Newbie 993 - Game Over!

[Mysterio]

Again, to avoid more walls of text (was getting tiresome), I'm just going to respond to Hinduragi's main contention.

If you aren't going to argue your case against him(I'll admit, though, that horribly clogged the game up), then why is your vote still on him? That's like saying "He's scum for this, this, and this". Then, after he responds and gives some reasoning as to defend himself, you ignore him.

If you read his reply, it was (1) more unnecessary exposition and (2) just digging himself deeper into what I've been accusing him off. It wasn't so much of a defense as a fairly blatant "I'm going to keep doing what you've accused me of doing" response, hence why I left my vote. If you feel like going through his wall post and picking out something that you think he actually defended himself against, then feel free to do so and post your findings. I'll respond to what you find. Otherwise, I think I've made my case.

[startransmission]

You never have to random vote, in fact that is completely counter-productive.

While there are differing opinions on this I for one am a big fan of RVS. I find it to be a highly effective way of getting a game started. Random is never truly random, and even the RVS can yield valuable information later on in the game. The exception to this is using RNG's (Random Number Generators) to pick for whom to vote, which really just defeats the purpose and is in my view slightly scummy.

Don't mislynch anyone, though.

Yes, let's try not to do that. Bold statement. I know people have already piled on this particular quote and that you've explained it, but it bothers me.

Actually, in many cases you learn more from a town lynch than you do from lynching scum. Obviously lynching scum is our main priority, but it's not always such a horrendous thing to mislynch.

I agree in principle, mislynches aren't the end of the world, and every lynch yields information that benefits town. However I have never seen a case where one learns more from lynching town that from scum. Both have wagons to be dissected, connections to other players to be examined, and the next day will often have a NK to be considered. The only difference, in my opinion, is that town gets closer to its WC (win condition).

Two big thumbs down at all the discussion over when to vote, voting for people based off when they confirmed blah blah blah. People vote for a variety of reasons. Make sure you hammer, or even put somebody at L-1, for good ones. And when you confirm has nothing to do with your alignment.

I'd love for anyone to explain to me how that's relevant. I have never seen such resistance to actually having discussion before this game. Yes, it's day 1, it doesn't have to be wasted. We don't have to have a RVS/RQS. Get this guys...we can jump right into the game! Imagine that. I find it odd how most people hate the RVS/RQS and look for ways around it, so we have game that leaves the RVS at the end of the first page, and people apparently don't want to discuss on day 1.

I don't disagree here. Day 1 is as important as any other day, and should be treated as such. I'm irritated that the RVS was so weak, and it's now dead on page 4. Partly my fault. No RQS, which I might throw out later on actually. I think what Mysterio and Steppenwolf are saying is that having wall o text debates this early in the game can be counter-productive. We don't have the information yet to warrant debates of useful value. Having WOT's this early can intimidate newb townies from participating and posting, but worse can create nice distractions for scum. It's easy to lay low and sail through a day when the thread is inundated with quote wars.

I'm not picking on you or Mysterio, the debate is mildly interesting and may have some value later in the game. But that's my feeling about these first few pages. Too much ado about not very much.

[startransmission]

It's easy to lay low and sail through a day when the thread is inundated with quote wars.

And for the record, I'm rather fond of quote wars and tend to get caught up in them myself. They can just be counter-productive this early in the game.

[Kirbyoshi]

Hmmm...

Sorry I didn't get to post sooner, uber-busy weekend. Thoughts on people, while trying to avoid a WoT (@whoever asked: Wall of Text; pretty self-explanatory from there):

Brod is town
Mysterio is newbie/VI town
star is town, but I'd like to hear more
Need to hear more from Illume
steppen and Thian are neutral
Leech and Hindu are my top suspicions at this point. However, I am prone to thinking aggression is a scumtell (it is not), and Leech is showing the most aggression out of anyone so far. He is also posting more than Hindu, which means that if he is town, he can offer more useful advice than Hindu can later on, and if he's scum, there's a greater chance that he will slip up, and then I can just switch my vote.

Vote: Hinduragi

Reasoning coming later.

