I don't find any reason why coin took prototype's message in a explicit sense as prototype was amending to a collective group in his feasible generalization. By having a glance of the first 3-5 posts, you do notice people that are cumulatively unpopular in posting or taking part of discussions in ambrosia. Which he has concluded to be people defined by his parameters of personality. So the only thing that prototype undergo was the anchoring bias, because he chose to opt for the first messages. This doesn't mean he is completely innocent, but his target were the first posts, where you came somewhere after the 5th post. I'm not embarking on some empirical formula what are considered first or last posts, I'm explaining prototype's thought-process.
Supplementing to refresh's point of view that people who are more proactive in the community have bigger chances to influence decision progression. Prototype is orbiting around that premise and gave his opinion as presented here.
I want to address on an additional discrepancy revolving of references and pointers. I'm pretty tired and to a point of regarding harsh moderate repercussions from the repetitive analogy of pinky-prototype intimate fragile state to be used as arguments against each other for gaining debate points, their state has been talked about and criticized a dozen of times to engrave harm on them just to sterilize their confidence. I for one have seen the trouble that was caused by their state and I could say it did stop after andrewvsprototype incident. They have been warned and if you have new-found evidence to suggest that it's still happening please plant them on the report section for validity sake.
Until then, any more stupid comments about pinky-prototype will go to the TREEEESH with a mouthful of warning points.
Thanks for your participation in this topic.
Topic: [UNBANNED] Unban request By DeDara [Unban Panel] (Read 607 times)