Sure, sure. Trying to get your bearings. Why, then, have you buddied three times even though almost immediately after each time you were told not to do that? Why, then, have you put forward no new arguments of your own since the random voting phase? Why, then, have you only been wagoning on other people's suspicions of SirBayer, who you were the initial attacker of? Why, then, are you acting exactly like a scum trying to push through someone he expects to be an easy lynch?
Because you are scum. Die.
Forgot to say this: the repetitive structure you're using generally functions better with three syntactically parallel phrases, and any differentiation occurring in the last of the three. I.e., establish a pattern and break it.
Here is what you wrote:
Why, then, have you buddied three times even though almost immediately after each time you were told not to do that? -
Repetition one: [Rep phrase] - [Behavior] - [Intensifier]Why, then, have you put forward no new arguments of your own since the random voting phase? -
Repetition two: [Rep phrase] - [Behavior] - [Qualifier]Why, then, have you only been wagoning on other people's suspicions of SirBayer, who you were the initial attacker of?
Repetition three: [Rep phrase] - [Behavior] - [Intensifier]Why, then, are you acting exactly like a scum trying to push through someone he expects to be an easy lynch? -
Repetition four: [Rep phrase] - [Behavior] - [No modifier]The result of this progression is that your statement seems a little bit clunky. To make our repetitions legible, we typically make our initial structures more rigid and then break the frame only in the final repetition. We perform this break for purposes of causing psychological discomfort, i.e. it puts more emphasis on the final and strongest accusation. Please note as well that we wish our statements to be ordered in intensity, so that accusations move from least to most powerful.
Since your third statement is essentially an instantiation of the second, I would suggest reformulating your collection thus:
Why, then, have you buddied three times even though almost immediately after each time you were told not to do that? -
Repetition one: [Rep phrase] - [Behavior] - [Intensifier]Why, then, have you put forward no new arguments of your own since the random voting phase? -
Repetition two: [Rep phrase] - [Behavior] - [Intensifier - we can play this off as being a long time, rather than a weakening of your statement]Why, then, are you acting exactly like a scum trying to push through someone he expects to be an easy lynch? -
Repetition three: [Rep phrase] - [Behavior] - [No modifier <- pattern break on strongest statement.]Notice also that we have an interesting structure with statement length symmetrical about repetition two, increasing intensity, and a third statement that not only follows logically from the others but also breaks the structural pattern.
Dunno if it will help anyone, but I figured I'd throw it out there anyway.
Author
Topic: Boot Camp Mafia: End (Read 34952 times)