[Hinduragi]

It wasn't so shoddy a defense as you make it out to be. In fact, it was decently backed, if you ask me. You shouldn't "avoid" WoT's when you're giving reasoning for voting or defending yourself. It voids the purpose. He now can't make a proper defense because you backed off the argument against him. I'm not going to point out specific quotes becuase, frankly, I'd make yet another unnecessary WoT. You want me to point out arguments I think are well made? I'll give you

a few

examples. Don't expect me to give reasoning as to why I think it's a good argument. I'm not speaking for this guy because he should defend himself. In fact, making me help you with an offense while I'm voting you doesn't exactly seem fair to any of the players here so I'd appreciate it if you responded to him to present a proper offense, not to me to present a proper defense.

Spoiler: A few examples

You've made some bold claims about me intentionally trying to confuse the town, and have yet to quote me doing it a single time. Your walls of text are full of accusations and "reasons" but devoid of substance, that is my point.

As for your reasoning, that's BS. Yes, my posts are wordy, they are in every single game I play in. What does it say about you, in retrospect? You're posting some pretty large WoT's yourself. I ignored it, the first time, when you requested that I shorten my posts because it's hypocritical, but the fact you're using it against me? It's laughable. 2 shorter WoT's in a row is the same thing as one longer one. Why is it, exactly, that you are allowed to splice up my posts, but I'm not allowed to do the same in response?

Why do you seem to be under the impression that I've ever suggested we do anything "blindly"? You seem to be taking simple things and twisting them to try and force a scummy feel. Find where I have even attempted to quick lynch in this phase. Where have I encouraged anyone to vote for you? I'm not concerned with this day ending any time soon, and I'm completely baffled why you'd even come to that conclusion. Also, when I said you had a scum perspective it was in no way linked to this subject. The fact that you are using pieces of an argument in places they were never argued shows me that you are trying to manipulate this into something it isn't, and never was.

Again, that wasn't my one point in voting you and there isn't any good reason available to ignore the rest of my argument. The other points are valid and will remain that way, even if you choose not to answer them. There are ways to reduce clutter, even in quote walls. Notice that I kept my points concise so as to avoid another WoT convo.

[Hinduragi]

EBWOP

I'm not going to point specific quotes becuase, frankly, I'd make yet another unnecessary WoT.

Should be:

I'm not going to point out all the quotes with points because, frankly, I'd make yet another unnecessary WoT.

[Trachimbrod]

On Style: If you don't want to WoT up with lines of quotes, please at least give the number of the post that has the content you're referring to.

I hope the format I use in this post is clear.

I've got a few things to say about two of your responses in 87, Mysterio.

Spoiler: Part One of Post 87

You said you were backing off, and the fact that I continued to question you and pursue leads, not only from myself, but others does, in fact, give a lot of information about my role in this game. The fact that you just assumed I'd stop because you were backing off, gives us a lot of information about yours, as well. You're trying to claim that pressuring someone is scummy, but it isn't.

Our information is only as limited as you decide to make it. We started this day on the right note, and it will carry us through the entire phase. Saying "it's day 1" has no meaning whatsoever. Scum can be lynched on day one as long as we work for it. I'm eager to get discussion going, and catch scum slipping. The fact that I constantly pursue discussion, and questioning is another scum tell? Hardly.

I condensed your two points here.

Your reaction to me backing off showed, which I elaborated on earlier, an overzealous need to continue down weak leads to muddle up our efforts. Information is naturally limited due to many unknown factors, including possible powers, player habits, player pairings, bandwagons, night actions, etc. As a result, your reaction made it clear that you were not taking any of those things into account, which can only be due to a few reasons, the major one being that you're scum.

It's important to look at all leads. How can you take into account unknown information? All we can do is follow leads, and review them again with any new information we learn. It reads like you're saying that just because there's a lot of information we don't have, it's scummy to pursue the leads we do have.

Spoiler: Part Two of Post 87

The second town dies and gets confirmed, that means that every time they stated an opinion on a matter, that they were doing what they thought was best for the town. That means all of their previous arguments were legit arguments, and they actually felt the way they were claiming to.

Again, reiterating the same point over and over again. You tried to paint my earlier explanations as being in "defensive mode", because I happen to mention the same thing twice. Yet, you've mentioned this same point about mislynches being helpful more times than I can count. What does this say about you?

There's a big context difference here. It's defensive to volunteer twice that you're backing off. The discussion about potential value of mislynches was a fairly lengthy back and forth (lengthier than it should have been I think, because it really was a lot of repetition and I didn't get much from it.) and there is nothing wrong about keeping your stance constant.

