"Most" classifies as a degree, specifically, the most severe. I don't want to associate "most severe" with that vote.In post 346, Aubrey wrote:If you think his post is opportunistic, but don't think the others are, then it is the most opportunistic vote on the bandwagon. No?
Most importantly, I don't think if i only noticed one time that I saw an opportunistic vote that that classifies as the most opportunistic since there is only one occurrence that I am seeing. How can something be the most when it has only happened once? Semantics.In post 345, Aubrey wrote:I dont fully understand what difference it makes what I categorize my post as being. I didn't understand this opportunistic argument you were making (nor did I really understand Transcends original statement, but sadly I think he is full of it sometimes so I ignored it) and I mostly did it for myself and others who may want to reference back to the bandwagon. More importantly, I did it so we all would have an illustration of what occurred for when you and Transcend answered why you thought he was the most opportunistic out of the lot. Which btw, you never did.
Further more, you never addressed why you are not voting him (since you have expressed doubt) but instead are voting an empty slot who has only made one post and clearly isnt here. Your vote, based not the reason you gave, would be better suited if he had made a second post later down the line that held little substance in correlation to his lurativity.
Can we make that a new word here? Lurkativity. Has a nice ring to it.
IDK why you didn't understand the reason I gave I thought I made it pretty plain and said it multiple ways.
Why do you think I should vote for someone who said something half the game ago when the game had basically just started? It does not need to be all or nothing. I can think it Scummy without voting it. I can think something Townie without defending it. I don't think a lot of people will grasp this statement as most of the time playing "Pro-Town" means making bold stances. There is more that I am focussing on than just "Oh, that looks like it could be an opportunistic vote, I should vote them ASAP so that people know exactly where I stand on this issue." The fact is, all game I have taken a stand back approach and at this point I want to encourage activity. I am not just voting for Deer because they are low activity, I am voting for the slot because the one post they made was sub-par and I don't want to have to worry about a slot that isn't active and provides bad posts. I am being extremely pro-active in my vote on Deer. Deer still does not have any more votes on them than me. I am the only one at this point in time who is trying to eliminate lurkers in this game, or so I feel.
