Ooh, I'm going to keep a misrep tally! (If you guys want to know what I'm referencing, go read the MMBN4-6 LP on the LP Archive. You'll get it the instant you read it.)
In post 714, Bulbazak wrote:The Om Case:
In post 258, Om the Destroyer wrote:page 6
rofl was towntowntown
Lots of buddying from B&B, they can be scum with Ryu. Thor is probably town. So is Cephrir I think?
~
I've already said why this is a bad point. First, I couldn't remember any sort of buddy type interaction between Majiffy and Thor, so I went back to page 6 to check it out. Wouldn't you know, they don't really interact with each other, AT ALL. Majiffy says one thing on this page, and it has nothing to do with Thor.
Misrep Tally: 1
I never said it was on Page 6; as can be evidenced from my other posts, this meant I had REACHED Page 6.
In post 714, Bulbazak wrote:Second, Majiffy is one of those players that NEVER buddies, mostly because of the type of player he is. I would have expected HD, as a more prominent player, to be familiar enough with Majiffy's meta to know that the buddying accusation is absurd.
Misrep Tally: 2
If Majiffy never buddies, EVER, explain to me how I was able to point out buddying spots in
Post 288.
In post 714, Bulbazak wrote:But Bulba
, you might say.
What if HD has never played with Majiffy before, and therefore, is not...
In post 323, Om the Destroyer wrote:
And no, agreeing with you is not a basis and not necessarily town motivated, and
I know you're a better player than that.
Nevermind. Continue with your case...
Misrep Tally: 3
In order for this to even be valid, I'd have to be in games where Majiffy and Thor were in a game
together
. This happened twice, and in both of them Majiffy was scum. (Thor was town in both but got culted in one)
In post 714, Bulbazak wrote: In post 288, Om the Destroyer wrote:
Obvious sucking up to Thor since this was a completely useless comment unrelated to rofl's that he was responding to.
Yeah, you might have a point. I mean if it's unrelated to Rofl's brilliant...
In post 93, roflcopter wrote: In post 92, Thor665 wrote:I don't disagree with that.
Why is Cephrir town, I don't see it. He appears to be playing up a concept that makes little sense, while accusing me of the same, combining hypocrisy and also skeevy apparent intent in vote placement.
I want him dead.
What am I missing?
you're already blinded by beautyandthebeast trying to make you their pet townie
Actually, nevermind.
That post is both insulting to Thor and B&B. No wonder they made that comment. Not buddying.
Misrep Tally: 4
There is no insult in said post. Roflcopter makes an observation that B&TB is buddying with Thor. This is Mafia 101, not Preschool.
Would you also like to explain why Thor never expressed that he was insulted by this statement,
but in fact said it was entirely possible that B&TB WAS buddying him
?
In post 714, Bulbazak wrote: In post 288, Om the Destroyer wrote:
In post 103, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote:Besides, if I was scum, I'd just kill him when it's opportune like I did
last time I played scum against him. And I consider what you said an insult; you disputed his competency with that comment.
*snip*
If both parties of the Flowchart are voting it, you know it's probably scum.
More subtle, but still there, especially with that cute little white knight motivation of "Oh you insulted Thor how DARE you! RAWRGLEBARGLE"
Wow. That looks really bad.
Let's go back and look at the original:
In post 103, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote:
In post 102, Amethyst Kitty wrote:though I do admit that I can see the reason behind the Cephir vote what I don't get though, is the Thor wagon.
Thor wagon is probably just a half-assed attempt at a pressure wagon. I'm not sold on OS either. You should vote Cephrir. If both parties of the Flowchart are voting it, you know it's probably scum.
You mean the original point had nothing to do with Rofl or Thor? It was about B&B and Kitty's scumread on Cephrir? What can this mean?
Misrep Tally: 6
Yes, I'm counting that as two misreps.
Here's why; it completely ignores the first part of my post (the one that quotes "And I consider what you said an insult; you disputed his competency with that comment.") which is fairly obviously what I was referring to, and uses the OTHER part of the post ("If both parties of the Flowchart are voting it, you know it's probably scum.") which is unrelated to said point, to act as if I had misrepped B&TB.
