Cruelty wrote:Why would not wanting to be lynched not be a basis to defend yourself? Obviously a mislynch is bad, and scum don't want to be lynched either. You're right in that it's a null tell but regardless of my alignment, self preservation is in the interest of both me and my side.
That's why it's a null tell. You can't defend yourself on the basis of a null tell that you brought up. No one is attacking you for it, I'm simply saying you can't defend yourself with it. You not wanting to be lynched is not a reason for me not to want to lynch you.
Now my list of reasons as promised.
1) Yesterday, you failed to do anything other than join existing wagons with bad arguments. See Papa Zito's post, #712 on page 29 for a very nice explanation of this point.
2) In post 885 you deliberately tell people not to analyze you and just take what you said at face value. This goes against the basic concept of the game, and is essentially giving you a free pass to say whatever scummy things you feel like.
3) During that same post you make an extremely scummy stab at me. You listed me greeting Archaebob and Muffin for some reason which you seemed to withhold. I don't know what you meant by it, then you listed three fairly consistent views of peanut by me and listed them as contradiction. The whole post looked to me like scum desperately trying to get attention onto another player he thinks there might be enough steam to lynch.
4) Then you say I was speculating about something and finish by saying you aren't that suspicious of me anymore. Hmm, not really sure what to make of that part, but it feels like throwing out a line and seeing who will bite. If I think about it psychologically i can't see a reason for a town player to make a post like that. You are trying to see what everyone else thinks of a potentially scummy player, not because you think they're scum, but because you think you might be able to get them lynched. I can't prove this part, but it sticks out in my mind.
5) In day one, you stubbornly stuck to your "playing cards close to your chest," and then revealed that you just didn't have any information worth posting. That feels like either scum trying to get by without posting, or disinterested town.
6)
Gammagooey wrote: Cruelty didn't contribute much at all yesterday, didn't mention Muffin/Socio until very late in the game, and similar to peanutman is pushing on archae who I think just made a townie mistake (reasoning was a few posts back if you want it). In addition, he's still stating that foilist is scummy even though Socio's flip makes him just about as confirmed as a village idiot as he can get. He also has inconsistancies in his reasoning for being irritated at AGM and changing from not wanting to lynch AGM yesterday to wanting him lynched now.
I will vote for any of these three dudes. However, if cruelty is scum I think AGM looks a hell of a lot better given my bussing is suicide theory, making peanutman the last maf in my eyes (doesn't work the other way around:if peanut is scum, either Al or cruelty could be the last maf). I'm thinking cruelty gives us the most info from the lynch and has a high chance of lynching ze scum.
Vote:cruelty
I like this reason, and I don't feel entitled to rephrasing it and taking credit for it. This is the information part.
7) Later you make a ridiculous argument about whether or not your arguments were factual. Either you deliberately misread what I was writing or you're at about third grade literacy.
8) In post 923
Cruelty wrote: I'm going to throw out peanut as the better lynch - even though I'm not entirely sold on the idea of him as mafia (although I do understand the cases being made) I'm willing to get behind his lynch for two reasons - one is obviously to save myself, and the other is I think we'll get genuine information from it. Firstly, as someone said earlier, cruelty/peanut scumteam + bussing at this point = suicide, so I think that by pushing this lynch I can effectively clear myself regardless of his flip. Secondly, if he flips town then we learn that there is a much more devious player at work here - I highly doubt anyone seriously considers an AGM/cruelty or foilist/cruelty scumteam, so regardless of how I look in a peanut-town flip, it becomes obvious that there is another, more dangerous (and possibly already cleared) player out there. I realise that's a fairly bold swing to make and yeah, WIFOM laden, but I can't see a better way out for both myself and for town.
Here you are not acting pro-town, you are acting pro-self. You are posting from a standpoint that it is unacceptable for you to be lynched. If you think the town would get definite info on who "X" scum is by you being lynched, then the pro-town thing to do would be to make sure the town gets as much damn information from your lynch as possible, or find scum. Your reasoning is that "I know I'm not scum, so me being lynched is anti-town and I can't allow it. So anyone's lynch is preferable to mine because there is a chance they could be scum, but there I know that there is no chance I'm scum." This is not unreasonable, but if you being lynched gives us good info on who a scum player is then being a martyr would actually be pro-town so long as you help the town as much as possible. You don't have to survive to win.
I'll buy your Peanut vote though, as from your point of view that is what it makes sense to do.
My case is not a solid as I had thought it would be, but I fail to find another player who is scummier, and whose lynch will provide more information, but I would be glad to be proven wrong.
"If you are going to tell people the truth, you had better make them laugh. Otherwise they'll kill you."
