In post 2461, toolenduso wrote:I see now where the confusion comes from, and it's awfully strange that it ended up this way because here you are acknowledging that you misunderstood my original post while simultaneously saying that I'm the one who's changed what I'm asking for.
I am not admitting that I misunderstood your previous post while claiming you moved the goalposts.
I am saying I understood your previous post and that you moved the goalposts.
Big difference.
In post 2461, toolenduso wrote:So originally, in #2437, I was asking for examples of games where town had two investigative roles and scum didn't have some method of blocking results. You responded in #2439 by offering an example of a setup where town has two investigative roles and is up against two scum factions []bWhere scum lack the ability to block investigative roles. So now in my mind we're talking about inv roles vs. factions instead of inv roles vs. roleblocker types, and I think "well of course town could have two investigative roles if they're up against two factions, the question is whether they would have two inv roles if they're up against one faction."
I added in the bold - and note that your initial comment doesn't include any issue about singular faction - therefore holding solid for my 'moving goalposts' commentary - yeah?
Feel free to quote from your original post otherwise and I'll rescind the accusation.
In post 2461, toolenduso wrote:From your perspective at the time, he was literally your role -- same ability, same number of shots -- plus more goodies added on top. That really didn't seem strange to you?
It did - which is why I expressed doubt.
I will agree that I didn't express the amount of doubt you claim I should have - but I fail to see what that shows as far as my alignment goes. Even if I was scum and lying, theoretically I would still "fake" the same amount of doubt I figured was appropriate - yeah? Like, how does this even make sense?
In post 2461, toolenduso wrote:It doesn't make sense because you've apparently ignored the very foundation of what I'm doing: Testing your claim against the likelihood of various scenarios. I'm not going to go around looking at the way other people reacted to test power role claims that they haven't made.
In other words, it's not the suspicion of Pers's claim that I care about. It's the suspicion of Pers's claim based on information that you should absolutely know to be true based on your role PM.
In post 2462, toolenduso wrote:If we can find this then it illustrates that I'm wrong about the unlikeliness of your role existing in this game given the assumption that we're only up against one scum team. Which opens up more possibilities for you being town.
The same goes for Jungle Republic - which you already dismissed. Why does the one suggest me more clear while the other suggests me more scum?
That doesn't make sense as far as I can tell.