Open 99: Mayo Clinic (Game Over!) before 703

[Wall-E]

Vote: Stef

for having a shorter name than me.

[Wall-E]

Vote: charter

What the crap are you talking about, mister?

[Wall-E]

charter: I think I see what you mean, but we'd need more docs, and there's no guarantee we'd ever uncover the mafia doc.

[Wall-E]

The doctor can die from protecting a double-killed player?!

[Wall-E]

I think players should be forced to claim targets each day starting tomorrow morning. Thoughts?

[Wall-E]

I think players should be forced to claim targets each day starting tomorrow morning. Thoughts?

Maybe... my first impression however, is that the scum can wait to see who claimed doing what first, and thus make an appropriate lie that incriminates them less or shifts blame onto someone else. Knowing that there will be liars in that group will just lead Town on a wild goose chase.

Gonna think about it some more.

Then whatever order we claim in D1, we do the opposite D2, and then find a third lineup for D3...

This might take too much coordination.

Why the vote on Kiro?

[Wall-E]

Ok.

[Wall-E]

Scenario: The vigs claim. We townie docs all divide our protects over them secretly and randomly (coinflips work), a doc dies that night, the vigs have a pool of 10, of which three are scum, to vig from amongst. The mafia doc is protecting one of those, so the odds are 2/9 to kill a mafia (since one of the scum will be invulnerable: addendum: there is the chance both vigs target the same player and beat the protect, but that's longshot territory). 2/9 odds are fairly good, imo.

I dunno. What says a math person? Anyone here a math person?

[Wall-E]

EBWOP: 2/8 chance to hit a mafia (-1 dead town doc, -3 mafia, one of whom is near unkillable)

1/4 chance to hit mafia is pretty good. Better than 1/11, in a normal scenario with no vig claims.

There might be a gamebreaking strategy buried in this setup. I'm open to conjecture.

[Wall-E]

I have to play devil's advocate here and point out that we are discussing asking the only non-vanilla docs in the game to claim, a provably scummy desire in most setups. I'd like to hear from someone against this idea with a well reasoned case for why it's a bad one.

[Wall-E]

I can see that, Nameless. I'll withold judgement until more have chimed in. Someone might come up with something else.

Is scumhunting at a crawl with this setup/planning discussion? Or is this part of our scumhunt? There's no way to know (and I like it).

[Wall-E]

lol wut

is this flavor influencing the game in any way, mod?

ps my brain hurts

I don't know. Are you letting the flavour influence the game? Do I need to get you a referral to someone?

[Wall-E]

You're against the claim even though EVERYONE in the game will know they got a power?

I guess both views have merits.

[Wall-E]

Upon reflection, I agree with charter's last post.

[Wall-E]

The major problem I have with the vigs claiming is that it would completely tell the scum every bit of information in the game. They'd know it all. I'm not liking that situation, so I will hereby denounce a vig claim.

[Wall-E]

Comedic timing is ruined by now, but...

Sorry 66% chance to kill one of our own. Still not good odds.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME STALLONE?!

Those are AMAZING odds! Those are odds with tits and beer on tap!

Shit, buster, on those odds I'd whip out an uzi and mow over half the town D1, giggling while I did it, just trying to randomly win ON ACCIDENT! I would strap a chainsaw on each arm and leg and CARTWHEEL OF DEATH through EVERY. SINGLE. ONE of you, randomly chopping off heads, arms, and peckers on the OFF CHANCE I'd win with those spectacufuckinglar odds.

I'm trying to say no, but you already know you're a newbie, so there's no call for such HOLY CRAP I WOULD MARRY THOSE ODDS admonishments.

Now, back to something we're all not focused on: Scumhunting.

I read Gonk town and Plum town... I didn't like how doublePuta chastized Plum's participation. It felt like stretching for something to attack.

Stef: I think your case on Gonk is based more upon a moment of bad logic on his part than strictly scummy logic. Just my impression.

[Wall-E]

ODDS FROM THE LOINS OF JESUS

[Wall-E]

It's not strictly bad to be hard to convinced of things. The world needs stubborn people. Try putting your explaination into simpler or more anecdotal forms, maybe? IDK. I get a town read off the kid, 's all I'm sayin'.

[Wall-E]

Can everyone take some time away from harrassing the newb (not that I disapprove) to scumhunt? Or do you all want to lynch the newb and train him up for the next game he's in?


MK's last post consisted of , sardonic comments about everyone else's comments, and generally added nothing valuable to the discussion (possible exception: I agree with MK that we're not scumhunting right this second, and the two comments about my own comments were spot-on). MK: Do you have a suspect for scum aside from Gonk?

[Wall-E]

EBWOP: MK's post 86 consisted-

[Wall-E]

What did you do to "act as a smoke screen" following his posts. You voted no lynch. If you think he was trying to mislead us, you are blaming him for your no lynch vote.

I think the situation was this:

What charter was trying to say: We're not likely to see death for a while, given the high number of docs.

What Gonk heard: We shouldn't promote deaths for a while.

Gonk: Then let's no lynch!

Everyone: GET THAT TALKING GUY

[Wall-E]

I wouldn't say either charter's or GnK's comments about how many NKs there may be is misleading... just useless conjecture. There are a ton of possibilities in regards to how many NKs occur and how various actions determine them.

I have an interesting proposal to share and would like some input. Doctors are not compulsive this game, so tell all Doctors not to protect at all on Night 1. Here are some reasons why:

1) Town Doctors might block a good hit on the scum/SK.

2) The Mafia Doctor will almost certainly go against Town's wishes and still protect one of his buddies. If someone calls out that they have a failed kill on Day 2, we might have a direct lead on scum.

Obviously, there's an inherent risk that we're gonna see up to 4 Townies die, but that was possible even if all the Doctors protect anyways. In this scenario, the Mafia are guaranteed a successful kill, but at the same time, they will be exposed to both Town Vigs and the SK. Without any real clue as to alignment this early in the game, I think it is a reasonable tradeoff for the chance to drop scum early. Also, on Day 2 if people have to claim who they acted upon on Night 1, you're gonna see some crazy WIFOM like, "why did you think this person was worth protecting, etc. etc." when there's probably no basis other than just gut or coinflip. This strategy would only apply on Night 1 of course. Comments?

I disagree with this idea. True, we'll be randomly shooting in the dark, but four innocent deaths on N1 after a mislynch could = lylo.

Let's all use our own best judgement and let the game develop more naturally, says I.

