Jump to content

Amber Vulture

RP Accounts
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    403

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Amber Vulture

  1. Amber Vulture
    What are people's thoughts on a D1 lynch this game? Helpful or no?
  2. Amber Vulture
    Finally, Amber Vulture checking in. Thanks @Fuchsia Ostrich for the poke vote. There is very little to add at this point, but my initial read of the role-swap mechanic was that it was swapping, not a termination of one player. And in regards to the elim team, I agree with Dingo. They probably have a hemalurgy-based power. It would fit with the general Scadrial enemy archetype. With that, there are probably some in village with Feruchemical or Allomantic powers. I'm leaning toward feruchemy at this point because we are on the Pride of Terris.
  3. Amber Vulture
    I look forward to the analysis. I think I’ve been pretty clearly village throughout the game, so I hope that you looking into my post history will help convince you. I’m not sure what exactly you want to hear from me. While I’m not sure about your statement regarding D3, I’ll take it as true, since you have no real incentive to lie about it. I can’t really add anything to that statement except give my heartfelt assurances that I’m not an Elim. One thing I would say is that just because I was the only candidate with a vote who hasn’t yet died does not indicate that I was the only suspect who hasn’t. I’ve forgotten much of D3, unfortunately, but I’d hazard a guess that others were suspected, too, even if votes weren’t placed on them. I’m not quite that unique. Also, I’d mention that it’s unlikely the eliminators would have ganged up on Flamingo, especially when every target for that day’s lynch was a villager, so if you’re looking for them among the bandwagoners, what you find will likely be NAI at best. Finally, I appreciate that you’ve taken the time to look back at votes in previous cycles. I’ll try to do the same tonight or tomorrow and post the relevant analysis Amethyst Scorpion. We’re in the end-game, and if we lynch me this turn and you the next, we’re screwed if we’re both village. It looks like we’re the primary targets, though, and I know I’m village, though, so I’m willing to vote on you now and hope You’ve given me a good gut read, which is why I’m voting on Scorpion instead of you, but considering the way the eliminators have very consistently slipped under the radar this game I’m not willing to trust gut reads. I’ll do what I can to look into your post history, although there’s no way I’ll manage it tonight. As for hearing from me, if you could elaborate more on what specifically you want to know, I’d be happy to share. Just saying you’d like to hear from me doesn’t really give me much to work with, though
  4. Amber Vulture
    I find the juxtaposition of “likely” and a precise percent figure interesting. That implies to me that there is an objective way to measure subjective reads, in the sense that a given “supporting post” or “lynch vote” is worth x or y, with the only ambiguity lying in whether a given post qualifies for such a category. I could, of course, be reading far too much into that word choice, but I see no other simple explanations as to how you’d arrive at a “likely” exact percent. I’m still hesitant to trust it, despite the fact that it put me at a rather low score, which is a point in its favor considering I know I’m good, so it’s accurate in at least one case
  5. Amber Vulture
    Ehhh, I’m rather hesitant about this. I dislike voting by role distribution, especially since that can be randomized with respect to balancing, but what’s more, 2 Elsecaller lynches in a row could spell the end of the village. We’ll keep taking hits as we spend 4 turns lynching 2 people. I’m not sure I like this plan. Agreed that it’d be much happier if Weasel flips Elim, though
  6. Amber Vulture
    If we still have a village dustbringer out there, which is admittedly unlikely from what I can see but still possible, I’d encourage them to kill Weasel tonight. The village is far behind, as it stands, and we need more discussion to potentially find more eliminators. Dedicating another day to the same arguments regarding Weasel’s lynch would be detrimental to this. While Ivory makes a good point regarding how a potentially new Weasel could offer interesting information, I disagree that they’d do so to such an extent as to make up for that discussion which otherwise would be lost
  7. Amber Vulture
    I'm going to go through all of Ostrich's posts, because I'm rather suspicious of them. Right off the bat, Ostrich begins by throwing a poke vote. Not really suspicious, considering it's still the first day NAI Ostrich withdraws the poke vote. Also NAI This is a very bad thing. RNGs are anathema to analyzable information Note that there was never any justification given, that I'm aware of Ostrich withdrew their vote. I'm not of the belief that this is alignment indicative, although please, someone, correct me if I'm wrong NAI NAI It was because I was bored and felt like sticking a vote out there. It was mainly a gut read that I had gotten. I do have thoughts, but they're on my computer which I won't have access to for a couple of hours. I'll post them then The notes that Ostrich mentioned failed to ever materialize. Had forgotten about this until I got to it when going over the thread. Whoops I disagree that an eliminator has no reason to post. A village stumbling in the dark will still most likely catch the elims unless the elims manipulate them. I also find it interesting that your argument that eliminators would remain inactive as followed directly by you voting for an active person NAI, I'd say Hm. I'm not sure that I'd expect 5, but it seems close enough I agree that activity could be better, but I don't think it's *bad* as it is Hm. Not entirely sure about that "soft defense", especially given their lack of context/quotes. I'm not sure what it was Chameleon did that they were referencing, and I really wish they had cited the post accusing Albatross Saying you think another lynch is likely to be good and then proposing an opposing lynch is an interesting move. On one hand, it generates conversation. On the other hand, if Chameleon flips elim it may let Ostrich claim that they suspected a teammate while still doing their best to deflect attention All in all, Ostrich was less suspicious than I was expecting based on my gut read. That said, they're still up there as one of the people I'm suspicious of. There was little to indicate that they were village, and some to indicate that they weren't. I'm not sure it's enough to vote on, however, especially this late in the game
