Hoo boy.
See: 'not falling for that trap', the analysis of both your actions, which totally did happen (ex: here)
You think not falling for the most obvious trap in the world is a scum tell? You don't need to be scum level defensive to notice where that one could have gone.
Not that he didn't fall for it, but that he was worried about falling for it.
Ok, did not realise how new Orangebottle was. To a degree, then, his actions become more understandable. On the other hand, I do not get the impression that he is an idiot. Is it that hard to just ignore the aggravating nature of your questions, if you know that there is nothing to be found by them? I pose that it is not.
But there was something to be found. Firstly, it was a chance to gauge Orange, and taking skill level into account, for what were a rather strange string of questions, he didn't do too badly. A mistake or two, but few people will get through a game making not a single mistake. But more importantly, it was so that I could see who would jump on the bandwagon, and especially why.
In your eyes, perhaps, he didn't do too badly. I disagree. Admittedly, I had assumed that he was more experienced, which made it seem stranger than it seemed to you.
Parroted is such a negative term, but call it what you will. How is that worrying? You make a good point, I agree with you. Calling it stolen reasoning makes it sound like you don't want anyone to agree with you.
And honestly, is one random vote and one pressure vote a bandwagon? I think I might say that I am the only person voting for Orangebottle who actually intends to see him lynched.
It is my point, I'll assess how valid it is.
What? No. It was your point, and you are free to assess its validity on your own, but I am perfectly entitled to find it more or less valid than you do. You do not have exclusive rights to the argument 'Orangebottle is scum because he was overly defensive during the RVS' just because you said it first.
It is worrying because it is something scum could do to look like they are contributing, while just following somebody around. Townies don't follow people around because they don't know who the scum are. Anyway, I said Orange made a mistake, but did I ever say he should hang for it? Your extrapolating my argument, not just agreeing.
...wut
No, you never said he should hang for it. Clearly you also never thought he should hang for it.
But, unlike you are suggesting, I am not hanging on your every word, Sir Max. I am indeed capable of taking your argument and carrying it further. You never said he should hang for it, but I did. Hence my vote.
One random vote, one that could or could not have been serious, and a barrel load of questions that from anybody else would almost certainly come with a vote. But the point is that scum like to find the bandwagon fast, and with at least two players on Orange's case, he was already a good target.
I disagree. To expect random votes, or even RVS pressure votes, to stay on someone until the lynch (without a change in reason), would be extremely foolish. Do I strike you for a fool, Max?
Are we allowed to use evidence from other(ongoing) games? If so, I have some damning shit:
-Ah. Overdefending. Accusation of last resort for weak attacks. However, a word of advice:
OVERDEFENDING.
IS.
A FALLACY.
'Overdefending' is not a scumtell. Being able to explain your actions in meticulous detail just means that you had a good reason for performing said actions. Pre-emptively explaining your actions saves people time. If the action has no reason/a stupid reason, it cannot be explained.
from
here, I couldn't quote it properly because the thread is locked.
Why would you then proceed to try and use overdefending to get me lynched?
Hmm. Well, what's done is done and so forth.
Why 'Overdefending is a fallacy' does not apply here:
There was no reason to defend yourself seriously. An 'overly' zealous defence in the face of moderate to heavy pressure is not a scumtell, at least not intrinsically. Your actions were in response to silly RVS questions (even if max claims otherwise I maintain that they were silly), which shouldn't have offered any pressure at all.
@NUKE:
I'm just wondering what made you jump to "Orangebottle is scum!" rather than "Orangebottle is new!" since both are reasonable explainations for the behavior.
This one, specifically. Although I know the answer, so I guess it matters more what makes you still think this now.
Ok. The reason I jumped to the conclusion "Orangebottle is scum!", rather than "Orangebottle is new!" is that I was not aware of how new Orangebottle was, thus eliminating the second option.
The reason I maintain my vote on Orangebottle now is because whilst it is possible that his actions stemmed from inexperience, the possibility remains that they stemmed from him being scum instead. Also, he asked me to, and I have no better targets. Then again, this path grows cold, which is why I am trying to get some of the lurkers to come the fudge out and play the damn game.
