Extend.
I will attempt to condense my case against Kamin into a few key points.
1. In post 65, Kamin voluntarily answers my opened-ended question from the scum perspective, saying"if I was mafia, I would do" such and such, and "if I wasn't mafia, ..." I think this is a blatant slip, and I am surprised I missed it in previous reads. My question was directly referencing the current game and in no way biased him towards a scum or town answer; but he answered it first from a scum perspective. I see no reason for him to do this unless he had been spending considerable time considering the current game from he scum perspective. A town player would answer as town to such an open-ended question.
2. Later in the same post and often throughout the thread, Kamin becomes agitated and obsessed over proving that what he is doing is not scummy, rather than directly confronting logic he disagrees with or simply admitting when he is wrong. This strikes me as convoluted play for town. Instead of trying to "de-scummify" your image, why would you not instead spend more time asserting your townie-ness and telling town by using evidence and refuting bad reason? But Kamin doesn't tell town, get frustrated, or attack logic; he just denies responsibility and compares himself to other scummy players, saying "look! I'm not half as scummy as they are!" Posts where he does this: 65, 73, 168,
3. In post 129, Kamin begins what is going to be a thread-long attack against me for two of my behaviors:
- Being a hardass and strongly pressuring every other player
- My special suspicion and distrust of the ICs
He never offers a lot of substance to show how either of these two charges are scummy, and eventually he is just going to repeat them no mater how often I explain these behaviors to him and to others that found these behaviors uncomfortable. Even when I directly demand that he deliver evidence, he trots out a repeated line about how there is no evidence in Mafia, and how things are based on feelings, which is just wrong; and it should be especially easy for him to find something in my case given my large amount of exposure here.
4. Finally, Kamin has displayed a lack of willingness to actually engage the town with real information and play. In post 131, I pressure him to explain why he second-voted mark. All i wanted was for him to admit that he indeed cast a second vote on Mark; Kamin never answers. In post 151, Kamin says he 'likes my answers'; but He says it still just really seems like I do want to lynch the ICs, telling me it seems I'm on a "witch hunt" (....yes?) and that I "look guiltier" than Mark. I demand evidence. No Evidence. In 172, Kamin nonchalantly asks about an extension when he knows the town is facing no-lynch; and in post 190, Kamin spends more time writing flavor text than he does actually going after me with real evidence or responding to my self-defense, lamely misdirecting the town to an "evidence" thread completely devoid of any.
For these reasons and more, I say we lynch Kamin; I think his play has been one dimensional and non-town, his lack of engagement is non-town, and his method of self-defense is definitely non-town.
PPE: I see nothing in his latest thread that changes my current opinion, but I am more than open to hear you explanations of these four points, Kamin.
IC's, I would like to hear come cold-blooded analysis on this Kamin/King situation during our extension. This isn't MYLO, so my though is that it is perfectly safe to mislynch here and then reanalyze after the flip. Yes?
Author
Topic: BM XXXVI: The Dirge of the Dead -- Scum Victory! (Read 86267 times)