Mini 698 - Georgetown Mafia - Game over

[Huntress]

Vote Count

StrangerCoug 2 - (Jazzmyn, Cephrir)
Apothecary 3 - (StrangerCoug, Ythill, MacavityLock)
Ythill 1 - (LLamaFluff)

Not voting 5 - (Apothecary, Atlas, Corvuus, Elmo, MiteyMouse)


With eleven players alive, it takes six votes to lynch.

[Atlas]

Asking you to choose was an effort to narrow the discussion without manipulating it. I was trying to be fair.

I wasn't questioning why you didn't pick a post, you know. I just wanted you to choose another.

Good scum will always have a reason. It's the number of instances that is most alarming. It belies a townie's level of paranoia.

Being paranoid doesn't mean refuting every defense and never agreeing with a player because they might be scum. If you see me write off a player as town because I agree with them, then you can claim that I'm not paranoid enough to be a townie. I do realize that I am not overly suspicious of a few players that I have agreed with, but that is based on their logic and whether I get to post before them.

Shifting again. You're barking up too many trees.

I'm not shifting, I thought this entire time that "you had convenient suspicions" meant "you had suspicions when it would be easy to get everyone to agree with you and lynch Primate", which directly relates to what everyone thought rather than how Primate was acting.

I just insisted that something you said later does not change the weight of what you said in #157.

Isn't insisting something does not matter basically dismissing it? I get what you are saying though, but I still think it's a bit unfair.

I believe this may be the most important point of our debate. I need to understand how you came to the conclusion that the PR was scummy, rather than just anti-town.

I think so too. I'll start with the general concept; at the time I believed that Primate's main goal was to convince the town that his PR was real, a feat that you agree would make him less likely to be lynched. In theory I wouldn't expect a player to be able to convince the town that he actually had a PR, but that obviously changed when several players believed he had a PR, couldn't make up their mind, or did not find him anti-town either way. Whatever.

This first begins in #77 where Macavity doesn't express any discontent for the PR and subtly praises it. This is pretty minor, though. In #112 Sminty gives a similar reaction to Primate's pictures. #122 Cougar says that Primate's picture posting does not warrant any votes and notes that he still may be able to communicate with the town. By #131 Macavity comes out and says that he doesn't think Primate's PR is anti-town or scummy at all, despite the fact that he is not being as informative as he could be (this is what I'm getting at).

In the next post Cougar agrees that #127 and #128 by Primate, which more or less follows Macavity's reasoning that Primate can be left alive without adverse consequences. Yet another player (EvilGorrilaz) jumps in the thread and says that Primate's posts are possible to understand, while FoSing the pressure vote. In #149 Zeppo says that he is enjoying Primate's PR. Most of Page 6 is just Cougar defending Primate from a policy lynch. On Page 7 Corvuus posted a pretty convincing case and Cephir jumped on Primate's wagon. He never outwardly supported Primate so that didn't really influence #157, anyways.

I saw this progression of events the same way that Corvuus did

("If we don't deal with this now, and what I see as a voluntary PR, then he is just going to coast through the game and we can't determine meta, scum-town-tells, etc. since it is a picture.")

. The Primate supporters/don't carers (Macavity, Cougar, EG, Zeppo, Mitey) outnumbered the players that wouldn't allow Primate to play with a PR (Corvuus, Sminty, Cephir) and Apoth didn't say anything on the subject. Reading through this, and being a non-supporter of Primate's PR, it is easy to come to the conclusion that Primate's goal was to coast through the game by winning over most of the town. He had already pulled an avid supporter (who was ironically his top suspect) and most others supported him as well or didn't show any interest in his lynch. When I got a chance to post after #156, clearly I saw that several people were allowing Primate to have an easy game and his true motivations started to make sense.

Why would Primate risk doing this, while not knowing how the town would react? That is something you brought up; for meta-game purposes. You said yourself that he may have been trying to "attain the best win ratio over multiple games" (actually I have no idea why you said this, because a townie is more likely to lose if he fakes a PR) which could be applied to town or scum. Maybe he was testing out a new strategy and didn't care so much about how it would turn out.

