Crub wrote:klebian in 266 wrote:I note your shift from apathy to antipathy toward the RW wagon. I will agree that it's obviously not the strongest reasons for a wagon, but I do think it seems a bit late to be jumping on a wagoner, especially seemingly randomly.
First post after lurky period, in regard to my voting him. Fair enough.
So I note that the post after this you remark "Well that post didn't do anything to ease my mind about your alignment kleb. " As you had said, you had picked me randomly off the RW wagon, and to gauge reactions. Does this mean that at that time you still viewed me as someone neutral but possibly scum because I was on a wagon that you didn't like (An aside, this wagon at first had just been one that you had no real opinion on)? Did my post affirm this view of me in your opinion?
klebian in 266 wrote:Crub wrote:
Secondly WTF is DS even a topic of discussion right now? He's about to be replaced. I think we can safely put DS's play down to his VI meta and hope he get's replaced by someone who isn't a VI.
I don't like this. First off, there was a DS discussion because korlash was recapping his opinions on the game. Also, I don't agree that you can excuse scumminess for meta and go on with it. And even more, this post seems like counter productive to discussion. It should never be the wrong time to discuss someone's behavior, and just because he is about to be replaced doesn't mean we can't do analysis on him.
But then followed by a healthy dose of OMGUS.
Crub in 277 wrote:klebian in 275 wrote:It is good to see a fresh analysis of past behavior, even if only to get some discussion going again...
Except that it wasn't fresh and there was no one around to respond to it in any case.
This got ignored. Why?
klebian in 287 wrote:Crub: I didn't respond to that post after mine, because I felt that there was no good to argue that point.
There would have been no positive discussion about that. You had argued that there was no good discussing a 5 page old point, my implication was that there was definitely no good discussing whether discussing a 5 page old point was worthwhile. Obviously we had different viewpoints on how this would move the thread on, and I didn't like it but I didn't think that an argument between us there would resolve my or your opinions.
Then he continues to lurk through the rest of the day. Comes back at the 11th hour to put a vote on. ie. He did absolutely the minimum he had to.
Admittedly I have lurked. I would argue that jdodge and melodyman were both as lurky during that period. But this isn't quite good reasoning on my part; however, this game has been too much of a lurkfest, and I felt that I should at least vote and provide my reasons, which I did- something I would argue is better than not having stated an opinion at all (and I feel that you would agree, in that you would find me significantly scummier if I had taken no position on jdodge vs mm yesterday).
Day 2. He completely ignores my vote up until :
klebian in 506 wrote:... is that all you're going to say?
I'm gonna
vote: crub
as well, because you're pointlessly wasting our time and there is a fixed deadline which is obviously getting closer and closer but discussion is not really picking up
Yeah I'm obv scum for committing to how I feel about someone's alignment.
Crub honestly I ignored your vote because there was not much I could say to it. I tried asking you about it near the end of day 1 and your response seemed to me as if you were at least some what joking. Additionally, your vote at the beginning of the day seemed as random as your accusation seemed to me ('just putting it out there') so I chose to ignore it until you gave solid reasons that I could actually respond to.
As you may note, a number of players, including Justin and TSN, asked you to clarify on your vote. Ross expressed some suspicion of my posts in the beginning of the day but you ignored these so they seemed to be different from what you were thinking, so in effect, he also didn't see where you were coming from.
Regarding the "Yeah I'm obv scum for committing to how I feel about someone's alignment." This was clearly not my argument. What was happening around that time was you asking for people what they thought of me, generally people saying they didn't see the scumminess and asking you to clarify, and you didn't. Korlash voted you for ignoring people and you lulzed. My vote on you was obviously an attempt to get some actual information that I could sufficiently respond to (which I did get a few pages later).
klebian in 514 wrote:also i don't frankly care whether my OMGUS makes you not feel better about my alignment because I have some actual basis behind the vote
And yet he doesn't explain. Hypocritical much? Oh and now back into lurk mode
Yay for klebian.
I had given my reason, I guess you didn't find it enough. As has been expressed by others, I OMGUSed you because I felt that you were just wasting time calling me scummy and saying next to nothing else. This was my actual basis, that you were not being vocal about what you should have been and the hope that a second vote would pressure you to do so. This is compared to your basis, which was my being "obv scum".
In 515, you posted, in response to that last quote of mine
Over-reaction to one vote for (seemingly) baseless or bogus reasons, I find to be a scum tell. <3
As I said later, I'm not exactly sure what you were referring to. Which vote did I overreact to? If it was a vote on me, obviously you can't quite use this as reasoning as the overreaction would have occurred... after you made the vote on me.
Regarding
Crub wrote:If you disagree, fair enough, if you think that makes me scum, please explain.
I never claimed this makes you scum. Unlike what you had been doing, I had not been accusing anyone of being scum and not explained. However, I had voted you on the thinking that a vote would get information. I know you're aware that a vote doesn't necessarily imply that i think you are scum.
