LogFAQs > #973251354

I typed a big angy post and then accidentally copied something else when I went to refresh things, so I'll try again but less angy and less word.

Peace___Frog posted...

Me being in that picture is unrelated. My case was that i did not see any progression of thought from page 1, topic 1 to the end of the day. Part of this is because i was a bad reader and totally missed one of his posts! You argued that I was only on him for reverse omgus.

Did I ever say you were only on him for reverse omgus? If I did I don't remember doing so. I thought you were on him for being afk and not doing anything except omgus you. Which as I said in the previous topic before all the votes went down, isn't really scummy for BCT. Understandable to get mad at him AFKing through a whole day, but not for anything he actually did. "No progression of thought" and "he didn't fucking do anything" is basically synonymous in this scenario.

Peace___Frog posted...

Dumey avoided the red thing entirely, as Marth pointed out shortly after. Interesting since that was by all measures the biggest thing up to that point. Scummates are some of the best people at recognizing when a buddy slips.

I would like you to explain where I "avoided the red thing entirely." Look at the timeline. I said I didn't buy his claim, and VOTED him at 11:30PM EST. The only other people talking at that time were you (Peaf) and BCT, which I joined in that conversation. The very next person to post was Marth at 12:30PM who I talked with about the Red situation. When did I even have time to "avoid the red thing"? What do you think a vote means in that context? Do you think I'm the type of person to vote someone and just leave it there without explaining? You know I love getting into arguments. I was just waiting for Red to be around so I could get into it directly with him.

Peace___Frog posted...

Why ask this? Obviously it's possible. We won't know for sure for some time. This is fake engagement.

No it is not "fake engagement." When we had 4 votes come in a two minute window at 6:23 PM EST (read: not at deadline where we might expect a flurry of votes), it is CRAZY for the first two reactions of this thread to be Peaf: "Nothing to take from this until X or Y flips" and Death: "No one who voted for BCT there looks worse." I think there's ABSOLUTELY a chance that at least one of the four people that jumped on Red there was opportunistic scum to cement the special onto a townie. What is the "fake engagement" here when I see two people immediately disregarding lynch results?

Believe it or not, this was less word and less jabby than my previous iteration. I think Peaf just has red in his eyes and views everything with the absolute worst intent behind it possible, rather than reasonably looking at both sides. I think looking at something like the TOPIC 1 PAGE 2 interactions where I talked to the people that were currently in the thread, and then claiming I was avoiding talking about the person whom I voted and clearly was willing to follow-up on when someone asked me about it, within the same hour of my vote, is proof enough that he's a little biased in his perspective and throwing anything at the wall to see if anything sticks.

I'm actually not certain what I think of Peaf alignment-wise. I think getting tunnel-visioned and seeing red in everything is actually something that speaks to Peaf's town play. It's just me personally being involved and seeing how flimsy the arguments are that make me feel like it's "fabricated".