Fine, but I don't agree with your assessment: Both are Day 1 issues.HamburgerBoy wrote:Sig not trusting you to follow Dom on the lynch does not imply there are others he would trust at the moment. He's just saying that he would rather look elsewhere for a vote, rather than jump on the bandwagon like Mac did (note: I'm not sure if Mac had actually jumped on the wagon by that point, just an example).
When I saw SVS's concession it immediately raised my eyebrows and put me in, "No, don't let that stand!" mode. Even if the wording was crappy, you frame it in the worst way, and ultimately "semantic jab" is just another way of saying word-twisting. When I read her post, I read it to mean "Dom is a good player, and I don't want to gamble because I don't trust Epi's scumdar". No statement on other players.
Why would sig say he doesn't trust me Day 1? Are there people sig trusts Day 1? If not, then the statement is saying more than it should: Why make it?
If you say someone is a valuable player, then you are implying there are others who are less valuable. If you say a menu item is expensive, it implies other menu items are less expensive. I don't get how that's difficult to understand.