xRECKONERx wrote:Also, it wasn't just that for me voting psycho. Try looking at his posts for yourself and making sense of them.
Like, calling Keyblade's random vote on psycho a OMGUS, when we were still in the random voting stage. Not to mention when Keyblade tries to correct psycho's mistake in saying he was the last person to confirm, he calls it suspicious! Well, maybe I think it's suspicious he's using his own mistakes to cast suspicion on someone else.
It doesn't matter if it happened in RVS, it's still an OMGUS vote. Technically he called the correction akward, you seem to be blowing Psycho's action out of proportion here.
xRECKONERx wrote:I also don't like how he admits
here, after I question him, that he only saw one quote taken out of context, not two. It's backpedalling, and it seemed like he was trying to make the case on geek seem much more blown out of proportion than it actually was. Not only that, but when he
votes geek, he basically does it because of a "contradiction" in geek's post.
If he stuck to an inaccurate point of Geek taking two quotes out of context, would you find it less scummy? Is there any way for this newbie to win on this paticular point, or would you not be satisfied no matter what?
xRECKONERx wrote:This is the point where I voted him, because I not only found his long wall o' text post a bit suspicious (with the OMGUS talk), but I also saw no contradiction. Psycho
explains here that the contradiction is that geek says he
doesn't follow others
but then says that he looks at everyone else's viewpoints. I see NO contradiction there, especially since psycho seemed to conveniently forget about the part where geek says "I look at the person's actions" (analyzes their actions), and the part where he says "I take the action I see fit" (makes his own decision). It's a stretch to call it a contradiction, at the very least.
I suppose it depends on how you interpret Geek's post. Still, I don't see how this is as insanely scummy as you think it is. You also seem to think BlueRaven is really scummy yet you aren't all that comfortable with lynching him. Oh, and when you come to the end of this paragraph, you backpeddel a little bit on it not being a contradiction, to saying it's a stretch. (Because Geek's intent might not be all that clear from reading.)
xRECKONERx wrote:Oh, and let's not forget how he tries to set up an OMGUS, calling my quick vote "suspicious". Without elaborating. And here it is, Tuesday night, two days after he last posted, and he has yet to come back in and say anything.
He got the same amount of elaboration from your vote to be fair. I stand by the fact that I find it very strange and very fishy that you seem to be most concerned about his attacks on Geek.
