Mini 836: Commie Mafia (Game Over)

[CoCo]

coco/vaya/mathcam/charter argument is a giant mass of red herring, overreaction and nulltell

How so?

[Peabody]

This is a pretty terrible vote. "Before discussion starts"? You're only two pages late on that score... are you sure that it's the only reason? Vote: Peabody

Yup, I'm sure its the only reason.

Yeah that question was (obviously) kind of rhetorical. I'm really after a response to two questions: firstly, why you made the "random" vote in the first place when there had been 2 pages of discussion already on which you could have made a "real" one and secondly, given the aforementioned 2 pages of discussion, why you thought "before discussion starts" was an appropriate thing to say when that boat had clearly sailed.

This is my first game where I'm not a replacement on this site. I wanted to experience the RVS. Also, I do not believe my "before discussion starts" comment was so unbelievable. The only events that transpired was the questionable argument back and forth between Vaya and Coco. Many of you have already said the conversation was useless.

Charter, I fail to understand your reasoning for calling both Hoopla and Vaya town. I hardly heard anything from hoopla, and the Vaya reading seems a little weak. You said you agree with everything Vaya said so far? Honestly, I find some of Vaya's posts a bit disagreeable. Can you please point out which post exactly you are referencing when you say you agree with Vaya?

Unvote; Vote Charter

This is another questionable vote. Are you always this jumpy?

I wouldn't say this is a questionable vote. I was applying pressure to Charter to hear an explanation, not much unlike many other player's jumping around. Nearly everyone in this game has made 2 votes. In fact, one player has even posted 3 votes.

[Cyberbob]

coco/vaya/mathcam/charter argument is a giant mass of red herring, overreaction and nulltell

How so?

Gut, mostly. It feels like a bunch of townies getting really caught up in shaking their fists at each other without anyone really having done anything scummy.

This is my first game where I'm not a replacement on this site. I wanted to experience the RVS.

The best thing you could possibly do for any game is to do your utmost not to contribute to random voting. The "RVS" is something that's become almost codified and while a couple of random votes are usually the only way a game can be started the best thing for the town is to get away from them as quickly as possible.

Besides, even someone who likes the concept of an "RVS" could have seen that it was well and truly over by the time you voted.

The only events that transpired was the questionable argument back and forth between Vaya and Coco. Many of you have already said the conversation was useless.

The argument was useless in the sense that neither of them really had anything scummy on the other but it was plenty useful in forcing people to react to something "serious". Those reactions are very useful.

I was applying pressure to Charter to hear an explanation, not much unlike many other player's jumping around.

You were asking him to point out a post he was referencing because you find some the person's points whom he was agreeing with "a bit disagreeable". I really can't see how you could justify voting for him to raise the pressure with a question as mild as that.

[mathcam]

Second, Mathcam quotes the post by Charter and says he was "about to make that point himself."
What point? There was nothing to go on in that post.

Huh? There is a very clear point in that post -- that it is bizarre that you are attacking Vaya and no one else, and further suggests an implication for this bizarreness. You have

still

not responded to this line of inquiry.

In fact, because you seem to be missing the point, let me emphasize with some questions: On Page 2, you vote vaya for continuing the bandwagon. Why did you not mention SensFan continuing the bandwagon? On page 3, you say that it seemed Vaya was being opportunistic in voting Vaya. Why not mention SensFan then? Why not mention charter, who quite explicitly was being opportunistic in his vote on Vaya?

Also, he later tells people not to be so hard on me because the wagon did indeed look suspicious.

No I didn't. I said to not be so hard on you because I could understand why

you

(or someone in general) would think it's suspicious. Then I said to Vaya that me coming to your defense in the meta-mafia sense does not mean I didn't find you suspicious. But I don't see what either of these points have to do with anything.

coco/vaya/mathcam/charter argument is a giant mass of red herring, overreaction and nulltell

I think you've confused "I'm too lazy to read this argument" with "There is no substance to this argument." I encourage you to reconsider. Chalking it up to a gut feeling that it's an all-townie argument is a pretty strong statement -- you think all 4 of us are townies, and have made no valid points? Perhaps you could explain CoCo's behavior that I'm questioning him about above then.

Finally, I'm not particularly swayed by the Peabody thing. Seems like an overeager newbie jumping in to the game...seems pretty brazen for a first post by scum. Along similar lines, I think charter's attack on Cathart for "defending" Peabody is bizarre.

