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.
Course I would be defensive when being attacked, but the problem was he eventually became overly defensive on the subject. I don't think it's special, or particularly relevant, just added in so it showed how he changed over the course of the game. A transition.
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.
Did I say it was a scum tell? No I did not, I just said I thought he was uneasy on the subject of his questions. You are putting words in my mouth and pulling things outta nowhere.
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supplied an original reason, you didn't tell me how these "bad" questions are lynchworthy, and what's more, you just rescinded your primary argument.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.
First.I never thought the questions were lynch-worthy or bad, and I've even pointed out the minor flaws in each one that keeps them from being good questions. I never had a primary argument that he was scum because he had bad questions, my primary argument was why does he think they are so good. I also don't remember rescinding anything, so you're bullshitting again.
Second.I never said it was a lynch vote, it was just a vote. I don't see how me asking him why he would say that his questions are good is me saying i don't think they could be middle of the road. I was quoting him calling his own questions good. I never said they were overly bad at all, yet agian you make something up to suit yourself. Just because I voted for him at the end of my post doesn't mean the last post was any stronger then the rest, I just put the vote where the question I wanted him to focus on was.
Third. How did you gently prodding me have anything to do with me not wanting this to go into a no-lynch with my vote sitting on someone who I am unsure of for alignment. The reason I removed my vote was because Max answered all the points I have, and his answers were satisfactory. While there is solifuge lurking away in the background as we are about to move onto night 1.
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.
Ha, so me having the time restraint to only keep up an attack on one person, with each reply taking me an hour or two to write is a reason for you to lynch me. Still I never said I was pushing for a lynch on him, and just because I have a similar problem with Max White as someone else makes it useless?
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?
I never was convinced because I don't think it's a good reason to lynch someone just because they get upset over their questions, the vote was pressure, and would of become a lynch if he hadn't responded in satisfactory measures.
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.
Yet again not a lynch vote, and yes I put down a policy vote, I don't see what the problem with that is on D1, of course I also happen to be slightly new so I just haven't encountered this type of thing before when D1 was chancing a no-lynch.
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.
The what I had was not something I wanted to lynch for, and I would rather lynch someone who has nothing at all. He's an insane lurker and there's nothing in his posts that Jim hasn't already brought up. I don't know how I can place a vote on someone lurking like that without having similar reasons as the other people voting him.