Road to Wrestlemania: Game over - WWF wins - BANG BANG!

[Hoppster]

Sidewalk Slam: Lowell

Bulldog: Lowell

I sure don't want to be on the recieving side of his moves. (No pun intended.)

[Hoppster]

Clothesline: JasonT

Missile Dropkick: JasonT

In his drunken state I fear what he might do.

[Hoppster]

Belly to belly suplex: JasonT

Neckbreaker: JasonT

[Hoppster]

Because I have no opinion regarding 'the list'. I haven't played with anybody here before that I can recall, so I have nothing to input. I accept my place on the list because it seems fair enough. I have no opinion on whether Thor should be on the list or not, or whether

Also, I've just mainly been absent-mindedly skimming, because from the offset I felt a bit isolated from the discussion regarding people you don't want to be in endgame with. It's only reading back just now that I actually noticed Baby Spice's comments regarding myself.

Ultimately, everything currently being discussed seems to stem from 'the list'.

[Hoppster]

@ VP Baltar: Right, because as scum I'm going to draw attention to myself by just randomly attacking people.

Wouldn't it make sense for scum to just sheep and attack the people that everybody else is attacking? Or perhaps just lurk?

I'm with bristep here: I feel largely redundant. The only thing I can really contribute is, well, just randomly attacking people so that this stage of the game finishes slightly faster.

[Hoppster]

@ VPB RE: "Scum have much more motivation to stand on the sidelines and see how things shake out instead of taking stances and drawing attention to themselves. I don't think your 'randomly attacking people' is drawing attention to you at all. You've been a non-entity until Baby Spice just called you out."

Okay, perhaps I'm getting a bit big for my boots and I'm not really having as much of an impact on the game as I'd like to think. However, I do think that my (admittedly somewhat haphazard) voting gives me more of a prescence than just not voting at all, which would be more comparable to your point about scum just standing on the sidelines.

[Hoppster]

Oh yah, that reminds me. It's been in my sig for a couple days now, but

V/LA

from tomorrow until Thursday.

@ VPB: If jediknight wanted to 'slow down progress', wouldn't he just not post?

[Hoppster]

@ Thor: Do you mean you wish me to research it or is it one of those things which you state out loud as a memo to yourself? You're being too vague. Either way, you're grossly overestimating the humourous nature of it.

@ Kise: No, I don't think it was a scum slip. I think by "breezing through this" he means he's not going to put a lot of detail/effort into scumhunting.

[Hoppster]

However, he also attacks primate. It undermines his attempt at stalling surely if he then makes an attack that does count.

And tbh I'm not sure what scum, or anybody in paticular, would gain from stalling at this stage in the game.

[Hoppster]

@ KK: Coincedence. If I wanted to eliminate people on the list I'd go for the ones everybody were attacking.

@ Thor: Oh, dear me, please excuse me. I have Normal-Sense-of-Humour-Syndrome, so I guess I didn't quite get it. My bad. But if you say so, I will look it up when I'm in desperate need of uplifting/lulz.

@ jediknight: Your reaction to being accused of stalling/deliberately attacking eliminated people is a lot more of a knee-jerk reaction than I had anticipated. Seriously, you sound like a little child whinging.

Crippler Crossface: jediknight
Walls of Jericho: jediknight

[Hoppster]

@ KK: Erm, it wasn't in the order listed... So, um, I'm not sure what you're talking about. NeroCain was still in when I was hitting Lowell, and NeroCain was BEFORE Lowell on the list. Lowell and JasonT just happened to make posts that stood out weirdly (crotch grab & drunk). So, yes, coincidence, but less of a coincidence than you think.

[Hoppster]

Eh...

Twist of Fate: Trendall
Extreme Twist of Fate: Trendall

He's contributed even less than me.

[Hoppster]

I don't see the logic behind this 1/3 idea. What's stopping people screwing up the plan before they're at E-1 (Elimination-1)? If the only deterrent is "Oh, don't attack this guy before we say you can because if you do we'll eliminate you", that's not going to change their attitude if they're determined to screw up the plan (or do whatever they concieve as good play). Unless they're scum, in which case I guess they might want to survive as long as possible, but otherwise, they're not going to be convinced something is good for town just because if they don't do it they get eliminated. And who is off-limits anyway? If ultimately everybody's going to wind up at 1/3, then what's wrong with attacking anybody who isn't already at these levels? And what happens when we do have everybody at E-1? Do we just say, "Oh, let's eliminate this person and if you don't we'll eliminate you", they'll realise that they'll be for elimination soon. I'm not expressing this very eloquently, but the gist of what I'm trying to say is that I think this plan is too short-sighted.

