these often sound similar bc they amount to “you aren’t gonna win lol just like, surrender rofl” they especially sound similar to the target
-
-
Show this thread
-
but in crafting the message, they are very different one relies on a picture where a coalition needs to coordinate to defeat an enemy; if you persuade him others are shirking more than he thinks (likely true), you can convince him to shirk too
Show this thread -
the other focuses on a multilevel game where the coalition, by choosing “coop” w/ each other, “defect” from enemy - this defection only makes sense if % of victory high, retaliation low, relative to what they’re fighting for
Show this thread -
convince them they stepped out of the natural order and have only invited retaliation until they stop rebelling, and they go home
Show this thread -
the big difference between them is one approach doesn’t rly req saying anything about what he’s fighting for, the other doesn’t req saying anything about who he’s fighting with
Show this thread -
if your allies are cowards and snakes, you lose even if what you’re fighting for is worth a war if what you’re fighting for isn’t worth a war, you lose even if your allies are all 100% committed; you lose even if you win.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.