Yosarian2 wrote:vollkan wrote:
As I said before, Des questioning you on other people is completely reasonable.
Did I ever say he was scummy because he questioned me? Of course not. I was looking for a possible pattern in behavior, which was why it was at all worthy of note.
Me questioning DES about the reasons behind his actions, and about his opinion on CKD, was also completly reasonable.
No, you didn't say he was scummy for questioning you simpliciter, but it was a fundamental component of the narrative of Des's play that you were trying to spin:
Yos wrote:
Note he was only asking this from people who were voting CKD; he wasn't asking anyone else to make cases on people. SO, again, I come back to the conclusion that either he suddenly had a problem with the CKD wagon, or else that he was trying to defend CKD for some other reason.
You are effectively setting up a false dichotomy - either he had a problem with the wagon, or he had other reasons for defending CKD. I mean, Des questioned you and I together asking:
Des wrote:Vollkan and Yos, if not ckd, who would you be voting for? Why?
It's a leap to read into that a desire to subvert the CKD wagon. Up to that point, I hadn't been clear in my broader views, and nor had you, so the narrative you weave is dodgy.
As for the BM debacle, I do think a wagon was justified, having myself criticised the stupid attacks BM was making against DGB. That said, it's particularly unhelpful that Rofl's vote was, in its entirety:
roflcopter wrote:unvote, vote: battle mage
Precisely the same deal as with Yos. A L-1 vote without objective explanation is unacceptable. Why did you vote BM?
The other thing I take issue with is this:
Pop wrote: Just for the record, BM also used this tactic in Adel's Nice Shot. Want to take a guess about his alignment?
I assume you meant the replacement request thing here. In any event, my problem is the idea that a meta can be established by a small sample space (in this case, one game) - a person's actions are impacted upon by more than just their alignment and can occur on different occasions for different reasons, so it's extremely tenuous to say that because BM does this in one scum game, he is therefore scummy to a significant degree in this one. The other question that merits consideration is whether you bothered making inquiries as to whether BM had done something like this as town in the past?
Korts wrote: Your case is basically this, correct me if I'm wrong: I made a case on Guardian (which was justified, just not based on the tell I thought it was); I made a case on BM based on a BS point of view in an argument, which I later retract on account of it being weak, but leave my vote because I can't find another place for it; "OMGUS" case on you, based on the fact that you seem to be pushing a weak case very hard; self-preservation vote on CKD (how's that even a point against me?); "bad logic" on the gut read on DGB.
You voted Guardian for being "non-committal". That argument was rubbish, as I have said already. How was that justified?
That's the main point against you, but I'd also add the following lesser reasons of my own to the ones you identify:
1) You defended Rofl as having justified himself when, as I showed, he'd done absolutely nothing of the worst
2) Subjectivising disagreement over your argument about DGB's actions being towntells
DGB wrote:
I'd like to lynch vollkan today. All the while he stays on the sidelines. He's very off.
This simply isn't true. I've voiced my opinions and suspicions very clearly and have been in a number of arguments.
(I do have my own pet theory about this, and its one I formed in the wake of games that have gone badly for me as town, like California Trilogy: Going to San Francisco and House Mafia (where at endgame I was in the awful situation of being both dead in the water as far as scumhunting went and confirmed protown), in contrast to successful games for me as town (ie. where I catch scum) like Mini 495 or Mini 636 which went well. My style of play only really "works" if I am able to have debates with people, because that's how I tease out reasoning and separate scum from town. In other words, it fails completely in dealing with people like yourself or Rofl, who have a very different style of play to me. Proof in point of this is the way that I have been able to have pursue my suspicion of Yosarian, because, despite our disagreement on gut, he has a style that I can work with. I don't know whether that
is
the reason I find difficulties sometimes, but it makes intuitive sense that if I rely on debate, I need material to debate about - and it is consistent with the experiences I have had)
Rofl wrote:
guh, really bm, that was ridiculous
vote: vollkan
Why?
=/
Des wrote:
I'm pretty sure we should lynch Yos today.
Vote: Yosarian2
(and welcome to the game FL.)
I'm assuming this is for the stuff that we've been debating with Yos for some time now?
Des wrote:
I also very interested in seeing who else is willing to lynch you.
Me.