I am not no-lynching, and I am not not using my doc protect. As of

this post

I consider non-scumhunting to be attack worthy. We've talked the setup to death, and it's time to move on.

[Wall-E]

I think charter's point, though, may be that the scum and town are all going to choose targets based on what's said in this thread. It's likely the mafia will pick their targets based on criteria that the docs will also be able to follow, and so the kills might be reduced by way of mass suggestion or subtle posting habits leading to everyone targeting Gonk.

But I also like GnKoichi's assertion that math > WIFOM. He's totally right.

[Wall-E]

I am really uninterested in anymore policy or setup talk. I want to see more of what Nameless did! It's called scumhunting! Leave a trail, townies, for us to look at when/if you die!

[Wall-E]

That's not exactly an encouraging response there, Wall-E.

You've done something scummy.

Nice scumhunting!

@ Tony: [sarcasm]That's ... nice? I guess it's a pretty accurate representation too. And very useful towards our scumhunting! [/sarcasm]

FOS: Wall-E, Tony

I can encourage good behavior without agreeing with the specific action.

[Wall-E]

Wall-E is saying, everyone, be like Nameless and scumhunt, and then doesn't provide any of his own cases to pursue. A bit hypocritical there. Arguing against setup discussion is fine, but once we're down to the scumhunting aspect, I don't see anything from you.

I admit to a bit of hypocrisy there. Still, calling for it is better than doing absolutely nothing, I'd think.

[Wall-E]

Your accusation is that I've been friendly with GnKoichi. I can't deny that.

If you want, I'll tell you that we aren't scumbuddies...

...but your point is valid and the only thing I can offer is, "Nuh uh."

Hence the lack of commentary.

Sorta wanting you to try harder, too.

[Wall-E]

Let the healing begin.

Wait, scratch that.

Let the CARNAGE begin!

Vote: charter

pwned by the newbie lol

[Wall-E]

Explain that vote and following statement.

Sure.

The vote is because I think charter's scum.

The statement is to aggrivate charter and exacerbate the situation.

Thanks for ruining it...

BUT!

GnKoichi has yet again pwned charter in post 148. I'm liking this situation. I'm going to keep doing what I do.

Feel free to get pissed and vote me for it!

[Wall-E]

I've been suspicious of omni and charter for some time now. Now that omni has forced my hand, relieving the pressure on charter, I'm opening this can of worms.

charter and omni have been buddy-buddy scumfriends all day. Viewing their posts in isolation, they double-team people, defend themselves, and for the space of one post omni even pretended to attack charter.

SUPRISE scumlords!

[Wall-E]

charter - 2 - [Wall-E, GnKoichi]
Charter - 1 - [Nameless]
??

thank you for bringing that to my attention. its fixed now

[Wall-E]

Plum: Your first paragraph: I did all that to get a reaction from charter. Then omni jumped in. I'd already been suspicious of their partnership, and now I'm going to reveal my case against them both. You'll have to give me some time, I'm eating dinner.

[Wall-E]

The vote is because I think charter's scum.

GnKoichi has yet again pwned charter in post 148.

unvote; vote: Wall-E

I don't understand what you're inferring. Can you elaborate?

[Wall-E]

omg i suck

yes i meant nameless

case to be posted before tomorrow night

[Wall-E]

EBWOP: Nameless and charter have been defending each other, taking pressure off each other, attacking each other's targets and attackers. Obviously there's nothing scummy about defending oneself. That was a typo due to fast typing.

[Wall-E]

It would just look bad for those first people who ganged up against me.

Uh, no, it wouldn't.

[Wall-E]

vote nameless

Guys, I found the first scum. Being serious here.

charter's 2nd post: Starts a huge debate over setup to avoid having to appear to be scumhunting.

charter's 3rd post: Owns up to the fact that this setup is clearly impossible to break and makes a non-issue out of MK's random vote. "Is this serious?"

To what purpose did you ask the question of MK in this post, charter?

charter's 4th post: Denounces the discussion he'd started to appear to be town trying to get things back on track, despite being the derailer wut lol.

charter's 5th post: Testing the waters on a vig claim wth?

charter's 6th post: Again, trying to appear town by shooting down his own suggestion, still not scumhunting.

charter's 7th post: More getting-the-town-back-on-track from his own derailment.

charter's 8th post: Denounces a massclaim but advocates a night action claim in the same post. What's the difference between the two?

charter's 9th post: Fence-sitting on the massclaim issue to promote people into possibly agreeing to it. Also conjectures about whether or not there will be nightkills. Still nearly zero scumhunting, and now he's inspiring a third derailment from scumhunting.

charter's 10th post: A question of GnKoichi, "Is this serious?" That's his second passing attempt to appear to be scumhunting. It would be a policy FoS at best, which is far from a scumtell.

charter's 11th post: More conjecture about the setup.

charter's 12th post: Votes GnKoichi. Reasons: Doesn't like how GnKoichi answers questions and asserts that GnKoichi "gave a poor explaination of his accusation." OMGUS.

charter's 13th post: Defense without providing evidence.

charter's 14th post: Shifting the burden of proof. YOU, charter, asserted that there were not likely to be many deaths at night. Your 14th post then says "Prove there are no WMDs in Iraq!!" You can't prove the lack of something, you have to prove it exists, or at the very least, offer evidence that it does.

charter's 15th post: Baseless assertion with no evidence backing his claim. Again. Again.

charter's 16th post: Applies some subtle psychological pressure, saying that if any townie claims to have used dice to choose their night protect he'll call them scum. Scaaaary, charter. For the record, this declaration is clearly bullying and the assertion that using random dice is scummy is flat wrong.

charter's 17th post: "I'm not scum!"

charter's 18th post: "There's some scummy logic being hurled around!" No backup, no citation, an ambiguous blanket statement that he can later claim applied to anyone he wants to handpick.

Nameless PBPA shortly, followed by scumpairing PBPA.

[Wall-E]

I really hope you plan on answering my question too, Charter. And explaining why you'll consider GK scum if somebody ELSE claims they randomly protected.

I'm a doc, sure.
I will consider anyone scum that says the randomly acted last night. I think you misheard me about GK being scum. Whoever says they randomly acted I will view as scum.

"Sure, yeah, whatever, I'm a doc... why not? Get off my back, mom!"

[Wall-E]

I was asked. I have a habit of lying as town. Is charter actually a doc? Only time will tell.

OMG

[Wall-E]

@Plum: Except I know I'm town, and the rest of my case points strongly at charter and Nameless as scum, imo.