In post 714, Bulbazak wrote: In post 477, Om the Destroyer wrote:Okay I only read from page 10-15 because everything kinda went over my head but I support HD's B&B vote but not for the reasons that I read (don't ask me what my reasons are either, it's mainly gut
).
Also AA is pretty much town.
Everything else kinda went over my head.
I'm probably just going to watch a bit from the sidelines as the game goes on before I really step in.
Also HD is totes crampin mah style.
Urgh, smileys
~Pertayter
Translation from the Om head: "I'll be lurking over here if you need me."
I'm not counting this as a misrep, but this isn't actually scummy considering I've been controlling the hydra this entire time and contributing, so to say we're scum for not contributing doesn't even apply.
In post 714, Bulbazak wrote: In post 531, Om the Destroyer wrote: In post 395, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote: In post 378, Om the Destroyer wrote:
Inconsistency ho!
Firstly, leaving out the word mostly is not a strawman of any sort and saying so is pretty contrived, so you can kindly shut the fuck up.
Secondly, one post says your reads are largely based on whether people agree with you or not, but now only 2 are based on that concept.
Which is it?
1) If mostly, then your argument holds no water. Argument only stands if only/all, not mostly.
2) Follow the quotes. It was only
ever
about only two reads. Slandaar and AA9.
1) ...no, it still applies. If your reads are even mostly based on who agrees with you or not, they still are horrible. It's like saying 1 or 2 good reads makes up for 10 bad reads, it makes no sense.
2) Provably incorrect:
In post 322, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote: In post 320, Cephrir wrote:I realize you didn't ask me but I for one would like to hear what Slandaar and AA9 have done that makes them such shining beacons of towniness that they don't even get (weak)'s.
As far as I can tell, it looks like your list is based entirely on whether or not people agree with you.
It's largely based on whether or not people agree with me, yes.
Because I am town. Ergo if you agree with me, you're likely town.
So yes, you saying your list was largely based on whether or not people agreed with you was in response to Cephrir saying the same. Only the second half of said post talked about Slandaar and AA9 specifically.
~
HD calls this an inconsistency and seeks to prove it with bolded phrase. Ignores the sentence before it asking about the 2 reads specifically.
Misrep Tally: 7 (Hey guys, we're up to 7 misreps IN ONE POST. If you aren't voting Bulbazak yet, you now have some 'splainin' to do.)
The word "it" fairly obviously refers to the list, so B&TB is
clearly responding to the sentence I bolded.
The second part of the post
clearly referred to the point made about his AA9 and Slandaar reads.
IMPORTANT: THE WORD "IT" IS SINGULAR AND CANNOT MEAN "2 SPECIFIC TOWN READS I HAVE".
This is 1st grade reading comprehension folks.
In post 714, Bulbazak wrote: In post 535, Om the Destroyer wrote:
So by my count, in this post, you've declared 3 scumreads, one of which is "scummy as hell", another of which deserves an FoS. Where's your vote?
Went back to look at Kitty's post. She doesn't outright declare ANY reads, instead only asking questions or clarifications from 3 people. She does call Cephrir scummy because of some recent posts, but she FoS's him for it. Where did you learn to read?
Misrep Tally: 10
Misreps Amethyst Kitty
2 times
AND myself. That counts as 3 misreps.
And just to prove it...
In post 428, Amethyst Kitty wrote:
@Fenix:
So what did you learn after catching up? Because voting him without giving reasons or thoughts is quite -
well scummy as hell.
Then you call out Nero for doing the same thing. >.>
Scummy as hell.
In post 428, Amethyst Kitty wrote:@B&B:
Mollie answer my question or else I will have to go extreme measures. (You do not want this)
Strongly implied scumread.
In post 428, Amethyst Kitty wrote:I'm not liking this whole; "If I'm correct then Nero was silenced."
The whole PR or even fishing for information is scummy as hell.
So
FoS: Cephir.
SCUMREAD THAT DESERVED AN FOS.
So that's three scumreads, dawg.
In post 714, Bulbazak wrote: In post 535, Om the Destroyer wrote:
Yes because calling someone out on doing something scummy is definitely stupid and scummy.
Mmm hmm.
Nice strawman. I called you scum, because I don't believe you to be stupid. The 2 were never connected.
Misrep Tally: 12
Calls on word semantics to call this a strawman; counting this as 2.
