Open 302: JUNGLE REPUB nope game over! Party time!

[Empking]

1036

[Empking]

Note to self: Vote neil.

[Empking]

Vote: Neil

[Empking]

Neil: Don't talk about on-going games.

Everyone: What alignment is of afraid 1 (one) vote that they wagon the largest wagon and try and discredit the person voting them?

[Empking]

Neil: Don't talk about on-going games.

I have not talked about on-going games. I simply mentioned I was IN on-going games. No rule about that?

Yes there is. Its this rule:
Don't talk about on-going games.

Everyone: What alignment is of afraid 1 (one) vote that they wagon the largest wagon and try and discredit the person voting them?

If I read correctly, you're asking "What alignment is someone, who jumps on the largest wagon, while trying to discredit the person voting them?" And if I read correctly, this is your attempt at casting suspicion onto me? Unfortunately, I've explained why I'm on the wagon, so I didn't just "wagon" on the wagon. I had full intention before the game even began to vote you. When the wagon started forming, it already helped my original plans to start the day. And I'm not discrediting your case, as you have no case to discredit. In all reality, it's almost

impossible

to have a case when the person you're accusing has only posted 1 time before your post...

When did I say that you were discrediting my case? Why the strawman?

Unfortunately, I've explained why I'm on the wagon, so I didn't just "wagon" on the wagon.

Ah, the well known fact that scum are always honest about their intent :roll:Could you get any scummier?

I had full intention before the game even began to vote you.

So I'm sure you wouldn't mind providing evidence of that effect, would you?

Everyone: What alignment is so afraid of 1 (one) vote that they wagon the largest wagon and try and discredit the person voting them? And then when called out for it just strawmnan the argument?

[Empking]

I have a feeling I'm going to regret this conversation...

Extremely scummy AtE.

Yes there is. Its this rule:
Don't talk about on-going games.

*sigh*. I have not talked about on-going games. I simply mentioned I was IN on-going games.

There is no rule where saying that you are participating in other games.

And to prove it:

Mod: Is it against the rules to say you are participating in a game with someone? Or is the rule there to prohibit talk about the game activities INSIDE the game?

Next.

You're not breaking the rules in

this

game you're breaking

that

game.

When did I say that you were discrediting my case? Why the strawman?

Everyone: What alignment is of afraid 1 (one) vote that they wagon the largest wagon and try

and discredit the person voting them

?

In order to vote someone you must have a case. So essentially, to discredit you, would be to discredit your case. Also:

So can I presume that you don't consider Ad Hom to be a logical fallacy?

Next.

Ah, the well known fact that scum are always honest about their intent :roll:Could you get any scummier?

Can you ask a valid question? Or do you enjoy asking questions that cannot be answered?

This is scum simply making frustrating noise. Does anybody actually think that neil isn't familiar with the idea of rhetorical questions?

If you don't think I'm honest, say it. Don't dance around the issue. And unless you can give valid reasoning as to why I'd lie just to bandwagon on you, you really have nothing to base that opinion on and then you just begin tunneling. Which, on this occasion, is anti-town.

You mean a valid reason like your being nervous of the single vote?

Next.

I had full intention before the game even began to vote you.

So I'm sure you wouldn't mind providing evidence of that effect, would you?

If I could, I would. I can't provide evidence to this. I simply stated a fact. Is that scummy too?

Yes. Essentialy you added noise for no other reason than you thought it would make you look town.

Next.

1. Trust me, I'm NOT afraid of your vote.

So I'm sure you'll back that up with some evidence.

2. The largest wagon? 2 votes? Hmm.

You don't think it was the largest wagon.

3. I

tried

to discredit you? So are you saying my

attempt at discrediting you

was a lie? Prove to me that this isn't your Meta. And I'll prove to you that it is. It's not so hard to do on my side. I bet it is on yours. I didn't try to discredit you, I simply stated fact. And that fact, or should I say essentially, YOU, discredited yourself.

LOL

So you were just stating a fact with complete disinterest? Its sheer coincidence that the person you simply stated a fact about was the person voting you?

Why do I doubt that?

[Empking]

Ahem... Neil

That was a typo I missed. My mistake.

That said if you are going to get bent out of shape with having your name spelled wrong on occasion here on MS you are probably in for lots of frustration.

*sigh*. I have not talked about on-going games. I simply mentioned I was IN on-going games. There is no rule where saying that you are participating in other games.

I’m not the Mod but I’ll answer – referencing any ongoing game of any sorts including mentioning who you are playing with are forbidden site-wide.

--

Everyone: What alignment is of afraid 1 (one) vote that they wagon the largest wagon and try and discredit the person voting them?

1. Can you demonstrate with quotes where Neil shows ‘fear’ of your vote?
2. Are you attempting to say that his posting of your style of play is discrediting? I find it a rather accurate portrayal of your playstyle. He doesn’t say it makes you scum, BTW. He said that pressuring you to provide more than unsupported votes and throw-away one liners is a good plan. And it seems to be working.
3. Please identify what you case on Neil is.

1. His vote and his discrediting of me have only one motive I can think of.
2. When did I ever said it wasn't the truth? If I started saying "Don't listen to Magna he has an 80% scum win rate and has very low town rate" would you just say "That's not discrediting that'sd the truth!"
2b. "He doesn’t say it makes you scum, BTW." This is an absurd misrepresentation of the point.
3. His posting comes from a scum mindset and only a scum mindset. Plus there's your post I'm quoting that maskes you look like buddies.

Ah, the well known fact that scum are always honest about their intent Could you get any scummier?

So he can’t be possibly telling the truth because you call him scum? Scumtastic thought process there.

So are you just wasting my time or are you saying we should we just take everyone's word as fact?

Curious coincidence that your posting is a mixture of defending neil and attacking neil's attacker. Wierd.

[Empking]

This is the sort of broad based statement that is completely invalid. Of course scum are going to lie. The goal of Mafia (you know the game we are playing) is to assess whether certain individuals a lying based on other contextual clues and logic. All you are doing is suffering from Confirmation Bias – “I know he’s scum so he’s obviously lying”.[/wquote]

So going "We can't trust everything neil says because he might be scum" is confirmation bias nowadays?
Why do I doubt that you actually think that?

Oh so now we are buddies. I’ll challenge you to provide the solid scum motivation for either sets of scum (2 Werewolfs or 3 Evil Sheep) to vote together and work together so obviously on Page 3. This is just more smearing from you. Noted.

To allow them tyo control the vote and keep them alive. That's why bussing works (because in a vacuum buddies should work together rather than against each other).
Why do I think that you already know that?

If you were to say something like that I’d simply ask you to back up your statement with reasons including how it has any bearing on the role PM I received

Oh you've changed your sig. Wierd. Very wierd.

how it has any bearing on the role PM I received[/quotye]

You keep bringing this up. Tell me, how is this relevant at all?

So I’m free to assume you are lying about everything you are saying since scum lie?

What a ridiculous strawman. (Oh no! Wiki tell!)

Unvote

Vote: MOI

- The mixture of opaque defending and chainsaw defences, lying (On ho another wikitell!) and strawmanning.

[Empking]

I have a feeling I'm going to regret this conversation...

Why did you say this?

If you can name one time I've personally insulted you

Misrep. (you can try to discredit somebody based off anything it need not be an insult.)

The largest wagon?

You don't think it was the largest wagon.

I didn't say that.

What bull. I can see why MOI has such a high scum win rate. Pretty clever plan of you two.

So you were just stating a fact with complete disinterest? Its sheer coincidence that the person you simply stated a fact about was the person voting you?[/quote

Y or N?

Its not difficult.

[Empking]

What bull. I can see why MOI has such a high scum win rate. Pretty clever plan of you two.

See and it is things like this that make me happy about my vote.

You've directly seen me work as scum. LMP's Mini Normal game not that long ago. Where you saw me do exactly the opposite of what you are accusing me of here.

In that game I distanced from Xdaa (my known partner) and more or less ignored DGB (who I suspected was the traitor but couldn't be sure).

Yet you are ignoring that game to spin some sort of obv-buddying partnership angle here.

Yes because when scum know their scum meta they continue to play in ways fitting with their scum meta. Why do I doubt that you actually think that?

I'll mark that down in my notes. Good effort if that is actually the case.

Ho ho ho. Very droll.

[Empking]

hmm

if this game had only one scum faction I'd be tempted to say one of neil/empking/magna has to be scum after these interactions

however it's more complicated since there's 2

How so?

[Empking]

No it's not sheer coincidence

it was funny coincidence

Sheer means nothing anbd funny is irrelevant in this context. Which one was it?

