It depends on the scenario.
No, it really doesn't. We know what an AtE is, and we know how to spot one. You don't have to camp on a member and post "AtE" every single time he posts one. Once or Twice? Sure. Every time? That's just a little too much.
Some of us don't know what AtE (HW) and others don't see it clearly. It doesn't hurt to point it out.
Why is arguing bad? It is very very good. If you could explain to me why it's bad then I might change my playstyle.
I agree. It provides an alternative viewpoint which I attempted to discuss later in my post, although apparently I wasn't clear.
Okkkkkk? Well I argue all the time so...
HW's post have logic? You have got to be kidding me.
While I will agree that he does not make the /best/ posts, and that some of his posts are just dumb (see: "Don't u dare lecture me camo, aaaaaand I'm ignoring you, etc.), SOME of his posts do. And when he's not too busy being mad at other members, he actually tries:
I try and succeed though.
HauntedWater said:
D1, Camo started going after everyone that posted. Scum thrives on chaos. So, I vote parked him after I got fed up with him and his ways. He comes on, and it's like, don't even bother reading, because he's spamming the thread, accusing people, not listing sufficient reasons, or is going after any intelligent reason. He's called me and alex out as scum, only because we both started telling him to post reasons.
oh, fun fact. This post by HW was completely ignored. Camo never made a case for himself other than "stop tunneling me." These points are pretty legit if you actually go back in the thread and read.
Anyways, HW takes something and backs it up with things that actually happened. When we ask you to do the same, all you say is "I've already laid my arguments out" or "I thought that was highlighted already." Which brings me to:
HW is trying. You aren't.
Why do you say that?
Arguing isn't bad (like we both said.) It causes discussion, and having somebody disagree with you and post about it means that they're bringing a point of view into the thread that might not have otherwise be considered. You don't argue, you just post one line and ask us to assume you're right.
I strongly disagree.
When we ask to defend your point of a view, you just say "I've already said everything lrn2reed.
You should be reading.
" Haunted Water when talking to somebody that isn't you, however, actually tries.
He is tunneling though. If you read back you will see that 0 of HW's posts have been about anyone else being scum.
I can't say I've seen the same from you. HW causes discussion.
Are you saying I don't. Also who cares if scum causes discussion he is still scum and needs to be lynched.
While he might be tunneling (I looked it up, I know what it means lol!), he's actually trying to get somewhere and actually causing discussion.
No he is not... Even if the discussion is just us disproving his theories, we're at least talking it out.
And?
Also thank you TT for making double posts against the rules. ^.^
If you want me to contribute something else, in the mess of HW and Camo, we've completely stopped all discussion of grantm1999 or whatever he username is. Somebody suspected him at somepoint (looking for the exact post now) and he also brought some good logical posts to light around the beginning of the day. Also, while I might dagree with/suspect camo at this point in time, the one thing he isn't doing is tunneling. He's suggested lynching LuckyFire tomorrow.
Lord Fletchling if you read. I haven't seen anything that's made LF lynch-worthy, but again, I'm looking back for that now.
Water Pokémon Master said:
