Would you be so kind as to rephrase, or highlight, or by any means you want to the case on said "two scum".
People always like to vote on "assummed" scummy behavior, or picky backing on others ideas...often i find i have to pull peoples teeth to get a few simple bullets, highlights, or rewording (maybe i want it in different words) and stupid ass people can be so obstinate...i have to ask my self why? And 2 options come to mine, stubborn scum, or dumbasses...you pick which you want to be in your next post.
And is this "oh 3 now" suppose to scare me...like asking you to rephrase scummy positions could possibly be interpreted as scummy, give me a fucking break, play better.
First quote. Hard to read this as anything but challenging the scumstate of those two players. Second quote, you add to this by saying only scum or dumbasses could think this...which especially feels like your lawyering for others. Third quote, i didnt call you an obstructionist, i said it was an obstructionist attitude.I'm an obstructionists?? Do tell....how is asking someone to highlight, or restate a case at all bad?
It looks like your calling people out to layout their entire reasoning so you can proceed to discredit it instead of directly defending those players as not scummy, when they clearly are scummy.
Finally your vote on drip is less than worthless.