Gorrad wrote:Nocase's Iso:
0-2: Claims to have a PR, runs with it. I think his PR is not being able to use caps.
reaction test, and wrong.
A reaction test that accomplished nothing but a false start and confusion. Not scummy, but worthless. Unless, of course, you can point out things that came from it?
3-4: RVS. To those who claim there wasn't an RVS, you're full of it.
that vote was not random; chevre and ckd tickled my gut. thanks for the attempt at trivialization, though; i really dig it.
Ah, so you couldn't even bother to post 'gut' as a reason for those. You just jumped on them without a word.
5: More PR bull
more reaction-testing pr bull.
Again, worthless. Did anything come of it?
6: Fluff
nope. it references the nuts reactions to my post restriction claim.
It did not contribute, it had no point, and I doubt even you can frame it as an ATTEMPT to contribute. It doesn't matter what it references, it's fluff.
7-8: Jumps on the gut-Gorrad wagon.
cyberbob and i both found your post scummy. i was the first to vote but good try.
Again, a wagon isn't defined by who votes, it's by the feel of the thing. CB started the movement and you joined it.
9. Fluff
nope. post 50 (yours) was loaded with nauseating rhetoric.
And how does 'lol rhetoric' (your exact phrase) say that? It doesn't invoke any reactions. It doesn't attack me, it doesn't do anything. You stand on the sidelines and make a useless comment.
10. Admits PR was bull
"admits" characterizes it as reluctant or sheepish. it wasn't and i don't know how you could really think it was. i wasn't going to prolong the test indefinitely.
Ok, confesses. States even. Semantics. It was pointless bull.
(Note: To those counting who are saying I had too much fluff, he's has 2/11 posts at this point that actually contribute)
11. "Everyone jump on the gut wagon"
yup. scummy how?
Because you're telling everyone to jump on a wagon that, by definition, has NO BASIS in fact. That's what makes it gut. You're relying on feeling rather than scumtells or other evidence.
12. Jumps to a gut wagon on Runner, asks for clarification regarding "Dutch, are you scum?" post.
no one was voting runner at the time but thanks for once again falsely stating that my vote was not the first on a given player.
I'll admit, that one's my bad. Still, gut. BAD.
13. Defends against SpyreX
are you trying to make a point?
It's always been my belief that scum have more to gain by defending than town. Scum's goal is to stay alive. Town's goal is to lynch scum. Town make logical decisions based on reasoning, even if their reasoning isn't stated (See:DGB) while scum have no reasoning, and have posts that either defend themselves or are votes based on 'gut'.
14. Votes Chevre for Indecisiveness (a fair charge)
aw, thanks for the seal of approval. it means a lot to me.
Sarcasm. That's original!
15. Gut read (again) on Xalxe
again, iioa.
As stated above, gut reads as pretty much your only tell is crazy scummy.
16-17. Immediately jumps to Xalxe as soon as Chevre and Farside start to talk about him.
no, i jumped to xalxe because my read on chevre changed.
Which you state where? I call BS.
18. Asks why Seraphim went through the trouble of color-coordinating Chevre's WoT, then FoS's CKD (following my calling CKD out on his statement)
more iioa. make a goddamn point. there's nothing to indicate that my reestablished suspicion of ckd was strictly bandwagoning on your suspicion of him.
You deny it then? Once more, BS. Give me proof ANYWHERE in your posts of where you expressed suspicion of CKD so that you would fos him at this point. No, it was strictly bandwagoning off me.
19. Explains his vote on Xalxe. Good reasoning. First post of his I like.
thanks! all i ever wanted was to please you!
Once more, awesome sarcasm.
20. Fluff
no. pushing to see how he would respond.
You and your pointless posts that you push as response-fishing. Once more, unless it accomplishes something, it's fluff. You can't just retcon and some that some pointless thing you said was reaction-fishing. Would you believe me if I said my posts at Korlash were reaction fishing? I has as much evidence that they were as you have that these are.
21. Confirms Xalxe-hate.
hey, look, another instance of FAILURE TO MAKE A POINT. i wasn't confirming xalxe-hate; i was confirming the uniqueness of xalxe's scummy attributes.
It's a PBPA. I can't find something scummy in every post you make, though you make it pretty easy for me.