Please keep in mind that I use the most biased possible language when attacking. I'm never 100% sure of a case. In this case, I'm roughly 70% sure charter and Nameless are scumbuds.

[Wall-E]

I see the problem here.

I'll tell you this:

I'm a hypocrite.

I was born a hypocrite. I hold other people to a different standard than I do myself. I understand myself, and I am not my enemy, and so I don't worry about following the moral strictures to which I believe that my fellow man should apply himself, and so long as I am not detracting from the enjoyment of the game of another player (excessively), I will do as my higher brain functions allow (they're a bit drugged up at the moment, but rest assured I am thinking clearly, if slowly.

In other words, my ethics are completely nonexistent in regards to how I play this game.

So if you want something important, you have to ask for it, and be really clear, so I'm sure to understand you completely.

Otherwise, I'm not going to respond much, mostly because it is hard for me to read some of the posts.

And if I miss a question, don't be mad.

Sometimes I miss bits of conversation due to windows tabs shenanigans.

Otherwise... wait, what are you asking me, specifically?

My case on Nameless and charter, scumlords:

Vote: Charter

, for wishful thinking.

Nameless: random votes charter.

Second post: Engages charter's banter, distancing a bit by taking a groundless stance on some inane setup debate, the two of them having the lamest and weakest possible riposte throughout.

Puta Puta agrees with me on this: Nameless' side of the banter felt fake.

They wagoned Kiro together, Nameless for lurking, charter for policy something I can't recall. I'll check back after I post.

I'd also like to note how charter pre-empted my case by bringing this up. Guilty conscience. He knew I'd include this, yet I never alluded to my intent to do so. Do you deny that?

Nameless comes to charter's rescue, a white knight attacking my attack as if charter needed to defend against a nearly baseless vote. "Lol pwnd by the Noob." or something, right? I forget now.

Strange how Nameless felt the need to defend against literally nothing.

All the while, Nameless is also ravenously defending charter, like a lapdog. Perhaps we kill charter, no?

GnKoichi agrees with me on this: Nameless was behaving oddly in favor of charter's goodwill with the town.

Nameless finds a roundabout explanation of a very complex emotion the newb was having (by pulling several teeth) and simplifies it to what he/she consciously knew was the truth, the proverbial purloined letter, the too-obvious clue left in plain sight to convince those who read it of some inherent ridiculousness of notion it was:

Nameless wrote the following, in the voice of roleplaying GnKoichi: "Just your willingness to join the attack against me and to defend charter, and you took things I said purposefully out of context to make me look worse."

Nameless: Why did you feel the need to build a case on yourself like that with zero provocation?

At this moment in the game's flow, I inject my first attack on charter, a real attack, one meant to wound deep like the spear of a warrior, thrust through flesh and against bone, leaving a dark, red hole.

So I tried to do that.


And that, roughly, brings us up to date.

Can you show me how I'm wrong, Nameless?

Can you, charter?

[Wall-E]

Oy, what the hell.

That deflates quite a bit of my own personal suspicion, actually. It was a major part of my gut read.

[Wall-E]

I meant to say that the opinions or guts of others agreeing with mine made me feel more confident in my case, and now a part of that is gone

but still

what say you, charter and Nameless?

ps sorry town for the small mistake

[Wall-E]

Upon review of your defense, it's ad hom. and bewildered sarcasm with very little content. I think you failed to address several of my important bits. The only things I was willing to demand you do in self-defense was answer/address the bolded bits of the attack, so you're off the hook for now. Suffice to say, charter's my pick at the moment.

[Wall-E]

Nameless finds a roundabout explanation of a very complex emotion the newb was having (by pulling several teeth) and simplifies it to what he/she consciously knew was the truth, the proverbial purloined letter, the too-obvious clue left in plain sight to convince those who read it of some inherent ridiculousness of notion it was:

Nameless wrote the following, in the voice of roleplaying GnKoichi: "Just your willingness to join the attack against me and to defend charter, and you took things I said purposefully out of context to make me look worse."

Nameless: Why did you feel the need to build a case on yourself like that with zero provocation?

Yes, that was an example of what GK could have posted to answer the question presented to him while still retaining all the same relevant points - posted in response to GK asking how he could have done so without the sniping at Charter re: the NK speculation. I didn't say I agreed with him (either of them). What's your point?

My point is in the first quote in this post. You acting like I didn't state the point originally is noted.

[Wall-E]

Meh, you're right that it's not the most airtight case, but I stand by my suspicions. Just be careful about calling someone scum for building a case you disagree with, Plum. It's usually not such a hot lead.

[Wall-E]

Plum: That's all fine. I'm willing to die for this cause, if I must.

Really would rather not, but ce'st la vie.

[Wall-E]

I haven't dropped the case on Nameless, I'm just going to be less vocal about it for now.

The loquacious post was the result of my medication, most likely.

Kiro: What does it matter if TM doesn't change his random vote for a while?

[Wall-E]

Yes, I ignored Nameless' post. I ignore entire posts because of one tiny ad hom attack. I'm also ignoring most of your last one, charter, for the same exact reason.

Way to defend your partner yet again.

[Wall-E]

Policy lynching me won't erase my case.

[Wall-E]

ITT your "charter's being intentionally misleading" reason is stretching and wrong.

[Wall-E]

Well, since everything in the game is based on supposition and opinion, none.

[Wall-E]

Honestly... I'm being lazy. I built a half-assed case based mostly on gut and got dogpiled for it, so I'm going to hang back and see what else develops. On the upside, what I did inspired some discussion, so I don't feel too bad.

[Wall-E]

animorpherv1: At the time, we were discussing that option amongst others. I stand by the question, as setup discussion in a mini like this is par for the course.

@everyone: Don't lynch me for doing what everyone else should be doing (scumhunting/building cases).

Don't quicklynch me under any circumstance. Only warning.

[Wall-E]

I'd also like to point out: Both people I attacked are on my wagon. Regardless of the reasons, that's downright coincidental.

[Wall-E]

I'm going to hang back and see what else develops.

Don't lynch me for doing what everyone else should be doing (scumhunting/building cases).

Are there subtle things being said about me? Are they bad? Explain more serious.

[Wall-E]

I see no contradictions there.

[Wall-E]

I'd like you to comment on what exactly you are implying by quoting me a bunch like that. Tell me what specifically you mean by each thing.

Taking the context out of all those snippets is not scumhunting.

