Open 566: Murder on the Oriental Express (Game Over)

[Riddleton]

Your post implies you have more problems with my CKD case. Please state them.

[Green Crayons]

@acryon:

As I read that post, the reason why she thought you were "probably scum" was because she thought you were manufacturing a reason why Amy should be lynched, a reason that was based on a particular way town should play that was contrary to her own experiences. (The "probably scum" part of her post was referring to you, the remainder of her post was referring to Amy's play and how Titus herself usually plays.)


Speaking of the Amy-wagon, as CDB noted in Post 1207, you never did put a vote on her, notwithstanding the fact that you appeared to approve of the wagon. What gives?

-----

@scrambles:

yeah, but you have chosen the weirdest things to argue over. Like, it looks like you're now arguing for its own sake rather than to make a point.

[acryon]

@acryon:

As I read that post, the reason why she thought you were "probably scum" was because she thought you were manufacturing a reason why Amy should be lynched, a reason that was based on a particular way town should play that was contrary to her own experiences. (The "probably scum" part of her post was referring to you, the remainder of her post was referring to Amy's play and how Titus herself usually plays.)

And herein lies one of the problems with Titus. She isn't actually saying anything; she is letting people like you and CDB say everything for her. It's perfect, because then she never has to be made accountable for what she is pushing.

[scrambles]

Grats, you know how to link posts.
Again, did I say that?

This is a really annoying shtick to be using here. You clearly implied that he was doing so, so if it was a joke could you please just fucking say as much and let me drop one of the many lines of inquiry that I am currently trying to juggle coherently?

Ok, well, I'm not trying to be annoying, I thought you were trying to misquote me purposely but it seems like you're just confused about it.
I was asking where I said your quote in entirety. It seemed like you were putting words in my mouth with the "but don't think he's scummy".
My response is that just because I found something scummy doesn't mean I read the player as scum yet. For the moment, he's still in my null read, and that one misplaced comment isn't going to change that. I don't mean to add to your pile. I just don't like all the misrepresentative quoting and selective reading atm. Sry if I lashed out at you. You appear genuinely confused.

[scrambles]

@acryon:

As I read that post, the reason why she thought you were "probably scum" was because she thought you were manufacturing a reason why Amy should be lynched, a reason that was based on a particular way town should play that was contrary to her own experiences. (The "probably scum" part of her post was referring to you, the remainder of her post was referring to Amy's play and how Titus herself usually plays.)


Speaking of the Amy-wagon, as CDB noted in Post 1207, you never did put a vote on her, notwithstanding the fact that you appeared to approve of the wagon. What gives?

-----

@scrambles:

yeah, but you have chosen the weirdest things to argue over. Like, it looks like you're now arguing for its own sake rather than to make a point.

Can you explain a bit? What are these weird things I'm arguing about, and what what points am I not making?

[Green Crayons]

@acryon:

As I read that post, the reason why she thought you were "probably scum" was because she thought you were manufacturing a reason why Amy should be lynched, a reason that was based on a particular way town should play that was contrary to her own experiences. (The "probably scum" part of her post was referring to you, the remainder of her post was referring to Amy's play and how Titus herself usually plays.)

And herein lies one of the problems with Titus. She isn't actually saying anything; she is letting people like you and CDB say everything for her. It's perfect, because then she never has to be made accountable for what she is pushing.

Irony: I never would have made a post explaining what I thought Titus thought except for the fact that you brought it up.

[ChannelDelibird]

Stop saying "overall approach." Her naked reads this game have nothing to do with an approach; the vast majority of her posting is fluffy reads without reason. That's not an approach; that's scum trying to appear active and involved, but ultimately offering nothing.

You can't pick and choose wording on this: If Titus is posting a lot of reads without immediately going into the reasons behind them in this game, then that is her approach to this town, be it from town or scum.

CDB - Are you trying to tell me that posting without actual substance with such repetition like Titus has isn't a scum-tell on any level?

