NY 164: Maniacal Street Mafia (Anticlimatically finished.)

mastin2 · Post Post #2250 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 11:47 am

(Yes, that's filler for a votecount.

)

Don't currently have access to my flashdrive, so you'll have to wait 'til tomorrow (Thursday) to get a fancy votecount edited into here. In the meantime, have this:

Forty-sixth Votecount

:

(

AKA, the "I'm a horrible, horrible person" votecount

)

Desperado - 5 (Cephrir, Om the Destroyer, ArcAngel9, Thor665, Bulbazak)

penguin_alien - 4 (Nachomamma8, Syryana, Kublai Khan, Red Ryu)

Nachomamma8 - 4 (Seanald, CrashTextDummie, Desperado, Bacde)
fuzzybutternut - 2 (thezmon221, Oversoul)
Om the Destroyer - 1 (fuzzybutternut)
BeautyAndTheBeast - 1 (Nero Cain)
Thor665 - 1 (Slandaar)
Nero Cain - 1 (BeautyAndTheBeast)

Not Voting - 5 (ThAdmiral, EddieFenix, Amethyst Kitty, PeregrineV, penguin_alien)

With

24

players alive, it's

13

to lynch.

If deadline were to hit now, Desperado would be lynched.

New deadline is Tuesday, May 28th, @ 12:30 PM PST, which is in (expired on 2013-05-28 12:31:59).

Nero Cain is V/LA until Thursday, May 23rd.
fuzzybutternut is V/LA until Thursday, May 23rd.

Spoiler: changes from last official votecount

Spoiler: Player Vote History

Spoiler: Voting History

Bacde · Post Post #2251 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 11:53 am

In post 2247, ThAdmiral wrote:Hey I'm replacing in and....

Fucking 90 pages!!?!

<<< Sorry, shoulda warned you 'bout that. >>>

Um, it'll probably take me to the weekend to catch up. Anything really important I need to know now?

<<< Deadline is in six days, on Tuesday. >>>

2 things

1) Sorry about playing with fire

2) you should vote for nacho

thezmon221 · Post Post #2252 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 12:50 pm

In post 2235, Bacde wrote:VOTE: nachomamma8

nvm he's scum

It's astounding how quick you are to hop from one wagon to the next. Two popular wagons, with one being the counter of the other, no less. Have you ever actually put thought into your cases and rationally thought it out, or are you doing this at the spur of the moment?

I completely understand if I've shot my credibility in the foot

You got that right.

Bacde · Post Post #2253 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 1:05 pm

In post 2252, thezmon221 wrote:It's astounding how quick you are to hop from one wagon to the next. Two popular wagons, with one being the counter of the other, no less. Have you ever actually put thought into your cases and rationally thought it out, or are you doing this at the spur of the moment?

rational and spur of the moment are not mutually exclusive

and please stop pretending like I ever had any credibility with you to begin with, even at the apex of my confidence and case and wagon on nacho you were never convinced to vote for him

seriously all your posts are posturing

Bacde · Post Post #2254 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 1:06 pm

thezmon why aren't you pushing on fbn harder?

why haven't you been trying to convince me to vote for fbn?

thezmon221 · Post Post #2255 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 2:25 pm

In post 2254, Bacde wrote:thezmon why aren't you pushing on fbn harder?

why haven't you been trying to convince me to vote for fbn?

Because you seem so hellbent on Nacho and Despo. Besides, I've already presented the case and have been rather impatiently waiting for him.

Bacde wrote:rational and spur of the moment are not mutually exclusive

They generally are. A rational case and a spur of the moment case are generally rather exclusive. However, in this instance it's not necessarily exclusive since you had a previous case. So let me rephrase my question, then.

Do you actually think about where you put your vote, or do you put it merely wherever you wish at that singular time?

ISO · Post Post #2256 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 4:40 pm

In post 2248, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote:
In post 2190, Cephrir wrote:I guess I should at least give you a chance. B&B, why Nero?
Because he hasn't done shit, he's been active-lurking through the game, hasn't participated meaningfully in any way with anyone or anything, and is voting us for a joke post.