  8. Amber Vulture
    I'm very, very hesitant to trust this, as secret "voting systems" basically eliminate the chance for the village to get the information they need from a lynch. If Axolotl is going to vote in this way and only this way for the remainder of the game, then they will be of minimal use to the village, and I'll be much less likely to give them the benefit of the doubt. After all, lynching them, even if they flipped village, would cost us less than lynching a different villager, and they could very well be an eliminator relying on a nonstandard playstyle to disrupt reads. It's easy to say you've been worried by someone's voting habits, but what specifically about them has been concerning? Dragonfly is one of my more village reads right now, so I'd be interested in knowing What you're essentially saying is that you went over my posts looking for suspicious stuff, didn't find any, and you're voting on me anyways I mean, that's fine. It's actually something I consider NAI, since villagers will often make more of these types of arguments than eliminators, who don't really care who's lynched and just want a village player to die. Ok, this is reading as suspicious to me. You just referenced my statement that Kangaroo seemed to me to be an "experienced villager", and then you say you didn't see any comments on Kangaroo's alignment. Also, I'm not sure what you mean that I've made efforts to show that I'm experienced, because I don't believe I've done so in an irrelevant way. With Chameleon especially I wasn't saying that people should listen to me because I'm experienced, I was saying I've done things similar to making a vote count in an effort to go over what has happened, so I know it's something that can be a village course of action. You say that I'm a null read, and given the fact that you're calling out me specifically and not another player leads me to believe that means I'm the most suspicious player alive now, in your opinion. If that's the case, that means you have at least a village lean on every other player in the game. That seems rather odd, to me. If I'm wrong, and there are other NAI players, I'd encourage you to name them. I'd also like to know why you're choosing to vote for me rather than them, if you don't mind. I'm always suspicious when someone's best argument for a lynch is a null read, since you're voting on someone you're self-professedly not suspicious of.
  9. Amber Vulture
    Hello, all. I apologize for my inactivity this previous night cycle. I’ve been incredibly busy for the past week, and the past few days especially, but I should be able to post with greatly increased regularity during this upcoming weekend. I’m writing this mainly to request that if I don’t post again within the next 24 hours, I’m tagged in some way so I’m reminded to. Hopefully, it will prove unnecessary
  10. Amber Vulture
    Whoops, I thought I had. Will do so now Basically, in previous games I've participated in, I've found people are much more open in PMs, if only because there's an illusion of privacy, and this means that active PMs can be an invaluable resource for the villagers. In this game, unfortunately, PMs are limited, which means we had to start talking fast in order to get as much of a benefit. In an attempt to jumpstart the conversation, I posted my suspicion, expecting others to respond by posting their own. Unfortunately, that didn't work. Edited to avoid double-posting: I agree that Ostrich is rather suspicious, and further agree that Zebra's case against them is quite compelling. I'd like to hear a defense before casting my vote, however. If these past cycles have taught me anything, it's that we need opposing viewpoints to debate the merits of a lynch before we engage in it
  11. Amber Vulture
    Well crem. I can't say I wasn't expecting it to happen at some point. I wish it hadn't happened quite yet, though. Kangaroo, I have a relatively strong village read on you, and have since day one. I believe I mentioned that in a post. You've been among the most cynical of Beagle's accusations, so when you go back through his posts in the light of his innocence, I'm very interested in hearing your impressions. I feel that your perspective was far enough away from his that you can serve as a foil to each other, in a way, ultimately giving us a better understanding of the information from a variety of perspectives. In response to Rhino's recent post, I actually have little to no read on Zebra, but no news is good news I suppose. If there have been no warning flags, he's probably alright. Axolotl, that's a fantastic tool to use for analysis. Thank you for providing it! I will, unfortunately, have to wait until the morning to do any concrete analysis with it, but the fact that you made it is very helpful. I... suppose I'll take that as a compliment? In all honesty, though, I do consider how my posts will be seen regardless of my alignment. I don't let it influence my decisions, but it does influence how I explain them. Whatever side I'm on, after all, I know it's bad for my team if I'm lynched, and I believe that the most beneficial course of action is the one I'm pursuing. I don't let it define my posts, but it is a consideration.