I don't think the substance is particularly hard to find but, for the sake of argument: Yes, I don't think that Titus's approach to posting votes and reads in this game is something that she is more likely to do as scum than town.

Really? Go ahead and explain some of those for me then.

A small handful of those about which you have complained:

"Conftown" a clear exaggeration (if you're seriously arguing that she used it 100% literally then you really need to step back and consider what you're doing) based on an obvious hypothesis that scum!CDB would not have backed down from the Amy vote at that point. I'm not endorsing such a view, I'm simply saying that it's pretty obvious from the most basic reading of subtext that that is the meaning here.

Declares farside is town. First opportunity to do so since Beliarius flipped scum, a flip which really obviously implies that farside is town, as I've already said. While I would have said as much, I am not surprised to see someone simply state the read and move on.

Declares scumreads on scrambles and acryon. Failure to go into why suggests that she wants to see if they sweat about it (if she's town and they're scum then they are more likely to get antsy about it). You can see from posts like this that Titus is interested in your reaction to her calling you scum.

And another point, completely separate to this aspect of your Titus case, is the fact that there's no reason to see Titus's hammer on Belisarius as scum trying to shut down Toby talking if Toby didn't die overnight.

---

acryon, please take a deep breath and consider this: Unless I am scum (and your posts previous to this argument of ours, as well as this, imply that you do not think that I am), then I do not have a reason to lie to you when I tell you that this sort of behaviour strikes me as within reasonable expectations for both Titus as an individual and for a not-insignificant portion of players generally on mafiascum. I have played with Titus before.

If you are town, then it is worth your while to seriously consider that I may know what I am talking about here.

[ChannelDelibird]

Edit for clarity:

then that is her approach to this

game

, be it from town or scum.

[Riddleton]

I see my post has caused some conversation. Interesting. I would like to change the point of discussion to this briefly so we figure out where the confusion lies, and to also determine how people (mainly scrambles and acryon) asses joke posts for analysis purposes.

Scrambles and acryon specifically, does my joke post (here for reference) change your read(s) of me from null to scum? I would specifically like you to comment which of the below is more likely, and why:
1) I wasn't joking in that post, but quickly said I was after one person brought it up.
2) It was just a joke. Joking's something I would expect town to do.
3) It was just a joke. Joking's something I would expect scum to do.
4) It's not alignment indicative.

[Green Crayons]

Can you explain a bit? What are these weird things I'm arguing about, and what what points am I not making?

Your interaction just now with CDB, making a big deal about whether you did or did not say that Riddle was "deliberately distorting content," as opposed to the point of CDB's question: whether such actions made Riddle scummy.

Your previous interaction with Titus, asking Titus to repeat herself (and refusing to allow anyone else quote posts) about how she saw you say two different things about your experience, as opposed to simply explaining your previous experience.

[acryon]

acryon, please take a deep breath and consider this: Unless I am scum (and your posts previous to this argument of ours, as well as this, imply that you do not think that I am), then I do not have a reason to lie to you when I tell you that this sort of behaviour strikes me as within reasonable expectations for both Titus as an individual and for a not-insignificant portion of players generally on mafiascum. I have played with Titus before.

If you are town, then it is worth your while to seriously consider that I may know what I am talking about here.

But I think it's also worthwhile for you to consider the fact that you could be wrong. I am considering everything you're saying; it would be stupid not to. But I'm also not convinced yet. At this point, I still think she is scum.

[Green Crayons]

(Catching up, I see that you've explained part of that in 1228.)

[acryon]

I see my post has caused some conversation. Interesting. I would like to change the point of discussion to this briefly so we figure out where the confusion lies, and to also determine how people (mainly scrambles and acryon) asses joke posts for analysis purposes.

Scrambles and acryon specifically, does my joke post (here for reference) change your read(s) of me from null to scum? I would specifically like you to comment which of the below is more likely, and why:
1) I wasn't joking in that post, but quickly said I was after one person brought it up.
2) It was just a joke. Joking's something I would expect town to do.
3) It was just a joke. Joking's something I would expect scum to do.
4) It's not alignment indicative.

