SerialClergyman wrote:
c) BAB caught you out in a pretty big fib in his post at 453.
Are you serious here?
I said this:
Yosarian2 wrote:B&B voted me because I think you're not his scumbuddy
B&B claimed that was a lie, but that was bullshit. That was exactally the reason B&B gave when he voted me.
BridgesAndBaloons wrote:Yosarian2 wrote:
, B&B is probably scum and, if he is, Xyl is 100% guarenteed to be town;
According to Yos, there's no such thing as bussing. Either he's forgotten all his games of mafia, or he's scum.
I'm pretty confident Yos is scum.
vote:yos
B&B voted me because I didn't think that Xyl could possibly be scum with B&B. That was EXACTALLY WHAT HE SAID HIS REASON WAS WHEN HE VOTED ME.
And then he lied about it later.
I have no freaking idea why he lied later, considering he was town; I don't know, I guess he was just freaking out and trying to save himself? In any case, it was bullshit, and I called him on it.
I can't believe you're just repeating such obviously untrue statements. You think you can just hide behind a dead townie and that'll let you get away with that?
I know you responded to it, but your response looked like overreactive scum.
No, my response was that of a town who was pretty damn sure he had a scum pinned to the wall who was trying to lie his way out of trouble.
So you put it out there that his attack on you is OMGUS, which is a relatively poor suggestion. He has actually given you plenty of reasons - none of which were based on your vote for him.
His reasons were just wrong. I demonstrated that his reasons were wrong, and his response was to change his mind and claim he was voting for me for completely different reasons. So, yes, I'm still pretty damn sure that the real reason he was voting me was just because I was voting him; it was an OMGUS vote. This is especially clear when you note that he had absolutely no suspicion on me until I started attacking him.
OMGUS isn't a perfect scumtell, of course; there are no perfect scumtells. But it's something town should not do, and something scum often have good reason to do. In this case, apparently a town did OMGUS, and that's a shame, because all it did was help get him lynched.
So he replies at 453, quoting where he had given further reasons for his vote:
BNB wrote:I'm voting you because your meta is off, your posts have a sort of unaffected tone that I've encountered when reading your scum games as opposed to the active scumhunter fearsome Yos I've seen.
Also, I think your attack of me is basically opportunistic and if there wasn't a wagon on me you wouldn't be voting me.
and then says
If you just quoted my post, which stated my reasons for voting you, and then say that I'm voting you "because I think you're not his scumbuddy," I have no choice but to believe you are purposely lying and not simply missing my posts.
Then, you replied thusly:
Yoss wrote:So, yes, you were originally voting me because I said that Xyl is town if you're scum.
Afterwords, once I had demonstrated that your wrong and that there was nothing scummy about that, you completely changed your reason; you changed it into basically a bad imitation of Claus' case against me. Basically, it looks like you really want to vote me because I'm voting you, and you'll come up with whatever reason you can to do so, and change your reason when the first one is disproven. What's worse, you seem to refuse to even admit that's what you're doing.
The fact that you're trying to claim "I'm lying" about your reason, when IT WAS THE REASON YOU GAVE WHEN YOU VOTED ME JUST YESTERDAY, has completely convinced me you're cornered scum. You've now gotten to the point where you're actually lying about your own posts in a desperate attempt to make your attackers look bad.
So this doesn't look like someone who is genuinely trying to work out who's scum. Whether BAB used those reasons when he first voted you or not, there's still a genuine question there that you've completely ignored.
There was no "valid suspicion". When the reasons he gave for voting me were proved false, rather then re-considering his vote, he simply changed his argument by repeated other people's "I think Yos's meta is off" crap.
You can make the point that he's added to his original reasons, but you still have to answer them.
No one can ever actually "answer" answer vauge comments about their "meta" or their "tone". If he had been specific with his meta or tone accusations, (..."I think Yos only does X when he's scum"), I'm sure I could have proven him wrong quite easily, but vauge comments like that are useless.
Your last post is overly aggressive and overly sure. You don't acknowledge that your summary of his reasons for voting you didn't include the reaosns he added later even though you were definitely aware of them.
I am always going to be aggressive and confident when nailing someone I'm convinced is scum to the ground; that's just the right way to act.
Anyway, I had already responded to all of his reasons only a few minutes before. I then make a short summery post just to quickly outline why I thought he response was scummy without going into all the details. His response to that was to quote that and claim it was a "lie" when it quite clearly was not, so I nailed him on that too.
And the language isn't right either. This might be more of a gut thing, but you're too derisive. A cornered scum with a desperate attempt to make his attackers look bad? Really?
Yeah, that's usually how a scum acts when he knows he can't defend the scummy actions that have gotten him all the way to lynch -1 or lynch -2. He lashes out, lies, cheats, tries to discredit his attackers, and just generally thrashes around a lot. And yes, that was what B&B's actions there looked like to me.
In addition, I also have a gut townread on kmd and also don't like your characterisation of yesterday's posts. His argument wasn't that scum never claim vanilla, it was primarily a gut read that scum in BAB's position wouldn't claim vanilla.
His argument was that a scum, bandwagoned close to a lynch on day 1 and told to claim, wouldn't claim vanilla, and that just clearly seems completely false to me.
It was a gutsy point that he knew he'd take flak for but made it anyway. I'm not sure how that plays to a scummy agenda, especially given BAB was in fact a townie.
Scum generally don't want lynch a scummy looking vanilla townie that claimed day 1 with no other claims, especally if they're worried about power roles. They want to keep going and get more claims.
Also, if B&B was going to be lynched, scum wouldn't want to be on the wagon when it happened.
In short - I think you were arguing about the theory of whether or not 'someone' who claims vanilla d1 should be lynched, but KMD was saying he thought BAB was town and the vanilla claim in that particular situation was part of the reason why. There's a subtle but significant difference between the points.
That's not really correct.
KMD wrote:
but I don't see scum fakeclaiming vanilla near a lynch on Day 1
KMD wrote:
Anyway. Until someone gives me a reason why scum would have motivation to claim vanilla here, knowing that vanillas are almost always lynched when they claim at L-1/L-2, and knowing that they won't be countered (or shouldn't be at least), I won't vote Bridge.
His argument was all about what he thought "scum" would or wouldn't do in that situation; it was all about what "someone" in that situation would do, in the abstract sense, and that was how I responded to it. I don't think he ever claimed he had a town gut read on bridges.
How do you feel kmd's play was scummy yesterday given the known status of BAB + the others that died?
So, all a scum has to do is get off of a bad wagon before it gets to a lynch, the way KMD did, and you'll just assume he must be town, huh?
I honestly don't believe that town-KMD would have believed that stuff about how "a scum wouldn't claim vanilla town when bandwagoned day 1" or whatever. He even specifically pointed out a counterexample himself, a time when a vanilla claim prevented someone from being lynched. However, scum-KMD would have had multiple reasons for getting off that wagon at that point.
I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie