Long Con wrote: ↑Mon Jan 29, 2024 3:28 pm
Seanzie wrote: ↑Mon Jan 29, 2024 1:14 pmI don't expect people who actually suspect me to give neutral judgements of my arguments.
Why not? You think that the response to every defense a player gives has to be either "ok, I believe you're town" or "I don't believe you, you're a wolf"?
First, your answer set me back on my heels a little. "Am I the asshole here, he said I'm making stuff up instead of reading his words, I am guilty of not fully reading Night 0, maybe I'm being ignorant here." So I didn't feel enthusiastic about pushing harder if that was the case.
You then clarified that you're not saying the two accusations were the same, ok, fair... but you still said one corroborated the other, which implies a level of cohesion to things that I don't think is there.
So yeah, I didn't continue the conversation. There was lots of time left in the day.
Your acknowledgement ended our conversation, presumably in a way you felt satisfied with, but then you kept pushing the idea of scum!me in the thread with information that predated my explanation.
Is that what I did? I didn't keep pushing you at all, why would you say that??
Epignosis said he didn't know why I had voted you. I gave a quick synopsis of why.
You're now claiming your thoughts of me were waning (I actually upon reflection think this is quite a bad look, the "I was faltering on you, but now that you're pushing back, I'm back to it" doesn't look good IMO), but I don't see any indication of reflection from you, just a reluctance to keep actively pushing me while still talking about me to others.
"Indication of reflection"? "reluctance to keep actively pushing me"?? Dude, what are you even talking about, this is not real talk.
So, let's have a real look at this.
I vote you, and say the reasons why. You respond, and I say 'fine'. I don't keep pushing you. I talk about other things. My suspicion wanes a little - maybe I was basing my analysis of falcon off D1 and you were more N0. Maybe we don't view the word "corroborate" the same; maybe I'm being pedantic and I picked up the wrong vibe.
A day later, Epi asks why I voted you. I tell him. You interject with a disparaging metaphor about my reasons.
I take the disparagement as an indicator that you are stressed about my opinion of you, and I let you know. I also tell you my suspicion has waned.
Here's where things get weird. In the same post, you just accused me "you kept pushing the idea of scum!me in the thread" and said I have "a reluctance to keep actively pushing [you]". Neither of those things are true,
and they contradict each other.
I did not keep pushing you in the thread, not because I was "reluctant", but because my suspicion was waning. Like I said. One might even say that a lack of pushing you might be an "indication of reflection" if you think about it.
The initial "I'm curious" line was to bait you into continuing to interact with me, but you didn't bite. Are you always so hands-off with people you suspect?
Ok, I thought that we were interacting at the time of that interaction. If you want to play coy word games, that's fine, but I might not always be in the mood, especially during times like these when you're somewhat frustrating me with the things that you ARE saying plainly.
Am I "hands-off"? I don't know, but I'm always open to understanding more about how I play, so you are welcome to look further into this idea.
The "I continue to find it curious that you aren't curious about what I'm curious about." was both wordplay and a point - you not following up with me after that does not put a good taste in my mouth. I would expect a townie to either tunnel in or show clear reflection and progression, not to feel like they wanted out of the conversation.
Out of the...? I wasn't aware that I gave that impression. I think you should expect Long Con to play like Long Con, and not toss out an arbitrary "No True Scotsman" about what townies do or don't do.
I feel like you wanted me to be a suspect, then when people like Sloonei and TSP weren't really biting, you perhaps "waned" in that you decided I wasn't a viable push, but then when I didn't let your push on me go, you've had to backtrack to pushing it again. Perhaps this lacks a bit of generosity towards a potential town!LC world, but I think this narrative makes sense in a wolf!LC world.
Why Sloonei and TSP? Did I try to get them to vote you?
This last paragraph is goofy. You should have quit while you were ahead, Seanzie, all these words here just made me much more suspicious of you than I was when I put the initial vote on.
Does it corroborate the first view though? "Voting without pushing or real reason" isn't the same as "doesn't interject with pointed, mildly aggressive etc." Right? But you are saying it does, and I just detect some level of fakeness going on here, both from the fact that falcon HAD asked such a question prior to this, and for the dodgy corroboration and general vibe.
