Firstly, yay for conjectures and putting words in my mouth! Good job! Secondly, If this doesnt go my way, then this doesnt go the towns way either, seeing as I'm protown. Also, what is suspicious about trying to deflect suspicion on yourself and onto someone who is suspicious, even if you could prove I was doing it? I have a townie have the exact same amount of motivation that a scum would have...so why does this make me scum?TheHermit wrote:This sounds to me like someone sees rumblings against him, and he picks the most publicly dubious of his attackers to make a case against him solely so he can throw back a "But you're scummy!" claim and deflect suspicion back to me. Fine, Elias, I'll bite. But just so you know, I don't think this is going to go your way.
I love how you misrepresent me and present opinion as fact. It's nice. I never once wanted to lynch you on that one vote alone. Are you insane? I've presented large amounts of evidence against which I plan to dredge up and post again when I finish my reread. Do you honestly just read my posts and not look at them at all? Because you're totally misrepresenting my reasons for voteing for you.TheHermit wrote: For starters, there's the double-talk. Elias has claimed over and over again that he shouldn't be suspected for voting Nelly because he had no intention of lynching (an unprovable statement), while at the same time claiming that my lone vote on oj is worthy of stringing me up.
Look! Opinion as fact again! I'm loving this! Pray tell, oh great Hermit, what is the chances of putting the third vote on someone turning into a lynch, if they are decent? Oh thats right, you have no clue. And even if you did, it would be based purely on your experience...and that has to do with the particular players in your game and what not...TheHermit wrote: Let me put that another way: according to him, putting the third vote on a non-contributor (decent chance of turning into a lynch)
If youre not getting this, "let me put that another way": Games are completely different from eachother, since the basis of the likelihood of things happening is dependant entirely on the players in the game. Guess what? This game has different players then any others you've been in (bar maybe a few). So how do you know the chances of that turning into a lynch? Simple answer: you dont.
You ignore the fact that the chances of things actually happening is purely irrelevant to whether an action is scummy. They are inadverdant consequences. Do you not see that you must look at things in terms of intent? Obviously I cant prove that I was voting for pressure, but even unwritten purposes are better then flat out claiming that you want him dead for not contributing, which is what you did. It is the intentions that make your actions scummy, not these made up "chances" that you keep bringing up.TheHermit wrote: Let me put that another way: according to him, putting the third vote on a non-contributor (decent chance of turning into a lynch) is less scummy than putting the first vote on a non-contributor (almost no chance of turning into a lynch).
What are you talking about? This stems entirely from you misunderstanding my process of scumhunting (ie looking at reasoning not hypothetical lynch possibilities). Since you dont understand how I decided what is suspicious, doesnt mean you make up some bogus reason for my opinions and present as if I said it myself. Putting words in my mouth for the win.TheHermit wrote: I shouldn't need to explain why this makes him look scummy: his viewpoints change depending on whether it puts suspicion on him or not.
Dumb enough to post it as your primary reason for voting him apparently. It would appear that you didnt see anything wrong with it until it was pointed out.TheHermit wrote: Right about now, Elias, you're probably thinking of deflecting suspicion by saying that I wasn't voting for pressure, I was trying to lynch him. I shall ask one question: "How dumb do you think I am?" .
You only admitted to that after you were pressured. What you are referring to is what I like to call the most obvious backtrack of the game.TheHermit wrote: Do you assume that, if I were scum, I would vote an anti-town (but not yet proven scum) player while admitting it was scummy to do so?
If you had not been pressured, you would have never called it scummy. Not to mention that the intelligence of the town is nothing you can just assume...I mean you guys are trying to lynch me, which will screw the town. I swear it. I will post this seperately and address the second half in a second.TheHermit wrote: How would that accomplish getting him voted out? It would not. No town is collectively stupid enough to follow a bandwagon like that. So in exchange for drawing attention and making myself look suspicious, Scum!Hermit would have achieved absolutely nothing.
) I'm again satisfied with your answers to those questions.
