In post 669, Smithereens wrote: In post 627, farside22 wrote:
You voted me at the start and I claimed already.
Why did you hammer kraeg?
Why aren't you attacking others who haven't claimed?
I'm interpreting the amount of points you're dropping as evidence that your attacks were 100% fluff and no real material.
>You received my vote initially because I had just read the entire DP up to that point and voted against a random who I didn't think had claimed. Evidently your claim was really early and since I'm not familiar with any name here, the high chance of error manifested itself.
>I already explained why I hammered Kraeg, and it would do you well to read it, as I even addressed it explicitly to you not a single post ago in this dialogue. Kraeg needed to die because all of towns votes were against him and couldn't move on. I was about to head off and wouldn't be coming back until within short time of the end of DP so I did the logical thing and killed him. Why are you hung up about this? Does something strike you as suss?
>I'm not
currently
attacking others who didn't claim as I had a circumstantial incident with only one of them, in the sense that Hippy was the only person who didn't claim to actually defend his non-claiming. My firm belief was that this defense was flawed, and hence why I argued the case against him.
There are several disturbing issues now regarding your behaviour.
1) You edited the list of role claims and moved me into a government slot when I was the only person in the investigative slot. Please refresh your memory:
Post #618 The post which you copied it off could in no way be interpreted incorrectly,
therefore please explain why you tampered with the role claim list. (knowing that it would make me look guilty)
2) The clear and distinct lack of thought that is going into your attack is more rather an example of fake scum hunting. You've brought up several reasons why you think I'm scum and you've dropped all bar three, (with absolutely no resistance at all) which I have addressed comprehensively. Despite this I'm still a scum read to you so you are either suffering a severe dosage of confirmation bias or this fluff of an attack has a more malign purpose.
Please explain why you gave up on all the reasons that demonstrated my guilt with such ease, but not your read.
3) From the start, your behaviour has been categorically reactionary and negatively reactionary for that matter. You only started this attack on me after I voted against you, and instead of questioning the vote, you came up with reasons as to why my initial posts were indicative of scum; Ignoring effectively the reasons behind my vote. Your failure to use questions to ascertain -and instead creating a case that was designed to convince others that I'm scum- is not only counter-intuitive for a townie; but counter-productive, illogical and beneficial only to those who want me dead. It is more reasonable to interpret this behaviour as scum aligned, as scum are the only factions that benefit.
Please address and explain each point thoughtfully. I don't want you replying like you have been previously, throwing up an attack of pure fluff and pretending it doesn't exist when it is explained to you.
You sure talk a lot.
Serious question back, why did you have to wait to respond to my attack on you into the next day phase?
First of all your vote said nothing at all about the reasons your claiming now for voting me.
Should I quote again what it said?
Sure.
In post 225, Smithereens wrote:Don't be mean, I'm in a minority time zone and won't wake up at 4am for a chat and tea. Also, town investigative.
Finish the mass claim before you bandwagon some1 to death what the hell.
VOTE: Farside
No I'm not dropping my points I'm asking questions because you danced around my points I made.
Where did you explain the hammer of kraeg and what do you even mean by all the votes were on him?
Did you look to see who or why or care?
As for not attacking others for not claiming, yeah that's scummy.
It could mean your letting your scum buddy not claim and not attack then.
Let's discuss you complaint.
1) I explained I had the wrong player. 2 investigative roles claimed doesn't make you look any more town then before.
2) that's your oppion. I showed quotes why I thought the way I did.
3) again an oppion.
I said why your vote looked fake. Your rage looks fake.
Do you think players are mind readers?
I'm assuming based on your longer post, no.
Sarcasm is just a way of saying how stupid you think someone is but in a more polite way.