(12-08-2025, 09:13 AM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote:(12-08-2025, 08:58 AM)Boris the Fool Wrote: I dont really understand your reasoning for voting amy, it just reads as very confusing to me
Ill check back if I have time but it just seems like you got confused and used it as a reason to vote amy
Id agree amy wasn't very helpful yesterday but their posts last night were a little better so im happy to hear them out today rather than rush to vote their
I voted Amy fairly early, so I'm not sure why you are saying I am confused. They claimed they had taken detailed notes at half three and would post them at half four but when I questioned them far later than that they said they were still compiling notes. I also didn't like their support for the Gordon two votes plan, which could have led to an inadvertent tie.
To clarify this again...I did do ISOs early on but I had very limited time yesterday so I was going back over thread to see if anything had changed. You can actually see it in the notes I posted that I added to them and my thinking progressed. You seem hung up on this idea that I didn't do the ISOs early on. I did, I just didn't post a wall of quotes along with it because I don't actually think they're very helpful.
Based on early reads you and Lilly were suspicious to me. Based on later reads, you fell down the suspicious pecking order.
On the Gordon's idea thing - I didn't spend a whole lotta time thinking about it but it was based on the idea that declaring and tallying votes wasn't the best idea, which had been a running theme. In the end, majority decided against it, and I went with that. As I recall, I might've been the most vocal about going along with that plan but I don't think I was the only - going back to read that now to be sure.