In post 65, Sinsun1 wrote:To explain my vote. Vedith and wgeurts opening little debate was essentially the first of many, but the first it's always easier to try to vote one of them off and later claim they looked scummy.
This is Sinsun's first contradiction. He votes ShadedMelee of the grounds that Shaded was being opportunistic, however he says that it is a "gut read". Here he goes into explaining his vote, and that doesn't match his original explanation as this shows it's definitely not "gut" nor is this speaking on the opportunism SM supposedly had. Which he did if that vote wasn't RVS but we'll never know as he replaced out. Then there's the point that this reasoning is utter crumpets, why?
Because this:
Mine and Vedith's debate had no alignment indicative content what so ever. It was about content/post relation in games. You could never fall-back on calling on calling one of us two scummy, and I doubt SM was that skilled as he is still a newbie. This whole line of reasoning is false as well as contradicting his early explantion for his vote on SM.
[quotr]Now as I have thought, a bandwagon is starting on both of them, both of the very obvious bandwagons.[/quote] It is? There was one vote on Vedith and that was an earlier RVS. This observation is false.
I knew they'd turn into a bandwagon before the mafia did and guess who the first two bandwagons are usually on in the beginning? Can anyone guess? It starts with a T and ends with an n.
Why was he expecting us to get wagoned because of a contentless debate? For one we were barely getting wagoned (besides me) and two there is literaly no grounds for expecting this. This whole thing sounds made up used a noise to make his SM read seem more valid.
The likelihood of both Vedith and wgeurts being town is actually quite high at this moment in time. But they are also the prime two lynch candidates already this early in the game.
He expects we're both likely town because we debated on a non-alignment indicative topic? He may as well be saying "because vedith and wgeurts disagreed on the best type of cake and are therefore obvious choices for scum to wagon I think they are town". Even if you disagree with this and say this is a "strawman" the fact still remains that he is using a pre-flip associative (bad) tell with almost no foundation yet he has such certainty in me and Vedith being town.
Then there's his second statement which is false as we were obviously not prime-lynch candidates.
Who else would love nothing more than to hope on their wagons in the beginning to get the ball running?
Anyone? I've seen town wagon to get the ball rolling and I've done it before myself so not really a valid argument. Search the member "BlueBloodedToffee" for an avid town-RVS-wagoner.
Look at both wagons, I can promise there's more than likely at least 1 mafia/wolf on each. Now my gut comes in and I am going to push ShadedMelee. It's a hunch and thus gut feeling.
There was only 1 person on vedith so that makes the person conf-scum in his eyes? Yet he doesn't push that person at all. No, lets randomly take one from the wagon with multiple people as having a 50% chance of hitting scum in my eyes is better than 100%. Although this is exaggerated it does show how his own reasoning is flawed.
In post 83, Sinsun1 wrote: In post 79, wgeurts wrote:Keep in mind as this is multiball scum will be hunting scum.
Exactly, now there is WIFOM. Is my tactic of reading based on town hunting scum, or scum hunting scum? Either way, I'd be deadly for scum if I am correct. The only question that remains, what are my motives for hunting?
This whole above paragraph is off. He's basically saying "I could be scum or town, however either way I'm deadly for scum so look how good I am". There is literally not reason he needed to post this.
Is it to secure the win for the town, or secure the win for one of the two anti-town factions? there's a 3/5 chance of it being the first and 2/5 of it being the later. So would you go with the 60% or the 40%?
Statistics and probability theory don't win mafia, his whole argument for the no lynch assumes that whatever happens in a game the probability percentages won't be swayed. This isn't true as many games and time have shown. You are able to catch mafia through interactions and if that weren't so we may as well all randomly generate our votes. Then there's the fact that he mentions he likes gambiting, and he made it clear he knows no lynching is "taboo". Does this raise the possibility he was gambiting? Yes.
Then there's the fact that stating numbers and probabilities doesn't further the towns grasp on the game. It's simply just stating numbers and can be done by any faction and is often done by scum to try and look "pro-town" and useful.
In post 89, Sinsun1 wrote:It doesn't matter if you agree with me and by your own logic, your vote on me is just as useless. What use does it have besides to state that you disagree with my logic? Absolutely nothing.
This is where his disrepping of me starts. He's strawmanning me by saying that I only disagree with his logic and giving the implication that was the only foundation of my vote. Surprise, surprise it wasn't. Trying to make someones arguments for you being scum look false/invalid or strawmanning them without actually combatting them or explaining why they are false is a common scum tactic. It's also used mostly by skilled players, which I believe sinsun is. For another example check out "Titus'" play style as scum.