Cam

p.s.: Sorry, Cathart, I don't think Haru's posts makes much sense to anyone. Keeps it entertaining.

[CoCo]

Huh? There is a very clear point in that post -- that it is bizarre that you are attacking Vaya and no one else, and further suggests an implication for this bizarreness. You have

still

not responded to this line of inquiry.

Where is the clear point in, "Early reports say Vaya is town?" (Paraphrased)

In fact, because you seem to be missing the point, let me emphasize with some questions: On Page 2, you vote vaya for continuing the bandwagon. Why did you not mention SensFan continuing the bandwagon? On page 3, you say that it seemed Vaya was being opportunistic in voting Vaya. Why not mention SensFan then? Why not mention charter, who quite explicitly was being opportunistic in his vote on Vaya?

Sensfan is V/LA. I'd get absolutely nowhere if I'd voted or questioned him until he returns.
Vaya admitted it was opportunistic. Sensfan was and is still gone.
In the argument with Vaya, I didn't see Charter's posts until later, and by then I had other bones to pick with him. Most notably, why he thinks agreeing with someone clears them as town.
Vaya's vote was smack tab in the middle of the bandwagon, this added fuel to the fire.

No I didn't. I said to not be so hard on you because I could understand why

you

(or someone in general) would think it's suspicious. Then I said to Vaya that me coming to your defense in the meta-mafia sense does not mean I didn't find you suspicious. But I don't see what either of these points have to do with anything.

But you didn't find it suspicious yourself?
If the bandwagon could be found suspicious by "someone in general,"why vote for the person that acts upon it?
What makes me suspicious for doing something you agree is possible?

[Cyberbob]

Chalking it up to a gut feeling that it's an all-townie argument is a pretty strong statement -- you think all 4 of us are townies, and have made no valid points? Perhaps you could explain CoCo's behavior that I'm questioning him about above then.

I didn't say that you're all townies, I said that that's what the argument

feels

like. I consider that kind of an argument to be a null tell. This may seem a bit contradictory but there you go.

As for CoCo, your point about SensFan

is

a valid one and I think a suspicion of him is in order. Your post, however, is distinct from the sorts of things I consider nulltells: all those posts where everyone's splitting everyone else's posts into dozens of quotes and responding to each and every one of them with a one liner and nobody's really thinking about what they're saying and it's all just getting out of hand and what was the original point of contention again?

[CoCo]

I believe my above points are valid.
In your perspective, what makes them nulltells?

[Cyberbob]

Gut, mostly. It feels like a bunch of townies getting really caught up in shaking their fists at each other without anyone really having done anything scummy.

I don't think much of anything that anybody has done with regards to the argument in question has been a scumtell.

(haha, I've got all sides of the argument coming at me because I don't agree with any of them)

[mathcam]

Thank you for answering my questiosn. I will think about your responses (missed that SensFan was on V/LA). On the other hand, in the rest of your responses, you seem to be deliberately misconstruing my argument.

Where is the clear point in, "Early reports say Vaya is town?" (Paraphrased)

I think it's pretty clear from my posts that the part of the quote I'm referring to is the part about you specifically targetting Vaya and no one else on the bandwagon. I think charter's "early reports" thing was pure speculation, and not particularly founded.

But you didn't find it suspicious yourself?
If the bandwagon could be found suspicious by "someone in general,"why vote for the person that acts upon it?
What makes me suspicious for doing something you agree is possible?

Eh, maybe a little -- certainly more surprising than suspicious. But for Pete's sake, I'm not sure how much more clear I can make this -- what I find suspicious is that you singled out Vaya, not that you found the bandwagon suspicious.

I didn't say that you're all townies, I said that that's what the argument feels like. I consider that kind of an argument to be a null tell. This may seem a bit contradictory but there you go.

Hmmm...isn't that like saying "I didn't say you

were

townies, I said I

think

you're townies."? Since we're only talking about what you're thinking in the first place (and not demanding you have absolute certainty before speaking), isn't the latter the relevant piece of information? And okay, I can sympathize on the line-splitting, though I think you use the term null tell a little too loosely.

[Cyberbob]

Since we're only talking about what you're thinking in the first place (and not demanding you have absolute certainty before speaking), isn't the latter the relevant piece of information?