You called the action scummy or stupid. This therefore implies I am scummy or stupid. You saying that calling it scummy or stupid isn't a connection is fucking ridiculous.
In post 714, Bulbazak wrote: In post 649, Om the Destroyer wrote:omg HD my skype hasn't received your message
I'm probably not going to be completely on the same page as HD until we can get something going (hooray for planning ahead
).
So it'll probably be fine tomorrow.
~Pertayter
Already stated how useless this post was and that it gave you a reason to lurk later.
Except the hydra isn't lurking.
In post 714, Bulbazak wrote: In post 653, Om the Destroyer wrote:
Is there any way you can actually make a decent attack on our slot at all this game?
I mean seriously if you want to attack a post like that you might as well attack anybody declaring V/LA in the future.
Also some of your posts are useless too bby
Deflection.
Misrep Tally: 13
Om points out something legitimately scummy about Bulbazak, Bulb deflects it by calling it a deflection. (Ironic, right?)
In post 714, Bulbazak wrote: In post 659, Om the Destroyer wrote: In post 657, Bulbazak wrote:Second, the difference between someone declaring V/LA and your post is that you essentially said "I can't talk to HD. Not going to say anything else.". There was no point in saying any of this, as you could just as easily have messaged HD via PM. This was posting for posting's sake.
I don't even know how you managed to get 'Not going to say anything' from 'We might not be on the same page for at least a day'. At least get your facts right.
More deflection via semantics.
Misrep Tally: 14
Even more fucking ironic considering
Bulbazak is the one resorting to semantics here.
In post 714, Bulbazak wrote: In post 659, Om the Destroyer wrote:
Right now is my pregame thanks. I hope you realise I've openly stated that I've barely read any of the game. However I don't particularly need to. Also :meta reasons: useless posts are a frequent pastime of mine.
Giving himself another excuse to active lurk.
And yet again, I point out this hydra is not active lurking and that one head not posting doesn't make a hydra scum.
In post 714, Bulbazak wrote: In post 659, Om the Destroyer wrote:
Fucking lol. Please, tell me why we're even scum in the first place. Your arguments aren't even scumtells.
Useless posting isn't a scummy thing unless it's done repeatedly (and I've only been in this game for a day). Informing people about things like activity and potential dissonance isn't a scummy thing either, it's just being fucking informative. Attacking someone who is easily perceived as anti-town doesn't even say why the fuck we're scum. If someone is perceived as anti-town, you'd vote them, otherwise you won't get anywhere. Just because they have a history of looking anti-town doesn't mean they aren't scum. Your chainsaw defense of B&B is meta-related without any evidence to support your statements. Not to mention that you've tried to discredit us multiple times too....
~Pertayter
Flailing.
Misrep Tally: 15
Another deflection of his scumminess being called out.
In post 714, Bulbazak wrote: In post 661, Om the Destroyer wrote:Also I'd kinda like to know why I'm definitely scum compared to OS when:
According to you, I'm scum because: Useless posting and attacking someone you think is town for meta reasons.
According to you, OS is scum because: Bad knee-jerk reaction to RVS vote, backpedaling, contradicting claims, suspicions on trying to use claim to gain townie status and he hasn't said very much at all.
(Note: I don't exactly support the OS wagon right now (nor do I entirely oppose it), this is just my interpretation of his reasons for suspecting either of us)
Like seriously wtf? If you're going to attack OS for a bad knee-jerk reaction to a vote then I'm pretty much going to do the same for you, only in your case there wasn't even a vote before you started reacting terribly (as evidenced by your P-EDIT).
~Pertayter
Explained why this was bad. Tries to deflect attention off them and onto OS, who they have repeatedly called town.
Misrep Tally: 16
Calls this a deflection of attention to OS when Om
specifically says
he isn't particularly interested in the OS wagon. He's also calling this a deflection when Om is clearly using OS as an example of Bulbazak being hypocritical and NOT as wanting to wagon OS.
Misrep Tally: 17
Misrep Tally: 18
Not a misrep, but not scummy and only coming from one head
Misrep Tally: 20
This deserves special mention.
Nowhere in Bulbazak's case does he state that we are outright lying about anything.
This counts as two since he misrepped us AND his own case.