In post 322, Datisi wrote:"there's not enough evidence to suggest anyone was scum [on page 2]" implies you cannot have a serious vote on page 2
You were also saying your page 2 vote was serious
Sorry chief the math checks out
that is where you are wrong though. You can place a serious vote and not think somebody is scum. Happens all the time. Used to happen when I played here, I am pretty sure it happens now especially since i did it...
In post 321, Wimpy wrote:1. I dislike when people come in and reference past games and vote them for it
This is still a *gasp*
policy lynch
And it changes things because you accuse Mena of lying when he said you were trying to policy me
So
Well good thing I wasn't actually trying to policy lynch you and I legit just thought you were scummy thus making menal's accusation a lie.
Thanks for confirming what I already knew. menal is a compulsive liar
I can't promise I will spell your name, half the time I don't even remember it
Posted: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:23 am
by Datisi
"evidence to suggest someone is scum" =/= "think somebody is scum", don't twist it
Like if you placed a "serious" vote
Then there must have been evidence to SUGGEST I am scum
Which you literally confirmed, because your reasoning was "referencing past games"
Which is literally "evidence to suggest"
Posted: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:25 am
by Wimpy
In post 148, Wimpy wrote:I did however say based on past experiences I have seen scum act awkwardly in rvs and do the exact same thing you did.
This right here makes it not policy, and actually makes it experienced based.
I don't understand how you can be ok with all of his other lies but OH NO, don't accuse him of lying about policy votes.
Posted: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:26 am
by Datisi
Wimpy's reasons of voting me:
1) thought I was violating site rules
2) disliked that i referenced a past game
3) thought referencing a past game is scummy
Literally 66.67% of your reasons to vote me were
Policy
Pedit: i still don't see a single place where he lied
But as said i will go over it again once I get some sleep
For now I'm tackling the simpler stuff
Posted: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:27 am
by Wimpy
In post 327, Datisi wrote:"evidence to suggest someone is scum" =/= "think somebody is scum", don't twist it
Like if you placed a "serious" vote
Then there must have been evidence to SUGGEST I am scum
Which you literally confirmed, because your reasoning was "referencing past games"
Which is literally "evidence to suggest"
no you are absolutely wrong. a player can place a serious vote and not be sure if that person is scum or not.
Posted: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:28 am
by Wimpy
In post 329, Datisi wrote:Pedit: i still don't see a single place where he lied
In post 327, Datisi wrote:"evidence to suggest someone is scum" =/= "think somebody is scum", don't twist it
Like if you placed a "serious" vote
Then there must have been evidence to SUGGEST I am scum
Which you literally confirmed, because your reasoning was "referencing past games"
Which is literally "evidence to suggest"
no you are absolutely wrong. a player can place a serious vote and not be sure if that person is scum or not.
I am not saying you were sure
I am saying there was evidence to SUGGEST
Posted: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:29 am
by Wimpy
In post 330, Wimpy wrote:no you are absolutely wrong. a player can place a serious vote and not be sure if that person is scum or not.
please don't tell me I need to go find actual completed games to prove you wrong. I really don't have the time the waste but I will if you really aren't going to concede this.
players can place serious votes on people that they think are scummy and that's it. They do not need any other reason than "Hey I think that guy is scummy so I am going to vote him"
They don't have to have evidence suggesting that person is scum.
Like it's literally the "evidence to SUGGEST I'm scum"
Not prove
Not make certain
Suggest
Posted: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:34 am
by Wimpy
In post 336, Wimpy wrote:players can place serious votes on people that they think are scummy and that's it. They do not need any other reason than "Hey I think that guy is scummy so I am going to vote him"
They don't have to have evidence suggesting that person is scum.
In post 336, Wimpy wrote:players can place serious votes on people that they think are scummy and that's it. They do not need any other reason than "Hey I think that guy is scummy so I am going to vote him"
They don't have to have evidence suggesting that person is scum
In post 336, Wimpy wrote:players can place serious votes on people that they think are scummy and that's it. They do not need any other reason than "Hey I think that guy is scummy so I am going to vote him"
They don't have to have evidence suggesting that person is scum
.
Posted: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:36 am
by Wimpy
how many more times do I need to quote it until it sinks in?
In post 333, Wimpy wrote:please don't tell me I need to go find actual completed games to prove you wrong.
Also what happened with you disliking meta??? It being a lazy way to play??? Referencing other games being
S
Ss
Scummy?
That isn’t meta. Nice try
Posted: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:59 am
by Datisi
But how is "evidence suggesting (emphasis on suggesting) someone is scum" different than "someone being scummy"?
Like if someone is being scummy
Sure, it's not given that they're scum
But there is *something* that makes them look like it
And that *something*
Is evidence
Suggesting
(again emphasis on suggesting)
They're scum
Posted: Mon Nov 11, 2019 11:01 am
by Datisi
Aight cheers ot ain't a meta on anyone here
But it would still be referencing past games now wouldn't it?