On the one hand, some okay points, though they don't really deserve a vote especially right now with deadline looming and a million other prospects. Not to mention, only the last doesn't apply to fuzzy, who is also actively scummy.

Bacde make up your mind, holy balls. You may be either bipolar or disturbingly good at pretending to be bipolar.

If Nacho gets lynched today via the counterwagon not being able to decide who to actually be on, I will be somewhat cross. I came in here after the 5th-4th last pages or whatever all ready to slap a vote on Baby Spice and then she flipped out and got replaced... I don't know what to make of that, but I'd like to give a less-insane replacement a chance. If that becomes the only legitimate counterwagon I guess I'll have to move to it but I still want Desperado atm.

Syryana · Post Post #2257 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 4:57 pm

I totally forgot to do this earlier.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Desperado

I wanna hear from the penguin.

Bulbazak · Post Post #2258 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 5:37 pm

In post 2210, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote: slaandy I don't think sylacious is new to mafia at all. so I can't follow that thought process

I've seen Syryana do this before. It's a null tell.

Baby Spice's attack of Nacho was bad and horribly stretched and reminded me of Om's attack on me, especially the lie count (compare to Om's misrep count). However, she replaced out due to rage (null tell). Therefore, I think it best to give her replacement a shot. Because of this, I find this post:

In post 2215, Red Ryu wrote:
Vote: Baby Spice

This wagon I can defiantly get behind though.

opportunistic and scummy.

Desperado · Post Post #2259 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 5:41 pm

In post 2163, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote:anyways desperado you don't have to sell the os lynch to me I am ready to vote him off of that one post plus he isn't doing much in this gamthe case needs to be sold to everybody else

This:

In post 2130, BeautyAndTheBeast wrote:look at your reaction to town coming together and then look at overlysoul's reaction and see how they are different, look at the motivation behind the 2 reactions and see how they are different. you want to avoid getting lynched then help me drum up some overlysoul business.

I am not good at making cases that is not what makes me a decent mafia player it is that I know how to find and coordinate with town I can do this fast and early with players that I am familiar with as long as I can keep my balance early in a game. when I get knocked off balance it takes me a long time to recover.

Read like you were asking me to help build a case on OS, which is what I did.

In post 2151, thezmon221 wrote:Confirmation bias itself, I will agree with Bulb, generally pertains to the fact that the person committing confirmation bias (in this case, Nacho) is town, since generally scum doesn't need to fit the read to a case as they know your alignment. Due to this, it seemed that you submitted to him being town in this instance with the belief of his confirmation bias.

What the hell? You just said this:

In post 2148, thezmon221 wrote:I know I personally have been able to deduce in an argument I am in that a person has succumbed to confirmation bias when I am town. Just because he says that Nacho is succumbed to such doesn't entirely mean that Despo is scum. While the part where he flipped his read on Nacho is scummy itself, the confirmation bias point simply is weak. Scum and town alike can come to the same conclusion. Scum are going to be more accurate, yes, because they know the alignments. However, a town can make the same conclusion if they are able to get into a third perspective of the argument, which is what a townie should be able to do in such an argument.

So you have personal experience, as town, with being able to deduce that another player is resorting to confirmation bias, and that me saying that Nacho is using confirmation bias doesn't necessarily make me scum. So which is it?

In post 2167, Bulbazak wrote:That is assuming that Desperado is ignorant town unwilling to learn about what certain terminology means. However, I believe the opposite. These posts fit with the pattern that he's established of arguing a point into the ground in an attempt to find any little way to discredit the opposing argument. His points in these cases never change, even if they've been disproven. It seems to be a way to turn the argument into pure noise so that town stops paying attention, and in so doing, discredit the argument itself and make it go away. As such, I believe that I've explained my points as well as I can, and I'm going to attempt to move on. If he wants to actually discuss the merits of the case and/or bring up something new concerning the current one, then I will engage, but if he is just going to run the same old points into the ground, I, as well as the town, am better off ignoring him.

