Jack:For example, Irony seems to have discovered that I used the words "glaringly obvious" once. For example, apparently I said I know the entirety of NUKE's plan, in depth, because I said I was only bringing up the glaringly obvious. In addition, apparently, saying I'm only bringing up the glaringly obvious is the same thing as saying that NUKE's entire plan is glaringly obvious.
Or, to put it differently, Irony has taken the words "glaringly obvious", and somehow used them to say that I know NUKE's entire plan and why he brought it up, completely ignoring the context of the words.
Your argument has been, from the very start, that I've been heavily twisting Nuke's words. Not "misinterpreting," not "jumping to conclusions about," heavily twisting. This really seems to require that there be an obvious meaning to twist there, since the more literal "you've been
interpreting his words" doesn't really have the same punch to it.
So, even specific examples aside, it's pretty clear that you think Nuke's plan was fairly obvious, including motivations and reasoning behind it. If it wasn't, you really wouldn't have had cause to doubt my questioning him on it, much less cause to attack me over it, since even if a
potential meaning, motivation, or reasoning could reasonably be assumed, there'd be no particular reason not to check. You've even explicitly stated that everything you've brought up has been glaringly obvious, which really seems to hammer that fact in.
Yet, everytime I want to know just where the hell Nuke said this or that, you get all defensive and explain some potential line of reasoning for why his plan would be/do X, despite him never explicitly saying anything of the sort. This does not mesh well with your assertions that I was heavily twisting Nuke's words in order to attack him, because that'd require he had a clear, established meaning to begin with. In fact, you've even admitted that there was a more likely possibility to his plan than the one you'd originally considered.
In short, your argument doesn't work. You say I'm scummy for twisting his words, but can't provide any evidence of what he intended or meant beyond hypothetical explanations.
I know what I read, and I know the obvious context they were in (that is to say, what day they were on, and when during that day, and what was said around them). What Irony and I were starting to get in to was a somewhat deeper exploration of the plan. Now Irony's saying that the results we got in that deeper exploration, which had never been brought up before the "glaringly obvious" comment, are proof that I...was lying about knowing NUKE's entire plan or something?
When the results of deeper exploration both require deeper exploration and are proof that I was deliberately twisting his meaning earlier, yes, I'd say that's odd.
And yes, I assume you're his scumbuddy. You've both jumped to defense of and displayed insistent insight of his plan, which doesn't make a massive amount of sense if you weren't in on it in some fashion.
IronyOwl: So, just to clarify, you're saying that you think FoSing or voting for me wouldn't have been productive, but that you thought just saying I'm scum without doing either would've been?
Yes. I'd also say it's worked, personally; you've seemed fairly defensive and you've certainly gotten the message, so I'd say mission accomplished.
Dariush:I didn't call him out on it and did so only now because I distinctly remember him mentioning the 'scumteam' at least twice at different times during the day, so I wanted to see what he would do D2 after one of the 'scumteam' has been lynched.
Two problems here.
First of all, this does nothing to address the "for the moment" bit you're ignoring.
Secondly, if you wanted to see what he'd do, doesn't that mean you weren't sure? And thus didn't know if he'd attempt chainlynching or not?
Now, this argument has gone way too far out of 'Your case is shit' territory and into 'Look at me, I'm defending a flipped town!' territory. Do you have any suspicions beside Big Bad Scum MBP, Nuke and me for the terrible crime of agreeing with a point of Big Bad Scum MBP?
I'm sorry, is three suspects not enough for you? Your case is shit on its own merits, not any association with MBP.
But yes, I suspect Jack and Bdthemag.
Speaking of which, who are your suspects? I don't recall anything but Nuke from you.
Nuke:...wait, what, are you serious. Please, please, please go and read my case against him. You clearly haven't. This is getting annoying.
The 'this' post is the one to which I am replying in the 'here' post. In 'look at how scummy he is' I link to that post instead of my own because I think that the scumminess thereof requires no explanation. If it does, they can simply scroll down four posts.
Well, it does. You've already explained that you don't mind Too-Stupid-To-Be-Scum arguments, so I'm not sure what about that post screamed scum to you. Mind sharing with the rest of us?
Jim:Extend, but if it doesn't go through I'm willing to see Bdthemag completely and totally dead for what he did.
Unvote, Bdthemag.
Which was?
Author
Topic: Totem Mafia - A BYOR - Game Over (Read 139558 times)