Rise of The Snake Cult [Concluded]

[SeveringViper]

A case that was much heavier on the rhetoric than the substance. And your switch to GK now shows you had no reason not to follow Raith's case in the first place.

Makes me wonder if you went for Zain because you didn't want to tie yourself too closely to Raith (who still hasn't given me that reads list, btw).

Oh, you're trying that now? Tell me exactly where and how my case lacks substance. So? I had no reason to vote along with him either, GK had already gotten a few votes and I wanted to bring another suspect into view. And also, if I was scum, why wouldn't I have just followed Raith instead of calling attention to myself by suddenly pushing a case of my own? Even if you say I was trying to protect GK, it was clear there was little chance of that, why would I risk myself?

That assumes I have ties to Raith I would be worried about. Where are they, then?

[SeveringViper]

Oh, and...

I like your analysis. I will vote: Zain

....Nobody was going after Zain when you posted that? Whose analysis are you talking about? Night's, in which he claimed to read Zain as (confused) town?

I would like an answer about this @Jarema;

[Winston Hughes]

Oh, you're trying that now? Tell me exactly where and how my case lacks substance.

The sole point of substance I can see is that Zain has been inconsistent in his attitude to activity (something I would take as null at worst - in my experience, scum are more concerned with looking consistent than townies are).

Seems like everything else you posted (including the spoiler tags) was just trying to make that look a more meaningful case than it was.

So? I had no reason to vote along with him either, GK had already gotten a few votes and I wanted to bring another suspect into view.

And also, if I was scum, why wouldn't I have just followed Raith instead of calling attention to myself by suddenly pushing a case of my own? Even if you say I was trying to protect GK, it was clear there was little chance of that, why would I risk myself?

That assumes I have ties to Raith I would be worried about. Where are they, then?

As with everything you've said today, this all reads like you searching for an out, looking for details in the case against you that can be attacked using rhetoric and WIFOM. Maybe this has worked for you in the past - I've certainly seen others escape the noose playing like that - but there's nothing townie about it in my book.

As for the Raith connection, that was just me thinking out loud. Both of you are on my suspect list, Raith's case on GK could be seen as a response to your being the default lynch today, and I know that scum tend to worry about acting in too concerted a manner. Since I'm not rating my life expectancy so highly at this stage, I figured it wise to give voice to this thought.

[SeveringViper]

The sole point of substance I can see is that Zain has been inconsistent in his attitude to activity (something I would take as null at worst - in my experience, scum are more concerned with looking consistent than townies are).

It's more than that. He was inconsistent in the reasons he wanted to lynch people, and in a strange way, going from voting someone for inactivity early to claiming activity is a easy way for scum to hide later (when it actually would be the other way around, scum find it easier to be active early when there's less they have to worry about and would want to try and slow down as the game goes on to avoid slipping up). He says he'll ignore me for having little to analyze, then goes back and votes me for having little. And there's also how in between, he voted Al on "instinct", after making a point of suggesting activity could be a scum tactic. Now look who's one of the three highest posters, behind Scarlett (a newcomer who he might not see as a threat) and Barto, who was scum? So it's not just his changing attitude to inactivity, but that it looks like excuses for how he wants to vote.

Seems like everything else you posted (including the spoiler tags) was just trying to make that look a more meaningful case than it was.

As with everything you've said today, this all reads like you searching for an out, looking for details in the case against you that can be attacked using rhetoric and WIFOM. Maybe this has worked for you in the past - I've certainly seen others escape the noose playing like that - but there's nothing townie about it in my book.

As for the Raith connection, that was just me thinking out loud. Both of you are on my suspect list, Raith's case on GK could be seen as a response to your being the default lynch today, and I know that scum tend to worry about acting in too concerted a manner. Since I'm not rating my life expectancy so highly at this stage, I figured it wise to give voice to this thought.

Well, yes, everything in there was part of building a meaningful case. Now that I've explained it a little more (hopefully), do you still think it was inflated? (And the spoiler tags were to make it look meaningful, really? Would you rather it have been a open wall of text?)

And yes, I'm attacking the arguments against me, I'm not just going to roll over and die when every person counts, even now, as we don't know how many scum are left or what they can do. And everything I've said has some reasoning behind it. What you quote and describe as WIFOM are statements of what I was thinking and what I would logically do as scum. Two scum are dead, and a 3p/scum as well, does it make any sense for the surviving scum to risk themselves? If anything, you're relying on rhetoric, as I had to ask you to provide your refutation of my case. And now you did, and I countered. Your move?

So you think Raith brought up the GK case to take the attention off me? Note, however, that he was pushing GK before this day even started. But yes, scum don't want to appear too close in thought, yet that isn't the case. Raith provided reasoning that I could simply have agreed with and voted by if my concern was protecting myself.

[Winston Hughes]

Well, yes, everything in there was part of building a meaningful case. Now that I've explained it a little more (hopefully), do you still think it was inflated? (And the spoiler tags were to make it look meaningful, really? Would you rather it have been a open wall of text?)

