In post 405, Nachomamma8 wrote:
This was the case before I reaffirmed my suspicion on you. Why wasn't I a suspect before that? What does this have to do with anything?
It has to do with why I think you are scum. You are trying to discredit me by implying my read on you is fabricated, when it isn't. Who said you weren't a suspect before that?
My response of "OK" was sarcasm as in your reasoning for me being scum isn't really a scum-tell.
Me. Look at the logic of your post.
In post 251, Nachomamma8 wrote:THIS is your reaction to the flashwagon on you? No diatribes on why everyone sheeping me is a bad idea and shows incredible scum motivation, no rage and anger on how you can't believe that the town is this lazy and horrible? And hell, even lacking that, no analysis and instead easy obvious scumreads? Come on, hawkie. You're a much better player than this.
Your final statement "You're a much better player than this" is showing that you think all of the things that I "am not doing" equates to good play. Therefore it should be clear that you feel like diatribes on people sheeping you/theory on scum sheeping/rage/anger about a lazy-horrible town all is good play.
MY POINT: I don't believe you believe any of that makes me town/is good play based on past experience with how you acted towards my town-play.
You aren't attacking things I have done so much as my character/play. When you say "I thought you were a better player than this" implies that I am a poor player. Which also implies that my reads/cases are poor and that people shouldn't listen to me. And then you re-iterate your point again:
In post 251, Nachomamma8 wrote:
People understand that you're a generally competent player; I don't see why you would change your playstyle in an effort to spare our feelings.
I can only imagine that is a contributing factor to Rufflig's post on me. So congrats on that accomplishment I suppose.