You could link the post and comment briefly on each one. As for ignoring your points, there's not really much for me to comment on in 300 since it is just you stating unsubstantiated opinions, nor in 301, where you quote a large passage but only write three words, nor in 303, which is much the same as 300, or 305, which is the same as 301, etc. In 302 you talk about hypocrisy but that is not equal to scum, and in 306, where you think him saying Saki was town was scummy as only scum can know alignments. I have seen town say that they know someone else is town countless times before, so I view that point as null. You say in 307 that mitillos or siv could be scum if bauss flips scum, but you don't say why. I've ignored you because I can't reply to poorly reasoned opinions.In post 326, Beginner wrote: @Frog: would you rather I had slowly copied and pasted each and every quote and response I felt like making and put it together in one gigantic post? How is the quantity of posts even relevant in light of said posts' contents? Frog, why are you ignoring my points?
@Frog:In post 331, frog wrote:You could link the post and comment briefly on each one. As for ignoring your points, there's not really much for me to comment on in 300 since it is just you stating unsubstantiated opinions, nor in 301, where you quote a large passage but only write three words, nor in 303, which is much the same as 300, or 305, which is the same as 301, etc. In 302 you talk about hypocrisy but that is not equal to scum, and in 306, where you think him saying Saki was town was scummy as only scum can know alignments. I have seen town say that they know someone else is town countless times before, so I view that point as null. You say in 307 that mitillos or siv could be scum if bauss flips scum, but you don't say why. I've ignored you because I can't reply to poorly reasoned opinions.In post 326, Beginner wrote: @Frog: would you rather I had slowly copied and pasted each and every quote and response I felt like making and put it together in one gigantic post? How is the quantity of posts even relevant in light of said posts' contents? Frog, why are you ignoring my points?
@mitillos: I was sort of talking to siv as he is voting for beginner, but as a matter of fact his posting habits do annoy me.
Highlight 1: True, it may/may not be difficult to stop Saki's lynch due to his attitude, but that is completely irrelevant. Bauss's effort? Minimal at best, insincere at worst.In post 327, Mitillos wrote:@Beginner: Fair enough, perhaps bauss could have acted more pro-town, by championing Saki. I can accept that. On the other hand,Highlight 1: Saki himself kind of gave up on this game, by lying about both his role and alignment and then self-hammering. Hard to stop the lynch of someone who gets to that point. But I'm not sure there really is anything else in his behaviour that points to him being scum. He attacked mutley for giving more information to scum.Highlight 2: This was not actually mutley's fault, but it does show a pro-town viewpoint on the part of bauss. The only other thing you seem to be saying against bauss is how being OK with his own lynch isn't pro-town. I agree that, if he is town, he should fight tooth and nail to convince people of this. But he did make the addendum that this was only in case there were no other alternatives (no-lynch is bad). And don't forget that he messed up and took out a PR overnight.Highlight 3: If he is town, being suddenly resigned after this makes sense. So, I consider this a null-tell.
Regarding the argument: Again, I am not simply going by post counts. It's also about the amount of content contained there. And yes, scum will sometimes argue for pages and pages. I've seen it too. You can even find examples of scum-mates doing it, hard-bussing each other for the entire game, hardly ever voting anyone else. But 1) it's *usually* town that does this and 2) (and this is far more important) I have town reads on both bauss and mutley, anterior to the argument. They are both operating from what appears to me to be a town mindset.
Or is he just scum trying to place another player in a negative light (leads to making them look scummy)?In post 324, Mitillos wrote:@frog: Why exactly would you be going after beginner? Cluttering the thread isn't alignment indicative and he is generating content, by going through the thread and making reads, i.e. scumhunting. My read on him is town, so am I missing something, or are you just too annoyed by the large number of consecutive posts?
Let me get back to that.. there were some posts and general behavioral tells that gave me this impression.In post 342, Siveure DtTrikyp wrote:Beginner complaining about discrediting and trying to make someone look scummy and doing it himself lol. VERY negative wording, so yeah...
About me/mit being scum if bauss is, say it now. If it's good, it'll strengthen your case. If it's bad, you've at least said what you think. You also seem to consider frog as scum, so who is your main scumspects?
Reread: I didn't register the sentence after the post I was quoting. Fair enough. Why are you working so hard to impair my credibility?Also LOL at "hey you said it's null because it makes sense as town well i'm gonna say it makes sense as mafia so it's null." Reduce redundancy!
I'm not liking that you and Bauss are pushing so much for the mass claim together.. as if you're working together toward a scumteam objective. Much of what you've been doing has been in line with what Bauss has been doing.Anyway, do we have a n3 vig? I say we just no-lynch now. Or, maybe scum have it. Ew. If they do we need to lynch scum now. If they don't then lynching town loses... Ummm, finish the massclaim. We're in MyLo, so we just finish it.
To be honest siv, you are one of my main scumspect. I've gotten nothing substantive from you this entire game. You ask questions, but with no apparent purpose or objective.. Are you just going to poke at people's posts the entire game?N3 vig needs to claim, because knowing we have it on a town person allows us to no-lynch.
Ummm, okay? The bolded does look like discrediting frog and making him look scummy.In post 338, Beginner wrote:@Frog:
There are three issuesyou are fabricating in your senile attempt to negate my case, and I will respond to each:
First, Frog, I've also seen town declare knowledge of alignment. You're ignoring the entire context in which Bauss touts his town-read on Saki. It is entirely weak and barely, if at all, justifiable. If anything, Mutley's HoS on Saki was actually much more likely, believable and presentable than Bauss's town-read. Again, Bauss's behavior does not compute unless he were mafia. It explains his behavior perfectly. You're suffering a case of refutation-bias.
Second, true, hypocrisy is not equivalent to scum. Again, you're taking individual points out of context. You're failing to ask the following questions:
What does it mean that Bauss was being a hypocrite in his reprimanding Mutley?
Frog, Bauss's being hypocritical means he didn't truly believe what he was saying.
What was his motive then?
Let us reexamine the post:
P1:The motive that is immediately apparent in that post against Mut is to portray Mut in a scummy light.
P2: The content by which Bauss was illustrating his intent, in light of his hypocrisy, is most likely contrived/fake.
P3: Bauss was using contrived/fake content to paint Mut in scumminess.
P4: Only scum use fake/contrived reasoning to make other people look scummy
C: Bauss is scum.
As for your comparing my posts (Post #2 = Post #4 and is relative to ppost #3).. I can't derive anything tangible here.. it's an utter mess.
As for the Mitillos/siv could possibly be scum if Bauss flips scum.. I'm not going to explain until the flip occurs.You're seriously going to discredit me based on this one post?
Frog, what are your reads?
Right, this is really blatant.In post 341, Beginner wrote:Or is he just scum trying to place another player in a negative light (leads to making them look scummy)?In post 324, Mitillos wrote:@frog: Why exactly would you be going after beginner? Cluttering the thread isn't alignment indicative and he is generating content, by going through the thread and making reads, i.e. scumhunting. My read on him is town, so am I missing something, or are you just too annoyed by the large number of consecutive posts?
^Siv ignores this, but addresses the lesser relevant content above, prioritizing credibility impairment over a scumhunting discussion.. pretty damning imoIn post 338, Beginner wrote: First, Frog, I've also seen town declare knowledge of alignment. You're ignoring the entire context in which Bauss touts his town-read on Saki. It is entirely weak and barely, if at all, justifiable. If anything, Mutley's HoS on Saki was actually much more likely, believable and presentable than Bauss's town-read. Again, Bauss's behavior does not compute unless he were mafia. It explains his behavior perfectly. You're suffering a case of refutation-bias.
Second, true, hypocrisy is not equivalent to scum. Again, you're taking individual points out of context. You're failing to ask the following questions:
What does it mean that Bauss was being a hypocrite in his reprimanding Mutley?
Frog, Bauss's being hypocritical means he didn't truly believe what he was saying.
What was his motive then?
Let us reexamine the post:
P1:The motive that is immediately apparent in that post against Mut is to portray Mut in a scummy light.
P2: The content by which Bauss was illustrating his intent, in light of his hypocrisy, is most likely contrived/fake.
P3: Bauss was using contrived/fake content to paint Mut in scumminess.
P4: Only scum use fake/contrived reasoning to make other people look scummy
C: Bauss is scum.