You're dodging all of the questions again. Do you have any intention of responding to the questions I'm asking, rather than the questions you'd like to answer?
Here's my attempt on that.
Nonetheless, I maintain that attempting to stay alive while dodging issues related to staying alive to the point where it interferes with your wincon is a Bad Thing.
"I am scum because I voted to lynch somebody rather than die myself."
No. I had no way of knowing what alignment he was, and spoiler alert: turned out to not be townie.
Right, there's exactly the problem. You had no way of knowing what their alignment was. You didn't suspect them. It is a spoiler to mention that they weren't town.
You've displayed nothing but the most contemptible, cowardly, self-preserving terror, both in actual actions and hypothetical responses. I even went so far as to ask if you'd intentionally mislynch a townie because they suspected you, and you brushed past it to carry on about how you had no choice.
So apparently the answer is yes, you would intentionally mislynch a townie if they suspected you, simply because you don't want to die yourself. You're not scum because you "voted to lynch somebody rather than die yourself." You're scum because you have no regard whatsoever for your supposed faction, and instead nothing but unadulterated intention to personally survive at any cost.
Sorry? Where did you get that conclusion from?
From asking you about it explicitly, asking about similar issues repeatedly, and getting the same generic semi-relevant BUT I HAVE TO LIVE! response each time. Presumably if this was not the case, you would have at some point addressed or implied it in some way, rather than dodging the specifics to reaffirm the principle.
You have not.
I would not act in that way in every hypothetical situation. I stand by my decision to lynch Shakerag instead of myself on the conditional that I didn't know his alignment (I did not at the time)- such that I could've been lynching a townie or an anti-town. This is different in my mind to saying that I would lynch
anybody to save myself. I would lynch an unknown, but if it was L-1 for both me and a confirmed townie, I would only choose to lynch them if I had some sort of hail mary one-shot that I was sure would kill the scum.
I was and am answering your questions about my decision to lynch Shakerag.
You responded to my asking flabort for clarification about this own role by pre-emptively reminding me that he could lie about it and asking me to consider your assumptions instead. That's not asking me to consider your words in a reasonable manner. That's more of the blind panic that's convinced me that there's no chance in hell you're town.
If Webadict really has confirmed whatever the hell it is you were saying about Flabort's abilities (he could've lynched two people with it, iirc, which was not what you were saying initially,) congratulations- I assumed something incorrectly about a power that Flabort himself didn't know how to use.
Alright then, let's go piece by piece:
1. You ask me why you're more suspicious for pulling the trigger than flabort is for pulling back the hammer
2. I explain that flabort intentionally set it up so that there was room for discussion, rather than panicking fully
3. You assert that he wasn't holding back, just unable to go all the way
4. I admit that's a potentially valid point, and ask flabort about it
5. Before he even has a chance to answer, you explain that:
a. He might lie about it to save himself
b. Your conclusion is drawn from his prior explanations and observed results
c. No, your version isn't perfect, but you'd like me to consider your version rather than immediately discounting it and accepting flabort's
5.a and 5.b are obvious. There was no particular reason to bring them up except to pre-emptively silence flabort. 5.c sounds downright desperate; you're explicitly asking me to believe you and not flabort before he's even had a chance to answer, and thus before there were any merits to make that call on.
That's all that's absolutely necessary for explaining the connection, but let's keep going anyway:
6. I point out that you're no less likely to lie to save your own skin than flabort is, and that you're paranoid about it enough to try to stop me from asking him about it in the first place
7. You streamline the above into "You want me to believe you, therefore you're scum," accuse me of tunneling, and claim that you just want me to consider your points; despite the fact that the actual quote explicitly mentioned the qualities of your desire for me to believe you and the response didn't, meaning it glossed over the actual point to restate your thesis. Again.
8. I restate the exact issues mentioned
9. You confess bafflement as to what I'm even talking about
Is it now clear what I was talking about, how it relates to what you said, why I think you're scum for saying it, and why I think you're scum for glossing over, ignoring, and/or dodging all conversation related to it?
Sure. I understand how this miscommunication arose.
When I 'panicked' about you asking Flabort (because if it turns out Flabort could've killed both of us, this would've lead to me being lynched or something in your head?), here's what happened:
1) I felt you were dismissing what I said out of hand about the possiblity of Flabort not being able to.
2) You also asked Flabort about it.
I was irritated because I felt that you dismissed what I said very casually- It seemed you were saying "Here's your lie, and now Flabort will give us the truth!"
I wanted to show that I wasn't lying intentionally or anything (It was an estimated guess), and I'd appreciate you taking it a bit more seriously.
In response to 2 in your timeline (Flabort set up the lynch to promote discussion): Flabort himself said that he set up the lynch so he wouldn't have to take responsibility for it, and the suspicion would be cast upon the person who chose to hammer. I don't think anybody else has the illusion that every single person active would've been able to withhold the temptation of instantly lynching somebody, given third parties, scum, etc. My move was panicky, I don't think I've denied that- I still see Flabort setting up the situation as much more panicky!
Yep, sure, just completely change your tune as soon as your scumbuddy comes into the question. I should jump at the ability to be lynched by the combined efforts of precisely two people, but for a now confirmed townie to die having listed people he was certain as scum and third party? No, no, that's stupid, that wouldn't help town at all!
You should! Just like flabort should jump at the chance to be a juicy, convenient wagon. See how much we're learning from who is and isn't on him and why? Marvelous; much better than him quickending the day because he's scared.
Of course, that's different from hammering yourself or being ambivalent about it to prove a point, in either case.
Okay- I'm sure Flabort is very glad to be dead now that he is. Nevermind that his lynch wasn't really that good for town, and it's rather hard to determine who (if any) of the people voting him were scum, given how legitimately suspicious he was behaving.
Also: Flabort didn't try to die! Neither did I.
Hyperbole aside, you've undeniably tried to use knowledge of Shakerag's alignment to justify your actions multiple times. I explain above why that's so scummy, you're free to address that any time now. Or you could dodge the issue entirely to complain about how you don't care for my tone, I guess.
I haven't used it as justification (I don't think? You will undoubtedly go through my posts to find any proof of me doing so, and I would appreciate that!)- I've been pretty glad he died, though. Having no information from flips would be pretty unhelpful to town, plus the fact that he wanted us all to die.
If you're just going to keep attacking my character rather than what I've done (or continually misrepresent what happened), we're done, Irony Owl. You're not going to convince me to stop voting for Flabort, whatever strange reason it is you don't want him to be lynched I do not care about- he's scum, or at least anti-town.
Quote one instance where I've attacked your character as it didn't relate explicitly to your actions after repeated attempts to discern the intent behind your actions. Alternatively, quote one instance where I've misrepresented what happened. Notice I said "quote," not "sarcastically pass off the gist of kind of what was more or less involved."
Also, this sounds like you know I'm not scum.
You've displayed nothing but the most contemptible, cowardly, self-preserving terror
Here's you attacking my character.
I don't know you're not scum- I was definitely beginning to think you were third party, though.
IronyOwl, are you a lyncher?
Author
Topic: BYOR 13 - Game Over: Thirteen (Read 259276 times)