[Hoppster]

Cobra Clutch: bristep123
Russian Legsweep: bristep123

To add to what I was saying before, the plan lacks forward planning (making imo a bad plan). The incentive of not being eliminated is not a good incentive to fall in line, paticularly as the reason for not being in line in the first place would either be due to a) Lack of belief in the idea; or b) A bad case of teh Scumz. Threatening people is not going to make them believe in the idea, paticularly when the threat is in this case more of bringing the inevitable closer. It's clear that whoever is nominated to be put at E-1 is unlikely to be victorious, and thus they have no motivation for following the plan through. Even if they do, they're just going to be eliminating other E-1's.

It would make sense to completely plan until the end now, with there (hopefully) being enough town left in to push the plan through. To clarify, the idea does make sense to me and I would be willing to go with it were it to be refined.

[Hoppster]

You say that the E-1s would have a voice in deciding who becomes champ, but I thought the whol reason to put them at E-1 was so that they'd attack the people we told them to? The reason I am working with the plan (albeit unintentionally ATM) is because I may be persuaded into following and regret eliminating current E-1s, and not attacking helps nobody. The plan seems rather aimless, it's in essence "Put everybody at E-1 then we'll decide who becomes champ". We might as well choose now and avoid running the risk of people accidentally hitting E-1s.

[Hoppster]

Oh, KK, you shouldn't have. I feel selfish hogging all your attention.

@ Mod: Once I choose somebody to support, can I change my mind later?

[Hoppster]

Cool.

Support: EA

[Hoppster]

@ VPB: I supported EA because I wanted to see how he'd use my moves (for good/evil, with great power comes great responsibility, yadda yadda). I didn't really have anything on him at all, apart from a brief clash with Thor.

@ Vas: What's with the hate on GMan?

@ Mod:

I am loving the elimination flavour. Paticularly my own. Just thought you should know.

[Hoppster]

Eh. In the interest of speeding up the Rumble then:

Support: KK

(now that EA's eliminated, obviously.)

[Hoppster]

@ EA: You can't support Sotty/Zach now. Players can only be supported up to 10 moves, and Furcolow's already done that at the top of the page.

Speaking of which, I just noticed AV's already got KK up to 10 moves.

Unsupport: KK

Support: Kise

[Hoppster]

@ Baby Spice: Yeah, it's a weeeee bit overpowered. Speeds it up and makes for awesome reading though.

[Hoppster]

Spear: Kise

I'm fine with the self-elimination, but "Please do not try to be a hero and let me survive - Win that belt"? Just strikes me as odd... sorta like you're trying to gain town cred. I really doubt that would've happened. Why would that be heroic of them anyway?

@ Mod/Back-up Mod:

How do we unvote? Do we post "Un-spear" or something like that? Or just "Unvote"?

[Hoppster]

1) It's not the Royal Rumble anymore... pay attention.
2) Y'know, I suspect that they want you to be less vague than "town vibes". That's just a guess though.

[Hoppster]

@ Kise: Re-read my post. It's not your opinion I disagree with, it's the phrasing. You also implied that KK and DDD would consider sparing you, and to do so would be heroic. The whole thing struck me as a rather manufactured/artificial way of seeming pro-town.

[Hoppster]

Kise, CALM. It's not the bit about you wanting KK or DDD to be champ. It's the bit where you say: "Please do not try to be a hero and let me survive - Win that belt!"


So it's SUPER clear what I mean:

1. Why would them sparing you be heroic?
2. Did you think there was any remote possibility that they would have considered sparing you?

READ: I'm not asking why you eliminated yourself.

[Hoppster]

@ Kise: Okay, perhaps KK not so much, but DDD clearly stated his intentions to take the belt.

Having said that, I do get your point now. Sorry about traumatising you to such an extent.

