Help
Tattersail_, on 22 October 2016 - 05:56 AM, said:
I see your point. Not saying you have the time but could you trim my case so that it would have been more convincing?
Honestly I think activity should be that high when your shooting the shit as it gives you a clearer view of the thread and people in it.
Honestly I think activity should be that high when your shooting the shit as it gives you a clearer view of the thread and people in it.
Yeah, i'm not gonna go through it post-b-post, but general remarks.
imho, your biigest issue was the emphasis of your argument. You turned out to be 100% factually correct, which is fantastic, but the way you presented it made it hard to get on board with you 100%
The reason is: your argument was focused on: "here is incontroversible proof that Serc is symping Aranatha and Mockra"
Not "Mockra is killer"; not "Mockra is Aranatha's partner" but "Mockra is being symped by Serc, who also symped Aranatha"
Bottom line is, EVERY player HATES being a target of a symp case. and here's why.
A makes a case: "X is killer, because Y is symping them". X, whether they are town or killer, are expected to defend. In order to defend, they need to explain Y's actions. Basically, a target in a symp case is going to be pissed off at A, because A is making an accusation by inferring something from behaviour of Y, over which X has no control at any time.
This leaves X with 4 options
1) X can attempt to dismiss the case, hoping the rest of town sees it as non-viable
2) X can attack Y for fake-symping them to set them up for a fall by having someone like A notice and make a case on X
3) X can accuse A of being a scum, purposefully making a case X can't reasonably defend against.
4) X can make a case on Z, that's better than A's case on X, and convince people to vote Z instead.
On some level, all players understand that a case based on symping is unfair towards X, because they don't have the means of defending, other than switching emphasis on someone else. So there's always an element of "but do you have anything that supports that X is acting scummy?" in it. And you didn't have much, because you focused on interactions, rather than my own actions.
Khell actually did a rather good job with that. Although I was fortunate he chose to focus on the play post-reveal, not really asking the question of Why did Gait have so many votes in the first place? , which is where I felt I committed my crucial mistake. The Gait vote was a lazy vote, and, yes, I was totally setting up Lio with it. It might've been fine in regular Day 2, but not on D-day- and I was terrifued of admitting I simply didn't notice it was D-day, becuase I expected Maccy to come down on me for "admitting a mistake" on-thread. Nevertheless, my play post-reveal was sufficiently reactive (frankly, I was scrambling for the 2 and a half hours from when I got on to when we lynched Kruppe) to make him and Nom trust you over me.
But you settled for the "they're both scum" conclusion, and then muddled teh water sufficiently to let Dolmen and me (independently) give off enough of an "Mockra is more innocent than Bendal" impression to Maccy. I genuinely wasn't sure if Serc was a symp or not, so I could not take the chance. I had to play as if he was inno, and I had to appear more innocent than you to him as well.
I know it's a bit of a ramble, but I hope I got the point across- you needed to focus on why Mockra was a killer more than "why was Mockra symped by Serc"