  12. Amber Vulture
    Posting again after a rather busy day. I've been able to occasionally read the thread throughout the day, so I'm caught up with what's happening, but I didn't have much of an opportunity to post. I'm pressed for time thanks to RL stuff right now, so I'm going to limit my comments below. If anyone wants me to elaborate on something, please ask. I'm annoyed and honestly rather surprised that Tuatara was innocent. I've never been the best at getting reads, but I really thought we might have had an elim there I still trust Beagle and Ivory, despite the fact that they've been involved in lynching a number of villagers. It's normal to stumble around in the dark for the first few cycles, and while I'd hoped we'd find an eliminator yesterday, it's not out of the norm that we didn't Beagle, I honestly thought you might have been Hero as well. When you first PMed me, I actually drafted a message saying "I see the contribution crusade is back in action", but decided against it Rhino, I agree that activity has been pretty good this game. That was one of my fears coming into an anonymous game, but the combination of pinch hitters and contribution encouragement by a number of people here has made the game work really well. Onyx, while I'm not sure what "GMM" is (I know I've heard it before, but I've forgotten), I can tell you that "IKYK" stands for "I know you know", and means a situation where a bluff or double bluff (or triple bluff or so on) means there's no actionable information to be gained from further analysis. It's like the Princess Bride scene where Vizzini makes contradictory conclusions based on the same information. Another term you may hear is "WGG", in which eliminators stage an attack on one of their members who is protected/has an extra life. That bluffs the village into thinking that player is an eliminator target and that they, therefore, must be good. This one stands for "Wounded Gazelle Gambit" I'm hesitant to accept all players in the PM as village. While I don't think Beagle or Ivory would intentionally mislead us, confirmed good does not mean confirmed right, and just because I consider them likely village doesn't mean I consider all of their village reads the same way. I'll have to take a closer look at some of the members this upcoming day cycle. Sorry if this was rather rambling. I'm trying to make sure I get what information I need down, but I've written it largely off the top of my head.
