There has always been at least one Kook. there will always be at least one Kook.
He asserts a falsehood as truth, and claims to have knowledge he doesn't have. Those are clear, blatant, scummy lies. But I'll let Meph confirm, maybe I'm wrong, and we'll indeed always have a kook.
It's hyperbole, but most games do seem to have a kook, and I don't think 2 kooks is hugely unlikely with 15 players.
More seriously, I think that your original RV on Argembarger was leading. It sounded like you were trying to trick him into saying he was scum which is, in itself, a scummy way to question.
If I actually were able to trick people into admitting their guilt I'd probably be in the courts rather than here. It was more of a "see if they flip out over nothing" question.
I don't think it was overexplanation, my thoughts on webadict are complex. I needed all of it to get my point across.
Yes, they make sense in that answer. But... you were being asked about a previous event, and you didn't bring up most of those reasons then.
I...never unvoted...
Ah yes, I forgot you don't vote.
and what else was I supposed to say about active-lurking? "I'm not. Totally not at all."? I just found it odd that you left it at that and moved on to others (which I know now weren't actual full posts). The least I expected was for you to say something regarding what you think are crap responses. That's usually something you follow up on.
I am and have. Hence my vote on you.
Not necessarily lynched, not yet anyway. But you're getting close and you seem most deserving of my attention right now.
So uh... do something about it?
I'm calling bullshit on that. What proof do you have that I wasn't going to follow up on that? If it's insufficient or interesting, I'll follow up. You saying "you will now because I pointed it out" just goes to show you're only trying to dirty my name and so far, I've only known scum to do that.
He says while uh, not following up on them. And I haven't been dirtying your name so much as pointing out why you're scum.
As for the previous questions, nothing interesting popped up. Org gave a useless answer and made it apparent that I wouldn't give much with it and Book answered sufficiently. Aside from that, I realized there wasn't much to actually gain from those questions, so I decided to abandon them.
The least I expected was for you to say something regarding what you think are crap responses. That's usually something you follow up on.
Hehehe.
I could have just as easily said 'not a reason at all.' Seems like we're splitting hairs here and talking about the same thing.
Fair enough, seems I just misread that.
MBP. Flimsy reasoning, taken the game's been going on this long. Seriously. The kook claim was a bad reason in RVS already, and now it is even worse.
Does flimsy reasoning make you scum? If so, how?
I voted him because I saw no reason for him to be content with my response. I wasn't even content with it. But that matter is over with, so unvote for now.
...
What? You made a response so bad that apparently being content with it would be a scumtell (not how it actually happened, but whatever) but it's all good because now... the same person is content with it? What?
So I'm only scum when you think I might be attacking you?
...Yeah, I'm sortof tunneling here, but quite frankly I feel like it's too late to read all those WoTs today. I'll try and get a proper suspicion list tomorrow.