In post 773, -Grey- wrote:In post 772, cassielle wrote:i did not intentionally misrepresent you. if i misrepresented you at all i dont want you to jump on me with both feet and just start beating tf out of me, i want you to point out specifics calmly.
- Accusing me of defending my predecessor
- "target locked" commentary about my
570- accusing me of being Scum for skimming when you've done the same
- twisting my playstyle as being alignment indicative
going to try and handle this now so you realize i didnt go into this intending to just tear you down and we can be a bit more productive when im ready to get back into the thick of things.
1: that was my read. to be fair i presented it stronger than "imo" or such because fishing for reaction there but yeah i got more than i bargained for. on the quoted list that is the only thing for which that is the case (reaction fishing, i mean). i even posted "ok, that's fair" in response. see
7112: "target locked" was explicitly stated to be my personal read.
In post 717, -Grey- wrote:In post 678, cassielle wrote:#
570 i can practically hear "target locked." thats a bit of hindsight but jfc
again, yeah, stronger than maybe it should be but that is definitely and unmistakably my personal read of it. i dont consider this misrepresentative. this is clearly put out as subjective, from where im sitting. can we agree that i at least represented it as my personal read there?
3: i havent done the same from where im sitting. and also, for me at least, it isnt purescum behavior. its scummy, but not scumclaim-tier. if someone showed evidence of a lot of skimming and the rest was all 100% NAI, thatd be scumlean or light nullscum even for me.
regarding me doing the same: if youre talking about the game you linked, i was /not/ skimming. i was doing the exact opposite and carefully reading through. i had gotten to around page 7 when i tabbed back over to see if anyone had jumped on. i never got to the point you were linking precisely because i wasnt skimming. i think thats one of the things that really ticked me off because to me it didnt make any sense -- if i was way earlier in the game when i tabbed back, wouldnt that imply deep-reading instead of skimming? etc.
you said that was the second time but looking back through i dont see the first, perhaps because it wasnt marked as being about me skimming directly. if you could link to the post ill explain myself. if i dont have a good response i will accept that hey, maybe i did. i was feeling flustered and not myself at all by the end, its very possible i did skim.
4: the playstyle thing im going to drop. to me its strong anti-town, but w/e, you think /my/ playstyle is strong anti-town and apparently i made life hell for rask despite trying to move on to finding a diff strong scumread (which is also my counter to your post regarding the "GET OFF MY BACK" quote) so what the hell.
at this point though, yeah, the whole thing falls apart. im staying off your wagon till endgame short of a LyLo/MyLo situation because this was not fun for me and apparently my playstyle is just going to get us right back where we were earlier. and for that reason im dropping my scumread on you, you're null. wincon is great and all but winning means nothing if im unhappy in the game.
when im ready to actually participate again im going to have to re-read the whole thing because with you off the list the top scum reads make no sense. tb+shade is not a likely team by any means. if you can come up with better, do it. i have nothing and no one else has anything so we need it.