Griffinpup:
Griffionday:
You have absolutely no defense against Web's accusations until he answers your one question?
No. The viciousness in his post surprised me, and I needed him to clarify where he was coming from. Considering the way he was leveling complaints against me that would have been equally valid against NQT from day one of the game and had been a topic of many of my posts to NQT (Webadict even quoted a sentence by NQT detailing why the question was useful) while at the same time not calling NQT out on any of the things he had an issue with, I had major suspicions of chainsawing. His reply to my question somewhat assuaged my concerns on that front though.
Leafsnail:
Secondly: let me clarify exactly what I'm apologizing for in that second sentence. I've no problem with any part of my case on NQT, what I'm apologizing about is the fact that there where days that it was all I was pursuing, which is slightly sloppy play.
Sure. But the first sentence and the first half of the second sentence are passive aggressive - "I am sorry that you are wrong". It's like you're trying to both stand your ground and concede that you were wrong at the same time.
Which is exactly what was trying to do. I'm convinced that NQT is scum, and as such I've no reason to unvote him, on the other hand I was conceding the point that my play with regards to tunneling was wrong.
For quite a while there it was "one more post, then I'll move on." then he made the comment that his wincon as town would be "interesting for some." This is him flaunting the fact that he knows the words of the town wincon which would ONLY happen if they have no bearing on his true wincon.
I'm not sure I follow. What do you mean by this?
It relates to what he had said about the question:
If one is town, the question can be used to compare wincons, if one doesn't have key words (like mine didn't) then one can and should press further or at least be suspicious of a player. During his post after I had replied with what my wincon was, his one question was:
"Have you talked to everyone else yet?" No pressure, no suspicion, just "get out of my face".
On the other hand if one is scum and has the town wincon, then the question has a second purpose when asked to noobs (such as myself), quite often a RVS question will be reversed at a player (like I did, twice actually) giving one an opportunity to provide the buzz-words that make one sound town. This is what happened.
Webadict:
Because I wasn't paying that much attention. Did you really need this answer, or am I missing something?
You're not missing anything I did actually need that answer, as I mentioned to Griffinpup my reason for asking the question to you was because I was suspicious of chainsawing.
- Contradictions that didn't really happen or are stretched to the very point of breaking. Example:
-snip-
This is NOT a contradiction. It's also a blatant rules violation, but that doesn't matter right now (what is with everyone trying to cheat these days?) It can be assumed that scum contains the mafia and third parties. Town would have you not learn anything from such a question, but her example is, of course, Town.
The last sentence here confuses me.
You are right; however, in that that contradiction was not the strongest. However, what about her statement that her statement of the town wincon
"For some indeed, asking my wincon may have been enlightening." As far as I can tell this statement is either a direct contradiction with her original premise (that it's only interesting if the question happens to hit non town), or an accusation that my statement of the wincon was a guess. As he did not in any way suggest the latter in either of his posts since I answered his question, I have to assume it's the first.
So, if we're going for the same tests of scummitude here, just quickly, you ACTIVELY AVOIDED A QUESTION. This, of course, proves you're scum, as it would be considered bad Townplay. Or, is it different if you purposefully miss a question versus accidentally miss a question? But, hey, is that poor play or just scumminess?
Do you seriously think I don't consider actively avoiding questions fairly blatantly scummy? My entire point was that NQT didn't choose to press me on these points ever. If as he said, I'm not pressuring him at all why would he choose to ignore this? He's been claiming to "play better" but ignoring the scum-tells I've been dropping for him, refusing to engage with someone who has voted for him. This crosses the line from "meh" town play (see all our lurkers) to activly bad town play.
- You managed to somehow prove she was town through your own fault. Example: SHE HAS THE TOWN WINCON.
This is, by far, the worst mistake you could've made. I'm not even sure if you realize this. The people that are voting you have seen the wincon. They know it's their own. I know it's my own. We're confused as to what you don't see in it. The worst part is that she could've easily asked Vector, "What's the Town wincon?" and gotten it, but, either way, you fell straight into it. You NEVER ask a question like that, one, because it breaks the rules, and two, because if she's your target, you just made yourself look like a fool. NEVER ask a question that only Town should be able to answer and then continue pursuin the target, even if scum could answer the question.
I do realize it now actually. I got overly caught up in my "being clever" and leaving scum-tells that he should have seen to realize that before I pressed post. Hence why I've not unvoted him; from my previous reads I had him painted as scum, but now I've given him an iron-clad alibi. It's up to me to break the alibi, and not let him win on the strength of it alone. Please at the very least tell me that your words of "even if scum could answer the question." mean that you're aware that his claim does not
guarantee his being town.
Your best bet right now is to reexamine your case on NQT. Nothing in it strikes me as scummy. If I can attribute all of it to meh townplay, then it's a terrible case. And if you are still insisting your case when several people have pointed out that it's terrible, then you're going to look foolish when these people vote against you. There are a few reasons to stick to your guns, but there are just as many reasons to drop them, and this is one of the drop it cases.
I have, and I will again when he responds to my accusations. Like I said, seeing as I was the person who gave him the opportunity to give himself a near perfect alibi, it's up to me to at the very least crack it. Or else I could very well have cost you the game, couldn't I have?
Author
Topic: The Lonely Prince: He Who Shall Serve (Read 193149 times)