Look, if I want to argue that he has never done anything useful, is it really a good idea to only point to one post? You seem to think the answer is "yes". Why?
Because I'm an IC.
You're also misrepresenting what I said. You can point to one post, and say, "This is his best post," and if it's completely lackluster then you've basically proven he hasn't done anything useful. That would be an effective way to present your argument. Listing every single post with a brief summary is not.
He basically said "maybe, depending on everything". So tell me, in what way is that not scummy?
There's nothing exceptionally scummy about that reply. It's not informative, but it's also not incriminating.
If he were more experienced I would give him shit for waffling around and not committing to any strong answer, but for a player who has no clue what he's doing it's fine.
Also, I did ask you a question. You gonna answer it or should I just assume this whole thing has been a scum ruse?
Ha.
First: Technically that's one question, singular, though since I missed that fact first I won't blame you for repeating my mistake.
Second: The question is, basically, "Why did you do this thing that you explained while you were doing it?" Why is that not a shitty question? If you wanted to claim his questions weren't shitty, that's probably the single worst one to point to -- why did you choose that one?
Because zombie urist is questioning Orangebottle about a contradiction in what Orangebottle said right there versus what he said elsewhere. Orangebottle said earlier he asked a question to gauge a reaction (a question he knew wouldn't have an exotic answer), and then later, said asking questions you knew the answers to was pointless.
It's not shitty at all. It's fairly insightful.
You still haven't answered all of my questions. You've gotten angrier and snippier but you're still not being forthcoming.
To repeat: How is answering questions with simple reasoning and answers a crime?