The first part seems especially scummy to me. I'm still waiting on that vote count though.

Kirby: Why do you think Mysterio is VI town?

[Kirbyoshi]

Because, in my experience, newbtown is more likely to go on the defensive, and newbscum is more likely to retreat into their shells, so to speak. He is playing kind of off, but he's not posting one-liners and lurking like I'd expect from newbscum.

[Leech]

Because, in my experience, newbtown is more likely to go on the defensive, and newbscum is more likely to retreat into their shells, so to speak. He is playing kind of off, but he's not posting one-liners and lurking like I'd expect from newbscum.

How is newbtown going on the defensive, and newbscum retreating into their shells different? Both actions are describing backing off. Also if your expectations of newbscum is to post one-liners and lurk, then you have a lot to experience in this game. Some may do that, but I'd say the majority of the games I've played in, that wasn't the case.

[Mysterio]

Sorry for the delay, things got a bit busy for me these last couple days. Although, it doesn't look like I missed much...

@Hinduragi post #104: None of those quotes are at all substantial. The first one was a confused attempt at deflecting my accusations. That quote literally says, "You posted reasons for why I'm suspicious, but you didn't post anything of substance." How in the world does that make sense? He may not agree with my reasoning (and why would he), but that comment was hardly worth responding to. The second quote was nothing more than whining. I shouldn't have to go through this thread and point out how many WoT Leech has posted to prove my point. He then complains that I posted one or two of my own, however he fails to mention that they were all

in response to his wall posts

. The third quote was pretty much a "nuh-uh" response. All in all, waste of my time.

(1)It's important to look at all leads. How can you take into account unknown information?

(2)There's a big context difference here. It's defensive to volunteer twice that you're backing off. The discussion about potential value of mislynches was a fairly lengthy back and forth (lengthier than it should have been I think, because it really was a lot of repetition and I didn't get much from it.) and there is nothing wrong about keeping your stance constant.

(1) That's what you're taking into account--that important information is still unknown--thus you have to be cautious about meandering down weak leads and wasting time. That was my point.

(2) Funny, your defense of Leech was pretty much my defense. Post #55

I took his post as asking why I thought your specific playstyle muddles things up over simply changing your vote to the person you are most suspicious of. My reasoning was based on objections that I had previously made against you, so I wanted to make it clear that you had answered those objections.

^Basically the same exact point. I was attempting to keep my stance constant when I replied to Thian. So, either both Leech and I are suspicious for repeating things, or we both aren't.

As for votes on me, I wouldn't worry about it. I believe I only have 2 votes on me, mainly because this game has really bad participation levels right now. I was gone for 2 days and only missed a handful of posts. Kind of boring.

[startransmission]

@Kirbyoshi

While I appreciate you being upfront on your reads, I would caution you against handing out townie cards this early in the game. As a matter of fact, it can be dangerous in any stage of the game unless you have solid reasoning for your feelings.

That said, and I know that Trach has asked this as well, I would like to know why feel the way you do regarding your town reads. Is it just gut? I can't imagine how it could be otherwise with as little information as there is, but I'm curious.

Vote: Hinduragi
Reasoning coming later.

Looking forward to that as well.

[Hinduragi]

@Hinduragi post #104: None of those quotes are at all substantial. The first one was a confused attempt at deflecting my accusations. That quote literally says, "You posted reasons for why I'm suspicious, but you didn't post anything of substance." How in the world does that make sense? He may not agree with my reasoning (and why would he), but that comment was hardly worth responding to. The second quote was nothing more than whining. I shouldn't have to go through this thread and point out how many WoT Leech has posted to prove my point. He then complains that I posted one or two of my own, however he fails to mention that they were all

in response to his wall posts

. The third quote was pretty much a "nuh-uh" response. All in all, waste of my time.

The first quote was him saying you didn't have sufficient quotes backing your arguement.(You can link posts by right clicking the post number instead of quoting the entire thing btw) The second was more or less about you being a hypocrite in your points. The third was you misrepp'ing him. You should reread the post where I took those excerpts from. You're largely ignoring the entirety of my argument while defending yourself.

[Thian]

but again I won't go after it to keep the game intact.

I think you should explain how it was WIFOM. I want to see what's going on in your head. Keeping the game intact involves discussing players' actions in the game and you were doing that earlier. Don't back down on it. It may not be WIFOM but explain it, please.

