cicero wrote:1. Pretending to be cop as town is only a perfectly legal gambit if we let it remain a perfectly legal gambit. In most team sports doing things that fuck over your team like that find a way to get weeded out eventually. This is not a sit-com named "Oh Albert". It is in no way "fair".
That's just silly, you know. The entire point of mafia is trying to figure out if someone else might be telling the truth or not, and why they might or might not be doing what they're doing. You (strangely) seem to be assuming that Albert is a lying townie, which is a bit odd. But in any case, a townie certanly has the right to lie about anything he wants to if he thinks it's going to help his side. Trying to make it against the rules to do that would just be horrible, IMHO. And trying to BAN someone from playing mafia for something that you THINK should be against the rules but isn't is...I don't even know what to say about that. That's why I'm wondering if this whole thing is an attempt on your part to just convince us all not to listen to Albert, because I have trouble beliving you would
actually want to get someone banned for that.
2. Your comment about ignoring my dust up with ABR looks like a lie right now. You are saying now that you deliberately ignored the discussion. But your comment AFTER I brought it to your attention was:
Yosarian2 wrote:You want to get ABR banned? Am I missing something here?
This shows that you werent paying attention and then that you lied about paying attention.
No, I had been ignoring it.
3. Your McPaltp response is just a repetition of what you said the first time. I respond with what I said.
Um, what? That dosn't even make any sense. Are you trying to get me to vote for you here?
You said "in general, there's nothing wrong with being undecided". I said "that's true, but IN THIS SPECIFIC INSTANCE, that is exactally what I would expect you to do if you and McPaltp were scum together". That is, with both you and him under pressure, and with someone claiming to be a cop with a guilty on you, you would pretty much just try to avoid connecting the two of you in any way, so when forced to comment on it you would do so in a completly neutral way. You response was to try to pretend I was just going on "generic scum tells", which is just silly.
5. Fighting my own mislynch is very pro-town. As you WELL know, I would normally never call for a mislynch. If I thought it was a completely bad idea I would have been calling for Ecto's head pages and pages ago. In this specific situation it MIGHT make sense. More importantly I think the distinction is moot. Ecto called for it, I said "a mislynch like ecto said". His reasons = my reasons by reference. I'm never a big fan of a no lynch but in this case I happen to know that the lynchee is a mislynch. Me!
Well, then, the correct pro-town move would be to try to put together a bandwagon against someone who actually IS scum. Trying to suggest a no-lynch, even though you KNEW it was a bad idea, just in order to save your own skin, is a scum move.
Note that I never attacked Ecto for "suggesting a no-lynch", because while he was wrong, Ecto-scum wouldn't have anything to gain really by suggesting a no-lynch there. It's not a "generic scum tell", it's a very specific scummy action on your part this specific situation.
I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie