Just to walk you through his posting, here's a quick summation;
In post 79, lane0168 wrote:You don't have to respond with "I got us out of RVs didn't I?" But I think your questions on the way there were just.... I need to find the words.
Here's his explanation of his vote on me which, based on his later explanations, is pretty suspect to begin with.
In post 95, lane0168 wrote:Well I don't know what grok is... But burden of proficiency eh?
Do we know each other? Have we ever played with each other? Should I know you?
I don't know what burden of proficiency has anything to do with it. Explain that.
This is a strange non-sequitur which kind of acts like I'm up to something but that I literally did nothing to trigger (and when I asked him about it he ducked the question)
In post 102, lane0168 wrote:This logical fallacy is based on the assumption that renowned players are expected to find scum. The attacker asserts that because the player in question has not yet found (enough) scum, they themselves are more likely to be scum...
So because he didn't find scum by the 4th post... He's the most likely to be scum?
I honestly thought you were confused about what burden of proficiency and were using it incorrectly
The bold is a direct misrep - especially considering in the post he's responding to I explicitly described how I was applying the tell.
The line immediately after the misrep acts like this is something he's been analyzing for a while (even though he was the second person to ask me the same question and needed to have th eanswer repeated to him - which looks to me like a fake scumhunting tell.)
In post 106, lane0168 wrote:As far as I can tell you explained it as "burden of proficiency". So please, explain it again because I seem to misunderstand how sesq not finding scum yet makes him scum.
He's called on the misrep and then asks me to explain again rather than offering up his reasoning to have reached the analysis conclusion of me not understanding the tell (never mind that if he had decided I was dense and was using the tell name wrong that there is no evidence to suggest that is remotely scummy)
It's not a pretty progression of thought. It reads like he found something he thinks he could paint as "wrong" and attacked it rather than finding something he thinks is scummy.
Now, yes, he may just be sloppy town, I am debating that - but to have him as town anything at this stage boggles my mind.
