More contradictions. You said the day before that you were not being contradicting (to Camo) but now you admit to it
Me saying I thought Camo was town was NOT a contradiction. It would be a contradiction if I said I never believed Camo was town.
I did. Then I didn't. Read Celever's post if you still don't understand.
It is pretty easy to misinterpret "camo/ata buddying" as Camo and AtA buddying with each other after that long hiatus .--. In regards to the tunneling, he admitted /after/ you accused him (i.e. pointed the finger). The main point is that you were pointing the finger at Camo after saying you did not want anyone doing so.
You admit you don't exactly remember what you're arguing about...?
Correct. But why did Camo get all those votes? Because you applied the suspicion. And not true - Camo was not half as scummy as you are now, and there is multiple occasions that I can find that points Camo towards being Town.
All those 5 votes? I must be some sort of puppet master or something to get 4 whole people to want to lynch Camo.
Most had their own reasoning completely separate from me by the way.
It addresses your concerns.
This quote is effectively saying that Camo has 'something to fear + hide' and therefore is acting negative, while you are not 'being fearful and hiding' and therefor acting positive. In short, your quote infers that you are displaying towny behaviour, perfect for building up your trust subtly.
He wasn't answering my questions because he was ignoring my posts. I wanted to know why, and he said he wasn't going to answer questions from scum. Even MtC agreed that he should have still addressed my concerns.
I'll rephrase it for you: As a way to defend yourself against Camo accusing you of being a contradict, you decide to accuse Camo of misunderstanding. And this does not make sense.
How does me telling Camo he's misunderstanding after he admitted to not reading my post not make any sense?
Oh, so you decide to go and accuse me of misunderstanding. Maybe you are the one misunderstanding? Besides, I would quite like you to find this posts that explain why you are being a contradict.
I never said you misunderstood. Actually, you were the only one to say that. Right here:
It is pretty easy to misinterpret "camo/ata buddying" as Camo and AtA buddying with each other after that long hiatus .--.
All I said was you weren't reading my posts.
You said that Camo was not being productive, but then you say that "he did get things started". Getting things started is a product of being productive. So blatantly you were being contradictory.
Again, starting discussion about something pointless is not productive.
I think it is quite hilarious and very hypocritical that you ended up changing your view on Camo and doing (i.e. pointing the finger) what you said previously that noone should do.
I find it hilarious that you managed to gather all these posts and try to make a flimsy case yet didn't have your facts straight about my accusations and also missed when I view changed on Camo.
Celever pointed that out, which is something I overlooked since that was part of the 60 posts I had to read through.
Second time in the same post that you admitted to missing something important.
Again? My case does not rest on the fact that Celever and you are scum buddies; that argument is minuscule compared to the rest of the case. i.e. this is you misinterpreting me.
So you now decide vote Camo, and right after Celever claimed. I'm predicting that Celever is your scum buddy and you are trying to subtly remove suspicions from him. Basically you lead the lynchee jump from Celever to Camo. And do some more finger pointing. Of course, when Camo claimed a power role that I would find more believable than Celever's claim, you don't change your vote. Trying to get Camo lynched and save Celever?
What were your words again... Hilarious and hypocritical?
So why did you wait until /then/ to actually start a discussion? As in, two to three days in, and basically let those days go to waste.
I was busy with school/waiting to see if others would help with discussion.
1: I no longer believed Camo was town. His role was far more likely to be fake than Celever's.
The primary fact is that you said that you did not want to point fingers, and you did. The role is not related to that - you are relying to heavily on one arguement.
2: Don't think so.
You said above that you were being a contradict and now you are saying you weren't? That in its self is a contradiction.
3: Huh.
Great response.
4: I'm scum for seeming town?
You are scum by trying to make yourself seem town subtly using a multi-meaning/comparative accusation on Camo.
5: Guilty as charged. Protecting the most likely to be town. Better kill me now.
As stated above, this point is now nullified.l
6: Because starting discussion myself and bringing more attention to me is the smart move for scum.
By starting a different discussion to diver suspicions from you when MtC is clearly targeting you is scummy.
7: Not a fact.
mhm
-At least it is only one argument.
-Don't think I've said anything about me contradicting myself.
-And it doesn't look like you're too concerned about getting a real answer.
-Yeah... No. That still means I'm scummy to you for seeming town.
-So you admit that one of your major arguments no longer applies. ...Does that mean we're done here?
-MtC was against me yesterday, what good would it do to argue with him now? He already stated he wants me dead because I don't agree with Camo's method (or maybe that was somebody else, would have to check, been a while) and I'm not going to argue with such thinking.
-Then present the evidence you clearly must have that says I'm scum.