My vote goes to
kilakan. My case is below and in my previous posts. I don't really mind tying the votes for another few hours, because chances are someone'll read this.
Before that he was already getting a bit touchy about the subject of questions, but has yet to actually say that 'he' thinks they are good.
Why is this relevant?
It's a transition, from trying to be cool, to becoming incredibly solid and defensive on the subject of his questions.
Well, wouldn't you be defensive when attacked? I don't really see why this is that special to you.
Before that he is saying that he always gets told his questions are useless and shrugs it off.
Okay. What do you think about it?
I think that at that point he was attempting to maintain his composure on a touchy subject, and arguing that point would make him lose that composure so he let it slide.
Right. That's an amazing tell you found there - let me change my vote right away.
MaxWhite-Tell us what merits you think there are in each particular question that make them 'good'.
This is, for the most part, directly derived from Leafsnail's argument. Noted.
What makes Leafsnail's point voteworthy for you? Mind providing some reasons of your own as to why the questions are bad?
See I don't really think they are overly bad or really good. In my opinion they are middle road, and I wanted to hear from Max what he wanted from each question. Judging by the fact that he only pursued the crownofFire line of questions tells me that he didn't expect all that much from them. At least he didn't plan on having second questions to each of them.
First off, I'll point out how you talked
around the questions but neglected to actually reply with what I asked for. You haven't supplied an original reason, you didn't tell me how these "bad" questions are lynchworthy, and what's more, you just rescinded your primary argument.
Secondly, your lynch vote, and let me quote it, said "Tell us what merits you think there are in each particular question that make them 'good'." Now, this very clearly shows that you don't think they're "middle road". And since you voted on that specific argument, you clearly feel strongly for it - that they are "overly bad". You then repeat and argue this point several times in later posts, so you've got some commitment.
I wouldn't call that the words of a man who really believes in the quote I'm replying to.Thirdly, despite all your conviction, when I just prod you gently for it, your entire position falls apart. Not good.
So since he didn't put enough thought into the questions to actually be able to push more then one of them, I'd say the questions were not all that good and mainly to make it look like he was very active right at the start.
Where did I hear this before? Oh, right, it's just a rehash of Leafsnail's posts with a tacked-on activelurking argument at the end.
So, in conclusion, you don't actually have anything, do you? You're just rolling with an easy lynch - an entire half (five sixths in spirit) of your argument is a rehash, and that half fell apart. Leaving you what, exactly? "Oh, he lost his cool a bit when he fended off Leafsnail" is not a case.
Not only that, but you haven't had a shot at anyone else today. This is everything noteworthy you have, none of it original. Nothing.
Now, I wasn't accounting for this, but I'll take your shitty Solifuge case apart too.
Either way I am not convinced you are scum enough to be lynched, and we are damn close to a no-lynch so Unvote
Why aren't you convinced? And why change now, if you weren't to begin with?
Solifuge-I happen to be a very good fan of the lynch-all-lurkers policy. You attack me with shit all reasoning, say more in a bit twice in a row and only deliver once. Before that you said yourself you were content to sit back and watch
So you change from a lynch vote to an 11th hour policy vote, in D1 even. Real smart, scumface.
Additionally, this is a straight rip from Jim Groovester coupled with an OMGUS.
Anyway, I hate to sit back and watch, but I'm going to for a bit longer. Not even posing a silly question, I'm afraid. =(
And you have all of three very small posts so far. I think you should hang, because you are lurking insanely so far, fail to deliver on promises, and don't even try to propose a good attack when you are here. I'd like to be able to have more to go on but the problem with lurkers is that they don't actually give you anything.
So you're content to go on "nothing" instead of what you already have. You're not putting up a lot of compelling reasons, boy.
In short, go hang. I'll be there to take the head as a souvenir.
In short, the reasons for his vote are flawed and he borrows Max White's language against kilakan verbatim (which is also flawed).
Jim-Would you mind explaining the underlined part, I am unclear as to the meaning of the word verbatim.
Word for word.