Guardian wrote:Guardian wrote:Like I said, I was not thinking that at the time I posted it, but I do now remember you saying you were wrong; however, how does that change anything?
stoofer, could you have a shot at answering this again? like, what are the differences in what I should be thinking if I did know vs. if I didn't? Why is it significant my analysis that I knew you took it bacK?
What I meant was this: there is a big difference between (a) making a point about another player, listening to the guy's defence, thinking about it, and then saying "OK, I don't think my point was a good one"; and (b) making a point about another player and sticking to your guns even when it becomes clear that you are wrong.
Case (b) is well worth a vote (even a lynch on Day 1) while case (a) is much less lynch-worthy. So I wanted to make sure you realised my point about lord_hur falls into case (a).
On the tvod debate, I want to make myself clear. I think he is scum because, amongst other reasons, of his (1) awful logic (which he simply says is "quirky") and (2) When he FoS-es people, I don't think he is being honest (i.e. he doesn't sound like he is convinced by what he says, he sounds to me like he is just trying to find any reason to cast suspicion on whomever he can. That is a strong scum tell, because whenever scum FoS/vote someone, they know that the person they are voting is not scum.)