Okay, I accept that. But I do think it's noteworthy how disparate your reactions have been- when it came to my plan, because you were forced to disagree on principle you act like it made no sense and repeatedly have postured against it, yet with Flower you clearly understand the merits and only really have issue with the implementation of it.
Then with Flower, she doesn't have any issue with you saying not to do it, but insists that I'm discrediting her plan because it's just sooooo good that I must do so. Despite me not discrediting it at all but working with it.
And you read all this and have nothing else to add but nod your head and like her posts and +1 where you can, while -1 mine despite, you know, me pointing out to her and trying to explain to her the very same sentiment you apparently can see too. How am I supposed to reconcile this Ekko? Do I treat you as a bad faith actor like Flower is, irregardless of alignment? Is that what you are these days? Or are you just not reading.
It's hard not to take all of this as very positionally-motivated play from you. Flower to an extent I can buy as just being a mess, but you don't really have that out. This is before we even get into reads - just purely based on how this whole day has gone so far, I'm struggling to see your motivation as town. I think your dismissive retorts also serve a position-focused mindset, rather than a townie that cares about solving.