In post 2235, Glitch wrote:I have a question, particularly for Blair. You said multiple times that I was arguing in bad faith and maybe this is just me being uneducated but could you elaborate on what you mean by that and explain how I did so?
I'm asking genuinely to find out, not to say I didn't do it. Just trying to figure out how I argued "in bad faith."
Arguing in bad faith, in this context, meant you were predicating an argument on a logical foundation that you did not genuinely believe, or that you had intentionally neglected to carefully examine before putting it forward to the thread.
tl;dr - "I'm not actually trying to understand what you meant in that post, I'm going to quote it and misinterpret it because I know the argument will sound persuasive."
I ask because I am wondering if if is something that is scummy but acceptable, or if it is actually like unethical playing regardless of alignment?
It's actually neither. It's not inherently scummy, because it's very difficult to tell the difference between a bad-faith scum argument, and townie confirmation bias. When I called you on it, it was a judgment call on my part - I interpreted it to be a bad-faith argument rather than confirmation bias. (I was right - you can't have confirmation bias about a Townie as scum, because you know they're innocent - but I couldn't have really been 100% sure at the time)
It's definitely not unethical play, either. It's pretty good scum play - you almost have to engage in this to some degree as scum if you ever want to convincingly push a mislynch. The art of perfecting it boils down to either A) being so subtle and persuasive that no one notices it's bad faith, or B) making it look like confirmation bias.
I believe the first time I accused you of it I singled out a single sentence that tipped me off - you might refer back to that if you want to develop this skill more. There was something in that post that tipped me off that you were fully aware that your case was stretching the facts.
You played well, and while some will say you didn't because *they* suspected you, the truth is you maintained about the perfect ratio of suspicion - you were far enough down the scum pile to avoid being lynched, while still suspected by enough people that no one was surprised you survived to endgame.