Bang! This is evidence enough for a vote. Town's sole motivation is to see who's town and who is not, this contradicts that! Ironically this is the guy who suggest we only town hunt later on which only involves "seeing if you're town".
For now my read on you for this phase is already stated.
Fixed reads isn't a town thing, town needs to be open to change and new evidence so closing yourself off from that is not town motivated. Further more his bases for his town read on me was "He and Vedith talked about post content and were therefore likely picks for scum to wagon therefore they are town."
Not very convincing is it?
Maybe tomorrow we'll have more evidence.
So why is he open to evidence yet refuses to consider the possibility of me possibly being scum? He avoids interacting with me to make more evidence with seems contradictory.
Day 1 is all shitty reads if you want to go that far. But using one's own experience to define what they do D1 is usually a smart thing to do.
Wrong, there have been many scum lynches on day 1. Content does exist and it does actually work as a tool for finding mafia, even on day 1 many games have shown.
You're no more clear than he is, that being said, why push you when we have no facts on the table as of yet that are valuable? All we have are votes flinging off and the reasons behind them. Right now I am on my hunch and Dongempire is on his hunch. Either of our hunches could be correct, or both could be correct/wrong. It's all part of scum hunting. So if you're happy with your vote for voting someone who is attempting to scum hunt early on Day 1, then perhaps you need to evaluate if you believe it's right. Is it just because you don't like my reason or do you think that by my reason I am likely scum for using it?
This whole bottom paragraph is a strawman of my reasons for voting him. He yet again (hint: he never actually responds directly to my accusations) evades saying why they are wrong by just saying they are "wrong".
In post 98, Sinsun1 wrote:I'm not even going to bother debating your argument because both, you are not seeing what I am seeing and I have my read for you placed for now, I'm not going to bother wasting pages debating on why I have the read I do, I just do, deal with it.
Why on earth would town refuse to interact? People make mistakes and therefore even town will have differing views amongst themselves. The best way to reach clarity and understanding? Interaction.
Hard avoiding interaction is a scummy thing, he does this
a lot.
Also just saying "I have the read I have because I do" is a pretty simple way for scum to get away with the reads while being able to avoid explaining them and risking the possibility of someone arguing back.
If I wanted town credit, I'd be fighting for it, instead, I am just sitting back and making observational comments and votes based on my gut and observations. Heck, why bother for town credit? I find that when I try going for town credit people say I am doing "horrific town play" or of the similar. What's horrific about it? The fact that you disagree?
"If I wanted town credit I would be pushing for it and people call my play horrific when I push for it and neither of those are happening so I must be town". Self-meta is bad kids.
You know, if you are town and you believe I am scum, perhaps you should sit back and see who guns for me. Because if I am indeed scum, then the other faction will want me gone. So that's at least 3 people wanting me dead whether I am the other faction or I am town. Either way, no matter which I am, it is better to watch how the others react to me than set upon yourself to react in a rather rash way.
He quite obviously wants me to back off him and it seems to be unnerving him. This refusal of responding to accusations and interaction is really one of the main reasons for my scum read. I dare you to find where he has directly explained anywhere why my main-arguments for scum sin are wrong. He either twists words, says he won't bother interacting, only responds to minor points or literally calls me dumb.
FP'd twice.
You'll find I am very chill. This is a game, I am not going to have a heart attack in real life because I got something wrong and I am not being rewarded with gold if I am right.
So my vote no longer counts as pushing? 2 other votes on him seem to disagree with that. You're quick to want the pressure to change though, why is that?
Voting people is apparently pressure enough now. Time to stop these long posts people explaining why we think someone is scum and interrogating them, naked-votes are pressure enough.
In post 135, Sinsun1 wrote:*Facepalm* Why do I even bother trying to do logic with people. It's like a religious debate. Everyone picks a side they believe in and decide they're right, everyone else is wrong. Not even being open to facts that stare them down in contradiction of their own beliefs
Says the person that refuses to actually interact with those interrogating him and won't budge his view-point. Mmm, Hypocrisy.
I wont even bother defending myself, there's no need to when those that oppose me are simply strawmanning things I say to make them something they are not. I'll just let my flip be the evidence of what I'm saying.
*Doesn't say where they are strawmanning him because they aren't and I just don't want to fight with them as I may loose*
P.S. Just because you play mafia one way, does not make people scum because they play it another way with different tactics and views on what counts as an advantage for town.
I know, I'm not pushing you for your play-style. I'm pushing you because the mindset behind your posts is off.
