Mini #1004 - Popularity Mafia (Over)

[Max]

Let us look at the case we've been provided for why would should lynch Tasky (From Sando):

Not much, but he's taking the opportunity to throw out attacks without actually calling someone scummy, FOS/Voting them etc.

What... you mean he can criticise players without necessarily thinking they are scum... That's my new number one scum tell.

Yeah I know you didn't vote him, it's part of my point. You're continuing to insist that it was scummy, yet you didn't feel the need to vote him... This further reinforces that you were simply pointing it out for no real reason other than to appear townie.

Haven't I persistently labeled both Friend and Andrius as scummy? Without voting either of them? You didn't criticise me for that. Nor have you criticised any player for that same thing. Calling something scummy for one player means it is scummy for all.

It's the same as attacking Xite as an easy target to appear pro-town. Scum tend to want to do things on D1 that looks so pro-town that everyone thinks they're town.

Is that really the best argument you have against Tasky attacking Xite? The fact that it appears pro-town. The fact that you are using this hypothetical argument against Tasky shows you are flailing,
I attacked friend earlier, was that a scum-attack in order to make myself appear more pro-town? No, of course it wasn't this is just you trying to find something/anything to prove your point. Say I attacked Xite in my first post would I be attempting to appear more pro-town. There were other options to attack tasky on, and this is possibly the weakest point in the paragraph.

Same applies with things like IIoA, it's a classic tell so accusing people of it is an easy way to get town-points.

Yet upon reading Tasky's ISO IIoA is never used to attack anyone. It is basically saying "lets move away from the set-up", I made this same point later. Because I didn't use the buzz-words I wasn't accused of being scummy.
Of course, according to you, it's the sort of thing I would only do it to get town points.

Those are the only points

From Sando

that are in favour of a Tasky lynch. When we criticised him for the weak case he has provided he tells us that his case isn't weak but evidently it is. Those are the "crème de la crème" of the case and it is pulled apart to be meaningless.

I'll ask you this, what is a town-motivation for Tasky to self-vote?

You still haven't provided any reason why Scum-Tasky would do it. It isn't an inherent scum-tell. He was the third on his own wagon. People dislike it because it's perceived as playing against your win-condition. However on page 3 it isn't a "Scum act of desperation" or anything else you could label it (I think "scum act of desperation" was regarding Xite actually)

Andrius and Vollkan, who's your last partner?

So all of a sudden after spending nearly two weeks arguing that Tasky was scum you change your mind. It seems to be a U-Turn that appears all of a sudden with no warning. This is very counter-intuitive, what has changed in the past few days that makes you certain Tasky isn't scum?

[VasudeVa]

V/LA for a 1-3 days,

Catch up real soon.

[Max]

Remind me when this game is up to make a MD thread.

[LlamaFluff]

Vote Count

Andrius (4) - RayFrost, Sando, ReaperCharlie, vollkan
Sando (3) - Tasky, Max, Andrius
CSL (2) - bv310, ConfidAnon
PranaDevil (1) - VasudeVa
ReaperCharlie (1) - PranaDevil

Not Voting (1) - CSL

If Tasky has not posted by the time Parama returns from V/LA, Parama will replace him.

[RayFrost]

Max:

Thoughts on players OTHER than sando would be appreciated.

[Andrius]

Sorry for not posting. I've been *essentially* spamming another game I'm in, so just be lucky you avoided that. >_>
And yeah. I was really active when D1 started, but then kinda' faded into the background when everyone else joined in.

Ok, here's my 2 cents.
One of Xite/Friend is probably scum (if Tasky isn't).

[Reasoning Needed]

Gut, and their constant bickering when they were actually in the game.

Andrius, I was pretty much content with ignoring you day one and looking back on you later, solely because my previous experience with you was such that it was nigh on impossible to work out if you were town or scum as you played the VI role to perfection, and I admit, the chances of you doing so again are likely.

>_> That was a big slam, Prana. I'm not trying to play VI. I just failed in my original take on this game: I was going to just post and be active like I have never been before. That obviously failed once everyone else came in, and I got lazy.
Yes, I know I call myself lazy alot. Deal with it. I'm just not as motivated here as elsewhere. >_>

That he thinks Andrius is scum, RC is town, and he just wants any lynch day 1? Possible but anti-town. Knows Andrius is scum thanks to other info? I'm leaning that way), but he also hasn't responded to the fact people are saying he needs to post more and has spectacularly failed to actually do anything of actual use in the game up to now.

