So you're saying only scum make mistakes?ryan wrote:This doesn't make it any less scummy.Wickedestjr wrote: Yes. I made a mistake and I apologized and unvoted for it. What's wrong with that?
Again, nobody has told me what the flaws were in my defense for this contradiction. How the heck am I supposed to defend myself if people just state that my points are wrong without giving reasons. It's stupid.ryan wrote:When you contradicted yourself. He makes a post with two quotes, both from you, both very contradictory. The post speaks for itself.Wickedestjr wrote: What huge point did xRx notice? The quote of mine that you quoted afterwards had nothing to do with xRx. It was a response to NHT. Please explain this once more.
Okay, which of these bandwagons do you think you would have been on, had you played the whole game;ryan wrote:Isn't it pretty obvious? If you agree with one side of the argument, you tend to disagree with the other. Thus, if NHT and CDB are in argument, and I agree with CDB, I disagree with NHT. Not that hard.Wickedestjr wrote:
Well, most of your points have been in agreement with the majority of the town. Are there any things that you disagree with that most of the town agrees about?
CB bandwagon
reckoner bandwagon
If you were another player would you have been on the wolf wagon?
I was considering the fact that some players might be bussing, but it didn't look to me like any of them were.ryan wrote:I know a decent number of people do this, but making scumbuddies and scumpairings on D1, in my opinion, is a strictly anti-town thing to do. Not only is it D1, but scum have the opportunity to buss, defend, attack whomever they want, and have inside knowledge on who is scum and who is town. I also see it to be a form of tunnelling, because many people get hooked on those scumbuddies, and if Lobster turns up as town then that person is biased towards the other two players because of the flip of another, which should never happen D1.Wickedestjr wrote: Overall, I have a feeling that lobster is scum and his scumbuddies are NHT and CB. I think this because lobster hesitated to vote for CB and gave an FoS to NHT when he wasn't voting anybody else. Lobster and NHT were also on three of the bandwagons. I think we should lynch lobster because it will tell us about CB and NHT more than a CB or NHT lynch would.
Personally, DRK, I don't know who I feel may be lying about their claims. Both have made adequate responses. Both used flavour from their role PMs. Initially it was gut that one of them was lying, but the more I think about it the more I feel as though both are telling the truth. It's an interesting predicament we are in with two PR claims so far. Suffice to say, although I feel neither of them are worthy of a vote at this stage, doesn't mean I don't find them off the hook, so to speak.
NHT - Mentioning insane cop? In a mini? And you are using it as a possible reason to still be voting CoCo? REALLY? What of Coco's didn't makes sense? Your post where you vote Coco is WAY too vague to be construed as anything of a logical argument. Why do you find Qax scummy again?
What are you trying to prove from Wicked's meta thing? That he is playing to his meta? What was his role in the other games?
Well that answers my question, and makes NHT even more scummier. Using an ongoing game, where you don't know someone's alignment, and saying he is posting similar to that game DOES us absolutely no good and it null-information, not to mention it's an ongoing game.[/quote]ryan wrote:[quote="Wickedestjr] Oh and just warning you, that is an ongoing game so you shouldn't be talking about it.
I don't have any finished games on this site, but when I do, I'll tell you, or I'll say so in my sig, so that you guys can use it for reference
I thought I had evidence of NHT being scum. When I started looking for my evidence, I realized NHT hadn't been on many bandwagons, so I unvoted.ryan wrote:You said you had evidence of NHT being scummy, then dropped it, essentially proving you were concocting an argument.
So just because something seems scummy to me, I should ignore it?ryan wrote:Your petty attack on my accordance with other people's posts, and saying it's a scumtell.
What is strawman?ryan wrote:Your attempt in 624 to strawman my responses and make them seem petty and that I simply think "See his reasons" is relevant in all cases.
I was not sure how much information we could know about xRx's decision.ryan wrote:Your rolefishing.
When did I say this?ryan wrote:Your insistence that apologizing for bad play and/or acknowledging it post factum makes it less scummy.
What gave you this idea? I didn't say that lobster wasn't scummy any more, but CB was scummier.ryan wrote:You use something as a case against lobster, then say that it isn't scummy.
Just because I'm in agreement with a player about something doesn't mean they're not scum. In that case, there aren't any scum in this game. We don't keep people alive because they make lots of good points. It doesn't make a difference how many good points they make. What matters is how scummy they act regardless.ryan wrote:You agree with someone in their PBPA, but vote them.
Well, I didn't.ryan wrote:I find the cases on CB to be extremely weak (because he was absent? RVS bs? Really?)CB's most recent response (743) gives a very pro-town vibe - no hostility, just straight response.
What the heck? C_o is hardly ever around and doesn't post much when he is. I was gone for three days, and apart from those three days, my posts have contained much more content than C_o's. It was not an OMGUS vote.ryan wrote:You OMGUS vote C_O for not being around, when you were gone for three days.
[/quote]ryan wrote:You say XrX's defense is no good, but never even FOS him.
I have explained why.