Darvi: Who do you think is right in the debate NUKE VS. Orange, and why?
TolyK: Same question.
Wow, this is the most thought-out and the most sensible line of questioning ever! Don't you have any better way of scumhunting than asking 'do you think I'm scum?'?
Ok, see, this is not helpful. Why is it lazy, why is it useless? You can't just say these things with no basis. I pose that, while it was a line of questioning that lay rather close to hand, it is not useless at all. I
demand that you explain why you think it is lazy and useless.
No offence, guy, but I don't like you.
And I hate you, your kin up to your grand-grandfathers and your dog. Let's not bring personal dislikes in here.
Not to derail things, but why don't you like me? I dislike the way you play, as I find it simplistic and inflammatory. What is it about me that you don't like?
1)Please try to avoid directly referring to ongoing games. Bit of a faux-pas.
It's amazingly easy to copy moderator's explanations/warnings, isn't it?
I was not aware that this was in the moderators warnings. If it was, then why the heck did you think it was ok to do it anyway?
3)Wait, what? You are calling me using ALLCAPS a scumtell now? Guy, seriously. It is a thing I do. How is it scummy?
Because that implies you can't keep calm demeanor, ergo you're deeply touched by accusations directed at you, ergo you're scum.
Demeanour? Town shouldn't have a demeanour. Of course, this is an unattainable ideal, but for the most part I write how I feel. And when I feel angry, due to stupidity on the part of others, I find it useful to express this through the medium of ALLCAPS, in the hope that they will realise their foolishness.
4)Why is my case on Orange bullshit? Tell me.
...you sure like forcing people to waste walls of text and tons of time on you, don't you?... Fine, whatever.
Woah, four lines! I can see you went all out on this one! No. No, no, no. You are berating me for asking you TO PLAY THE GAME. You cannot get away, as town or scum, with just saying things and never explaining them. If you want to scumhunt someone, you need to put some effort into it.
Because in a stunning display of hipocrisy you accused him of feeling pressured by Max's questions DESPITE INSANELr=NY OVERREEACTING YOURSELF!!!
1)Typos. Say what you like about ALLCAPS, at least I have enough of a 'calm demeanour' to hit the right keys.
2)Insanely overreacting to what, exactly?
Because you later explained to Max how Orangebottle was supposed to react to his questions.
See above: Why am I not allowed to do this? I can interpret Max's questions, and the reactions to them, however I please, surely?
Because your primary case on him, it seems, is that he defended the RVS which OBVIOUSLY IS SO FUCKING INTOLERABLE THAT IT'S WORTH A VOTE!!!!!!!
1)Say what you like about ALLCAPS, but hot damn son, that's seven exclamation marks you got there. You trolling me with this, or what?
2)That is indeed one way of describing my case. You still haven't explained
why this is bullshit.
Because... oh wait, that's your entire case. And every single point of it is bullshit.
I still don't quite understand
why its bullshit.
woah missed this one. i need sleep, but here is this at least for now:
TolyK: Same question. (Who do you think is right in the debate NUKE VS. Orange, and why?)
It's hard to tell. Orange is pushing you well, but you seem to be holding ground mostly (except for these... "slips" in trying to show *you're* town by means other than asking and answering questions... kinda like Dariush pointed out). Orange is either a good scumhunter, or a good mimicker. You are kinda desperate to prove you're town and he's scum. I'm... not sure here. You've slipped more, but... eh.
Also I realized my vote is still my random one - Unvote.
Tomorrow morning (for me) expect some nitpicking of other posts. I've started today, but it... sucks to be honest. 
...eh
So in conclusion, you don't know. Ok, not the most interesting response, but whatever. Anxiously awaiting more content.
Darvi: Where you at?
Simple: Who do you think is right in the debate NUKE VS. Orange, and why?
Author
Topic: Roguelike Mafia 3 - Rise of the Jewel [Game Over] (Read 114220 times)