I've been ignoring RC in this game because its part of the RC/Andy meta for him to vote me, so. Should probably stop ignoring him.

With Andrius: Well, I'll be upfront and honest with you now that I don't want him lynched yet coz we've been wanting to play together for a while now(especially since, in ALL of our games together thus far, one of us gets lynched D1.) But I really can't disagree with both you and Sando's points against him.

I have experienced him play scum twice and so far, isn't really playing like his scumself.

He's so obv when he's scum it's kinda cute

(See: Greek Mythology, Trader Mafia.). I'll gladly move my vote if/when he becomes scummier.

I think you mean YOU get lynched D1. >_> I don't get lynched D1. Didn't I hammer you in Trader Mafia?

@ italicized: O_O

You say the wagon isn't going anywhere, implying that's a bad thing. You then say Tasky is seeming town to you (so surely that makes redundant the fact that the wagon isn't going there), but then you'd be willing to swap again at deadline (for somebody you are leaning town on??). Heavily suggests hedging of one's bets. +3

"Welcome to mafiascum.net, where we see Andrius is a cautious town player. Tune into *on-going game* to see him take 2 pages to hammer someone!" [/sarcasm]

vollkan/Sando banter makes me want to skip their whole posts. Which is why I have probably missed stuff. Sorry for not caring enough to read it. I looked at the quote tags and didn't see my name so I skimmed over it. ^^;

Remind me when this game is up to make a MD thread.

About what? (It might help me remember later.)

[RayFrost]

Hey andrius, I think you are missing a few points

THIS IS NOT GOOD POSTING. Sure, you state the completely obvious, and there's not really anything wrong with that. But then you try and force people to consider only two possibilities without any personal analysis of it. This, in of itself, is suspect.

Your lack of analysis isn't helping at all either, so call it even.

Sure, it's possible, so is what PD said. I don't like the fact you also fail to consider the possibility that... *suspenseful pause* ... the case is bad. You seem to assume that he's either scum or the scum are already on him. Now, naturally, 2.a could encompass lolbadcase, but you don't discuss that part of the scenario... nor do you really discuss anything.

[Andrius]

THIS IS NOT GOOD POSTING. Sure, you state the completely obvious, and there's not really anything wrong with that. But then you try and force people to consider only two possibilities without any personal analysis of it. This, in of itself, is suspect.

So shoot me. I was asking people for their opinions on something. I'm not telling them "IT MUST BE A OR B SO GO AHEAD AND NOT BOTHER THINKING FOR YOURSELF".

Your lack of analysis isn't helping at all either, so call it even.

That would be me coasting along not doing anything helpful. I do that alot, I admit. >_>

Sure, it's possible, so is what PD said. I don't like the fact you also fail to consider the possibility that... *suspenseful pause* ... the case is bad. You seem to assume that he's either scum or the scum are already on him. Now, naturally, 2.a could encompass lolbadcase, but you don't discuss that part of the scenario... nor do you really discuss anything.

I don't think the case was bad. I voted him, remember?
There's scum on almost any given wagon, so I'm right there. Err, correct there.

I really, really, really, really dislike this post. You unvote him based off of "the wagon isn't going anywhere" and then also say you are now leaning town on him while being willing to vote at deadline.

A lynch is better than no lynch. I'd be willing to vote anyone over a No Lynch, given its D1. (Assuming they don't claim a PR, *insert good reason here*, etc.)

1. If the wagon isn't going anywhere, you reiterate your case, etc. I also dislike the fact this comes after I asked for a brief summary of the tasky case. Feels like a dodge and also jumping off a wagon as it loses steam (a la lack of conviction)

Is the first line what I did or what I should've done?

2. You say tasky's been "doing well on his own" without much explanation. It seems like a very generic way of excusing your previous suspicion. In addition, it's something that would (hypothetically) make me feel that you, as scum, were trying to bus. (he's doing well on his own kinda implies you were trying to improve his situation with the vote or some such, could be wrong on my interpretation)

Yes I did. I'm assuming the other people are reading the thread to see what Tasky's been doing. If they don't agree, I can debate it.
That's what I thought, so take it or leave it.

