Moses le fou wrote:For the record, I've never said that rulebreaking is inherently scummy. I've merely found Panamon's rulebreaking mixed with his bandwagon vote (and the indifference in which he moves from one to the other) to be scummy. I've given reasons why it could potentially be scummy: it adds chaos to the game, it puts a player in a position where he can't properly defend himself. And while BM keeps pointing out that the mafia has no reason to scum hunt, they do want to get people lynched.
I find this stance acceptable. I merely think you are reaching tremendously to translate 2 things that arent inherently scumtells, into a vote. If you can consider this encouragement of rulebreaking to be an effective tell, then i think you should also be considering Schez, on the grounds that he felt so insecure that he chose to break the rules in order to defend himself from something of no substance.
Moses le fou wrote:
Another key reason why rulebreaking (in how it went down this game) can be scummy. Panamon votes on Schez based on a meta from an ongoing game. Schez explains himself by drawing from said game. Technically, Panamon was not the one to break the rules; Schez was. Panamon put Schez in a place where Schez could only defend himself by breaking the rules, but Schez is officially the rulebreaker nonetheless. Volkan issued a warning to Schez and the rest of the players not to do that again. But what if Volkan hadn't been such a lenient game-runner? He could have been much stricter and modkilled Schez. Granted, if Volkan were to take actions against Schez, he more likely would have replaced him, but it's worth a shot for Panamon.
So Panamon was trying to get him modkilled?
Even from an objective position, that seems unlikely, but it does emphasise why ongoing meta cannot be considered a good case for others to base votes on. It's the equivalent of a vibe. You know it's there, but you cant explain it.
Moses le fou wrote:
I know it's a little bit of a reach, but I maintain it's the combination of these factors that led me to vote for Panamon. Is rulebreaking inherently scummy? No, but it can be. Do I have doubts about BM being scum? Yes, but he's still my #1 suspect.
Anything CAN be scummy. Signing your name at the end of your post CAN be scummy, because at some point i will be scum, and hence i will have done that as scum. But that doesnt make it a ScumTELL. For something to be considered a scumtell, it has to be something only, or almost always done as scum rather than town. You've given know reason to believe that this is true of rulebreaking.
BM
