Quad wrote:Eh... nice try at the misrep but no.
*scratches chin* not sure how it's a misrep. Seems to be word for word what you said, just with my own perception's spin on things...
Korlash wrote:Corlash, your predecessor is BV310. BV is a good player, who knows better than to jump on a weak wagon like Newman's as a town player. The only motivation bv has for that in this game is to try to build it into a mislynch. My predecessor, on the other hand, was Ghostlin, who was not on the wagon. Good try, though!
Ignoring the Ghostlin part, Isn't the whole building a wagon in RVS to start the game a common theme amoung this game's players? I realize your views on Newman match my own, but you admit his own reasoning was flawed, right? So why is Newman wrong in his thinking that L-2 is bad, but BV is scum for being part of that L-2? That doesn't make sense.
Tl;Dr: Are you saying you also think an L-2 wagon that early is bad? Unless you say yes, there is certainly another reason for BV to be on that wagon which you are ignoring. (either intentionally or not)
Quad wrote:Oh, and as to your second point? When you argue against people, making "Why would this person do Action X, when no one asked him for Action X," the crux of your argument, him actually having been asked to do Action X is not a "tiny detail." And with the amount of detail and time you clearly take making each post, I simply don't believe you just missed it. You looked at the age/likely quality of the players in the game and said "I can get away with this."
Half right, I looked at the players in the game and knew I could play the game my way. The 'crux' of my argument is that they attacked Newman without actually looking for the truth, simply pushing the lynch. All they needed to do to 'counter me' is show me where they did in fact either A) Have evidence or B) actually tried to find some. Since the join date was a minor issue that I knew some sort of evidence existed for, I attempted to force someone to point it out.
The discussion then has relatively few paths to travel. Either A) no one points it out, my point is justified entirely, my case is strengthened. Or B) One of the people I attacked points it out, thus giving me the option to ask for evidence on a more serious topic, which they can't produce. My lesser point about the joindate would be forfeight, but my overall poiint would be proven. Or C) Someone other than the people I attacked points it out (I was betting on Jun). This gives me an opening against the people I am attacking and allows me to see better into the person who stepped up to do their work for them.
Obviously I knew there existed a place where someone asked Newman the question. (I didn't actually look for it, but I assumed it had to exist since Newman wouldn't have brought it up otherwise.) I'm a relatively good player, if I may say so myself, and as such I don't feel the need to play honorably as town just because I'm one of the 'good guys'. I play to win, I play to strengthen my cases, and yes... I play dirty. =D
Tl;DR: The joindate thing wasn't a 'crux' of my argument, just a single part of it. And yes, I knew what I asked for existed. So tell me, why did YOU have to tell me? Why didn't Rat say it? Or V2V? You had to step up and fight their battles for them... Why would you have to do that if they are town? (ignore V2V since I didn't actually post his case, so just blame Rat on this one.)
Quad wrote:Please, don't pretend that your word vomit is actually legitimate content. Yeah, there might be a few bits in there, but simply spewing out every word you can think of? Not good for town. Period. Not scummy by its nature, but definitely anti-town, and combined with my previous point on leaving out important bits of information, I think that you're using it in a scummy way.
It's a valid point on both accounts. I can't replace into games without posting a crap ton up front. I have to catch up and it take me a while to integrate into games. Sadly, I'm a very active player and will always post a lot, it's just a lot more up front since I have 8 pages of content to post all at once. And yes, I tend to use 'scum tactics' regardless of my role because I tend to win more games when I play to my strengths. sadly you're missing that I didn't 'leave out important bits' but asked someone else to present them, which they failed at, which further suggests they aren't town since town have no reason to ignore giving simple and easy answers when asked for them.
Quad wrote:Shoot. Correction to my previous post: Ghostlin was actually on BV's wagon. I ISOed the mod's votecounts, rather than Ghostlin. My apologies there. Nonetheless, my point about BV yet stands; Ghostlin was not nearly as strong or experienced a player as BV, and I don't believe that he would've been able to determine that the wagon was bad, whereas BV should have.
And my point also stands. Unless you can tell me you disagree that an early wagon in RVS can be used to start off a game, you cannot say it was purely a scum intent to be on that wagon, given the exact 'message' it was created over. In addition, Ghost's position and actions ON the wagon are a hell of a lot scummier than anything BV did so it seems kinda weak you pushing this as the main point against me. (Please don't take that personally, if it isn't your 'main' point I apologize, but that isn't the way I see it.)
On a side note, what are you basing this 'bv is a stronger player' attitude? I always considered Ghostlin a very strong player... If not that, at least overly experienced. Do you feel that you will be able to defend this attitude? (if I may take a page out of Rat's book, just for example, their joindates would suggest the opposite of what you say.) I checked their wiki but got nothing out of it, I assume due to the crash.
I counter that whole ideology of yours with a simple request: Show me evidence that you are scumhunting.