In post 1078, Performer wrote:
I don't think CT is town . What sort of throws me off he has tic as an sr, tic has him as a tr.
Why does that throw ya?
responding to rest of
942 would be nice.
1071 listing the names on a wagon and coloring them isn't wagon analysis. Ya have to have some sort of thought on what being on the wagon
means
about their alignment for the 'analysis' part.
Ya agreed with the bit about dave-voters not being surprised about the claim, but I don't see it affecting yer reads any.
What I do see ya doing is ISO-dives, but ya calling it wagon analysis.
In post 1058, davesaz wrote:If you're questioning whether I see CT doing things (which I call "appeasing people"), that's not acceptable to me.
If I say I see something, I see it. Seeing it is a verifiable fact. I've already shown something that I see.
First off: yer claim makes ya town-for-now, so I wasn't trying to attack ya. I was trying to talk to ya, so git off the defensive mindset pls.
Second: verifiable isn't the same as verified.
I do not consider
1001 to be showing anything because to show something means to make it visible to people who aren't you.
This you have not done by your own admission in
1013.
I do not have the faintest idea what the 'things you are seeing' are so I don't have an opinion on whether or not they indicate appeasement.
That is beside the point however.
The statement Garm agreed with in
824 was '
CT is changing stances under pressure
' and is
unrelated to appeasement
.
It is my
easily disprovable hypothesis
that this statement cannot be shown to be true, because it's not a thing that actually happened.
Now, townies can brainfart, but two townies are not going to brainfart in the same way without an underlying cause, which is why I asked about yer opinion on
824
pls keep in mind that I'm asking
specifically
about whether or not ya think it's plausible that town-Garm arrived at the same view on 'CT is changing stances in response to pressure' as you did.