Please support all of these claims with evidence.

In post 2198, Amethyst Kitty wrote:Desp, you're backing down by moving your vote from Nacho (reasons to why, I still don't fully understand. what of Angel did you see that was scummy) to Angel who, I percieve to be, an easier target to 1v1 with. the fact that you went back to Nacho after I called you out for backing down is note-worthy

This is so frustrating. I voted AA9 because syry had developed a meta read on Arc that I agreed with and could support with personal experience. I thought it would be valuable to apply my vote to her wagon in order to garner a reaction from her that could be read. She proceeded to OMGUS the shit out of me, which was explicitly counter to the read that Syry had put forth. I've stated this

repeatedly

, so why are you unsure of my motivations?

Regardless of that, how is following another lead "backing down?" And why are you so arrogant as to assume that you saying something about me backing down (an accusation that I have only disputed) had anything at all to do with me going back on Nacho?

In post 2257, Syryana wrote:I totally forgot to do this earlier.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Desperado

I wanna hear from the penguin.

Still waiting on that case you said you had coming.

Speaking of which, you absolutely come off worst with the Baby Spice fiasco. You were convinced that penguin's slot was scum in #2197, Seanald asks you why/by what in #2999, you blatantly deflect the question here:

In post 2200, Syryana wrote:Hello Seanald. Who are your scumreads and brief reasoning why?

PS: I'll answer you if you answer me

And then are saved from ever having to address it by a) seanald not first answering your asinine question, and b) Baby Spice replacing out. So what convinced you that Spice was scum?

Syryana · Post Post #2260 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 5:50 pm

In post 2259, Desperado wrote: Still waiting on that case you said you had coming.

I'll get there eventually. I'm actually more interested in penguin than you right now.

In post 2259, Desperado wrote:Speaking of which, you absolutely come off worst with the Baby Spice fiasco. You were convinced that penguin's slot was scum in #2197, Seanald asks you why/by what in #2999, you blatantly deflect the question here:

In post 2200, Syryana wrote:Hello Seanald. Who are your scumreads and brief reasoning why?

PS: I'll answer you if you answer me
And then are saved from ever having to address it by a) seanald not first answering your asinine question, and b) Baby Spice replacing out. So what convinced you that Spice was scum?

Ooh, I like it when people use words like asinine. As for why BabySpice, perhaps you should read my posts?

Desperado · Post Post #2261 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 5:54 pm

Yeah I read your 2204. Spice responded to every point you made, up and and including indicting you for the way you posted it. Fortunately for you, as I said, she replaced out right after and you...don't mention her again. So I guess you could also respond to that post of hers, or just hope it goes away which is clearly what you had intended.

ISO · Post Post #2262 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 6:20 pm

@Desp 2259, in which I should use quote blocks but don't feel like it:
Syryana is not deflecting in 2200. The only one looking bad after "the Baby Spice fiasco" is Baby Spice, and maaaaaybe Red Ryu.

the confirmation bias point has to mean you think Nacho is town. That's how you solve the apparent contradiction between thezmon's posts. If you insist that you hadn't flipped your read on Nacho, give how convinced those posts seemed, yeah, you're scum.

We understand your reasoning for voting Arc in a vacuum, it just doesn't make sense in context, where you were hardcore sold on Nacho. Your confirmation bias points read as backing down or admitting you're scum. It's hard for me to get something other than one of those things out of them. I am always wary of the 'scumslip' theory, as I don't think I've ever seen one be correct, but without this point the case on you is still easily solid enough to have my vote.

Thor665 · Post Post #2263 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 6:20 pm

@Mod - V/LA for uncertain period...um...basically it will assuredly be over Sunday the 26th, and may end sooner, but I'm not sure.

Apologies to all.

