Specifically, it was to establish a baseline for Tommy. I've never played with him before, and so to read him I need a profile to work with. I've now established that he is a new player, who has been burnt before by not commenting on his availability, so his motivations for doing so are within reason to me. Moreover, I can infer that he probably isn't a very confident player, especially when pressured, so to engage with him I need to ask questions and draw things out, rather than play aggressively against his slot and see what happens.
Not quite - my initial read of the situation was him dismissing the vote, but potentially leaving it open for further discussion. I was overeager, sure, but the dismissal of the vote itself was fine.
The problem with the Jeff angle here is that, for your characterisation to be true, I would have had to played super aggressively from the start, which I did against Mando, and then when that doesn't go anywhere I do the same thing to someone else. In terms of you building up a profile on me, I would at the very least have had to do what I did with Mando to another player for it to be me trying to find dirt on anyone I could muster. That, clearly, is not the case. You use the term "jump the gun", which I think is apt, but frankly John I am struggling to see *how* you came to your initial conclusion. Probably not much you can add to what you have already said that would change that - would appreciate some other input from elsewhere on this point.
