Thank you for your lengthy essay based on an off the cuff comment with imprecise terminology. I hope it was therapeutic :) I'm sorry you can't find joy in treating objects in a game as something more than just words, though. Creativity and imagination are fine things. I personally enjoy playing the heroes as though they cared about more than numbers, but it doesn't have to bouy everyone's watercraft.
By the by, like it or not, when you play the top card of a deck, you're flipping it over in the literal sense unless it's someting cute like Ambuscade's traps (and really those have their own mechanic that happens when they're visible rather than played). Sometimes real world terms overlap game terms, we cope as best we may. For example, we "play" Sentinels of the Multiverse in a way not accordance with play or put into play as game terms.
Tongue very much in somewhat bemused cheek.
Look, man, I love pedantry as much as the next English major, but kreistor - chill. No need to jump down people's throats or nitpick their every word choice. This is a super friendly community. Let's try to keep it that way.
One of my frustrations about Spite is that I really enjoy the concept of having to sacrifice to rescue innocent victims before they get murdered by a drug-addled psychopath, but the victim cards themselves made it really hard to consider that option, especially given the likelihood that any saved victims will get busted out and eaten after you've sacrificed to save them. I'll never rescue the Sidekick again having seen the benefit I get from keeping him out there in danger, and the Good Samaritan is as good as dead whenever he comes out. The number of times Forced Entry "freed" the victims and then he immediately ate one or more of them has made me cautious about saving them in the first place.
I really enjoy his concept, and when I RP it out it's a lot of fun… but if I really want to win the game, I almost have to play my heroes like sociopaths, and that's not a ton of fun.
That said, the first time we played against Spite, he never got Forced Entry out, and we managed to kill him when he flipped with Safe House damage. That was pretty satisfying, and it hasn't happened since.
I actually agree with kreistor that can be confusing to use the word "flip" in the context of a Sentinels game where "flip" has a specific meaning, and that we should try not to do that if it makes our communication less effective.
But there are nice polite ways of saying that, right?
I played 2 Spite games in the app last night. I won both by ignoring the victims, which didn't feel in the slightest bit heroic. Several times I had to choose which one died and which lived, which again wasn't terribly heroic.
The Potential Sidekick even encourages you (mechanically) to leave him in danger by feeding you cards.
That Safe House must be the worst safe place ever. I really hate making sacrifices to save victims then having Spite just undo all that work in one fell swoop and kill someone that I just saved.
Spite makes me sad, because there's a good deck and an interesting villain in there. He's just not quite where I want him to be.
If there was some way to sacrifice to "shore up" the Safe House or counter Forced Entry... Like a hero takes damage or destroys a card or everyone discards a card, etc., to show that we're protecting the Safe House and not just letting it rot there across the street from Spite's house and next door to the proverbial Lab.
Yeah, so we're actually protecting the Safe House rather than letting Spite just chase everyone out of it whenever he feels like it. I like the idea of being able to choose to sacrifice to keep a victim in there.
Heroes may protect the safe house by choosing a number of heroes equal to the number of cards undernearth the Safe House. Spite causes each chosen hero H -1 damage and they must discard 2 cards.
Something like that, cleaned up for adequate rules wording? The idea would be all-or-nothing, and you could aim it at heroes with insufficient cards without messing up the defense.
I just watched last night's Twitch stream from Handelabra. They had the Sidekick out and they were using other victims (usually Good Samaritans) as human shields to keep the sidekick alive as long as possible without saving him. It seemed... antiheroic.
Communication is a science, not an art. When Analysis indicates that the Predicted outcome did not occur, you rewrite. You know that, better than most here. There is no friendly way of informing someone their predicted outcome failed to be achieved and confusion was the result. That blow always hits the Ego squarely.
I disagree. There's definitely a way to say that without coming across as a dick.
I've been writing and/or editing professionally since 1998. There are ways to correct someone's grammar or usage without insulting them. If there weren't, I'd probably have been working in retail or food service since 1999.
This is a fun gaming forum full of people who like to play with cards that let them pretend to be superheroes. It isn't a Master's thesis defense.
Then again, it isn't really my place to police this (or any other) forum. So, I guess, knock yourself out. 
EDIT: I quoted Silverleaf to denote agreement, not to respond directly to her. In case that isn't clear.
It's actually easy to come up with tactful ways to explain something like "why flip is confusing in this context." I don't know, maybe being a professional writer has spoiled me or something.
Communication is not my strong point (and I have never done anything writing-related for a living), but even I usually manage to correct people in a respectful way. And if I do slip up, I apologise for my behaviour.
This forum's usually a really nice place even when people disagree, and I for one appreciate that. We can totally all get along and be nice, right? :)
Spite just brings out the worst in people. I blame him!
Yeah, and the Not-Safe House!
I've found a new (to me) way that Spite is awful.
I've been playing with his variant (testing for the App), and found it generally to be much more fun than his standard version. But just to prove that he's still the worst, I discovered the following Spite-ful interaction.
If Good Samaritan is out, and you elect to rescue him by playing the top card of the Villain deck -- if that top card turns out to be Lab Raid, then because no card was actually "played", the Good Samaritan is not actually rescued.
Yuck. I wouldn't have thought about that interaction but this certainly would be the case since Lab Raid is immediately discarded. Just another reason the Good Samaritan is the hardest victims to save.
The soup is a lie.
NO SOUP FOR YOU!