No, it does not change my read of you from null to scum. I think it does earn you a non-zero amount of scum-points, but not anything extremely significant. I don't think it was any of those 4. I don't think it was "just a joke," but I also am not dumb enough to think it was serious. Joke or not, it was a way to paint scrambles in a negative light, but I'm not convinced at this point whether or not that motivation was town- or scum-driven.

[Riddleton]

Green Crayons

, comments on what I've said in #1224 and #1225 please

[ChannelDelibird]

But I think it's also worthwhile for you to consider the fact that you could be wrong. I am considering everything you're saying; it would be stupid not to. But I'm also not convinced yet. At this point, I still think she is scum.

I've literally said that I could be wrong*, it's just that you're not presenting anything that stands out to me as any kind of real reason to think her scummy beyond generic complaints about her approach, which I think is pretty untenable for reasons stated, and your continued defence of it with nonsensical arguments like this perplex me to the extent that I think it more likely that you are scum than that you are open-minded town.

*My argument is that you are attacking behaviour which is not alignment-indicative, rather than that you are attacking behaviour which is strictly more likely to come from town than scum.

[scrambles]

I see my post has caused some conversation. Interesting. I would like to change the point of discussion to this briefly so we figure out where the confusion lies, and to also determine how people (mainly scrambles and acryon) asses joke posts for analysis purposes.

Scrambles and acryon specifically, does my joke post (here for reference) change your read(s) of me from null to scum? I would specifically like you to comment which of the below is more likely, and why:
1) I wasn't joking in that post, but quickly said I was after one person brought it up.
2) It was just a joke. Joking's something I would expect town to do.
3) It was just a joke. Joking's something I would expect scum to do.
4) It's not alignment indicative.

1. Clearly. you were trying to push the momentum on me. Its clear as day.

[ChannelDelibird]

Also, given the length of the argument that acryon and I are having about the specifics of his Titus case, I just want to restate the below parts of my initial vote post so that they do not get lost.

Spoiler:

Originally posted here. I have snipped out the part of my objection to his Titus case that has been most discussed recently.

acryon spent the first couple of days straddling the fence

hard

. Since I called him out on it, he's shown that he does have teeth. While that's a good thing if he's town, I'm feeling uneasy again. He was one of the first ones to encourage me about the Amy case and has been one of its strongest supporters since I started advocating for her lynch. So I'm worried that he's getting involved because he thinks that I wouldn't complain about him finding his conviction during a mislynch if I was the one driving that mislynch along with him. You do have to wonder where this acryon was for the first two Days now that he's much more up for the fight here. Honestly, I usually find that indecisive town stay indecisive, even when called on it.

Supports Belisarius's flimsy farside crusade in the early days before Belisarius makes himself unsupportable and then gets noncommittal about it when the farside vote "doesn't give us what we'd have wanted out of it". It's a bit awkward.

In his defence, though, this needs a little reconciling if acryon is a Belibuddy; if he voted for Skelda it probably would have sealed the mislynch earlier. And he gives the Belivote some conviction at the start of Day 2 - if this is a bus, then it's a pretty good one.

Mainly the thing that is pushing me towards a vote for acryon beyond general paranoia around his relationship to the Amy wagon is his push on Titus at the moment. Posts like this and this don't feel like posts that are seriously considering whether or not Titus is approaching this game from a town or scum mindset, they're just dismissive because of their format. The sarcasm isn't great here. It's prematurely dismissive and the way he says "do you have anything concrete to bring to the town" like he's the elected governor of the Town Relevance Commission deciding what is and what isn't admissible really rubs me up the wrong way.

And then there's this, which is just ... man, it's just ridiculously overrighteous. "What kind of person calls somebody town for no reason?" It's like it's meant to be read by a hammy Shakespearean actor. There are, like, loads of people who do that as town.