(Page 82 - for my own records)

Bulbazak · Post Post #2264 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 6:32 pm

In post 2259, Desperado wrote:
In post 2167, Bulbazak wrote:That is assuming that Desperado is ignorant town unwilling to learn about what certain terminology means. However, I believe the opposite. These posts fit with the pattern that he's established of arguing a point into the ground in an attempt to find any little way to discredit the opposing argument. His points in these cases never change, even if they've been disproven. It seems to be a way to turn the argument into pure noise so that town stops paying attention, and in so doing, discredit the argument itself and make it go away. As such, I believe that I've explained my points as well as I can, and I'm going to attempt to move on. If he wants to actually discuss the merits of the case and/or bring up something new concerning the current one, then I will engage, but if he is just going to run the same old points into the ground, I, as well as the town, am better off ignoring him.
Please support all of these claims with evidence.

I'm mainly referring you your argument with Nacho regarding the CTD point. It is apparent that you are trying to do anything you can do discredit Nacho, especially when you consider: 1.) Nacho never mentioned CTD in his case against you 2.) You brought CTD into the argument. 3.) Nacho never mentioned you "vaguely supporting" massclaim/CTD. 4.) Nacho never found CTD to be town BECAUSE of his DLG case. 5.) You trying to gain towncred via Nacho's townread on CTD and CTD's similar read of DLG is scummy in and of itself and is also CIC.

Essentially, you created an argument that did not exist, and whenever Nacho or somebody else tried to explain it to you, you simply argued all the louder, essentially creating an Argument from Repetition. This quickly just devolved into noise, as before long, nobody really wanted to hear about it anymore.

In post 2261, Desperado wrote:Yeah I read your 2204. Spice responded to every point you made, up and and including indicting you for the way you posted it. Fortunately for you, as I said, she replaced out right after and you...don't mention her again. So I guess you could also respond to that post of hers, or just hope it goes away which is clearly what you had intended.

Scum post.

Bacde · Post Post #2265 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 6:40 pm

In post 2256, Cephrir wrote:Bacde make up your mind, holy balls. You may be either bipolar or disturbingly good at pretending to be bipolar.

nice attempt to discredit me by using a reference to mental disorders

does being bipolar affect nacho being scum in any way?

Bacde · Post Post #2266 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 6:40 pm

In post 2255, thezmon221 wrote:Do you actually think about where you put your vote, or do you put it merely wherever you wish at that singular time?

how are these two things mutually exclusive?

I do both

Kublai Khan · Post Post #2267 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 6:42 pm

In post 2249, mastin2 wrote:I checked--we're the third-longest D1 ever on site, and counting. Yay, us?

What this means is that we need to quit dithering and decide on a lynch.

EddieFenix and Amethyst Kitty need to place a vote. Now.

ThAdmiral, PeregrineV, and penguin_alien are replacements and therefore get a grace period. But I encourage them to catch up and vote.

fuzzybutternut, Nero Cain, Slandaar, & BeautyAndTheBeast either need to make a very moving case to build their wagon, or move their vote.

Enough arguing. Let's lynch.

Desperado · Post Post #2268 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 6:46 pm

In post 2264, Bulbazak wrote:
In post 2259, Desperado wrote:
In post 2167, Bulbazak wrote:That is assuming that Desperado is ignorant town unwilling to learn about what certain terminology means. However, I believe the opposite. These posts fit with the pattern that he's established of arguing a point into the ground in an attempt to find any little way to discredit the opposing argument. His points in these cases never change, even if they've been disproven. It seems to be a way to turn the argument into pure noise so that town stops paying attention, and in so doing, discredit the argument itself and make it go away. As such, I believe that I've explained my points as well as I can, and I'm going to attempt to move on. If he wants to actually discuss the merits of the case and/or bring up something new concerning the current one, then I will engage, but if he is just going to run the same old points into the ground, I, as well as the town, am better off ignoring him.
Please support all of these claims with evidence.
I'm mainly referring you your argument with Nacho regarding the CTD point. It is apparent that you are trying to do anything you can do discredit Nacho, especially when you consider: 1.) Nacho never mentioned CTD in his case against you 2.) You brought CTD into the argument. 3.) Nacho never mentioned you "vaguely supporting" massclaim/CTD. 4.) Nacho never found CTD to be town BECAUSE of his DLG case. 5.) You trying to gain towncred via Nacho's townread on CTD and CTD's similar read of DLG is scummy in and of itself and is also CIC.