22. List of people he'd vote for. List is 8 people long, 3 of which he hasn't mentioned in any prior posts.
you caught me.
Damn skippy I did.
23. Presses Xalxe lightly.
no, actually, this post is an instance of what we english speakers refer to as ASKING A QUESTION HEHEHAHAHA.
Oooooookaaaaay what's with the laugh? Anyhow. You're pressing him lightly for information by asking him an easy question. There. Better?
24. Agrees with DGB that Farside's reaction is weird, but goes on to say that it IS scummy, whereas DGB said it was not from a scum perspective. Also does so two pages after DGB's comment.
cute. another non-point.
My point is that you misrepped DGB two pages after the statement. The main thing I want to know is why you did so so late?
25. Confirms his Gorrad-hate is gut based, then cops out on explanation by just citing SpyreX
i voiced suspicion of you in the nascency of this game. the hunch stuck and i liked spyrex's case. but you're right. i'll never DARE to appreciate another player's theory again.
That's not the point. The point is you made NO CASE of your own. Pun not intended.
26. And on that note, as soon as I call him out, he votes me! (on gut + SpyreX's case)
the vote immediately followed chevre's wall. the wagon on chevre and chevre's overwhelming towniness were the direct cause of my vote.
So....you unvoted Xalxe...and voted me...because Chevre sounded town? The heck?
27. Tells chevre to vote me "if you value your life". AKA "Hey, want to not get lynched? Move the wagon to this guy."
yes, that's exactly what i was saying. there's nothing remotely anti-town about urging a fellow townie to vote a player who's actually suspicious in order to stay alive.
You were using basically bargaining with Chevre's life to get her to do what you wanted. I would call that pretty bleedin' anti-town.
28. See 25
see 25.
See 25.
29. Votes CKD as he is now "up for grabs". Note that his only reason to suspect at this point that he's stated is back in 18. Again, quick wagoning.
my instinctual suspicion of him accumulated over several of his posts, although it did taper off a little later on.
And you stated this where? This is why you say things. Because otherwise, when you claim you felt them later, you have no evidence to back you up.
30. Says he has "a number of town reads and no terribly strong scum reads" despite the 8-long list earlier of those he'd lynch.
if i had strong scum reads then my list of ideal lynches would be considerably shorter.
So you'd lynch someone without a strong scum read on them? That is what we would call BAD.
31. Addresses things not meant at him, Explains the hop off of me as him thinking I had some town cred (as opposed to Oooh, new wagon- Shiny!). Revotes me.
you seemed to be directing all three at me, but if you'll look again you'll see i was unsure of whether or not you actually were. i revoted you due to a reread of your iso. and to the fact that your recent contributions were garbage.
Which once more, you obviously stated clearly at the time. Why in the nine rings should I believe a thing you are claiming? You revoted me as soon as you thought I was attacking you.
32. Fluff
bullshit, gorrad. you failed to rebut my defenses and i called you out on it. jesus christ.
No, you defended against things that weren't meant towards you. We were not debating at the time.
33. Actually content, isos Runner, Katsuki, IAAU, and werewolf. Suspicion on all but IIAU.
are you trying to insinuate that expressing reasoned suspicion of three players in a large normal is scummy, or are you just posting iioa again?
IIOA. As said, it's a PBPA. That means I put in every post.
34. Lynch list is up to 9.
yup.
One worse than 8.
35. Make that 10. (nearly half the town)
oh, my bad, i don't generate fifteen town reads on day one. i must be scum.
So you're saying that anyone on whom you don't have a town read is a lynchable target? That's not scummy, that's just horrible play!
36-37. Asks for Clarification from DGB. That's reasonable.
do i get a sticker?
Yes. It's a scratch and sniff I stuck to the bottom of the pool.
38. fluff
i really have to wonder whether or not you actually comprehend the words that enter your field of vision. i asked dgb a question about jerbs and in her response she (1) failed to answer and (2) deflected onto another player. i called her out on it. but you're right, of course! how could i not have realized it all along? calling someone out for deflecting is an irrefutable scum tell and i should be lynched for it. WAHOO.
That's not 'calling someone out'. That is, once more, making a smarmy remark from the sidelines to which no one will react and calling it content.