CKD, if you think abandoning the Amy wagon is scummy from me, I think it's worse that acryon has found this thing to latch onto while not saying anything about the fact that he's left the Amy wagon to push it. At least I'm talking through my relationship to the Amy wagon; acryon hasn't mentioned whether or not he thinks that Titus and Amy are buddies together. He hasn't said anything about Amy's alignment during this despite the fact that Amy is one of the players whom Titus has been calling town, which is supposedly behaviour that bugs him.

acryon, you quoted the first part of this GC post and responded to it, but not the second paragraph. Both he and I have now asked questions about your relationship to the Amy wagon (mine quoted in the spoiler here). Please could you answer them?

[Riddleton]

WiFOM alert: If, hypothetically, scum-Riddle was trying to push a case on you by making such a post, why would he say he was joking after one person posted about his comment? Wouldn't it make more sense for scum-Riddle to keep pushing the comment made on that post to get a scrambles (hypothetical) mislynch?

[acryon]

But I think it's also worthwhile for you to consider the fact that you could be wrong. I am considering everything you're saying; it would be stupid not to. But I'm also not convinced yet. At this point, I still think she is scum.

I've literally said that I could be wrong*, it's just that you're not presenting anything that stands out to me as any kind of real reason to think her scummy beyond generic complaints about her approach, which I think is pretty untenable for reasons stated, and your continued defence of it with nonsensical arguments like this perplex me to the extent that I think it more likely that you are scum than that you are open-minded town.

*My argument is that you are attacking behaviour which is not alignment-indicative, rather than that you are attacking behaviour which is strictly more likely to come from town than scum.

You don't have to like my argument, and I certainly think that both my lack of interaction and your wealth of interaction with Titus are distorting each of our views to some extent. The longer Titus stays alive, the worse off I think we will be, but as long as my argument is remembered at a later time, I think I've done my job.

And for the sake of stupid semantics, you didn't

literally

state that you could be wrong.

[ChannelDelibird]

Semantic objection granted.

I don't believe it's a case of liking your argument or not, I believe that I have explained objectively why said argument is invalid.

[Riddleton]

That was directed at scrambles. I would prefer a more solid explanation as to why I would make a joke post like that as scum, and then immediately step-down from the podium after being challenged by a grand total of 1 person.

[acryon]

acryon, you quoted the first part of this GC post and responded to it, but not the second paragraph. Both he and I have now asked questions about your relationship to the Amy wagon (mine quoted in the spoiler here). Please could you answer them?

Whoops. I definitely didn't see that. I didn't vote for her, because there was already enough pressure on her, so I didn't think a pressure vote was warranted. I think her reactions were scummy, but I am not confident enough that I feel comfortable seeing her lynched.

[acryon]

I don't believe it's a case of liking your argument or not, I believe that I have explained objectively why said argument is invalid.

Invalid based on your experience with mafia/Titus.

[scrambles]

Can you explain a bit? What are these weird things I'm arguing about, and what what points am I not making?

Your interaction just now with CDB, making a big deal about whether you did or did not say that Riddle was "deliberately distorting content," as opposed to the point of CDB's question: whether such actions made Riddle scummy.

Your previous interaction with Titus, asking Titus to repeat herself (and refusing to allow anyone else quote posts) about how she saw you say two different things about your experience, as opposed to simply explaining your previous experience.

What point do I need to make the point should be self-evident.
Titus called me a liar despite me previously having a discussion with him where I SPECIFICALLY said that I played on another site.
She made an accusation and I wanted to see her back it up. She cannot. And she didnt even quote the post riddle did, which actually is the better accusation. So, in my opinion, she was throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks. It was a baseless accusation.
On top of which ive made mo secret about my experience whatsoever. When asked about it, I divulged. Im being accused of covering ip something I never said.

With cdb I asked him to repeat because again, im being accused of something I never said. When I ask people to quote me its because I want to see if their accusation is actually coming from scumhunting or momentum pushing. I see the purpose in asking why a scum read changes. I dont see the point in asking why scumteam haven't changed.

[acryon]

That being said, I recognize that there may be more to consider, so I am willing to step off of this train for now.