RE: Murder By The Book - Day 4: Life of Pie
04-26-2014, 11:51 PM
Because while I'm rather aggressive and paranoid and sometimes prone to flights of fancy I have always tried to hunt scum. My most significant blunder was my crusade against Slorange, and I have learned much from it.
I understand if people are suspicious of me for that, but beyond that I'm not sure. Several of the recent claims against me have seemed rather flimsy to me, hardly any analysis, particularly no longterm analysis pointing against me. In fact most of the long term examinations have suggested light town. Might I point out Coldblooded's statement earlier today. Post Post: #757 on page 31 if you want to reread it.
I would also like to point out that my central claims have often been solid and defensible even if my extrapolation has been somewhat off target. I was right about Slorange obscuring the nature of his power, I presented what some consider as the most probable pie mechanic, I called Schazer out for his very dogmatic defenses of Slorange, something even Slorange conceded was unusual. I point out things that others often don't consider. Maybe I can be too vocal sometimes and I am not without flaws but I can be a definite asset. I look at things from various perspectives. When I see bullshit I am unafraid to come down on it like a mallet of iron, expecting others to do the same to me.
Do not forget also, that this is my first time playing the game. And yet I feel that some treat me like a veteran. It has been commented that I have learned quickly, and while I am nowhere close to being an expert, I feel I can hold my own in this game.
I understand if people are suspicious of me for that, but beyond that I'm not sure. Several of the recent claims against me have seemed rather flimsy to me, hardly any analysis, particularly no longterm analysis pointing against me. In fact most of the long term examinations have suggested light town. Might I point out Coldblooded's statement earlier today. Post Post: #757 on page 31 if you want to reread it.
I would also like to point out that my central claims have often been solid and defensible even if my extrapolation has been somewhat off target. I was right about Slorange obscuring the nature of his power, I presented what some consider as the most probable pie mechanic, I called Schazer out for his very dogmatic defenses of Slorange, something even Slorange conceded was unusual. I point out things that others often don't consider. Maybe I can be too vocal sometimes and I am not without flaws but I can be a definite asset. I look at things from various perspectives. When I see bullshit I am unafraid to come down on it like a mallet of iron, expecting others to do the same to me.
Do not forget also, that this is my first time playing the game. And yet I feel that some treat me like a veteran. It has been commented that I have learned quickly, and while I am nowhere close to being an expert, I feel I can hold my own in this game.