|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
How is that discrediting? It's blatantly true.
On April 07 2013 21:16 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2013 21:14 marvellosity wrote:
Think in your head why I've responded to sciberbia on this and not you. Because you're totally irrational and incapable of reading, whereas sciberbia is not.
The very fact that you broke my post down to the response you gave basically shows you're incapable of critical thought. No I just know that you can rationalise anything and make it seem reasonable. Disagreeing with you does not make me an idiot despite you trying to create that myth. I am quite content in my ability to think critically thanks.
What this says is that there's no way you won't see me as scum, because any bad explanation i give is scummy, but any good explanation I give isn't townie, because I'm capable of giving it as scum. Ergo, even if I explain my thought process in an open way, it's impossible for you to read town from it because I'm capable of doing so as scum, apparently.
You also belittle my self-meta analysis, fine, self-meta analysis is in itself kinda useless. But you've played many games with me and you should know that what I talked about IS true. Or you can go and check for yourself what I'm referencing, that it's true. You can go look at the GSL game you like to reference and see if I made any "shit" votes there.
Actually you're reasonably intimate with how I play, we've played, what, a good 8 games together? Why would you disregard my past games?
All this is precisely the definition of confirmation bias.
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
Don't disappear on me now, I want to see how genuine all this is.
|
On April 07 2013 21:26 marvellosity wrote:How is that discrediting? It's blatantly true. Show nested quote +On April 07 2013 21:16 DarthPunk wrote:On April 07 2013 21:14 marvellosity wrote:
Think in your head why I've responded to sciberbia on this and not you. Because you're totally irrational and incapable of reading, whereas sciberbia is not.
The very fact that you broke my post down to the response you gave basically shows you're incapable of critical thought. No I just know that you can rationalise anything and make it seem reasonable. Disagreeing with you does not make me an idiot despite you trying to create that myth. I am quite content in my ability to think critically thanks. What this says is that there's no way you won't see me as scum, because any bad explanation i give is scummy, but any good explanation I give isn't townie, because I'm capable of giving it as scum. Ergo, even if I explain my thought process in an open way, it's impossible for you to read town from it because I'm capable of doing so as scum, apparently. You also belittle my self-meta analysis, fine, self-meta analysis is in itself kinda useless. But you've played many games with me and you should know that what I talked about IS true. Or you can go and check for yourself what I'm referencing, that it's true. You can go look at the GSL game you like to reference and see if I made any "shit" votes there. Actually you're reasonably intimate with how I play, we've played, what, a good 8 games together? Why would you disregard my past games? All this is precisely the definition of confirmation bias.
Let me make this clear. To the part of the case I really was interested in, you responded that you wouldn't do scummy stuff like that as scum. The other parts seemed reasonable, and were also responses to the parts of the case that were weakest and thus that I cared about the least. But the part that gives me the biggest scum read on you is the part on which you gave an entirely unsatisfactory answer.
I don't do scummy stuff like make ridiculous votes with no reasoning behind it as scum is not satisfactory answer. In fact it is the kind of answer I often give AS SCUM.
The scummiest thing against you was answered unsatisfactorily, ergo: I still find you scummy.
I do know your meta, but I am bad at reading you with it and using it in general. So I am choosing to ignore meta and focus on events IN THIS GAME. And IN THIS GAME you have made questionable reads and actively refused to give reasons. IN THIS GAME the excuse that it's not scummy because you wouldn't do something so scummy as scum is not an acceptable argument.
Furthermore. I read people better by reading their contributions to scum hunting rather than their defense posts so it is fallacious to say that I will never find you townie because i am sceptical of your defense posts. I am sceptical of every defense post due to their very nature.
As your scumhunting barely exists aside from association cases before the flip and a sheep of palmar I cannot use that to form a town read on you.
What I am wondering is why on earth you are stating I am stupid over stating I am scummy. Why you are calling this confirmation bias rather than scum trying to mislynch you. Perhaps you KNOW I am town?
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
My reads aren't questionable and I've actively given reasons, even if they are only sheeping Palmar's reasons. This should be pretty clear from my filter, regarding sciberbia. You are, for some reason, taking the self-analysis part as my defence, when, as already stated, it was context.
Take this game out of a vacuum for a moment, and pretend we're talking outside the game about my play. To repeat, forget about this game for a moment. I could state that;
1) I never make 'badly' explained votes as mafia
2) I regularly make such votes as town, and I can provide evidence for this
Conclusion: making such votes is actually a 100% towntell for me.
Ok, now we can bring it back to this game, because I understand that a mafia-marv can make this defence. But from *my* perspective, look at what *I* am seeing from you.
I'm seeing DarthPunk, a player who has played many games with me, confidently calling me mafia over something that I know for me is usually a towntell. Does it necessarily mean I'm town this game? Of course not! No, I could be scum doing it this game. But from my perspective it should be giving you a fucking lot of pause calling me mafia and voting me as strongly as you are now. It's something I can't understand when you should know me better than this.
This is entirely on top of the fact, as explained in my long post, my feelings for sciberbia weren't without reasoning, they were just very similar to Palmar's. Would you really have rathered I'd written a couple of paragraphs paraphrasing him every time I wanted to vote for someone? Why? Why are you so bothered that I agreed with Palmar's reasoning and came with him on to sciberbia, but it doesn't bother you in the slightest when Palmar effectively does the same with WaveofShadow? You're calling my reads/reasoning questionable, but they entirely aligned with Palmar's, and I said as much, yet you're voting for me and you don't give a shit about him? I don't get at all why you wanted me to over-explain my sciberbia vote when the reasoning was already in the thread.
NONE of this do I understand.
|
Marv, current read on Palmar?
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
|
On April 07 2013 22:00 marvellosity wrote:
Pretty likely to be town
Thoughts about his reads?
He said I am his only scumspect.
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
That's not what he said at all.
|
On April 07 2013 22:02 marvellosity wrote:
That's not what he said at all.
then what did he say?
Hmm?
I thought he backed off out of everything
and now is gonna be like Red Team. Which is slightly disappointing 
|
Marv am I more likely scum or town?
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On April 07 2013 22:14 DarthPunk wrote:
Marv am I more likely scum or town?
Why don't you just answer my last post properly instead, we're in civil mode now.
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On April 07 2013 22:05 Oatsmaster wrote:then what did he say? Hmm? I thought he backed off out of everything and now is gonna be like Red Team. Which is slightly disappointing
Yes, he backed off everything, but he didn't say you were his only scum suspect either. He said "maybe you" in an offhand manner, which is completely different.
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
Besides, Oats, i think Palmar will come in to the thread and work with it today. That's my hunch anyways.
|
On April 07 2013 22:24 marvellosity wrote:
Besides, Oats, i think Palmar will come in to the thread and work with it today. That's my hunch anyways.
Maybe.
Maybe not.
I hope so. My back is perfectly fine, i dont have a hunch though.
|
On April 07 2013 22:22 marvellosity wrote:Why don't you just answer my last post properly instead, we're in civil mode now.
Why don't you make a small commitment to a read on me?
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
Why don't you just answer my post?
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
This reminds me of last game Corazon screaming at me to call him mafia. It's so silly.
|
On April 07 2013 22:40 marvellosity wrote:
Why don't you just answer my post?
You've got my answers my opinion hasn't changed and i don't like to repeat myself.
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
Do you at least understand the perspective I've put forth in the post you won't reply to? Do you understand my grievances?
|
On April 07 2013 22:46 marvellosity wrote:
Do you at least understand the perspective I've put forth in the post you won't reply to? Do you understand my grievances?
yes. I understand your perspective.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
