. YOU MADE A CLAIM, SO YOU HAVE EVERY FUCKING REASON TO GO PROVE IT.

SO STOP BEING ALL SELF-RIGHTEOUS WITH YOUR "OMG ANYONE WHO DOESN'T LOOK THROUGH THE GAMES I LINKED MUST BE SCUM" BECAUSE GUESS WHAT: I DON'T REALLY FUCKING CARE.

MOLLIE HAS BEEN ACTING GODDAMN SCUMMY, AND YOU'VE BEEN ATTEMPTING TO DISINTEGRATE IT WITH BULLSHIT META TELLS THAT MAY NOT EVEN BE REAL.

THIS IS A WHOLE CROCK OF BULLSHIT BEING USED BY THE SCUMTEAM TO PAINT ME AS SCUMMY.

AND QUITE FRANKLY, I'M DONE WITH IT.

Please NK yourself.

[mcqueen]

Can't tell if the hydra-replace is a scumtell or a towntell...

Beauty, can I have a link to at least 1 Town and 1 Scum game?

[Wisdom]

Yeah but mollie hasn't done anything scummy - while I have "slipped", which should surely be scummier. Shouldn't you vote me?

What the hell is this?

This is accusing HD of keeping his vote on mollie while he says he finds me scummier. Something wrong with it?

[Human Destroyer]

Before I say anything, I'd just like to note that one person is using my town meta to call me town (D_O) and one is using my scum meta to call me scum (Mitillos). Make up your minds people!

I was going to do a PbPA of D_O vs. Wisdom but...lolno too long

So let's do this simply:

D_O's original accusations of Wisdom:

• Wisdom says a lot of things he doesn't really mean.
  
• Wisdom defends more people than he actually attacks, i.e. buddying.
  
• Dodging his question of "If Mollie is scum, can you read her?" and why Wisdom cut that out of his post.

Wisdom's responses:

• Claims bullshit.
  
• Says he was only shooting down bullshit accusations based solely on playstyle, but refuses to take a stance on the people he was actually defending.
  
• Answers the question vaguely with a "How should I know?"

D_O:

• Complains that Wisdom didn't answer why he cut the question out of his post.
  
• Complains that Wisdom hasn't actually proposed a way to read Mollie; rather, he just deflected the accusations on her and simply called her null.

That's actually something that bothers me. Deflecting accusations on someone, proceeding to call them null, then not really making an effort to read them looks like scum behavior.

Wisdom's #390:

THIS POST IS REALLY BAD AND HAS SCUMSCUMSCUM WRITTEN ALL OVER IT

• Claims that D_O is misrepping by saying Mollie is unreadable, yet that is D_O's opinion, so it can't be a misrep. (This is a discredit to his attacker without actually refuting anything)
  
• Asks D_O whether he thinks people can be read on meta, which is the exact opposite of D_O's point, since he thinks Mollie can't be read for this reason.
• Asks D_O to show proof that Mollie
  can't
  be read (D_O counters with a general meta look that shows that she plays anti-town regardless of alignment), although D_O had just asked him for proof that she
  can
  be read. He's dodging his burden of proof again.
  
• Says pointing out accusations against someone =/= defending them...but that's exactly what defending someone is. So now he's pretty much lying. His complaint that D_O is misrepping him is still an attack with no basis used as a discrediting tool for the skimming reader.

I don't even really need to look at the rest. #390 is all sorts of bullshit, and Wisdom's lack of even trying to read Mollie and Slimer after calling them null, is, in fact, scummy.

[Wisdom]

• Claims bullshit.

Which it was. I have not said a single word that I don't mean.

Says he was only shooting down bullshit accusations based solely on playstyle, but refuses to take a stance on the people he was actually defending.

Which is because I defended nobody.

You

call it defending. But it's not defending exactly because I don't take stances.

Answers the question vaguely with a "How should I know?"[/list]

Wtf is this. No. I never dodged any question or cut anything out of any post. This is a blatant misrep of D_O. I answered his question instantly.