Essentially, you created an argument that did not exist, and whenever Nacho or somebody else tried to explain it to you, you simply argued all the louder, essentially creating an Argument from Repetition. This quickly just devolved into noise, as before long, nobody really wanted to hear about it anymore.

In post 2261, Desperado wrote:Yeah I read your 2204. Spice responded to every point you made, up and and including indicting you for the way you posted it. Fortunately for you, as I said, she replaced out right after and you...don't mention her again. So I guess you could also respond to that post of hers, or just hope it goes away which is clearly what you had intended.
Scum post.

1) He sure didn't, but he DID say that my reads on DLG were weak while simultaneously praising CTD for his scumhunting activities, which included a case on DLG that reflected my thoughts.
2) Yes, because Nacho's reads w/r/t our slots were different when our play dictated otherwise.
3)

In post 1263, Nachomamma8 wrote:Desperado's early posting hurts a fair bit.
Vaguely supports massclaim
, sort of talks to B&B about the Nero = indy read everyone was talking about, small attack on Ryu. His first significant anything is his attack on DLG, which is a location I like, but then the whole accusation of "DLG isn't scumhunting and is being a hypocrite for expecting AA9 to scumhunt when he is not" sort of fell flat; he said DLG's townreads were surface and not good enough, but they were still townreads. It was still scumhunting, whether it was fake scumhunting or real scumhunting. Then, DLG posts a bunch while he's typing the case, Desp acknowledges as much, then posts 10 minutes later that "no, not good" while posting other things at the same time, which seems like he just waited a little while but never actually read any of DLG's posting unless he's a god of speedreading or some shit. His hop onto my wagon is awkward and doesn't have anything in his ISO hinting at it, so that will have to be explained later. Scumread.

4)

In post 1169, Nachomamma8 wrote:He was willing to defend his idea when he got a little traction, and when that traction ran out, he still found something more from it. He also easily found other things to look at and didn't stall in coming up with scumreads and townreads, regardless of his massclaiming shenanigans

The only substantial case CTD has come up with to that point was on DLG, so what else was he talking about here if not that? Why did he lie about it when he said "CTD's case on DLG had absolutely nothing to do with my townread on him" and then backtrack later and say that it was "the way CTD pushed his case?"
5) No I'm not. I'm pointing out inconsistencies in Nacho's reads. Inconsistency is a scumtell for me. Do you disagree?

And really great analysis there. What's scummy about asking Syry to respond to a post that was made in response to something he thinks was the final word on the subject?

Desperado · Post Post #2269 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 6:56 pm

In post 2264, Bulbazak wrote:Essentially, you created an argument that did not exist, and whenever Nacho or somebody else tried to explain it to you, you simply argued all the louder, essentially creating an Argument from Repetition. This quickly just devolved into noise, as before long, nobody really wanted to hear about it anymore.

This deserved it's own post.

You say I "created an argument that didn't exist" when, from my perspective, I was engaging another player who had expressed a strong scumread on me in an attempt to understand why and their responses either a) demonstrated a clear misunderstanding of what I had said ("CTD didn't say that you vaguely supported a mass claim"), or b) a complete unwillingness to engage me in discussion ("stop asking these questions because they are scummy as hell"), and I know my alignment, then I'm going to assume they are scum that doesn't want to go into detail about their read on me because it's manufactured.

Desperado · Post Post #2270 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 7:05 pm

In post 2262, Cephrir wrote:@Desp 2259, in which I should use quote blocks but don't feel like it:
Syryana is not deflecting in 2200. The only one looking bad after "the Baby Spice fiasco" is Baby Spice, and maaaaaybe Red Ryu.

the confirmation bias point has to mean you think Nacho is town. That's how you solve the apparent contradiction between thezmon's posts. If you insist that you hadn't flipped your read on Nacho, give how convinced those posts seemed, yeah, you're scum.