  13. Amber Vulture
    No worries, I’ve just had people pretend not to see my argument before, which can be rather infuriating. At least, I suspect that that has happened, I don’t know it conclusively. I’ve still made a habit of checking timestamps The issue, traditionally, with people expressing agreement with a lynch after it pans out is that we don’t know how they’d respond were it not a successful lynch. We have no indication if they’d have supported the lynch when voting, or if they’re attempting to be credited retroactively. This same problem does not hold true for my vote, I’d argue, because I most certainly would not be trying to get credit for lynching a villager, regardless of my alignment, and I wouldn’t want to draw such attention to my purported machinations were I an eliminator I was inactive for much of the day cycle, and I in fact didn’t recall having posted in it at all until another player sent me a link to my post. I just checked, and the first vote for Swan occurred 32 hours after my most recent post at that time. As I said in the PM, my suspicion was little more than a gut read, and I didn’t see the sense in derailing a lynch against an unlikely candidate who hadn’t even been voted on until the last minute. I’m also not entirely sure why, exactly, it matters when I “owned it”, given that whether I had expressed suspicion and voted or simply acknowledged my suspicion after, the result is the exact same. I have no justifiable reason to avoid the lynch and then say I would have lynched them, regardless of my own alignment. The only logical explanation that I can think of is the one that’s true: I was inactive and missed the vote, but didn’t want Beagle to be lynched for something I could see myself doing as village. Hm. I’m surprised to hear that, given the wording of your post earlier. You said you were “really very suspicious” of Tuatara, assuming I recall the wording correctly, but that you were voting on me anyways. You then explicitly said that your vote was subject to change because you “hate [lynching me]”, and that you just wanted to hear discussion about it, which I’d argue you’ve heard. Either you’re retroactively changing the level of suspicion you have for me or you were qualifying your suspicion much too heavily in your original post. Oxblood Beagle is active and, as he told me via PM, taking notes, so I’m sure he’d be happy to give his read on me with or without your vote. I really do think this justification feels more convenient than genuine I strongly agree that we should have dissenting voices, and I’m not saying you shouldn’t have accused your primary suspicion. I’m simply arguing that I shouldn't be your primary suspicion I may be tunneling a bit much on this issue, but once again I’d stress the importance of telling people who your primary suspicion is in unambiguous terms, because it really did seem that you were attempting to qualify your suspicion of me in your post so as to distance yourself from the lynch This we can agree on, at least. I’ve defended Beagle in a number of my posts, and I hope he doesn’t prove to be an eliminator. If he is, though, it was extremely well played on his part
  14. Amber Vulture
    I’d like to state for the record that @Onyx Flamingo has been online since I posted my comment, which I know because as my comment reached “3 hours ago”, his last login remained at “2 hours ago”. If he disappears until the end of the day cycle and his vote remains on me because of claimed inactivity after I made my post, that will heavily increase my suspicion of him, as he professed to want discussion and then did not promptly reply to my post despite being online. Apologies if this came off as aggressive, but given the fact that I am currently one of the primary targets for the lynch, I wanted to make sure it was said before my possible untimely death.
  15. Amber Vulture
    I’d encourage you to vote on the person you said you “honestly really did suspect a lot”, namely Tuatara. Expressing heavy suspicion of someone and then voting for someone else noncommittally reads as rather suspicious, given that it’s a good way to distance yourself while still trying to save the lynchee from the lynch. You say you “hate” lynching me, and I’m rather reluctant to be lynched myself, so why not vote for your primary suspicion instead? I hadn’t noted such a tendency on my part. I feel I’ve dedicated significantly more time to analysis than I have to discussing Ivory’s newness. That said, I mainly post as I go without any wider consideration for the pattern of my posts, so if I am mistaken, I apologize, especially to Ivory. I try not to patronize new members, so if I have been I legitimately regret it. It’s good that you have more village reads than elim reads, given that there are more village members than Elims.
  16. Amber Vulture
    Did they claim, or are you guessing? We have 2 supposedly new players here that I know of, so if that's what you're basing your guess on it is possible that you're incorrect. Also, while guessing the normal alias of various players may be amusing, I'd suggest focusing analysis on players' behavior in regards to their suspiciousness, at least in part because this game is specifically intended to escape the normal meta. I, for one, don't particularly care if my identity is known, so I've only made cursory attempts at obscuring it. You're welcome to guess if you want. For other players, though, this is an invaluable opportunity to play without the impact of their reps, which I'm told can be a significant burden. In the interests of good sportsmanship, I'll refrain from guessing at others' identities unless they explicitly state that they don't mind. (Please note, Beagle, that this was not directed specifically at you, but at everyone)
  17. Amber Vulture
