There's a TL;DR at the bottom.
Like I said before, your "theory" only works until someone flips town.
SpyreX wrote:If XScorp flips scum the following things are true (at about 80% - if he's a PR about 95%):
1.) Robo is town.
2.) Charter is town.
3.) Jenni is scum.
Making up numbers isn't scumhunting. It isn't evidence just because you've declared it is a fact. You have said those three statements before, but just because you say them doesn't make them true. I also really like the protective percentage qualifiers at the end of your first sentence here. When, for example, you succeed in herding the rest of the town into lynching me and I flip town, you've protected yourself by saying there's still a chance you're wrong.
By the way, why all the deflection on Charter's behalf?
Why can't he defend himself? Hiphop is offering to defend him, and you're defending him here, but he still won't defend himself. Making a case for why Charter's scum isn't tantamount to saying XScorpion isn't scum, it's sharing information with the rest of the town that may help us with our win-con if it turns out to be correct. Also, Charter tested a lot of different wagons before going with the XScorp one.
Also, the first two quotes you include merely appear to be one by Charter in which he lays out a two and a quarter line case case against XScorp, asks questions about Sawyer and SSBF, and gives a reason not to vote Robo and a second that says he thinks XScorp is scum because he's rolefishing. I'm assuming these are meant to prove that Charter is scumhunting; however, scum are supposed to appear to be scumhunting, so this isn't enough to exonerate your buddy, at least for me. If he's decided on Scorp as his best possible chance for a D1 lynch, then why wouldn't he say these things? I also know he "claims" to be scumhunting me, but I'm not scum, so I know how bogus his accusations are. You can huff and puff and blow as much as you want, but that won't change my alignment.
By the way...the final quote you quoted is wrongfully attributed to Robo rather than to Scorp in your post, but combined with your short analysis, it's the one quote that actually has weight in your argument that Scorp is scum. It makes a lot more sense than some of the other things you've said. It's a lot more useful, too.
However, I find Scorp's actions far less scummy than Charter's. Aside from his constant questions to players about other players, the thing that made me even begin to question what Charter was up to at all was the fact that I asked him a simple question, but before he even answered my question, he accused me of being lurker scum, then went back and actually read something that I'd written that attached him to doing something scummy, stated that he was certain I was scum, and then FINALLY answered my question. It's not that he "investigated" me as scum, it's that he decided I was going down as scum after he saw me questioning him and associating him with scum in two separate posts. He's also doing this to others who question or challenge him; it's like the instant someone associates him with scum, then he must associate them with being scum themselves. Isn't that OMGUS to the extreme? His attack on me came out of nowhere, and he offered no justification for why he thought I was scum, and the ONLY justification he's given for first calling me scum in that post since then is that I was associating him with something scummy (which he actually says is scummy, but it doesn't matter b/c no one is listening to me) to undermine his "good name," which is one of the things I have said about him--it's not even an original argument.
Quotes made by me that made Charter decide I was "lurkerscum" and then that I was "actual" scum...note the order of events, and that only he only answers my question AFTER he accuses me. Why not just answer the question and then ask me about what I thought about XScorp?
jenniwren wrote:Gentlemen, I think everyone is missing the underlying point of Kirby's (Toucan Sam) "daykill"...it's
so
obvious that the imperialist British bird just wanted to take a pot shot at the subjugated Irish leprechaun, amirite? xo, Sugarbear
Seriously, though. It's still early in the game and discussion is really just starting now (thanks for that, Kirby).
That being said...
I think Kirby is joking, much like Robo was joking.
Xvart's rationale for why he wouldn't vote Kirby if Charter DID die is sound if not a little reductive. However, I think his declaration that he would be voting Kirby if Charter didn't die is a just a knee-jerk overreaction. Kirby could have been joking, but if he weren't, there are still multiple reasons the kill might have failed, and I agree that it's probably not a good idea at this time to privilege one of those potential reasons over another as Xvart did; nevertheless, despite his earnestness in this discussion, he backed off a bit after the flavor scene was added. That reinforces the idea that his initial reaction to the action in question was more knee-jerk than scumtell. Charter did something similar--calling for a lynch--in reaction to Robo's self-vote (post #38), and that action has not garnered quite so much discussion as Xvart's threat to vote.
jenniwren wrote:Charter: what was it in SSBF's and Sawyer's last posts that makes you feel better about them? You don't give any indication of feeling better about Sawyer anywhere except your next to last statement, and I'm curious about the turnaround.
charter wrote:Jenniwren is shaping up nicely for the slot of lurkerscum, we'll have to see how that pans out as time goes by.
Actually,
now
that I
actually read
her post 53, I believe we've got another scum hooked.
Jenniwren, if you had to vote someone right now, who would you vote and why? What do you think of XScorpion?
I'm not sure who else is scum at the moment.
Jenniwren wrote:Charter: what was it in SSBF's and Sawyer's last posts that makes you feel better about them? You don't give any indication of feeling better about Sawyer anywhere except your next to last statement, and I'm curious about the turnaround.
I got the sense that they were interested in answering my questions in a direct manor. I put myself in their shoes and answered the question, and I came up with something similar to what they said.
TL;DR for the scum's sake:
1) Anyone can say anything but it doesn't mean it's true; just because they attach phony statistics to the claims also doesn't make it true.
2) Spyrex uses protective percentage qualifiers to give himself an out for when I or someone else flips town.
3) I ask why there is so much deflection going on on Charter's behalf (Hiphop offered to defend him, now Spyre is defending him).
4) Making a case for why Charter's scum isn't tantamount to saying XScorpion isn't scum, it's sharing information with the rest of the town that may help us with our win-con if it turns out to be correct.
5) Spyre actually makes a decent analysis of one post by XScorp and tries to prove Charter is town b/c he questioned Scorp; again, though, scum are supposed to try to appear town, so why wouldn't Charter fake scumhunting?
6) I think Charter is scummier than XScorp b/c he does things like go after people who dare to challenge him in any way, implies that only scum aren't on his wagon (in which case the town is sadly outnumbered), insinuates that people who disagree with his conclusions are scum in order to bully people into agreeing with him,
fishes for who is likely to receive the most votes rather than for who is likely to be scum
, and cannot or will not defend himself though others are willing to do it for him (Spyrex and Hiphop).
ing it off. Right there. Its been right there clear as day. Further, this madness CONTINUES.
