In post 298, Siveure DtTrikyp wrote:
Amy, anen, NOBODY except you two find either of you scummy. If you really want the other guy lynched, you'll need to engage everyone else, and not just be arguing with the "scum".
Alrighty, sure.
Let's start with his initial serious vote, which was on me.
He's talking about my speculation of what would be beneficial to scum. The logic behind this is somewhat skewed. Surely part of figuring out the scum is figuring out their thought processes, and I was doing so. And there goes reason #1.
He's also supporting the notion of me saying a role isn't scummy as evidence. There is no connection to one being scum due to that, and that's trying way too hard to provide more evidence of which there is none.
She's trying to make a case out of nothing here.
I'm
trying to make a case out of nothing?
He also does something that I've notice a fair bit of from scum trying to fabricate evidence. He decided to inflate my mention of Venrob's unprompted mention of his game history as this huge case.
Well, of course it'll sound scummier if you inflate it to be a bigger deal then it was and then shoot that strawman down.
His responses as to why people find me scummy are a bunch of drivel, nuff said.
Finally he chose to unvote me, probably because he saw the depth of his case on me and realised that he wouldn't get anywhere.
