In post 1359, Frogsterking wrote:Out of all things CFJ could comment about he says that in a hypothetical scenario where Walter is town, provoking NM into playing less cryptically may be beneficial to scum by giving an easier excuse for them to join the Walter wagon.
How is that the first example you post when you don't even read Walter as town? And what would NM reveal that would provide an easy excuse for others to join the Walter wagon?
Did you miss #
774 in the middle of your quote? geraintm thought that #
745 was scummy because it might be scum trying to find an excuse to vote Walter. I thought that that was possible, but wasn't the most likely explanation (in that there were obvious benefits to town too).
There's a difference between having a scumread on someone, and not even considering the possibility that they're town. I didn't have a strong scumread on Walter; and even if I did, I would be open to considering the possibility that he was town (especially when looking at a hypothetical scumread on someone else – in which there would be fewer other scum in the setup – or when trying to reason with someone and trying to explain to them why their reasoning was wrong, a situation in which I need to use their reads rather than mine).
In this case, I thought that the reasoning behind geraint's scumread on you was incorrect. geraint's read was based around a hypothetical in which Walter was town, so I started from the same starting point as he did, and explained that although how the post was consistent with you as scum, there were also obvious pro-town reasons why you might have made it, and therefore this wasn't evidence that you were scum. You seem to be taking geraint's argument for you as scum, falsely attributing it to me, and then claiming that clearly I have secret knowledge that Walter is town or otherwise I wouldn't have made it. Don't you see how utterly illogical this is?
I don't think I've ever seen people use reasoning quite this bad unless they're really deep in a tunnel. Please, step back, and try to evaluate your reads more objectively rather than getting caught up in emotion. I fear you've constructed some really elaborate, complex, unlikely and probably even internally inconsistent scenario in your mind by starting with an incorrect assumption that I'm scum, drawing tenuous conclusions from that, taking them as fact, drawing more tenuous conclusions from that, and so on. (I've been there myself; I've been known to tunnel as town on occasion, and it's really helpful if someone catches what I'm doing and points it out to me.) When you're this deep into a tunnel, the assumptions you're reasoning off have essentially no connection to reality, so your conclusions don't either. That means that, in addition to being wrong on me, they aren't going to be useful for scumhunting anyone else either.