McNoble, dude, you're just digging yourself deeper. I fully admitted that what drew my attention to questioning you were "feelings" and "tenuous" like the overly helpful thing, which I found somewhat scummy. I then said so, and you abandoned
immediately any stance that could be construed as helpful, and grew increasingly confrontational.
Here. You had been invariably polite, until I said "and a bit of that 'too helpful' vibe". Just a "vibe". your response? "I'm not trying to be helpful. I'm establishing for the record that you know what you're doing, so that if you keep doing it and it goes to shit you can't go "oh, I herpaderped, my bad" when D2 rolls around." Immediately disowning the behaviour that had been seen as scummy, and turning from helpful to "if it goes to shit I'll git ya!"
This. This reversal of attitude, is the first strong point of your scumminess. Before that, it was just a feeling, but this was undeniable. You can't read your posts before this, and after this, and not admit that there was a notorious change, can you?
From there, it got worse. No, "clarification of same" is not part of my case. "Abandonment of same when confronted with perception of scuminess of same" is.
Then you added others. Overdefensiveness? Aggresive overreaction to a vote? How about this:
and of turning markedly confrontational as soon as some of your actions were called scummy.
Surely you are joking, Mr. Feynman? If clarifying your misreading of my statement counts as confrontational in the version of English you are presently employing, then I shudder to imagine an actual confrontation.
Isn't that confrontational? Yes, it is. Were you confrontational before I accused you? No, you weren't. Therefore, you "turned markedly confrontational as soon as some of your actions were called scummy."
You can add your "rebuttal" as an additional point (as in "Lynch all liars").
So, when I'm being brief I'm lying by omission...
When you say my case didn't in fact include "turned confrontational" when
you knew it did, yes. That's not brevity, that's deliberate omission, and misrepresentation of the facts. You lie. Lynch all liars.
Want one more? over-defensiveness.
... and when I'm being thorough I'm over-defensive.
Seems to me you are not being thorough. You are being dismissive, aggressive, deceitful, and panicky. Why? Because I voted you. Yes, over-defensive.
But the words speak for themselves, and it's not you who needs to be convinced. People will make their own minds and have their own reads.
I welcome people's opinions of my case against McNoble.. I am, however, surprised at how quickly and utterly you abandoned that politeness of which you were so proud not ten posts ago. I thought it would have more of a spine, but oh well. Not even at his direst would Sir Humphrey Applebee sink that low!
[[OOC: Can't resist, McNoble reminded me of it. Sir Humphrey, at his most cross, angry, having been evicted and dispossessed of his most priced keys and passes to cabinet offices, when he was at the brink of tears, he exclaimed:
"Prime Minister: I must protest, in the most energic of terms the continuation of the current policies that place intolerable limitations upon the ingress and egress of senior members of the hierarchy, which will in all probably, if these deplorable conditions are continuated, result in a state of organisational atrophy and administrative paralysis which will culminate in an inability to discharge the functions of government within Her Majesty's United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland!"
...man! How much of a geek am I that I typed that from memory?
/OOC]]
PPE:
Pranz: I don't know. Do. Reread the posts I
linked way back when. Calm down, think, and play for your team to win.