podium123456 wrote:GhostWriter wrote:
176: but, as I have pointed out already, it is nothing more that Nacho's vote defined. If Nacho's is seen as RVS, Fate's was RVS. The corelation between the two is undeniable.
It was clear to me that nacho was joking, because of the delivery.
But this goes back to my other post that you didn't address... if your argument is that they both say the same thing, and that i was hatching this nefarious plan, then why didn't i attack nacho?
this is what shuts down your theory. think about it.
No, it really doesn't. You point it out yourself above. Though both posts are very obvious, Nacho's is far more obvious than Fate's, and is part of the reason why Fate's is obvious. As I have implied many times. To go after Nacho would be far too large a stretch. Going after Fate is the easier of the two.
podium123456 wrote:GhostWriter wrote:
What the hell is good about him just saying "herp derp" until he has multiple pages in his iso making it look like he's posting well when most of it is pointless drivel and contentless babble that has no point?
Quit getting so hung up on the fact that i put 'herp' and 'derp' in my post. The points i made in that post were valid, and substantive... don't act like they weren't.
I assure, I am not acting. They weren't.
podium123456 wrote:GhostWriter wrote:
My 101 is not saying that at all. You tell me, where was my discussion going? In circles. I don't feel like restating my point and restating my point and restating my fucking point. Oh, just because he says "Nuh uh" to what I say, that makes it true? No.
That's not what happened at all.
In post 63, i raised the point i bolded above... as well as highlighted that all i did was ask him and drop it... if i had this master scheme planned out, dont you think i would have... oh i dont know... USED IT? you act like i actually made the case against him and kept pushing it... and i didnt even come close.
That is hardly 'nuh uhh'... you avoided answering it then, and you still avoid answering it, even though i have directed you there several times. Why is that? Because you realize it pokes holes in your 'theory' and you dont want to have to back down.
I grow tired of using the phrase "for later". Does it mean nothing to you? I didn't answer it because it seemed very obvious. Then again, we're supposed to believe you didn't know Fate was joking, so I guess it follows that we're supposed to buy that your big statement is such a groundshaker, when, in fact, the answer is simple.
podium123456 wrote:GhostWriter wrote:
The lack of any follow-up behind each of his "cases" seems to me as scum trying to point at people once said scum has been called out for lack of hunting, but not having anything to back it up with due to either knowing that they are aiming at townies who aren't guilty or scum partners they aren't willing to bus at the moment.
Sigh... pay attention kids.
There were 3 'cases' (although i wouldnt really call VV's observation a 'case')
1. VV's 'case'. There IS no follow up to 'those are low-thought questions'... it's an observation... what should i follow up with? Should i have repeated the observation? Tell me.
2. Seacores 'case'. I
FOLLOWED UP ON IT.
3. My other case was on implosion.... AND HE HADNT RESPONDED. How should i have followed up with that? Tell me? Repeated it as well?
You have quite the knack of being pretty damn disingenuous -- if not flat out misrepresenting -- with your language. Too bad there's all that text to prove you wrong.
1. Let us begin with knowing that "follow-up" doesn't mean "continue to call them scum". You ended up pulling a 180 on VV. All we had to go on was that you liked the fact that they defended you. A HORRIBLE reason, and, quite frankly, not much of a follow-up, if you can even call it that, which I cannot. You do not even really go in-depth about the defense.
2. Posts 87 and 95 counter that. After that, there is no more mention of him until the vote, which, as pointed out before, came after Fate began showing increased interest in Seacore as a possibility for scum. Oh, but you didn't read any of that...
3. Repeated it? Yes. Yes you should have. And broke it down for people when they wouldn't listen. And then asked why they didn't agree with it. And if then gone from there. Or you could have argued with the people who began to pick it apart in front of you.
podium123456 wrote:GhostWriter wrote:
I sneaked a peak ahead, someone already answers your first problem with MoI's post.
The next thing, though... He wasn't even attacking you over it, he called it a nulltell, and you defended against that for what reason, exactly?
It's because i didn't understand who he was directing the first part to. I thought he was criticizing me, and saying my story 'wasn't convincing'... in the next part he said 'that doesn't sell me either'... so i thought all of that was connected and related to my argument.
Or you're set to cruise-control with your defending.
podium123456 wrote:GhostWriter wrote:
Post 204: You claim one is not excluxive of the other, yet how can you be confused by a post in the way Fate implied, and yet also be sure of something about the post, in the way Fate implied?
Restate the question, im not sure what you are asking.
No need, it was already touched upon and you ended up answering it. I forget to who at the moment, but I was writing things up as I went, so this just ended up in the post.
podium123456 wrote:GhostWriter wrote:
239: Okay, cut that out. "I'm too busy defending" is not a good defence. The best defense in mafia is a good offense. Meaning if you really wanted to prove how town you are, you'd attack someone you found scummy and prove why that is, instead of spending time split 50/50 between defending and complaining about having to defend.
Fuck. You. Look at the timestamps on those posts, and what was said. People were hitting me with posts left and right, and then asking why i hadn't responded yet... as if i was ignoring them because they were valid points or something. Yesterday was NOT a typical scumday. And this isn't the only game i was attending to.
and again... IGNORE the fact that i took the time to attack someone (and make a case) i found scummy right in the middle of all that.
i LITERALLY did what you said i should have done. disengenious as hell.
Yet you spend so much time defending that your attacks get swallowed up, when they do happen. For instance, what attack were you making in that post?
podium123456 wrote:GW refuses to acknowledge the points i made that shoot holes in the biggest part of his case. his language is disengenious as hell, as PROVEN above.
i want to hear how he justifies some of his misreps.
scummy behavior ='s scummy read
Oh yeah, let me tell you. Because the fact that you didn't go after Nacho is totally like my case getting shot with a bullet from the golden gun on Goldeneye...
Preview Edit: There's more! Oh boy!
You continue to emphasize that you dropped it. Fail to see the point you're trying to make. You fail to remember (here we go again) the "for later" part. To use FOR LATER. So that you could try to combine it with other things later and turn it on Fate. Luckily, you've never played with or heard of Fate, so this backfired against you greatly. My case isn't swiss cheese.