[Wall-E]

Are you addressing Kmd or I in the above post?

In any case, regarding #254, what I'm pointing out is that you yourself seem unsure whether your case (which you never clarified, I might remind) is BS or not. The obvious implications are that is IS and that you appear moreso scummy for wavering back and forth about it.

I assure you that the gaps in information in the quoted selections are making my snippets there appear self-conflicting. Nothing more. If you'd like to prove otherwise, be my guest. It's your case. I'll defend against anything you feel the urge to put into words.

[Wall-E]

Kmd, SHOW me a BETTER case that YOU have built and let he who is without blemish cast the first stone.

I've copped to every flaw pointed out in my case. The case itself eventually deteriorated. Being wrong is a scumtell now?

[Wall-E]

you guys are

smurfs

i'm not doing any of the things you suggested

i'm going to keep on playing this game and you can just cry over me not liking my own

smurfing

case anymore

or if you don't like that, pull your lower lip over your head and swallow

play nice please. while the words i replaced werent that bad, i would prefer if y'all laid off the name calling, thank you.

[Wall-E]

You're setting up lynches without giving a good reason.

[Wall-E]

Lurker lynch? Don't think we should do that when we have decent discussion happening anyway. I see policy lurker lynches as not better than random lynches in most cases. Granted, some of the lurkers have acted moderately scummy. Also, setting up lynches/vig kills? This is the second time you've done that sort of thing (earlier you said 'If charter turns out to be scum, Kmd is likely a partner'). Furthermore, while Charter hasn't really explained his votes, I still don't fully see your case on Wall-E aside from 'he was defensive' and having said at one point that he'd started acting 'like [he isn't] even trying'. If you're voting him to L-2 with only that on him, I'd like to hear more of your thoughts on the case.

QFT!!

[Wall-E]

You're wrong. It's coincidence. I defended you because I agreed with you. I built a case motivated by an instinct I felt upon reading the thread once through. I've done it before to great success, and 100% of the times I've done it I caught scum. This time it was revealed to me that I'd made two critical reading comprehension errors which had expanded the relationship shared by Nameless and charter into a more convincing reality, but upon posting the case Nameless offered a new perspective, so I withdraw now my case.

I will continue to discuss this at length with anyone who wishes to continue the discussion.

GnKoichi: If I'm reading you right, you set up a trap for me by switching to my bandwagon to provoke a reaction?

[Wall-E]

EBWOP: Sometimes I forget to mention my motivations. It's a bad habit. Call me on it and I'll try to make it up.

[Wall-E]

GnKoichi, I have agreed with some of your points in this game, but you are way off track with the charter/me team theory. I'm not saying charter's not scum. I did get a strong sense of scum off charter/Nameless, but I have no supporting evidence that can withstand specific scrutiny from a point-of-view which is assuming I'm lying. I therefore dropped my line of attack. I still suspect charter. You'll notice I'm still voting for him.

You are flat wrong, so I invite anyone to say anything indicating otherwise in the hopes of changing minds. I will continue to vote for charter until such time as I find a more definite scum or he is lynched.

[Wall-E]

"Knight in Shining Armor" - I was the first person to use this phrase. It was to describe charter's defense of Nameless.

[Wall-E]

I'm saying that my brain first popped up with it. I don't know what you meant to reference by using it, so I was clarifying what I used it for.

Knight in Shining Armor

[Wall-E]

'Kay, 'cause when I used it I was describing scum rescuing town or scum. Sorry for the confusion.

[Wall-E]

Nameless, you you have jack shit to back that up or are you just terminally stupid?

[Wall-E]

I got it.

This is what I get for sticking up for a newb.

Luckily, I think Gonk does have some talent, so it'll just be a question of him learning not to say illogical things.

[Wall-E]

GnKoichi and charter are both off my list as of this post.

Who else in this town needs some TLC?

Vote: OP

Speak up or die.

[Wall-E]

Kiro: GnKoichi's off my list because, well, he was never on it. I've always had a town read on him.

charter's off it because the reasons I thought he was scummy for turned out to be clerical errors on my own part, pointed out by Nameless, who attacked me for being mistaken (and thus my participation dropped off).

Because the reasons you inquire about are strictly personal, I can do little to dissuade or encourage any other lynch at the moment.

Furthermore, as this spotlight's focus continues to narrow upon me I remain unable to perform my usual duty/service to the town...

I'm actually a big baby and when things go wrong I tune them down/out or blow them up.

Currently I'm blown up. I'll still keep up with conversation, but the kind of in-depth analysis that (so far) has netted me 100% scum has to be put on hold until I get my mojo back.

Still a bit upset with Nameless, but I think my perception of things will cool enough for me to get a more unbiased read eventually. Just not today. Sorry. Also, don't feel responsible, Nameless, I'm cranky, overmedicated and homesick.

[Wall-E]

lol nub

[Wall-E]

People who I think are paying attention and playing well:

GnKoichi: NOOB
Kmd4390: Feeding the NOOB/Paying attention
Nameless: Paying attention
Kiro: Paying attention
Plum: Paying attention

Other people:

animorpherv1: Lurking and not reading NOT DOING WELL
Mana_Ku: Absent NOT DOING WELL
Tony Montana: Absent

Everyone else: No posts in three pages.

[Wall-E]

Nameless, stop pushing for a lynch for transparently OMGUS reasons.

[Wall-E]

Uh, all I'm hearing is a slight degeneration in my participation/playing, but I'm certainly not the worst offender, and I'm paying close attention to the thread. I continue to insist GnKoichi is town. I berate him as a noob out of love, because despite his posts being EXCEPTIONALLY prolific and long and rambling, he's made a few good points, and if he'd just drop the ridiculous semantics and charter scumclaim lines of attack he'd be doing the best job of scumhunting. It's frankly a pain to read some of his posts.

I've been berating him the entire game, so really all you're mad about, GnKoichi, is that I've stopped vocally pursuing people. You are doing a fine job of it, though, and too many vocal town spoil the stew.

So, if anyone has a direct question, please ask, otherwise, IGMEOYA.

[Wall-E]

I think the problem here is why would charter mention suspicions or knowledge without stating what they are? Why not just keep quiet?

I now want to hear what charter's reason for being so sure I'm town are.

[Wall-E]

you're right, but he might just be lazy

i'll wait for charter to post again

if he hasn't explained the things mentioned in post 403 after that point, he's earned my vote for the day

[Wall-E]

your lies certainly don't benefit the town

anything that doesn't benefit us is unhelpful and distracting

die scum die

vote: charter

[Wall-E]

"whatever" is a scummy thing to say in the face of a lynch

[Wall-E]

FoS: OP

Don't say someone's someone's partner without stating a reason, ugly.