You think if you can catch us as scum, a few pages into the game, when it first starts, that we'd have a GOOD scum win rate?

1. You botched it.
2. MOI will still go on to win.

Now just to be clear, you're accusing me of lying correct? Before I respond, I'd like to know what exactly you're accusation here is?

No I'm accusing you of deliberately trying to screw over the town by adding stuff like "?" so you can can say you didn't actually say something when we both knew what you meant.

Which part of this conversation is an argument based off of a characteristic or belief that I have about you?

You were pretty clear that you poisoning the well against me in order to defend yourself.

[Empking]

I have a feeling I'm going to regret this conversation...

Why did you

say

this?

I think you deliberately refused to answer this. I've bolded it now so you can give it another go.

Twisted: All multiple scum teams means it that while neil and MOI are still ceratainally scum, I may be part of the other scum team.

[Empking]

Mind showing me where you addressed it?

P-Edit:

You think it's coincidence that the two people you're just "so absolutely sure" are scum that you're ready to go tell the world, are the two that are pushing the hardest on your wagon?

OK, does anyone buy what MOI (And neil) are saying? Clearly I'm attacking my attackers, the fact that I was attacking neil before they (as in both of them rather than just one) attacked me is sheer coincidence.

[Empking]

I have a feeling I'm going to regret this conversation...

Why did you

say

this?

I think you deliberately refused to answer this. I've bolded it now so you can give it another go.

Twisted: All multiple scum teams means it that while neil and MOI are still ceratainally scum, I may be part of the other scum team.

Now can you answer this?

[Empking]

Unvote

Vote: Neil

(I'm thinking about shifting my post every post just to make it clear.)

His outrageous AtE and refusing to answer the question.

MOI: Does neil have to post everything he thinks or is he avoiding the question? (Watch how he either refuses to answer the question or makes it ridiculously non-commital.)

[Empking]

@Mod: Thank you, my points been proven.

Really? Do you just not care about your point (which was there so you could fake-distance from MOI) or did you fail to see "or people's play in that game"?

Emp: You're purposely playing as a joke aren't you? My "outrageous" AtE which by the way, you conveniently ignored when I asked you to prove that it was an AtE, and refusing to answer a question, in which I've now answered twice, given you the post in which I answered once, and even went into specific detail, breaking down the post for you so you can understand? I think you're purposely playing as a joke and I have no desire to continue this.

Now I'm completely confident in my vote for this anti-town character.

AtE, AtE, AtE.

[Empking]

I'll give you a hint: You see that box above the abbreviation AtE which has some of your words in it? Those words are the AtE.

Also, what happened to "I think you're purposely playing as a joke and I have no desire to continue this."? You weren't just saying it for sympathy, were you!?!

[Empking]

I'll give you a hint: You see that box above the abbreviation AtE which has some of your words in it? Those words are the AtE.

Also, what happened to "I think you're purposely playing as a joke and I have no desire to continue this."? You weren't just saying it for sympathy, were you!?!

Now you're just trying (failing) to get me frustrated.

Can I presume by your refusal to answer the question that you were just playing for sympathy? I can I presume that you still are by your obviously insincere comments?

[Empking]

My hypothesis was that you were scum. I had an experiment to test that. I made my prediction of what my experiment would yield public so that when my prediction came true it would carry more weight. Please explain why that is scummy?

If he wants to effectively scum-hunt in a Pro-Town manner he should be posting his thoughts. I’m not sure what the second part of your question refers to. It looks like you just tacked it on to create a false dilemma situation.[/quote

So you're refusing to answer the question. Just like I predicted you would.

Care to elaborate?

Ok, I asked "Why did you say X?" He "answer" was "X is true because Y". This means that either
1. He has to say everything which is true OR 2. He refused to answer the question.
I then asked you which one you thought it was? And you refused to answer?

[Empking]

Vote Empking

It doesn't seem like he will be a help to the towns much... and since he already has people piling votes on him, he could of done something scummy so far.

Too many [expletive] scum!

What did I do that was scummy? What do you think of purposely asvoiding questions? What do you think of refusing to scumhunt and instead merely engaging in AtE and trying to get town on your side (neil)? What do you think of refusing to answer awkward questions (MOI and Neil)? Whast do you think about putting all your energies in defending another player on page 4(?) (MOI)?

[Empking]

Please tell me everyone else realizes that everyone who challenges Empking is called scum by him?

You mean like Wicked?

Muffin: What do you think of neil's insistence that he challenged me before I voted him? Kind of makes it clear that he's scum, right?

[Empking]

Please tell me everyone else realizes that everyone who challenges Empking is called scum by him?

You mean like Wicked?

Muffin: What do you think of neil's insistence that he challenged me before I voted him? Kind of makes it clear that he's scum, right?

So now you're trying to buddy with Muffin and get him on your side? Lol.

Its called scumhunting and getting reads on people. Maybe you'd like to try it?

And I'm not insisting that I challenged you before you voted for me? When have I said that?

Wicked: What do you think of neil's habit of writing statements where everything is implied rather than said and as such gives him plausible deniability?

MOI: What do you think about the fact that neil doesn't seem to have any desire to scumhunt?

[Empking]

Please tell me everyone else realizes that everyone who challenges Empking is called scum by him?

You mean like Wicked?

Muffin: What do you think of neil's insistence that he challenged me before I voted him? Kind of makes it clear that he's scum, right?

So now you're trying to buddy with Muffin and get him on your side? Lol.

Its called scumhunting and getting reads on people. Maybe you'd like to try it?

And I'm not insisting that I challenged you before you voted for me? When have I said that?

Wicked: What do you think of neil's habit of writing statements where everything is implied rather than said and as such gives him plausible deniability?

MOI: What do you think about the fact that neil doesn't seem to have any desire to scumhunt?

Lol. Wow. Enough said. I've caught scum. You.

1. Hopping onto a wagon is the same thing as catching scum nowadays? That's new.
2. There is only one scum in this game, is there?

You're intentionally leading with your questions, putting a thought into their mind by telling them a view, rather then pointing out facts and asking their opinion of an actual fact.

Care to give an example?

[Empking]

cj: Scum only care about finding one mis-lynch a day. neil only want to find one player that he wants to be lynched. What are your thoughts on that?

[Empking]

1. Hopping onto a wagon is the same thing as catching scum nowadays? That's new.
2. There is only one scum in this game, is there?

1. Developing a wagon, and finding that person to be scummy, yes. RVS votes, into an ACTUAL wagon, yes. Catching scum amongst the midst of that like you, yes. It's catching scum.

MOI's vote on me was random?

2. Of course not, but because you continue to misrep and continue this dreaded attempt at making me look scummy by twisting and stretching things about me, nobody else has really said anything. So until people start getting involved, I can't get reads or question anyone else?

So you're using the question mark trick again.

So until then, I'll continue to further the case of how scummy you are, by watching your scum-tells that you're releasing by the bucket.

Pointless noise and rhetoric.

You're intentionally leading with your questions, putting a thought into their mind by telling them a view, rather then pointing out facts and asking their opinion of an actual fact.

Care to give an example?

Sure... let's see.

From most recent:

cj: Scum only care about finding one mis-lynch a day. neil only want to find one player that he wants to be lynched. What are your thoughts on that?

Prove that I have ever said "I only want to find one player lynched"?

So you didn't respond to an accusation of you not scumhunting by saying "Lol. Wow. Enough said. I've caught scum. You."? Is that what you're saying?

What do you think about the fact that neil doesn't seem to have any desire to scumhunt?

Since when was I not scum hunting? I'm scum hunting, and I'm finding you scummy. Just because I'm scum hunting and my current focus is YOU doesn't mean I'm not scum hunting.

Other than rhetoric and plays for sympathy what have you actually said about me?

MOI: You can answer that too (about neil).

What do you think of neil's habit of writing statements where everything is implied rather than said and as such gives him plausible deniability?

"Statements." Key word. Give me two times in which I've implied something, and not said it straight up? Otherwise, you're leading.

"Please tell me everyone else realizes that everyone who challenges Empking is called scum by him?" and your "Biggest wagon?"

What do you think of neil's insistence that he challenged me before I voted him? Kind of makes it clear that he's scum, right?

I called you out on this earlier, and you gave me no response. Show me one example in which I've stated I challenged you before you voted me?

That was your implied vs stating trick.

And then the beginning:

What alignment is so afraid of 1 (one) vote that they wagon the largest wagon and try and discredit the person voting them? And then when called out for it just strawmnan the argument?

