Open 418 - Friends and Fun Times at the Fair (Game Over)

[Om of the Nom]

One is directly putting words in someone's mouth, the other is indirectly doing it. This is my point.
Also the general context of the words I mentioned normally point to strawmanning, and your question was no exception.

[Om of the Nom]

Why is arguing semantics anti-town?

[Om of the Nom]

Gut lol.
I've been getting a townie feel from Venmar's posts. Though again, I still haven't really read them in detail.
Why don't you go and point out the scummy things he has said and then I'll see?

[Om of the Nom]

RP, are you willing to do a bork lynch?

[Om of the Nom]

Generalising. That's a fallacy. You're using one point that links them all together to try and portray my reasons for suspecting you as scummy, without paying attention to the cases and reasons I've given for all of them.

I mean seriously, that was a horribly weak attack and you must be scum for doing that instead of defending yourself.

PEDIT: I already am bro. And again, you willing to do a bork wagon?

[Om of the Nom]

@Potack - It was vague in the sense that they were acting as though they were connected and suggesting it, but they hadn't came out and directly said what they were alluding at.

Did this make them scum?

This normally is something to be applauded, but it was ridiculous in the sense that they were stifling discussion and refusing to admit the possibility the other may be scum in their actions.

Why would this make them scum?

This is the hallmark of an informed player, and was clear to everyone, but if we allowed it to go unchecked, scum could just as easily vaguely act as masons and use it to stifle discussion.

So are you suggesting that scum would also claim Masons

separately

to Gunny and andrew just to confuse us?

It's unfortunate they had to come out as masons (if they are), but then they also shouldn't have been so blatantly obvious by not even paying lip service to the idea the other could've been scum.

Why is it bad they had to come out as Masons?

It's not "horribly fake town jargen" - you misconstrued what I said. I didn't say we shouldn't lynch them and we shouldn't tie them together. What I meant when I said that was that none of the evidence was conclusive enough to warrant a lynch at this time, but it's suspect that two players are linked directly (which, given that they then are either masons or mafia, is relevant).

You literally just took what I said then and made it wordier. You're trying to justify something by adding more words to it to make it look different. "None of the evidence was conclusive enough to warrant a lynch at this time," is literally saying, not enough shit, so don't lynch them. "But it's suspect that two players are linked directly," basically means you've already tied them together.

His constant battling with you up until this point after you accused him of scumminess (and drmy's assistance to him) substantiates my statement that anyone who accused him was considered autoscum in his head.

What about everyone else who attacked him? Did he do the same thing to those people too?

Drmyscum's attack on me immediately after further cements this.

How?

I don't quite understand your "what makes you think this" question, Potack. I only mean to say in that statement that andrew's logic is terribly flawed and he is only correct if he is scum. He says that lynching himself, then him turning town, means we should lynch you. He then says that wouldn't work. The only part of that that could be impossible to work is him being town (not saying it's impossible he's town, I'm saying it's impossible to not lynch him and then you if we want to). It was blatant OMGUSuckery and not a real defense or real attack on you.

But if he says to lynch me if he flips town, wouldn't that mean he wants me dead? That would be a suicidal move as scum because I would have won that battle without a scratch on me, so he would have been lynched instantly. So I don't see why this makes you believe he is scum. Also hey, I notice the needless adjective in that last sentence for discrediting purposes. You're doing it again.

The mason claim itself doesn't make him scum, but they had made it abundantly clear they were connected and hadn't claimed yet. Everyone in the game was acknowledging they were connected. This means either scum or masons. If they are scum, no one else is sure whether they are masons or scum. If they are masons, town is still confused, but scum already knows. To suggest that anyone wasn't aware that andrew and drmyshotgun were connected before they came out and claimed is to suggest that everyone is profoundly stupid.

Why does a minimum of one person not being aware that they were connected suggest that

everyone

is stupid?

This mason claim means that we know have a confirmed innocent or scum the next day, or, if neither flips, we have some hard evidence to go off of on Day 2. I'm personally still not convinced they aren't scum, but they aren't the best lynch today regardless - tomorrow we'll have much more information based on who survives the night.

What will you think of their alignments if none of them die tonight?

Keep in mind one of them was dying tonight anyway if they're really Masons - we all knew they were somewhat informed.

Why do you think scum would definitely kill them tonight if they are Masons?

Now we have the confirmed link out in the open and stand a better chance of making a scum lynch today (or tomorrow if both live).

So now you think they're definitely town?

This situation didn't happen because I was "rolefishing"; it happened because they basically let the whole game know they were informed of each other's alignment.

Were they scummy for this?

I didn't ask directly because I feel as though a much more genuine and telling response would come out of reaction-fishing.

Why?

The reaction has certainly been genuine, kneejerk, and emotional, and if one flips scum then there is no way the other one gets away, as they're clearly linked.

Why does kneejerk and emotional make him scum? I would think town would be more emotional with their reads, and would really do anything to get their biggest scumreads lynched. I know I play like that.

Another productive thing to come out of the mason claim is that you and drmy have apparently ended this ridiculous quarrel. We can focus on bigger fish to fry.

We ended it before the claim, the claim only just made me believe andrew was town too.

[Om of the Nom]

If the Masonry aren't completely honest, we'll never know and the scum will be able to WIFOM town with it. If the Masonry are honest, the scum won't be able to WIFOM us and it will give us conf. towns to lower the lynch pool. So at this point there is literally no reason not to claim.

It would obviously out scum because then we would have had 4 Mason claims, which means one person

has

to be lying.

PEDIT: Thank you, Gunny.

[Om of the Nom]

Anyway I'm going to try and forget this game now.

[Om of the Nom]

Code, you should not be bashing yourself over this. You played great in LYLO, and you were clearly obvtown just from that day alone.
What you should learn to do instead, is to continue that kind of play throughout the whole game.

PEDIT: Yeah, I definitely let my anger get in the way when we were arguing. I'm sorry you all had to bear through that.

[Om of the Nom]

Logic was telling me McStab was scum, but gut was saying Aru. Oh well, I guess my gut was right in LYLO again.
Had I not been quicklynched, and actually had some time to say something, I probably would have tried to get Aru's lynch.

[Om of the Nom]

Frankly, I think my early game reads were much better, and had the mass replacements not happened and confuddled my brain, I probably would have kept pushing my reads.

[Om of the Nom]

Can I see the mason QT by any chance?

[Om of the Nom]

Just delete his post, he's already been reported in the Spam thread.