Archaist wrote:Pra a Funkee Homo Sapien wrote:pressurevote Guardian why is Sir Wario scum?
Guardian wrote:he isn't being particularly helpful while looking like he is trying to be
That said, while I think it's pretty clear why Guardian is voting Sir Wario, I also think that his explanation is pretty lacking. Do you have any posts in particular that made you think Sir Wario is actively lurking?
Where did I say he was actively lurking? And no, it is a general impression from the whole game that he is trying to appear helpful, while not being so. I can't point to one specific post for that.
Furthermore, you yourself seem to be actively lurking, especially with this post:
Guardian wrote:Still here, still think Sir Wario's scum.
How so? I'm waiting for the lurkers to be replaced.
Even if your suspicions on Sir Wario hadn't changed, you could still have made some useful comment on the posts of other players.
Which I did, in my opening post. And then said that the scum could very well be among the lurkers. It isn't useful to me to analyze all the players when a couple of scum could easily not have posted in the game.
Saying "I'm here and my suspicions haven't changed" isn't being very helpfull
No? I'd have thought it would cause others to look at Sir Wario.
voting for Sir Wario because "he isn't being particularly helpful" is pretty hypocritical.
I'm not voting for him because he isn't being helpful -- I'm voting for him because he isn't being helpful while trying to appear as such.
Scum try and make paragraph posts where they discuss facts, and name some names, and not really leave anything meaningful. I made one post with my very limited thoughts on the game, and that's it. I am not doing what I accuse Sir Wario of, which is trying to appear helpful while not being helpful. I'm actually trying to be helpful.
Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]