    I would agree that this is the most likely case, both due to what you said in your post and the way I'd expect the GMs to balance the game I'm flattered that I'm seen as a threat. Hopefully I can do something major for the village soon so as to prove my goodness This reads to me as very suspicious. It feels in many ways like a retaliation vote, which is something that I believe to arise more naturally from an eliminator than a villager, since villagers want to help the town by lynching those they are truly suspicious of while eliminators care much more about their personal fates and silencing their critics. It would have been much less suspicious, as I see it, for Tuatara to have argued for their own innocence rather than the guilt of their accuser, but I'm of the opinion that the way they handled it speaks volumes. I'd also contest the arguments Tuatara makes, as I've expressed before that I believe the village will gain far more information if Beagle continues to live, and I additionally believe that his "PM empire" was, in a number of evidenced cases, legitimately meant to engage players and promote activity, something which only hurts the eliminators. I agree that the PM manipulation of the vote was suspicious, but so long as that is not repeated I count Beagle as a probable villager This. Confirmed good != confirmed right Hm. I'm not sure how well that meshes with him calling out you, a player many people have villager reads on. I'd disagree with this accusation, at least in this case
  18. Amber Vulture
    Hm. That's an interesting theory. I'm not sure that it's necessarily accurate, but I've never thought of it before myself. If they're trying to avoid giving any information, though, why not just use an RNG? Targeting inactives reveals at least a little about their strategy, as opposed to truly pseudorandom behavior. The issue with that - and their apparent targeting of inactives - is that any deviation from that norm or pattern to strike a strategic target will give a wealth of information because we'd learn what benefits they'd value enough to break from their randomness or established behavior. I'm aware of many metagame conversations lately about how inactivity is rising in large part due to the factor of killing off active people. While killing off active posters may be the strategically viable move, it makes the game less fun, and SE is about fun, not winning. I'd hope that the eliminators wouldn't target players specifically for their activity as early as this is in the game. I disagree. I doubt that an eliminator would draw attention to the fact that they, a viable target for the elim kill, wasn't targeted. Of course, that could be what he was going for, but we're getting into IKYK territory now. Hm. Once again, you've provided interesting analysis that I'm not sure I can agree with. There's something of a mantra here that confirmed good is not confirmed right, and even if Beagle did prove to be a villager it'd only marginally impact my analysis of his arguments. Further, I'd argue that if you posit there'd be such a village benefit from the elims killing Beagle, we may as well just lynch him now to get that information anyways. I'm obviously not advocating for such an action, but rather attempting to employ reductio ad absurdum. Killing Beagle at this time would cost us much more than it gains. Beagle is perhaps my strongest village read at the moment, so I'd much rather keep him alive for the time being, but I doubt that this reasoning is that which the eliminators used Or, possibly, that they're attempting to appear that way. It could also indicate that, assuming they're an eliminator, they made plans with their team to try to orchestrate a lynch against Opal Lion, and simply neglected to check if a village vigilante had done their job for them before posting and trying to put it into action. This analysis is quite good. I'm somewhat torn, now. I plan to vote on either Ostrich or Tuatara, unless a more compelling lynch presents itself I disagree that activity is alignment indicative. That said, I agree that the more proliferous a poster is, the more benefit we gain from their posts, regardless of their alignment. If, when Beagle inevitably dies, he proves to be an eliminator, we would perhaps gain more information from revisiting his posts than if he proves to be a villager I'd say this is also true without regards to alignment. Anyone with a sufficient number of posts will do or say something suspicious, whether eliminator or not Note: This is the second time I've written this post, at least in part, because the first time I visited the next page and the contents of my message erased themselves. If I've put incomplete thoughts here, it's likely because I remembered elaborating on it when I had only done so the first time through. I plan on doing page 2 soon, but don't want to lose what I've already done again
  19. Amber Vulture
    I really appreciate hearing this! Thank you Also, “he”? I wasn’t active during the day cycle, I didn’t think. Have I forgotten a post I’ve made? I’m not sure how that would be a good strategy for an eliminator, drawing attention by pushing a lynch and then not actually voting. Seems like a lot of work for relatively little gain, since the elim’s goal would be to ultimately get the person lynched and decrease village numbers, and voting is a sure way to help accomplish that. With that said, I suppose your suspicion is fair. I haven’t been active enough to establish a base of consistency for my actions. I’ll work to rectify that
  20. Amber Vulture
    I’m supporting Beagle on this one. I had an Elim read on Swan, so lynching Beagle for a gamble against them is something I can’t really criticize. Honestly, I’d have likely voted on Swan myself if I got on in time. I’d prefer to be kept in whatever loop there is, of course, and feel that last minute lynches by PM are very bad for the village because there’s no discussion, especially on the part of the accused, but I don’t think Beagle’s an Elim for acting as they have. If they continue to behave in this way, or if anyone else tries something like this for that matter, I will vote against them. It doesn’t work, it just hurts the village. I hope we can all learn from this, though. Ivory, I think you were the one who mentioned Track practices. Track in the winter? I feel for you
  21. Amber Vulture
    I’m not sure that’s a well based suspicion. I know that I, in the past, have made vote counts in an effort to get a basis for my own analysis, and it’s natural that when a player is under pressure to post something they’ll make a post that will enhance their own understanding of the game. Vote counts are a good way to show activity and consideration without necessitating a stand on a particular issue, which is something most villagers avoid on day one due to a general lack of information. Were I asked to guess, I’d say it’s a village vigilante. 2 kills each turn on the side of the eliminators seems a bit unbalanced. That said, it’s entirely possible that the size of this game meant GMs wanted to thin the herd early.
