In post 2633, TheReverend wrote: In post 2631, ² wrote:Why are you even talking to me when you're just going to go by your own hypothesis of lying being scummy anyway?
I'm sorry, is trying to interact with someone in order to attempt to determine that person's alignment not cool? Why are you asking me why I'm talking to you? I think you're scum, this tiff with mollie reinforces that read, I'm interacting with you now to see if you come across as town, seeing as we have a few days left and you're at L-2. You are failing to convince me my vote is in the wrong place. You should know why I'm talking to you. And I really think that you should be concerned about mollie's alignment if you are so convinced she is lying to push for your mislynch. Maybe I'm wrong there, but you telling me I'm wrong won't convince me, two town flips will convince me, and that isn't happening today.
This is not at all the impression I've gotten from this conversation. Briefly speaking, you asked me why I thought mollie is town when I simultaneously claim that she's lying. I told you that lying isn't a scumtell. You told me that lying is scummy. I told you that lying is anti-town, but not necessarily scummy. You told me again that lying is scummy. I told you that lying isn't even always anti-town and certainly not necessarily scummy. Then you repeat yourself again and I ask why you are bothering talking to me when you're just going by your own hypothesis of lying being scummy anyway.
So, to answer your questions:
I don't get the impression that you're trying to interact with me in an attempt to determine my alignment; I think you've convinced yourself a long time ago that we're scum and you seem to be grasping onto anything you can to reassure yourself. For instance, you're currently asserting that we're scummy because I think mollie is town despite lying. How the hell is thinking mollie is town despite lying even scum-motivated in the first place? I find your whole argument quite absurd.
I am asking you why you are talking to me because it seems rather extraneous when taking into consideration the content of our conversation. It seems that you have made up your mind a long time ago and I sincerely think you're quite stuck in confirmation bias land, asserting that anything I do is scummy - much like mollie is.
I may be failing to convince you that your vote is in the wrong place, but that does not necessarily mean that I am to blame for that. For instance, you should be looking at things more skeptically instead of blindly sheeping mollie. I don't think you're actually trying to create new content with the conversation that you instigated, I think you had made up your mind that me thinking mollie is town while claiming that she's lying is scummy and you just wanted to point this out.
I think I understand by now that you think I should be concerned with mollie's alignment because she's lying, but I'm not. I think I also made it fairly clear by now why I'm not concerned with mollie's alignment. On the contrary, I don't think you made it clear why you think me not being concerned with mollie's alignment is scum-motivated (aside from just asserting that because this is what you personally think, it must also apply to others).
I think you sum it up quite neatly when you state that only two town flips are going to convince you; if that's the case there really isn't a purpose of our conversation.
- b