Where have I said that I was afraid of your vote? Where did I say I was trying to discredit you?

This is ridiculous. You didn't say it therefore it can'ty be true. I vote you and in order to discredit me you call me a lousy player (And we know its an attempt to discredit me because you later tried to pretend it was just a coincidence.)

Come to think about it, 99.9% of your questions have been leading, as I've shown above. Show me one question you've asked, concerning me, that has not been leading?

Er, you've just shown some.

[Empking]

So "Please tell me everyone else realizes that everyone who challenges Empking is called scum by him?" was not you implying that everyone who challenges Empking is called scum by him?

No, I said prove to me where I only want to find one player that I want to lynch?

So you want multiple people lynched today? How many?

I asked you to prove me wrong. Prove to me that I have done no scum hunting? Hint hint, you can't. You fail at your response here, as well.

Mind answering the question though? (Without reference to your latest post?)

[Empking]

Vote Empking

It doesn't seem like he will be a help to the towns much... and since he already has people piling votes on him, he could of done something scummy so far.

Too many [expletive] scum!

What did I do that was scummy? What do you think of purposely asvoiding questions? What do you think of refusing to scumhunt and instead merely engaging in AtE and trying to get town on your side (neil)? What do you think of refusing to answer awkward questions (MOI and Neil)? Whast do you think about putting all your energies in defending another player on page 4(?) (MOI)?

I was defending any body on page 4, intentionally. I wasn't closely paying attention to any conversation on page 4, really. But to me, you are try too hard to defend yourself and make people think that you are a townie which is scummy enough to me.

Mind providing some quotes where I defended myself?

[Empking]

So "Please tell me everyone else realizes that everyone who challenges Empking is called scum by him?" was not you implying that everyone who challenges Empking is called scum by him?

Lol this is a joke right? I flat out stated that.

Where?

If anything I implied that I'd like someone other than you to tell me I'm wrong for once about you. But saying "everyone who challenges Empking is called scum by him" MEANS "everyone who challenges Empking is called scum by him" despite how I say "everyone who challenges Empking is called scum by him."

Yet you still get that plausable deniability that you're so enamoured with.

No, I said prove to me where I only want to find one player that I want to lynch?

So you want multiple people lynched today? How many?

Again, the burden of proof is on you, not me. Don't ask me questions, prove what you've already stated. My point is, that you can't.

Oh no! Not questions!

I asked you to prove me wrong. Prove to me that I have done no scum hunting? Hint hint, you can't. You fail at your response here, as well.

Mind answering the question though? (Without reference to your latest post?)

Again, you're not proving anything. You're asking questions. You've already made your statements, so prove to me BEFORE the statements, that they were accurately backed by MY posts?

If I knows its true (which is why I said it) and you know its true (which is why you won't answer the questions) then what's the point of asking for proof?

Otherwise, stop wasting this space and stop distracting the town. You're already scum, let the others have a chance to talk so we can get some more reads.

1. Am I shouting over other people?
2. Am I forcing you to post?
3. Are you actually encouraging other people to post?

[Empking]

Vote Empking

It doesn't seem like he will be a help to the towns much... and since he already has people piling votes on him, he could of done something scummy so far.

Too many [expletive] scum!

What did I do that was scummy? What do you think of purposely asvoiding questions? What do you think of refusing to scumhunt and instead merely engaging in AtE and trying to get town on your side (neil)? What do you think of refusing to answer awkward questions (MOI and Neil)? Whast do you think about putting all your energies in defending another player on page 4(?) (MOI)?

I was defending any body on page 4, intentionally. I wasn't closely paying attention to any conversation on page 4, really. But to me, you are try too hard to defend yourself and make people think that you are a townie which is scummy enough to me.

Mind providing some quotes where I defended myself?

That is unnecessary, yet again. You are trying way to hard to prove to us that you are townie and if you haven't noticed the last few pages are proof of that, you quote every single attack against you.

What attacks against me? From neil? Because I don'tr remember reading any from that direction.

Provide one example of where I solely tried to defend myself, should be that difficult should it

[Empking]

What attacks against me? From neil? Because I don'tr remember reading any from that direction.

Provide one example of where I solely tried to defend myself, should be that difficult should it

What is the point?

If I take the time to provide an example, where will we get? Nowhere.

Meh. I just hopes everyone takes not of your recent actions.

[Empking]

Neil stating he regrets getting getting into a back-and-forth over semantics is a null-tell.

But he didn't say that. He said that he

would

regret it. This is called a lie because if he would regret it then he wouldn't have gotten into it. Surely lies in order to get sympathy are scummy?

Empking, you can't have a playstyle like yours and then bitch about someone discrediting you.

You don't think poisoning the well is a scum tell?
Also: Isn't post 110 a result of my playstyle?

[Empking]

Wicked

2. The largest wagon?

When coupled with:
Me: You don't think it was the largest wagon.
Him: I didn't say that.

Please tell me everyone else realizes that everyone who challenges Empking is called scum by him?

When coupled with
Me: What do you think of neil's insistence that he challenged me before I voted him?
Him: And I'm not insisting that I challenged you before you voted for me? When have I said that?

[Empking]

Wicked: I don't want to tunnel and I've got a town read on you. Would you mind explaining how that first example was not him blatantly implying something in order to be able to use his pet phrase "I didn't say that"?

Can you also give a town motivation for him refusing to answer my question while trying to pretend as if he had?

[Empking]

MOI's vote on me was random?

Nope. 100% real for your immediate vote on Neil for reasons that I already outlined was horrible in my pre-game discussion with Twistedspoon.

I knew I wasn't suffering from confirmation bias. MOI doesn't want to interact with neil. (Neil calls MOI's vote random but MOI doesn't respond. I ask Neil to clarify so he can't back up and MOI respondes to that in the negative.)

How can you call someone down for a soft-attack after what you said to me in the pre-game?

Quite easily. Empking’s soft attacks came in the midst of me questioning him and pointing out his logical failures. You I was purely reaction fishing. Context is everything.

I said you looked like neil's buddy. Why is that a soft attack?

[Empking]

Hey
, neil: What's your case against me again? Like what have I done that was scummy?

[Empking]

Would you mind explaining how that first example was not him blatantly implying something in order to be able to use his pet phrase "I didn't say that"?

This is how I interprated it:

Empking: What allignment is so afraid of 1 (one) vote that they wagon the largest wagon and try and discredit the person voting them?

Neil1113: The largest wagon? 2 votes? =

You consider two votes to be a large bandwagon?

My interpratation: I don't think he was questioning your statement that you were the largest bandwagon, but questioning why you think he would feel the need to join the largest bandwagon when it was only two votes in this case.

Empking: You don't think it was the largest wagon.

My interpratation: You thought he was denying that you were the largest bandwagon, when, in actuality, he was simply saying that he didn't think your bandwagon was as large as he thought you were making it out to be.

Neil1113: I didn't say that.

My interpratation: He didn't say that, it was just how you interprated it.

I'm pretty sure that's the misunderstanding.

You seem to be producing the word "large" out of nowhere because nobody ever mentioned how absolutely large it was. To quote Neil "The

largest

wagon?" (bold mine)

The question was about why he said the "I'm going to regret this" comment. He refused to answer that and instead answered the unasked, easier and utterly unrelated question of why he thought he was going to regret it.

Empking, have you ever seen scum blatantly defend their buddy? If so, can you post a link, please?

I've got an awful memory but give a minute and I'm sure I'll find one.

[Empking]

I think the latter days of this were the scum team defending one another: http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=15577

[Empking]

Is there anything illogical about being suspicious of somebody engaging in extreme trickery so they can avoid having to answer an awkward question?

[Empking]

MOI: 1. Why is pretending to answer a question while in fact refusing to answer a question not a scum tell?
2. Why is interacting with another player

exactly

as scumbuddies would interact not a scum tell? (Also we know this isn't confirmation bias because I made my prediction of what would happen before MOI responded.)

[Empking]

MOI: 1. Why is pretending to answer a question while in fact refusing to answer a question not a scum tell?
2. Why is interacting with another player

exactly

as scumbuddies would interact not a scum tell? (Also we know this isn't confirmation bias because I made my prediction of what would happen before MOI responded.)

Empking - Why is asking loaded, leading, or completely incomprehensible questions supposed to be scum-hunting?

What is loaded about "Why did you say "X"?"
What is leading about "Why did you say "X"?"
What is completely incomprehensible about "Why did you say "X"?"

Oh the second part is rich. You say I am interacting EXACTLY with Neil as scum-buddies would. Yet you can't find cases to support that's actually how it works.

