In post 224, Kmd4390 wrote:snip
We know nothing on where Bingle actually stands on Porkens yet the name has been brought up a few times. I don't know, it just feels like Bingle is trying to give us a lot of words without rocking any boats.
Next, Bingle gives some scum reads but it's just the wagon and the guy voting Bingle. So... I really don't see anything more than surface level stuff here. It's also scum reads on about half the game. If a wagon pops up, Bingle really hasn't given us ANY he'd be unwilling to join except maybe clidd.
This caught my eye too:
Bingle wrote:
As far as the wagon on me, I'm not particularly worried, nor will it influence the way I play the game.
It was unprompted so it seems like feeling the need to acknowledge the wagon and it seems like a downplayed way to say "I don't feel any pressure". It just feels unneeded.
:thorface: Was this an attempt to see how many blatant lies you could squeeze into a post?
First of all, I've been pretty up front that I'm scumreading Porkens, but looking to firm up my read there. The fact you can't get that from my ISO makes me wonder if you've read any of
63,
94, or
176. You know, the posts you're specifically referencing here. Second of all, yes, I would be willing to wagon most of the thread right now. Would you not be? Why would you not be? Third, the accusation that I haven't given any townreads is untrue (
15,
34, etc.). Finally, your "unprompted" statement was not only prompted by clidd, but you literally snipped the quote of the prompting from the post in order to make that point.
For reference: the full quote that KMD didn't link to.
In post 176, Bingle wrote:
snip
Say it with me now... Geriatric. You should probably go read the linked Geriatric rules in the OP, because you seem to completely misunderstand them.
As far as the wagon on me, I'm not particularly worried, nor will it influence the way I play the game.
VOTE: Porkens
VOTE: KMD
@Bulge: In the interest of brevity I'm not going to quote/respond here.
I outright admit most of my early content wasn't particularly strong in the realm of substantive commentary, and if that's your problem with it, fair enough. I brought up your lack of engagement with me as an attempt to get insight into your thought process, and, you know, engage with you.
182 is where Porkens talked about the effort that went into his Freudian analysis, but I frankly agree with him that further analysis there is a waste of both of our times. I questioned it, he responded with an answer, and I found that answer unsatisfactory. If he's lying, he's not about to jump up and admit to it, and I'm not suddenly going to find the answer satisfactory. I also disagree with there being implied town arrogance in my
200 as I made a point of the context there being Datisi seeing me in an uncommonly strong showing as the reason his treatment of me is town indicative. I also do, very much, believe that there is at least one scum on my wagon.
What do you make of KMD's
224?