the possibility was considered, but i find the probability that you're scum to be much greater, and i find you to be the scummiest player period.Xylthixlm wrote:Your case is bullshit because you aren't even considering the possibility that I might be town as an option.
There, I responded to your case.
Then you should be able to say why you don't think I could be town, but you're avoiding the question insteadroflcopter wrote:the possibility was considered, but i find the probability that you're scum to be much greater, and i find you to be the scummiest player period.Xylthixlm wrote:Your case is bullshit because you aren't even considering the possibility that I might be town as an option.
There, I responded to your case.
saying that i am not considering that you could be town is bullshit and you know it. this is how scumhunting works.
Wait, MastinXylthixlm wrote:So let's see if I understand this
I brought up a possible partner-based tell on Wickedestjr. Because I linked him to Mastin, and therefore thought he's Cerulean, roflcopter accused me of selective scumhunting. Mastin came up Vermillion, and now roflcopter is pressing the case that ... I am selectively scumhunting for Ceruleans by linking people to Vermillions?
If you believe that I have a bridge in brooklyn to sell you
The question here is, do you think rofl is cerulean scum just trying to focus on a vermillion lynch? If you do then this is valid, however since I think rofl being cerulean is ridiculous then this doesn't work.The scumtell you pointed us to says that people who focus on one group exclusively are likely to be scum.
You have made no secret that you are focusing on one group exclusively.
Why should I not think you scummy based on the tell you yourself are using?
It seems a ridiculous gambit for scum-mole to make, and I see no reason for it, unless he's trying to get 1 confirmed mason lynched, but it just seems unlikely.Kublai wrote:WTF? I might believe his neighbor claim if a 4th neighbor came out of the woodworks, but to take it at face value? No way.
The claim was unprompted. I wasn't near lynch. At all. I wasn't even being pressured.KK wrote:WTF? I might believe his neighbor claim if a 4th neighbor came out of the woodworks, but to take it at face value? No way.
Faraday, got anything to add to this now?Faraday wrote:The comment was meant to indicate that Zazie seems to be thinking similar to me on a number of issues, I believe if people are thinking similar to me, or asking similar questions then it makes them more likely to be town, as they're scumhunting.
Uh, that part is so self-evidently bullshit I didn't think it needed a response.roflcopter wrote:xyl, you're strawmanning my case against you. you've ignored the whole part about how your push against wicked was scummy.
Suit yourself. My job isn't to convince you that you're scum.roflcopter wrote:so yeah, i'm ignoring you because everything you're doing is actively hurting the town.
Because there's a difference between posting "here's *my* list" and "here's the town's list". roflcopter is doing the latter.SerialClergyman wrote:I don't understand this at all. Perhaps it's just me being thick, but why can't rofl just be posting his scummiest -> towniest list? Obviously if he's scum he's be lying..? And it's not like any of the people he calls scum are 'confirmed'...
Unlikely? molestargazer did agree to the "Let's testlynch the masons" idea shortly after his claim.Faraday wrote:It seems a ridiculous gambit for scum-mole to make, and I see no reason for it, unless he's trying to get 1 confirmed mason lynched, but it just seems unlikely.
It doesn't quite make sense as scum unles you're really confident in your ability to talk yourself out of a tight corner, but truth be told you're not super high on my scum list. I'm more interested in Faraday's reaction.molestargazer wrote:The claim was unprompted. I wasn't near lynch. At all. I wasn't even being pressured.
I made the claim in a sincere belief that Hayker & Wicked might be scum, and the claim was needed to explain why I thought so.
The claim was, in all probability, suicide. If the lynches happened, and I was correct, I'd most certainly die pretty quickly. If I was wrong, I'd be dead very soon after.
Please outline why you think I would do this as scum.
Erm, no?Xylthixlm wrote:Faraday, got anything to add to this now?Faraday wrote:The comment was meant to indicate that Zazie seems to be thinking similar to me on a number of issues, I believe if people are thinking similar to me, or asking similar questions then it makes them more likely to be town, as they're scumhunting.
I should qualify thisXylthixlm wrote:Uh, that part is so self-evidently bullshit I didn't think it needed a response.roflcopter wrote:xyl, you're strawmanning my case against you. you've ignored the whole part about how your push against wicked was scummy.
Well this makes it more likely he's a neighbour who believes there aren't masons in the game then surely? I don't see how it's scummy when you're coming from his line of thought, I do think it's a bad idea to testlynch them though.Unlikely? molestargazer did agree to the "Let's testlynch the masons" idea shortly after his claim.
You, wicked, Lowell, and curiouskarmadog. I expect the curse of Xyl to kick in any moment nowroflcopter wrote:xyl, your apparent disdain for my suspicion of you notwithstanding, the wagon speaks for itself
Yes, I did. Your point?KK wrote:Unlikely? molestargazer did agree to the "Let's testlynch the masons" idea shortly after his claim.
Precisely.KK wrote:It doesn't quite make sense as scum unles you're really confident in your ability to talk yourself out of a tight corner, but truth be told you're not super high on my scum list. I'm more interested in Faraday's reaction.
I haven't read the Xyl case yet, so I can't really say.rofl wrote:mole, sc, faraday: why is your current vote (or lack thereof) better than voting for xyl?
rofl, do you think these points against me are correct?Wickedestjr wrote:Vote: Xyl
-He tried to lynch a player without even giving reasons.
-He is being lazy.
-He hasn't posted many opinions on other players.
the first point is correct but doesn't cover the whole reason why it was scummy.Xylthixlm wrote:rofl, do you think these points against me are correct?Wickedestjr wrote:Vote: Xyl
-He tried to lynch a player without even giving reasons.
-He is being lazy.
-He hasn't posted many opinions on other players.
not particularly. i found him less scummy because you were voting him, actuallyXylthixlm wrote:so roflcopter - did you think wickedestjr was scummy before the claim, or not?
I was riding the bus on the way to work, and thinking about my (gut) case on Wickedestjr. Obviously since I was not giving much in the way of reasons he had no way of defending himself, and there was of course a possibility I was totally wrong. I was playing through the inevitable conversation - "How am I supposed to defend myself" "Just find someone who's willing to tell me I'm wrong about you being scummy" - and realized that I didn't need to wait for wickedestjr to bring it up, I could just ask for the reality check myself. I figured that if he's scum, his scumbuddies would be hesitant to go on record defending him, and if they did it would be something to link them later. And if I really was just crazy, some townie should come out and say so. I get a check on my read, and help build connections if he turns out to be scum. Win-win.Xylthixlm wrote:Is anyone willing to read Wickedestjr's posts in iso and go on record as saying they arenotscummy?