Okay, sure.

And okay, I can sympathize on the line-splitting, though I think you use the term null tell a little too loosely.

Most likely. I can tell that I'm being a wee bit incoherent, but I'm not really sure how to rectify it.

[CoCo]

Here's a recap:

42: First post of the game, Talitha votes Hoopla.

43: Harumafuji, second post of the game, votes Hoopla. Says something about being inside the glass and agreeing with the cute little girl.

44: Vaya votes Hoopla.

45: Col.Cathart posts a remark of surprise that a bandwagon has already happened. Votes Harumafuji for creating it.

46: Sensfan votes Hoopla. Very suspcious as well, due to Cathart's remark.

47: Cyberbob posts and questions if the bandwagon is because Hoopla may have caused the game to restart.

48: I post. Vote Vaya for continuing the bandwagon. Clearly echoing the reasons for Cathart's vote.

49: Charter votes Hoopla. Exuberantly proclaims "Bandwagon!" Also suspicious.

50: Mathcam posts. Uses non-canon posts to suggest Hoopla as a valuable pro-town asset. Or strong scum. Would like to keep her alive. Doesn't understand Haru's statement. Wants to focus on Vaya and Sensfan's votes. Thinks Charter's vote is so nuts he isn't sure its scummy.

51: Vaya posts. Says it was a random bandwagon vote (is there such a thing?). Doesn't see anything wrong or scummy because no one has the intention of getting Hoopla lynched.

52: Hoopla posts. Doesn't care about blatent bandwagon. Votes Vaya as a bandwagon alternative.

53: Le Chat doesn't understand why all five players voted without the intention of lynching Hoopla.

54: Le Chat inquires about Hoopla's ongoing birthday.

55: Vaya doesn't see what's so hard to understand, when you bandwagon, you're not always pushing for a lynch.

56: Cathart posts. Says yes. Why join a bandwagon if you don't intend to lynch.

57: Mathcam asks Vaya why he didn't tell us it was blatant bandwagoning. Asks if Vaya rolled dice or just couldn't think of anything else. Is okay with blatant bandwagoning as long as its aknowledged.

58: Vaya once again defends the bandwagon. Responds to Cathart by saying the random bandwagon jump was to gauge reactions (doesn't this imply it wasn't a random vote then?). Doesn't understand why people have an issue with it. Tells Mathcam he didn't see a reason to point out that it was blatant bandwagoning. Claims by random vote, he meant he saw a wagon forming and jumped on to see what would happen.

59: I mention it seems rather opportunistic of Vaya to jump on the wagon.

60: Vaya says it was indeed opportunistic. But there's nothing scummy about it.

61: I say it is. Jumping on a bandwagon brings a person closer to a lynch. Too early to read Hoopla, and of all possible players, Vaya does the admited opportunistic route and jumps on a bandwagon. I say it seems scummy to me.

62: Charter says early reports say Hooplah and Vaya are town. Thinks I'm suspicious for my inquisition of Vaya (two posts) while ignoring the other bandwagon voters. Votes for me.

63: Vaya again says he was merely jumping on the bandwagon to promote discussion and gauge reactions. Asks if I was suggesting Vaya was trying to get Hoopla lynched. Also points out a lynch was unlikely to happen.

64: I concur that a lynch was unlikely. I point out that I was suggesting the wagon wasn't completely random.

65: Vaya asks what Vayascum would have to gain from pushing Hoopla one vote closer to a lynch.

66: Charter asks where I've said or hinted at the wagon not being random.

67: I point out Vaya had the third vote, creating the wagon, which in turn (because it was opportunistic) that the wagon wasn't random. I asked (knowing full well who I was asking, mind you) if anyone else voted after Vaya.

68: Charter says yes.

69: Vaya doesn't understand my point. Asks what scum motivations he would have for jumping on the bandwagon.

70: I say it eggs on the bandwagon. Allowing it to continue. Scum would know Hoopla is town, and can capitolize on it.

71: Charter asks why Vaya's was scummy rather than Sen's or his.

72: I point out that Sens and Charter voted for Hoopla as well. I ask why it wouldn't be suspicious.

73: Vaya tells me scum wouldn't be trying to go for a quick lynch because it would be too obvious. Also doesn't think a five person bandwagon right away is suspicious. Thinks I don't have good reasons to attack him and only going after him because others voiced suspicion and I'm obviously trying to go for a mislynch. (What???) Votes for me.

