Edosurist wrote:
You're one to talk. Remember your second post in Mini 1394? It was your overreaction to MM suggesting that you had forehand knowledge of my alignment.
but... but... that was made by me, and i was town
.
In seriousness: that actually is my justification. I, as a person, enjoy overanalyzing things. It isn't even always that productive; I just enjoy doing it. That vote on MM (which, i ought to point out for my own edification, was right) was a product of me trying to glean as much information as I could out of what had been done. There's also an element of sarcasm in my overanalyzing at times. Sarcasm and overreaction are different things. A reaction to something with an excessive amount of sarcasm says things about the personality of the person reacting. An overreaction without sarcasm (which, I think, is the category that popc's reaction falls under) says things about the alignment of the person reacting.
Edos wrote:This is wrong. From your way of thought, NS is scum. Then you suggest that pecan is scum because he was too cautious to actually vote NS, his partner.
That assertion is a stretch, and you unvoted who you believe is scum in both scenarios to do it.
Decent point. Safety is still town, though.
Edos wrote:I'd also say that you appear to have overreacted, but in a different way.
Within the course of 5 hours, you made 7 posts. 7 fairly long ones, mind you.
It's mainly directed at pecanpie, but it also has things like this:
Worse point. Calling that an overreaction is like calling the evacuation of a city an overreaction to a hurricane that's about to hit that city. Sure, it's a big reaction, but it's
called for.
When I say a big reaction, I mean that Safety was reacting to several things - like he said, he had to, because there were several things to react to. He did not, however, overreact to any thing in particular. pieceofpecanpie, on the other hand, very definitely DID overreact to one very specific thing.
Note to self: ac and probably apozzle are town for page 7.
Frankly, I'd say criticism of my cub case as grasping at straws is absolutely justified, and quite possibly right (I'm going to spend some time reevaluating cub too).
ac wrote:implosion: Seems like you're throwing around suspicion at anything that sticks. or you're just really eager. I don't know. I don't like the smell of what you're cooking though (some of it smells OK I guess)
Nah, just at cub. Again, I overanalyze a lot.
popc wrote:But unlike your comment to someone else, I don't think this was foolish. I thought implosion's response in #122 was particularly delicious, taking the bait and putting his own uppity defensive attitude on display. He's a contradictory mix of "Yeah, I'm just hanging around here mostly giving troll responses" to "I don't spend every waking moment here! Have some patience." I've made a note of his flippancy for later.
Once again, you are being patently absurd here. For several reasons.
Firstly, I am in no way giving an attitude of "i'm hanging around here giving troll responses." You're literally pulling that out of the ether. I was giving trollish responses, but saying that i was "just hanging around here" or portraying that attitude is ridiculous.
Secondly, EVEN if i was giving that kind of attitude, those are in no way contradictory. One can both be sarcastic and have a life.
Unvote
VOTE: pieceofpecanpie
For a combination of several things. First, for a tone that is reactive rather than proactive (explained in 317). Second, his overreaction, and subsequent reaction to being called out for overreaction. Third, his actions towards me (in particular, misrepresentation as a basis for criticism). Fourth, for generally grasping at straws (specifically, attacking me and others for the amount of time between our posts. Yes, this point may be slightly hypocritical, but again, I grasp at straws for fun).
