starbuck wrote:That's also a loaded question because due to personal obligations, I wasn't able to post until today. That'd be like asking someone else if they think I'm town after I haven't posted for the past few days.
No, that wouldn't be the same thing at all. You've given plenty of content to get a decent read off of, whereas lewarcher hasn't.
SC wrote:
She is discrediting elvis constantly. There's nothing inherently scummy about trying to clear yourself, there's certainly nothing inherently scummy about trying to clear someone else (doubly especially if that person is town). Yet Starbuck uses that as an argument against her constantly. It's purely done to discredit the finding. There's a natural distrust of people who speak about clearing themselves, as I learnt in my first game of mafia, but that should lead you to doubt the conclusion, not incriminate the person suggesting the theory. I say again, just because elvis suggested it doesn't mean it's not a good idea, nor does it mean she's scummy, nor does it mean it can be dismissed. Her actions have town motivations as well as scum motivations.
You say there's nothing inherently scummy about trying to confirm yourself, which is true, but you're ignoring the reasons why in this particular
case some people feel it was. You are correct as far as everything that ek says shouldn't be discredited automatically, though.
SC wrote:
If she'd come out and said he was town I could have perhaps understood her obsession with him in the first section, but she didn't. She did the classic can't-say-my-buddy-is-town-can't-say-he's-scum thing and said he was kinda scummy, but there's nonetheless reason not to vote him. This is perhaps more gut, but this is EXACTLY what scum talking about their buddy look like.
So you're saying starbuck is scum because she mentions DN a lot but has a neutral read on him? I don't get the scumtell here at all.
SC wrote:Did you have any thoughts on my case against her?
Sure. It has a couple of legitimate points(as well as some I completely disagree with). Far too much of it seems to be that you think she is "obsessed with" and "defends" DN, but I don't see the huge scumtell there. The only way that her defense of DN could be scummy in my eyes is if DN was scum, but you say that you only think DN is scum in the first place because starbuck defended him. It just doesn't add up.(If you feel that it's unfair to say that most of your case is based around the way she talks about DN then we should discuss that, as it would change the way I view the case considerably.)
It's times like this..