webadict, since you've displayed the maturity of a child with your death threats, I will now refer to you appropriately.
Jim, goading Webadict isn't exactly a sign of maturity either. In fact, you've been pretty inflamatory and petty yourself.
Moreover, what's the goal in asking him loaded questions, where he can't answer without either insulting himself, or admiting to being scum? Do you hope to force him to ignore the question, and then use that against him?
And thus, the scumhunt charade goes.
I suppose you have a point.
Hmph.
Eh, I don't really expect anything productive to come out of the loaded question (because webadict is horribly unproductive when faced with people who dare deign to challenge his supreme lordly intelligence), but it does serve to make a point: his accusation arises from either petty or suspicious motives. I don't think there is an alternative. And here I stand surprised.
But you're right that I'm being petty about it, but I don't really care all that much. It's so hard to resist when it's so easy to turn webadict from mildly abrasive into grating jackass at the drop of a hat. With such control over a person, wouldn't you do the same?
Except it wasn't a random vote. I had exactly 1 random vote, placed onto Ottofar after I read a sentence of his, mostly in hopes that it would successfully end RVS. It did. I kept my vote where it was until I read forsaken1111. I voted him promptly, so that I may have my vote on him, and he would display more scumminess while I collected data thereon. He didn't respond at all to it.
No, wait, I mentioned that I was in the process of conversing about said vote, when he replied questioningly about that statement. He was thus wagoned upon and refused to not only defend himself, but also to attack or anything. He continued his passive resistance to the flow of the game and dammed the entire thread up.
You seem to think that I care whether he's concerned about my vote or not. I could care less. I planned on voting him for the rest of the Day once I voted him in the first place. His reaction is something that I'd want, yes, but I'd only use it to further my goal of lynching him.
Where, oh where, did you get the idea that I randomvote willy nilly? I ended the RVS a long time ago, and if you haven't found someone scummy yet, you're doing it wrong.
But, you're right, aren't you? We should merely act cool to being voted after random voting has stopped. Everyone should vote Jim Groovester, because it'll be random, and he'll be cool about it. Right? Isn't that right, Jimmy? *nudge nudge* Now dance, pretty boy.
If it wasn't a random vote then it was a pressure vote; whatever you call it, it's designed to get a reaction, and I've seen you do it many times before. It's a matter of semantics, which you spend an inordinate amount of time arguing to avoid answering questions.
You seem to suggest that
no matter forsaken1111's reaction you were planning on using it to lynch him. If you don't care whether the reaction makes forsaken1111 look like town or scum, then that suggests you're not interested in scumhunting at all and you'd rather pursue lynches.
I find it incredibly difficult to believe that you're town if you don't care how people react to your votes.
But, you're right, aren't you? We should merely act cool to being voted after random voting has stopped.
If the vote comes from you,
absolutely. It doesn't matter whether you're town or scum, giving you any reaction outside of the one you arbitrarily deem correct is almost always counterproductive.
Unvote, Solifuge
Hmm, okay. You're going to have to explain that one.
Author
Topic: Paranormal Mafa - Round 16 - Game Over! (Read 58654 times)