I'm holding off the Ace Emerald stuff for the moment so that I can comment on this argument.
tl;dr I support Celever. The DLL lynch wasn't that suspicious, and I honestly have no idea how it's sparked this monstrosity.
Also, now that I see the votecount,
lynch Obmudd99 for reasons I've stated earlier. Don't want the day to end yet, though. I'm still not suspicious enough of LW to lynch him... tbh they seem to be both town.
Originally, I, like many others, felt that both
LightWolf and
Celever were town. I didn't see anything egregious from either of them, but I thought that it was healthy discussion: it could root out a potential mafia, and it seemed to be big enough that the mafia could get interested. Also, I didn't feel that I was experienced enough to step in at all. To be honest, I still think that LW is unlikely to be mafia, but if I had to choose, I would say that it would be him.
Here's my take on the feud as it unfolded.
Celever's post, that sort of started it all as far as I can tell, tried to lynch DLL (now Tesung) for inactivity. He also mentioned that DLL started a new bandwagon, but acknowledged that that vote was a "troll post" and thus wasn't much of a point against him. LW responded sort of aggressively, noting that he seemed to be doing the same thing he blamed DLL for doing. However, I think this aggressiveness is just a part of LW's playstyle. Nonetheless, I feel that it was obvious that the main reason for Celever's vote of DLL was inactivity, and that he probably didn't intend to keep it until the end.
Celever responded with reasonable logic, saying that it wasn't entirely a serious vote and that he mostly voted for inactivity. I feel that this was a reasonable response, and I don't understand why LW continues to press the point that it was too long. If the question was "Why did you vote DLL?" then sure, "Because he was inactive" would've sufficed, but LW's accusation of hypocrisy warranted a longer response – like the kind that Celever delivered.
The argument then dies down for a little while. In fact, they don't seem very suspicious at all, and the argument seems to have reached a resolution.
After Felony's death, LW votes to lynch Celever, accusing him of making a long post defending his DLL vote (which I already talked about earlier) and using incorrect logic to vote for Felony. Admittedly, some parts of that post are strange, but I get the general idea: Felony was randomly accusing people without much substance to back it up. Celever goes on to make pretty convincing arguments against Felony... if he avoided suspicion because of Felony's "badly phrased attacks," then so be it. LW emphasizes that this was just an opening statement, so whatever then.
LW replies, again focusing on Celever's DLL post. If this post was so suspicious for its ~5-line length, then why wait a couple pages before mentioning it? (Excuse me if this was just because neither of them were on at the time, which is probably the case.)
Celever replies, again after a couple of pages, and this time he takes a different tack. He emphasizes that LW and other experienced players are capable of putting up good facades, and that appearing 'town' doesn't necessarily render LW clean. This was a valid, well-expressed point.
LW proceeds to agree with Celever's basic point, that experienced players can put up facades, but then seems to accuse Celever of what I believe is OMGUS. Perhaps, but LW seems to be a prime example of an experienced player with a facade (Mafia from the Depths seems to be a good example). I think that the point is valid.
Celever acknowledges his mistake in not emphasizing that Walrein isn't necessarily clean either, and restates that his DLL lynch wasn't all that suspicious. While this could be interpreted as backing down, I think that both make pretty valid points. Celever says that the discussion of the DLL lynch should end, which I totally agree with. The post wasn't that long or suspicious.
Celever asks LW to target some more experienced players, while LW says that you have to wait for an experienced player to make a mistake. That makes sense, although you could make the argument on the other side of the coin that inexperienced players make so many mistakes you can't draw good conclusions from them. Celever seems to make this point in response. Also, I'd like to emphasize this:
More experienced people don't make that kind of mistake, they usually slip on the long run by contradicting their past posts or changing their playstyle so there is so little to grab onto.
Celever quoted this as well... by this logic, LW should be our #1 target. However, I still don't think LW's mafia... he should
Anyway, LW responds with a good argument that new mafia players will react differently. I honestly think that it's just a playstyle difference at the moment. He accuses Celever of OMGUS (which I'm presuming is the term similar to an ad hominem argument; excuse me if it isn't)... to be honest I'm not really seeing it. Celever did say that he should have mentioned Walrein as well, and just because somebody is arguing with you doesn't mean that they're focusing on you in an unhealthy manner.
A few pages later, Celever states that he feels that LW was a little bit paranoid with those claims, a sentiment that I agree with. However, he's not too aggressive at all.
And then... LW seems to prove Celever's point with a massive post filled with maniacal laughter and caps lock. LW states that they tunneled each other equally... I'd say that's true, although LW did make more accusations of personal attacks as far as I can tell, which I believe is what Celever was referring to. I don't think the number or volume of posts targeting the other person really applies to what Celever was talking about. I honestly didn't see a whole lot of backing out or passive aggressiveness from Celever.
Then LW emphasizes that people have been ignoring your points... to be honest, I feel that this argument definitely hasn't received enough attention. I'm glad LW pressured us to comment on it. LW also emphasizes that if this was town v town, mafia would've stepped in by now... but by that logic, if it was town v mafia, then a mafia member would probably step in as well. If it's mafia v mafia, then all of the puny villagers have already lost thanks to the mighty powers of the actors Celever and LW.
Then that whole storm of tl;drs... to be honest I feel like I've already made my stance on all the points that they're talking about clear. I've been targeting LW a lot during this post, but like I've mentioned earlier, I feel that both are town. I'm just trying to imagine a mafia player, who has to make sensible posts every time, suddenly creating this massive tl;dr argument out of what seems to be to be nothing... and I just can't imagine the benefit. If I was forced to choose between Celever and LW, LW has been acting more suspicious.
LW, you asked why people who thought this was town v town didn't step in earlier. I didn't feel like this was quite big enough to warrant that, but to be honest I feel like this argument isn't really getting anywhere. I still think this is town v town, and thus I'm asking this argument to stop now.