---

I admit it, you got me. I've been busy wrapping up work in time for my Thanksgiving vacation. Between that and the WoW between you two, I'm having a hard time going through all this. (I didn't know the term either, but it certainly applies in this case.) I'm going to try to dig in to this when I'm home, and I promise I'll get to it eventually.

You know, I wasn't talking to anyone in particular. When typing #386 I recalled several (or at least, it seemed like several) players saying that they would give their input in this around the time that Ythill replaced in. Ofc I didn't remember seeing any input so I just threw that out there. Thanks for confessing though.

(I missed the part about the pronunciation of Ythill's name, as if it's relevant. I've always pronounced the Y and the T individually in my head, e.g. "why-tee-hill".)

And I thought pronouncing it 'why-thill' was weird...

Going back in thread to analyze Primate-supporters, I noticed a pretty opportunistic vote from Sminty. In #112 he says that Primate's posts are "rather entertaining" and doesn't give another tick about it, but a day later he follows Corvuus on a developing wagon with a vote that greatly contrasts from how he felt about it earlier. This makes no sense because Primate didn't do anything in that time frame to make himself seem more useless.

Llama, I agree that some of Ythill's points were reaching or silly and that the overall case is weak, but I didn't necessarily find it a scum-tell. There are a few original points in there though.

I'll read the quote war between Cougar and Corvuus (wait--what?

Another

one!?) later but right now it seems kind of weird. Suspicions coming in next post as well. Oh and yeah, sorry for the walls of text. I hate them myself. Hopefully I can post more frequently so I don't have to bundle everything into one post.

[Jazzmyn]

Hello, all.

I'm replacing in, and while I did read a bit of the thread before volunteering, I think I only looked at the last couple of pages at the time. Now that I've looked at the

first

few pages, I plead inebriation and/or insanity for having volunteered to sub in at all.

Okay, all kidding aside, I will read the entire thread and catch up as soon as possible. It may take a couple of real life days before I can offer anything of substance, in light of the length of the thread and some of the posts and in light of my work schedule, but I am happy to be aboard.

Regards,
Jazz

[Apothecary]

When I made that statement about grasping straws, I was saying that you're going for an easy way out of today. I wasn't making any reference to, ah, "Strawmen". I was merely being a little bit defiant and angry. I think if you breathe to much into that SC, then I think that's a sign of desperation, trying to keep me as the prime suspect.

[StrangerCoug]

When I made that statement about grasping straws, I was saying that you're going for an easy way out of today. I wasn't making any reference to, ah, "Strawmen". I was merely being a little bit defiant and angry. I think if you breathe to much into that SC, then I think that's a sign of desperation, trying to keep me as the prime suspect.

But you used the term "you lot" instead of just the word "you", so you said that we as a group, and not I alone, are grasping at straws. In addition, as far as I am aware, grasping at straws = straw man (but again, someone needs to correct me if I am wrong).

[Corvuus]

This is so utter lose. Kokusho's gambit (or whatever) has nothing to do with this. You bringing it up when it doesn't relate and then knocking it down is utterly pointless and I don't count crap as contributing originality.

Kokusho's gambit was presented as the only pro-town fakeclaim I could think of. Since it does not apply, of course I brought it up so I could knock it down, but it was part of my case against him.

The rest of this part of my post is on you than Apothecary, but it's more "you should have told me earlier" than scummy. Here goes:

I could only think of pro-town fakeclaiming as town pulling Kokusho's gambit.
The only way someone can think of ≠ the only way period.
Therefore, pro-town fakeclaiming ≠ town pulling Kokusho's gambit per se.
Furthermore, I was not aware of any pro-town reasons to fakeclaim other than Kokusho.

You should have specifically brought up your explanation of why it would be pro-town for town to fakeclaim doc below the moment you saw me vote Apothecary for the same.

It also presents a false dilemma in that YOU think that a vanilla townie would never fake claim doc in order to save himself.