• Claims that D_O is misrepping by saying Mollie is unreadable, yet that is D_O's opinion, so it can't be a misrep. (This is a discredit to his attacker without actually refuting anything)

Maybe the term misrep does not accurately mean what I said, but his repeating "Mollie is unreadable" and using it as a fact and as an argument is something terrible. For lack of a better word, I call that misrep.

Asks D_O whether he thinks people can be read on meta, which is the exact opposite of D_O's point, since he thinks Mollie can't be read for this reason.

Asks D_O to show proof that Mollie

can't

be read (D_O counters with a general meta look that shows that she plays anti-town regardless of alignment), although D_O had just asked him for proof that she

can

be read. He's dodging his burden of proof again.

The burden of proof was on D_O. He made an extraordinary claim that "mollie is unreadable". Nobody has to prove someone is readable because by default everyone is readable. His claim "Mollie plays anti-town always" is bullcrap since mollie does not play anti-town.

Says pointing out accusations against someone =/= defending them...but that's exactly what defending someone is. So now he's pretty much lying. His complaint that D_O is misrepping him is still an attack with no basis used as a discrediting tool for the skimming reader.[/list]

As I explained, I don't consider that defending. It would be defending if I called them town and attacked valid reasons against them. The reasons were invalid (omg your playstyle is bad you must be scum) and I didn't call anyone town. This doesn't count as defending in my book.

I don't even really need to look at the rest. #390 is all sorts of bullshit, and Wisdom's lack of even trying to read Mollie and Slimer after calling them null, is, in fact, scummy.

How do you know I am not trying? I am, in fact.

There are 2 possibilities. Either you're still biased as fuck and still tunneling on me, or you're scum. My exchange with D_O should tell you I am town after all these illogical statements D_O pulled off ("omg mollie is unreadable") and after all his misreps, but no, you found them all reassuring that you're right and that I'm scum. This doesn't look too good for you.

[Human Destroyer]

If Wisdom was town, he'd be voting and pushing D_O, the person who supposedly is making complete bullshit accusations against him, not a lurker who isn't even responding to pressure

Just sayin'

[Wisdom]

Indeed, and that's what I am going to do if he continues his bullshit. I only don't do it because I am not sure if he's just tunneling like you or if he's actually scum. Usually town tunnels on me, so I am reluctant to draw conclusions so easily.

Besides, The Puck has still not posted a word so my vote is fine there for the time being.

[Human Destroyer]

• Claims bullshit.

Which it was. I have not said a single word that I don't mean.

Don't have plans to harp on this because it isn't really provable so

Says he was only shooting down bullshit accusations based solely on playstyle, but refuses to take a stance on the people he was actually defending.

Which is because I defended nobody.

You

call it defending. But it's not defending exactly because I don't take stances.

Which is fence-sitting. Which is

still

scummy.

Answers the question vaguely with a "How should I know?"[/list]

Wtf is this. No. I never dodged any question or cut anything out of any post. This is a blatant misrep of D_O. I answered his question instantly.

Why would I know who can read her and who can't?

• Claims that D_O is misrepping by saying Mollie is unreadable, yet that is D_O's opinion, so it can't be a misrep. (This is a discredit to his attacker without actually refuting anything)

Maybe the term misrep does not accurately mean what I said, but his repeating "Mollie is unreadable" and using it as a fact and as an argument is something terrible. For lack of a better word, I call that misrep.

He said she is unreadable based on past games. That's not a misrep in any way.

Asks D_O whether he thinks people can be read on meta, which is the exact opposite of D_O's point, since he thinks Mollie can't be read for this reason.

Asks D_O to show proof that Mollie

can't

be read (D_O counters with a general meta look that shows that she plays anti-town regardless of alignment), although D_O had just asked him for proof that she

can

be read. He's dodging his burden of proof again.

