xvart wrote:Please elaborate on how I am "flying under the radar."
Doing a scattering of vaguely suspicious things without attracting much attention (positive or negative) around yourself.
xvart wrote:1 Other than in the same post right before this quote I stated my reasoning for keeping my vote on you, which others had not mentioned yet. It should also be noted that the post you are referring to was my second post of the game, so I apologize (not) for not having a solid set of reads down in the first 23 minutes of the game. And since my second post came nine hours later your attempt to call me scum fails. My second post (the one in question) was my first real observations of the game, ten hours after it started.
2 I actually haven't FoS'ed anyone this game, but I'm sure that's just semantics since I called him suspicious in my second post of the game for insinuating that non posters in the first few hours of the game were scummy.
3 Once again, you'll have to look at post time. When I posted I was catching up and my original comment about people claiming responsibility for ending RVS are just looking to score town points and therefore scum, was still true, since after my second post where I explained that line of thinking, you mentioned it two or three times more, which is what I pointed out and asked about. So, what is the point of continuing to take credit for ending RVS after it has obviously ended? How does that help you find scum?
4 Can you finish this thought, please?
1/ It was several pages into the game, and other people were coming up with original points and ideas. If it was too early in the game for you, then it was too early to be calling other people out on it, that was why I considered it hypocritical.
2/ Granted there was no official FOS that was my mistake. But he still held that second position on what I considered a slightly wishy washy point. But as I went on to say you did go on to scrutinise properly so I do not have much of a problem with this after all. But it was one of the things that made me look closer at you.
3/ you successfully avoid the point here. I am suggesting that you drew me back into theory something that was used to smear me. You are not the only one guilty but it is this rather than the specific RVS discussion I have issue with. Since you ask about the RVS ending howerver; I originally claimed credit because credit had been given to someone else and I was slightly shocked and worried about the extent to which the thread had been misread, I only went on to discuss it further when it was questioned attacked etc... I refute that I pontificated over the issue with no cause. I was under attack so responded to the points my attackers made which included RVS/ending thereof.
4/ Yes, sorry. I was suggesting that you spent a long time over relatively unimportant things, I would include the discussion of RVS but for a different example:
Why didn't you say this the first time? Also, the fifth vote? Not the fourth? Is the fourth vote not a bandwagon? Is the sixth vote to late? You make zero sense here.
I think it is obvious he would have put the fourth (maybe not the sixth) but any bandwagon vote in, it just happened to be the fifth. It is actually quite obvious, I frankly dont believe anyone who misundestood CES there and it was just a useless point to be making. (this goes for all your bandwagon discussion of CES there)
