You are forcing it into a dicotomy that is not how I am thinking about it. And then asking me why I would support such a dicotomy.In post 1370, Thestatusquo wrote:What?
Literally you are arguing that scum titus would be trying to enact her agenda on who gets to be king and therefore she is town.
In order for that to be a logical statement you would have to also be asserting that the town titus would not be doing this, otherwise there is no difference?
My assertion is that an engaged titus would be doing this as either alignment, and I think this is pretty obviously true.
I agree she is not doing this, but until you can express why you think she wouldn't be doing it as town, its a pretty nonsensical reason to town read someone, bordering on TMI.
It's so surface level to pick out a difference in two worlds and then jump right to alignment related reasons for that difference without considering whether that difference is actually explained by alignment.
And here it's just clearly not?
My thoughts are that her approach does not feel like she is approaching this with a pre planned agenda that she is working towards.
Reframing it as "but town player wouldn't try to make good for town things happen" you completely divorced it from my own thinking.In post 1365, Thestatusquo wrote:"Scum player would try to make good for scum things happen but town player wouldn't try to make good for town things happen in the same circumstances"
Because I never said that Titus was not doing anything that could be her attempting to make good things happen for the town.
On the contrary, her comments on wanting there to be two large wagon dueling fits in line with something that I think that town!Titus believes, which is : "having dueling wagons and watching where people land as the vanity wagons start to dissipate creates valuable information with which to sort and discern players alignments. "
And she appears to be working more towards creating such a scenario then attempting to get any particular person elected.