Hatland Mafia

[Sifright]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

Yes, it is going to annoy the crap out of me if you insinuate that you think I'm Scum because you refuse to actually take 30 seconds to read stuff I take a damned long time thinking about and typing. But even then, what annoys me isn't "who you are," it's how you've chosen to "play the game." You're a smart person, one who's intelligent and capable of investing the minimal time and effort necessary to read a post in under sixty seconds and respond to it appropriately.

I'm not going to be soft and gentle in criticizing you when what you express against me isn't even a criticism that I'm 'scum' or 'anti-Town,' but rather a sentiment that you're too lazy to read my efforts to contribute and that you choose to believe that my serious efforts to articulate actual points constitute 'pointless fluff.'

I didn't once call you scum in my post. (reading comprehension problems or prehaps you are being to defensive?)

[Solid Snake]

Originally Posted by Sifright

I didn't once call you scum in my post. (reading comprehension problems or prehaps you are being to defensive?)

Reading comprehension problems? If you read what I wrote you'd realize what I'm trying to say is that I'd much rather see you call me 'Scum' or 'Anti-Town' than accusing me of wasting even more of my own time than yours by 'writing pointless fluff.'

[Sifright]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

Reading comprehension problems? If you read what I wrote you'd realize what I'm trying to say is that I'd much rather see you call me 'Scum' or 'Anti-Town' than accusing me of wasting even more of my own time than yours by 'writing pointless fluff.'

Well I have to give you kudos for enraging me enough that I literally misread your post due to personal bias. Yes I can accept that I misread that post but if your honestly trying to claim you were simply criticizing the content of my post and the style it was made in thats alot of crap. You brought up the previous game as a way to discredit me when I've already changed from that style Hell i changed away from that style during that very game. You are attacking my self and other directly in your posts you may think you are going for their content or style but you simply are not prehaps you have reacted as emotively as I just did but stop take a look at what you wrote. Don't try to excuse it just look at it and imagine how it comes across to others, I my self can't see how you could write

"Oh no wait this is Sifright, sorry guys clearly I'm mistaken, under the Laws of Sifright any post longer than 500 characters in length is automatically illegitimate because he refuses to type more on that on average, and would prefer you spam the crap out the thread with tons upon tons of tiny posts that add nothing of consequence."

and not expect that be taken as personal attack given it actually has no fucking relevance on the current game, by the way I've no problem actually reading your long ass posts except when being insulted directly anger has an amazing way making you dumber, I've said previously that I can and will dissect your posts regardless of length that doesn't make it any more or less annoying to do and there are plenty of damn posters who when hit by your mounds of text do the opposite and shut up and give up.

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

...Are you going to insult my profession now? And you accuse ME of completely unrelated ad hominem?

Yes by that point I was already writing emotively because you managed to upset me with your DIRECT attacks on my OLD style of posting which you attempted to use to discredit me CURRENTLY.

Ridiculing a person is not the same as criticizing them.

[Solid Snake]

Originally Posted by Sifright

You brought up the previous game as a way to discredit me when I've already changed from that style Hell i changed away from that style during that very game.

RPG and others have brought up my behavior in the most recent MLP game as a way to discredit me. Smarty did vigorously criticize my playstyle in the previous game. While I argued against RPG's points and I debated Smarty's interpretation of my playstyle, at no point did I attempt to discredit their arguments by throwing a hissy fit and simply labeling their behavior as ad hominem.

You are attacking my self and other directly in your posts you may think you are going for their content or style but you simply are not prehaps you have reacted as emotively as I just did but stop take a look at what you wrote. Don't try to excuse it just look at it and imagine how it comes across to others, I my self can't see how you could write

"Oh no wait this is Sifright, sorry guys clearly I'm mistaken, under the Laws of Sifright any post longer than 500 characters in length is automatically illegitimate because he refuses to type more on that on average, and would prefer you spam the crap out the thread with tons upon tons of tiny posts that add nothing of consequence."

and not expect that be taken as personal attack given it actually has no fucking relevance on the current game, by the way I've no problem actually reading your long ass posts except when being insulted directly anger has an amazing way making you dumber, I've said previously that I can and will dissect your posts regardless of length that doesn't make it any more or less annoying to do and there are plenty of damn posters who when hit by your mounds of text do the opposite and shut up and give up.

Sure, it's an offensive and perhaps even an erroneous interpretation of your playstyle.