[Wall-E]

That is some cold stuff.

I like it.

[Wall-E]

charter claimed already? he's omgusly attacking his attacker? he claimed doc? let's let him do his thing for a while and find a new target.

[Wall-E]

Is charter dead yet?

[Wall-E]

You want more from me?

[Wall-E]

To be clear, between here and post 483? Or between here and post 453? Or the one before that? The most interesting thing that has happened is GnKoichi hounding charter into a defeatist attitude that I find worthy of my vote and an eventual lynch.

[Wall-E]

If charter had a decent claim is another story, and I'm far for certain, but he'd better talk quick if he wants my vote off him.

Sigh.

charter, why are you sounding so beaten?

[Wall-E]

EBWOP: and I'm far

from

certain, but

[Wall-E]

I'll give some analysis, if you want, but not now. Don't know when I'll be not-busy.

[Wall-E]

OP please address the many posts and questions directed at you/discussing you.

I'm voting charter for "losing the faith." He's stopped belving he can win and started preparing his body for burial. It's easy to lose the faith when a person never had any to begin with. Entertaining GnKoichi's sometimes ridiculous accusations kept his feet out of the fire, but then he started wimping out hard. That's my only real lead at the moment.

[Wall-E]

Nope, that's exactly what I wanted. Thanks OP.

[Wall-E]

WELL YOU ARE CERTAINLY MAKING THAT EASY, CHARTER, AS YOU APPEAR TO HAVE GIVEN UP COMPLETELY ON DEFENDING YOURSELF OR PUSH YOUR OWN AGENDA!!

/disapproval

[Wall-E]

ebwop: 'pushing your own agenda' ... your teammates undoubtedly should be disappointed.

[Wall-E]

Explain why it would be pointless for scum to do exactly what the town is hanging you for doing.

If you can do that, explain who your biggest suspect is.

[Wall-E]

"I'm not going to respond any more."

OMGUS possibility

I'm keeping my vote with charter.

[Wall-E]

Unvote

I've just now changed my mind. They're both town.

[Wall-E]

It wasn't something charter did. I was on the fence on charter. Now I'm 75% sure he's town, and so is GnKoichi.

[Wall-E]

I could tell y'all, but you'd call me insane. I assure you, I am quite mad. So if you want to know, I'll wait for more people to say so and then I'll tell the town.

[Wall-E]

If I get nothing out of this game but derision and blame, let me be remembered for this: I think GnK and charter are town.

you guys read way too much into interactions before scum have been caught... it's really quite silly and i will enjoy watching this town learn some hard lessons... here are some words you will likely regret ignoring: scumteam speculation is near worthless before the 1st scum is caught

[Wall-E]

GnKoihi

The moderator mispelled GnKoichi's name.

[Wall-E]

Wall-E, I'd like to hear why you made the sudden turn around.

The answer is in post 531: When I misspell something it means I was experiencing consternation or anxiety over the thing. I think the Mod is worried GnK is going to deflate this game with a townie vs newbie townie brawl.

[Wall-E]

THEY ARE BOTH TOWN AAAAAUGH

*dies of heart failure*

*rises as a concerned zombie*

Vote: OrangePenguin

Tired of your lurkish fluff.

[Wall-E]

When I misspell something it means I was experiencing consternation or anxiety over the thing. I think the Mod is worried GnK is going to deflate this game with a townie vs newbie townie brawl.

(Sorry for the empty post here, but you have to admit that's pretty funny.)

Yeah, I was concerned as I wrote that I'd get lynched for using the most ridiculous metagaming I'd ever heard of.

[Wall-E]

Now you're being over-defensive

just do what they ask!

or don't

but don't whine about it!

zoiks, scoob

[Wall-E]

lol, that last post of mine was in response to orangepenguin's most recent post

sorry for confusing people

it was basically a less verbose version of post 550






i am involved in like five scumteam theories

most of the theorists aren't voting for me, though

weird, huh?

[Wall-E]

Unvote: Vote: Animorpherv1

I forget who I'm voting for.

I decided that the mod mispelled GnKoichi's name as an involuntary reaction to consternation regarding his play style, leading me to believe the town's fighting affected the mod's mindset, thereby influencing his actions while typing GnKoichi's name.

I know, that sounds dumb as all hell.

I believe it enough to ignore how it sounds.

[Wall-E]

yes i am insane sorry i forgot to mention that

[Wall-E]

Wall-E [has] been very difficult to read. [he is a bad player]

This.

I have been feeling Tony's style was rather alright by me.

i am involved in like five scumteam theories

most of the theorists aren't voting for me, though

weird, huh?

This too.

[Wall-E]

Unvote: Vote: orangepenguin

If you disagree with the lynch, don't add to it. This plus everything else you've done in this game (or haven't done), it's all too much.

[Wall-E]

Nah, I like a good old fashioned mess. GnKoichi provided a spectacular mess for us to appreciate. Now let's do something with it.

Let's analyze the mess.

OP: This is not the first time I have said that I was suspicious of you.

[Wall-E]

unvote: OP

vote: animorpherv1

hi OP

[Wall-E]

That's okay Nameless. While going over my own posts, I knew that not everyone would believe that I'm turning over a new leaf. I can only prove that with my future actions. I didn't think this was going to suddenly get everyone to turn the other way. I just had a realization about how I was playing and I wanted to fix it right away.

Which is why I have my vote on OP. It's not so much about him voting for me, or that he's doing so when he says there are two people he'd rather lynch. It's really about him saying that he knew how to play better, but that he was going to wait until Day 2. Why wait? He may have posted more often in the last few pages, but I don't think he's added much to the conversation; certainly not enough to make me change my mind about him overall.

Apology accepted.

Let the healing begin.

[Wall-E]

I'm not going to lie: I forgot this was Mayo clinic, and dove into the thread with the usual "don't lynch the claimed doc d1" mindset.

I agree that OP has made a specific and unpardonable error.

OP claimed he quickvoted in lieu of posting an elaborate series of quoted selections with reasoned arguments.

If said analysis existed, even if only in OP's head, why feel so unconfident as to do what OP did, lurklurlurk and always with an excuse. Scum don't read the thread. Scum just post whatever. They don't worry about lynching not-scum.

However.

