^Please, at some point toDay, skydive with no parachute……… It'd do Town a lot of good
Also I'll touch on that vote below.
Ever heard of the term "rhetorical question"? Of course you would answer that you thought it was a good idea but I don't buy it. How is it a good idea? He was put at L-2 and he didn't talk. There was a time when he was at L-1 before and he didn't talk either. And now suddenly you think he's gonna tell us everything in detail because you put him at L-1 again? You're smart enough to foresee that somebody will have issues with that.
And your "reverse case" example doesn't even make sense? Like, had he actually answered stuff because of your vote I would've admitted that the pressure was in the right place and I would've understood the pro-town implications. In this case however, we already know that putting him at L-1 yields no useful results.
Why aren't you taking any of the contextual factors into consideration? UTD's restriction had just been magnified so this was a perfect time to apply pressure to gain the reads we need. Are you actually rereading page 23 with the thought that UTD wouldn’t respond to added pressure when he looked visibly shocked that people were playfully ganging up on him (lol) JUST BECAUSE he didn’t do so before on D1, a time when no one had the information they did prior to that point? It’s like smashmachine’s revelation of a post doesn’t exist anymore! – also I still don't see why this is a problem especially when your biggest concern was not giving him room for explanation when my vote gave him room for explanation. Because of this I can’t see where you’re going aside from “you placed him at L-1, you are anti-Town”, and by that you might as well run rampant in every mafia game you play. What are you talking about regarding the reverse case?? If he was giving sufficient answers then I’d consider not voting him based on those answers, but he wasn’t… some players vote lurkers to get them talking… some prisoners get tortured more and more so they reveal more information… look at any D1 of every game here… etc etc… it’s a very common principle imo that you give more pressure to those that aren’t talking so they start talking.
Can you show me where he was at L-1 before plz?
Also, quickly in response to your pushing/questioning post, how on earth can you say you're just categorizing me on your player list and that you're not pushing me when in another post you claimed you
don't buy my reasoning? That would imply you think I'm not Town and thus worth pushing, right? - what exactly are you doing? Your intentions look very muddled to me.
Let's not confuse things now. First of all, rereading and miscounting are two very different things. You can reread a thread and miscount votes at the same time. When I "came" back on the start of D2 I skimmed through what happened from the start of the day up to that point and mentioned what stood out to me the most. Then I actually read the stuff [but miscounted] and thought Nabe put UTD @L-1 and you followed with the hammer. I realized that this wasn't the case when you pointed it out. Instead you put UTD @L-1, which lead us to where we are now.
Just to quickly clarify - I didn’t literally place him at L-1 but I intended to. Also I’d actually consider counting votes as part of the rereading process – I thought the point of a reread was to understand situations as best as possible to make the best analysis possible in finding scum, which, well, doesn’t apply to you in this instance lol.
The problem I have with your answer here is that, on a reread and votecount, the situation was only about half a page’s worth of understanding, and yet you still missed the important details. I would never expect this from you in all honesty. Were you just too hasty to get a word in edgeways regarding the situation and the heat of its moment? Who knows?... but the fact you skimmed and got it wrong is something I’d be content with, as everyone initially thought I almost hammered, but no one actually insisted I did afterward - only you did this upon reread(s).
Quite simply, because I didn't realize it at first. Especially the "baiting" part didn't occur to me like this at all. More like the typical "Cello tries to provoke people by being an *******, that reminded me of his town play at first. I also remembered him posting some "wall of texts" making me think he's not a "true" lurker [who just posts to avoid prods and then slips away]. Infrequent [but quality] input is not necessarily lurking but I must admit now that I overrated the amount of content he provided and a lot of his text were just fluff.
Baiting and provoking imo are almost the same. Also this is fine.
I guess you can call it "out of nowhere" but in actuality my vote on him is a lot more "solid" and a lot less fluctuating than other people's. You probably won't care about what it means though so take it as you will. I just think my vote is more deeply rooted and built upon stronger logic than the people who "established" [and abandoned] it. Either way, I don't feel like I followed a trend by voting him but more than I revived it after people went on to Swiss.
………………………………………
Have I missed something? I just browsed all of D2... Where was your vote on Cello prior to this post? Either the scummies have forgotten their lines or the script’s faulty or I’ve blinked and missed it…?
I don’t know… If this is the case why would you talk about a non-existent vote?
Most importantly I said your thought process lines up with mine. That means that I came up with these thoughts ony my own and your argumentations merely confirmed mine.
Curiously, how did my arguments on Gord confirm yours?
