how do you feel about deathsauce?bv310 wrote:Sorry. Back. Catching up. Laptop hates me, etc., etc.
reckoner: your day 1 behavior does not earn you the "drunk and lazy" pass for today. my vote moves to you if nobody agrees about deathsauce.
Knights of Cydonia wrote: I provided a decent case on soras yesterday, actually.
Knights of Cydonia wrote: Bandwagoning is a much more overt scum tell, is being committed (apparently) by two other players, and yet soras is focusing on what may or may not be misrep. It's poor play. Is poor play necessarily scummy? No. Is it scummy that he continues to push it despite people pointing out that worse offences have been committed, and he has acknowledged them but continued to tunnel? Yes.
Just because he's not 100% guaranteed town doesn't mean he's not a horrible lynch. And you don't like the claim solely based on flavor, from what I understand. In other words, you're willing to lynch a claimed doctor because you don't agree with the flavor...?Knights of Cydonia wrote: Not being counterclaimed =/= guaranteed 100% town. This isn't an open setup. And I still don't like the claim.
...for sticking with your main FoS and refusing to comment on anything else.. That's called TUNNELING, you know. And tunneling is a powerful scumtell in a LARGE THEME, where you should have more than two suspects >.>Knight of Cydonia wrote: Well, excuuuuuuse me for sticking with my main FoS.
I've posted cases in this game. I've commented on major bandwagons without being prodded, and I've found suspects all my own. And I honestly could care less about how busy you've been; the point is, you haven't been providing any content whatsoever. And still, you have the nerve to accuse me of not providing content.Knights of Cydonia wrote: So because you're using "ZOMG ACTIVE LURK" on me, that gives you an excuse to not post a case? lolwat. I should also point out that for most of the end of Day 1, I was organising my Large Theme I'm modding. That takes a certain amount of concentration.
If you were offended, I'm sorry.Knights of Cydonia wrote: Not scum either. And I like that you're resorting to insulting my intelligence now.
I don't get the point of this. Is your defense to all of this "it doesn't count cuz I did scummy stuff after you voted me"?Knights of Cydonia wrote: The problem with Nacho's "case" is that it's all based on stuff that occurred (or didn't occur) long after his initial "ZOMG KoC is scum get him I'll giev case later kthxbai" crap. Basing a vote you initially made at the very start of Day 1 on stuff that happened much later doesn't work.
I'm fine with that, since we should be lynching you for your blatant last-minute attempt to save Toon. Seriously, I thought this was an easy one, everyone needs to take a good second look at the last page of D1.xRECKONERx wrote:Can we not lynch KoC till I get a chance to read this like tomorrow or Sunday?
No. My point is, you're pushing a wagon where you initially promised to provide a case very early on Day 1, based on stuff that you're interpreting as scummy from much later. Your case to back up a vote from page 4-5ish cannot be based on actions from page 20.I don't get the point of this. Is your defense to all of this "it doesn't count cuz I did scummy stuff after you voted me"?
So, let me get this straight:DeathSauce wrote:I'm fine with that, since we should be lynching you for your blatant last-minute attempt to save Toon. Seriously, I thought this was an easy one, everyone needs to take a good second look at the last page of D1.xRECKONERx wrote:Can we not lynch KoC till I get a chance to read this like tomorrow or Sunday?
Straw man: wagon-hopping. Actual scumminess: Attempting to derail the Toon wagon.xRECKONERx wrote:So, let me get this straight:DeathSauce wrote:I'm fine with that, since we should be lynching you for your blatant last-minute attempt to save Toon. Seriously, I thought this was an easy one, everyone needs to take a good second look at the last page of D1.xRECKONERx wrote:Can we not lynch KoC till I get a chance to read this like tomorrow or Sunday?
You think my wagon hopping back and forth isn't genuine? What about it, specifically, makes my changing my mind unbelievable or particularly scum-motivated?
Is that literally all you have to say?Knight of Cydonia wrote:Wow, talk about an epic bandwagon right there.
No. My point is, you're pushing a wagon where you initially promised to provide a case very early on Day 1, based on stuff that you're interpreting as scummy from much later. Your case to back up a vote from page 4-5ish cannot be based on actions from page 20.I don't get the point of this. Is your defense to all of this "it doesn't count cuz I did scummy stuff after you voted me"?