Yes because when dealing with praxeology, Emperical Data is king

And you tried to 'handwave' away the evidence I provided from LMP's game regarding how I deal with buddies.

I'll ask you straight up. Why would scum choose to play to their scum meta?

[Empking]

Hey, MOI I think I asked you some reasonable questions. Mind answering them k thanx

Because that's how meta works. It is effective. It certainly fooled you easily then. Why exactly would I depart from a winning strategy? DERP

Because when people meta you, they'll be able to point out that you're playing to your scum meta.

Then you answer the following - why would scum choose to play as blatantly as you have claimed?

1. It allows you to lead the town and protect your buddy.
2. The meta doesn't punish you for doing it for reason 1.

Which bit don't you agree with?

[Empking]

Everybody: I want you to look at the second quote in MOI's post and then look at my actual post. He took at the quote I was responding to in order to change my point completely.

(My point was about why he'd opaquely defend and work with neil. He tried to pretend it was about him refusing to take concrete stances about neil's individuals actions (AKA exactly how scum would act.)

MOI: Why would town misquote somebody like that?

Wicked; MOI called my question leading, loaded and incomprehensibly worded. When asked why it was those things he refused to answer. Why do you think that is?

[Empking]

Everybody: I want you to look at the second quote in MOI's post and then look at my actual post. He took at the quote I was responding to in order to change my point completely.

(My point was about why he'd opaquely defend and work with neil. He tried to pretend it was about him refusing to take concrete stances about neil's individuals actions (AKA exactly how scum would act.)

MOI: Why would town misquote somebody like that?

Removing my original quotes is hardly 'misquoting' you. Quote pyramiding is pointless waste of space.

Essentially you took out a paragraph to make two points about two different things (meta VS defending scum buddies0 look lioke one thing.

I was responding to your two points at once. Where you are taking contradictory stances. And explaining exactly who they are contradictory.

Playing to your meta is punished by the current meta. Defending your scumbuddy isn't. Therefore you won't do one but will do the other. What's contradictory about those two stances?

[Empking]

You seem to be producing the word "large" out of nowhere because nobody ever mentioned how absolutely large it was. To quote Neil "The largest wagon?" (bold mine)

When you said this:

What allignment is so afraid of 1 (one) vote that

they wagon the largest wagon

and try and discredit the person voting them?

You accused him of wagoning the largest wagon (the bolded portion). Neil defended against the wagoning accusation by saying that he didn't think the bandwagon on you was that large. He said:

The largest wagon? 2 votes?

He never says in this quote that he didn't think your bandwagon was the largest. What he meant was that he didn't think two votes made it a large bandwagon and that he didn't feel his vote for you was truly opportunistic, because your bandwagon wasn't large in the first place. Get it now?

The question was about why he said the "I'm going to regret this" comment. He refused to answer that and instead answered the unasked, easier and utterly unrelated question of why he thought he was going to regret it.

He didn't avoid answering your question, he just didn't give you the answer you wanted and I think he misinterprated the question because it could have easily been interprated in two different ways. Did you mean to ask "Why did you feel the need to say that you are going to regret this?". Because I think he interprated the question as "Why do you think you are going to regret this?".

If it was the second why would I bold and enlarge the word "say"?

Also, can you find any games in which the scum defended eachother blatantly in the first few pages of a game?

Give me an hour.

[Empking]

Scum getting attacked early doesn't happen early. Two men scum teams don't happen that often. I read very slowly. But this was thethird game I looked at and Hoopla in this game defended Haylen from a random vote.

Mod: You have two TS wagons.

[Empking]

Scum getting attacked early doesn't happen early. Two men scum teams don't happen that often. I read very slowly. But this was thethird game I looked at and Hoopla in this game defended Haylen from a random vote.

So notice he is now placing lots of qualifies. But let's examine.

1. He says "Two men scum teams don't happend often". Ummm, how does he call us Werewolves partners and not Evil Sheep partners? Perhaps because he knows we aren't part of the Three Man scum team? Yup.

No I know you're werewolves because the opaque defending suggests that. Plus the timid way TS and KD are playing suggests they're Mafia and all four of you can't be mafia.

2. His third game he reference began over a year ago (March 2010). Why is that his THIRD stop? Wouldn't a quick glance through recent ended games have been quicker than finding a year old thread?

What are you saying here? That in ten minutes I looked at all the games in the last year, found that one and then pretended it was my third?

[Empking]

What are you saying here? That in ten minutes I looked at all the games in the last year, found that one and then pretended it was my third?

You claimed it was your third game examined as you said RIGHT HERE –

Scum getting attacked early doesn't happen early. Two men scum teams don't happen that often. I read very slowly. But this was

thethird game I looked at

and Hoopla in this game defended Haylen from a random vote.

I’ve bolded where you directly claim it was the third game you looked at.

That you don’t seem to know what you are saying moment to moment is astonishing. Somehow you want to make me look like I’m making up things to smear you when in reality that is exactly what you said.

How is that the third game you looked at? Please explain how you magically were drawn to that game which isn't in the first three in the Closed file was the third one you chose to review.

Yes and you think I'm scummy for that. What do you think I did? That in ten minutes I looked at all the games in the last year, found that one and then pretended it was my third?

Then explain how a Lovers game - where immediate death for both partners happens when one is lynched - is a good comparison to this game.

Because losing a werewolf day one is pretty much the death knell for werewolves in this game. Just like in that game!

No I know you're werewolves because the opaque defending suggests that. Plus the timid way TS and KD are playing suggests they're Mafia and all four of you can't be mafia.

Thank you for more or less ruling out Twisted or KD ( I assume you meant Diety and just mixed the letters up) as likely partners.

Yeah DK.

[Empking]

Yes and you think I'm scummy for that. What do you think I did? That in ten minutes I looked at all the games in the last year, found that one and then pretended it was my third?

Dodge dodge dodge. Once again you don’t answer the question about how that game was the third one you looked at. Anyone with sense can see where it is in the Closed game list. No-where near the top.

Yet you keep trying to deflect by saying “Did I lie about it”.

Weren't you the one just banging the drum that not answering questions is a scum-tell?

When did I say that?

OK, let me get this right. You think that the game I showed was the third game I found. Like I said. Yet for some reason you want to know why it was that that was my third game?

1. Why do you want to know that?
2. I looked at the two recent games and noticed that the person attacked was always town. I then thought to myself: What open game has a large porportion of scum? And then decided to search for Lover*

Dodge dodge dodge. Because you can’t answer why you chose that game in any manner that makes sense.

Oh so you do think I'm lying? I read every game in the last year in no more than ten minutes?

Or why more recent closed games don’t show it. Where are the MANY other cases that you have been saying are obvious scum play?

Mind providing some evidence of that?

Because losing a werewolf day one is pretty much the death knell for werewolves in this game. Just like in that game!

This is self-evident stretching to justify your bad tactical choice.

Do you disagree with it?

[Empking]

Would you mind explaining how that first example was not him blatantly implying something in order to be able to use his pet phrase "I didn't say that"?

This is how I interprated it:

Empking: What allignment is so afraid of 1 (one) vote that they wagon the largest wagon and try and discredit the person voting them?

Neil1113: The largest wagon? 2 votes? =

You consider two votes to be a large bandwagon?

My interpratation: I don't think he was questioning your statement that you were the largest bandwagon, but questioning why you think he would feel the need to join the largest bandwagon when it was only two votes in this case.

You mean all that was

implied

. Which ultimatyely was my point in the start.

[Empking]

1. Why do you want to know that?
2. I looked at the two recent games and noticed that the person attacked was always town. I then thought to myself: What open game has a large porportion of scum? And then decided to search for Lover*

1. Because it shows your motivations.
2. Aha, the light is shed. You looked at recent games and found they didn’t support your premise. So you went to the one game style where linked Mafians have an overwhelming motive to defend themselves … because they automatically die when one is lynched.

And now I think you are lying about the whole thing. I just ran a search of Central Park using Lover* as the criteria and only looked for Titles. 214 isn’t the first game that appears on that search … the more recently run 267 is.

Yes which means I put that in a new tab first and then new tabbed the second. This means surprise, surprise that 214 was the closest to the left and thus the first one I read.

Summary – I think you actively hunted a game that bears no resemblance to this game to prop up your argument that is clearly bad. And when called on it have made up some garbled explanation.

Oh so you do think I'm lying? I read every game in the last year in no more than ten minutes?

Of course not. I just explained exactly what you did.

So what was my motive to say "third" rather than "fourth"?

Mind providing some evidence of that?

