In post 693, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:That's actually a retarded statement to make. Seriously.
It actually isn’t, but we can save that discussion for later if you feel so strongly about it.
In post 693, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:It's you who is being dense. I said Beck was scum, multiple times, you said he was anti-town. I did not say he was anti-town.
The only time I even remotely referred to Beck as town during that time is when I said 'Beck is anti-town at the very, very best and scummy at worst'. That means, if I gave Beck extreme leeway, (hence the very, very best section of that statement) I could see him being town in the absolute best of light. Otherwise, he was scum.
I will concede here – that was the only time you called him antitown.
In post 693, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:My oh my, you seem extremely confident up there on your pedestal. Feel like you're in control of this game do you?
I wouldn’t go that far. I’m feeling pretty influential.
In post 694, Scripten wrote:In post 692, Grib wrote:
No, there isn’t. Don’t pretend one of your reasons for wanting to lynch him wasn’t “antitown.”
I called Beck dumb and wanted to shut him upbecausehe’s being antitown. You cannot be this dense.
Wait.
Clarify this for me. Did you think Beck was scum when you voted him? Please just yes or no.
No.
Also I never voted him.
In post 695, Scripten wrote:BBT and Grib:Define exactly what you believe "anti-town" means, please? As in, one sentence, simply what it is and what alignment it is a subset of.
Same: town playing against their wincon is antitown.
I consider tunneling a provable town PR antitown.
fake edit: this post is very relevant.
In post 528, Grib wrote:Pointlessly tunneling on a PR who claimed a power with a confirmable result is phenomenally stupid. Crying that we're "policy lynching" you is just empty, useless noise I'd expect from a seven year old.
If no one unvotes within the next handful of posts thenI will hammer.