It matters to me, because it changes the world of your perception when you attacked him.In post 1206, Titus wrote:Semantic pointless argument.In post 1204, Cooperative Sheep wrote:So your answer is exactly what Vedith said more or less?In post 1201, Titus wrote:Vedith did that.
What about my comments rebutting his answer - Vedith has washed over them pretty strongly, do you actually agree with him that there are multiple scum benefits to the fake claim, or do you agree with me that there are very limited and specific ones?
Scum benefit, scum motive = anti-town needs sorting with votes
There was actually very little/no scum benefit/motive in my eyes, which would then not require voting and sorting.
There was a lot in Vedith's eyes (if you buy his theories) so, maybe then, yeah.
What did you believe specifically?
At the moment I am about ready to presume you just totally crib Vedith's notes as presented - meaning you see many many scum benefits, and have all sorts of pseudo half baked theories you think need to be given equal weight while ignoring the gamestate analysis that some people might have used to assess whether something was scummy or not. Feel free to agree/disagree with this and clarify.
