NerfedBuj, Vorkuta
With
Day 1 ends in
kIn post 272, Vorkuta wrote: a bunch of bullshit that doesn't even come close to acknowledging my problem.
kIn post 272, Vorkuta wrote: a bunch of bullshit that doesn't even come close to acknowledging my problem.
isn't that at least a slight cause for concern?In post 274, Vorkuta wrote:Pika hasn't said anything relevant so far (100% fluff) so idk
-neither has skitterIn post 276, Nero Cain wrote:isn't that at least a slight cause for concern?
mine is bigger than yoursIn post 282, Vorkuta wrote:I can get along just fine- nom x3 is just losing the ego battle here so idk what's up on that end.
but the difference is that Skitter is not here and is v/la. DP is here and active lurking.In post 279, Vorkuta wrote:neither has skitter
The quality, in both formulation and actual solid logic, of your arguments has dropped off considerably since your initial "youre reaching" push on me, and now you're just openly admitting that you don't have a case on me anymore and this is crossed into personal territory.In post 283, nomnomnom wrote:mine is bigger than yours
The meta would be way more telling than just the playstyle.In post 244, Vorkuta wrote:Dilemma
>wanting to lynch a scummy playstyle
>knowing that town!X has this scummy playstyle
Applies to Buj as well
You can't apply LAMIST when you're attacking them for scummy behavior, and they counter by saying it isn't scummy. That's not LAMIST, that's just defending yourself.In post 262, nomnomnom wrote: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
okay bud
trying to escalate further with jokes is yikesIn post 287, Vorkuta wrote:The quality, in both formulation and actual solid logic, of your arguments has dropped off considerably since your initial "youre reaching" push on me, and now you're just openly admitting that you don't have a case on me anymore and this is crossed into personal territory.In post 283, nomnomnom wrote:mine is bigger than yours
I might be guilty of a bit of LAMIST (a thing I do as town anyway), but you're just flailing horribly
The LAMIST part is overly-justifying your vote then when questioned admitting you didn't need to do it. It's really obvious to me.In post 289, EvilDeanius wrote:You can't apply LAMIST when you're attacking them for scummy behavior, and they counter by saying it isn't scummy. That's not LAMIST, that's just defending yourself.
indeed- yikesIn post 290, nomnomnom wrote:trying to escalate further with jokes is yikes
My walls of text... explicitly tell you why what you said is not true.. like what is this argument evenIn post 290, nomnomnom wrote:My case still stands, it's not because you write WoT constantly that it makes what I said any less true lol
I DO IT ALL THE TIME FFSIn post 291, nomnomnom wrote:The LAMIST part is overly-justifying your vote then when questioned admitting you didn't need to do it
I INVOKE SELF META TO CLEAR MY SLOT ONCE AGAIN.In post 293, Vorkuta wrote:I DO IT ALL THE TIME FFS
In post 297, nomnomnom wrote:Let me hope thatfor once my scumreadis followed by a wagon and not ignored and laughed to death
This display of double standards & Pot calling kettle black is also disgustingIn post 294, nomnomnom wrote:I INVOKE SELF META