Gorrad wrote:Can someone sum up the Monkey case for me?
Why, chamber?chamber wrote:Can that someone be semioldguy specifically.
There are more people than just myself and Semioldguy with cases on Monkey.chamber wrote:He has very recently asserted that he has such a case, and used it as a defense, so I'm curious what it is.StrangerCoug wrote:Gorrad wrote:Can someone sum up the Monkey case for me?Why, chamber?chamber wrote:Can that someone be semioldguy specifically.
I don't feel that I'm being overly defensive, therefore your question is loaded. He's been getting an unproportionate amount of grief for what he's done.Starbuck wrote:There are more people than just myself and Semioldguy with cases on Monkey.chamber wrote:He has very recently asserted that he has such a case, and used it as a defense, so I'm curious what it is.StrangerCoug wrote:Gorrad wrote:Can someone sum up the Monkey case for me?Why, chamber?chamber wrote:Can that someone be semioldguy specifically.
Going off the last vote count
MonkeyMan576 (5) - Starbuck, StrangerCoug, Crazy, semioldguy, fuzzylightning
You can easily read Semioldguy in iso to find his case. So why not hear more from Crazy, Fuzzy, or Stranger?
You have been white knighting Monkey since the beginning of the game, and picking apart anyone's case on him. Why so overdefensive of him?
Omgus is an over used term these days. He should fully be allowed to vote for someone because they are voting for him as long as they are going about it in an anti-town way. Given that I feel many peopl on his wagon are, I don't view his votes as omgus.Starbuck wrote:He straight up left the game because the lynch turned towards him, and instead of coming up with a case on someone he has just been OMGUSing on me.
My vote hasn't moved because of how he has acted, but he has committed an insane amount of ad hom on more than just myself.
I'm waiting on the semioldguy case. It may turn out that I find semioldguys case against monkey to be telling. Yours, however, is full of holes. Its not like I have a town read on monkey, I just think he's getting way too much flak for what I've seen him do up to this point.Starbuck wrote:Can you explain how he is not being anti-town?
So you are stalling on answering my question because you can't read back in iso and see semioldguy's case?chamber wrote:I'm waiting on the semioldguy case. It may turn out that I find semioldguys case against monkey to be telling. Yours, however, is full of holes. Its not like I have a town read on monkey, I just think he's getting way too much flak for what I've seen him do up to this point.Starbuck wrote:Can you explain how he is not being anti-town?
I'm "stalling" on the answer because I don't want to impair a chance to judge semioldguys alignment. I really dislike how you paint everything about people you are interacting with in a negative fashion.Starbuck wrote:So you are stalling on answering my question because you can't read back in iso and see semioldguy's case?chamber wrote:I'm waiting on the semioldguy case. It may turn out that I find semioldguys case against monkey to be telling. Yours, however, is full of holes. Its not like I have a town read on monkey, I just think he's getting way too much flak for what I've seen him do up to this point.Starbuck wrote:Can you explain how he is not being anti-town?
Where have I painted things negatively? I just have been pointing out things I find suspicious.chamber wrote:I'm "stalling" on the answer because I don't want to impair a chance to judge semioldguys alignment. I really dislike how you paint everything about people you are interacting with in a negative fashion.Starbuck wrote:So you are stalling on answering my question because you can't read back in iso and see semioldguy's case?chamber wrote:I'm waiting on the semioldguy case. It may turn out that I find semioldguys case against monkey to be telling. Yours, however, is full of holes. Its not like I have a town read on monkey, I just think he's getting way too much flak for what I've seen him do up to this point.Starbuck wrote:Can you explain how he is not being anti-town?
semioldguy wrote:you can move it on yourself if you feel the need to. What benefit would a town player have of letting everyone else do the work in the game for him? It either gives scum more control over the direction of the game or if scum is the one doing this it allows scum to more easily ride the wagon/case of their choosing without risking getting caught had they tried to start a case themselves; they could just blindly follow a town player who is wrong while simultaneously pushing people toward that case.MonkeyMan576 wrote:Okay, this is just getting stupid. Let me know when you guys want to move on.
He also completely ignores the points brought up against him by me. The only time he even responded (which wasn't even a good or even accurate response) was on the most recent page and I had to specifically point out to him that he was ignoring me. If he thinks my reasons are not good then by his own logic he is scummy:semioldguy wrote:This is beyond hypocritical coming from the person who refuses to engage in discussion. YOU clearly have no interest in discussion if you are just going to disappear and wait for other to change the subject for you.MonkeyMan576 wrote:You clearly have no interest in discussion, just pointing fingers and making accusations. That's why I left the game. You can think whatever you want.