The burden of proof was on D_O. He made an extraordinary claim that "mollie is unreadable". Nobody has to prove someone is readable because by default everyone is readable. His claim "Mollie plays anti-town always" is bullcrap since mollie does not play anti-town.

He said pretty much "Based on her meta, she's unreadable." There's a difference between showing someone a general playstyle and something that someone specifically does that they do as both alignments, which was my problem with you and fuzzy earlier. So he asked you to show him a scum game where Mollie is successfully read and lynched. Which you didn't. So.

Says pointing out accusations against someone =/= defending them...but that's exactly what defending someone is. So now he's pretty much lying. His complaint that D_O is misrepping him is still an attack with no basis used as a discrediting tool for the skimming reader.[/list]

As I explained, I don't consider that defending. It would be defending if I called them town and attacked valid reasons against them. The reasons were invalid (omg your playstyle is bad you must be scum) and I didn't call anyone town. This doesn't count as defending in my book.

No.

The objective definition of defending someone is refuting accusations made against them.

That's what a defense is.

Saying not taking a stance makes it not defending is inherently bullshit.

I don't even really need to look at the rest. #390 is all sorts of bullshit, and Wisdom's lack of even trying to read Mollie and Slimer after calling them null, is, in fact, scummy.

How do you know I am not trying? I am, in fact.

Then tell me why nearly all of your interactions lately have been with your accusors and, in fact, not Mollie nor Slimer?

There are 2 possibilities. Either you're still biased as fuck and still tunneling on me, or you're scum. My exchange with D_O should tell you I am town after all these illogical statements D_O pulled off ("omg mollie is unreadable") and after all his misreps, but no, you found them all reassuring that you're right and that I'm scum. This doesn't look too good for you.

Or you're just mad that you're caught and trying to paint me as someone that shouldn't be listened to.

P-Edit: This post is so much bullshit lol

Firstly, he just let it slip that he knows I'm town even though he said in his previous post that he was considering me as possible scum

Secondly, he's trying to justify a vote park on a lurker instead of someone who is making a supposedly bullshit case against him. That's scummy because it means he's unwilling to engage D_O and keeps insisting that he must be tunneling town to make excuses not to engage.

[Disturbed_One]

@Disturbed: To be honest I don't see it. You say he hasn't addressed your question. The thing is, I said you were pushing for a PL on mollie. The same thing Wisdom said. That's exactly addressing your question, in what I consider a pro-town manner. We shouldn't lynch mollie (or anyone) for being too hard to read, because that would be a PL and PLs are generally bad. Now mollie is in a hydra (which makes reading her harder) with Majiffy (who is also quite difficult to read). Should we lynch them for that, irrespective of their actual alignment? No, that's a very anti-town thing to do.
I take Wisdom's response to be a perfectly valid answer and my read on him is town.

If you don't see it, then you don't see it. I can't help you there. Either you're blind, or I'm reading too much into this. But I still see it that way and it has everything to do with the fact he cut out the question.

You tell me, why cut out part of a post if you're addressing it? That's because he wasn't addressing it directly.

PLs being bad is your opinion. I'll be honest; I'm not the biggest fan of PLs myself. However, I do think they can be a necessary evil when playing with players that would be too difficult to discern their alignment, if they got a scum role-card. In the case of Mollie and also in the case of theslimer3, who refuse to play this game the way most people go about playing it, it makes it difficult for us to judge their behavior rationally, because their behavior is not at all normal play for town or scum.

I feel this makes players like Mollie and theslimer3 a liability. It's my opinion players such as themselves are fair game to be lynched.

That's my opinion and I stand by it. I respect that you have a different opinion, but I think you're wrong and I do wish you'd see things my way, because I feel I'm not coming from an illogical place here.

I would never lynch Majiffy just because he's Majiffy, but that's because he's not different in terms of playstyle. He's just a damn good player. He is difficult to read, but not because he plays in an inherently harmful way to the town. His playstyle is fairly normal, he is just good at playing an identical town game to his scum game.

