You're just as much of an unknown as Jackson at this point. You're just presently a more powerful unknown.
From your point of view, yes, but I know that I am Resistance.
APPROVE. Card holders is good and I don't mind Jackson.
You're just as much of an unknown as Jackson at this point. You're just presently a more powerful unknown.
There's nothing dumb about rejecting a team that you have no reason to trust. And every game who are the people who get the most suspicion? The people who approve teams that they aren't on that get sabotaged. Blind approvals only help the spies. Without information from teams, there's nothing to separate the roles of other players, so there's no reason to trust three random players rather than 2, since statistically the two will be safer than the three.It's not a bad team. The problem are all of the voters selfishly voting to reject because they're not on it. I expect that from Audren & aedan777; I'm a little bemused to see Ironhide G1 also now adopting this dumb attitude.
But now, with so many Rejects, this is a problematic proposal. It is only getting accepted if someone secretly switches their vote by PM. And what motive would a Resistance player have to do so?
REJECT
But, as tamius23 pointed out, it is not intrinsically helpful to go straight to the 4th or 5th proposal. Rejecting for not trusting a team is fine; rejecting just because you are not on the team is dumb.There's nothing dumb about rejecting a team that you have no reason to trust. And every game who are the people who get the most suspicion? The people who approve teams that they aren't on that get sabotaged. Blind approvals only help the spies. Without information from teams, there's nothing to separate the roles of other players, so there's no reason to trust three random players rather than 2, since statistically the two will be safer than the three.
But why should one trust any teams one isn't on? There isn't any information on anyone yet, so trusting anyone is the exception, not the norm.But, as tamius23 pointed out, it is not intrinsically helpful to go straight to the 4th or 5th proposal. Rejecting for not trusting a team is fine; rejecting just because you are not on the team is dumb.
to be fair, I don't really like the idea of letting everything fall into Haresus' hands and we have to accept whatever he proposes. Especially since he's such an unkownBut why should one trust any teams one isn't on? There isn't any information on anyone yet, so trusting anyone is the exception, not the norm.
Ok? Your distrust of Haresus is noted. But he isn't the one who'd have the fifth proposal that must go through. That'd be you.to be fair, I don't really like the idea of letting everything fall into Haresus' hands and we have to accept whatever he proposes. Especially since he's such an unkown
to be fair, I don't really like the idea of letting everything fall into Haresus' hands and we have to accept whatever he proposes. Especially since he's such an unkown
Agreed, Hazbot's proposal is solid It's nothing against you personally, I just in general don't like having the mission get to proposal 5, which you are right, it falls on me not you. Honestly if I were you I'd keep the same team. You got 1 guaranteed resistance member in me and a card holder.Well, I don't think Hazbot's proposal is bad at all, and I might even suggest the exact same one if this is rejected. It got myself in there, it got Hazbot with the ItS card that he can use to make the mission extra safe and I see no special reason to replace you for some other unknown person. Of course, I am open to suggestions.
Plus, as Aedan noted, you are the one with the last mission, not me.