Galz its interesting that you claim I am overdefending TWM. First off I have made two posts about it, one simply saying based on my experience with TWM that it was not scummy of him and I don't think it merited a vote. You then explained what you meant by forced and I agreed that while the last two posts were possibly fakely misspelled that still wasn't alignment indicative. That is hardly overdefending simply stating my thought about a pretty small thing you posted. Lets actually go through your posts on the matter.
Your initial post about TWM which was a read followed by a vote, something we typically want everyone to comment on and discuss, not a question to twm which I could maybe see where you would be upset that other people answered for him.
I then disagreed with your read and you felt the need to defend your statement and explain what you meant by forced.
2.7 tells you he disagrees with the read and you again defend yourself saying its not an iron clad case more of a gut read. Which is fine, its early day one, noone is saying you are too confident in your case we are just stating our opinion of the situation.
O questions the situation and insinuates he also think its not scummy, to which for the third time you defend yourself and explain why for twm you think its scummy
In response to your explanation to me about what you meant by forced I stated that I understood what you meant and that even if the last two posts were faked I still didn't think it was alignment indicative. You once again defend yourself stating you know its a weak case but you still think there is reason enough to vote. Which is fine, noone is forcing you to unvote, noone is claiming we find you scummy for making the case in the first place, three people are just stating their opinions about what you said and you won't let it go.
2.718 is townie.
TWM is possibly actually DAMA or is trying too hard. This sequence felt forced:
Why can't it be both? The last two were intentional misspellings because at the time I thought it was funny. My sense of humor gets seriously warped after a couple of drinks.
But I hardly think that is alignment indicative and if anything it is your vote that feels forced.
vote: mcmc
From you, that's fine. That's essentially saying "Yes, the sequence was intentional" - which is all I picked up on (and read "forced"). And you're right - you would do that as either alignment (as I noted). What I wanted and was waiting for, was for you to speak to it yourself - not have others jump to your defense for you.
Mcmc's defense of you by trying to delegitimize my vote feels like an attempt to discredit me - something he would be acutely aware to do if scum after reading (and commenting on) my VT QT in 114.
Finally when TWM defends himself by saying yep the last two posts were faked and that he claims it's not alignment indicative, you agree that he would do it as either alignment and state what you really wanted was for TWM to respond to your vote and not have other people comment on it. Now you come to the conclusion that because I made two posts about it one my read and two a clarification that I knew what you meant by forced and still thought it wasn't scummy you think I was overdefensive and trying to discredit you because I complimented your qt last game.
I am curious how you think I should have reacted as town to you placing a vote for TWM with a reason I disagreed with?