  22. Amber Vulture
    I'm not saying that you shouldn't have a problem with it, just that because of the way you referred to it I was left with the impression that you were familiar with it in a way. I'm not implying that that's the case, merely remarking that it was my initial thought Also, I agree that lynching for inactivity in a game with pinch hitters is a poor decision, but I would strongly argue that there has to be a real threat of a lynch to ensure discussion occurs. If eliminators feel that they can skate by if they remain inactive, that'd be a significant negative. The one thing I would comment is that aversion to lynching new players arises not so much from any thoughts that their suspicious behaviors might be the result of inexperience, but rather from a general willingness to give them the benefit of the doubt to avoid scaring them off. I know that if I were given 2 equally suspicious people to lynch, I'd try to avoid someone who was still playing their first game
  23. Amber Vulture
    Just a reminder to all players, PMs are only open during the day, per this message from Orlok: “In order to clear up further confusion that has arisen, PMs are open during day cycles, until there are no Edgedancers alive. Please include Stink and myself in all PMs created.”
  24. Amber Vulture
    Amber basked in the sun as she soared above the village. A highstorm would be coming in the approaching days, and she wanted to stretch her wings while she still could. While she flew, she thought forward to her coming feast - the village below her had recently lost two members, and they’d feed her for days. While much of the village looked at her in disdain - a chicken that ate rotting carcasses was not the most appealing to them - she was absolutely essential to its continued health. No one wanted to die of infection bred by corpses, after all, but no one looked highly on those who disposed of them either. It was hardly her fault people died, she thought. It’s not as if death operated in on the principles of supply and demand. She continued her slow loop, ignoring muttering below of “bad omens”. The village would need her services a lot in the coming weeks, it seemed. Hello, everyone. Sorry for the inactivity the first day, I had forgotten that the game already started. I’ve read over the thread, and while I wasn’t able to keep everyone straight in my head, I managed to get a few reads. First, I’m reading Sage Kangaroo as an experienced village player. This seems to be a view I share with at least one other player, given comments in the last thread made by an animal I am now forgetting. Nolan, or Ivory Dragonfly, is someone who I’d read as at least a semi-regular. I’m not saying this to contest their claim that they’re a new player, but rather to state that they’re not, as they see it, dead weight. They’re coming off as genuine and villager-y, although a few of their comments (such as a claimed hesitance to “play the ‘new’ card”, which seemed to indicate they had familiarity with others playing the new card) have raised some warning flags. While I don’t think they’re new, it’d be an excellent guise for an Elim to hide behind. This would be easier for an Elim who was less active, of course, so I’m in retrospect suspicious of whoever it was that messed up their coloring earlier. It was already explained once in-thread, so it feels a bit like a contrived mistake to draw attention away from what they’re doing and towards the automatic conclusion that they’re new. That may just be my paranoia speaking, though I’m most suspicious of Swan right now, although I don’t have anything more than a gut read as for why. Maybe it’s just that my Vulture persona is jealous of a swan’s ability to exit the ugly duckling stage I’d disagree. Edgedancer, please avoid role claiming at all costs. There are a multitude of reasons for this. If we indicate a willingness to avoid lynching a self-professed edgedancer, that becomes something Elims can take advantage of. If we postpone lynching someone because they’re an Edgedancer, the Elims could simply kill them the following night. If the Elims neglect to do so, we’d likely waste another turn lynching them because many would reason that the Elims wouldn’t leave such a valuable resource in Village hands, so the player must lying and/or an eliminator. That could lead to the Elims forcing us into voting for a village edgedancer two cycles in a row, with little discussion on anything else. It goes back to the standard thug lynch, in a way, where it severely stagnates conversation, as Sage Kangaroo also mentioned. All in all, while I believe this suggestion to be made with the best of intentions, I disagree that it is anywhere near the optimal solution
×
×
  • Create New...