Not being consistent also gives you plausible deniability in case you fail. If you want to kill all your opponents, but one of them escapes... then from certain perspective, you have publicly failed. The one will become famous.
But if you decide to kill three of your opponents to teach the rest of them a lesson, and you only succeed to ki…
Not being consistent also gives you plausible deniability in case you fail. If you want to kill all your opponents, but one of them escapes... then from certain perspective, you have publicly failed. The one will become famous.
But if you decide to kill three of your opponents to teach the rest of them a lesson, and you only succeed to kill two of them... everyone will assume that killing two was exactly what you wanted.
Not being consistent also gives you plausible deniability in case you fail. If you want to kill all your opponents, but one of them escapes... then from certain perspective, you have publicly failed. The one will become famous.
But if you decide to kill three of your opponents to teach the rest of them a lesson, and you only succeed to kill two of them... everyone will assume that killing two was exactly what you wanted.