Oso wrote:
Those are the points he made that I believe where he tries to link vezo's behavior as scummy.
Notice the bolded parts. In every one of those, except his points on ISO 11, he gives himself an out. Look at the wording "I think...but call it null' - 'seems like..but give benefit of the doubt' - 'possibly true or....' - 'again possible...is unlikely'. No matter what vezo's alignment turns out to be, he's given himself an out on all major points. "See, I told he was scum" or "I said right here in the game that I thought I could be wrong"
Looking back on the wording you mention, you are correct that I seem unsure of myself quite a bit. But, there is (I believe) a good reason for that. The reason is that I
am
unsure. I know most scumhunters like to make themselves out to be completely confident in their cases, but I just don't do that when I'm not 95% or more sure. With vezo, I'm more like 80% sure, but he seems to be the lead candidate to me so far. I'm not purposely wording it like that to give myself an out. If he is lynched and he flips town, you can consider me completely wrong as if I said I was 100% sure. Sound good?
If you really want to see if that is really my playstyle or not,
Newbie 937 is a finished game where I was town and you can see that I was quite hesitant there too, even when I really thought I had something. In fact, if anything, that game might have made me even more hesitant considering how it was ending with me suspecting the wrong person going into the final 3.
Oso wrote:Then there is his point on ISO 4, giving vezo the benefit of the doubt on sheeping. Then in his commentary between his points on ISO 5/6 and ISO 7 he throws this in:
Tasky wrote:....If he really agreed with Oso and wasn't just sheeping,...
I thought he was giving vezo the benefit of the doubt there about vezo following me off the Tasky vote? But look at his words in his point on ISO 11 "...which was already mentioned mutiple times...more sheeping?" To me, it is obviously he just threw that whole giving vezo the benefit of the doubt into his first point about sheeping so he could be seen as making a fair assessment of vezo's play so far. He certainly didn't give vezo the benefit of the doubt on anything it seems.
First of all, "Tasky"? I think you're getting the wagonees a bit mixed up.
To answer this questioning, for me, the "benefit of the doubt" means that I won't assume the worst, but it doesn't mean I'm going to sweep it under the rug either. And, that benefit of the doubt was only given for the first instance. For example, if a player in the World Cup performed what may be considered a purposeful late tackle but not certainly one, the official might not give a yellow card for it, giving the player the benefit of the doubt and assuming he did it on accident. If the same player seems to do it again, will the official act as if the first one never happened and act as if this was the first time? That is highly unlikely. It is likely that he will recall the first incident and, seeing it's similar to this one, give a yellow card this time (and if it happens again, it becomes two yellows or red). Well, in our game, the offense seemed to happen 3 times (not including the possible SSBF one). He had already received his "yellow", but that doesn't seem to stop him from doing it again in ISO 11, earning a "red".
Sorry if that analogy just seems completely stupid to any of you. It makes sense in my head. What I'm basically saying is that even though something is given the benefit of the doubt, if similar things happen again (and again), that first offense can be looked at again and that benefit can be revoked.
Oso wrote:He started off good by going after vezo for an emerging pattern that may have well had merit. He ended by being so eager to pile every little piece of crap he could find onto vezo that he become scummy in my eyes no matter if the original thought might have had some merit to it. His post I have quoted above is a post that is meant to lynch a player. Not scummy at all doing that, but because of the way he gave himself an out on the major points of his argument to avoid consequences if vezo flips town or take a major portion of the credit if vezo flips scum, makes this into a post that only scum would use. Either to kill a townie with deniability or get credit for a bussing.
My vote is already on KageLord and there it will stay. We have nine days to deadline so there is plenty of time so I urge all of you to read what he has said so far in Isolation and then in context and see what you think.
I will say this right out. This post is meant to get KageLord lynched. He's the lynch for the day in my opinion.
So again, if vezo is lynched and by some strange twist flips town, I don't (and didn't) want to use those words for deniability. Treat it as if I was sure and using the same conviction as Oso here. Now, I have a couple things I want to clear up about Oso, but I want to make it clear that I would rather see vezo lynched today than anyone else so far, unless Oso can't come up with anything reasonable against what I say (which I think is unlikely). But, if vezo is lynched (today or ever) and flips scum, I'm (if I'm still alive, that is) going to be looking very closely into Oso for possible Chainsaw Defense (note: he can't really be considered for CD right now since vezo hasn't flipped yet, but this is just thoughts for a possible future).
_________________________________________________________________________
Oso wrote:most everything has washed null or scum/town tells in equal parts. Except vezo. Don't care about alignment there at the moment because a lot of conversation is being generated around him.
Don't care right now if he's town or scum
, I have no interest in lynching him today.
This just screams "scum" to me. I would care if anyone is town or scum at any point in a game. Even if I'm in the heat of going after someone I believe to be scum, if I find someone else that is even more likely to be scum (I know this hasn't been proven about vezo to Oso's satisfaction, but saying you don't care...), I'll drop my current case for the moment and nab the new one. Saying that you don't care if someone is scum does not seem town to me at all.
Now, Oso, one thing that I am wondering about is why you put Tasky in the town category, even though you pretty much say that you think he has been doing things entirely wrong but with no maliciousness, yet you find maliciousness in my case or method against vezo. Is it just the part about me using words of uncertainty or is it to do with my previous assertion about the 6 minutes thing? Either way, it could be that they made you think my play style was flawed or my logic on some points was weak (or downright non-existent), but I can't see why it would necessarily be "malicious". And, for the record, Tasky is in my town pile as well and has been for most of the game.
Also, vezo, I would like to see you answer the points I mentioned in my post of your ISOs, please. I want to see your answers to all of them, but I am especially anxious to see the answer to the point mentioned between ISO 5/6 and ISO 7 about what looks like backpedaling on Tasky, which was originally brought up by Friend but never answered by you.
And as an extra little bit to add to my case against vezo that I just noticed is that diddin also gave Tasky the famous "noob pass" in
post 99, just after Friend's point about the backpedaling, but this was never mentioned by vezo. I would think that if vezo was really suspicious of these noob passes, vezo would have said something to/about diddin. In
post 92, vezo had just said he suspected Friend and Tasky of being scum buddies after Friend gave Tasky a noob pass (still not sure why vezo still suspected Tasky). Why would vezo not also suspect diddin for the same thing?
