In post 267, ThAdmiral wrote:@ yates 163: no doubt you have a point but as squirrel girl mentions I'd feel a lot better about you if you didn't cherry pick.
That was something of a superfluous post but you have to admit that if you had clicked on pidgey's ISO at that point in time looking for scum hunting "right out the gate" seeing those posts in sequence would make you chuckle. That said, my previous post challenging the assertion is basically a call for people to ISO pidgey and read a grand total of EIGHT posts - short ones at that. So to focus on the one post and disqualify my entire argument as a "cherry pick" is both hypocritical and inaccurate. I'm not saying you are doing this but this isn't my first rodeo and I know where this bull is headed.
In post 267, ThAdmiral wrote:It would have taken less words to just say: "my scumreads are X and Y".
True. But I'm not comfortable doing that this early in Day 1. I would prefer to see the many varied directions different players take their own investigations and see how they read the game organically without being lead. How many times have you seen scum ask Town for reads only to hide in those reads? Think about it.
In post 268, Squirrel Girl wrote:[Yates] is flat out presenting a false case and doing the literal definition of misrepping, which is to present only part of the info with the express goal as to paint it bad. ...somehow, in Yates' view, it's illogical to call those posts "out of the gate" no, no, no "out of the gate" can ONLY mean the very early intro posts, and CERTAINLY not the later posts that contained...well...y'know, scumhunting.
No, THIS ^^ is a misrep. I argued that pidgey didn't scumhunt at all in ANY of his initial 8 posts - the posts you used to arrive at your "read" - and I stand by that. I later conceded that he had 2 content posts according to your purported BROAD definition of scum hunting and actually used that to challenge why you wouldn't consider my content posts [since all of them are furthering the game to some degree] to fit that same definition. And you still haven't addressed this.
If you think the Pidgey post I quoted wherein he said he was confused by your calling him a super scum hunter is a misrep then there's a very simple solution to this - ask
him
what he meant. When I "cherry pick" statements [as you and ThAd have phrased it] it's because I'm trying to highlight precisely what I'm taking issue with without all the inapplicable clutter. I'm pretty careful about making sure the link is there to the entire post in case someone thinks I'm taking something out of context or intentionally misrepresenting a case on someone. Look at the post where I quote Pidgey, for example. I highlighted the portion of the Pidgey post that had to do with the argument we were having simply because the rest had nothing to do with it. The link to the entire post is there and you don't seem to be taking issue with the context, are you? So what's your issue? You have a problem with me being concise?
In post 268, Squirrel Girl wrote:I don't think he went into an ISO of 7 posts and just grabbed the first few. he did it on purpose.
1. It was 8 posts. Count them.
2. Of course I picked the first four on purpose. It made your argument look as silly as possible. That's the point. I'm disproving your arguments. It's not like I picked posts 1,3,4, and 8 randomly while ignoring ACTUAL scum hunting. If I did that? You'd have a valid concern. Instead, *I* am the one with a valid concern.
In post 271, ThAdmiral wrote:I completely agree with your point about him strategically misrepping you
I would like to know, given the information presented, if you still think this. And if so, what
specifically
am I misrepresenting?
Perhaps. Let's take a different approach. Do you feel like Pidgey was scum hunting in those first 8 posts? I don't think he was, my interpretation of Pidgey's post is that he didn't think he was, but what do YOU think? Also, do you feel like I was NOT scum hunting in my first 6 posts? I think I was, but of course I have the benefit of knowing why I go in the direction I go so maybe my scum hunting isn't obvious to everyone else? What do YOU think?
In post 277, vezokpiraka wrote:The fact that he spoilered pidgey's post because he knew it wasn't what he wanted. That part just screams that he is scum misrepping.
If it was without the spoiler I would've thought he is a townie with a conviction.
So you think I spoilered the quote to hide... something? Or, is it at all conceivable that I spoilered the quote for effect? Also, have you bothered to ask Pidgey if my interpretation of his post is accurate? You seem pretty concerned about that so I just thought maybe you'd verify the information. *shrug* Flash Gordon would not be amused.
Best for last:
In post 257, pappums rat wrote:And there are people doing actually scummy things in this game, so attention would be better placed on scumhunting rather than trying to boost your own egos.
Are you still talking about ZZX "forgetting" to vote? If so I find this to be uninteresting as I have done this before as both alignments and find it entirely null. Is there something else I'm missing here? As far as I'm concerned, there ARE scummy things happeneing in this game and I'm in the process of sorting it out. It's good to see you back, though.
I could buy some "I'm going to play to Nero's ego" and then not sheep when he gets called out on budding me. 
