In post 284, Maxous wrote:the highlighted quote answers the question.
i don't see a concise, clarified reason for the vote. It's jumbled up into wall posts that people have to struggle to figure out.
Okay, so to get this straight;
1. You didn't understand the reason for my vote.
2. You agree I have expressed issues with Flubber and you find them difficult to piece out.
3. So you have an issue with my info not being clear and easy to understand.
4. So you complain that the entire Flubber case is bad, and that my vote is poor instead of just asking me to state my reasoning.
5. You don't reveal this until I ask for you to clarify your stance.
6. Your beef with me is that you think I'm trying to intentionally be hard to understand - ignoring that I'm the one getting actual info out of you by asking direct questions.
What's your issue with the Flubber wagon again?
I feel like I'm missing something here.
In post 286, Maxous wrote:hmm finished.
Still saying no to a flubber wagon. Also no to a beefster wagon
You are aware that the Beefster wagon just died and I killed it, right?
In post 286, Maxous wrote:my two scumreads are Penguin & Bella.
Two null-scum reads in Thor & Texcat
everyone else is fine
I like your scumreads fine.
I can understand null on Tex, and even though I have a vast amount of info to parse for my alignment I understand that people get lazy and refuse to read me.
But you're fine on *everyone* else?
Like, they're all decent town reads for you?
Can you explain why Errant and HeWhoSwims are decent reads for you?
Because I'm not there with either of them.
In post 291, HeWhoSwims wrote:Yeah I guess this puts it well. If he's town why would he not change his playstyle if it's not helping his game / his WC?
Yeah I guess this puts it well. If he's
scum
why would he not change his playstyle if it's not helping his game / his WC?
Why is your sentence valid and mine isn't?