He's also not impossible to read, just highly difficult to read. I consider an anti-town playstyle, like the ones Mollie and theslimer3 use, to be an impossible to read playstyle.

I have asked for evidence to show that it is possible to read them, but it has not been given to me. I can directly prove that Majiffy

can

be read, as I played a game with him where he was scum and we foiled his plan, ultimately. No one has directly proven to me that Mollie and theslimer3 can be read.

That's all I'm asking for. I don't think that's unreasonable.

[mcqueen]

wow

[Disturbed_One]

wow

With contributions like this, who needs a scum-team?

[Wisdom]

Which is fence-sitting. Which is

still

scummy.

Too bad that neither of them have not posted the amount of content that I'd need to have solid reads on them.

Why would I know who can read her and who can't?

What is wrong with this? Do you agree that mollie is unreadable? Unless you do, every statement related to this should tell you that I was arguing that this claim is bullshit.

He said she is unreadable based on past games. That's not a misrep in any way.

Wrong. He said he has not played with her in the past. He said that he considers her play anti-town, and her play in all previous games (that he skim-read, not played) also anti-town. Both are bullshit, mollie is not anti-town here or anywhere I have read. It's just her playstyle. Using that as a fact is a misrep in my book.

He said pretty much "Based on her meta, she's unreadable." There's a difference between showing someone a general playstyle and something that someone specifically does that they do as both alignments, which was my problem with you and fuzzy earlier. So he asked you to show him a scum game where Mollie is successfully read and lynched. Which you didn't. So.

Again, no. That's not what he said. He said that her playstyle is anti-town in this game and in every other game. Which it isn't. Nobody has to prove that, it's a fact. He was the one with the extraordinary claim, all burdens of proof were on him and only on him.

No.

The objective definition of defending someone is refuting accusations made against them.

That's what a defense is.

Saying not taking a stance makes it not defending is inherently bullshit.

Only when the accusations are valid, which they weren't. If you accuse someone with a valid point and I refute it and call them town, then call it defending.

Then tell me why nearly all of your interactions lately have been with your accusors and, in fact, not Mollie nor Slimer?

Check again, I have asked slimer questions (which he didn't want to answer). It's absolutely normal that my interactions will mainly be with my accusors, since they're trying to mislynch me, and I'm not just gonna stand and allow that to happen.

Or you're just mad that you're caught and trying to paint me as someone that shouldn't be listened to.

Do I seem mad? Because I am not. But yeah, if you continue to tunnel on town instead of scumhunt, we shouldn't listen to you at all.

Firstly, he just let it slip that he knows I'm town even though he said in his previous post that he was considering me as possible scum

Which I still do, tunneling has limits and you're close to passing them.

Secondly, he's trying to justify a vote park on a lurker instead of someone who is making a supposedly bullshit case against him. That's scummy because it means he's unwilling to engage D_O and keeps insisting that he must be tunneling town to make excuses not to engage.

Yeah, that must be it. You know me better than I know myself.

[mcqueen]

wow

With contributions like this, who needs a scum-team?

What are you guys contributing? Nothing. You're making pointless arguments about who thinks who was defending who.

[Disturbed_One]

What are you guys contributing? Nothing. You're making pointless arguments about who thinks who was defending who.

Actually read through HD's arguments and I'm 99.9% sure you will not think they are pointless.

In the case of the 0.1%, what exactly do you find pointless about it?

It's not really at all about the defending, but rather how Wisdom lies and how he reacts to the fact that he is defending players. It's scummy beyond belief.

[mcqueen]

What are you guys contributing? Nothing. You're making pointless arguments about who thinks who was defending who.

Actually read through HD's arguments and I'm 99.9% sure you will not think they are pointless.

In the case of the 0.1%, what exactly do you find pointless about it?

It's not really at all about the defending, but rather how Wisdom lies and how he reacts to the fact that he is defending players. It's scummy beyond belief.

No shit, Sherlock.