74: I call it an OMGUS vote. I refuse to believe Vaya doesn't see anything scummy about such an early L-2.

75: Vaya asserts that its not OMGUS and he has perfectly good reasons for voting me. Also if someone attacks him, he can find those attacks scummy. It was just a harmless random bandwagon and nothing bad can come of it. Says I haven't explained why I think the bandwagon is scummy.

76: I respond by saying I certainly have explained why I view it as scummy. I also say at least on of the people on the wagon, votes 3-5, are scum.

77: Vaya AGAIN says I haven't explained why the bandwagon is scummy. Nor why I singled him out instead of Sens or Charter.

78: I frustratingly post that I HAVE said why I think the wagon is scummy and why I singled out Vaya. I then say exactly why I did those things. I point out the circular argument furthers my reading that Vaya is scum.

79: Asks if I'm implying its his fault the wagon is at L-2. Asks why I blame him and not Charter. Doesn't see the harm in putting someone at L-2, because it won't kill them.

80: I tell Vaya not to pull me into a circular argument and to go read my posts.

81: I post again and tell Vaya that I wasn't the only person that thought the wagon was odd. I say I find Vaya scummy for defending the wagon strongly and admitting it was an opportunistic play.

82: Peabody votes Mathcam because he sucks at math... and because he missed the random phase. Doesn't understand why Hoopla is at L-2 right out of the random phase. Thinks something fishy is going on. Agrees with me, Le Chat, and Cathart. Asks Vaya if his vote on Hoopla was random. Asks Charter why he's gatting a town read on Hoopla and Vaya. Requests specific posts.

83: Mathcam quotes Charter's post #62. Ssays he was about to make that point. Votes for me.

84: I ask where the early reports came from.

85: Vaya's large post. Says he isn't blaming me because I think the wagon is unusual. It doesn't happen often. Says I'm stubborn for refusing to believe its not scummy. Says I have no good or consistent reasons for thinking so. Tells me I continually change my stance on why I think the wagon is scummy. Tries to imply I contradicted myself concerning whether or not a lynch of Hoopla was even possible. Claims I only think the wagon is scummy because I think it wasn't random. Says I claim the wagon is scummy for absolutely no reason. (Fuck you, btw. L-2 as soon as the game begins IS the reason.) Says I'm using whatever I can come up with to attack Vaya. Says I need a well backed reason. Also says I haven't given a good reason for singling him out. (round and round we go...)

86: Vaya tells Peabody there's nothing wrong or scummy with an early random bandwagon. Then says, "

My vote was an intentional bandwagon vote. When I said it was random, I meant that the wagon itself was random.

" (I thought your vote was random.)

87: My response to Vaya's large post. http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 50#1832050

88: Long response from Vaya: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 78#1832178

89: Charter responds to Peabody that Hoopla's reaction to the bandwagon wasn't scummy, so he gets a town read. Says he agrees with Vaya and that makes her town. Tells Vaya not to bother arguing with me because its too early for quote wars and no one is "buying what I'm selling." (Coaching?)

90: Vaya says Charter is right and he'll stop arguing.

91: I tell Charter that his "reports" aren't even facts.

92: Harumafuji agrees with Charter and Mathcam, although I can't understand why. His wording is obtuse due to being a non-English speaker. Votes for me.

93: VOTE COUNT

94: Mathcam notices Haru isn't a native English speaker. Then says:
"And I don't think we need to be too harsh on CoCo -- certainly common wisdom raises an eyebrow at a 5-person bandwaggon in the first few posts of a game. That he finds this suspicious is not that surprising. The whole "The bandwaggon is scummy" vs. "No its not" quote war isn't particularly informative, imho."

95: Cathart expresses that being a verteran or not has little to do with the surprise that occurs when a bandwagon forms so quickly. Does not believe 5 people voted for the same person for little to no reason. Says its too little to accuse anyone of anything and drops out of the argument. Unvotes. Says Haru's posts causes his head to spin.

96: Hoopla says my facts in post 87 are debatable. Doesn't want to do the math, but agrees its probable scum is on the early bandwagon. Says bandwagons are more beneficial to the town because they generate reads, while the only thing scum stand to gain is the remote chance of a quick lynch.

