cropcircles wrote:See, I'm not voting you because you attacked PJ. I was saying that the case against you is stronger then the case against PJ, thus you are a better place for my vote.
Well then that's fair enough. Half of the reason I was suspicious of you in my previous post was because of the way I thought you were subtly misrepresenting my case by making a disagreement seem vote-worthy. But I now see that your post can also be interpreted this way.
cropcircles wrote:Everything here is completely useless and pointless. I can read. I saw what you said. When people write nothing, but do it in a lot of words, it is a tell.
That's a tell because it allows scum to lurk while appearing not to lurk. Are you suggesting that I'm lurking? I'm the most active player in the thread!
cropcircles wrote:Turbovolver wrote:
I would think it scummy if somebody ignored every mention of their name, and only responded when they got a vote or an FOS.
Yeah, that's not really gonna catch you many scum.
Clarify this please?
Also, I'm not going to throw a bunch of quotes in here, but what exactly have I been repeating over and over? I looked back because I thought I had explained myself to Stewie and then again to Sotty7, but no I actually just told Sotty7 to re-read the thread as I'd already explained myself.
I didn't do a 100% thorough check though - do you care to point out where I have been doing this?
Lastly,
Turbovolver wrote:In my opinion a player is "over defensive" (in a scummy way, at least) when their defenses of their actions start to involve reaching, when they begin defending against things they haven't been accused of yet, or another I recently discovered is when they go on a campaign to defame their attacker(s) in any way possible.
cropcircles wrote:You're attacking your attacker. By your own definition, you're being over defensive. Real slick.
Attacking my attacker is nothing like defamation. And suggesting that it is wrong to attack your attacker is rubbish:
I am calling out things in your posts that I see as logic flaws. If I truly believe that you are using flawed logic to make your case, it is
natural
for me to attack you - it's the scum that have to make up their arguments and hence are far more likely to use flawed logic.
Unvote: petroleumjelly
Vote: cropcircles
I still don't feel as though his attacks on me are genuine. He removed some of my previous suspicion by explaining how I misunderstood the "case against PJ" thing, but then he put all the suspicion back on with the rest of his latest post.