Evidence that your theory of Partner defending in the first 4 pages is complete crap?

So the game I provided isn't evidence?

I've let you suck me in again. VIs drive me nuts.

Note how he';s using the

exact

same trick as neil. Almost as if he saw how well it worked for his scumbuddy and ecided to do it for himself.

[Empking]

1. Why do you want to know that?
2. I looked at the two recent games and noticed that the person attacked was always town. I then thought to myself: What open game has a large porportion of scum? And then decided to search for Lover*

1. Because it shows your motivations.
2. Aha, the light is shed. You looked at recent games and found they didn’t support your premise. So you went to the one game style where linked Mafians have an overwhelming motive to defend themselves … because they automatically die when one is lynched.

And now I think you are lying about the whole thing. I just ran a search of Central Park using Lover* as the criteria and only looked for Titles. 214 isn’t the first game that appears on that search … the more recently run 267 is.

Yes which means I put that in a new tab first and then new tabbed the second. This means surprise, surprise that 214 was the closest to the left and thus the first one I read.

Sorry. I misremembered. Though I did do that tab thing the actual reason why that one was first was due to me only looking in completed open games.

[Empking]

Wow... I really have nothing to say here. Empking, you're really not making this game fun.

You make it your personal mission to try and annoy me to such a degree that another player thinks that we only consider each other scum because of an outside grudge yet

I'm

the one not making this game fun.

Such bull.

I'm almost positive you'll flip as Mafia and not Werewolf, because of your slip up earlier. You knew we weren't Mafia, because you're Mafia and you know we're not your buddies.

Or I know you're not Mafia because you're pretty obviously wolves? That seems a bit more likely to me.

Now onto who are your buddies? I'm guessing TS is Werewolf, since you made an effort to call him scum as well.. and I'm still not sure who KD is...

See does anybody buy that?

[Empking]

Hez: When did I ever say that neil was calling me scum for my playstyle? Its irrelevant and an absurd misrepresentation of the point.

[Empking]

Bloody hell, I sleep, wake up, find this?

Empking and MOI are arguing now. Again, probably not a Town on Town fight.
So either Empking is scum, or Neil and MOI are scum.

I'm going to hold you to that.

Hez: Why are you saying that you're annoyed about the spam but look favourable on neil and MOI doing what they did to cause the spam? (I'm a simple creature. Whenever I'm suspicious of someone who refuses to scumhunt or answer my questions I post like that. Its a habit IO try to avoid.)

[Empking]

Is there anything illogical about being suspicious of somebody engaging in extreme trickery so they can avoid having to answer an awkward question?

In this case, yes: I don't think Neil deliberately avoided your question, but I do think you were illogical to assume that he did rather than clarify the question.

Is this a joke? What do you call bolding and enlarging the crucial word if not clarifying the question? You have to remember, I didn't just decide that neil was dodging the question I gave him the benefit of the doubt before it was clear that there was no other explaination than neil being scum.

Any why has neil yet to answer the question? Is it still unclear?

[Empking]

Everybody: I want you to look at the second quote in MOI's post and then look at my actual post. He took at the quote I was responding to in order to change my point completely.

I'm not seeing this.

You're not seeing how he changed the quote or you're not seeing how taking away the quote changed what the word "it" referred to?

Wicked; MOI called my question leading, loaded and incomprehensibly worded. When asked why it was those things he refused to answer. Why do you think that is?

Tbh, I can see why he didn't respond. I think your questions were loaded and

were

pretty much fluff.

What was loaded about them and what was flufff about them?

MOI: Your question was X.
Me; Why was it X?

If it was the second why would I bold and enlarge the word "say"?

I'm

not completely sure why you bolded and enlarged the word "say". What

was

that even supposed to indicate?

That the important thing was why he

said

something rather than why he

thought

something. (Which was the unrelated question he was answering.)

Scum getting attacked early doesn't happen early. Two men scum teams don't happen that often. I read very slowly. But this was thethird game I looked at and Hoopla in this game defended Haylen from a random vote.

1. Hoopla wasn't defending Haylen, but simply questioning the vote for her.

Why did Hoopla do that? To find out the voter's alignment?

2. The vote for Haylen was

random

.

Your point?

3. This game happened over a year ago. I find it hard to believe that it was the third game you checked.

I want you to check three games for whether there was defending day one. Tell me how long it takes.

How did you find that game?

By searching "lover*" in the Completed Open Game section.

What were the other two games you looked at?

Two recently completed normal games. I can't remember which two.

Also, please tell me, why did you chose this game in particular to look at? Has a scum never defended their buddy blatantly from a serious accusation early in any of

your

previous games?

Do you remember the intimate details of the games you've played?

Any examples of games where a scum has blatantly defended their buddy from a serious accusation early in the game?

Why does this matter?

This is incorrect logic, let me explain why. I know I'm going to regret going to university every day because my uni lecturers are incredibly bad, however I still go, is me going a lie? No. Is me stating that I'm going to regret going a lie? No.

It is a lie or at the very least a miswording (unless you're irrational).

[Empking]

The argument that X is defending Y and Y is mafia therefore X must be mafia too holds no ground nor does the argument X is defending Y and Y is mafia therefore it's impossible for X and Y to be buddies.

I you taking into account the fact that MOI doesn't want to interact with Neil and the fact that along with an opaque defense he also engages in a chainsaw defence.

I've seen both occur in previous games that I've witnessed, for example in this game Reck defended Dram almost throughout the entire game, in this particular case the fact it's a lovers game is meaningless because Dram/Reck weren't lover partners.

I counterexample does not discredit the entire thing. I've seen people fake claim as town does that mean that fake claiming isn't a scum tell?

Oy yeah: Wicked I've just realized that you asking for an example of a defence of a serious point during a period of time where its unlikely to have serious points.

[Empking]

Emp, I still don't understand what you're asking?

Everybody: Do you notice how neil either knows or doesn't know whether or not he understands what I'm asking but rather than saying either way whether he knows or not he instead adds a question mark to it so he can't later be called out on it whether he knows or not?

What specifically do you want to know from that question, what's the point in asking me this question,

By goshy want me to make a model answer for you while I'm at it?

and why do you only choose to clarify when everyone ELSE calls you scummy, but not when I asked originally?

1. If I clarified after everyone else calls me scummy then why don't you understand it? Doesn't really make much sense.
2. I clarified

twice

before anybody added any extra votes to me.

When I asked you blew it off, and called me scummy.

You mean clarified twice.

Are you now prepared to explain?

I thought I already chose "to clarify when everyone ELSE calls you scummy"?

[Empking]

Hez: When did I ever say that neil was calling me scum for my playstyle? Its irrelevant and an absurd misrepresentation of the point.

What? When did I ever say this? Your question is an absurd misrepresentation of the point.

OK. Explain to me why it was relevant for MOI to bring that up?

Hez: Why are you saying that you're annoyed about the spam but look favourable on neil and MOI doing what they did to cause the spam? (I'm a simple creature. Whenever I'm suspicious of someone who refuses to scumhunt or answer my questions I post like that. Its a habit IO try to avoid.)

I hate hate hate hate hate the spam

I could have sworn a minute ago you praised neil for causing it? And now you hate it? That doesn't make sense to me.

If you lynch everyone who urks you that is a quick way to lose the game. The only thing I can do is meta them out of future games I play.
On the other hand, your sixth ISO made me highly uncomfortable, as explained above, and the seventh basically sealed the deal. You were pressured and I did not at all like your response.

What specifically about my response didn't you like?

[Empking]

A counterexample does not discredit the entire thing. I've seen people fake claim as town does that mean that fake claiming isn't a scum tell?

This is correct, however your argument for MoI being mafia seesms to highly hinge on his defence of Neil rather than much else.

No MOI is scum because

1. He's making statements he knows to be untrue (like the leading, loaded questions deal) (we know he knows them to be true because he refuses to explain why he thinks the question was loaded and leading).
2. He editted a quote in order to misrepresent a point.

Both of those things would only come from scum and he objectively did the second (as in it isn't my opinion or my deduction its straight up in black and white).

[Empking]

hmm

if this game had only one scum faction I'd be tempted to say one of neil/empking/magna has to be scum after these interactions

however it's more complicated since there's 2

hmmm

I agree with this.

And right now it looks as if Empking is more scummy than niel.

If Empking turns out to be scum then neil may be townie, since I don't think two scums would get into pages long of debates against each other, and I can't see both of them working together as scum. So for now, it's best if we get Empking lynched. This is my conclusion after skimming through lots of the conversation between Empking and neil.

