This is the easiest, most contentless move you could make right now. Do you have any reason to think Squilly is scum as opposed to just lurker?
An outright lie.I think he slipped up here.In post 34, NicCage wrote:I haven't asked anyone to do anything.
This was the response to my question which was unsatisfactory to me and he just said(what he really meant by it): his first big post in this game was mostly nothing and you could have ignored me.So I will try and deflect further by asking you more questions.In post 36, NicCage wrote:It was. That doesn't mean I actually want those asked it to do anything, I just want to know why you're doing one thing rather than the other.
Do you find my not voting and my question suspicious?
Here i am not sure if he teams up with Wake or he just sees an opportunity where a heated discussion might take place and he would like to make everybody see he is trying to act town on his own.Subsequently when others see the side he has taken against wake does not seem strong to others ,he moves on to Squilly.In post 46, NicCage wrote:It's not clear, but whatever.
This was his response to getting voted by me.This looked like nobody is going to believe you and let me just move and not actually provide any content in my post.
Show how I've lied. Pro tip: You can't, because I haven'tIn post 304, aptil wrote:This is day1 so i do not know how strongly others feel about this read.I have quoted most of the things that i find are scum worthy posts by NicCage.
An outright lie.I think he slipped up here.In post 34, NicCage wrote:I haven't asked anyone to do anything.
How the fuck does the explanation you offered make any sense to you? It's obvious English isn't your first language, but damn you must be almost trying to misread what I've said.This was the response to my question which was unsatisfactory to me and he just said(what he really meant by it): his first big post in this game was mostly nothing and you could have ignored me.So I will try and deflect further by asking you more questions.In post 36, NicCage wrote:It was. That doesn't mean I actually want those asked it to do anything, I just want to know why you're doing one thing rather than the other.
Do you find my not voting and my question suspicious?
Except I didn't ask people to hop on a wagon, I askedIn post 33, aptil wrote:you ask people to hop on a wagon yet you have not voted for anyone .
Yeah, that post isn't super important. It's not much more important than an RVS vote. The only purpose of that question was to start discussion. Except I never got any answers from anyone except you. I didn'tWhy are you all voting random ass people rather than wagoning?
Uh, again, what? I thought it was pretty obvious from Wake's initial response to my question that he was going to be unhelpful, so I was going to ignore him and read him through the interactions he chose rather than trying to drag an answer out of him. Maybe I switched because I don't actually think Wake is scum?Here i am not sure if he teams up with Wake or he just sees an opportunity where a heated discussion might take place and he would like to make everybody see he is trying to act town on his own.Subsequently when others see the side he has taken against wake does not seem strong to others ,he moves on to Squilly.In post 46, NicCage wrote:It's not clear, but whatever.
What content do you want, you haven't asked me for anything. Yeah I was pretty much brushing you off, because your case against me was and is completely baseless. I asked you your reasoning on voting me to judge whether you had developed a better case. Clearly not.This was his response to getting voted by me.This looked like nobody is going to believe you and let me just move and not actually provide any content in my post.
Fine.All in all i think he has tried to play like he is scum hunting seriously and then when most of the people have said he behaves suspiciously he has tried to go off the radar.So my vote is on Nic until he makes a valid arguement .
/ blehIn post 306, Albert B. Rampage wrote:He doesn't seem to be going after lurkers so hard or else he wouldn't have complained about Squilly being voted.
Antihero wrote:Hey ABR, you seem familiar with archaebob's meta.
Does he usually go after lurkers like this?
1) Always. I've posted MD stuff about it too.Albert B. Rampage wrote:He doesn't seem to be going after lurkers so hard or else he wouldn't have complained about Squilly being voted.
In post 30, NicCage wrote:Why were you voting for someone who hasn't shown up yet? They can't react to your vote.
In post 31, aptil wrote:So they can come and react to my vote.Get all players in as soon as possible.
2)In post 32, NicCage wrote:They'll get here when they get here, I don't think a vote they haven't seen yet will get them here any faster.
But whatever, I accept your explanation.
