Claus wrote:PsychoSniper wrote:all I see is you more or less parroting
Funny, because what YOU said is just more or less a summary of the info Kast put on the thread. So when I say it, it is parroting, when you say it, it is... ?
Did I accuse you of being scummy because you parroted me? I didn't. I was more confused over the fact that everything else you posted fit with what I said, then followed by a vote on me with no actual explanation. I don't consider parroting someone to be scummy action if you happen to agree with said person, but apparently, according what you posted above, you
do
consider it scummy, so why are you doing it yourself?
Herodotus asked everyone for their opinions on nameclaim, and I posted mine, and yes, it agrees with everything Kast said. And that's wrong because.....?
Claus wrote:
I also asked Herodotus to explain his reasons for wanting a name-claim more clearly.....which is exactly what you did yourself in post 38.
Except that, when he said "I'll say it later", you just said "ah, ok". Weak.
And again, that's wrong because....? He didn't say he isn't going to answer, just that he wants to wait to see others' opinion. I can wait, I see no reason not to. Unless you're trying to force a quick Day 1???
Claus wrote:
Then later you switch to a weak vote on a lurker, when we have much better stuff to go on with. Why, for instance, not vote on heretodus, who has not yet answered your questions?
I would have thought that answer would be obvious. Let me lay it out simple for you:
- Herodotus says he wants to hear from others before he explains.
- I want to hear his explanation.
- There are lurkers/inactive guys that have yet to voice their opinion on his question. If Hero's answer was an excuse not to answer, getting everyone to speak up takes away that excuse.
Herodotus isn't going to just fade into the background after what he proposed, there's guaranteed to be sustained attention on him for a while, I don't see the need to pressure him at this point.
And there's something else. Since I personally can't see any benefits in name-claims, I sort of figured perhaps Hero was doing this to prompt a reaction from everyone in order to read them instead of really wanting a claim. I've seen other (pro-town) players try this in past games. I see no harm in obstructing him and would rather help it along.
And here's something else that's funny: why would you expect me to vote on Hero for not answering my questions, when you're not doing it yourself? He hasn't answered your question either at the time, did he? You voted me for being willing to wait for his answer, but apparently YOU hadn't pressured him for the same answers you wanted from him.
Hypocritical, much?
Claus wrote:
An when I ask you your opinions on the players, after three pages, you have none. None? Really? Are you playing the game? Or are you just waiting for a townie wagon to form so you can find an excuse to jump in?
Funny, the only one who's jumped on a convenient town wagon so far is you, how I love the irony.
There were only 3 things of note in that 3 pages: your attack on me, of which I was more confused than suspicious because of how you presented your post; Herodotus suggestion, of which I'd already explained what I wanted; and Slicey being voted by Kast. By your definition, wouldn't I have hopped on the "convenient" Slicey case for being the only other guy to take a serious vote other thean myself if I were scum?
Claus wrote:
So what's your reason for voting me again?
You are extremely on the wall, refusing to really contribute to the game.
Not everyone plays by your style. I don't think it's wrong to listen to what everyone has to say before casting a serious vote.
Claus wrote:
The only part of your post tha makes sense to me is the fact that you want to form bandwagons and I just happened to have the most votes.
So why don't you call me scummy for it? Because you know that I'm right about you being scum, and you are praying that if you stare at me in a mean way I'll get scared and back off.
Not going to happen. Happy with my vote
Why would I call you scummy for that? I know you like bandwagons, there's nothing wrong with that, I understand lots of players play that way, that's why I didn't even question Oman about calling for more votes on me when he clearly just wants a wagon. I just don't like that style myself.
I don't want you to back off, I wanted you to explain because you confused me by repeating everything I said before the vote. I didn't vote Hero for not providing an explanation, why would I do it to you?
Like I said, I didn't vote for someone just because they confuse me. I was waiting to hear your explanation. Now that you have explained, I'm ready to form my opinion.
- You accused me of being on the fence and not contributing because I refused to prematurely accuse ayone of being scummy. Yet, you were already voting for me before I turned down both your questions, so that explanation clearly doesn't stand. And prior to that I was hardly the only person who wasn't attacking someone.
- You cited post 42 as a valid reason to vote for me, but did not elaborate at the time. When I questioned your presentation of that post, the only point you really addressed was the point that "You parroted too!" So? It doesn't explain why you
did the exact same thing
and then went on to call me scummy. Hypocritical action #1.
- You cited post 44 as a valid reason to vote for me because I was willing to wait for Hero's explanation rather than pressuring him, yet you, who asked him the same questions, didn't do what you clearly consider what a town player would do (pressure him yourself). Hypocritical action #2, that's another scummy point checked.
So thank you, i'm ready to "contribute", as you put it, now, because you've posted enough for me to form an opinion of you. I'll probably attract more votes for what some people will consider to be an OMGUS action, but now that I finally have a proper case, I'm going to take it.
Vote: Claus