We understand your reasoning for voting Arc in a vacuum, it just doesn't make sense in context, where you were hardcore sold on Nacho. Your confirmation bias points read as backing down or admitting you're scum. It's hard for me to get something other than one of those things out of them. I am always wary of the 'scumslip' theory, as I don't think I've ever seen one be correct, but without this point the case on you is still easily solid enough to have my vote.

No. It. Doesn't. Is there any evidence is this thread,

anywhere

, where I say that my scumread on Nacho has gone away? That does not have to do with me saying he is using confirmation bias? No, because it doesn't exist, I don't think that, and you and Bulb and Nacho are using an incredibly narrow definition of confirmation bias, and what it means to say that another player is using it, to tell

me

what

I

meant when I said it, and thus justify voting me because you

don't have any other relevant reasons to do so.

No one has explained to me how leaving the Nacho wagon to follow another lead is scummy, period. You all keep saying it is, but no reason beyond "but you were so sure nacho was scum!!!" has been given, as if I can't have multiple scumreads at the same time, or use my vote however I see fit. I very clearly stated why I was voting Arc, my vote got a reaction out of her as I intended it to, and then I went back to Nacho. Explain to me in detail your definition of scumhunting and why that doesn't qualify.

Bulbazak · Post Post #2271 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 7:54 pm

In post 2268, Desperado wrote: 3)
In post 1263, Nachomamma8 wrote:Desperado's early posting hurts a fair bit.
Vaguely supports massclaim
, sort of talks to B&B about the Nero = indy read everyone was talking about, small attack on Ryu. His first significant anything is his attack on DLG, which is a location I like, but then the whole accusation of "DLG isn't scumhunting and is being a hypocrite for expecting AA9 to scumhunt when he is not" sort of fell flat; he said DLG's townreads were surface and not good enough, but they were still townreads. It was still scumhunting, whether it was fake scumhunting or real scumhunting. Then, DLG posts a bunch while he's typing the case, Desp acknowledges as much, then posts 10 minutes later that "no, not good" while posting other things at the same time, which seems like he just waited a little while but never actually read any of DLG's posting unless he's a god of speedreading or some shit. His hop onto my wagon is awkward and doesn't have anything in his ISO hinting at it, so that will have to be explained later. Scumread.

Point retracted. I need to stop reading these games so late at night...

However, I would say that I agree with Nacho on this. Simply saying, "I support massclaim for all the reasons CTD said" is not adequate, as you simply sheeped someone else's reasons without providing any of your own, or at least putting those reasons in your own words. Did you support massclaim? Yes. Were you a staunch supporter of it? No.

In post 2268, Desperado wrote: 4)
In post 1169, Nachomamma8 wrote:He was willing to defend his idea when he got a little traction, and when that traction ran out, he still found something more from it. He also easily found other things to look at and didn't stall in coming up with scumreads and townreads, regardless of his massclaiming shenanigans
The only substantial case CTD has come up with to that point was on DLG, so what else was he talking about here if not that? Why did he lie about it when he said "CTD's case on DLG had absolutely nothing to do with my townread on him" and then backtrack later and say that it was "the way CTD pushed his case?"

Nacho is talking about CTD's massclaim idea, and how he used it to scumhunt afterwards.

In post 2268, Desperado wrote: 5) No I'm not. I'm pointing out inconsistencies in Nacho's reads. Inconsistency is a scumtell for me. Do you disagree?

I don't disagree that inconsistency is a scumtell, but Nacho wasn't being inconsistent. If you read his original town-case on CTD, it had to do with CTD's push for massclaim and how he used the information gathered after the fact in order to scumhunt. At no point does he mention CTD's scumread of DLG. That is actually brought up in a different case, the DLG-scum case.

His push on you was not that he disagreed with your scumread, but that you didn't put much effort into reading and responding to the 4 posts that DLG had made during your initial case. Essentially, you wrote them off, and Nacho found that to be scummy.

In post 2268, Desperado wrote: And really great analysis there. What's scummy about asking Syry to respond to a post that was made in response to something he thinks was the final word on the subject?

