I do this all the time though..? I always am trying to fish out responses. I admit that I do analyse flaws in my arguments and still leave the weak ones in my cases, but this is a technique that I sometimes use to get reactions (this is the "baiting" I refer to). TGK cases were big ones. Though... in those cases TGK flipped town... so maybe you're right in that this technique doesn't work. >_>
Fishing out responses is a bit different. Scouting for poor responses by applying fake pressure is alright in the early game, but actively trying to make a player slip up by giving them an awkward post to respond to is manipulative. I don't think that KX not responding to one or two of your points is scummy as it is something which all players do from time to time if they are awkward points to respond to, or simply because they didn't think they were important to respond to. Personally I think the parts of your case which you are claiming are your strongest points are your weakest. Not playing optimally doesn't mean that the player is scum, and it usually means the inverse. Your case boils down to "with hindsight, this would have been a bit better", and that's not a case. I said this in my last post and you didn't respond to it, even where you addressed me calling your case terrible a bit further down your post -- does this make you scum? Because that's the main reason why you think KX is scum. Maybe I wasn't super clear enough for you but... neither were you.
I disagree that these are "minor flaws". I think that anyone who entertained the thought that Excal slipped after the "slip" was resolved are suspicious. King X's posts seem like the typical scum making paths to jump on/off bandwagons. Scum pushing someone like KX is subjective.
When exactly was the slip resolved? Like ngl, I stayed away from everything to do with Excal because it was a confusing mess of a non-case. There wasn't a single moment in time where the case was "resolved", and it wouldn't surprise me if KX was simply confused.
But either way, this is once again "with hindsight, that post wasn't the best use of time". So? Not playing optimally isn't grounds for a lynch.
And town keep their options open too, it's not just a scum thing to do. KX is always somewhat enigmatic in this regard.
And I wouldn't say it's subjective so much as anecdotal. However, anecdotal evidence shouldn't be ignored in this game, unlike most aspects of life.
Don't hate the messenger! :U Everyone was thinking it... your case got no support.
If you're expecting me to defend my case from being named "terrible", I really can't if there isn't reasons. And, well, you can see above for my response to me being scummy/manipulative.
I provided reasoning in the post you quoted and you ignored it.
..
..
..
..
bb is scum confirmed guys lynch him.
Seriously, the main part of my post is that your case boils down to "his play wasn't optimal" as well as you being manipulative with how you framed your case. You didn't answer one of the main points of my post, therefore you are scum, yes? That's your logic on KX, so it should work here too.
The pressure hasn't finished yet - I still haven't got the response for the upper section of my case that I need.
What are you even holding out on now? The stuff about Excal? The part of your case is the worst part. There is no fathomable response, and I don't know what you're expecting from him.
Maybe... but this doesn't explain why King X was vocal on his doubts and not his suspicions pre-claim.
Was he actually posting in this time, though? You're acting like the guy on snapchat who gets annoyed at someone for ignoring them when they haven't even opened their snap -- I'm pretty sure he just wasn't around, or that he didn't see a major reason to fill us in on his suspicions. It's fair enough.
This wasn't my intention - I wasn't trying to make anything appear stronger or weaker (it shouldn't look like that in my original case) - King X responded to the weak stuff and neglected the strong stuff, which is what I think is scummy.
But your strong stuff appeared to be your weaker stuff. If KX didn't have enough time and/or willpower to respond to everything in your post, I would have also responded to the stuff he did. I don't think there is a response he can give about Excal because he didn't do anything wrong in the situation.
Then may I ask you
@Celever, what exactly are you referring to when you are talking about baiting KX? If it is what I said, then could you give an example from bbninjas posts that proves his intention to make the smaller points more important than his main point?
bb is correct. Which is even worse, because it shows he consciously did it.
Btw, I finished rereading the whole thing about Excal and I now understand that there are high chanses that either (if not both) Jesi or Excal is scum. Unless I am missing something , Excal explained that Jesi told him to contribute and vote, but Jesi stated earlier that she didn't talk with her, and even voted for Excal. So.. someone is lying.
I don't think we can read into what either of them said too much. They definitely talked outside of the thread -- Excal wouldn't lie about that and the emotion in her posts was genuine -- so Jesi is the liar. Probably because she's new and didn't want to get into trouble for breaking the main rule of the game.
I don't know why.
