Alright, reading and responding as I read.
Affinity, I did not consider Dormio worthy of attention at the time I posted. I reread him since you find him important enough, clearly, and I find myself annoyed with his
repeated promises of
posting more about HW, and ultimately
deciding he likes HW with a single post. I don't get why he's voting Shadoweh.
Dan I found to be useless, and I preferred to talk about the scummy rather than the useless.
Bardiche: Would you prefer I spend hours on a post and not tell you how I feel?
I'd rather not hear how you feel, it'd break my heart. I also want you to stay on point, which you generally do well. It was moreso aimed at the ones posting a wall of neutral reads, which assists us nothing in scum hunting much.
Bardiche, what do you think of huhwhat in light of his new vote on ActionDan?
Well, Conq, I don't-- Oh, right, there it is. Sorry, I actually inattentively missed that during the back-and-forth and rapid-fire posts. His vote on ActionDan seems sound enough. I do wonder about some parts of his posts, but I can construe those in town/scum light alike, so it'd be weird to press him for that. Consider my eyes opened, he is not so scummy as he dropped his entire case on you and recognised how silly it was; and the way it all happened, it doesn't seem like the kind of revelation that came from scumchat.
Shadoweh I feel tempted to vote you. Alright, so I can take the votepark with the idea that, indeed, it's not entirely crazy you look at MOTK Town and you see either Town or Derps. I see Scum or Derps, but this ain't about me. Anyway, while I was initially fine taking that stance, I don't like the business about how "cases are for the transient", and "let's confuse HW by sheeping to him": this doesn't sound like scumhunting, this sounds like playing around in a fantasy land. Openly admitting you didn't read the game overmuch but still voted just for the heck of it shows further lack of care! I don't put credit in Pesco VS Shadoweh because those two have a long-standing history as far as I care, but I would care Shadoweh if you could answer me this:
oh you posted a convenient list how convenient: why do you consider Rawr, Serela and Pesco to be most scummy? I don't need "a case", but if you can somehow show me how you reach the idea they are scum, I'd like to see it produced.
When I read Dormio I see textbook opportunism: there's a wagon on Shadoweh, now I can get on her, don't worry my vote is legit, since I said ages ago I didn't dislike her any less. I also don't entirely get his case on Shadoweh, as some of the quotations in his vote post seem to just be picked out without his opinion shared on them or made explicit, with the exception of the comment re: rawr. "Interesting" does not equal "Scummy": we're not lynching people we're interested in. We date those. The scummy ones we lynch.
Reading the last posts and I literally sighed at Serela's posts. You... seriously spent all that time just to unvote? Of course, I'm more upset with PX's opportunism in jumping on Serela, decrying "Serela is useless" and quoting the part about people without a vote down needing to fix it. As far as I care, PX, you haven't fixed your voteless stage: why is Serela scum? Being useless is not intrinsically connected to being scum, why is Serela's particularly exasperating brand of useless scummy?
##VOTE: PX
