Well, he's not very wordy, but not especially scummy, I suppose. I'd ask you to please look into the wagon on me, though, seth, since I'm a pretty big candidate for a lynch at the moment.
Aaand, more responding to Thor. tl;dr version and also responding to Cirno's question, I think that Thor is scum because of his sudden switch from reluctant to scapegoat, and his scum list being two easy newbie lynches and one person that I just don't understand the suspicion on at all. In fact, Cirno, could you please explain your willingness to vote Travis to me?
~
Thor wrote:Again - you are commenting about how *you* find the scumtell I raised on reluctant to be worthwhile and how *you* think everyone else came in with solid reasons and cases of their own. I disagree, I said so at the time. Also, if we accept all of them as not following me I'll be curious to see who all the people following the IC are (edit: and later you list no one else but willows, so I guess "all" the people I didn't call out was just him then?)
I suppose I can't argue it any further if it just comes down to us disagreeing, but I still maintain that it was a weak reason to unvote and strikes me as off.
And hey, I also listed reluctant. I also think scapegoat was, somewhat, as well, but I'll get to that in a second. In a game this small, two or three people is enough to start a bandwagon pretty quickly on someone.
Thor wrote:First off, you "answer" my question of whether we should read AtE as Newb scum or Newb town by telling me again that it's a newbie tell. I agree with you, that it's a newb tell. Now, why is it Newb town as opposed to a Newb scum tell?
The biggest thing that scapegoat did that everyone was suspicious of was put reluctant at L-1, saying he knew that it was scummy but that he wanted things to move along, right? It looks to me like he saw you guys saying things like
Also, bandwagon for the win!
I agree with using bandwagons just at the start to set up discussion, get a reaction from the player being voted for, and in general so we can get out of RVS as quick as possible.
The idea is to move to productive discussion as quickly as possible.
And figured, well, bandwagoning and moving things along is helping the town, so even if it's risky putting reluctant at L-1, I'll do it. Then when everyone turned around on him and told him it was scummy for the exact reasons he thought were pro-town, he threw a fit and left. If he was scum, he probably wouldn't have taken that risk at all, or just defended it relentlessly with bad logic, as I've seen newbie scum do before.
I get the reason that you voted for him initially, but I really think his reactions to the wagon would've been completely different as scum, if he'd voted reluctant at all.
If you agree that scapegoat's actions were newbtells, what makes
you
so convinced they were newb scum and not newb town?
Thor wrote:You go into a speech on how active lurking is scummier then regular lurking. I am aware of this distinction. You then pretty much act like I wanted Anton lynched right now You've missed my point, I already explained it. Address it or don't, but don't expect me to defend a standpoint I never took.
I don't think you want Anton lynched now, and I'm sorry if that's the impression I gave, but you did say that he was your second candidate, as did reluctant, and unless I'm mistaken, others have referred to him as suspicious as well, and I'm trying to point out that he isn't a good lynch, either.
thor wrote:Much easier then the guy I took to L-1 without having to push him and had everyone else agreeing how scummy he was for their own individual reasons? And I decided to dismantle that vote why?
Maybe you're scumpartners and you hadn't intended to bus him to the point of lynch (if you are, then reluctant's vote on me despite most of my suspicion being on you makes sense). Or, more likely, maybe you were afraid of a quicklynch occurring from a wagon you led, you wanted to gain town points by ending it, and scapegoat putting reluctant at L-1 was an easy reason to.
I called out Travis for the 'follow the IC' stuff because I found the way he was doing it more suspicious then anyone else. I've said this before. I never said he was the only one, only that I found his actions in that regard suspicious. willows followed my suspicions pretty tightly, but he at least occasionally came in and offered scum tells that were his own, I never felt Travis did and that's why I called him out on it. Also, even as you're chiding me for not calling willows to task on this stuff, you're admitting that I did;
For the record, the quote you used was talking about reluctant, not willow. Again, if this just comes down to a disagreement, I guess I can't argue my point any further, but I honestly find willow and reluctant much scummier. The only thing you've mentioned about Travis being scummier so far is the fact that he's following you, and I don't think that makes him scummy enough to be one of your top three lynch candidates just for that. Maybe he just agrees with you. Reluctant and willow on the other hand, have other things against them, at least in my eyes, and neither of them even made that list.
Thor wrote:Both posts are saying that the only way my actions make sense, if you believe what you're saying, is for me to be scum partners with reluctant if I'm scum. There is no contradiction between the two sentences - they say the same thing.
I just didn't understand whether you thought that an accusation of you and reluctant as a scumteam was reasonable or not, since in the context you said it to me, it sounded like you were trying to pre-emptively discredit that idea.
Thor wrote:you disagree with my top three and find them bad lynches. Who are your top three?
My top three would be you, willow and reluctant.