3. You vote sando without giving any reason whatsoever as to why you are. It really is looking like you are just jumping on the most popular wagon without really justifying why. Coattailin' anybody?

Well, it was me being lazy and me liking the case on Sando and other stuff. It wasn't the most popular wagon (I think), I'm pretty sure Tasky was still #1. Not coattailin'.

[RayFrost]

Sure, it's possible, so is what PD said. I don't like the fact you also fail to consider the possibility that... *suspenseful pause* ... the case is bad. You seem to assume that he's either scum or the scum are already on him. Now, naturally, 2.a could encompass lolbadcase, but you don't discuss that part of the scenario...

nor do you really discuss anything.

I don't think the case was bad. I voted him, remember?
There's scum on almost any given wagon, so I'm right there. Err, correct there.

Main point of contention in bold. Conveniently ignored.

I really, really, really, really dislike this post. You unvote him based off of "the wagon isn't going anywhere" and then also say you are now leaning town on him while being willing to vote at deadline.

A lynch is better than no lynch. I'd be willing to vote anyone over a No Lynch, given its D1. (Assuming they don't claim a PR, *insert good reason here*, etc.)

Then that'd make the comment moot, besides, you should not be willing to vote somebody you think is town at deadline - it's better to vote somebody you DO NOT think is town. The issue is willingness to lynch a town read.

1. If the wagon isn't going anywhere, you reiterate your case, etc.

I also dislike the fact this comes after I asked for a brief summary of the tasky case. Feels like a dodge and also jumping off a wagon as it loses steam (a la lack of conviction)

Is the first line what I did or what I should've done?

The first line is what you should've done if you still felt the case was good.

2. You say tasky's been "doing well on his own" without much explanation. It seems like a very generic way of excusing your previous suspicion. In addition, it's something that would (hypothetically) make me feel that you, as scum, were trying to bus. (he's doing well on his own kinda implies you were trying to improve his situation with the vote or some such, could be wrong on my interpretation)

Yes I did. I'm assuming the other people are reading the thread to see what Tasky's been doing. If they don't agree, I can debate it.
That's what I thought, so take it or leave it.

"I assume others are reading the thread, so I don't have to explain myself" ~= what you are saying here, imo... and it's horrible reasoning.

3. You vote sando without giving any reason whatsoever as to why you are. It really is looking like you are just jumping on the most popular wagon without really justifying why. Coattailin' anybody?

Well, it was me being lazy and me liking the case on Sando and other stuff. It wasn't the most popular wagon (I think), I'm pretty sure Tasky was still #1. Not coattailin'.

[/quote]

A wagon that "isn't going anywhere" is hardly #1. Especially considering there were two very active players attacking sando (max + vollkan = lethal combo, imo). The fact that you are just giving a generic "I like the case and other stuff [that will not in any way be discussed or explained by me]" is actually reinforcement of the coattailing idea. You are giving a blanket agreement with two highly active and semi-aggressive players while pretending to give a semblance of actual content while not really doing so. (note: VV attacked PD on this issue but not andrius). I'd also like to note that vollk was on the tasky wagon and was then moving to an attack on sando. You were on the tasky wagon and are now moving on to sando. If this isn't playing "follow vollkan" I really don't know what is.

[RayFrost]

Oh, and for clarity regarding the VV note...

My issue is more that VV attacked PD while also not really agreeing with the andrius wagon - he doesn't want andrius lynched, but he can't disagree with the points is a vague way of avoiding the wagon while still not arguing against it. The form of fencesitting that I really, really don't like.

[Andrius]

Last volley before I go to bed.

Main point of contention in bold. Conveniently ignored.

No, I didn't discuss anything. Coasting by, as stated before. You caught me: lazy town player. Slap me in irons and lead me to the gallows. I hope you're not surprised.

Then that'd make the comment moot, besides, you should not be willing to vote somebody you think is town at deadline - it's better to vote somebody you DO NOT think is town. The issue is willingness to lynch a town read.

Town read =/= town. Read POWERFUL WIZARD MAFIA. Town reads aren't always town aligned.

The first line is what you should've done if you still felt the case was good.

Well, there's another prime example of me being lazy.

"I assume others are reading the thread, so I don't have to explain myself" ~= what you are saying here, imo... and it's horrible reasoning.

Yep, pretty much. If they want to debate it they will. If not, no. Horrible reasoning or not, that's what happened, so.