97-98: Vaya asks Mathcam if he feels that way (post 94) why is he voting for me.

99: Mathcam responds its because there is a difference between finding someone scummy and being condescending to them.

100: Cyberbob chimes in saying Vaya and I are overreacting. Says new players tend to be more emotional, overreacting != scum. Votes Peabody for the late RVS vote.

101: Haru agrees with Cyberbob. FOS's Peabody. Bolds Peabody's statement of something fishy going on with the L-2 wagon. Says something about a 21 polling day.

102-103: Talitha arrives and says the bandwagon is good, unsure about me, votes Peabody for the random vote.

104: I unvote and FOS Charter and Mathcam for various quotes.

105: Admits he doesn't have any facts. Says his reason for voting me isn't shabby, its due to the fact I claimed I was questioning bandwagoners, yet hadn't confronted anyone but Vaya. He felt as though I didn't care about the bandwagon and only wanted to build a case on Vaya. Tells me I'm OMGUSing. Adds that the peabody wagon is good.

106: I tell Charter he is twisting the argument and I wish to see his early reports (i.e. specific quotes).

107: Charter says they were just his thoughts. Early reports = I think.

108: I point out his choice of words implied he had additional information.

109: Le Chat tells me he understood what Charter meant by "early reports." Thinks Haru's posts make things interesting. Tells Vaya he should have stressed "all 5 of you" because he found it odd that Vaya could speak for the alignment of everyone on the wagon. Says the wagon inspired discussion. Understands it didn't threaten Hoopla. Inquires about Hoopla's ongoing birthday.

110: Le Chat asks Charter what Hooplascum reaction to a 5-vote bandwagon would be. Says Peabody's random vote isn't a scumtell.

111: Vaya tells Le Chat he wasn't speaking for everyone on the wagon. Says jumping on the wagon doesn't have scummy motivations. If scum are on the wagon, voting isn't a sign of it. Also doesn't agree with all the votes for Peabody.

112: Peabody tells Cyberbob there are no other reasons for his Mathcam vote aside from the fact it was random. Doesn't see what's wrong with his bolded line in Haru's post 101. Tells Charter he disagrees with Charter's readings on Hoopla and Vaya. This is due to not hearing much from Hoopla and the Vaya reading being weak. Says he disagrees with a majority of the things Vaya has said. Requests specific quotes Charter refers to when saying he agrees with Vaya. Votes Charter.

113: I agree with Peabody. Announce I want to hear from Mathcam before making a vote.

114: I chuckle at my phrasing in post 113 and regret drinking so much coffee.

115: Mathcam responds. Says he gave a reason for his vote. Goes back to saying I ignored the other people on the bandwagon. Talks about me ignoring Charter. Says my post 87 is a pathetic reason. Says its not a good enough reason because I gave reasons long after Charter asked for them. Says I shouldn't have a problem being found scummy because two people disagreed with me. Wonders if I couldn't think of a valid response.

116: I point out Mathcam's contradiction with the quotes in 104.

117: Mathcam has no idea what I'm talking about because I offered no additional commentary. Tells me they are meta-mafia and irrelevent.

118: Hoopla says the CoCo vs the world discussion has become an irrelevant typing contest. Says my post 104 is rife with OMGUS and over-defensiveness. Wants Peabody's wagon to pick up steam. Votes Peabody.

This recap extends to the middle of page 5. The rest I'm sure you're all aware of.

Now, who looks scummiest in all that? This is a question for everyone.
Second, the Peabody wagon is incredibly stupid.

[Hoopla]

I don't get the purpose of a recap after 5 pages, we're all capable of reading.

Now, who looks scummiest in all that? This is a question for everyone.
Second, the Peabody wagon is incredibly stupid.

^ This is all you needed to say.

Condensing every post into one is subjective and more often than not bias seeps in. If you really care for a true evaluation of the game from everyone, why must they do it through your interpretation of play so far? We don't need recaps, we need analysis.

[Hoopla]

Unvote, vote: Talitha

[CoCo]

Unvote, vote: Talitha

Any particular reason?

[Cyberbob]

I don't mind recaps so much, though I think they're more effective when they focus on analysing the most important posts rather than simply summarising every single one with perhaps a few comments in parentheses along the way - whether it's been 5 pages or 50.

