Newbie 1779 | Spring | Endgame

[PenguinPower]

Vote Count 1.10

Ulti

(2): mhsmith0, aa-dono

mastina

(2): oldwino, DogWatch

oldwino

(1): mastina

-Grey-

(1): RadiantCowbells

mhsmith0

(1): -Grey-

Not Voting

: JustDanceWorld, Ulti
With 9 alive, it's 5 to lynch.

Deadline

: (expired on 2017-03-15 06:05:00)

[-Grey-]

wrt 319, it's almost like I took a quick skim at VCs, saw you were lynched d2 (I guess you got rez'd then?), didn't bother to look after that, and then took a quick look at your ISO to see if there were a bunch of mentions (there weren't especially). How is any of that scummy?

That's because I was town before I was lynched, and scum after.

My role is listed in the OP. Feign ignorance all you want, you have been around long enough to know how Judas works.

Edit

[mhsmith0]

My role is listed in the OP. Feign ignorance all you want, you have been around long enough to know how Judas works.

I have never played a game with a judas before (this is verifiable btw), and certainly didn't take the time while doing a quick vc/iso skim to think through how that role would work in that game.

[-Grey-]

My role is listed in the OP. Feign ignorance all you want, you have been around long enough to know how Judas works.

I have never played a game with a judas before (this is verifiable btw), and certainly didn't take the time while doing a quick vc/iso skim to think through how that role would work in that game.

Unfounded assumptions are pretty shitty, aren't they?

[mhsmith0]

Smith> associative assumption based on uninformed opinion of meta

Me> question regarding knowledge of meta

Smith> admission of ignorance and doubling down on unfounded opinion; attempt to redirect to association to take focus off bad meta-based associative

That about sums it up.

Smith: associative speculation based on semi-informed opinion of grey meta

Grey: "you have no idea what you're talking about, tell me where you've even seen my scum game"

Smith: references Grey's own signature, as well as discussion of grey meta from elsewhere (admittedly I don't recall where in particular)

Grey: bullshit for you to buy my own meta description without taking the time to carefully vet my self-description of my meta, also here's an example of one time I actually bussed

Smith: doubles down on "well duh" interpretation of grey's own description of his meta, does a quick skim of the example offered, sees it doesn't seem to really fit, asks for clarification while expressing skepticism

Grey: votes Smith

(and the 316/318/321 back and forth also happened)

I fail to see how any of this is indicative at all on me. Your case boils down to
1) I gave credence to your own self-description of your meta, and made a game-relevant comment based on it
2) I did a half-assed job of looking at the example you cited in the span of a few minutes of time

Is that basically it or did I miss something? Neither of those points are remotely strong.

[mhsmith0]

My role is listed in the OP. Feign ignorance all you want, you have been around long enough to know how Judas works.

I have never played a game with a judas before (this is verifiable btw), and certainly didn't take the time while doing a quick vc/iso skim to think through how that role would work in that game.

Unfounded assumptions are pretty shitty, aren't they?

Yeah, heaven forbid I believe someone's own meta description and apply it to a game-relevant context

[mhsmith0]

Incidentally, what exactly do you think my scum motivation would have been for making the comment in the first place? Do you think I'd be oldwino's buddy who's looking to create false associatives between him and you? Do you think I'd be scum without oldwino and looking to create false associatives that... don't ever do anything useful for me? Do you think it's just busywork/fake content on my end? I feel like this is a strange over-reaction to "OMG your meta read of me sucks" in a context of my talking about someone you're town-reading anyway (and that context is VERY important, unless you think that I have scum motivation for drawing false associatives between you and a townie); what exactly makes you think I'm scum for it?

[-Grey-]

I fail to see how any of this is indicative at all on me. Your case boils down to
1) I made assertions that have no basis in reality
2) I snatched at the first thing that supported those assertions without considering that you might have posted that example for a reason.

FTFY.

Fact of the matter is, I

don't

bus. But there is no reasonable way for you to be so certain of that based on a signature as to base pre-flip associatives on it. Especially when I post meta that directly contradicts your assumption.

[mhsmith0]

Fact of the matter is, I don't bus. But there is no reasonable way for you to be so certain of that based on a signature as to base pre-flip associatives on it. Especially when I post meta that directly contradicts your assumption.

1) I based pre-flip associatives on it (BEFORE your meta citation btw), and hardly did so in a manner that suggests the kind of certainty you seem to be accusing me of. I requote:

btw, for the curious, this is probably about what I'd expect scum!grey to be doing for a buddy under pressure. I don't especially think grey is actually scum, but I'm noting it for possible future reference.

That's a "hey, if oldwino is scum, Grey seems plausible as a partner even though I don't especially scumread him rn" which seems like a pretty reasonable take based on your talk about non-bussing

2) In response to your meta citation, I did a quick look, saw that it didn't seem to jive, and asked you about it. Again I requote

and searching for "not_mafia" in your ISO makes him barely show up.

How did you "bus the hell out of him" exactly?

What exactly is your issue with EITHER of those two things? Both seem entirely reasonable (having a meta understanding of you and speculating based on it, and then being unconvinced by your counterexample and asking for more info).

[-Grey-]

1) You have zero grounds to make any such statement in the first place about my scum play one way or the other and it comes across to me as a lazy narrative. You can ease my suspicions by posting examples of other games where you were town and made similar assumptions that were then destroyed by a simple glance at actual facts. You don't strike me as the kind of player that would be so careless as town, so I'd like to be disabused of that notion if I'm mistaken.

2) You seriously thought I'd post an example that didn't support my argument? Your complete disinterest in actually doing the work to dig at the truth instead of engage in this point/counterpoint bullshit when you know I easily tire of vacuous arguments only serves to solidify my read.

