Orangebottle: So basically, your question is not rolefishing because people can lie? That's...wow. Also, what exactly were you trying to get with that question?
This looks like a lazy bandwagon.
I have a hard time figuring out what your case is, other than you're just agreeing with Leafsnail for the sake of agreeing with Leafsnail.
I saw Orangebottle as the scummiest player at the time (and still do), and I like voting for people I consider likely to be scum, whether the reasoning originated from me or not. Simple as that. And no, I'm not agreeing with Leafsnail just because I feel like agreeing with Leafsnail.
Jim: You spend a lot of time jabbing at people for bandwagoning, but that's just under half of your solid post-RVS content today. What are your own thoughts on Orangebottle?
I will admit it was a bad example.
Imiknorris: Can you give us a better example, then?
Orangebottle: So basically, your question is not rolefishing because people can lie? That's...wow. Also, what exactly were you trying to get with that question?
Essentially. I was trying to figure out how Leafsnail would use the PWV role. It lets me learn a bit about how he thinks.
Orangebottle: So, basically, you're saying your intention was for it to just be an ordinary RVS question. Okay. I can see that being done. The problem I have is your reaction to the idea that it might be rolefishing. Essentially, the possibility of lying doesn't make a question suddenly not rolefishing, or usable for rolefishing. For example, take the question "What action did you take last night?". Yes, the response may be a complete and total lie, but that doesn't change the fact that the question is blatant rolefishing. Under your logic, however, the possibility of lying makes the question a non-rolefishing question.
Do you see the problem now?
You're not looking more townlike by saying this, mang.
Pandarsenic: Any specific reasons why?
Extend. With the time as it is, I won't have time to post tomorrow at all if there isn't an extension.