DK: If I flip Mafia, neil is not a wolf because...?

[Empking]

Oh, I blindly forgot that their are "two" evil forces. But if you are a Mafia, and Empking is a werewolf, then he is more of a threat since he has that night kill. But I am just making assumptions if you flip Mafia.

Please tell me that that has not impacted your thinking. Please.

DK: What actions have I done that were scummy?

You'll need to be way more specific about this, I just went through his ISO and found I agree with most of his points.

That's what you'd expect to happen when the majority of your points are both uncontroversial and unrelated to the game at hand (like the neil didn't say your playstyle made you scum point).

From memory:
Me: Neil why didn't you answer my question?
MOI (popping up almost as if they were buddies): Your question was leading and loaded.
Me: Why?
MOI:

Refusal to answer it

ScumMoI would want to attempt to cast suspicion and misrepresent your words to have you lynched.
TownMoI would want to attempt to cast suspicion and misrepresent your words because he believes you're mafia and wants you lynched.

No. ScumMOI doesn't care who he lynches as long as it isn't him or neil (and as such would misrepresent my words). TownMOI wants the truth to come out and lynch scum and feels that since he's only human he should allow people to come to their own opinions because he's not necessarily right (and thius would not misrepresent my words).

[Empking]

Um... Empking, how I see it, it's kind of like your play style in this game. You quote everyone who has attacked you/or has something to say against you as if you are trying to hide something or convince that you are Townie and get them off your backs fast enough. But I also noted that you've switched your vote around, but I don't know if people think that's scummy or not. I don't have much experience.

1. You think I'm trying to convince neil and MOI that I'm town?
2. You think that in order to hide something I respond to every point against me? Why do I do that? OR what are the mechanics of how that works?

[Empking]

Um... Empking, how I see it, it's kind of like your play style in this game. You quote everyone who has attacked you/or has something to say against you as if you are trying to hide something or convince that you are Townie and get them off your backs fast enough. But I also noted that you've switched your vote around, but I don't know if people think that's scummy or not. I don't have much experience.

1. You think I'm trying to convince neil and MOI that I'm town?
2. You think that in order to hide something I respond to every point against me? Why do I do that? OR what are the mechanics of how that works?

Uh... It should be everyone's goal to convince people that they are townie. Are you saying that you are Mafia, and you are not trying to convince neil and MOI because they are your Mafia partners?

or convince that you are Townie and get them off your backs fast enough.

Can you answer the second question BTW.

[Empking]

Well sometimes Mafia may tend to want nobody to see them as suspicious, which is an act of scum/suspicious itself.

Normal townspeople really don't tend to have to prove to everyone that they are not scum, it just comes by their behavior and how well they act like a townie.

Uh... It should be everyone's goal to convince people that they are townie.

Does that answer your question?

No.

[Empking]

Um. Right now you aren't making that much sense

Why do you say that?

or putting any effort into your posts.

Why do you say that?

[Empking]

No. ScumMOI doesn't care who he lynches as long as it isn't him or neil (and as such would misrepresent my words). TownMOI wants the truth to come out and lynch scum and feels that since he's only human he should allow people to come to their own opinions because he's not necessarily right (and thius would not misrepresent my words).

ScumMOI wants to avoid suspicion therefore does care how he acts and who he lynches, therefore he won't attempt to string together weak pieces of evidence to push the lynch. TownMOI wants to lynch mafia, he has stated he believes you're mafia therefore he does everything he can to get you lynched.

Are you seriously suggesting that dishonestly trying to get another player lynched is a town tell?

[Empking]

Are you seriously suggesting that dishonestly trying to get another player lynched is a town tell?

No, I'm suggesting that MoI misquotting you is a null-tell and that you're tunnelling on him without standing back and realizing that his play is understandable from a town and scum point of view, thus nothing to base the crux of your case around.

But ScumMOI wants to avoid suspicion therefore does care how he acts and who he lynches, therefore he won't attempt to string together weak pieces of evidence to push the lynch?

[Empking]

Are you seriously suggesting that dishonestly trying to get another player lynched is a town tell?

No, I'm suggesting that MoI misquotting you is a null-tell and that you're tunnelling on him without standing back and realizing that his play is understandable from a town and scum point of view, thus nothing to base the crux of your case around.

But ScumMOI wants to avoid suspicion therefore does care how he acts and who he lynches, therefore he won't attempt to string together weak pieces of evidence to push the lynch?

Yes, meaning him misquotting you wasn't something that was done intentionally meaning it's not the scum-tell you make it out to be.

He accidently took out a pararagraph and some bbcode from my post? How did you do that?

I removed my own text from those quotes. Nothing you said was altered in any way.

You removed my quote of you in order to make an "it" that was referring to playing to your scum meta instead look like an "it" referring to defending your scumbuddy (or vice versa). In what way is that not trying to alter my meaning? Why didn't you change the "it" to "[your scum meta]" if you were just doing it to prevent a quote pyramid?

I feel most safe having Empking lynched today because if he has the power to kill, who knows where the world will end. o.O

Seriously? I'm the scummiest player?

[Empking]

@Empking,

I've counted about 10 different times now that you've tried to use something completely insignificant in making a case against someone. For example, do you genuinely think incorrect use of grammar and punctuation can be used as a scum tell?

No. Have I ever used that as a scumtell?

DK is right when he said you're spending way too much time quoting every single little thing from every person that attacks you, especially when it seems you're completely misinterpreting what they're actually saying a lot of the time.

Care to give an example?

[Empking]

OK...

You removed my quote of you in order to make an "it" that was referring to playing to your scum meta instead look like an "it" referring to defending your scumbuddy (or vice versa).

I don't think that was his intention, and nobody else who has read it and commented on it seems to think it was his intention either.

1. He did it. Do you agree with this?
2. He either did it for a reason or it was an accident. Do you agree with this?
3. You don't delete a paragraph and some bbcode by accident? Do you agree with this?
4. He did it for a reason. Do you agree with this?

If yes to those then what reason do you think he did it for?

Do you want me to go through your ISO and point out all of the times you've done it? I just picked that one because it was on this page.

Is misquoting someone a grammar mistake or puntuation mistake?

[Empking]

1. He did it. Do you agree with this?
2. He either did it for a reason or it was an accident. Do you agree with this?
3. You don't delete a paragraph and some bbcode by accident? Do you agree with this?
4. He did it for a reason. Do you agree with this?

If yes to those then what reason do you think he did it for?

1. He cut out your quote, yes.
2. He did it for a reason, yes.
3. See 2.
4. See 2.

To save space. I don't think it can be read into any deeper than that. I do it myself, when I want to cut out any irrelevant bits and make my posts as short and concise as possible.

You misquote people to shorten your post? Surely it'd be shorter to not do a quote to begin with?

And I know you were asking a question here, but you were implying that you thought it was something he was doing as scum. I saw it as nothing more than incorrect use of punctuation (a question mark, in this instance). You're making a big deal out of nothing.

You're ignoring the repeated times that he used the implied trick previously.

[Empking]

1. He did it. Do you agree with this?
2. He either did it for a reason or it was an accident. Do you agree with this?
3. You don't delete a paragraph and some bbcode by accident? Do you agree with this?
4. He did it for a reason. Do you agree with this?

If yes to those then what reason do you think he did it for?

1. He cut out your quote, yes.
2. He did it for a reason, yes.
3. See 2.
4. See 2.

To save space. I don't think it can be read into any deeper than that. I do it myself, when I want to cut out any irrelevant bits and make my posts as short and concise as possible.

You misquote people to shorten your post? Surely it'd be shorter to not do a quote to begin with?

Also if he did it to save space wouldn't he do it for everyone rather than just the player(s) he wants lynched?

[Empking]

Since I worry about monopolizing the conversation unless I'm put to L-1 or asked a question this will be my last post of this (RL) day.

[Empking]

Unvote

Vote: DK

Yeah refusing to answer questions, not putting pro-town thought into the game and trying to pretend that he wasn't contributing because of my actions.

Hez: Still sure that its spam walls that encourage lurking?

[Empking]

Hez: Still sure that its spam walls that encourage lurking?

Yes. And you are largely responsible. With you, I'm largely of the opinion that you are active enough (even if you don't post much content in many of your games) that you can be read, and so am comfortable just waiting for a read to pop up. Today, on day one, I had my read on page three (as mentioned in my previous post) and so, your spamming is incredibly annoying as it monopolizes the discussion and is unlikely to change my thoughts (but it does prevent us from catching scum on future days so thank you for being anti-town)

I didn't post for 24 hours at all. Did people start posting? No. People stopped posting.