Still boils down to him being inconsistent, which is not something I see as a scumtell. It is, however, something I've noticed scum tend to pick up on when looking for a patsy to mislynch. Townies can also make that kind of case, obviously. But given the timing and the situation (and my estimation of your abilities), the way the case was presented is not something I'm going to dismiss as a point against you.

And yes, I'm attacking the arguments against me, I'm not just going to roll over and die when every person counts, even now, as we don't know how many scum are left or what they can do. And everything I've said has some reasoning behind it. What you quote and describe as WIFOM are statements of what I was thinking and what I would logically do as scum. Two scum are dead, and a 3p/scum as well, does it make any sense for the surviving scum to risk themselves?

What risk? You were already catching votes, and you'd surely have known that simply jumping on the first counter-wagon to appear would not have made you look any less suspicious.

If anything, you're relying on rhetoric, as I had to ask you to provide your refutation of my case. And now you did, and I countered.Your move?

I've not been trying to persuade others to lynch you, if that's what you're suggesting. If I wanted to, I'm pretty confident I could've dropped a case which would have done exactly that. But it wouldn't have been an entirely honest case. It would've been fluffed up and made to look like more than it was. It would have meant pretending to be more sure than I was. And the same is true now. I could paint you up much scummier than I have been, but the fact is that you've preserved a good deal of doubt in my mind about whether or not you really are a wrong-un.

Nevertheless, and despite having narrowed the margin on GK, you're still my top pick as scum for two reasons. Firstly, because you've only given me cause for doubt after starting to address me directly. Secondly, because I'm pretty sure you're good enough to make these plays as scum.

[SeveringViper]

Still boils down to him being inconsistent, which is not something I see as a scumtell. It is, however, something I've noticed scum tend to pick up on when looking for a patsy to mislynch. Townies can also make that kind of case, obviously. But given the timing and the situation (and my estimation of your abilities), the way the case was presented is not something I'm going to dismiss as a point against you.

I see. Any argument can be boiled down to its base idea, I must note.

What risk? You were already catching votes, and you'd surely have known that simply jumping on the first counter-wagon to appear would not have made you look any less suspicious.

I believe I addressed this. At the point I made that post, I was far from the sure lynch from that day due to that counter-wagon. And I simply wouldn't be jumping on a wagon, there was a case presented which I could have easily agreed with as scum rather than entering the spotlight as I did.

I've not been trying to persuade others to lynch you, if that's what you're suggesting. If I wanted to, I'm pretty confident I could've dropped a case which would have done exactly that. But it wouldn't have been an entirely honest case. It would've been fluffed up and made to look like more than it was. It would have meant pretending to be more sure than I was. And the same is true now. I could paint you up much scummier than I have been, but the fact is that you've preserved a good deal of doubt in my mind about whether or not you really are a wrong-un.

I wasn't, I was saying that in your challenging me, you were using rhetoric until I drew out the reasoning you had. Fair enough, then.

Nevertheless, and despite having narrowed the margin on GK, you're still my top pick as scum for two reasons. Firstly, because you've only given me cause for doubt after starting to address me directly. Secondly, because I'm pretty sure you're good enough to make these plays as scum.

1. Alright, I see we've gone as far as we can. 2. Heh, I'll take that as a compliment. I can only ask that you reconsider before you continue pushing this.

[Winston Hughes]

That's more like it. Now you're playing me. If scum, you've got game. The problem, for both of us if you are town, is that I suspect you've got that kind of game as scum. Right now, your best bet for reducing my suspicions is to show me some townie mindset on something other than your own situation.

Even if GK is scum, there's no chance he's the last. Who else would you pick, and why?

I see. Any argument can be boiled down to its base idea, I must note.

Some arguments can. Whether or not they are good arguments depends on whether or not the base idea is any good. And an argument based on one weak idea, dressed up as if it's more than that, is a pretty typical scum device.

[SeveringViper]

That's more like it. Now you're playing me. If scum, you've got game. The problem, for both of us if you are town, is that I suspect you've got that kind of game as scum. Right now, your best bet for reducing my suspicions is to show me some townie mindset on something other than your own situation.

Even if GK is scum, there's no chance he's the last. Who else would you pick, and why?

Some arguments can. Whether or not they are good arguments depends on whether or not the base idea is any good. And an argument based on one weak idea, dressed up as if it's more than that, is a pretty typical scum device.

I've already shown I'd have Zain lynched, and I was ready to return to that next. If Zain flips scum, I would look at Nightbringer next, as I get the sense of a connection. As of now, the lynch will be on GK. If he flips scum, good, Raith is in a pretty good position. If not, I'll be looking at his case again, but similar to something you mentioned, being wrong is something town might do as well. And Jarema hasn't impressed me with his posts today. That's where I stand.

I see. I agree my base point of his inconsistency isn't enough to make a case from, but the argument I built on it is. And that's my point, by boiling it down to its base, you strip it of its strength and meaning.