[Talitha]

Even overeager newbies typically actually want to vote for scum. They are usually MORE worried about making a good vote. People are buying the 'ooh, it's my first game, I must make a random vote or i just won't feel like my game experience is complete' explanation? It's possible that Peabody is genuine, but it's also likely that he's a scumbag hesitant to stick his neck out and make a proper vote.

I skipped over at least a page cause I'm too tired to read. I'll catch up properly after some sleep.

[CoCo]

Talitha, that sounds a bit like WIFOM. And does Peabody really deserve a vote for it?

[Kublai Khan]

Official Vote Count

Players needed to lynch: 7

CoCo

- 3 - Vaya, mathcam, Harumafuji - (L-4)

Peabody

- 3 - Cyberbob, Talitha, charter - (L-4)

charter

- 1 - Peabody - (L-6)

Hoopla

- 1 - SensFan - (L-6)

Talitha

- 1 - Hoopla - (L-6)

Players not voting: CoCo, Col.Cathart, le Chat

Mod Note: Will be an activity check later on this evening. Unvotes aren't really all that necessary.

[CoCo]

I'm going to be V/LA until at least Sunday night. Perhaps longer.

[Harumafuji]

"Coco" is annoying. Many are with me, in my opinion, for a detailed list of players is a rare event. 118 I was excited - but where "Coco" to accept just to avoid the lid. Cyberbob I find a major contract issues.

unvote: Coco

I have an idea to offset the Charter Lynch. Peabody Charter please vote for my questions. We are all benefiting from the UN Charter. Peabody "random votes" is a cop. Peabody, the drive is quite right in the Charter is already voting.

Vote: Charter

Fos: Peabody

"Coco": We give scumlist.
In addition, scumlist give the Peabody.
Thalita, stop lurking.
Charter, the death rate has already increased bandwagons.

[Peabody]

You were asking him to point out a post he was referencing because you find some the person's points whom he was agreeing with "a bit disagreeable". I really can't see how you could justify voting for him to raise the pressure with a question as mild as that.

Honestly, I don't understand why my vote has to be "justified". It is a pressure vote at best. Votes are the best power of a townie, and I want to take a closer look at charter. Charter has a way of hiding behind the arguments.
=================

If the bandwagon could be found suspicious by "someone in general,"why vote for the person that acts upon it?
What makes me suspicious for doing something you agree is possible?

Classic WIFOM. Are you the type of person who would put the poison in his own chalice? Your argument is void.
================

Just something to point out. I know this isn't much but examine carefully the wording of Cyberbob's post:

Gut, mostly. It

feels

like a

bunch of townies

getting really caught up in shaking their fists at each other

without anyone really having done anything scummy.

I didn't say that you're all townies, I said that that's what the argument

feels

like. I consider that kind of an argument to be a null tell. This may seem a bit contradictory but there you go.

I don't like your word choice. It "feels" like a bunch of "townies". If I were to take a wild guess, I could see how a member of the mafia could 'feel' that there is an argument among townies. Word choice is crucial in detection of mafia. Obviously, its not the best point, but something to pay attention to.
==================

I know this was asked already, but:

Unvote, vote: Talitha

Why? You vote then you go V/LA.. When you get back, this needs to be explained.

[Talitha]

CoCo, I'm tempted to vote for you for bringing up the most useless and overused acronym in mafia. As for your question: yes, it's the most vote-worthy thing I've seen so far. And why aren't you voting for anyone from the "scummy" wagon?

[Hoopla]

Unvote, vote: Talitha

Any particular reason?

Of course! I expect more from her.

[Talitha]

Why?

[le Chat]

i think that its hard to feel comfortable with a read on coco because i feel like his aggression is naturally matched with his inability to recognize the fact that 'early reports' was just a phrase, he bit very hard on one piece of discussion and didnt let go for a very long time, and he felt the need to spend his time making a giant writeup that doesnt seem to prove any point. i feel like it is just who he is.

i dont find peabody's first post of a late rvs suspicious but i understand that that isnt the only thing pb has done. peabody your point in post 145 about mafia knowing if the wagon is full of townies is similar to what i said earlier towards vaya.

hoopla seriously how old are you. also hoopla do you expect as much from me as you do talitha?

Harumafuji you seriously just said "We are all benefiting from the UN Charter." I look forward to your posts.