A-hem. Timmeh, timmah, tammahhhr.
Following a re-read of the thread so far, I present to Mini 757:
GREATER UNIFIED CASE ON DEJKHA, by TIMMAAAH! (and the contributors of the underworld)
dejkha (38) wrote:Would there be any harm in saying which character you are? As far as I know, the effects of each aren't known yet, possibly except for obvious ones like Officer Barbrady or maybe Satan if they're in it. Not that I'm suggesting claiming your character is the right thing to do, but with Spolium repeatedly giving a Timmy reference, it doesn't seem like it's a big deal...
In this post, dejkha:
- implied a lack of harm in a NC
("
Would there be any harm in saying which character you are?
")
("
it doesn't seem like it's a big deal...
")
- fronted my PR as an indication that NCing is not a big deal
("
with Spolium repeatedly giving a Timmy reference, it doesn't seem like it's a big deal...
")
- pre-emptively absolved himself of responsibility with a handy dissociative disclaimer
("
Not that I'm suggesting claiming your character is the right thing to do
")
Timmeh? When I questioned dejkha about this, his response was to vote me:
dejkha (54) wrote:Spolium, you hopped on an opportunity to vote very quickly and on something quite minor and I love your reasoning as to why. That reasoning being... "I was all like TIMMEH"
Of course, I had already provided my reasoning, in #45. When I clarified what was mistaken for my reasoning above, the response was:
dejkha (62) wrote:Maybe I should rephrase what I said. Rather than you voting on something minor, it was... silly, I suppose. I wasn't justifying my reason with yours, only supporting it.
Ter... eh... Timmeh?
This is generally confusing. So it's not minor, but just silly? Does silly vote = scummy vote? At this point dejkha didn't elaborate on why he was retaining his vote, which was apparently serious.
Meanwhile, his back-and-forth with nonny was painful to read since the first point of nonny's to which he took exception (bearing in mind the point was clarified by nonny in #66, having been obtusely challenged by dej beforehand) was subsequently dodged deftly enough that I didn't catch it until I was paying closer attention to the exchange.
Trrrrghm-Timmah. Once pressed about his actual stance on nameclaiming by at least two people, dej responded:
dejkha (67) wrote:I answered that already in a response to Rest's post, but apparently it didn't go through, as far as I can tell. People answered my question on the matter, so I'm against it.
This boils down to two vital, bullshit elements:
1 - "Oh, I answered the question already but APPARENTLY it didn't go through, AS FAR AS I CAN TELL."
2 - "My question was answered, so I'm against it"
1 is a prime example of dej's wishy-washy play. "Apparently"? "As far as [dejkha] can tell"? Is there some way to check whether a post went through, other than hitting the refresh key? Why the forced implication of uncertainty? The post either went through, or it didn't.
2 is just... I don't know what to say. Is dej saying that he is against a NC because that's what everyone else said? Dej has not even given the slightest hint of an opinion regarding this, and has tried to palm off requests for his opinion on the basis that he "doesn't have one". Am I to understand that someone who has over 400 posts on this site is not familiar enough with the game to even consider the
possible
pros and cons of NC, or to check the wiki/theory discussion archive? It just seems unfeasible.
Anyway... Timmah... with a grand total of four votes (L-3) - TIMMAH! - dejkha then had this to say:
dejkha (70) wrote:I'll be honest, I'm getting tired of arguing this, so if people want me lynch for this, then I'll just go ahead and claim now to get everyone of my back sooner, so we can concentrate on something that will get us somewhere.
And depending on if everyone else seems to be as close minded as nonny, I may or may not change my vote to her.
- Why so willing to provide a claim? Smacks of scum with a safeclaim.
- Attempt to undermine the case (let's concentrate on something useful guys, srsly)
- Accuses nonny of being close-minded, having missed her point even when it was spelled out for him
- "May or may not" change vote to nonny based on open-mindedness of other players
The first three ring scummy, the last one gets +50 WTF points and sports the kind of flagrant wishy-washiness that makes me want to rip my eyes out. Since when should [player a]'s state of mind affect [player b]'s decision about the alignment of [player c]? What about "may or may not" - hasn't dej decided whether this bizarre voting policy is worth doing at all prior to even hinting that he would employ it?
Timmeh timmeh timmarajag.
Questions aside for the moment, I employed dej's
butt sex
example to further clarify a point which dej had not yet addressed (as highlighted by nonny and RestFermata already -
SEE HERE for more). Dej's response?
dejkha (72) wrote:Is that a yes to my claim? Or is there someone with an ounce of open mindedness in them. If there's anyone like that, I would expect it to be caf, so I'll wait to see what he thinks.
"
Is that a yes to my claim?
" - somewhat ironic, considering dej's derisive "you didn't understand my butt sex point" which was to come later.
Appears to think that almost everyone is close-minded now. Apparently his only hope is Obi-Wan Cafnobi, who would subsequently give him the middle finger (seriously Caf be wary, given what we know of dej's predilection for butt sex - mmmTIMMEH).
Anyhow, I requested that dej do some scumhunting instead of bitching about everyone not being open-minded, and got this eye-opener:
dejkha (74) wrote:Oh I am scumhunting. And you and nonny really seem to pushing this, so you can bet I suspect you both. You more than her BTW and for more reasons than one. Buuuuut, none of which I'll say now.
So dej isn't just bitching, he is scumhunting, but it is
SECRET SCUMHUNTING
. This is clearly the best kind of scumhunting because dej doesn't have to tell anyone anything about who he thinks the scum are, and this isn't at all a great way for scum to avoid providing useful content so let's not think anything more of it, eh?
We do get one teasing hint of his masterly sleuthing though - we can sure bet that he suspects the people who suspect him! I thought it would be helpful to find out more about how I "really seemed to be pushing" the case on him, so I asked. When asked whether he would answer my question (having not acknowleged it at all) dej said:
dejkha (83) wrote:No. Not yet. I don't know when either, so don't ask.
TIMMMAAAAH! This is pretty much the icing on the cake for me. Let's just dwell on that for a moment.
"
I will not answer your question... yet. I don't know when, so don't ask when
"
If I was "really pushing", shouldn't it just be a case of highlighting a few comments, or posts? Why would waiting any length of time change what I've already said, and that which you've identified as part of some really pushy agenda against you?
You know what? Here is my present to you, dejkha. I am
really
pushing for a vote on you, because I am all but certain that you are as scummy as pond scum which has just been appointed Professor of Scummery at Oxford University, and am of the firm belief that you should be lynched accordingly.
Timmy Timmy Timmeh Timajarooooonargh TIM
