What I posted in the sign up thread:
What I posted in the previous game:
Which is to say, the sign up thread gimmick was a far more low-effort affair than what I had maintained in the actual game.
Jonny acted like that last game, backing down easily. I get the feeling it's just natural for him.
Correct. When I call out fallacies, I don't use them to say that the arguments made within them are wrong. I establish that by breaking down the reasoning within. I call out and look for fallacies because scum, by necessity, have to employ fallacies on some level, whereas townies should be less inclined to do so. It is not the be all and end all to scum hunting, nor have I suggested as much.
That's nice. Still doesn't change my read though.
I wouldn't say that's necessarily true at all. Scum can make entirely correct arguments, even if they are for the wrong reasons. For example, a scum player can defend a town player who's under pressure but hasn't actually been scummy. They could do this to pocket that town player, or to reduce the negative impact on themselves / their team members when the troubled townie flips.
I mean, I'm not asking for your Mafia philosophy lectures here. It has served me pretty well in my time playing. I never claimed there were no false positives to it, but the liklihood of scum getting to go through a whole game defending under pressure townies only is a pretty slim one, so at some point they'll probably have to defend themselves or defend scum. This is not to say townies cannot commit fallacies either.
If you're going to come at me with Mafia philosophy, don't be surprised if I fire back with the same
I didn't. I explained my scum read of Poyser, which included him employing fallacies. You retorted with "argument from fallacy" fallacy, to which I defended by saying I never claimed the arguments Poyser was making was wrong due to employing a fallacy, but that I believe scum have to use them, and townies are generally less inclined. You then decided I needed to be made aware of specific scenarios where that method would result in a false positive reading. I'm quite aware of all of this, hence why I've never sold it as an absolute sure-fire method.If you're going to come at me with Mafia philosophy, don't be surprised if I fire back with the same
What is this, if not explaining Mafia philosophy?
The argument you say you're making is the opposite of what you're making. You say that "scum commit fallacies", yet by sussing Poyser the point you're actually making is "anyone who commits fallacies is scum", which is wrong.