[Empking]

@Empking,

Have you dropped your case on neil or do you just think DK is scummier at the moment?

Neither. My previous play wasn't being very productive so I decided to put my vote on DK (Who has always been my top pick for Mafia.)

[Empking]

"Once again – the only thing I removed WAS MY OWN WORDS. Absolutely nothing was removed that you said. I can’t misquote you if I only removed words YOU DIDN’T SAY."

Would you agree that I said everything in this post?

[Empking]

Stop asking questions that have already been answered.

Am I right in thinking that you're refusing to answer that because you're scum?

(Last post for today.)

[Empking]

Can s0omebody provide an example of where I've asked a leading question? People keep on saying that but that shut their mouths when asked to give an example.

(also, that Empking is dominating the discussion with his massive three sentances is absolutely ridiculous.)

(Also sorry for the post but this leading question business is a rdidiculous scum accusation.)

[Empking]

Wicked: The first question is hardly a serious question.

Loaded because you're implying I "misquote" people and leading for obvious reasons.

If memory serves you said something like MOI wasn't scummy for his misquotation (which only seems to be on the person his vote is on) because you do the same. That was basically asking for clarification that you knew what you were claiming to do. I don't see what's so wrong with that.

[Empking]

Unvote

Vote: neil

[Empking]

Everybody: One of MOI's points against me boild down to neil OMGUSing me. What do you think of that?

I think that accurately illustrates that MOI is scum.

Secondly, I have beren at L-2 for yonks. That seems to illustrate that there are a lot of scum on my wagon (so many that the remaining scum(s) don't want to be the ones to put me on L-1). So its only logical that my main suspects would be the individuals on my wagon.

His playstyle in regards to defense is classic Fate-style scum (yes, to some degree a meta argument)

This post also seems to have mistaken me for Fate (where else would the meta come into it?). I find this unlikely.

[Empking]

Secondly, I have beren at L-2 for yonks. That seems to illustrate that there are a lot of scum on my wagon (so many that the remaining scum(s) don't want to be the ones to put me on L-1). So its only logical that my main suspects would be the individuals on my wagon.

Actually quite the opposite. You hanging at L-2 means that there is very likely a subset of players (and under my theory 2 since I think you are Evil Sheep) who do not want you lynched. That explains, to my mind, the difficultly in moving you farther up the list.

You're using the fact that I'm mainly looking at the people on my bandwagon as a reason I'm scum. You're ignoring the fact that as town my wagon is populated by scum because you're calling me scum. On this point your reasoning for thinking I'm scum is because I'm scum. Its not a serious worthy point.

So he's free to feel that OMGUSing isn't a scum-telll when he does it but is clearly indicative of scum when he claims Neil did it. Inconsistently applied standards? You are soaking in it!

When did I call neiel scum for performing the act known as OMGUS?

This post also seems to have mistaken me for Fate (where else would the meta come into it?). I find this unlikely.

If you had reading comprehension skills beyond that of the average fallen log you would understand that I am ascribing a scummy style of defense (made unfortunately famous by Fate) to your play.

So how is it a meta point, again?

[Empking]

It’s just one factor. I’m not ‘ignoring the fact that you are Town’ because it isn’t a fact. Ask each player here and 100% will tell you they are Town.

See, after looking at this post, I don't buy the argument that I'm the one grasping at technicalities.

You're using the fact that I'm mainly looking at the people on my bandwagon as a reason I'm scum. You're ignoring the fact that if I am town my wagon is populated by scum because you're calling me scum. On this point your reasoning for thinking I'm scum is because I'm scum. Its not a serious worthy point.

Do you agree or disagree with my assertion that if there wasn't a reasonbly large amount of scum parked on my wagon then a scumbag would have put me on L-1 by now?
'

From beginning of the game. You are clearly inferring that Neil is scummy for jumping on your wagon based on your sole vote. That’s OMGUS. You just avoided actually using the direct phrase.

See this clearly isn't what you think. You're well aware that OMGUS is when somebody votes you for the sole reason that you voted them. I made it perfectly clear that I felt the reason why neil voted me was because
1. I was the biggest wagon.
2. Neil was afraid of my vote.
Neither of those two reasons is OMGUS.

This is a perfect example of why I think he’s scum. He’s not even bothering to say my assertions about his play aren’t accurate. Instead he first tries to deflect by saying “He mistook me for Fate” and then wants to quibble about whether it is meta or not.

Whether your accusations are true or not is just a metter of looking at my iso. Whether you're just trying to put persuasive language in your case because you have no interest in actually scumhunting is not such a simple matter.

[Empking]

See this clearly isn't what you think. You're well aware that OMGUS is when somebody votes you for the sole reason that you voted them. I made it perfectly clear that I felt the reason why neil voted me was because
1. I was the biggest wagon.
2. Neil was afraid of my vote.
Neither of those two reasons is OMGUS.

Except 1. You were hardly a wagon at that time, let alone continuously describing yourself with such large adjectives like "biggest" and "largest.

Was I the largest wagon? Yes or no.

And 2. I was NOT afraid of your vote.

And we can just take your word for it?

Also, you asked for proof about asking leading questions, and then stated afterwards that everyone has "shut up" when you asked them for proof. I have you 5 examples of proof. You just don't man up to your own lacks. By the way, happy birthday.

Scumday.

Can you quote the examples for me? (Orv tell me which post of your's it was?)

[Empking]

Was I the

largest

wagon with one more vote then the other wagon? Yes or no.

Yes.

Was I the largest wagon? Y/N?

Scumday.

Can you quote the examples for me? (Orv tell me which post of your's it was?)

I said happy birthday, and you said scumday? Did you just admit you're scum?

Is this a joke?

And no, I won't requote to you the examples. You can ISO me if you really care, but I'm not going to go back and forth with you again. Twice now you've promised it would be your "last post of the day"

Yes.

On previous days.

yet you're still insisting with your petty, pointless, scum-filled, ridiculous posts that push people into stupid little arguments when there is no need.

How are they scum filled?

[Empking]

Wicked, Muffin: Would you mind looking for neil's post where he pointed out five leading questions. Fail to find it (because it doesn't exist). And then vote neil.

[Empking]

Yes Wicked, Muffin... please vote me because this post doesn't exist!

Where in that post did you call the questions leading?

[Empking]

Yes Wicked, Muffin... please vote me because this post doesn't exist!

Where in that post did you call the questions leading?

Yeah that was my mistake.

MOI: Can I get your confirmation that your thoughts on "You're using the fact that I'm mainly looking at the people on my bandwagon as a reason I'm scum. You're ignoring the fact that if I am town my wagon is populated by scum because you're calling me scum. On this point your reasoning for thinking I'm scum is because I'm scum. Its not a serious worthy point." is "It’s just one factor. I’m not ‘ignoring the fact that you are Town’ because it isn’t a fact. Ask each player here and 100% will tell you they are Town."?

[Empking]

I refuse to do this. I've been trying to get the point across that blatantly defending day 1 is very rare. If it takes me a long time to find anything, that will just prove my point.

This is complete scummy bull. You were saying that I checked 100s of games in 10 minutes and that I was lying about checking only three. Surely you'd be eager to take the chance to prove that I was lying about only checking three games in my 10 minutes (By doing it in a significantly quicker time?)

Your point would be downright disproved if it took you along time.

[Empking]

This is complete scummy bull. You were saying that I checked 100s of games in 10 minutes and that I was lying about checking only three. Surely you'd be eager to take the chance to prove that I was lying about only checking three games in my 10 minutes (By doing it in a significantly quicker time?)

Your point would be downright disproved if it took you along time.

For the record note how Empking absolutely focuses on anything but the points about his 'search' that matter.

1. That he cherry picked a Lovers game (which has clearly a completely different dynamic than normal Mafia games).

Apart from the fact that the dynamic is as good as exactly the same w.r.t the wolf team in this game.

2. That he first evaded explaining how he arrived at his 'evidence' until I forced him to.

I'm sorry but the word "lover" was bolded in that game I linked to. I was hardly hiding what I did.

3. That 1 game doesn't demonstrate his original theory - that scum teammates often strongly defend each other very early Day 1.

When did I say that scum teammates often strongly defend each other very early day 1?

[Empking]

This is complete scummy bull.

You

were saying that I checked 100s of games in 10 minutes and that I was lying about checking only three.

Umm... I think you are confusing me with MoI.

Am I? I thought you were in agreement with him on that point. See that's the problem when you dredge up old posts.

[Empking]

Wat. I have no clue what you are saying.