A wagon that "isn't going anywhere" is hardly #1. Especially considering there were two very active players attacking sando (max + vollkan = lethal combo, imo). The fact that you are just giving a generic "I like the case and other stuff [that will not in any way be discussed or explained by me]" is actually reinforcement of the coattailing idea. You are giving a blanket agreement with two highly active and semi-aggressive players while pretending to give a semblance of actual content while not really doing so. (note: VV attacked PD on this issue but not andrius). I'd also like to note that vollk was on the tasky wagon and was then moving to an attack on sando. You were on the tasky wagon and are now moving on to sando. If this isn't playing "follow vollkan" I really don't know what is.
1) It still can be, and was.
2) vollkan being 'lethal' is somewhat funny, given the our last game together he was a town-read but mafia, so.
2x) So i'm supposed to sit here and let vollkan and Max just work on Sando? Yeah, because those two have enough votes to lynch the man. [/sarcasm]
3) I'm doing the "follow the good case on probable scum" play. I wouldn't follow vollkan, especially after 951.

That's it for today.

[Andrius]

Tags fail.
oh well.

[Sando]

What... you mean he can criticise players without necessarily thinking they are scum... That's my new number one scum tell.

It's a sign that he wasn't invested in what he was saying.

Haven't I persistently labeled both Friend and Andrius as scummy? Without voting either of them? You didn't criticise me for that. Nor have you criticised any player for that same thing. Calling something scummy for one player means it is scummy for all.

Considering I said that it 'further reinforced' it seems pretty obvious that I meant it as a part of a pattern leading to that conclusion.

Is that really the best argument you have against Tasky attacking Xite? The fact that it appears pro-town. The fact that you are using this hypothetical argument against Tasky shows you are flailing,

How do you turn what I said into me saying the appearing of being town is scummy? Actions that are taken with the deliberate goal of looking townie rather than scumhunting is something scum do, not town. Hence they are scummy.

You still haven't provided any reason why Scum-Tasky would do it.

You really should read the thread:

Scum self-vote because it's thought that town will react with 'no scum would ever do that'. I've seen scum self-vote and turn around the most ardent supporter of their lynch, thankfully the hammer went through before he could un-vote and he flipped scum. Townies never have to try and do things to show their towniness, scum try to.

I posted why, and then quoted it again more recently to Vollkan.

So all of a sudden after spending nearly two weeks arguing that Tasky was scum you change your mind. It seems to be a U-Turn that appears all of a sudden with no warning. This is very counter-intuitive, what has changed in the past few days that makes you certain Tasky isn't scum?

Read the thread ffs:

I personally know that a claim done correctly could sway my vote.

My only concern at the moment is that his claim is believable in that it in general terms it matches mine, in the use of school-yard terms to describe the role, not just the name.

There is, or was, scum or Tasky imo, and the claim is totally believable for me at this stage so I'm going to look at that wagon.

You could at least ISO the person you're looking at Max.

[VasudeVa]

Quick post from my V/LA:

@Ray: Sooo, it's not okay to support a lynch on someone who I don't think is scum because I've experienced him play scum twice? It's not coasting if I've made it clear why I'm not voting him yet.

@PD: Well they are INTERPRETATIONS because scum will lie about their intentions(duh) and those excuses of yours aren't quite cutting it, plus the way you abrasively defend yourself isn't winning you Town points. I'm following a lead and some gut here to find your alignment, which is skewing a little bit to scum right about now. Convince me that you are Town through your actions not through your explanations.

@Andrius: Oh come on. You know what I mean. . I'm pretty sure you are Town, and you arey my strongest Town read right about now(Since all the other Town reads I have are slightly weaker.) Explanations come when asked.

Reserving comments for Max/Volkan VS Sando for now because I don't have time to review the whole skeedadle.

Where the hell are the other replacements anyhow? D:

[Sando]

Which is why I have probably missed stuff. Sorry for not caring enough to read it. I looked at the quote tags and didn't see my name so I skimmed over it. ^^;

Lolwat? There's an entire post of mine dedicated to you, with all of the quotes directed at you, where I voted you.

[ConfidAnon]

Replace Me, VERY sorry

Having difficulties getting into this game, and I'm likely going to continue lurking and not having things to say here. My apologies.

[Max]

Max:

Thoughts on players OTHER than sando would be appreciated.

Yeah, I was just making my case clear on Sando to prevent Sando attacking me for lack of promised case.

[Andrius]

@ Andrius: Oh come on. You know what I mean. . I'm pretty sure you are Town, and you arey my strongest Town read right about now(Since all the other Town reads I have are slightly weaker.) Explanations come when asked.


Where the hell are the other replacements anyhow? D:

I put that line into my schnazzy new Wiki page. Thank you much. You lean town too.

I know that RC's wife was going into labor the other night, so he's busy.

Lolwat? There's an entire post of mine dedicated to you, with all of the quotes directed at you, where I voted you.

--; Show it to me and I'll take a look; don't expect anything ground-breaking though.

[Max]

You could at least ISO the person you're looking at Max

I did ISO you. Hence why I used genuine quotes.

My only concern at the moment is that his claim is believable in that it in general terms it matches mine, in the use of school-yard terms to describe the role, not just the name.

A flavour claim doesn't confirm somebody. Especially not in this game where flavour is entirely for entertainment purposes. I mean, a foreign exchange student could want to kill everyone.

Scum self-vote because it's thought that town will react with 'no scum would ever do that'. I've seen scum self-vote and turn around the most ardent supporter of their lynch, thankfully the hammer went through before he could un-vote and he flipped scum. Townies never have to try and do things to show their towniness, scum try to.

Well frustrated townies can do the same. I mean self-voting can unpile a wagon on town too. It is in a townie's best interest to avoid their own lynch. If Tasky did so to unpile a THREE PERSON WAGON (once you add him), then either he's much better at this game than I believe or he was JOKING. Voting yourself page three is not a scumtell. Page 14 or 15 when you are L-1 or 2 then I could see why people could claim it is. But it most definitely is not when you are miles away from lynch. Some people had yet to post. We weren't out of the RVS stage instead to the bandwagoning for info one.

Considering I said that it 'further reinforced' it seems pretty obvious that I meant it as a part of a pattern leading to that conclusion.

Hmmm... I don't buy this considering up to this point I think you had only said once that Tasky was aiming to appear protown.

It's a sign that he wasn't invested in what he was saying.

This again reinforces your contradictions. Most players don't vote the INSTANT they have an incling. I didn't vote until I voted you. So why am I not scum?

[LlamaFluff]

ConfidAnon and Tasky have requested replacement

[vollkan]

[quote="Sando"
So wait, me providing a reason why scum would do something, and you providing no reason why town would do it (self-voting) still requires more objectivity? [/quote]

I've already said that it's a "cat among the pigeons" thing, basically a personality trait - some people like self-voting (no matter what their alignment) as a shit-stirring technique, myself included.

The objectivity deficit is that you are effectively reversing the onus of proof. In the face of a reasonable nulltell reason for the behaviour, you aren't explaining at all what reasons (be they analytical or empirical) are compelling you to favour the scum interpretation.

I raised the context of near-lynch, but yeah... You're basically saying that scum and town have equal motivation to self-vote, and you're apparently happy with my scum-motivation for doing it, but still, scum aren't more likely to do it?

In a nutshell, yes. Both have reasons why they might self-vote. It's completely inadequate to rely on one scum motivation and ignore all others.

I thought this was an attack, demanding he provide evidence or unvote etc

When somebody (who hasn't convinced me that they are thinking independently) says "This is a good wagon", that raises a red flag for me that they are just playing follow-the-leader.

Rayfrost/Vollkan: I have a problem with the general attitude of Vollkan to the Andrius wagon. He agrees with one tiny part of my case, gives Andrius a few scumpoints, then questions (I think attacks, you can decide on the wording) one of the supporters of the wagon. It's like he realises that he has to comment on the wagon, but wants to get back to other things straight away and attempt to throw it in a weak light. Ray, it's not that it's RC, I understand you dislike RC, it's how he went about going after the weakest link of the wagon.

See above; I completely agree that a good indication of distancing can be where someone expresses weak agreement with a case, but then tries to dismantle it - but that isn't at all what I did.

Also, noting that 2 people have been attacked over the wagon very quickly, one for agreeing and basically paraphrasing before voting, one for not paraphrasing and then voting. This is despite noone actually coming up with any counters to the case(s) put up. I'm more and more convinced that Andrius is scum because of this and being defended by a buddy. At this point I think it's Vollkan.

This is because I asked RC to elaborate?