The reason I did not continue with it was becausee Leech's comment about second guessing a mod. it isn't right, and the current game I am hosting at another website people had done it to me to try to guess what peoples roles are. This is not fair to mod and I absolutely had to agree with it. so sorry for not continuing with pushing the subject.

I will briefly explain WHY I thought it was, but will not bother to entertain any further with that discussion after this post so we can move onto other things. You can tell me if I am wrong with my interpretation of WIFOM is but i don't want the debate to be brought up and used against the mod.

WIFOM to me means: someone brings up a situation with two possible outcomes but neither provable and you end up taking a risk to choose.. Case in point. mod handing out mafia roles first and mysterio posting.

to me it has some possible outcomes and neither can be prooved correct or incorrect.

1. the mod hands out mafia roles first thus making mysterio guilty.
2. the mod doesn't hand out mafia roles first. thus making mysterio wrongly accused.
3. the mod does not have an order of how roles are handed out. Again making the theory flawed.

that to me is WIFOM. the reason i clamed up on it was, really this is my second game on this website. Not all terminology I may have an exact understanding and Leech brought up a valid point not to second guess mods as I agree, it can ruin a game and give people an advantage or disadvantage.

Now, I will side with Leech at testing a theory out. Incognito had provided stats, Leech had stated he was testing a theory and there is nothing wrong with testing a theory to provide something to go on and get us out of RVS.

So there is some disappointment in not having a long enough RVS. mainly with startransmission.
Corret me if I am wrong transmission but that reason was due to the fact that scum do not vote RVS or have less random reason during RVS? I don't agree with that at all. Scum can certainly vote RVS for non arguable reasons. They can do so up until someone ((with any role)) starts asking questions about more meaningful things which spark a debate.

So for me to decide if RVS is useful? No. I do find it fun for sure, but it isn't concrete and you could probably use the voting patterns as some sort of platform, but everyone can fall on the fact like previously stated that it was RVS and thats a cop out.

So i am glad leech jumped us right into a theory based on something tested.

now my thoughts on players.

Leech I am tending to side with and i would like to test that incognito theory myself. Mysterio's reaction to it of course seems a bit off and my vote is leaning towards him.

Trachimbrod, you brought up the "I'm going to back off" senario. it should be looked into because of the reaction. i think that the reaction and feeling of needing to do it is really aweful but at the same time I can't help but feel the other side.

If someone was harping on another persons guilt like Leech and Mysterio were doing to each other, Mysterio backed down and said I'm backing off. to me that shows that leechs arguements on why Leech is innocent were strong enough to warrent Mysterio to step down. Then the continuation of questioning Mysterio's suspicion of Leech from other people, mysterio may have felt to say "ok ok, I had already stated im backing off"" as if to affirm that he isn't going to harp on that anymore and he gets the points that were being discussed.

this week has been busy with work I do not have much time off like I did at the beginning of the game. So please bare with me until I can get a few days off.

currently the uproar between Mysterio and Leech has given discussion as to debate the guilt or innocence of these two but it can also make scum hide in this confusion as well.

Steppen wolf you had stated you found Leech to purposely be contrairian what makes you feel this way?

illume: hopefully you are not too busy, that pinkyswear is lookin mighty lonely.

Not at all. I'm saying that I won't vote until I would want everyone to vote with me

I don't get it. So if you don't want people to vote with you, you won't vote. So, uhh, you're saying you won't bus as scum? Or did you mean you want to lead bandwagons?

hinduragi, are you claiming brod is scum when you say "So if you don't want people to vote with you, you wont vote. So, uhh, you're saying you won't bus as scum?" i may be overthinking that line but explain it please.

and you also asked why my vote is not on anyone. There are still many more people to question and about the only question that would come out of me voting would be "why do you vote so and so". Mysterio has given me enough reason to suspect him but the problem is, if Kirbyoshi is correct in feeling that Leech and Mysterio are nitpicking so much. They both are getting right into the analyzation of each others posts Kirbyoshi feels that it comes off as a town read. Then before I put my vote on someone right now, there needs to be other discussion with other people to be able to throw a confident vote on someone and unfortunately leech and mysterio have taken quite a bit of spotlight time for me to gauge others.

especially when there is a lot of complaint from everyone at how much txt is flying around instead of taking all of that txt and sifting through it. it is work but I am sure there is enough here for people to ask questions.

