o_0In post 241, Vorkuta wrote:do lumberjacks do that with chainsaws
Such wk/chainsawing
Where are my "bad arguments"?
o_0In post 241, Vorkuta wrote:do lumberjacks do that with chainsaws
Yet you've given extensive reasons to do so. That's contradictory and that's exactly why you're scum.In post 254, Vorkuta wrote:I don't need reasons to vote people, especially in D1.
Neither do most people on site (due to uncontested naked votes being status quo)
You can't claim at the same time that you don't need to provide reasons to push people, while reaching this fucking hard to justify your vote on someone.In post 256, Vorkuta wrote:*sighs*
At least I provide people the courtesy of giving them solid reasons that will form my initial scum case on them
It's 100% pro-town as you can see my thought processes/logic (unlike anything you've done this game) on most of the players in the game.
-I don't need reasonsIn post 253, nomnomnom wrote:too hard to find reasons to vote people
You are LITERALLY proving my point.In post 258, Vorkuta wrote:My thought process and play-style is quite pro-town, even though it doesn't explicitly need to be, as the alternative is a naked urap2 vote without any ATTEMPT to read the slot
How on earth am I proving this?In post 257, nomnomnom wrote:It's not pro town, you're giving completely two different signals that contradict each other. On a fucking D1 vote.
The literal definition of LAMIST but yeah I'm just having "leaps of logic" lmaoIn post 261, Vorkuta wrote:I'm saying that "I'm not obligated to BUT I will anyway"
The 2 signals are not mutually exclusive, but COMPLEMENTARY
I don't see harmlessness and a valid explanation, I see justified opportunism.In post 263, Vorkuta wrote:You took one harmless and valid explanation to "you're reaching too far" and are blowing it way the fuck out of proportion.
Your reasoning and thought process for trying to push this is disgusting.
I'm like really lazy and I don't want to go back and quote multiple VC's although it'll prob prove my point better.In post 200, ofrhz wrote:
So he's being shit with his vote.
this is mainly for Nom and I know he's not Bob but this IS similar to the same thing Bob did. Could this be a newbie scum tell?In post 71, teacher wrote:Why’d you jump in?
Why’d you chop it so it looks like me speaking?
I also did not like his light defense of the urap wagon.In post 212, teacher wrote:Woah, jump from TR to vote is pretty aggro and illogical. Care to explain?
You mean the thing where he doesn't pay attention to the game and shows that he blatantly doesn't follow the thread? That's what Bob did by pushing Sky and putting a misread claim in his reasons to do so.In post 265, Nero Cain wrote:this is mainly for Nom and I know he's not Bob but this IS similar to the same thing Bob did. Could this be a newbie scum tell?
The onus is on you to show how this is "opportunism" and not "genuine scumhunting" as I have already more than adequately defended myself.In post 248, nomnomnom wrote:the reach is real
I just think you're banking on your loose playstyle way too hard and that the over-justification for your vote was a complete contradiction of your usual demeanor, which is absolutely a scumtell as far as I am concerned. That or just a big contrast with how you are as a person. But I'm banking on scum here.In post 267, Vorkuta wrote:The onus is on you to show how this is "opportunism" and not "genuine scumhunting" as I have already more than adequately defended myself.In post 248, nomnomnom wrote:the reach is real
You're more interested in trying to get me to "slip up" or catching me in a contradiction than actually... you know... making your point.
Also- does scum!vork just go blazing all out for blood for a miller claim, and after it doesn't attract enough attention immediately I try to gut the next best person? (your former scum read, might I add)
Like how bad/desperate for a mislynch (on D1 when not everyone checked in ffs) do you think scum!vork is?
I was talking about the time where I edited one of his posts to just include the relevant portion of his quote and he was all like "why you'd do that?!?"In post 266, nomnomnom wrote:You mean the thing where he doesn't pay attention to the game and shows that he blatantly doesn't follow the thread? That's what Bob did by pushing Sky and putting a misread claim in his reasons to do so.In post 265, Nero Cain wrote:this is mainly for Nom and I know he's not Bob but this IS similar to the same thing Bob did. Could this be a newbie scum tell?
Then again the circumstances were different.
Literally anyone can tell you that every time I vote someone or something I can TELL YOU exactly why I'm voting for that player.In post 269, nomnomnom wrote:that the over-justification for your vote was a complete contradiction of your usual demeanor
Again- do you think I'm that bad enough to "ridiculously slip up like this" on D1?In post 269, nomnomnom wrote:absolutely a scumtell as far as I am concerned
I literally don't remember that happening lmaoIn post 271, Nero Cain wrote:I was talking about the time where I edited one of his posts to just include the relevant portion of his quote and he was all like "why you'd do that?!?"In post 266, nomnomnom wrote:You mean the thing where he doesn't pay attention to the game and shows that he blatantly doesn't follow the thread? That's what Bob did by pushing Sky and putting a misread claim in his reasons to do so.In post 265, Nero Cain wrote:this is mainly for Nom and I know he's not Bob but this IS similar to the same thing Bob did. Could this be a newbie scum tell?
Then again the circumstances were different.
What do you think of my scumreading teacher and DP for being useless with their votes?