for the 1,000,062ed time, i will answer a question WHEN I SEE THEM!In post 1162, mutantdevle wrote:So @UCV, here is my list of all the times you have failed to answer a question, not answered a question adequately or been ignorant to calls against you. Sorry about this wall but I think that just reflects how your play has been:
913 - At the top of my post I asked you a question. The second one was, of course, rhetorical but I would have liked an answer to the first question. Overall, you didn't really react to my post here at all.
945 - Boring asked who you were leaning town on based on your initial read of the thread. You never replied. Your next post after this simply promised thoughts on DV which didn't address either my nor boring's questions.
948 - I reinforce the idea I want you to answer my question in 913 yet you continue to ignore it.
970 - fishy votes for you and says your attack on DV was bad. You made no attempts to justify your attack on DV after this and you claim fishy's vote on you was a random jump. This is blatantly ignoring how someone is seeing scum within you.
993 - fishy makes a proper case against you and calls you out as scum. He made several points in this post which you chose not to address for a while. Furthermore, at the bottom of the post, he asks you a question based on something you wrote in post 968. You have yet to answer this question and clear the confusion with the point you were making there.
994 - Luca says he agrees with fishy which clearly shows there is some support against you. You completely ignored this additional pressure.
1001 - Luca asks if you are going to answer fishy's case against you and in post 1003 you straight up tell us you are not. So you are purposely avoiding any pressure put on you with the excuse it doesn't help you scum hunt which is such a bs point to make.
1005 - You make a complete u-turn on your stance of not answering fishy. But instead of addressing each of his points you simply ask a few questions to reject the points made against you. I do not feel you answered fishy, you just tried to make it seem like you did. If that was genuinely your defence against him then it is a very poor defence and does no one any favours.
1012 - fishy points out your response wasn't good enough and asks you to answer each point he makes individual which you have not done. He then asks if you read the boring vote in context which you also have not replied to.
1014 - Deas asks you to elaborate on your read on him by explaining the inaccuracies within it. You do not answer.
1025 - You completely ignore everything that has happened beforehand here to take a weak shot at Ectomancer. You make no reference to any of the mounting pressure on you and seem oblivious to everyone's points against you.
In posts 1038 and 1040 you are purposely ambiguous over what I am doing to raise alarm bells for you despite Transcend's call for you to elaborate. 1040 was hardly an elaboration as you briefly state 1 new thing followed by a reiteration of your previous post.
1059 - Luca votes for you which you seemingly do not care for and you choose to ignore.
1068 - I call you out for a 2nd time for not answering my question in 913. I also make reference to how you inadequately answered fishy's concerns. Finally, I directly call you scum in this read and state how I intend for there to be a wagon upon you. You make no attempts to address any of this reiteration.
1069 - At the top of this post I make a statement of how you could be in a scum team with boring and kelbris. Not one of you three have addressed this thought and it makes me wonder why you'd choose to ignore it. Boring even quoted the rest of what I was saying in that post so she purposely left out the part where I call the 3 of you out. Would you like to address your relationship with boring and kelbris now?
1077 - You claim there is barely a case on you yet both fishy and Luca are voting for you. Furthermore, I had put forth and interest in voting for you as well as generally being against you. Finally, DV had also questioned you to some extent. If all of that is "barely a case" then it must take the entire town to be against someone before you think they are being opposed.
1082 - Luca asks you 3 questions here. You only answered 2 of them. You are still yet to answer whether you think myself or DV are more likely to be scum.
1088 - I asked you about whether you are reading in context which you have not answered. It is still unclear now if you have read things in context. I also mention how you had not answered my original question for the 3rd time as well as reference how you haven't been answering other people's questions as well.
1091 - Luca aks you what made you change your thoughts on Transcend. You ignored this question for quite some time.
1096 - I vote for you, which you also ignore. Would you still consider being halfway towards a lynch as barely a case?
1103 - I make a detailed post as a defence against the points you made against me. This is the kind of thing you should have done when fishy called you out. Furthermore, if you are genuinely trying to push for a wagon on me like you suggest later then surely you would respond to my defence by addressing each point I make? So are you serious about trying to lynch me or what?
1109 - You answered fishy's question in 1108 basically immediately whilst ignoring the huge post I made about you and the other concerns players have such as why your view on Transcend had changed.
1111 - You get angry with me because apparently I had never asked you any questions. Not only have I asked you many questions but I've also stated you're not answering other's questions. You claimed you looked through my posts and couldn't find anything which makes me doubt this claim since I mentioned that you hadn't answered a question 3 times; 4 if you include the question itself. Furthermore, this post makes it clear that you've acknowledged my calls to answer questions but have ignored them every time. Even if you didn't know what questions I was referring to you have had at least 3 opportunities to inquire as to what I meant. But instead you maintain ignorance against most of the posts that call you out.
1117 - You finally answer Luca's question in post 1091, at least, it appears that way. You stated in the next post that you were actually thinking of DV so that invalidates your explanation of why your Transcend vote changed. You then stated your reason for the change which was kinda strange if you ask me. You stated the change was because his reason of trying to attract the night kill made sense to you but his alleged motive of trying to attract the night kill would have been something you would have read before you gave the initial read on him if you truly did read the thread as you claim.
1156 - You ask us not to meta read you. Why, is there something in your meta you have to hide? Meta is a good way of scum telling players if their general play style is consistent. At least you have started to address concerns against you in this post and post 1158 but the way you are doing so is coming across as aggressively anti-town and as though you feel backed into a corner. Besides, you still have a lot more to answer to.
That's 25 points against you. Do you see why both myself and others see you as scummy? I expect you to adequately answer everything I have brought up here. If you feel like that's too much to answer all at once then you should have been answering these concerns as the game has gone on. I doubt you're going to answer much of this though since you never do.
I have not seen a question from you I havn't all ready answered. do you need me to iso you and quote all your posts to show you this?
