In post 72, 2birds1stone wrote:If Shos flips scum, I know who's going down next.
In post 74, 2birds1stone wrote:It's hardly nitpicking. It's not like I picked a tiny sentence out of a wall of text and span an entire case around it. These are fairly obvious transgressions, you can call them minor, or even go as far to argue that they're not scumtells (though I obviously disagree), but it's most certainly not picking nits.
In post 48, kondi2424 wrote:2b1s, vote Camilla.
In post 52, kondi2424 wrote:I'm going to scream for your lynch. With good reason.
Yes, that's not nitpicking.In post 77, shos wrote:In post 74, 2birds1stone wrote:It's hardly nitpicking. It's not like I picked a tiny sentence out of a wall of text and span an entire case around it. These are fairly obvious transgressions, you can call them minor, or even go as far to argue that they're not scumtells (though I obviously disagree), but it's most certainly not picking nits.
hardly nitpicking? you seriously accused me of being scum for not voting in ym first post, and for 'not taking responsibility' of my RVS vote!! aer you fucking kidding me???
and @sean - "try real damn hard" - read my meta, I literally always get defensive when attacked.
VOTE: 2birds1stone
obvious consistency in bad logic and faulty arguments is obvious.
In post 60, shos wrote:In post 58, 2birds1stone wrote:Very well
*Removal of accountability (with as much explanation as I can possibly provide): When you make an RVS vote, you say, I dunno, "Vote: 2B1S because he's a total nutjob" or something to that effect. In saying this, you have said "I am voting this person for no real reason of my own free will, and if they flip scum, I was either bussing them or being a good townie". Yes, that's a very broad statement, and seemingly worthless than "I vote this person because my pattern of voting the last voter says I must, and their flip has no bearing on my actions". You did the latter. Now, on the one hand, you have done a very good job of looking like this is a new concept to you; on the other hand, your join date suggests not.
*Not voting in first post: This is a small point, but it's a point of sorts. There was no notification sent out to the players when this game started; that gives scum a great chance to stall a few RL days off Day 1; eh, it's not much of an advantage, but it's a minor one.
*Paranoia about L--2: Self-explanatory
*Assumptions about set-up: Self-explanatory, especially when you admit you've never seen this sort of a game before and therefore shouldn't have any preconceived notions of what the scumteam should be.
*Initially ignoring my serious vote: Yes, you didn't freak out. That was good. However, any serious vote, however weak, is ultimately good for the town, and any townie should be relieved to see RVS over. You weren't.
Scum enough.
Very well indeed.
1. I seriously do not understand what the difference is between "I vote him because he's stupid" and "I vote him because he RVS voted her". seriously, you said that my vote was 'because I must' instead of 'because I want' - in order to remove responsibility - but nothing dictated me to vote that way, in fact, nothing even dictated me to post; I really see no water in this jar of yours.
2. .......
"there was no notification sent out to the players when this game started" - IN CASE YOU DID NOT NOTICE THAT IS WHAT THE POST IS ABOUT. if I wanted to stall the game I wouldn't post that. SO forced.
3+4. I can't see any reason for my setup spec and the fear caused by it to be a scumtell, not to mention self explanatory. I gave you my not-so-unlikely analysis of the game(yes, without investigating alllllll the ways a 7p game can go) and gave you very specific reasons on how and why being in L-1 is dangerous. Just the fact that Camilla has been like that for a while now makes me sure that she is scum. If you think this is a scumtell, you are welcome to correct me; analyse the setup yourself. tell me everything.
5. that was not a vote to come out of RVS. eventually it was meaningful since it promoted this discussion, but at the time, I coulda sworn it wasn't serious. the reasoning behind it was just about as stupid as any RVS vote you can find. Now that you elaborated, it might look a tad less stupid, but still it is SOOO forced that even if this happened again in another game, I'd react exactly the same.
No, once again, you're missing the point. Nitpicking actually is scummy. Being wrong isn't. Forcing a case would also be somewhat scummy, but honestly, does this look like I've gone and put fucktons of effort into it to you?In post 82, shos wrote:That is just bullshit in disguise. You are trying to negate my argument by saying that i gave it the wrong name. Fine - call it an uber forced case, i dont care. Point is that having not voted in fitst post is no scumtell; nor is reasoning your rvs vote.
Occam's Razor? There's something truly hilarious about someone plead Occam's Razor in mafia.In post 86, shos wrote:I'm taking the logical line of reasoning. ever heard of Occam's Razor? you're going against it consistently, and really I have nothing else to say.
