no padding your vote is where you say more than you need to to convey your point effectively. people do it to give the appearance of conviction or to convince themselves of something. you were trying to build this case where in 10/10 universes you would vote redsludge right now.
i found one of your scenarios to be half-hearted and/or disingenious at best, so i'm concluding that you're padding your vote. i'm not sure why tho.
people do it to give the appearance of conviction or to convince themselves of something.
implying i had to write that post in order to "convince" myself to put a vote on someone who i had already voted on
you were trying to build this case where in 10/10 universes you would vote redsludge right now.
there's admittedly one niche scenario where i wouldn't vote but i really feel like the possibility of that happening is so low it's not worth mentioning
i found one of your scenarios to be half-hearted and/or disingenious at best, so i'm concluding that you're padding your vote.
hey man thanks for the elaboration on which scenario was half-hearted and/or disingenious
but i'm taking your post with a grain of salt because of this:
if there's a bulletproof in the game, they're not going to counter-claim because it narrows the game down from six setups to two. in both cases, there's really no way for the second town power role to save themselves from a night kill. wolves won't counter-claim because there's still a chance the counter-claim could go badly (if there's a cop or a doctor in the game, they know that redsludge and the counter-claim are both lying)
the first sentence, it was focused on the most unlikely scenario (if he claimed and there was someone else with the actual role) and you just come to a random conclusion about the scenario that supports your lynch somehow. that felt like padding. maybe it had more to do with that scenario being underanalyzed?
Comment