Thanks.

[Hinduragi]

It was a scenario question. Simply put, I wasn't accusing him; I was asking if would he do it if he was scum.

[Trachimbrod]

...Wow. Mysterio, did you read my entire post? In reading your 109 response to my 106, I'm flabbergasted. This post is a WoT, but I've tried to be concise, so please read it.

For part 1, you quote only the part where I ask how you expect people to take into account unknown information. There's always going to be unknown information, that's why we have to follow all leads since they'll return more information. Getting information by following leads is hardly a waste of time. And our leads were pretty limited (especially back then), we're not at a point where there's too many leads for us to pursue (I don't know if there's even a situation where all leads shouldn't be investigated as much as they can be). What does it mean to be cautious in following leads? I think any concern should be voiced and answered, at the risk of being repetitive, that'll bring a wealth of new information for us to consider.

For part 2, The context wasn't the same though. As I believe Leech said, Thian was asking for your opinion on how different voting styles can muddle things up, and you volunteered for a second time that you were backing off, which was a little much, so it became a lead to follow. Your defense in 55 includes a threat that you'll become suspicious of Leech if he continues down that lead further, which I find scummy. I see Leech pointed this out in 59, and I'm a little upset that I glanced over it the first time.

As for Leech keeping his stance constant through the mislynch discussion, that was information that was specifically being asked for, he had a clear reason to be repeating it. You say you felt like your stance on Leech was being asked for by Thian, making the context the same. To me it seems that Thian's question was quite clear, and you made a hasty leap. I'm not too sure about it anymore but I feel it's the kind of leap someone with a guilty conscience would make.

I count three votes on Mysterio. At this point I'm pretty convinced that Mysterio is scum or possibly VI town, and my vote on him is soon coming. I'm still waiting on that vote count though, and I'd like to hear some feedback on the above part of my post. Does this look as bad to other people as it does to me?

Mysterio, I'd like it if you could respond to my full part 1 and explain why you snipped only those two sentences in your 109 reply.

@mod: Vote count, pretty please?

Thian: From what I gather, no one asked what Mysterio thought of Leech after he said he backed down the first time. Mysterio says that he interpreted your question about voting styles as questioning about his former suspicion of Leech.

I also would like to hear from steppen and Illume again. Particularly Illume since he's voting and has promised details.

[Thian]

Thian: From what I gather, no one asked what Mysterio thought of Leech after he said he backed down the first time. Mysterio says that he interpreted your question about voting styles as questioning about his former suspicion of Leech..

hrm, yes, that is true. I needed to go re-read. Leech did address one point about Mysterio though after I had posed my question.

So Mysterio, I am going to ask you, was your second time stating you were backing off a response to Leech's post after my question?

[Leech]

Sorry guys, quick post, I'm rather busy until the weekend:

He may not agree with my reasoning

(and why would he)

, but that comment was hardly worth responding to.

The second quote was nothing more than whining.

I shouldn't have to go through this thread and point out how many WoT Leech has posted to prove my point. He then complains that I posted one or two of my own,

however he fails to mention that they were all in response to his wall posts.

The

third quote was pretty much a "nuh-uh" response. All in all, waste of my time.

First Bold: You seem to be implying that there is a reason that I wouldn't agree with your reasoning, what reason is that exactly? If you think that just because you are making accusations against me that it clouds my judgment, you are entirely wrong. I'm more than capable of looking over the things people say and find truths and decide whether or not you are being genuine. From my perspective there is no "obvious" reason why I wouldn't agree with you, other than the fact that I simply disagree. I'd love to know what you're implying with that, because you seem to have put this on a level that I haven't.

Second: If you legitimately think for one second that I was whining, you need your head examined. I was pointing out your double-standards. I have never "whined" about anything in my entire time playing mafia, so I'd request that you choose a different method of trying to blow off my points. When multiple people are agreeing with the points I've made, and call them valid, maybe you should realize that you might be wrong on the subject. Or, for that matter, maybe you should realize that your approach just isn't working.

Third: I'm not the one with the problem with WoT's. You, seriously, have no room to try and persecute me for WoT's when you've posted them as well. Again, this is a double-standard.