I feel there is room for explaination, and so I will not vote OP until he addresses this post.

[Wall-E]

I get what you're saying, but OP has had equal interaction with other players.

[Wall-E]

Scum don't read the thread. Scum just post whatever. They don't worry about lynching not-scum.

This is so wrong that it hurts me not to vote you for saying it.

Maybe you can be more specific? Why is it scummy to say this?

[Wall-E]

you guys

i just got off the phone with mirth's next-of-kin

it seems he turned into a marmoset

doctors don't know what to say or do

they're working round the clock to find a cure for Mirth's Disease

in the meantime, if you feel your ears itching and your nose shrinking and you crave plantains, please see your doctor immediately

thanks

[Wall-E]

A few more questions, OP:

OP has made a specific and unpardonable error.

OP claimed he quickvoted

in lieu of

posting an elaborate series of quoted selections with reasoned arguments.

If said analysis existed (as he's claimed), even if only in OP's head, why feel so unconfident as to do what OP did, lurklurlurk and always with an excuse why he won't say what he's thinking, not even to simply throw his two cents in on anything being discussed?

Scum don't read the thread. Scum just post whatever. They don't worry about lynching not-scum.

However.

I feel there is room for explaination, and so I will not vote OP until he addresses this post.

Here's perhaps a more clarified version of a post I made earlier. Can you address the following questions:

What happened to the analysis in question here? What form did it take? How long between when you wrote it and the time you decided to just go ahead and post did you wait? Can you cite the post you voted in with it's numeric identity?

Specifically I'm accusing you of being so blaze with your responses as to scan the current page, pick a randomly bolded name, read the case against the person, decide, "That's good enough," vote the same person and claim, "Dog ate my analysis."

Any questions I haven't addressed? I suspect there may be.

[Wall-E]

From what we've seen here, I say we can all think Wall-E is grabbing at mid air.

Really? Despite my questioning of OP essentially exposing him as either the scummiest town ever or the most hypocritical? Or even (gasp) scum?

Try again, lurkmonster.

[Wall-E]

Maybe you can be more specific? Why is it scummy to say this?

Saying that scum don't read the thread and just post whatever is like saying that football players close their eyes and just kick wherever. I'd call you a complete idiot if I actually thought you believed it, but you saying things like that in the context of a serious argument would seem to imply that you're scum BS/craplogic-ing. I'd congratulate you on that being one step up from nonsense posts, but then 637.

Maybe our definitions of "read" are the problem.

When I said "read," I probably should have included the ideas of "analysis, careful, medatative thought and reasoned posting."

People who don't do those things are wasting their time reading the thread. Scum don't need to bother with "reading" the thread because they only need to find some crappy reason to vote someone and fade into the crowd. I hope that's clearer.

[Wall-E]

Quick post here:

1. OP

didn't

make any analysis whatsoever for his vote,

which he thought was the hammer

, because, he says, "I figured, no, I'll just vote, since I figured it was the hammer anyways, and that, since I was the last one, that a full blown case wasn't necessary". He evidently was prepared to hammer GnK on no analysis at all, which begs the question: So, what made you want to hammer him, then? Also, what's with the discrepency between that and

I think, if I were to hammer, I should've provided quotes to support my reasonings.

2.

I really dislike when people try to group people as scum partners when you don't even know if either of t he pair are confirmed scum or not, or what have you.

Fair enough, though I did make it clear that I was pointing out a second instance of dubious interaction between you and Wall-E and that I was and am far from certain that you two are scumbuddies. But what's with

I didn't really think so at first, but his Wall-E-Charter theory makes enough sense.

Eh, I think Wall and charter are partners [...]

You don't like scumbuddy speculation when neither of those on which the speculation is focused is confirmed scum? A fair enough position. So, why have you done that this game? Hypocrisy has already been discussed and the conclusion is that it's at least not town-helpful, if not in and of itself scummy. So?

Thanks for being the only person to PICK UP my momentum rather than stabbing at it in a lame attempt to look industrious.

[Wall-E]

GK is still scum, and a fantastic lynch for today.

Why?

Be very specific and succinct, please. A citation wouldn't hurt. I think attacking him now that he's backed off would normally be a great idea, but in this case he went WAY overboard and it was a HUGE town tell, imo.

[Wall-E]

There was never an analysis. It never did take form. I was about to start one though, or at least wanted to make one, but I figured, no, I'll just vote, since I figured it was the hammer anyways, and that, since I was the last one, that a full blown case wasn't necessary. My math was off. I wasn't the hammer. A case would've been good, especially "an elaborate one supported by quotes and reasoned arguments". If I had one, even half of one, I would've posted it. (if I had started though, I would've finished)

How... convenient. You'll excuse me if I assume the worst in you (as I always do of everyone). Do you remember what specifically led you to believe your "hammer" was justified?

[Wall-E]

animorpherv1: are you lurking or reading or what?

[Wall-E]

Unvote: Vote Animorpherv1

WISHING THAT WAS A HAMMER

[Wall-E]

animorpherv1: I WILL ACCEPT ALMOST THE BAREST OF PASSINGLY INSIGHTS FROM YOU AS AN EXCUSE NOT TO LYNCH YOU: PLEASE DO ONE OF THE FOLLOWING

1) Build a case. Well-reasoned, couple paragraphs, nothing major.

2) Start posting three times a page for a few pages.

3) Build a defending case for yourself. The key points against you are that YOU WON'T DO ANY OF THE ABOVE, so really this one is added to 1 or 2 as a bonus if you do one of them.

Unvote

We are in no rush.

Ani, I will revote you if you post again without doing one of those things.

[Wall-E]

OP's case is still fresh in my mind.

Vote: OP

To reiterate:

1)

OP claimed the intention of posting a long and detailed case against someone - ostensibly because he was the hammer (or so he thought), so why bother?

2)

Plum said it best:

1. OP didn't make any analysis whatsoever for his vote, which he thought was the hammer, because, he says, "I figured, no, I'll just vote, since I figured it was the hammer anyways, and that, since I was the last one, that a full blown case wasn't necessary". He evidently was prepared to hammer GnK on no analysis at all, which begs the question: So, what made you want to hammer him, then?

3)

Hypocritically denounced scumbuddy theorizing whilst engaging in it himself. This is less a scumtell in my book. It's like a half-scumtell. After all, I'm a huge hypocrite. Still, it adds to the pile.

4)

unvote, vote: orangepenguin

I don't know if you could call this an OMGUS vote, since you seem really unhappy to be voting me. Seriously, if you think there are two better lynches, don't vote for me.

