So first off, the style dragon chosen is immensely annoying to deal with. I could quote strip back the whole thing but his post is already unbearably long and responding in kind would be the worst thing in the world so instead let me try and tease out what narrative threads I can from his post.
1) My first post - now he's claiming to "have no particular problem with the levity, brevity and quick catch-up style of his post" but remember, he had no issue enabling copper by calling it weird and claiming to not understand it earlier. Maybe he "got it" at some point between then and now but it was mighty convenient at the time to keep copper harassing me and it was a fucking catch-up post, it's not exactly rocket science, what is there to get?
2) My read on dreal - "My issue is that he didn't explain it right away, only when he was under pressure with three votes on him, at L-2. I just don't see this kind of behaviour coming from a townie who assumes everyone understands his townread on drealmerz. Personally I try and explain my reads, and if asked I will explain further. But to everyone except DDD, that joke looked NAI, so I can't understand why he assumed we would understand it instantly." What is this shit? Dreal was under absolutely no pressure at that point, giving a paragraph lecture about how the people who aren't calling him scum shouldn't call him scum is a waste of time. Further, I like how I'm supposed to be able to psychically anticipate that other people are going to take umbrage with a town-read on a player who isn't being pressured. Finally, later he comes back to this read and just comes up with the absolute dumbest shit, he doubles down in his completely asinine theory that despite the fact that I said dreal was town and linked it to his joke in my initial post, never implied I wasn't dead serious about that, and then stated an argument that is completely logical even if people don't agree with it that I apparently completely came up with my argument on the spot only because I was pressured. In what reality does this make sense?
3) My initial vote - "It's almost as if he didn't want to vote someone who currently had no votes on them." Given that I said I was voting for whoever had the most serious votes among my top three multiple times, well reasoned Inspector Clouseau.
4)
In post 774, Dragonfire wrote:One of the scummiest things I've seen from him. As I've mentioned before, DDD is calling him scum for being "the odd one out". Not everyone else "got" his post, and saying that is just arrogance. In fact, this is quite hypocritical as it was DDD who went on the attack rather than explaining his thought processes.
All of this is, of course, based on the assumption that copper's attack on DDD was a reaction test and that copper is town, both of which I am fairly sure of.
There are only two people who took umbrage with my initial post. Copper, who now claims it was a reaction test and you, who claimed to believe him and who enabled him but now you've claimed to come to the realization that it was just a perfectly normal catch up post. How am I not vindicated here? There's no one left legitimately claiming there's an issue with my first post and yet somehow my arrogance and attacks are unjustified when it's clear that you or copper or both of you were full of it.
5) Amished tell - "just looks opportunistic".
Child, please Oh and because he might decide me saying child, please is scummy here is evidence of me regularly using the expression...
Child, please
6) Whining about me voting for him - I'm not voting for you because you're voting for me, I'm voting for you because asty was scummy and because I don't believe your arguments are made in good faith. Notice how I do my best to ignore the windowlicker that is ironstove? I think he's brain damaged town and while it would feel really good to break his neck, I learned long ago that if you want to win you need to lynch scum, not idiots.
