Valern has not read this thread very well, and seems to be tunneling on me without good reason. I'm taking this opportunity to defend myself yet again, as noted below:
Valern wrote:Top of Barry's 230 sounds like OMGUS minus the accompanying vote.
Actually, my post included this
:
Barry Allen wrote:3. This is where Ace is being overly defensive. If I were ready to FoS you I would have done so.
Please tell me how this is OMGUS. I was defending myself from Ace's post, not OMGUS'ing him.
Valern wrote:Not really feeling Barry's case on Hiplop [259]. Seems like he's on his case for playstyle more than anything else. More scumminess from Barry, though, as he spends all that space on a Hiplop case and then backs out with a non-commital "is he scum? i dano lol" at the end. Looks like Barry is dipping his pinky finger in the waters trying to determine if the water's the right temperature for a Hiplop soup.
Please get the quote right if you want to use it against me. This was a post well before I posted a vote, when I was explaining what was then just an FoS on hiplop. My actual quote was:
Barry Allen wrote:Now, does this all add up to scum? It's not hard evidence, so I would like to hear more from hiplop upon his return.
I was not doing an LOL "backing away from a case", I was giving hiplop a chance to respond to an FoS before deciding to vote.
Valern wrote:Barry's 273 is noted. I haven't really been reading much of the current pages yet, but I'm aware Pine is the lead wagon and that he's been on V/LA. Interested to see if Barry was consistent with his "I don't want to vote someone on V/LA before they post a defense" statement.
I think I have shown my consistency, especially as regards L-1 before Pine gets to defend himself.
Valern wrote:Barry 292 - he seems to like to comment on people and say things to the effect of finding them voteworthy without actually placing a vote. Why has this guy not gotten more attention?
I think this is claiming that giving your reads on different players is somehow scummy. That is ridiculous on its face.
Valern wrote:Barry 299 - Like his question at scumhunter regarding pine, suspicious of his relative lack of useful comments on Scumhunter's reads.
This looks like tunneling.
Valern wrote:SH 305 - "As for my reads list. I want to change it a little. I'm going to back off both my Barry scum read and my hiplop town read a bit" -- okay, sure, so he talked with Barry and found him to be slightly townier. I can see that, even if I don't agree with it. But why is hiplop suddenly scummier when he didn't post, unless he's sheeping Barry's logic (who he previously thought was most scummy behind Ace)? SUSPICIOUS.
More tunneling.
Valern wrote:Barry's response to hiplop [335] cements my feelings that this is scum-on-town.
Here is the link to that post. I responded to hiplop and did NOT vote for him at that time, giving him the opportunity to respond after coming off V/LA.
Valern wrote:Barry 340 - He comes in to respond to hiplop and COMPLETELY IGNORES ace's case on Pine. Afraid of having to fake a reaction?
Valern is talking about the post where Ace comments on Pine,
and then votes DemonHybrid in that post instead of Pine
. Why would I go into detail on Ace's case on Pine when Ace was voting for someone else in that same post?
Valern wrote:Barry 346 - Suddenly, the typo thing is scummy enough for a vote, despite him saying it was null in 340! AMAZING!
Here is the link to that post.
If you actually read that post you will find that there were a LOT of reasons I was voting hiplop. My note of his typos was an observation after I had made my case, NOT the case itself.
TLDR: Valern took a very poor read of the thread, decided on a lynch target, then went back to twist and misquote posts in order to make his version of a "case". Valern uses Ace's observations as part of his case, ignoring the fact that Ace has long since noted me as a town read. If you compare the actual posts to the misquotes, I believe you will see that this is a bad case.