Also, if you have a plan on how to play better, start now. That's what I'm doing.

I think they are better choices, personally, not better lynches. I think you might be right in that charter might just be anti-town, but not really indicative of scum. I've seen charter play like this as town before, so I wouldn't be too surprised. I really don't have a case on Wall-E, but I planned on pursuing it tomorrow.

Better choices but not better lynches? What in the Crab Nebula are you talking about, hose beast? You claim not to have a case on me, yet you'd PREVIOUSLY said:

My case on Nameless and charter, scumlords:

That deflates quite a bit of my own personal suspicion, actually.

Upon review of your defense, it's ad hom. and bewildered sarcasm with very little content.

Meh, you're right that it's not the most airtight case,

I haven't dropped the case on Nameless,

I built a half-assed case based mostly on gut

unvote, vote: Wall-E

That's a fairly established case. Why not just repost or say, "Read my posts, fool!" Why this whining about whining over your contributions?

Honestly, I do appreciate your contributions to the game. I just found a post where you say that you don't see the need to throw your opinions onto the desks of the mafia just to look pro-town. I like that logic.

We're all interested in what you have to say now. I'm calling your bluff! You say you are quiet to let others talk! Now be loud! If you've been keeping such golden thoughts so quiet, I think one of them might help us immensely right now, when we are essentially reduced to a lurker lynch.

The CEO at the meeting calls for silence and says, "OP, what do YOU think about the quarterly report and how the business is being run?"

[Wall-E]

You realize that ani has posted nothing since you voted him and said you wished that your vote was a hammer?

Meh. Assuming ani does what I think he will (more lurking), it won't be a problem. I'll just hammer him (or add my vote if he's not at L-1).

[Wall-E]

It's "understandable" because you are the scummiest player in the game. If you weren't, then I wouldn't be thinking you are scum, and I wouldn't be voting you.

This post is meaningless drivel, as it includes nothing that can be debated.

[Wall-E]

I don't really see the need to debate GK being lynched. He needs to, there's really no other side of it. Look at what he's doing now. It's almost the same thing as me saying I lied, he's admitting to playing scummily. By his own logic he should be lynched. I've said that phrase about him too many times to count now...

Do you truly believe GnK to be scum?

[Wall-E]

Also, if it's almost the same thing as you saying you lied, why don't you self-vote?

[Wall-E]

ani isn't even trying

unvote: vote animorpherv1

why do you make me hate, ani? why?

nameless: can a person say something pro-town and still be scummy? can the opposite occur, where an honest-to-god pro-town player does something scummy? what was it that I said that you supposedly already said? do you think i'm town or scum?

[Wall-E]

what was it that I said that you supposedly already said?

You effectively called Kmd out for active lurking in #727, while I'd called out Kmd for active lurking in #721 (although you referred to a different post of Kmd's).

HAHA! Good one.


...oh, you're being serious.

I... I've never been told that saying something completely different from someone else was parroting before. What's your case against me, again?

[Wall-E]

If I answered in that context, I'd be lying. I wanted to fake hammer for reactions. No one will believe a case coming from me right now, so I have no reason to make one.

False.

If you die and flip town it will give us something to think about.

unvote: vote: KMD

[Wall-E]

UNVOTE

Wth KMD what's with voting yourself?!?

Gah. I'm going to put you all on timeout until someone makes some sense in here.

[Wall-E]

if you are town i'm going to strangle you

[Wall-E]

THE ROLES

6 Protown Doctors

Stef - Doctor, Killed Night 1
Elvis_Knits

EdwardElric

Mana_Ku

- Doctor, Killed Night 1
Charter - Doctor, Killed Night 2
Orangepenguin - Doctor, Killed Night 2
????
????

2 Protown Compulsive Vigs

animorpherv1

Puta Puta

- Vigilante, Lynched Day 1
????

1 Compulsive SK

????

2 Mafia Goons

Kmd4390 - Mafia Goon, Lynched Day 2
????

1 Mafia Doctor

????

--

The Suspects:

TonyMontana
Nameless
Wall-E
Plum
Kiro
GnKoichi













We are in lylo. I'll claim vanilla doc. My targets were GnK N1 and nobody N2 because I was

V

acation

/

L

imited

A

ccess.

...I'd like to

Vote: GnKoichi

. Gut, and I'll change it for almost no reason and at the drop of a hat. Charter attacked him repeatedly, KMD tried to get an early wagon on him (a safe move when busing), and he's been commenting on night deaths, which is typically a noob scum tell.

[Wall-E]

I can agree with the tone of your post, but the specifics fall short...

I didn't have time while coughing up blood in the ICU to specifically read the entire thread before choosing my night action on N2. Rather than potentially lose the game for us by protecting mafia, I specifically CHOSE not to protect.

I misunderstood LYLO: I thought it meant we

can

lose if we mislynch. Apparently it means we absolutely

WILL

lose if we mislynch. I'll clarify now with a LSooC: Lynch scum or oh crap. I hope that's more accurate, and apologize for my ignorance.

As to your assurance that I had nobody to consult and therefore should have chosen a target N2 if I were town: False choice. It's not "I'm town OR I protected N2" it's "I'm town, and I chose not to protect." False choices are a scumtell.

As to the "not a noob mistake, but a scumplay" I made in voting KMD: He self-voted, which was enough for me to vote him. I don't particularly care for your insistence that NOT voting him would have been a good option. What would that gain us? Were you hoping scum would hammer? Or were you hoping scum would set him up for a self-hammer? Given that you're voting for me, I'm assuming the latter, but as I am town my action disproves your claim that scum would have necessarily done so, so I fail to see the validity of your vote for me. I realize nobody else can come to this conclusion, but I would appreciate if you'd explain further.

To the SK:

If we mislynch and you fail to kill mafia tonight you will lose when the two mafia outnumber the two remaining players tomorrow morning (worst case, you and a townie doc). It therefore behooves you to help us find scum.

Given that, there will be two people trying to cause a mislynch today. Kiro, can you clarify your vote on me? You're mad that I claimed... am I scum for that?

I'd like to hear from TM or he'll be my fallback vote for today. We can't afford to let 1/6th of the town lurk today. I will not be condoning a hammer before all six remaining players have posted at LEAST twice, and would prefer something closer to ten posts from each person.

