Ythill wrote:Assuming that what you stated was true, a Rich-scum-Esp-town scenario makes just as much sense, with all of the scum either lurking, distancing, or pushing Esp. The difference is that I thought your initial suggestion was simply that scum were attacking their likely targets; adding the point about the thread stalling doesn't add anything to the logic IMO, and so reads as fluff. And remember that I didn't think the initial argument was definitive anyway.
I am not going to concede on this point, we disagree.
If it would have frozen accurately to my earlier mental picture of the time with Esp (town) pressure declining and Rich dominating and then freeze, I would absolutely find that telling.
I'm not going to verify this now but I had the impression mostly the same group of people was questioning Esp and Rich which might make my pov easier to understand.
For the record, just Esp pressure plus Rich pressure in itself would be pretty much a null to me so we disagree there too. I would expect them to be attacked regardless of alignment and only the overall momentums being more informative of what's going on D1.
Ythill wrote:The point about Luchris was not about the totality of actions but, rather, the lack of ceratin expected actions. I'm still wondering about it, FTR.
Blah. This is spinning semantics. Lack of certain expected actions means
they are missing from the totality of actions
. Something expected perceived missing about the totality of actions
is
a feature of the totality of actions. Lack of certain expected actions is even exactly the same as my point was. ugh.
Ythill wrote:What do you want to call it then? You pointed out the suspicious vote and are explaining why it is suspicious while also excusing it as an act committed by a townie. It's very odd and, to be frank, gives me the feeling that you weren't sure which way my attack was going and so are hedging on both sides, which suggests you have something to hide.
Ok this is just bullshit.
I said:
I am very very annoyed by Richard's vote, although the side of me that looks at the dynamics of today and sees likely town still wins.
Catch up in a few hours.
I said I was annoyed by the vote, not state reasons I was suspicious about it.
AFTER that, you agreed with me and said Prozac wagon is intriguing and you must be wrong about something since you had townread on Prozac and most of his wagon. AFTER which you later voted for me and simultaneously asked me to meticulously explain what I meant.
So my actions, amazingly, do not revolve around Ythill's opinion with my actions solely hedging bets on which side you're gonna take and the timeline simply is false for your assumed motive of mine.
Ythill wrote:Not even a little? On the one hand, you're saying that you were annoyed because you thought people would mislynch him over it, and yet there you were pointing it out to everyone. You claimed you wanted Prozac lynched, and yet there you were complaining about what you believed was a town vote on his wagon. That post just seemed to act plainly against your interests and I'd expect a stronger motivation for making it.
No, I didn't consciously analyze risk/reward. Annoyance is a strong motivation for speaking your mind. You are exaggerating my sureness on Prozac (go look at my prior-to-this-comment-to-Prozac-in-timeline: pressuring him to answer the questions so I can more confidently really push him or change targets, and jumping on and off the Luchris wagon instead on becoming more certain after his answer did come). And I expected people would find legitimacy in their prior Rich attacks over this vote which means I thought it was obvious.