It was designed to be. It was in response to your offensive and erroneous interpretation of my playstyle. Perhaps the subtlety eluded you, but much of my argument was simply trying to show you how ludicrous it was to watch you insult my writing habits with my superfluous Walls of Text and then express utter indignation when your own writing habits were placed under similar scrutiny.

What I am failing to understand is how you are distinguishing your comments (and remember, you started this) from my own. What was I supposed to say, when you insinuated that my lengthy and time-consuming efforts to contribute positive content were not even merely 'Scummy' or 'hiding an anti-Town agenda' but actually pointless and of negligible value? Was I supposed to just say "Oh yes, Sifright, you're completely and utterly right, I shall worship to your altar of insight, how foolish of me to basically approach a Mafia game the way Snake approaches any other topic or event on NPF, clearly I must never write anything again for any contribution I attempt shall be sullied by my fruitless Walls of indigestible text?" Or might I actually be allowed to defend my own habits while contrasting them with your history of contributions?

Is the rule at NPF that Snake can and should be expected to take all kinds of insults, but Lord and Mods Forbid if Snake ever slings an arrow back?

For the umpteenth millionth time: This doesn't bother me. I've been insulted in Mafia games before. I have been insulted far worse than either one of us have just insulted each other in Mafia games before. I can literally copy-paste excerpts from past Mafia games and you wouldn't even believe the degree of CAPS-LOCKED VITRIOL in the games. I once got into an arguing match with a woman on B8 in which we practically were screaming at each other and she was so livid with me I thought she'd never talk to me again, and then a week after the game was over, much to my own shock, we were cool.

But for Heaven's sake, don't make me out into some kind of terrible troll of a person over this disagreement. I'd much rather be policy-lynched and just wash my hands of Mafia on this board altogether under an assumption that y'all just can't handle how intense the criticism in Mafia games can get under the competitive strain of the suspicion and the paranoia than stick around and get brow-beaten under some erroneous assumption that I personally despise you because how dare you prefer short concise posts or whatever.

(Just keep in mind after I flip that there's an increased likelihood that everyone who readily agrees to policy-lynch me is Scum, because for reasons I've already articulated, Scum loves the free chance to knock off a Townie with a policy-lynch and emerge with clean hands.)

[Sifright]

Okay let me make this as short as possible for you to understand.

How are you conflating "Your posts are obnoxiously long please make them more concise" with "Sifright your comments about my posting show what a stupid illiterate fool you are and only a moron would ever ask for that especially give how stupid your posting was last game"

There is a line you are professing that you aren't crossing which you are doing massively whilst decrying that others attacked you first the difference is severity you didn't just escalate the criticism/attack slightly you went from pea shooter to atomic bomb. The post that set this off was set in a slightly jokey tone but was hoping to get you write more concisely. Now your retroactively rewriting the narative to seem like you were the first one attacked.

/me shakes his head.

[rpgdemon]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

For the last fucking time; I'm insulting your playstyle and the manner in which you write Mafia posts and the way you play the game of Mafia and not you as a person, learn to make the damned distinction. You're a fine person. An awful Mafia player, as your most recent explosion has undoubtedly proven, but a damned likable and admirable human being.

Then why did you rage out when he insulted your wall of texts and say, and I quote:

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

Oh no wait this is Sifright, sorry guys clearly I'm mistaken, under the Laws of Sifright any post longer than 500 characters in length is automatically illegitimate because he refuses to type more on that on average, and would prefer you spam the crap out the thread with tons upon tons of tiny posts that add nothing of consequence.

That's not his posting style there you're insulting, you're saying that's Sifright.

...Hey if you're going to insult my posting style, yours is fair game, bro.

Except that all the insult of players that happened in your post, because you got super-defensive and angry about someone DARING to say something bad about your posting style. If I'm wrong for wanting to quit because your way of throwing suspicion on me happened to line up with a very real problem that I've been having for awhile now and it was going to be no fun, you're very much in the wrong for starting to sling insults because someone's way of throwing suspicion on you is not by insulting you, but by insulting the way that you post. Snake, you have to learn that in a Mafia game, you're not insulting the player, but the thoughts behind the post, and you can't take any of this personally, because they're just criticizing your play. [/ohwaitlookyoudidittoobutwayworse]

[rpgdemon]

Originally Posted by Sifright

Euuurghhhhh, God damn it snake this is exactly the kind of shit I mean, The only reason you post in fucking huge walls of text is to shutdown all analysis of what you are actually saying. Everything you have stated there could be condensed down to far more manageable levels with out losing meaning. Stop doing the Republican bullshittery equivalent of filibustering in mafia games.