If you had an interest in discussion, then you could have taken the discussion somewhere else instead of siting by idly and doing nothing except complain.
If not, then he thinks my case against him is good by his own admission. Either way there is a clear contradiction in Monkey's own logic here, as well as in many other of MonkeyMan576's posts. He has done absolutely nothing to defend against the points I bring up against him. He has been a hypocrit in many ways and has been acting scummy in more than one way, none of which has to do with his original vote and reason about the RVS stage.MonkeyMan576 wrote:I think if I didn't react to a poor-reasoned vote, it would be scummy.
Did you read my whole post? It doesn't seem like you have, as you missed a good portion of the case.chamber wrote:So to put it shortly, he ran away from the thread then didn't defend those actions? Cause I can see either alignment running like he did, and I wouldn't be defending them either, as it was clearly wrong, as either alignment.
So you're going to defend someone who had been anti-information by being anti-information yourself? Gotta love it. (You also don't explain how Starbuck's case is full of holes.)chamber wrote:I'm waiting on the semioldguy case. It may turn out that I find semioldguys case against monkey to be telling. Yours, however, is full of holes. Its not like I have a town read on monkey, I just think he's getting way too much flak for what I've seen him do up to this point.Starbuck wrote:Can you explain how he is not being anti-town?
chamber does not have a good reason to be defending MonkeyMan576. It is impossible for him at this stage to be cop with an innocent on him, and there have been legitimate cases made against MonkeyMan576.Crazy wrote:I find Starbuck's and SC's cases on him horrible. They mainly just add up to "He's defending Monkey."
There are other things MonkeyMan576 is guilty of too, but I pointed that particular one out for ironic effect.Crazy wrote:And SC's post right before mine is one of the biggest strawmans I've ever seen.
You don't have any reason to be riding me so hard. So I posted the same reason as Starbuck and admitted to not reading that particular post. Then I left an argument because it was crap. That makes me scum?StrangerCoug wrote:chamber does not have a good reason to be defending MonkeyMan576. It is impossible for him at this stage to be cop with an innocent on him, and there have been legitimate cases made against MonkeyMan576.Crazy wrote:I find Starbuck's and SC's cases on him horrible. They mainly just add up to "He's defending Monkey."
There are other things MonkeyMan576 is guilty of too, but I pointed that particular one out for ironic effect.Crazy wrote:And SC's post right before mine is one of the biggest strawmans I've ever seen.
Mod: Please note sig.
You've also attacked Starbuck over something that's pretty much pointless (was she busy IRL, or was she playing catch-up?).MonkeyMan576 wrote:You don't have any reason to be riding me so hard. So I posted the same reason as Starbuck and admitted to not reading that particular post. Then I left an argument because it was crap. That makes me scum?StrangerCoug wrote:chamber does not have a good reason to be defending MonkeyMan576. It is impossible for him at this stage to be cop with an innocent on him, and there have been legitimate cases made against MonkeyMan576.Crazy wrote:I find Starbuck's and SC's cases on him horrible. They mainly just add up to "He's defending Monkey."
There are other things MonkeyMan576 is guilty of too, but I pointed that particular one out for ironic effect.Crazy wrote:And SC's post right before mine is one of the biggest strawmans I've ever seen.
Mod: Please note sig.
Why should I, when people like you won't be persueded by reason?StrangerCoug wrote:You've also attacked Starbuck over something that's pretty much pointless (was she busy IRL, or was she playing catch-up?).MonkeyMan576 wrote:You don't have any reason to be riding me so hard. So I posted the same reason as Starbuck and admitted to not reading that particular post. Then I left an argument because it was crap. That makes me scum?StrangerCoug wrote:chamber does not have a good reason to be defending MonkeyMan576. It is impossible for him at this stage to be cop with an innocent on him, and there have been legitimate cases made against MonkeyMan576.Crazy wrote:I find Starbuck's and SC's cases on him horrible. They mainly just add up to "He's defending Monkey."
There are other things MonkeyMan576 is guilty of too, but I pointed that particular one out for ironic effect.Crazy wrote:And SC's post right before mine is one of the biggest strawmans I've ever seen.
Mod: Please note sig.
I don't give a darn about your RVS actions, but as for leaving an argument for it being crap, that's not how you handle such a situation. You explain why it is crap. If you're good at doing that, then the tide changes in your favor.BUT NO.You had to go cry in a corner. So that bit, yes, makes you scum.