On the first two pages of the game proper then its unlikely to be more than what you call "random" votes. The odds of scum being attacked with a serious point is very unlikely. That's the reason why I can't find what you're looking for which makes it completely useless when taking into account this game where a player in a two man scum team in a 13 player game

was

the victim of probably the most serious vote at the time.

[Empking]

Furthermore do you think it likely that a significant portion of the scum would pile together on one wagon of a Townie in getting him to L-2?

(Not directed to MOI (as in I'm not asking for an answer))
It makes more sense when you remember that neil and MOI are the wolves together and I essentially forced them to stay on my wagon.

[Empking]

I'm the Seer. As MOI said my wagon is populated by scum. Can we lynch neil now?

[Empking]

I feel like carrying out the lynch on Empking is still the best move. If he's not lynched today, I doubt that he'd live through the night with no kind of doc or JK in this setup.

Presuming I'm not a Wolf (which I think even MOI admits to agreeing with) I'm the nightkill target tonight. Therefore its absolutely moronic to lynch me.

[Empking]

wait.. why are you the top NK target?

I am either Mafia or the Seer. 100%. Wolves want to kill the Mafia and the Seer. Ergo I'm the best kill for the Wolves.

[Empking]

Why can't you be a wolf again?

Does anybody claim to think that I'm a Wolf?

(Supposedly a made a slip where I became adamant that MOI was a wolf rather than a Sheep. At any rate, if MOI was town then

he'd

unvote me.)

[Empking]

Am I right in thinking that you've gone from:

I'm still here. I've realized with a week left, the DK wagon isn't going to go anywhere and Empking has become basically our only feasible lynch.

Which I'm fine with.

to

"Lynch Empking despite there only being a 1/3 chance of him being a good lynch and a 2/3 chance of him being a really awful lynch."?

[Empking]

what's to say that you're not mafioso and werewolfs are keeping you alive because they think you're lynchable?

Because from the Wolves' POV I might be the Seer (I am the Seer) and as such I'm too dangerous to keep alive. (If we lynched neil today then I can as good as guarantee that my action will target a Wolf.)

Preview: I can agree with MOI's analysis. Its better to lynch tommorow's lynch today and either get me nightb killed or lynch tolmorrow's lynch today and get my night result.

[Empking]

(Supposedly a made a slip where I became adamant that MOI was a wolf rather than a Sheep.

At any rate, if MOI was town then he'd unvote me.

)

I've bolded the part that is funny.

1. Why I am I the only one who isn't Town for not unvoting you? Hmmmm?

Because you've been going "evil sheep" "evil sheep".

2. If you are the real Seer you really have little to fear about being quicklynched. You know that right?

No Town player is going to hammer you now. That means the only players who would risk quicklynching you are the Werewolves. Evil Sheep have no reason to do so as the Seer is zero threat to them and makes a tempting NK target instead of them. You have repeatedly stated that you believe Neil and I are Werewolf partners. We are both on the wagon. Under you premise that you've been floating you can't be quicklynched.

So letting you sit at L-1 is hardly a danger to you unless you are fake-claiming. Then you risk either the Werewolves or real Seer hammering you.

I'm glad you didn't unvote me. That doesn't change the fact that it neatly makes it clear that you're scum because your actions (not unvoting me) don't fit with your words (calling me an evil sheep.)

[Empking]

Claiming Seer... Yeah I don't believe it.

You think I'm more likely to be a Wolf over Mafia?

Why claim at L-1? Why not claim when you were at L-2?

Because this way we can as good as confirm four-ish of the six people on my wagon are scum.

[Empking]

Claiming Seer... Yeah I don't believe it.

You think I'm more likely to be a Wolf over Mafia?

Ummm... Does it matter? Both Werewolves and Mafia want the Town dead.
Werewolf have a kill, sure, but there's not really a difference in what they'd do or claim.

I don't believe that you have thought about this and that you believe it. One of those fact is false.

Why claim at L-1? Why not claim when you were at L-2?

Because this way we can as good as confirm four-ish of the six people on my wagon are scum.

I... Still don't get that logic. You reckon that out of:

MagnaofIllusion, neil1113, DeityKabuto, cjdrum, HezLucky, Sloth

That you have four of five scum. If someone can give me some clear logic behind this (from a third person perspective), it would be muchly appreciated.
If I agree with it, then I have to be suspicious of MoI, neil, DK, Hez and Sloth... I reckon

out of those five

MoI is the Towniest. I dunno, it's just a gut thing. Which makes...

• neil1113
  
• DeityKabuto
  
• HezLucky
  
• Sloth

scum.

I still don't see how you can jump to that so easily.

Scum left me at L-2 for a week. Scum left me at L-2 for a week.

[Empking]

Wicked: Why do you think I was L-2 for an entire week?

[Empking]

Wicked: Why do you think I was L-2 for an entire week?

I don't know. I don't think it has anything to do with the allignments of the players on and off the bandwagon. It could be happening for several different non-allignment related reasons:

1. Many players are inactive and the game is moving slowly.

2. Everybody on the bandwagon believes he is scum and doesn't want to move their vote while nobody off the bandwagon wants to join the bandwagon.

derp a derp derp. The reason my wagon didn't get any bigger is because those with the ability to make it happen weren't so inclined? Gosh. Now here's the thing, unless my wagon was already mostly red the scum would be so inclined to put me at L-1. But that didn't happen. Now if Y is required for X not to happen and X did not happen then Y is true!

[Empking]

Well, assuming you're really the seer, I don't think your wagon was necessarily filled with scum. It could just be something like 1 werewolf, 1 mafioso. That would still explain why scum would have been hestitant to move you past L-2.

No because Mafia wouldn't not join the wagon just because one mafioso was already on it.

[Empking]

No because Mafia wouldn't not join the wagon just because one mafioso was already on it.

You're saying you think there was more than one mafioso on your wagon because otherwise they wouldn't be hestitant to put you at L-1 if just one of them as on the wagon?

I'm not a fan of this sort of WIFOM reasoning.

How is that WIFOM reasoning?

[Empking]

Lynching neil increases the odds of us finding a Wolf massively.

[Empking]

I don't see any reason to believe neil is a werewolf as opposed to mafia.

neil is scum. MOI is scum with neil (he opaquely and subtly defended him on the first page of the game starting. They are sumbuddies together) . DK is the scum that isn't with neil and MOI (I highly doubt my wagon was all Mafia and DK has 0 interest in scumhunting) . If neil is a wolf then so is MOI. If neil is mafia then DK is a wolf.

Why exactly do you believe he is? What do you think of my points against Twistedspoon?

Your points are essentially a more town-looking DK.

[Empking]

neil is scum. MOI is scum with neil (he opaquely and subtly defended him on the first page of the game starting. They are sumbuddies together) . DK is the scum that isn't with neil and MOI (I highly doubt my wagon was all Mafia and DK has 0 interest in scumhunting) . If neil is a wolf then so is MOI. If neil is mafia then DK is a wolf.

So... why do you think neil is a werewolf as opposed to mafia? You still haven't answered my question.

MOI's defence of him.

Your points are essentially a more town-looking DK.

No, they aren't. My points:

I still like the points I brought up earlier against him, but what's even more suspicious is how Twistedspoon:
1. Ignores the points against him. If his actions are truly town motivated then he shouldn't have trouble explaining why. The fact that he doesn't defend against the accusations directed at him forces me to believe that he can't defend against them.
2. Has made no effort to scumhunt. His first serious vote was only FOUR pages ago. Meaning he didn't seriously vote somebody until page ELEVEN. And even this vote is terrible. He still hasn't justified it. It is pretty obviously a bandwagon vote. Otherwise, he would've given some reasons for it.
3. Has been lurking.

From memory, none of the points I brought up against TS earlier can be applied to DK.
1. I think DK has acknowledged/made some effort to defend against the accusations.
2. DK has at least given reasons for voting you. It doesn't matter if they're accurate or not, I can't apply this point to him.
3. DK is pretty active compared to TS.

1. Not really.
2. He voted me because MOI and neil were voting me. That isn't scumhunting or even approaching it.
3. Not productively active,

When you say TS is a more town-looking DK, does that mean you think TS is less suspicious or that you have reason to believe TS is town?

He's less suspicious.

[Empking]

Your points are essentially a more town-looking DK.

So.. do you suspect TS at all?

Meh. Is he town looking? No. Is he probably town? Almost certainally.

[Empking]

He wasn't playing in a self-interested matter (w.r.t his vote).

[Empking]

Empking, what do you think of my point against Sloth?

I think he meant if I'm the Seer.