forbiddanlight wrote:Sthar's defense does boil down to "OMG, hypocrisy" and seems to ignore other points.
Umm, what? Only a couple of his points were based on hypocrisy, and I defended against them even while I was calling him out on them.
forbiddanlight wrote:And it seems that when Goat stirred the pot the outcry for my lynch started up.
You mean that when goat and SC abandoned the lynch I thought we'd agreed upon, for poor reasons, I tried to talk them back onto it? Why is that surprising? We've caught scum, and there is no protown reason that you should get away.
goatrevolt wrote:Your reasoning here is that sthar8 was a mind reader? That sthar8 knew others had theories about who was scum with forbiddan, but nobody voiced them yet? He's just that good at reading people's minds?
Horse Laugh. With the number of people who had expressed theories about FL's partner, and having such theories myself, it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the evidence is indicative of a trend. That's not actually what happened, but attacking that assumption as you have shows poor reasoning.
goatrevolt wrote:That mostly stemmed from your analysis of every player for the reasons I brought up against it before.
Which I had responded to, and you had not pursued further. Seriously, if you didn't like my answer, you need to make that clear. There's no way I can defend myself if I don't know what I need to defend against.
goatrevolt wrote:I mentioned BaB's as being not very meaningful because he wasn't pursuing it. At the moment, it's now the meat of his case against me, which does lend validity to your stance, although after the fact. I don't recall that post by megatheory, but it's valid in your defense. Veerus's post is completely irrelevant.
Why is it not meaningful that BaB's waiting for the evidence that I said he was waiting for? And veerus's post is entirely relevant. It's a summation of an argument between SC and alvinz that assumes a particular result from FL's lynch, making it a theory that needs the info from her lynch in order to develop.
Goatrevolt wrote:What theories do you personally buy in to? If theories about who is scum with FL is part of the reason for your vote, then I'm curious as to which ones you find especially meaningful.
I don't and they're not. Without the solid information from the lynch, scumpartner theories are worthless, which is why I've kept
mine
out of thread. My vote is based entirely on the
pile of scumtells
that FL has cranked out this game. Everything else is bonus.
goatrevolt wrote:...but why mention that? You specifically saying "but I don't want to clear him" gives off the impression that you are not solid in your opinion. Whether or not it's true that you don't wish for me to be 100% cleared (which is true, naturally), mentioning that you don't want to clear me creates the idea that your read isn't strong.
Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner! When did I say my read on you was strong? And how is it scummy that it isn't? To my eyes, this looks like you're suspicious of me because I'm not sure enough of your alignment to outright defend you, even though I expressed my opinion that you are probably not scum.
goatrevolt wrote:I think it's also anti-town to list reasons you find a pro-town player's actions scummy though.
Why? Isn't it in the town's best interest to make sure that everyone has all of the information? If I were wrong about you, or anyone else, providing my thoughts on any anti-town play could allow someone else to point out the error in my thinking and help us catch scum. I would agree that it would be counterproductive to provide examples on someone that I'm sure enough about to defend, but there are only a few people matching that description in this game, and none of them are under serious attack currently.
goatrevolt wrote:My point is that if you were to hop on my wagon at a later point, even if it were for legitimate points, it doesn't reflect as poorly on you if your town read of me from earlier contained some points which allowed you to easily transition.
So I'm suspicious because you think I'm defending against something that isn't a scumtell? Why would changing my mind on you reflect poorly on me
at all
, if I provided solid reasoning to go with it?
goatrevolt wrote:Show me where you refute.
1. "I don't like his reliance on meta" is not a scumtell, it's just bad play. (in my opinion)
2. "the end of yesterday's alvinz wagon makes my skin crawl" corresponds to "The shifts in opinion seem honest to me, and they coincide with things like rereads that explain the sudden changes satisfactorily." This would be obvious to anyone who checked the context of the alvinz wagon.
3. "goat doesn't respond to posts that answer him, presumably unless he disagrees, but if that assumption is correct there is nothing anti-town about this behavior." I hope I don't have to point this one out
goatrevolt wrote:My issue was that you had so many suspects, but I didn't see any real town reads out of you
So you agree that I shouldn't announce town tells in thread, but not doing so makes me suspicious if I also express my own suspicions?
And since when is three suspects and one worry too much for a twelve person game?
goatrevolt wrote:My read is that you're playing the field, pushing as many players as possible, and leaving things open-ended to allow you to go wherever best suits you as scum.
As evidenced by my single-minded pursuit of FL today, right?
goatrevolt wrote:I don't think those theories should be pressed until after X's alignment is known, though.
sthar8 wrote:At this point, though, a good number of the theories being discussed assume you to be scum, and we can't act on any of them until after you're dead.
But my desire for information that would allow us to evaluate these theories, because they are held in part by someone who I find suspicious, is scummy?
goatrevolt wrote:I feel her play has been pro-town as of late. Her suggestion that we lynch her so the town can move on to discussing other targets, thus expressing worry about the town losing track of scum by focusing solely on one target, speaks to me of a pro-town mindset.
This is horrifyingly flawed. The fact that we've pointed out FL's scumtells, and she subsequently stopped displaying them, only proves that she can read. Nothing she has done nullifies the huge amount of scummy behavior we've seen in any way. And the suggestion that her "giving up" is a town tell is laughable as well. In her situation, it would make sense for scum to emulate the behavior of alvinz from yesterday, as that made you drop your suspicions of him and saved him from a lynch. In addition, the "lynch me, it's best for the town" strategy is a good example of WIFOM, and could be used to scare votes off of her wagon, as we have already seen.
goatrevolt wrote:The difference here is that I've brought up a lot of suspects over the course of the thread, many of whom I don't suspect anymore, whereas my interpretation is that you currently have that many suspects
I'm no longer suspicious of BaB or SC, and I've never been suspicious of you. I see no difference in the situations, because your
interpretation
of my suspicions is a list of everyone I've suspected
all game
plus some random guesses that are only tangentially supported by a misinterpretation of my arguments.
goatrevolt wrote:The issue is that if I were scum looking to do this, I would have picked a target that was easier to accomplish it with.
I've already brought this up, but it has no bearing on the fact that your argument was a straw man. Had you expressed
this
sentiment, your objection would have been valid.
forbiddanlight wrote:How about I explain that.
How about you let goat explain his own reasoning?
.