My beef with Acronach revolves around something I suspected based on the over-clarification from the very early game: in the process of trying to appear to have an explanation for everything, he's basically making up ways to explain his actions, with statements that he either does not fully believe, or do not make much sense at all.
When I voted him, I asked him about why he didn't vote, as I expected his answer to not make much sense. I didn't believe he had a reason that it was better to withhold his vote after the RVS had ended as opposed to during the RVS. Though I disagree with his reasoning here, his answer was better than it could have been. The point about it being a suspicious overclarification still stands - however, this makes sense.
Acronach wrote:ConfidAnon wrote:
Acronach wrote:funny part is, i almost bought that post, until i read the "shut up and vote" part. something just rubbed me wrong about it. i reread... and i reread again, and finally, i decided i already have a minor scumread on you and i think your logic is either creating something out of nothing, or oppratunistic scum following spoon and confid.
to sum it all up, there is very little chance of you being town, and, your logic is just horrable. sad but true.
Why did you already have a minor scum read on him?
mostly a gut read. something about the way hes thinking just rubs me as scummy.
This vote is extremely suspect. The original post contains a whopping zero solid reasons for voting Ivan. It throws around some buzz words and phrases, like "gut read," "rubbing the wrong way," "opportunistic," but does nothing to explain what exactly is scummy. Why is the logic bad? He did try to qualify the vote with already having a "minor scumread" on Ivan, but when asked about it, it amounted to absolutely nothing. Gut reads are fine, but you need to have evidence to back them up.
This has been Acronach's only vote so far this game, if I'm not mistaken. You claim to be waiting for concrete reasons to vote . . . yet after you are pressured for not voting, you make a vote based on what appears to be absolutely nothing. This is a perfect case of scum trying to appear like they are scumhunting, but actually providing little content. It smells very badly of totally disingenuous reasoning, and the timing of it basically screams scum.
Acronach wrote:kk then, explain #31
I already did. Reading a thread is a great skill to have when, you know, playing a thread-based game. =P
-------------------------
I completely agree with subgenius here.
Acronach wrote:ConfidAnon - not really sure where to place him. he's been lurkish and the only real case i remember him making was against me. he makes another post against me once every 4 pages or so. initially, i had a slight townread on him, but after consistant lurkiness, i'm having my doubts.
Here is another example of Acronach just making up things that sound good in order to bolster reasons for what he does. This game has been open for five days; for four of those, I have made at least one post every day. Lurking is consistently avoiding the thread - I have not done so in any way shape or form. Sure, I don't give seven or eight posts a day, but I put everything I have to contribute into one or two longer, thought-out posts. He did not check his facts, and just tried to apply a buzz word, "lurking," in order to decrease a town read he once had, to appear like his "opinions" are shifting.