Like, this is that horribly offensive post that you felt the need to personally berate Sifright over.

He's insulting your posting style, plain and simple. You have a long running problem with being seen as anything Republican-like (In every thread they're mentioned, you go off the handle making sure that you say, "I HAVE TO SUPER PROVE MYSELF NOT A REPUBLICAN BECAUSE OF HOW MUCH I WAS BEFORE"), I have a long running problem of being seen as incompetent.

You get angry because your posting style is insulted in the way that you have a problem with. You start throwing personal attacks against Sif.

I got angry because my posting style was insulted in the way that I have a problem with. (Well, actually, I was angry because people kept going "confidence = something's wrong with RPG". Posting style or not, it says a lot that you'd say that.) I wanted to quit.

Just cool it.

[Solid Snake]

Originally Posted by rpgdemon

He's insulting your posting style, plain and simple. You have a long running problem with being seen as anything Republican-like (In every thread they're mentioned, you go off the handle making sure that you say, "I HAVE TO SUPER PROVE MYSELF NOT A REPUBLICAN BECAUSE OF HOW MUCH I WAS BEFORE"), I have a long running problem of being seen as incompetent.

I can assure you that absolutely nothing that's happened has anything to do with the Republican comment, because to be quite blunt I didn't even notice the Republican insult buried in there. (Though it's interesting that you don't perceive that as remotely ad hominem.)

And you've clearly failed to read much of my inglorious Walls, because pretty much my entire point acknowledged and in fact articulated the fact that I believed that Sifright was merely insulting my playstyle, and in fact I was not initially terribly offended. The discrepancy appears to be that you and Sifright believe that my attempts to "insult his playstyle back" were ad hominem attacks when I contend that they weren't.

I mean hell, I'm 'insulted' far worse, completely unprovoked, by people like KP nearly every time I log into the NPF Chat. And you're going to tell me by comparison that chiding Sifright for being 'illiterate' because he sees no value in text I work damned hard to type is far, far worse? No it ain't. This isn't about what I said to Sifright; this is simply you trying to justify your own beef with me by painting me as a No Good, Very Bad Person.

[rpgdemon]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

I can assure you that absolutely nothing that's happened has anything to do with the Republican comment, because to be quite blunt I didn't even notice the Republican insult buried in there. (Though it's interesting that you don't perceive that as remotely ad hominem.)

I see if as being deliberately chosen to be worded as such to offend you, but that's still just digging at your posting, saying that you talk too much around the point instead of talking about the point.

[Solid Snake]

Originally Posted by rpgdemon

I see if as being deliberately chosen to be worded as such to offend you, but that's still just digging at your posting, saying that you talk too much around the point instead of talking about the point.

There's absolutely no difference whatsoever between
Sifright choosing the Republican reference in a manner "deliberately worded to offend me" in the process of proving a negative point about my posting, and me tossing in illiteracy references to "deliberately worded to offend him" more than necessary in making a negative point about his posting.
(And I had a valid point about his posting habits, too, namely that the notion of being lectured about posting Walls was ludicrous from someone who rightfully was bashed last game for typing one sentence fluff posts and sincerely believing that was 'constructive content.')

The line you're drawing is entirely artificial, is all I'm saying.
And I can't reiterate this enough, this shit happens in Mafia games, WORSE shit happens in Mafia games, hell, worse trash talking and competitive insults of skills and tactics happens in just about every competitive board game or sports experience I've ever played, watched, or participated in at any level. Last game we made similarly derogatory comments about Nikose. And Verified! We collectively -- myself included -- chewed Verified out. About the only defense you could have as to why it was cool to basically label Verified childish and illiterate and incomprehensible while similar comments don't fly with Sifright now is that you personally agreed with the comments against Verified and that your personal opinion of the commentary justified the language.

...Which, come to think of it, is very similar to the argument that your acceptance of Sifright trying to pour salt down a wound regarding my playstyle by randomly introducing Republicans into the fray can be readily contrasted with your denial of me generalizing Sifright's abhorrence of 'fluffy' Walls of Text as stemming from childish laziness really is just a matter of bias. You agree with one insult of one's playstyle and disagree with another; therefore, you're not opposed to any perception of ad hominem generally, you're just to opposed to specific iterations of "ad hominem" for subjective reasons.