See above.

If you claimed Vanilla, we would almost 80% guaranteed be lynching you right now. The only way to prevent your lynch today is to claim a power role, i.e. doc, regardless of whether you are town, scum or real doc.

I understand that. I also understand that town would much rather be nightkilled than lynched, but at the same time they should not be worrying about self-preservation.

I could craft a sane hypothetical with a sane townie claiming doc when there was a real doc in the game and it 'working'.

The hypothetical is completely based on whether the real doc *knows* he shouldn't counterclaim, and he should know based on it being D1.

The townie fake claiming would survive an extra day but probably get NK'ed later that night since mafia would take his claim at face-value. Go town.

If it is scum fake claiming and they survived, then suspicion will come back later, and if the real doc died then they will almost certainly be gg'ed right there. It could be the scum fake claiming to also net the doc with his death, etc.

See above.

Either way, a D1 doc claim is the weakest, laziest claim but there is no reason to lynch you now since you will 100% die before the end of the game.

What other option do I have as a doc at L-1, claiming something else? To sit there or claim vanilla is tantamount to suicide. The only other role I can think of claiming is jailkeeper, and for that to work the doctor would have to be paranoid. You rarely know your sanity if you're starting on Day 1, and even in night starts, figuring out you're paranoid takes awhile.

It is D1. There is no need for a counterclaim by real doc. Whether you are town, doc or scum, you will not die this day but you will die eventually. If you were cc'ed then you would and real doc would both die and that would be fairly pointless.

If you know a townie knows this and think others know it (or can insinutate it before real doc counterclaims) then your 'get out of jail free card' doc claim is just postponing your execution which may be good for town.

OK, point understood and case dismissed.

Cougar can you summarize your top suspects in one sentence?

Apothecary proposed the idea of vanilla faking doctor, and my suspicions of Ythill and Zeppo007 are minor anymore.

as above, lame. you really aren't trying.

OK, which of the following three do you find scummiest?
A.) Suggesting that vanilla would fakeclaim
B.) Rushing the game
C.) Asking about someone's role

Or, by some chance, are all of the above equally scummy to you, even if none of the above are scummy?

see, you seriously aren't even trying since your above suggestions are silly.

First of all, suggesting that vanilla would fakeclaim in itself isn't scummy. How apoth said it is. I would point out that someone else other than Apoth said the equivalent that you may be vanilla fake claiming, but then again, i don't expect you to have read or seen that.[/quote]
Rather than keeping to yourself (which is scummy) hoping that I die, why don't you bring it up?

Second of all, what is your definition of rushing the game?

Asking people to mindlessly bandwagon someone.

Just because we vote and get someone near L-1, L-2 doesn't mean we *want* the day to end with quicklynch. We can just get information out of it and move on. If the vote actually ended with a lynch on the first person to get to L-1 in the very few pages, then it is suspicious and rushing. If the vote gets to L-1, L-2 and pressure, discussion, etc. and the day moves on then it is fine.

Ythill already shot down my rushing argument against him by saying he was the only vote on Atlas, but given the situations you talk about here I'm having a hard time why you don't think rushing is scummy, especially when you mention otherwise.

Third, you say asking about someone's role. Asking for a role without any reason at all is horrible. soft claiming, etc. is horrible. Asking you to claim at L-1 and discussing it is a null-tell to me since "everyone" does it.

What I was trying to get at has nothing to do with my being asked to claim. That was supposed to a reference to Zeppo007 asking about Primate's role. You imply here that his doing so is horrible, so why are you attacking it being scummy as nonsense?

Ha! I'm bankrupting my credibility! Most of us have done that already in this game! Right now you lot are just grasping at straws for quicklynches! That's pretty self destructive in itself.

Are the straw men the main reason we've bankrupted our own credibility if that's how we're going to look at it?

What does the above, "straw men the main reason we've bankrupted our own credibility if that's how we're going to look at it?" really mean?

I am trying to probe exactly what made Apothecary make that statement. I'm not attacking this specific post; I just want to know what he's thinking.