[mhsmith0]

1) You have zero grounds to make any such statement in the first place about my scum play one way or the other and it comes across to me as a lazy narrative. You can ease my suspicions by posting examples of other games where you were town and made similar assumptions that were then destroyed by a simple glance at actual facts. You don't strike me as the kind of player that would be so careless as town, so I'd like to be disabused of that notion if I'm mistaken.

Except you've yourself admitted that my meta understanding of you was correct, so your only issue is that I've apparently arrived at a correct meta understanding of you in a way you disapprove of?

Fact of the matter is, I don't bus. But there is no reasonable way for you to be so certain of that based on a signature as to base pre-flip associatives on it

Given that it was in fact correct, I fail to see how it could have been

destroyed by a simple glance at actual facts

or what the point would be in digging through my meta to find other instances where I've been wrong about something (or even looking for specific instances of being spectacularly wrong and/or simply presuming that a self-meta description was accurate)

2) You seriously thought I'd post an example that didn't support my argument? Your complete disinterest in actually doing the work to dig at the truth instead of engage in this point/counterpoint bullshit when you know I easily tire of vacuous arguments only serves to solidify my read.

I dunno, maybe you fucked up. Maybe you actually meant a different game. Maybe you remembered bussing him much harder than the data seemed to show. I did a quick skim, saw that the example seemed off, and asked for clarification. I'm not going to do substantial work on something that you can presumably clarify yourself easily (especially if you were correct after all and I'd just missed it). I did a bit of work, enough to call it into question, and that was sufficient. More than that would just be busywork, something that I don't particularly enjoy doing.

[-Grey-]

I've proven your assumption on my meta is flat out wrong. Period.

There is a reason it's wrong. And there is a reason it's right. You only care about pricing yourself right, with no actual interest in the truth.

Hence you're scum and you can take your walls and shove them.

[mhsmith0]

Incidentally, you can also see an example of my thoughts about busywork at
http://www.playdiplomacy.com/forum/view ... rk#p888723
and subsequent discussion.

[-Grey-]

I've proven your assumption on my meta is flat out wrong. Period.

There is a reason it's wrong. And there is a reason it's right. You only care about proving yourself right, with no actual interest in the truth.

Hence you're scum and you can take your walls and shove them.

Edit.

[mhsmith0]

I've proven your assumption on my meta is flat out wrong. Period.

There is a reason it's wrong. And there is a reason it's right. You only care about pricing yourself right, with no actual interest in the truth.

Hence you're scum and you can take your walls and shove them.

My assumption about your meta was that you don't, or only rarely, bus. You yourself admitted said assumption was CORRECT. Literally that's what you admitted to.

You've debatably proven that my quick read of your meta EXAMPLE was incorrect (or at least lazy). You've proven nothing about this being the slightest bit indicative of anything at all.

Your "case" on me right now seems to be:

1) I made a meta read on you that was correct but, despite being correct, isn't something I should have done or known about for

REASONS

(and that somehow this is scum-indicative)

2) I put less effort into investigating your meta example than you wanted me to. Almost like I put the onus of demonstrating your examples are correct onto you instead of me

PS

There is a reason it's wrong. And there is a reason it's right. You only care about proving yourself right, with no actual interest in the truth.

What exactly do you even mean here? When in particular did I display that I cared about being proven correct more than the truth? And what do you mean by there being a reason it's wrong and a reason it's right?

[-Grey-]

All of a sudden the truth matters now that I've illustrated how he had no interest in the truth.

[mhsmith0]

All of a sudden the truth matters now that I've illustrated how he had no interest in the truth.

the closest thing to illustrating this is you illustrating that I had no interest in doing more than minimal busy work to evaluate the example you provided, and instead asked you to justify it. Asking you to justify the example you cited is completely consistent with having an interest in the truth (as well as having an entirely reasonable expectation that you should do work to prove your example reasonable when its validity is unclear upon a quick look).

If there is some OTHER way I've failed to display an interest in the truth, please enlighten me.

[-Grey-]

You're not the person I need to convince.

I need to convince town to help me lynch scum.

Continuing the back and forth with you is pointless because OF COURSE you aren't actually going to admit I'm right.

[mhsmith0]

True or false:

Your "case" on me right now seems to be:

1) I made a meta read on you that was correct but, despite being correct, isn't something I should have done or known about for REASONS (and that somehow this is scum-indicative)

2) I put less effort into investigating your meta example than you wanted me to. Almost like I put the onus of demonstrating your examples are correct onto you instead of me

If I'm scum, clarifying this might actually help convince other people to lynch me! If I'm town, it will instead help me figure out whether you're just wrong or whether you're intentionally trying to inflate flagrantly NAI stuff into a scum case. Either way it's a win-win for town!you.

[-Grey-]

And as soon as someone shows any interest in that, I will address it.

You're tiresome and I'm ending the perpetual cycle that you thrive in.

[DogWatch]

I feel like this is my opportunity to utilize what mastina told us about discerning town-town arguments from town-scum arguments, but I'm blowing that opportunity because I can't even follow the damn argument.

[DogWatch]

So far I do think smith simply made an honest mistake when reviewing grey's meta. I don't see it as a misrep, or at least an intentional one.

Grey's weird "reason it's wrong and reason it's right" thing felt off to me. Overall his responses sound more manufactured to me, but I think that's kind of his grandiose style of posting, for lack of a better word.

[-Grey-]

Grey's weird "reason it's wrong and reason it's right" thing felt off to me.

How can it feel off, when you don't even know what those reasons are?

[-Grey-]

Lol... grandiose.

I like that.

[RadiantCowbells]

Dogwatch is obvtown and I'm willing to lynch anyone scumreading them.