Friend wrote:Yos, you're missing a key difference. Motivation.
You have to tell if the person committing said scummy actions is committing them because they are indeed scum, or because they're a VI and despite their efforts to contribute to the town, they end up acting scummily. In Furc's case, it was clear (to me) that he was doing the latter.
His motivation was quite clear. He was lying about his role to get pressure off of him. He even admitted that that's what he was doing.
You can call him a "VI" as much as you want, but at the time it looked like he knew exactly what he was doing; he semi-claimed a lie to get the pressure off of him, and then recanted once the pressure went away so he didn't have to prove the claim. That doesn't make him dumb, that makes him reasonably clever scum.
Now, apparently what actually happened was the original claim was true and then the recanting was a lie to try to avoid being nightkilled, but that didn't even occur to me at the time, because that's a completely illogical play.
I'm not saying that VIs are always town, but they can be read and it's a knock on you that you couldn't - either you're scum or you're not the great player that everyone thinks you are.
My vote goes for "Yos is scum," because I don't think you've built up your reputation as one of the best players on the site with VI mislynches.
Oh, please. I never claimed to be perfect. A great player is one who's right perhaps 50% of the time on day 1. A decent town player is right perhaps a third of the time on day 1, and the town as a whole actually tends to lynch worse then random on day 1. I clearly had a good read on several players alignment; I was right that Zwet was town, I was right that Dramonic was town (and I managed to prevent him from being lynched, which took a great deal of effort even after he claimed a power role). But "Yos was wrong on day 1, so he must be scum" is one of the worst arguments I've heard.
This is the situation, friend. You apparently had a pro-town read on Furc, based on gut or meta or something. That's fine, in fact, that's a good thing when you can get a read on someone like that. But you could never explain why you had that read (other then vague comments like "He always acts like this"). When you make comments like that and can't back them up, and no one else agrees with you, you can't expect your unsubstantiated opinion of someone to convince anyone else; we don't know your alignment, and we don't know if you're right, so we're not all going to just drop a wagon just because you say so.
if you're so keen on meta, then feel free to look at mine. I will nearly always lynch someone caught in a lie about their role, because it's nearly always the right thing to do, and I will generally lynch people who are acting in an anti-town way. Especially on day 1, when you don't have any bandwagon analysis to go on. The mistake a lot of people make is to assume that people don't know what they're doing; I always at least consider the possibility that people actually do know what they're doing, and try to figure out what their motives are for it, and it works quite often.
I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie
And I don't feel like repeating things other people said.