asdfasdf
Incognito wrote:I think genuine frustration can certainly be a town-tell depending on the circumstances. To me, springlullaby didn't seem frustrated though. I mean, I can't even think of a reason why she'd be frustrated when she had no real pressure placed on her, and I don't think anyone was really provoking her to such a degree where she'd become frustrated. Instead, she began resorting to personal insults and flaming, which I actually think is more likely to come from scum than town.
Also, aside from that, I'd really like for you to read this comment from another game made by Battle Mage who was referencing his meta-experience with springlullaby: BM in Nice Shot! Mafia and here is the game he was referencing: Mini 561 - R-1000 Mafia. In Nice Shot! Mafia, BM specifically mentions that she came off as extremely aggressive towards him in Mini 561 where she was the Mafia GF pushing for his lynch (you can read through the game on your own if you'd like. BM was correct). BM ended up switching his vote to springlullaby in Nice Shot! and was 100% correct about her being scum in that game. So no, I think springlullaby's overly aggressive, pissed off behavior can certainly come from a scum her, and I still think she's scum in this game.
Really?
I'll look at that link later, but if SL is known to fake anger, then that would drastically make me reevaluate my read of her.
Jahudo wrote:A few of iLord's questions and comments on RR look to me like he is drawing conclusions without looking carefully enough at the information. For now, just a
FoS: iLord
Um, that's not a scumtell.
RR wrote:If you really thought I was trying to back away from your original point, you'd be pushing that more and the stuff I brought up to "distract from it" less. However, your original point isn't convincing at all and your case is dependant on moving discussion to other matters, which proves your above quote contrived as well.
My original point was that your push was scummy because the action wasn't scummy.
You said you were pushing for the guilt.
I said that guilt wasn't scummy.
That was how the main argument evolved - it's gotten dropped somewhere along the line.
I was attacking you for backing off the above point - I'm pushing mutliple other lines of attack because apparently my case against you isn't convincing anyone, mostly because I'm losing this argument fairly badly.
@The Rest of the Town: Do you think Guilt is indictive of scum?
RR wrote:This question is still loaded, as well as irrelevant. There's more than one possible reaction for "a townie", the best one being to say so and unvote.
And what would scum do once they realized that they were pushing a weak point?
RR wrote:Contradiction in this game is a subjective term. I have strong doubts about your alignment, so taking everything you say at face value would be a severe mistake. Saying that everyone should the accept the "it's not a contradiction because I say so" statement is completely false.
Normally, of course, you can't just take my word for it. However, the crux of your contradiction point is based on my definition of each of the backing-offs. Therefore, you have to judge not whether or not you agree with my definitons, but whether or not I genuinely feel that way, which is not what you have been.
Eldarad wrote:Precisely because the poor points can give insight into the motivation behind making the case - is it to scumhunt, or to get an easy mislynch?
The consequence of your suggestion is that if a player who has claimed to be scum made some "good points" we should take them seriously as the bad points (ie, they are confirmed scum) do not cancel out the good points...
EXACTLY! First of all, motivation does not decrease the value of the points. Second of all, if a confirmed scum gave us good suggestions, and we found those suggestions valid, then why wouldn't we follow them?
I was actually about to use this example.
Eldarad wrote:I really don't think it is genuine.
I also really don't think you are in a position to make such definite, sweeping statements about all townies and all scum.
I am not convinced by iLord's idea that RR's "backing off" was due to iLords pressure AND is indicative of scum.
Anyone is in a position to say anything and not have the magnitude of the point affected in the slightest.
Weird switch to third-person there.
Eldarad wrote:OK, so I guess a better question is this:
Regardless of whether you agree with iLord's opinion, due you believe he sincerely holds that opinion (even if he is wrong)?
Not to sound condescending, but good job! You said basically what I was trying to say.
Unfortunately, you said it before I did, which you shouldn't have.
sthar8 wrote:1. He continually pushed RR to back off from his attack on me (Do I need defending? How are you so sure of my alignment?), but once RR admitted that his read has changed, iLord started pushing him for changing his mind. While it would be reasonable to continue pushing based on your original points, attacking someone for cooperating seems really odd.
Cooperating is something any alignment can do.
sthar8 wrote:2. I really didn't like how he attempted to discredit Electra's opinions with an ad hominem attack aimed at her experience. I especially didn't like how vague he was in describing these tells, combined with his remarks to RR, Electra and Incog about how tells cannot be blindly and uniformly applied.
They were vague, and I can't really explain it, but a lot of Electra's overview posts give me huge newb reads.
RR wrote:If he's town yes, if he's scum most probably no. I believe his points contradicting each other combined with his contrived explanation for it makes him more likely to be dishonest (and therefore scum) than anyone else at this point.
Ah, so you don't believe me.
Then what more could I say? I've shown how it is not based on my definiton. You don't really believe I hold those definitions. It's for the rest of the town to judge.