@Ramus:
And besides, fluidity of positions is what defines my playstyle. The best debater is one who can argue both sides.
While the worst of debaters are those who don't know which side to be on, and that's the same with townies and their standards. You are of this category in all regards except on me. If you have no good reason to change your opinion, then you are scummy for it, simple as that. In this case, what you cited here...
UK I find neutral for the lack of doing much besides attacking Roukanken. I've seen both town and scum focus on one target using circular logic and ad hominem. I don't really see reason to bat an eye towards either right now.
UK did was something early game, concrete and unchangeable. Therefore, your opinion should be itself, concrete. However, before that post, you explicitly said that UK was scummy in your list
here, and then you negate what you said by saying things about what UK did early game. Therefore, your opinions are ineffectual, and this is not the mark of a skilled debater.
First off, I'll point out the fallacy that just because there's more tackles doesn't mean more carelessness.
This is directly at odds with what you said earlier
here. I was merely pointing the fact that there were more tackles to counter the following point.
However, now I can see it's not all that much as apparently people have sufficient HP to survive some hits and more so, people are being cautious about how they're using their tackles.
I still stand by my point, if people are reasoning why they're tackling instead of just doing so for the lulz/game start/ whatever, then I good with that.
Any sort of reasoning? ...Rou's first had some reasoning attached to it, so obviously, that is not the case. It's more of good/bad rather than present/not present, and it's up to you to define the earlier if you are that intent on healing.
---
@UK:
On Ramus' case, look above, I guess.
It feels like you agree I shouldn't have been hit so hard but you hit someone for healing me despite that agreement.
Fair and your feeling is correct. But what's wrong with that? You announced your intent to attack Rou three more times, so do we heal Rou too, or what? So you are on equal footing with Rou, and thus you should not have been healed. It's consistent. You actually tackled, so you 'executed' that action in a sense, even though no damage was done.
Provide evidence that the town's issue with me was my declared intentions.
Serp tackled twice for kneejerk OMGUS, for example. Rou and Zakeri have cited things which are wrong with you, and if you want, people can raise their hands if they thought this too.
Not necessarily. And Zak didn't back it up with an action. We get to the difference between intent and consequence. You actually tackled me. Zak, merely expressed the opinion. You didn't leave town any time to decide if I was to be kept alive or not.
Let's go on with today then, with your intentions/consequences shtick. And there's time now, isn't there? It was not an outright hammer, but an action. Might as well accuse Drake or even Ramus for healing you without letting town decide either, which you did not.
Um...what?
This doesn't address my point at all.
I put that point to Rou, twice. Rou did not respond. I can't do anything, and it is not my fault for that. Those points something I will keep for the future, however, in my assessment of him.
---
@Rou:
If you are that adamant about my non-existence, answer
this point. And, off-topically speaking, this game is fun and you are all jerks for thinking that this is not so. It's also a huge insult to the mod in saying that you find this game unfun during the game itself, who took all the effort to organize it, by the way, and I really look down on that behavior.