In post 44, NicCage wrote:Could you explain what you're referring to?In post 42, Wake1 wrote:Activity's good; paranoia isn't.
In post 45, Wake1 wrote:No. It's not complicated.
Do you actually have opinions?In post 46, NicCage wrote:It's not clear, but whatever.
In post 54, NicCage wrote:This is a little silly, asI'vealready asked civilly, and this isn't really scummy enough to warrant a vote.
In post 55, Wake1 wrote:It was more neutral, Nic.
I don't think I need to explain what "activity is good; paranoia isn't." Shouldn't have to; don't want to.
If you will ask me nicely, with a "please," I'll oblige you in detail.
Convenient. Let's pick the overtly unpopular player and vote him when he predictably fails to cooperate with my softball questions.
Squilly has made the effort to come on and change votes, but voting for what was seen as the obvious choice while not greatly contributing anything for the reasoning.In post 303, archaebob wrote:This is the easiest, most contentless move you could make right now. Do you have any reason to think Squilly is scum as opposed to just lurker?
Seriously, do youConvenient. Let's pick the overtly unpopular player and vote him when he predictably fails to cooperate with my softball questions.
I'm able to follow his line of thinking so far; it makes sense.Scum usually don't change their minds as easily as town in my experience.
unfortunately, i don't have any real scum reads, mainly because wake has created enough strife that I can't really read much posting from anybody,In post 314, Banksys Flareon wrote:
@Ace: Before I actually vote you, I've noticed the vast majority of your posts are simply reactions to Wake's resemblance to an anal cavity. You've gotten away with this because he is overpowering all discussions with hints about how great he is (I'm really stretching the meaning of the word hint). I would very much like it of you would post clear reads of at least two of three players who you find scummiest, with reasons why, etc.
Yeah, we can thank Wake for that. Still, the scumhunting has to occur somehow.In post 313, NicCage wrote:Yeah I do have opinions, just not cases. I'm not feeling the passion, I'm not enjoying this game yet so you're not going to get any.
You didn't try very hard.Nic Cage wrote: Seriously, do youreallythink that's what happened? He was unpopular until I asked him that question, and I didn't even try to blow up that stupid argument, SD did. I tried to avoid the damn thing because I knew it would be useless and counterproductive to my reads.
Oh pish posh. Like anyone is telling you not to get reads.Nic Cage wrote:I haven't done anything for you. But I have been doing things for me. I've been trying to get reads, but I guess I'm not allowed to do that.
I'll switch tactics then. Expect something from me by the end of today.
Errm.In post 316, theaceofspades wrote:Cage: the most scummy so far, for reasons that I have already posted.
What is it that you want to hear from me?In post 202, theaceofspades wrote:Nic Cage is the only slightly scummy person that I see as of now. i'm of the opinion that he and wake both came out badly from the whole paranoia thing. i'd be willing to vote him assuming that wake makes a very convincing claim.
i wanna hear from nic before I vote him though.
I mean, that's what it looks like you're doing here too.
in the same way that demanding a population's tax returns or birth certificate helps nobody.In post 320, NicCage wrote:Errm.In post 316, theaceofspades wrote:Cage: the most scummy so far, for reasons that I have already posted.
What is it that you want to hear from me?In post 202, theaceofspades wrote:Nic Cage is the only slightly scummy person that I see as of now. i'm of the opinion that he and wake both came out badly from the whole paranoia thing. i'd be willing to vote him assuming that wake makes a very convincing claim.
i wanna hear from nic before I vote him though.
And would you like to elaborate on you reasoning a little, or was there more that I have missed?
What about the "paranoia thing" do you think made us come out badly?
Or is that just an excuse so that you can express interest in joining the biggest wagons?
Because that's what it looks like you're doing.
I mean, that's what it looks like you're doing here too.
Might wanna explain that why the PR hinting warrants a vote. Also, after he claims, now he's only a "pain in the ass". Why is that?
___
And on another note, my vote on squilly was for pressure so that he would explain himself further. I felt that him explaining his confusing reasoning more will help me determine whether he is newbtown or newbscum. Cause it looks to me like it can go either way.
