I’ve already explained why I think Persus isn’t town. He had no interest in understanding my position behind scum fakeclaiming a daykill, prefering to tell me he thought scum wouldn’t fakeclaim, which was super helpful in showing me how I was wrong. /capital sarcasm
You gave your reasons why you thought it would be beneficial for scum to fakeclaim a daykill. I gave you a list of reasons why they wouldn't.
You did. Then I tried to explain why I disagreed and share my thought process, and you kept restating your list, as though I were a slow child having trouble understanding a simple idea.
I understand your simple idea, and wanted to explore an alternative, but you had no interest in that, nor in the motivation behind it. You apparently think scum are going to conform to the way you think they’re going to act every single time, and never deviate. Optimal play, erry time.
A question for you: consider things from my perspective.
NQT gave me misgivings on D1. He alluded to having information about you, but wouldn’t say what it was, only that he’d reveal it on D2, pinky promise. Red flag number 1, he’s happy to say he has information the town needs, but not share it now.
He engaged in what could be described as standard, optimal play (I hate the term and the concept, but it fits here) on a guilty claim, voting the guilty party. Non-alignment indicative move: town want scum gone, scum don’t want to get caught defending someone they know is actually guilty.
He then votes for the one person who voted the cop with the guilty result after it was shown to be accurate. Another NAI play, easy towncred for scum, as town are curious why someone voted the cop.
A little later he slides that over to a player who has 0 posts. Sensible move... but disappears and leaves it on said player for the remainder of the day. Red flag number 2, activity is not alignment indicative, and this was not a good place to have a vote at the end of the day. Easily explained away as being too busy to change the vote.
D2, he claims he misread his PM, lol that information I had isn’t all that useful, Persus is my BUDDY. Red flag 3, the information that he alluded to on D1 as being useful then turns out to actually not be that useful after all.
He claims killing the scum player on D1. Red flag number 4, in the short-term, a good fakeclaim because it’s unlikely to be disproven even if someone counters it, in the medium-term and beyond, well it’s a power heavy game so he might be trying to draw actions to him to nullify town powers because he has, for example, green goo or a paranoid gun owner role.
How would you approach trying to figure out NQT’s alignment in this instance?
PPE:
Superdorf no I’m saying I find meta-arguments to be bullshit because past performance does not guarantee future results. For example, You’re playing much more cagey in this game than you did in the last, does that mean you must be scum? You argues”d earlier that Kit’s inactivity then active-lurking (apparently dishonest) meant he was likely scum, and you’ve done nothing but active lurk for the entirety of D2 ‘til now, does that mean you must be scum?
How is it audacious to suggest I learn from past experience? Do you make the same mistakes over and over and over, or do you have the common sense to understand that doing something the same way you did before will very likely end up with the same result? Or maybe that’s what I want you to think and I’m doing the same thing in the last game in the hope you think I’m actually clever and woukdn’t do the same thing again.
This is why meta-arguments are stupid.
Why is this even a thing we’re talking about? What have I done in this game specifically that is scummy, anti-town, whatever?
PPE2: well that was a complete waste of my time. I feel so fulfilled in my existence.
