A break for Night Lynch Deciders after N1?

  • Yay

    Votes: 2 6.9%
  • Nay

    Votes: 11 37.9%
  • Are you enjoying the Game?

    Votes: 7 24.1%
  • Yay

    Votes: 8 27.6%
  • Nay

    Votes: 1 3.4%

  • Total voters
    29
Status
Not open for further replies.
This doesn't really make any sense. He himself offered that descriptor - which plainly indicates that he must have read them. Furthermore, in post #527, he states that even if he does pull up the posts that lead him to that, I would be dismissive, which is why he doesn't do so. This implies he believes there are individual posts that exemplifies the behaviour he characterised, which in turn means he must have read them.

I cannot see how you conclude, then, that this comes from me "forcing a contradiction" when it's very plainly already there.
He could very easily have not read your posts and given your history between you and Ekko filled the gap with the presumption you two were arguing at length because you've got "a thing". That's probably what occured here, or he skimmed and got a bare impression.

If not - and he's feigning like he hasn't read your posts when he actually has, I don't think you need justification for suspecting him past that. But I don't see that as really something all that necessary to lie about.

In any case, questioning him on these grounds comes across as a forced "gotcha", and it's not very compelling.
 
D

Dragomir

You've missed my point. I'm saying you've reached your conclusion first, which is more characteristic of an agenda, rather than letting the vidence guide you to a conclusion.
You're gonna have to explain this to me as I'm not following.
 
I

Indigo

Honestly Flower I expected you to brush it off, or joke, or otherwise clap back in some way, Instead you've been rather serious, in a way that I would describe as self-concious, and you're not displaying a great deal of imagination behind my possible motives here.
See

I know i'm gonna sound like a pure newbie, but i really don't like how Ratchet does stuff like this at D0/D1

i was the target of this in D1 in the Star Wars game, and i was town, so getting an entire read based on how you think someone should act if they are town sounds completely baseless

and once again you start by lying with saying you have evidence D0

but, since this is how Ratchet did act in my previous experience with him, it does make him look townie i guess

unless this is just how Ratchet operates no matter what
 

Emil

Kekko Taro
See

I know i'm gonna sound like a pure newbie, but i really don't like how Ratchet does stuff like this at D0/D1

i was the target of this in D1 in the Star Wars game, and i was town, so getting an entire read based on how you think someone should act if they are town sounds completely baseless

and once again you start by lying with saying you have evidence D0

but, since this is how Ratchet did act in my previous experience with him, it does make him look townie i guess

unless this is just how Ratchet operates no matter what
its not as genuine as it was in SW
if flowa plays better today we can day yeet ratchet actually
 
See

I know i'm gonna sound like a pure newbie, but i really don't like how Ratchet does stuff like this at D0/D1

i was the target of this in D1 in the Star Wars game, and i was town, so getting an entire read based on how you think someone should act if they are town sounds completely baseless

and once again you start by lying with saying you have evidence D0

but, since this is how Ratchet did act in my previous experience with him, it does make him look townie i guess

unless this is just how Ratchet operates no matter what
Ratchet didn't lie about having mechanical info, they share a mafia pm
 

Ratchet

The End and the Beginning
He could very easily have not read your posts and given your history between you and Ekko filled the gap with the presumption you two were arguing at length because you've got "a thing". That's probably what occured here, or he skimmed and got a bare impression.

If not - and he's feigning like he hasn't read your posts when he actually has, I don't think you need justification for suspecting him past that. But I don't see that as really something all that necessary to lie about.
This is all incorrect, and rather wildly so in fact. I just pointed out a specific post, allow me to quote it verbatim:
what's the point of that? No matter what i bring you will simply say ''that's not emotional'' rational ratchet wouldnt be fighting that's all there is to it.
his *very clearly* indicates that he has something *to bring* but will not do so because he thinks I won't accept it. For this to be true, he must have read some parts of it. This is further evidenced from his post where he says he twn reads Ekko, where he quotes a very specific portion of our discussion that, if he had not been reading, he simply could not have made:
All i saw was ratchet saying townies think a certain way even using an A and B example and ekko saying that because he doesnt think that way doesn't mean he's scum.
Emphasis mine.

Which in turn brings me to you. Frankly, I don't think your opinion on this is at all erudite, but yet you've clearly read the thread, so I don't see any reason to view it charitably. See, I can reconcile Pero as simply being stubborn and wanting to say *something* even if that something isn't very good, and instead of conceding it, arguing himself into a hole. He does that quite a lot. That's more of a personality trait, and thus is good enough for me to give some benefit of the doubt (though not entirely, hence my vote, and my questioning him in the first place).
In any case, questioning him on these grounds comes across as a forced "gotcha", and it's not very compelling.
I don't think you could be more insincere here if you tried. Why does it come across as a "gotcha" when the evidence speaks for itself?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top