That is what you think your question is doing? getting to know what he's thinking by asking about straw men?

Exactly; more specifically, if he thinks we're guilty of straw man arguments. I won't drop it at that; it's a statement I still plan on working with after he answers what I asked.[/quote]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

eh, i read what you wrote and you didn't say anything at all. You aren't really reading.

Pretty much everything you said is wrong.

1. I didn't need to bring up why town would fakeclaim doc since it was already said. You are going to die either way, so I don't understand your argument. The point is for Apoth.

2. Zeppo's asking is certainly anti-town, especially if it exposes a role, but it isn't necessarily scummy. I don't like how you think tells are absolutes. Primate was posting pictures on you (SC) being guaranteed scum. He either knows by role knowledge (i.e. being scum himself) or he is just voting you for 'unknown' reasons. Zeppo may be noob who didn't see any evidence to explain his voting so he simply assumed it was role based and that there was a Night0. There was no N0 so Zeppo should never have even considered this, which is why I think it more likely just 'noob' anti-town than actual scum. If that is all you have on zeppo, then LOL. (note, this is consistent with what I said above since I perceived the reason for zeppo asking and deemed it a anti-town/null-tell).

3. Apoth never used straw man arguments or said that. He said we were grasping at straws because he perceived us to be voting him for based on what he considers a 'null-tell'.

But sure, by all means, go ahead and post some discussion on straw men and something useful. I would love to see your case on Apoth.

4. I think all of my above statements (and from my previous post) are consistent with themselves and clear. The fact that you read piecemeal (i.e. one sentence at a time) is amusing. Perhaps if I say it in 4 sentences right next to each other you will get it.

I think rushing and getting a quicklynch is scummy.
We don't have the same definition of rushing.
I think rushing would be actually lynching them without discussion
since 'mindlessly' bandwagoning can give info -> not necessarily scummy.

Corvuus

[Apothecary]

Okay. After reading the wiki article, I would just like to say I was not "Strawmanning". I said you were grasping at straws. In other words, looking for any, no matter how small, tells or give aways. Basically, you've just been a gigantic idiot, SC.

[StrangerCoug]

You know, instead of making ad hominem attacks, maybe you should reread the last senence of #429 closely and explain where I'm wrong.

[MacavityLock]

In addition, as far as I am aware, grasping at straws = straw man (but again, someone needs to correct me if I am wrong).

First of all, no. "Grasping at straws" means something to the effect of "this person is coming up with the flimsiest possible excuses to save him/herself." "Strawmanning" is the act of tearing down a case that looks very similar to your opponent's actual case, but that is not equivalent and far easier to attack.

OK, I went through the game again. (As much as I can while spending time at home.) Here's what jumped out at me:

My current top 3: Apoth, Zeppo, and MM are all powerfully useless, and this has been true since the beginning. Of the 3, I'd say Zeppo has been the more useful, but his suspicions were by far the weirdest (see again his "case" on MM). Jazz, you've got a bit to make up for. MM has been by far the most useless. Have you done any scumhunting that wasn't of the "You didn't explain this right away, therefore it is scummy" variety? As for Apoth, I'm pretty happy with my vote. Little analysis and rarely anything new to add. Also, I noticed this:

Well, on page 3 he [Cephrir] tried to pull a quicklynch on Evilgorrilaz (when he was playing), and when prompted to give a reason, he simply said "later".

This exact point was brought up by Zeppo on page 3, and was pretty well shot down as a good argument by page 4. I get the feeling that Apoth is barely paying attention to this game, and when he is, he's using arguments that are superficial at best.

Atlas-Ythill puts me to sleep. The fact that you're throwing post numbers in there as opposed to useful quotes makes it that much more impossible to read. However, as far as I can tell, Ythill is winning the argument: the "minimization" and the "false dilemma" points specifically feel like good craplogic callouts. But I don't think that Atlas is doing too bad of a job defending himself, and the whole argument is not putting Atlas near the top of my scumlist.