In post 161, Sinsun1 wrote:
That speaks a lot for how much hunting you've done so far. Every post mentions me? Seriously? You might want to expand on your horizons.
So if you find someone you think is scum you're not allowed to push them these days as that is "tunneling" and not "scum-hunting". People are strange.
@Vedith, it's a simple pointing out that if I am a baddie, the opposite team would want me out to make their odds of winning a bit better. However if I am a town and both sides view me as the opposing mafia/WW then they both have the possibility of gunning for me. Town's only reason to vote me is if they think I am mafia/WW. However, as of yet, it's just been about not liking my way of doing things.
Once again he strawmans the reasons for the push on him in that final sentence. ISO me, there's a lot more than playstyle difference. If you disagree, I'll go have a chat with you asking you various points which you can explain how they are "playstyle differences".
In post 253, Sinsun1 wrote:
VOTE: Lalendra
This is not the response a townie would make D1. Deflection of something as meaningless that I've said with an accusation of scum so that you can ignore it, that is the result of scum with nothing else to say. I rest my case. Boom-shaka-laka.
Other people where piling onto her and this seems like a weak and opportunistic way to join really. The scum case on Lal may be valid however as this is multiball that doesn't disclude opportunism.
In post 257, Sinsun1 wrote:Yeah, no. You done goofed Lale. Now I'm onto you, one of the few rare times a scum slips up this bad on D1. Scum-lean is one thing, but you still listen to those you scum read so you can figure out if your read it right, you do not just completely ignore them, then vote someone else that had no one voting them.
It's not even a scum slip for goodness sake, it's one line which really isn't that motivation indicative. Please go ahead and explain why "town wouldn't say this day 1".
In post 266, Sinsun1 wrote: In post 262, wgeurts wrote:Then Sinsun comes along, all "hah I knew you were scum all along" like with honestly pretty awful reasoning once more.
You have officially proven yourself to not be so bright. Lale is drawing lines on a day there should be none. Everything should still be valid and skeptical and when someone starts with saying they wont listen to players X and Y on D1 without any factual evidence, then my scumdar starts blowing off the charts on them.
Everybody should be skeptical yet I hard-town-read two people because they were the most likely to get wagoned early game. Further more I refuse to interact with a person being skeptical and insist he is town (how many times is this said?) yet call his play "stupid" as he isn't doing what I want him to do.
You have tunnel vision unfortunately and until you clear yourself of that, you'll never be able to comprehend what I am saying about Lale right now. On her flip, if I am correct in my current read here, you'll see exactly what I am getting at.
Basically I'm not allowed to scum read him because I'm convinced he's scum and I've pushed him too long. He really wants me to back off. The sheer amount of times he mentions me when I'm the only one hard-pushing him (besides possibly FireKari) shows he really doesn't like what I'm doing and he will do everything he can to shake me off or look like an idiot. Go town mentality! Not.
In post 279, Sinsun1 wrote: In post 278, The Silver Bard wrote: In post 262, wgeurts wrote:This Lalendra wagon is scummy as fudge. TheSilverBard comes in, joins the most potential wagon and then ignores everything else. Then Sinsun comes along, all "hah I knew you were scum all along" like with honestly pretty awful reasoning once more.
What do you mean by the most potential wagon? Please elaborate.
What is your take on Lalendra?
I don't think I like wgeurts. I wish he wasn't town like I currently believe him to be, I'd love to vote him off, but unfortunately to do so would to be playing against my win-con.
He is the biggest hypocrite so far this game. Accusing TheSilverBard joining "the most potential wagon and then ignores everything else" meanwhile him and others are doing just that on The Silver Bard wagon.
I don't know if The Silver Bard is mafia/WW because as of yet, I have to form a more solid D1 read on him. However, the wagon forming out of it seems scummy as all hell. People votes someone exactly how and why they say someone else is voting, opportunistically. So I will definitely place an FOS on the wagon (besides wgeurts) and Lale furthers her scuminess by being on it when she supposedly believes concretely that I am scum. (Even wgeurts transfers over but I'll give that a pass).
Sometimes I hate town-reading stupid people.
At the time the TSB wagon definetely didn't hold the most potential and I'm now dumb as he finally realises he won't be able to shake me off. Scum mindset: Can't loose em? Discredit em.
Also Lale voting someone other than her scum read isn't scummy. What's also funny is that when town does this it's "ignorable" and when one of his scum reads does this it's "scummy enough to ping my radar". He's fitting the narrative to his reads, not vise-versa.
