Guardian wrote:I would like everyone to let the group know what they think about
Incognito's dismissive-ness of arguments against him in general
My recent points against Incognito
Incognito in general
Incog definitely has been dismissive of SL, and took a patronaizing tone in the process - which is her stated reason for replacing out. While an overreaction on her part, I do think his approach was rather unpleasant for her, and somewhat scummy to boot. A related matter which concerns me more is the process of him going from finding her pro town for making a case against him to finding her scummy for it, and finally voting her. I noticed this before but it seems much worse after rereading him, I'll go into details:
Incog wrote:Glad to see you getting more involved now, springlullaby. I almost forgot you were even in this game. Addressing your points.
Some of your points seem like a bit of a stretch to me, which is a bit bothersome. I'll try and take it as a slight pro-town sign that you've called me of all people out on certain things when I've pretty much had absolutely nothing directed at me and have been finding myself trying to create my own content to get involved in. But yeah, there ya go.
He's been called out on this before, complimenting her like that for attacking him is quite absurd. He makes a real effort to appear so unselfish and pro town that attacking him is cause for a heads up, and then sounds like some sort of disappointed patron when he notes some of SL's points being "a bit bothersome", which off course is what a case against someone is supposed to be for him, but is willing to bite his lip and still take it as a "slightly pro-town sign".
And who are you, the Neils Bohr of Mafia or something? Have you been running statistical analysis to come forward with these numbers, or are you just pulling them out of your ass to help add even more weighted bombast to an already weak case? Have you considered that it's usually a good idea to reserve judgment on people because it's, oh, I don't know, a bad thing when you find yourself running up on someone who ends up being innocent? Is it abnormal for someone to not know who exactly is scum on page fucking 4 of the thread and who is instead choosing to use this early time to try and figure people out?
Here he does a 180 degree switch of tone and is acting all annoyed suddenly, like SL deserves punishment for not abandoning the case even after he made the effort to consider it a pro town sign before.
And I'm trying to take it as a positive sign because I know that my immediate impression from your attack on me is that it's slightly scummy for stretching the truth the way you have. Instead of immediately jumping to conclusions about your alignment, I'll continue trying to engage in conversation with you to see if you genuinely believe the points you're raising against me or if they're merely contrived and created to paint me in a bad light. Usually when someone makes a case against me, I can sometimes see where the person is coming from and why the person might think something I mentioned gave them a bad vibe. But with you, I really can't see that, and I'm becoming more and more curious about what your alignment really could be.
Here he goes back to being somewhat of a nice guy, and is willing to give her another chance and continue discussion to find out whether she "genuinely believes" the points she makes. His reason for not believing them is finding them weak, and I don't see how he could possibly suddenly decide she's genuine unless she takes back the points.
I really do find myself most troubled with springlullaby's attack against me and am having a hard time believing it could be coming from town. I've been attacked before in past games, and I feel like I can usually understand what the person who's attacking me for has a problem with and can usually tell when an attack against me is a bit misguided. I've reread the thread a number of times and did a focused read on myself to see if I can genuinely find myself agreeing with the points springlullaby raised against me, and I just can't.
I'd totally expect him to vote her by now since it's obvious he claims to find the attack completely unreasonable, but Incog makes a strong effort to show everyone he's willing to give SL a strong benefit of doubt and will only vote her when all else fails.
What he's saying about usually understanding where attacks against him come from sounds really odd. Incog, do you often find yourself really agreeing with points made against you? Assuming you're town, how can an attack against you be anything but either scumdriven or misguided? I have a hard time believing you're always so soft on people attacking you.
I've tried to think about reasons for why a hypothetical pro-town player might say something like this when she couldn't have possibly been tabulating this kind of data on her own and really the only conclusion I could come up with is if said pro-town player was suffering from a bout of tunnel vision. But tunnel vision on page 4 of the thread? I just can't convince myself that this was the reason for her to bring these numbers up and use them against me.
This is followed by finally voting SL, after all else has failed and logic leads him to the conclusion that the chance for SL to be
this
wrong and town is slim.
All of the things quoted here have little to nothing to do with actual rebutting of her points, this whole process just seems meant to make his vote look as justified and not OMGUSy as possible and cast Incog and a pro town light as a well thought out and considerate player, while making SL and her case look ridiculous. I just don't think all this behavior that keeps changing from fatherly to patronizing is at all natural, and especially dislike how he keeps mentioning other "good" attacks against him to make hers look all the more unreasonable.
I also disagree with both you and sthar8's mentioning that springlullaby's attack comes across as pro-town for pressuring me the way she has. The only time I've had a full-on attack against me this early in a game for just about the same level of ridiculous reasons as this one was in Pick Your Poison 3 and that was from Sarcastro who was scum. I think what matters is the context. Do you think springlullaby's points were valid? Did you think they were strong enough for her to actually be pushing for my lynch? I don't think this is just simple pressure coming from her like you're making it out to be.
The Sarcasto example is far from proving anything, you can't deduce SL's scum based on one other case which you find subjectively similar. Also the "do you think they (her points) were strong enough for her to actually be pushing for my lynch?" question is odd, I dislike how suddenly pushing for your lynch (voting for you, basically) is a such a big deal, while originally you considered it a towntell because it's good for people to question you. You go from one opinion to it's complete opposite just to fit the rethoric you're currently using.
About that: Yeah, I do think it's mildly pro-town to maybe shift some attention onto someone who did not have the spotlight put on him or her. Those feelings changed when I saw the points that she was actually trying to use to push for my lynch and how incorrect they were. That's what I was trying to get at.
Didn't you see these points before? Could you give some examples of games where you found points raised against you "correct" and continually considered attacking you a towntell?
There's also the correlating matter of Incog sometimes going out of his way, without relation to SL, to show us how much of a good townie he is. I think true townies would find this less necassary. Examples:
I posted that link because I think one of the points of your "case" against me focused on how I didn't immediately reveal my own thoughts with respect to the answers I received to my own questions and how you supposedly perceived this as scummy because I wasn't revealing my own insight with respect to my position on the other players' alignments. I was using that link to show you that when I'm ready to make my thoughts clear on why I think a particular person is scum, I'll do it in typical Incog-fashion by posting a well-elaborated, thoughtful case against said person. I haven't garnered enough information from this game yet to do so though obviously.
Also, I've probably been the most active player in this game and have been generating my own content through scum-hunting even while I've had to persistently defend myself. I think you're very much incorrect when you say I "only come alive when under fire", and I suspect the other players in the game can look through my posts fairly easily and see how false this is.
In fact I haven't seen Incog do much scumhunting except for above trail on SL and making a case on iLord after I asked him to name a second subject. For the "most active player in the game", I don't think of that as much.
About Guardian's points, I agree with some of them, mostly Incog's use of Guardain's OMGUSy meta as a defense being unreasonable and Incog going back to vote SL only after Guardian replaced her being odd. Combined with the above points, this definitely turns Incog into a top suspect along with iLord, and I need to reevaluate which one I find scummier.
![:]](./images/smilies/icon_smiling.png "Cheerful Smile"){kind=icon}
