nutella wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2019 7:57 pm
MacDougall juliets is bad because she is saying that in retrospect drago and I are obvtown for objecting to the creature lynch, whereas she never reconsidered her creature vote when it was happening. She made the appearance of taking us and our LC cases seriously after we were proven right, but only after the fact. While creature was being lynched she was totally content to just let it happen.
I will address this again because I don't think it proves anything, and others seem to think it does.
The series of events was this:
1. I suspected Creature
2. I considered Long Con
3. I voted Creature
4. Creature flipped civ
5. After Creature flipped civ the two people who argued against his vote appeared civ to me
So first, nutella says I never reconsidered my Creature vote. In fact, I considered the argument for Long Con BEFORE I voted for Creature.
Secondly, nutella says I only took the LC case seriously AFTER they were proven right which is false. Look at my ISO, I engaged with Drago about his case on Long Con BEFORE Creature flipped civ. I also engaged with indiglo about Long Con BEFORE Creature flipped.
Thirdly nutella says I was "totally content to just let it happen". What? nutella has the ability to get inside my mind and tell you all about the state of my feelings? Who of you are accepting this as fact? [mention]birdwithteeth11[/mention] ? I was not "totally content". I stayed in the thread after voting to keep reading and give myself a chance to change my mind.
So I ask those of you who vote for me, which of her points are you considering rock solid fact? I hope if you're voting me you can track it back to something other than this "case" against me.