IronyOwl:
As far as you questioning your buddying, I wouldn't have mentioned the second example were it not for the first- it's more establishing an association. The third one, like I said, is setting up a false "us vs them," where you push Jokerman away from you and pull Zathras toward you.
So mentioning his name
is buddying, but only when I've buddied him earlier. Gotcha.
Let's just simplify this: Rephrase the information the way I would have put it if I hadn't been trying to establish connections and pose false dilemmas. Let's get the nonscummy version up there for comparison.
If it's any consolation, I tried to deliberately not mention how scummy it was that Jokerman wanted to be all reasonable now.
So you didn't mention something you saw as a scumtell so as to improve your own image? That's very townie behavior! [/sarcasm]
Jesus, you really want me lynched, don't you? I didn't want to step on Zath's toes, as I've mentioned previously. Where did I mention my image?
You are the man for now Irony. If you want to throw back the quotes with the reason why for you it's not buddying go ahead, but i'm certain people here already got their opinion on it. If you want to be actually usefull, go right ahead, i'll be checking you go.
What is this bolded part? Is it some kind of veiled threat? You seem to be saying "go ahead and defend yourself but I'm sure several people have already made up their minds regardless of what you say."
Toaster, you seem to be our resident wording-minutiae-scum-everywhere expert, what do you make of this? Is it a veiled attempt to get people to think of me as scum?
What I read from this is MBP saying "I think you're scum, ok bye now." He's not trying to push his view on anyone else, and there's a sense of conclusion to his attack line on you.
That's backwards; he says he's certain
others have already made up their minds, but if I want to defend myself or be useful he'll be right there checking up on me. For the amount of attention you've paid to my wording, and the dire implications you've drawn from them, you seem awfully careless and carefree with MBP's. Why?
I find it noteworthy that I've never seen you this aggressive this early, Toaster. Are you eager for an opportunity or simply desperate to defend your scumbuddy?
Am i now ? Why dont you re-read yourself ? Now with actually relevant titles
IronyOwl PostsRV Question-Yes
Fuck yeah Zathras mode. Calling Jokerman on lurking policy-Yes
Attacking Jokerman with Zathras argument. It's ok since hes good.-*BZZZZRT*, we have bullshit. I was attacking him for one of the same reasons as Zath, but I wasn't copying him. You have the last part backwards- I felt it was okay to attack him THAT LIGHTLY because Zath was already on it.
Nothing usefull, why cant you see that Jokerman is scummier than meeeeeeeee, Irony edition-You don't think questioning Pandar and pointing out that Jokerman is going back on his own policy to avoid attention is useful? I also see that you're now using Toaster's argument, which is both ironic and the same issue you've had before with reading key phrases and nothing else.
Me , buddying ?? But that's non-possible-*BZZZRT*, bullshit again! It had already been established that I buddied him the first time; Toaster was grasping at straws for the rest. But please, if you agree with him use your own words and quotes, I'd like to see your reasoning.
But i'm totaly fine with it. It's normal after all.-Now you're just trying to make me look bad, in the same way you (and Toaster, hrm) have been- taking things I've stated and trying to make them look scummy. Why don't you explain- again, in your own words, precisely, and with quotes when appropriate- what about this was scummy?
I totally should not have said that fuck yeah Zathras thing-*BZZZZZRT*, yet more bullshit! Not being a native speaker will only excuse so much of this shit. I said I didn't
have to have said it, but I've never said I shouldn't have.
I don't understand/ I don't trust him, i just let him do my scumhunting for me -That's odd, in the
third link attacking the same guy as Zath was a scumtell! Now
not attacking him is a scumtell? Which is it, MBP?
Oh hell NAW i wasn't buddying that man, Zathras.-Once AGAIN, there's a difference between "I was buddying here" and the horseshit Toaster's been spewing. I see you STILL refuse to read the goddamned thread, and insist on latching onto Toaster's strategy instead.
Where is that scumhunting you want me to see ? You did ask a few question on Jokerman, then just stood back throwing flowers at Zathras from the side.Oh, you also threw a few inane question at Pandar then tried to get yourself out of the pit you dug yourself. That's scumhunting like i've never seen.
Answers included. So, here we have the sum of your arguments:
-Attacking the same target as Zath is scummy
-Letting Zath attack the target instead is scummy
-Poking Pandarsenic is inane, and therefore scummy
-Responding to questions directed at me is attempting to dig myself out of a pit, and therefore scummy
-Buddying once means "throwing flowers at Zathras the whole game," and is therefore scummy
Congratulations, you're tunneling like crazy, despite needing to outright lie to do so.
For one thing, Zathras is scum. You're so jumpy, dude, it's appalling.
As to your question: IronyOwl for sure, and maybe Pandar. I would say Zathras, though it's not really much beyond a feeling that's developing as time goes.
So I'm
certainly scum, but you're voting for Zathras, even though that's just a well-developed feeling. Why?
Pandarsenic, you still haven't answered any questions. You've had plenty of time to ask your own questions, and receive answers, but you're still avoiding giving opinions or saying anything definitive (aside from the Org bit) like the plague.