Because:

1.) Due to Baby Spice's replacing out, there was no need to respond to it. It would be a waste of time and space, and the town has better things to do than get caught up in that.

2.) BS's response and original attack against Nacho were terribad, and had she not replaced out, even I was going to show why. The attack consisted of mainly calling Nacho a liar as many times as she could in an effort to try to trick town into thinking he's scummy and discredit him. As I said, it reminded me of Om's attack against me. Her actual points were laughable and easily disproven and countered. Trust me, it wouldn't take much to take her points apart like an Oreo.

3.) You were attacking Syryana for attacking Baby Spice (possible chainsaw defending?). And the way you were doing so was a clear misrep of his actions. I essentially saw it as you trying to use broad strokes to paint Syryana as scummy as possible, instead of investigating possible intent.

In post 2270, Desperado wrote:
In post 2262, Cephrir wrote: the confirmation bias point has to mean you think Nacho is town. That's how you solve the apparent contradiction between thezmon's posts. If you insist that you hadn't flipped your read on Nacho, give how convinced those posts seemed, yeah, you're scum.
No. It. Doesn't. Is there any evidence is this thread,
anywhere
, where I say that my scumread on Nacho has gone away? That does not have to do with me saying he is using confirmation bias? No, because it doesn't exist, I don't think that, and you and Bulb and Nacho are using an incredibly narrow definition of confirmation bias, and what it means to say that another player is using it, to tell
me
what
I
meant when I said it, and thus justify voting me because you
don't have any other relevant reasons to do so.

So what you're saying is that Nacho, Cephrir, Thez, B&B, myself, and who knows how many others who have experience in such matters are wrong, and you are right? Do you know how ignorant that makes you sound?

From the Mafiascum wiki: "Confirmation Bias or Tunnel Vision is when a player becomes convinced by their own arguments by virtue of how long or how strong they hold them." Scum cannot be convinced by their own argument, since they already know it to be false. Therefore, the only ones who could would be town. You said that Nacho was suffering from confirmation bias. Ergo, you called Nacho town. How clearer can I make it?

If you don't get it now, you are clearly not trying to, which means you are scum, and any future posts from you refuting this matter should be treated as scum posting.

Red Ryu · Post Post #2272 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 7:56 pm

In post 2218, Bacde wrote:
In post 2215, Red Ryu wrote:Bacde show me why Nacho is not scum off what you read recently.

Vote: Baby Spice

This wagon I can defiantly get behind though.

Why were people voting Desp though, I forgot/didn't get far enough to see why.
tbh I'm not convinced nacho is scum anymore

i dunno if it was a specific post or what

I think its likely that he is scum and he manipulated me to somehow feel this way, if that makes any sense

anyway AA9 is defo scum so we should lynch there

Give me a few quotes or post numbers, I still think he is scum but I am actually a lot more sure Baby Spice's slot is scum.

Red Ryu · Post Post #2273 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 7:57 pm

In post 2267, Kublai Khan wrote:
In post 2249, mastin2 wrote:I checked--we're the third-longest D1 ever on site, and counting. Yay, us?
What this means is that we need to quit dithering and decide on a lynch.

EddieFenix and Amethyst Kitty need to place a vote. Now.

ThAdmiral, PeregrineV, and penguin_alien are replacements and therefore get a grace period. But I encourage them to catch up and vote.

fuzzybutternut, Nero Cain, Slandaar, & BeautyAndTheBeast either need to make a very moving case to build their wagon, or move their vote.

Enough arguing. Let's lynch.

Lynch the slot, not the player.

If the previous player was scummy, that slot is still scummy.

Good advice from the best mafia player I have ever played with.

Red Ryu · Post Post #2274 (ISO) » Wed May 22, 2013 7:59 pm

In post 2235, Bacde wrote:VOTE: nachomamma8

nvm he's scum

I messed up the past couple of days

I completely understand if I've shot my credibility in the foot

but to be honestly not that many people thought I was that credible

doesn't matter though, I'm right

nacho is scum

Bacde your playing like scatterbrain me does.

You are all over the place but give me a little with your mindset more here.