In post 280, Sinsun1 wrote: In post 255, Lalendra wrote: In post 253, Sinsun1 wrote:
VOTE: Lalendra
This is not the response a townie would make D1. Deflection of something as meaningless that I've said with an accusation of scum so that you can ignore it, that is the result of scum with nothing else to say. I rest my case. Boom-shaka-laka.
Right. Or I've already written you off as scum, so I don't care what you think, which is what actually happened.
In post 254, The Silver Bard wrote: In post 246, Lalendra wrote: In post 244, The Silver Bard wrote:
Ricastles trap in post
48 sprung on Lalendra. Not knowing that vettrock is mod, and asking Ricastle to tell us his reasons for suspecting vettrock is to me a scumslip. She is trying to be active by asking davesaz a question and Ricastle a question in her post
60 . This to seem active, but she slips up by being lazy and not realizing that vettrock is the mod.
Did you completely miss the part where he said it was a joke? You are seriously misrepping that exchange.
Of course he meant it is a joke/trap.
The thing is you didn't realize it was a joke, and tried to question him on it. It is like you didn't care who he wrote about, you just wanted to make a post to appear active. If you were truly scumhunting you would have seen that he wrote about the mod and instantly understood that it was a joke.
Actually, I was legitimately confused by his post, because I knew there wasn't supposed to be an SK, which is why I questioned him on it. He never called it a joke/trap, he caked it a joke, and you are reading to much into it. If this is really all you have on me, you're really reaching.
VOTE: The Silver Bard
Like seriously, this is the most messed up post for wgeurts to completely miss. She has "written me off as scum" yet is now voting The Silver Bard. Well if I am scum, vote me for bloody hell. This pings my scumdar to the max by not going with someone you supposedly think 100% is scum. Instead you hop on a bandwagon. Anyone who cannot see this as scummy play needs to get their eyes checked.
Mentioned above.
In post 285, Sinsun1 wrote:
There is always the chance that both The Silver Bard AND Lale are mafia/WW which will play havoc on the town voting for either side of this.
Either way, I think this is going to turn into a town-hunting game. Meaning that for town to win we must hunt for other people that are town. Trying to hunt for scum will result in town-reading the opposing scum faction.
So I think for future reference, we should be having town-lists in place of scum-lists. Because a person can seem townie when they are really just trying to eliminate the opposing scum faction if all we do is look for the scummiest people.
Here is the quote with him saying which was used in an early point against him.
In post 304, Sinsun1 wrote: In post 303, wgeurts wrote:Hey hey sinsun.
You're "contradiction" is petty at best.
I stopped voting you even though I am certain you're scum?
Why not go after me?
This is going to be my last post I mention you or even bother reading your nonsense from here on out the next time I bother with you will be if new evidence turns up that you must be voted off. Otherwise, you can considered yourself ignored completely by me. Not because of your bad play, but your refusal to answer simple questions has made scum-hunting together impossible.
Right now, I believe you're town, that's enough for me to ignore something so small. But someone who I believe to be scum, doing it just pings my radar a little more. Going after you, would be going after one of my town-reads. Which would be to play against my win-con. So even though I want to kill you off by lynching you (or wish I had a vig power to do it secretly at night and not deal with any whining), I cannot, simply because I believe you're town. You're many words and the fact that you cannot tell the difference between "you're" and "your" further adds to those many words, but at the moment, I don't think you're the word scum.
Now, you can answer my question about what you think about Lale, or I can ignore you for the rest of the game and completely pretend you do not exist as you will not be useful for scum-hunting. Only useful in adding an extra townie life to keep us away from LYLO.
"Because I call you town I don't need to interact with you"
Seems like a pretty convenient way as scum to justify ignoring people pushing you.
In post 421, Sinsun1 wrote: In post 416, wgeurts wrote:
B, It places the fate of how this day/night cycle goes in the hands of scum. Towns power is the lynch, without it we are nothing.
I'm just going to let Dong rip you apart, he sees you as scum so he can do the work for it, since I see you as town, I don't bother much with wasting my time.
But I need to point out your flaw in logic in this quote. Lynches can be used by scum just as easy to mislynch someone.
Do you know what happens tonight? We have this thing, it's called a town vig. He/She is 100% town and they get to make a choice in the kill. It's not determined by scum wagoning with town VTs to lynch fellow town in a mislynch. It's a townie making a choice to kill somebody without losing control of the choice due to "majority rules".
So therefore, we are not nothing and we are not powerless. The town as a collective gets to kill someone. Essentially, we can opt to give up out lynch in favour of giving the vig to go with their choice tonight.
I would lynch him just for this post. If we give all the control to one person who also may be wrong we aren't doing something right. We get more information from the lynch than the vig kill.