Oh, though I do like sando's analysis at the end of his post.

Why?

[RayFrost]

To answer vollk's question, I'll quote the analysis to help others know what I'm talking about

Rayfrost/Vollkan: I have a problem with the general attitude of Vollkan to the Andrius wagon. He agrees with one tiny part of my case, gives Andrius a few scumpoints, then questions (I think attacks, you can decide on the wording) one of the supporters of the wagon. It's like he realises that he has to comment on the wagon, but wants to get back to other things straight away and attempt to throw it in a weak light. Ray, it's not that it's RC, I understand you dislike RC, it's how he went about going after the weakest link of the wagon.

Also, noting that 2 people have been attacked over the wagon very quickly, one for agreeing and basically paraphrasing before voting, one for not paraphrasing and then voting. This is despite noone actually coming up with any counters to the case(s) put up. I'm more and more convinced that Andrius is scum because of this and being defended by a buddy. At this point I think it's Vollkan.

The reasoning behind this makes some sense to me and doesn't feel like a contrived case on somebody. It's not so much that the analysis is

spot on awesome

so much as

the motivation behind it seems townish

.

RC's not a weak link of the wagon so much as a scummy individual on the wagon. It's not like vollk's attacking a real supporter of the wagon - RC's a tagalong that isn't giving anything of value.

I also agree about andrius scum and I do lie the fact he's pointed out nobody has come up with a counter while supporters of the lynch are still being attacked over it. I don't agree with the end conclusion, though. vollk seems town.

[vollkan]

To answer vollk's question, I'll quote the analysis to help others know what I'm talking about

Rayfrost/Vollkan: I have a problem with the general attitude of Vollkan to the Andrius wagon. He agrees with one tiny part of my case, gives Andrius a few scumpoints, then questions (I think attacks, you can decide on the wording) one of the supporters of the wagon. It's like he realises that he has to comment on the wagon, but wants to get back to other things straight away and attempt to throw it in a weak light. Ray, it's not that it's RC, I understand you dislike RC, it's how he went about going after the weakest link of the wagon.

Also, noting that 2 people have been attacked over the wagon very quickly, one for agreeing and basically paraphrasing before voting, one for not paraphrasing and then voting. This is despite noone actually coming up with any counters to the case(s) put up. I'm more and more convinced that Andrius is scum because of this and being defended by a buddy. At this point I think it's Vollkan.

The reasoning behind this makes some sense to me and doesn't feel like a contrived case on somebody. It's not so much that the analysis is

spot on awesome

so much as

the motivation behind it seems townish

.

RC's not a weak link of the wagon so much as a scummy individual on the wagon. It's not like vollk's attacking a real supporter of the wagon - RC's a tagalong that isn't giving anything of value.

I also agree about andrius scum and I do lie the fact he's pointed out nobody has come up with a counter while supporters of the lynch are still being attacked over it. I don't agree with the end conclusion, though. vollk seems town.

I already explained why the very notion that I 'attacked' RC is ridiculous (to recap: asking somebody to state their reasoning is not 'attacking'). And you seem to share my concern with the way RC joined the wagon.

How then is it not "contrived"?

[RayFrost]

I already explained why the very notion that I 'attacked' RC is ridiculous (to recap: asking somebody to state their reasoning is not 'attacking'). And you seem to share my concern with the way RC joined the wagon.

How then is it not "contrived"?

I do share it, yes.

I've played with sando before (me-scum, him-town), and he had a proclivity to misinterpret the stances of other players (nearly got him lynched, IIRC) and act in a hyper-reactive manner when attacked.

Despite his misunderstandings, he has an undercurrent of

absolute conviction

that is hard to break through. His frustrations and extreme reactions are palpable to me.

[vollkan]

I already explained why the very notion that I 'attacked' RC is ridiculous (to recap: asking somebody to state their reasoning is not 'attacking'). And you seem to share my concern with the way RC joined the wagon.

How then is it not "contrived"?

I do share it, yes.

I've played with sando before (me-scum, him-town), and he had a proclivity to misinterpret the stances of other players (nearly got him lynched, IIRC) and act in a hyper-reactive manner when attacked.

Despite his misunderstandings, he has an undercurrent of

absolute conviction

that is hard to break through. His frustrations and extreme reactions are palpable to me.

Is his behaviour in his argument with me consistent with what you saw meta?