Kuribo taught me how to smell fear.
In post 3437, Bacde wrote: In post 3429, Bulbazak wrote:You mean you wanted her to ask someone who was not a vig rather than someone who had actually claimed vig? What kind of crap logic is this? Do you not like the attention being on you, Bacde?
Yes I am afraid of attention
which is why I spammed the thread to force everyone to lynch thezmon
and is why I've been leading a controversial charge against nacho since d1
and is why I've been forcing everyone to address me and respond to my interactions w/ them (except for nacho who will only pretend to address me!)
...
But it's different when someone questions and suspects you, isn't it?
In post 3441, Cephrir wrote:
This is an absurd simplification and blatantly ignores the relevant parts of the case
I don't think it is. Your original case on the Haylen slot is that Fuzzy voted Ryu. He later unvoted, because Ryu posted a picture of a cute fox, which Fuzzy gushed over. He later stated that he wasn't going to revote. What you failed to take into account was that all of this happened in the pregame when votes didn't count. Therefore, Fuzzy unvoting and refusing to revote in pregame due to a cute fox gif is not a scumtell, it is in fact a Fuzzy tell and is therefore null (Actually, I might have done the same thing in the same situation. Gut is actually telling me that this makes the slot more likely to be town, as town wouldn't care.).
In post 3444, ArcAngel9 wrote:bulba, do you have any real case on me? except your only reason is that you don't like my posts?
Mostly gut right now. It's a good thing I'm not actually pursuing your lynch, isn't it?
In post 3447, Nero Cain wrote: In post 3428, Bulbazak wrote:Nero, I also asked you to quote your point about Kitty doing the same thing in the same post. Ergo, I was giving you the opportunity to defend your side of the argument and put me in the hotseat by having to defend mine or concede the point. I was ready to give you the benefit of the doubt, because maybe you had a point. Instead, you blatantly attack me for even suspecting you. By actually quoting and asking me the question from there, you would have shown an eagerness to actually scumhunt and get to the point of this entire conversation, which I imagine is to develop a read on me, but you were more interested in attacking me and defending yourself instead, as if you shouldn't be suspected whatsoever. So, yeah, you're deflecting. You're refusing to actually discuss the point, seeking instead to discredit me. And because of all this, you are a strong scumread.
So you think I'd just make up something that never happened?
I never said that.
In post 3447, Nero Cain wrote:
lol Just 'cause I'm lazy and don't feel like playing quote mine mafia doesn't mean that I'm refusing to discuss things with you. I think your attack on me is weaksause and I therefore called you on it. I don't know if you are scum attacking me or town. I find it utterly pathetic that you are whining about being called out on a shit case.
To be honest, I don't have the time to sift through the ISOs of a 100+ page game just to find what you may or may not have been talking about. Since you brought it up, the burden of proof lies on you to provide the quote for me to respond to, not to make a comment about it and expect me to do all the work for you. If you think my attack is weak, then you need to actually argue why it's weak and put in the effort to do so, starting with this quote.
Are you seriously going down this road to discredit me now?
On to page 139.