SC-Corvuus makes me want to strangle someone. SC is making nonsense arguments, responding to the wrong questions, and is at this point basically flailing. See "grasping at straws." But he's doc-claimed, so he's off-limits. Fine, we'll wait on him. Corvuus, why are you still attacking him so strongly? Why are you filling up our monitors with massive posts? I don't know if there's anyone left who doesn't think he's scummy. Why are you so adamant about making sure we know that you think he's scummy? What do you have to gain by this?

PS. This is my big post for the Thanksgiving break, don't expect anything of this magnitude until Tuesday at earliest.

[Ythill]

Mac gets a whole pan of townie brownies for his last post. Sorry about putting you to sleep. I’m an admitted blabbermouth.

@ Corvus & SC: Nested quotes are bad enough when the tags are done right. Please preview before posting. Pretty please?

Atlas has been slinging lots of mud, trying to find a place where it will stick. It

could

be an aspect of his early game play and therefore null, but time will tell.

You called it null but at the same time can easily change it later

Oh. That wasn't me dismissing it. It was me admitting that there

might

be another explanation. Note how I put “might” in italics... same way I did with “could” in the original quote.

I was talking about possibilities, not conclusions. Fact is, I could be wrong about Atlas, so I try to look for holes in my own evidence.

I think its partially an anti-town vs scummy debate.

I don't buy this. In #157, Atlas said. "Assuming it is voluntary I see Primate's play style as both anti-town and scummy." This means that, no matter how subjective the difference between anti-town and scummy is, Atlas had differentiated between them and found Primate

scummy

.

I wasn't questioning why you didn't pick a post, you know. I just wanted you to choose another.

I didn’t know that, actually. Thanks for clarifying. I choose #24 (iso). You dismissed Corvus’ overplay offhand, though you agreed it existed. You then demonstrated your displeasure with the argument, stopping just short of suggesting that the subject be dropped.

Isn't insisting something does not matter basically dismissing it?

You’re still taking me out of context. I didn’t dismiss anything

overall

. I did rule it out as conclusive in my reading of #157, for the aforementioned reason.

I'm not shifting, I thought this entire time that "you had convenient suspicions" meant "you had suspicions when it would be easy to get everyone to

agree with you and

lynch Primate", which directly relates to what everyone thought rather than how Primate was acting.

Quote fixed. You’re a tricky one, Atlas, and I want to say that I really enjoy arguing with you.

In a nutshell… I asked you to show me why you found Primate scummy, you demonstrated that consensus found him anti-town rather than scummy, I pointed that out as not being what I’d asked for, now you build a strawman out of “convenient.”

Convenient suspicions = people were voting for, questioning, and attacking Primate. None of them said he was scummy.

You

took the argument to the next level. This is all clear. I am trying to determine

why

you did that. There are two theories: (1) scum with convenient suspicions or (2) town/other honestly convinced that Primate was scummy (not just anti-town).

Whether or not

you believed

Primate was scummy has nothing to do with town consensus and everything to do with how (you perceived) he was acting.

I think so too. I'll start with the general concept; at the time I believed that Primate's main goal was to convince the town that his PR was real, a feat that you agree

would

could

make him less likely to be lynched.

Quote fixed. There is a big difference.

I think I’m understanding you here though. Let me paraphrase and simplify, tell me if I’ve got this right… You believed Primate was scum because his actions had the actual effect of earning him allies, regardless of what the reasonably expected effect of those actions was? If no, tell me why.

Why would Primate risk doing this, while not knowing how the town would react? That is something you brought up; for meta-game purposes. You said yourself that he may have been trying to "attain the best win ratio over multiple games" (actually I have no idea why you said this, because a townie is more likely to lose if he fakes a PR) which could be applied to town or scum.

I don’t want to get too deep into theory here, but you’ve got me wrong. I believe that the worth of an empty meta, to those players who favor it, is that it gives them an unreliable meta defense when they are scum but also provides excellent late-game information to their allies when they are town.