[Wall-E]

To further tear apart your insistence that my choice not to protect N2 was a scumtell: Don't you think scum would have just faked a protect claim? It's arguably less attention-getting and supremely easy to do. Why confess if I'm scum? Why not just say, "I protected [living player] on N2?"

[Wall-E]

Why not out the vig? There's no way he can be killed with two docs in the town, and the odds are good the mafia will hit the SK (1/3) and the odds are good the SK will hit mafia (2/5)... meanwhile the true vig has a 3/4 chance to target scum, and a 2/4 chance to kill scum.

Let's do some fun math, shall we?

We all claim. The remaining scum claim doc. That makes five docs and a vig. The town docs protect the vig, so he's out of the NK pool. That leaves the mafia three available targets, one of whom is the SK.

The SK, on the other hand, has four targets: The two docs, the mafia, the mafia doc (who will be protecting the mafia). 2/4 chance to hit scum.

To complete the tanglefuck of numbers and ratios:

The SK has a 50% chance to kill scum tonight.
The mafia has a 33% chance to kill scum tonight.
The vig has a 50% chance to kill scum tonight.

All of this is predicated on the vig claiming.

Am I wrong?

[Wall-E]

Ok, thanks for fixing my numbers. I was unaware of the not-NK-ability of SK.

And you're right, the entire plan was predicated on a no-lynch. I hammered those numbers out somewhat haphazardly.

So since the numbers suck, nobody else claim. I'm happy with my GnK vote for the moment. NOBODY get GnK within L-2 range before more discussion!

Unvote

I'll revote him provided nothing else substantial comes up.

I meant that his self-vote retroactively reinforced my vote, in my mind. I was online at the time (see my WTH KmD? post) and had considered unvoting. I'm still glad we killed him. I still don't see what waiting would have accomplished. Can someone explain that to me?

[Wall-E]

Not when the scum basically claim by self-voting.

And I'm not going to get into a WIFOM discussion based on a satellite point I made while you ignore my main one.

[Wall-E]

Plum is town: Is that a statement of fact or opinion?

[Wall-E]

I should have said, "Which was enough for me to lynch him." I misspoke(typed?).

[Wall-E]

Maybe I'm not seeing the point you're all making, but I'm going to restate the problem to see if that helps:

I voted for KmD. KmD voted for himself. At that point, I decided to keep my vote on rather than unvote.

Does that make more sense?

[Wall-E]

I protected GnK N1 because I wanted to protect a townie, and was sure GnK was one at the time.

[Wall-E]

After thinking about it, I would recommend the vig don't claim or at least if s/he does the doctors don't protect the vig unless they would have otherwise, because the chances of going into N4 is low, the vig's kill still goes through if the big is NKed N3, and both docs protecting the vig just makes it easier for the Mafia / SK's kill to go through.





arglebargle

SO YOU AGREE WITH ME THAT WE SHOULD BE CLAIMING THEN?!?!

GNK APPARENTLY DOESN'T!! DESPITE HIS CLAIM!!

[Wall-E]

Wall-E's actual response to KMD's self vote:

UNVOTE

Wth KMD what's with voting yourself?!?

Gah. I'm going to put you all on timeout until someone makes some sense in here.

Vote: Wall-E

Well, if you're so cock-sure I'm lying, why did you claim?

[Wall-E]

I have completely boned the town and I apologize right now.

[Wall-E]

I never lied.

[Wall-E]

Unvote: Vote Plum

[Wall-E]

Why do you think I'm voting for you?

[Wall-E]

The situation is exactly as described by Tony. Thanks for the post.

[Wall-E]

Hey, it was worth a shot.

I voted for you because you appear to me to be keeping a low profile and buddying.

[Wall-E]

Hey, do NOT vote me. I am town. I agreed with the non-incriminating version of Tony's post. It's not a confession or anything.

[Wall-E]

I didn't specify at all what I meant. It looks like you are going to oblige me by building a case against yourself for me. Thanks!

[Wall-E]

Wall-E is hanging back as usual,

Can you point out another time I've "hung back?"

voting Plum for no reason

Untrue. I gave my reason.

and says Plum will incriminate herself.

Untrue. I said that Plum built a case on herself despite claiming she'd never fall for "that trick." And so the rest of this sentence:

If you have something to share regarding that, say it. Keeping the cards close to your chest like that does Town no good at a time when you should not be playing shadowy games (if you're Townie).

...is invalid, as it's based on the supposition that there's something I have yet to say.

In the meantime, if we're going to get anything else out of this round, I think it requires more claiming, at least by the other doc

But I already claimed. Or did you mean that YOU are not a doc? At least one person agrees with me that a massclaim is a good idea.

(I think we can assume Wall-E was lying)

Only if you want the town to lose.

I can't really think of any other sources of information to wait on.

So let's just end the day, is what you're saying? Hell no. The fact that ANY player is at L-1 in such a close game is a sign of extreme disfunction on the town's part.

I doubt [Wall-E] will self-hammer.

Why do you doubt I'll self-hammer?

[Wall-E]

At the risk of sounding like an echo of Kmd, I'll gladly hammer myself when I'm convinced the rest of the town know who the rest of the scum are. (See: #850)

I'm starting to dislike Nameless myself.

Why would you hammer yourself as a doc? You can't be the vig, because if you were hammering yourself would absolutely guarantee a town loss. You can't be a doc unless GnK is lying.

Can you help me understand this comment about self-hammering?

[Wall-E]

The reason nobody will hammer me is that there are only scum left not on my wagon, and it would be a giant red flag to the opposing scum team if anyone hammered, alerting them to the identity of their enemy.

[Wall-E]

Hmm. Is anyone going to be unsurprised when I flip town? I mean besides the scum?

[Wall-E]

You should be lynching Tony instead of me.

[Wall-E]

I'm voting for Plum on a hunch. I'd rather you vote for yourself, but since that's not a very sane thing to try to convince you of, Tony's a good alternative. Duh.

As for making a case against you... how do I rationalize a hunch in terms you won't attack me for stating? I'd rather just put my vote on you, then after the game is over brag about how onto you I was and why. I won't muddy the water with my very probably silly psychology.

[Wall-E]

Oh, forgot to mention. Loved how everyone tried to make scum connections and list possible teams on Day 1.

grumble grumble murmer

[Wall-E]

We won didn't we? :p

I don't think you actually participated in the game enough to fairly say that you won anything.

Those grapes look pretty sour, Nameless.

[Wall-E]

GOOD GAME MAFIA

Good game Gonk, you turd

[Wall-E]

Agreeing with you 3000% here.