I think Glooble is scum.
vote: GloobleI have been thinking this for a while but I didn't want to say it because I know some people assign a lot of weight to our reads on each other. I would ask you to pay attention to the case itself rather than that.
So this is more or less all of Glooble's posts and why they make him scummy. There are two parts to the case, plus a random scumtell.
1) He has played it as safe as one possibly could in the duel conversation, up until the point where having a strong opinion could actually help scum, at which point he developed one.
2) His case-making has been tentative, perfunctory, and unconvincing. His attempts at scumhunting read performative, and I think he's better than that when he's actually trying.
I'm neither pro-duel nor anti-duel. I will vote for a duel if I think it has a reasonably good chance of containing scum, and I will vote against a duel if it's more likely to me that both players are town. I'm not sure I see the advantage of having a default preference for duel or no duel.
This is exactly how scum positions themselves if they want to be safe however they vote. And it has the advantage of looking like a very sensible, towny position and staying neutral in the back and forth.
vote: DatSwan
Hard to articulate exactly why but I’m getting a strong scum vibe off of his analysis posts. I’m trying to trust my gut more.
clip -- Glooble's Swan case -- clip
These two posts, together and individually, just really feel to me like someone who is trying to make a case, not someone who is trying to determine who scum is. It feels like the kind of case-making that you do when you know you’re not actually scumhunting. The fact that he states the vibe first and then makes the case further reinforces the idea that he wasn't so much looking for scum as choosing a person then building a case on them.
Well that was fun while it lasted. I now think DatSwan is town.
vote: pubby I guess?
And he immediately backs off the case when it fails to gain traction.
If we’re ignoring MiX’s set order I’ll go ahead and say I voted no. I’m townreading ADK, e hadn’t really said enough to give me a read one way or the other, and I honestly didn’t think the power role gained would have been particularly useful on night one, especially with information twisted as it would have been by the duel.
Safe vote explanation, set up by his prior post.
MiX: doesn’t want to lynch e by default
Also MiX: wants to lynch e the regular way instead
Well then I guess ADK's also scum for doing the same thing... I would rather have a real day than a random lynch (E loses the duel everytime anyway) and a one-shot PR.
Meh. That's such a non-post.
I wasn’t calling you scummy for it. Sorry if it came off that way. I was just being flip.
This is actually the post that made me start looking at Glooble. Overly-apologetic/defensive is my top scumtell, though I know not everyone’s a fan.
Also for now I want to Vote: ADK
My theory being that if there's a duel with a scum on it, then that's 50/50 that the scum does, compared to 3/14 with no duel
So in my mind, the no duel makes it slightly more likely that one of the duellers were scum. And as I'm agreeing more with the e logic, ADK seems like a better vote
What you're missing is the fact that the scum in this scenario have two people who they know will vote for their opponent if necessary. That makes getting involved in the duel a lot safer for them. I think if I were scum I would vote for the duel unless the townie I was up against had a ton of towncred. And frankly, neither ADK nor e had that amount of towncred going into this vote.
This isn’t scummy in and of itself, but if scum voted no, it behooves scum to get town looking at claimed yes-voters.