I agree about the tone and everyone chilling out a bit, I disagree that because it got heated there must not be anything substantial to the argument.
I disagree on a fundamental level about lining up lynches. Saying you want to lynch someone, then if they flip town lynch someone else is fundamentally scummy play. That is, in a nutshell, a description of exactly how the scum work, going from mislynch to mislynch. I'm genuinely surprised at ABR for not agreeing with me on this point.
I'm possibly biased because in the following game, bigmc as scum does exactly this here:
bigmc scum wrote:Yes, muh is looking pretty bad, and
if Staple flips town, I'll definetely be voting muh tomorrow.
But because of what I just said, I'm really liking my Staple vote right now.
and I nail him as town on it here:
SC town wrote:crypto -
lining up lynches in D1 on townflips is absolutely a scumtell.
Saying if A turns up scum we should lynch B is fine, because you're looking at scumteams. But saying if A is town, we should move on to B is an easy way to get a couple of mislynches, andin this case they were two juicy targets. It looks to me like bigmc went for lynchbait number one and signalled his intent to turn on lynchbait number two (and co-voter of staple) the next day.
I encourage anyone who is keen to read all about it
here. I've always thought it was a scumtell and am at least surprised to hear ABR dismissing it.
And to be specific - lining up who you're going to hit next if your target flips scum is fine - that's just looking for scum teams. What I specifically find scummy is someone saying I want to lynch this person because I think he's scum, but if I'm wrong about that and he's actually town, I ALREADY KNOW MY NEXT LYNCH. This is outright scummy. It ignores the fact that you were wrong about your first instinct, it ignores informaiton from the wagon and the night kill, it encourages another target without thinking about how the game has changed and it allows scum to have their cake and eat it too when picking sides. It's enough for a D1 vote any day of the week and twice on Sundays.
I'd also point out that one of ABR's best attribute is his ability to push the town around, which is awesome, except when he's wrong or off on a tangent, in which case it's irritating. But you don't have to be swept along, if you actually look at his posts they're a lot less powerful than they appear.
ABR wrote:I want you to stop focusing on farside or SC, and start playing the game aggressively as you should. *You* make a case on Neto. Go and convince yourself. I already know who I'm lynching today.
This, for example, sounds a lot better than it is. Essentially, all he's saying is that he cbf to post a case.
ABR wrote:You are a stubborn person in general, and I wouldn't know how to ask you to drop this matter, but Shotty is most likely town, and we sure as hell ain't gonna vote him off because of you and SC.
This is to try to push down the fact that there's currently 3 people on shotty's wagon, the equal biggest wagon in the game, tied with DLA (ahem, not Neto, who has 1 vote - ABR's.) Plus there were a few people who at least thought my initial case was good, even if they haven't joined the wagon yet.
Albert - your wagon has LESS people agreeing with it, there are MORE than just me and farside who are voting, let alone those who think shotty is scummy and you have no right to speak for whom 'we' sure as hell will or will not vote off. If you want people to agree with you and join your wagon, including myself, actually build a case. I've already made a start for you.
Also - it gets old hearing that the case you worked hard on and filled with quotes and genuine evidence is 'etheral' and that I'm a crazed player picking on a townie when you've done bugger all to find any evidence for your case andh ave less support form that town you supposedly speak for than I do. I like you and your playstyle, but an element of respect for trying hard in a difficult situation would be awesome too.
I'm old now.