Problem is, if it’s a meta, you and I both know it’s a null. If it’s not, then it makes no sense as a scum tactic to avoid the noose. I know that I didn’t meta Primate because I know his alignment. Did you?

In addition, as far as I am aware, grasping at straws = straw man (but again, someone needs to correct me if I am wrong).

I have a special place in my heart for correcting people when they are wrong, but Mac beat me to it in a way that only leaves QFT.

Apoth never used straw man arguments or said that.

See below.

I simply offered an alternate viewpoint. I don't see why this is arousing this much angst and suspicion. If we all jumped on someone when they offered an alternate view, we'd never get past day 1.

Fail. Strawman. You are not being attacked for voicing an alternate viewpoint. You are being attacked for...

Okay. After reading the wiki article, I would just like to say I was not "Strawmanning".

Rx, if someone accuses you of something and shows evidence of how you did said thing, responding with

nuh-uh

is absolutely unconvincing. Or, in other words…

Did so!

[StrangerCoug]

So I'm wrong. Shoot me.

[Apothecary]

But that's just it! When I posted my suspicion, I was offering an alternative viewpoint! Most other people are making this seem like a massive deal. I never made anyone else's arguments seem any less valid!

[LlamaFluff]

Atlas has been slinging lots of mud, trying to find a place where it will stick. It

could

be an aspect of his early game play and therefore null, but time will tell.

You called it null but at the same time can easily change it later

Oh. That wasn't me dismissing it. It was me admitting that there

might

be another explanation. Note how I put “might” in italics... same way I did with “could” in the original quote.

I was talking about possibilities, not conclusions. Fact is, I could be wrong about Atlas, so I try to look for holes in my own evidence.

You still seemed to present it in the sense of you wanted it mentioned but called it weak. Even with the italicised could, it showed more of a "there also might be this" attitude. When you make a case you dont defend the person or add filler, that just makes the case weaker so it wasnt for either of those reasons. When you add in conditional parts to the case like that, especially when the "could" was never greatly elaborated on, they just seem like ways to necro a dying case later.

I think its partially an anti-town vs scummy debate.

I don't buy this. In #157, Atlas said. "Assuming it is voluntary I see Primate's play style as both anti-town and scummy." This means that, no matter how subjective the difference between anti-town and scummy is, Atlas had differentiated between them and found Primate

scummy

.

I just think your overall case and even inital reason for voting him is scummy and a bit off. In your post that you initally voted you said

I am however concerned with Ythill concentrating on Atlas. It just seems to be a bit odd how he wants more people to vote him, when I believe there are people who need more pressure.

Wait... I'm supposed to vote based on your beliefs, not mine? How does differing from the pack make me scummy? Chances are, if there's a D1 majority, there's scum in it.

Your suspicion seems ingenuous and your stance on SC's claim is just plain wrong.

unvote; vote Apothecary

Let's see where this leads...

It seems like the main reasoning was the stance on SCs claim (which you claimed wasnt a reason before), and that his suspicions were ingenuous. Firstly, I really dont understand what you mean by ingenuous suspicions here so I may be partially lost. The bringing up his stance on SC though is what makes me think that you voted him partially on him calling SC "town fakeclaiming".

Just the whole timing of the situation seemed off a bit to me though. I just get more of the feeling like you were trying to steer the SC wagon onto Apoc by casting your vote when you did. The SC wagon was obviously dead at this point, and there was some murmering for a SC wagon. At this time, instead of trying to push the Atlas wagon to the people who were now looking for a new top suspect, you hop to the much easier wagon without spending time trying to convince these people. That is what I mean when I say your vote just seemed really opportune to me compared with what was going on before SC claimed, compared to after. His claim seemed to make you move from Atlas to Apoc.

[Cephrir]

SC-Corvuus makes me want to strangle

someone

SC.

Fixed.

Apologies for uselessness, need to reread, etc.

[StrangerCoug]

SC-Corvuus makes me want to strangle

someone

SC.

Fixed.

FoS: Cephrir

for misrepresenting MacavityLock. MacavityLock gave a legitimate reason why he would want to "strangle" Corvuus too (namely, Corvuus is still pressuring me after my claim—he has the right to think that doing so is useless, and he apparently is exercising it). A Mafia game is not a good place for the concept of "fixing" other people's quotes to make them say what you want.

[Cephrir]

...I wasn't misrepresenting anything. I was giving my own opinion. I don't think it was terribly hard to figure that one out. Way to take me too seriously and blow it way out of proportion.

[StrangerCoug]

Bolding mine to clarify what I'm addressing:

Way to take me too seriously

and blow it way out of proportion.

Here's something to keep in mind: Regardless of alignment (or situation, Mafia or not), I will not necessarily get something that requires a sense of humor. You've already given your opinion; MacavityLock was giving his.

[Elmo]

Apothecary: ..reasons, monsieur?

Atlas's avatar seems very pro-town to me. Where is Mitey? I don't remember seeing anything damning, but there's a lot of fluff in her posting. Worse, it occurs that she makes a good buddy for SC, who is scum. Hmm. Mitey, who's scum?

I also feel the rumblings of a Jazzmyn wagon deep in my stomach.

[StrangerCoug]

I also feel the rumblings of a Jazzmyn wagon deep in my stomach.

We've agreed that Zeppo007 was not rolefishing; why are you worried about Jazzmyn being bandwagoned?

[Apothecary]

Elmo, reasons on what?

[Elmo]

Apothecary: On why you thought SC was town after agreeing with LlamaFluff's post on him. I believe you said you thought he was scum, and you seem to have changed your mind, and I'd like a solid reason as to why.
StrangerCoug: I'm not worried about it. That was meant to indicate that I was considering pushing for it.

[Ythill]

When you make a case you dont defend the person or add filler, that just makes the case weaker so it wasnt for either of those reasons.

How do you know what I do? You know how you play the game. I make my cases the way I do to

help me determine

if someone is scum, not to craft an airtight argument that neither scum nor town would prevail against.

As for the rest of the case, look how often you used "seem"... my favorite one was where you were trying to accuse me of preparing to do something that hasn't been done by anyone, because I "seem" like I'm

going to

do it. Seeming is made up of (my) action and (your) projection, and your PoV

seems

to be skewed.

It seems like the main reasoning was the stance on SCs claim (which you claimed wasnt a reason before), and that his suspicions were ingenuous.

There's the "s" word again. So, when I say something is

just plain wrong

, as opposed to disingenuous, wouldn't most people think of those two things as opposites. Thing A is a lie, thing B is

just

wrong.

[StrangerCoug]

When you make a case you dont defend the person or add filler, that just makes the case weaker so it wasnt for either of those reasons.

How do you know what I do? You know how you play the game. I make my cases the way I do to

help me determine

if someone is scum, not to craft an airtight argument that neither scum nor town would prevail against.

As for the rest of the case, look how often you used "seem"... my favorite one was where you were trying to accuse me of preparing to do something that hasn't been done by anyone, because I "seem" like I'm

going to

do it. Seeming is made up of (my) action and (your) projection, and your PoV

seems

to be skewed.

It seems like the main reasoning was the stance on SCs claim (which you claimed wasnt a reason before), and that his suspicions were ingenuous.

There's the "s" word again. So, when I say something is

just plain wrong

, as opposed to disingenuous, wouldn't most people think of those two things as opposites. Thing A is a lie, thing B is

just

wrong.

I never paid attention to it in his post, but now that you bring it up, I can see how the word "seem" is being abused. There's a big difference, mentally and otherwise, between "he

seems

to be doing it" and "he

IS

doing it". Your bringing it up does leave a black mark on LlamaFluff, but it on its own doesn't make him overly scummy to me.

[Ythill]

Meh. I haven't seen any reason to suspect Llama. Not saying he's looking townie, but I haven't noticed anything really scummy about him either.

Projecting is often done subconsciously, so I don't think it's a reliable scumtell.

[Apothecary]

Elmo, I explained this! It was merely another viewpoint that I incorrectly structured.