In post 1089, Zdenek wrote:
You think it's townie to not vote for scum because the scum is lurking and you think that it's suspect to vote for lurking players?
I never said any of this. I said that I understood Jen not wanting to vote for a player that was V/LA, and that it was not a bad decision at all. Just because Key ended up being scum still does not make it a bad decision. That's Post Hoc.
That being said, I actually do not hold lurking to be the scumtell as others do. I find it to be null in terms of alignment, as both town and scum do it. It is the actual content of the posts that I judge. That's why I thought Antilles and TAM to be scum, not by their lurking, but by what they actually posted. And you are right in one regard, I do find it suspicious when someone focuses on a lurker for the sole reason of them lurking. Lurkers make easy mislynch targets, and it's easy for scum to excuse themselves after the fact. So yes, focusing on lurkers can be scummy.
Also, what exactly do you find irritating about my posts?
Not really liking BB's posts so far.
In post 1106, Ms Marangal wrote:
I'm not really seeing MO scum, mainly because of the ingenuity of the MS part of the post. Kx isn't all to horrible either, and I'm thinking that people are making him look worse then he actually is. the survival tells are weak for that slot, and there really isn't anything that's standing out. if anything, MS is actually trying his hardest to actually participate in this game evidence by him being upset that people are ignoring his wall post
First, ingenuity is not a towntell. Scum have every reason to be clever too, perhaps even more so than town. Second, how are the survival tells weak? Third, you try to vindicate the slot by saying there is nothing that stands out, and that MO is town partly based on MS being upset about ignoring his wall, but did you happen to read any of the walls, especially the back-and-forth between us? I brought out several things during that conversation. Heck, I even summarized it in a tl;dr post that highlighted the main points of the MO case. What exactly do you not understand/disagree with?
