You said yourself that you are just now going to start taking this game seriously, but soon after you want us to consider lynching a lurker? I said it before and will say it again. Advocating lynch the lurker when your own participation has been lacking smells like scum saying “hey wait, look at that guy, he’s doing it too, why not lynch him instead?”
I find it hard to believe that you just spent hours rereading and have gone through N0 and D1 and still have nothing better to suggest than, look at this lurker… isn’t he the biggest lurker? Either you are being disingenuous or this is just plain sad.
Kinda OOG: Hey Thing Fish, this reminds me of something;)
And for some reason, maybe it’s sentimental, it makes me see paulwhoisaghost in a bit of a more townie light. Still an off smell though, but that may be for a plethora of reasons.
@Prof. Pepperwinkle: Have you begun on the task I presented you with? I haven’t had time or energy to begin myself. I probably won’t have until Saturday. Just wondering if you forgot, since you’ve started reading everything anew.
SNF - has to be connected to booze, somehow…
Hmmm… FOS on Ender24.
You know what, I’ve been liking the case on Pleo since Day 1, and he has only reinforced that since then.
**
vote Pleonast**
For now*
Sorry guys, I’m super tired, rehersal today blew my mind, I’m pretty drunk and I don’t think I’ll be of much more use tonight. I’ll read along for a bit. If someone for some reason wants me to resond I’ll consider it, but I’ll sayonara for now.
*Pleo, if you want something to argue against, I’ll provide later in the week. Provided I don’t find a better vote in the meantime.
Yeah I know, but he caught some flack on D1 for not claiming right away. If you don’t like that he claims VT in every game, and I don’t, then at some point when he doesn’t claim and he catches heat for it, you have to stick up for him.
The rest of the case against him is on him… I just don’t like the first bit because it reinforces his claim habit. A habit which always generates a lot of noise and ends up in the same places. Either everyone agrees it’s a null tell or Idle gets lynched.
Without the claim issue you are essentially voting him for being a lurker and bolstering that vote with metalogic. It’s really sound metalogic, but I’d rather let him get mod killed than use a lynch. When was the last time he posted? Is he due to get axed by the mod at Dusk? If so I feel it would be better for us to focus our attention on someone else and hopefully have 2 scum gone at Dusk. At this point it would be unfair to allow anyone to sub in for him. He’s already got quite a few people calling for his head. To ask someone to read thus whole game just to walk into that situation is ridiculous. I highly doubt he’ll be subbed. I’d he’s not due for mod kill then I have no objection to his lynch. I agree he’s probably scum, but it’s low hanging fruit.
If you knew my history with Idle you would know that I wouldn’t be worried about losing him as a teammate in any situation. We simply do not get along. That doesn’t mean that I won’t say something if I think it’s unfair. How does that point against him point to him being scum? His claim is a null tell… the absence of his claim is also a null tell. Casting suspicion on him for not claiming reinforces in his mind that he has to continue to claim in every game. I hate that, so I’ll speak out against anything that reinforces that practice.
paul, I think I understand your defense, and find it implausible, so I have no further questions. I will note that I am not actually, at this point, voting for you. I do quite agree that I should look at some other people.
I can see it. I’m certainly not going to defend Idle, though he wouldn’t be among my first choices Today.
That was before a mod kill, him opening several discussions through different mediums, and having a lot of people tell him that if he doesn’t like the results then he needs to change. He probably didn’t change too much, but again, I’m against the negative reinforcement of his VT claim habit.
