I think drealmerz' heart is in the right place but his actions are making things harder to discern.
In post 115, drealmerz7 wrote:It's not really a "joke" even, just an amusing flavor-based (I do like flavor) role-play of sorts based on what there is to use to do so, as I stated that I like to do. Because there was nothing else going on and I thought it'd be fun/funny.
What serious discussion was it in the middle of? I don't agree that there was such a discussion going on. If there had been serious discussion going on, I wouldn't have said "I think it is time to try and analyze the most important thing we have available to us so far:" because 1.) the "I think it is time" wouldn't be accurate in the middle of a serious discussion so I wouldn't want confuse things by saying this and, 2.) I'd be talking about the content of the serious discussion instead of amusing myself with some meaningless flavor-talk.
Whether or not you agree that there was any kind of serious conversation going on before you dropped that joke, it doesn't excuse the fact that it IS a joke, and a really non-sequitur one at that. I was actually stunned by how late that kind of post was because that's usually the kind of joke you make during an RVS, so then I thought you were just trying to sarcastically prove a point that the NL convo was as fruity and over the top as this joke, but no. Apparently you really did mean to play a straight joke and expected us to accept it as nothing.
Possibility 1: You made an inquiry towards Jae, got bored waiting for 33 minutes of nothing, and decided to further develop your persona as verbosely established (something which you were warned against doing btw because of how counter intuitive it is) by making jokes.
Possibility 2: You made the joke on purpose. I mean even if the playstyle of all 11 normal games over wherever were different from how this one was played, you would know that making that kind of post in that moment was highly inappropriate. So I dunno...a gambit? Or possibly a distraction or deflection? I can't possibly be the only person who's thinking this.
In post 115, drealmerz7 wrote:And now you're rephrasing things by saying I'm "new to...the playstyle and methods of this site...[because my] earlier ideas about No Lynch [were] one manifestation of this" which is not true at all and something I thought I made clear (I wasn't purporting no-lynch for this game! AND where I'm from also holds the same general view on no-lynch.)
And now it seems to me you're essentially saying "if you don't agree with the general policy about D1 no-lynch held here on this site, then your opinion/viewpoint on it are simply not going to be taken seriously or considered by me" or something similar, and that is a problem and scummy, to me, regardless that you're not actually taking issue with my no-lynch stance in this game.
*sigh*
And you know you could've let it go, right? Accountant neatly explained that the the banana split is nothing more than flavor. This terrible incident could have been cleared so easily, but no. You decided "well, it's not in my persona to just not concisely accept things as they are. I'm going to argue about this meaningless tirade and it's not like it's theorycrafting because what the parts of a banana split represents isn't something you'd actively want to discuss post game like NL on D1."
