Alright, fine. You questioned Orangebottle for using evidence against TolyK that's different from the evidence against TolyK that you think is best. Is that right? Because that's the same goddamn thing as what I said, so quit nitpicking and tell me what makes OB scummy for this.
Now you're putting words into my mouth. I never said that wuba's case was bad, and definitely never said that my suspicions were any better.
I don't understand why you asked this question because it doesn't make any sense to me why you would care which of the two reasons Orangebottle finds TolyK scummy. Specifically, why are you using this against Orangebottle? Isn't coming up with new evidence a good thing?
Finding new evidence? Yes. That's not the problem.
The problem is, OB aknowledged the excuse, but not the scummy behavior that was excused. Not until later. Okay so that's cleared now. And his general behavior after my vote. And him not even trying to explain why he used these arguments.
Then what about this post right here where Orangebottle freely admits the whole case is Webadict's?
Okay, I didn't see that. Point.
Which still doesn't mean a damn thing except for that he was using his arguments. Which we knew already.
What I wanted to find out was whether he was simply bandwagonning or if he genuinely thought the case to be good. He never said anything among those lines. Instead he becomes reacts aggressively and starts bullshitting.
So what's Orangebottle doing that's suspicious? It sounds like you're saying Orangebottle secretly know Webadict's case is bad, but you haven't brought forth any evidence that Orangebottle thinks that way. You've said that Orangebottle never said Web's case was good. That's true, but you're ignoring the fact that OB started justifying the TolyK case with original evidence (not very much, but hey, it's something) and attempting to question to TolyK. There's a case you can push OB with, sure, I'm just saying I don't see enough here to be attempting to convince me Orangebottle is scum.
Who ever said wuba's case was bad? The thing is that his points are
good to a certain extent, and OB was using them. Also, original evidence? You mean his original reason to FoS TolyK? Because that's pretty much the only thing that wuba didn't bring up that PB did.
And even then there's the question why he finds the excuse scummy and not the thing that got excused itself. Nevermind, he answered that.
Also, first you ask me to tell you "how is that suspicious" and then in the same post "so why is he suspicious?". So first you imply one thing to by my reason for suspicion, and then you ask for a reason. Please, at least try to get some internal consistency into your posts, even if you refuse to stop "reinterpreting", so to say, my posts.
Also, another question. Why are you giving Orangebottle shit for this now yet didn't give me shit for doing the same exact thing during D1? After Webadict made a case on TolyK, I also "mysteriously" started saying TolyK was scummy, yet I don't remember you saying a word to me.
The only bit where I see you stating that TolyK is scummy is
here, with a "TolyK is indecisive". That and the part where you ask how Dariush can be less scummy than TolyK, but that's less of an accusation against him and more of a "why do you vote him"? OB makes an entire post that, contentwise, is similar to the one where wuba first elaborates on his vote, except with a "question" attached. Those are hardly exactly the same thing.
No, I had it right the first time. Dariush's case is that OB is dropped a good case against Webadict out of fear of getting lynched. OB's defense is that the case was in fact not good. So obviously for Dariush to be correct, he's got to prove that Dariush's case against Web was in fact good.
I suppose there are other ways Dariush could build a case, but I can't think of any offhand.
Ah, I see. Guess that makes sense.
Former. Because I wasn't actually looking at his posts until I saw that line.
Aha.
Furthermore, the whole point of the game is to get the rest of the town to agree with your reasons for a lynch. Basically, to convince the entire town your target is scum.
Except you never said that webadict had convinced you. That was all I was looking for. And you consistently failed to say anything of the sort.
Except "You're next" is very vague. I could mean "You're next. I'm going to hunt you next." "You're my next night action target." "You're next on my list of people I'm sending christmas cards." "You're the next American Idol."
For clarification, I meant,"You're next. I'm going to start asking you questions after nuke's out of the picture."
Aight. So why not question him while NUKE still was around? There was nothing that kept you from engaging him further. And yet all you did was tell him to be more active and that one pretty lame question. Which I hardly call asking him questions.
Yes, I am aware that you got distracted by Dariush, but still. Nothing kept you from actually doing something relevant about the guy.
Author
Topic: Roguelike Mafia 3 - Rise of the Jewel [Game Over] (Read 113682 times)