Fourth: How is "Show me where I've asked anyone to blindly follow me" and asking where, exactly, I was pushing for a quick lynch is a "nuh uh" response? You made accusations and I asked for you to back it with a quote, where I've done it a SINGLE time. That's not a "nuh uh" comment, that's a back up your words comment. If you can't back it up, just say you can't. Misrepping my posts is not going to do you any favors. If you are going to make broad accusations, be prepared to back them up. If you can't back them up, you probably shouldn't make them in the first place. As I said before, quote it or it didn't happen.

It's kind of telling, isn't it, how you are resorting to insults to dismiss my points against you? You're also misrepping what I'm saying, continually, and arguing cases that I've never made. I still want you to find a single instance where I've ever even hinted at wanting a quick lynch, or requested that anyone follow me blindly. I have built a case against you, but find a single instance where I've even suggested a wagon. If people vote for you because of the posts I make that's because they apparently believe in what I'm saying. It has nothing to do with me suggesting people to do so, because I haven't suggested that anyone makes any moves in this game. To even insinuate otherwise is a blatant lie.

[Kirbyoshi]

@star: Yeah, I looked back, and my reads really are mostly gut. I was expecting to find a wealth of info against Hindu, but I found virtually nothing. Kind of disappointing. Nothing much on others either, so I'm gonna stay with my gut for now.

The walls of text still need to subside, and the activity level needs to go up. I bet no one even realized I was on V/LA. We need more frequent, shorter posts.

[startransmission]

5 pages, and we're stuck on Mysterio and Leech. Are they the wrong places to look? I dunno. All I do know is that the discussion regarding them is oddly dominating.

The walls of text still need to subside, and the activity level needs to go up. I bet no one even realized I was on V/LA. We need more frequent, shorter posts.

I agree. And I did realize, but that said, you're all I'm really paying close attention to.

[Hinduragi]

This game vastly feels like the majority of players are sitting back while others make discussion for them to pass judgement on. I'm not accusing anyone specifically but it just doesn't feel like each player has been looked into accordingly.

Star

-
Why are you paying attention to Kirby? What do you think of Steppen?

Kirby

-
Why are Brod/Star/Myst town? We're on page 5. In fact, even if it was page 50, I'd advise against ruling out people. Giving out townie cred also lets scum easily rule out the best NK choice.

Illume

-
Hey, you here? Why are you voting Myst again? You gave opinions on one person and then disappeared hardcore.

Leech

-
Are you tunneling on Myst?

Mod: Can Illume be prodded or replaced?

[Trachimbrod]

I was (and still am) interested in hearing what others thought of Myst's reply to the quotes I posted. I guess my 114 was too WoT for people to read?

The game shot out of the gates in the beginning, it's odd how we've come to a halt now. Is it really the WoT?

Kirby: You voted for Hind in 103, expecting to find a reason, and in 117, you say you found virtually nothing on him. And nothing on others? Do you know what caused this gut feeling at least?

It seems a little late in the game to have gut votes.

[Kirbyoshi]

@Hindu: Like I told star, my reads at this point are mostly gut. The WoT's make me wanna go and puke out my innards, and they ultimately prove very little. Let's get some actual discussion going, and get everyone posting good stuff, instead of posting the same opinions over and over. And the thing about letting scum know who to NK is WIFOM and a theory point.

@Brod: Sorry, but it's really nothing more than a vibe at this point. Later in the Day, I will notice more, and I may find out that my vibe was totally off. But for now, I have nothing stronger on anyone than my gut read on Hindu.

[Leech]

Are you tunneling on Myst?

Are you serious? Take a five second glance at my ISO and you should clearly see that I'm not. I'm replying to everything I'm concerned with, or have something to comment on.

The WoT's make me wanna go and puke out my innards, and they ultimately prove very little. Let's get some actual discussion going, and get everyone posting good stuff, instead of posting the same opinions over and over.

I fail to see how repeated comments like that, do anything to help the situation. Why are you so eager to point out the flaws in this game, while doing nothing at all to improve upon them? This is the second time you've made this same comment, isn't that posting the same opinion over and over?

[Thian]

Hinduragi, do you find it is tunneling? or would you say that the debate between Leech and Mysterio has taken the spot light since there are a few people who have not posted much.

[Kirbyoshi]

I'm trying to do something to help the situation by simply not contributing to one of the major flaws of this game (the amount of WoT's), and by expressing my disdain for another (inactivity). I also think that people not putting their vote where their biggest suspicion lies is a flaw, but that's theory discussion.