HijacK: I am not picking on anyone. Maybe on just the fact that he follows a guide and could lead us to disaster. Should I remind you that he advocated lynching lurkers just because it said in a guide? Nothing wrong with that, but when you have 3 posts pushing for that I'm done.
Take it this way: From what I skimmed through that guide, since I didn't have the patience to read it, quite a few regular players here would always be under extra suspicion just because of their playstyles.
I'll do a short read of that guide later, but I am fairly confident the guide addresses only ideal situations in which the players are all based on the same template.
1) Doesn't look like I'm leading anyone anywhere, at least from where I'm sitting. But that is a minor point.
2) Hijack, you are missing (deliberately?) two different pieces of context from that very post you are so concerned about. 1) "
Look for a reason [to vote for someone]" (bolding added here, and I added the assumed end of the sentence), and 2) "
Lacking any other leads, selecting a lurker to vote for would be
decent play" (bolding added here).
I didn't say it was an amazingly good idea, and I didn't say to lynch a lurker above all else. I said that
if one has nothing else to go on, then hey, maybe a lurker is a good target. Notice that I didn't vote for anyone that seems to be real quiet recently (Sage, CSVPG), I voted for someone that is being active. I have something I think is even better than just selecting a lurker. Someone keeps taking the posts of someone else, misrepresenting them, and then accusing the first player of scum behavior based on the misrepresentation.
For comparison purposes, JMich is making dedo squirm by using dedo's actual words.