Umbrage wrote:el simo wrote:I was definitely not implying random
el simo wrote:Sora is right I was specifically pushing the bandwagon.
el simo wrote:I called my vote random once
el simo wrote:The vote was random, the target wasn't.
el simo wrote:Because I decided to ignore the previous seriousness and specific reasons for voting him and randomly bandwagon him.
el simo wrote:I wasn't acting in random in my decision to bandwagon him.
I... I just don't know what to think...
The first quote was in response to Ortiz claiming that when I called my vote unrelated I was implying it was random, when I wasn't, I was implying it was unrelated.
The second quote doesn't mean anything. The fact that the vote was a bandwagon has no bearing on the fact that the act of voting itself was random, it is the same deal as the target of the vote.
Third quote is correct, the vote was random, the target wasn't. These are two separate actions and are left to two different and the randomness of one has no bearing on the other.
Fourth quote is correct.
Fifth quote is correct because like the target of my vote the bandwagon aspect has nothing to do with the action of placing a vote in the first place, which is what I am claiming was the random element.
I'm going to explain this to you AGAIN, because you just clearly illustrated how little you understand.
When you make a vote, you are making a series of decisions, not just one.
The first decision you make is the decision to vote.
The second decision you make is who you are going to place the vote on.
The third decision you make is the seriousness of your vote, it's aim, what you are trying to achieve with it, do you want to pressure him? Do you want to lynch him? Is it just a placer vote?
What you are claiming is that because the second and third decision weren't random, the first wasn't. This is not true, these decisions are independent of each other and therefore have no bearing on the randomness of the rest.