Unvote

Pumphandle Slam: jasonT

[Hoppster]

@ chesskid: I thought I understood what you were saying until this recent post.

- You have town read on VPB
- You want him dead soon
- You are not voting him

Conclusion: Say hai to my chokeslam, scum!

Unvote

Chokeslam: chesskid

[Hoppster]

You made two points:

- You have a town read on VPB
- You want VPB dead

Why do you want town dead?


Even if we then disregard your first point, your second point contrasts with your behaviour. You want some guy dead, you then don't vote him.

Perhaps it's the LSD but all that seemed awfully self-contradictory.

[Hoppster]

@ chesskid: Well, I understand to a better extent but still not completely. What is it about his playstyle that makes you want him dead?

@ Thor: While I don't completely agree with everything VPB has been posting, so far he's seemed to me to be decently pro-town. Is wanting pro-town people dead not anti-town? That seemed rather intuitive to me.

[Hoppster]

@ Thor: "Anti-Town is a catch-all term that applies to any role that is neither pro-Town or ambiguous. An anti-Town role or faction is one whose win condition is to kill off all pro-Town players. The most common anti-Town role is the Mafia Goon.

In addition to killing all the pro-Town roles, most third-party anti-Town roles also need to kill off any other anti-Town players in the game. The most common third-party anti-Town role is the Serial Killer.

Anti-Town roles or factions are commonly referred to collectively as Scum. " ~ MafiaScum Wiki.

This seems to suggest that Anti-Town tell = Scum tell. YOUR INTUITION IS WRONG.


@ NC: What about sotty/Zach's vote on Jason?

[Hoppster]

What? Is the wiki not a reliable source of information?

^ Not sarcasm, genuine question.


@ NC: Wasn't VPB's vote also a pressure vote? I saw them both as pressure votes.

[Hoppster]

That lampshade reference is lost on me I'm afraid. Unless you mean the "^"?

@ Thor: Something scummy doesn't necessarily have to have any scumvantage, does it? It could just be really stupid and bad play. In this case, I think it's chesskid's overreaction to people over-pushing his rumble actions.

I'm not saying chesskid is a dead cert for scum, but he's certainly the best bet I've got for scum so far during Raw. I just don't see how wanting a pro-town player dead is not anti-town and/or scummy (depending on discrepancies of the definition between the two). Unless there's some horrific aspect to VPB's play which I haven't experienced yet (in which case, please tell me), I see no town motivation for wanting somebody you have a town-read on to be killed, (unless in some scenario where you're in possession of an awesome PR and it's either you or him). Do you?

Also, I would appreciate it if you'd answer my question about using the wiki as a reliable source of information.


@ NC: What would you say is the difference in playstyle between chesskid-scum and chesskid-town?

[Hoppster]

@ Chesskid: I'd like to know what you hate so much about VPB's style of play.

@ jasonT: Are you referring to Chesskid's threat to vig?

@ KK: I'm playing like scum in what sense?

@ NC: Upon ISOing you we get "A PL of Chess wouldn't hurt us" and then "Meta says Chess is prob town" in posts #16 and #17 respectively. What exactly is the Policy Lynch for? I'm also not completely happy with your "They [Chesskid's metas] aren't too terribly different. In his own words he's unreadable. Though I think he's a tad fluffier when scum." You don't sound confident enough with his meta to make a statement like "Chess is prob town".

@ Thor: Wait, so if I wasn't a "loose goose who worships the wiki", I would be more scummy? Why? I'm not quite following you here.

[Hoppster]

@ KK #670: I didn't feel that it was appropiate to open up a new avenue of discussion because everybody was so committed to this idea. What can I do? Seriously, look at it from my perspective. I wasn't getting great reads from the Rumble, and I couldn't (and still can't) think of a realistic alternative to what everybody was doing. It felt like RVS, except the votes you cast do actually count (in a way).

In terms of the self-mockery, if you're saying what I think you're saying, I genuinely didn't realise they were on the list. I'm flattered you think I'm dumb enough to go "OH HAI GUYZ THIS LIST STINKZ BTW I'M JUST GOING TO ATTACK THESE PEOPLE ON THE LIST HOPE YOU DON'T NOTICE", but really, it's a coincedence. Denial... because I have nothing else to do. It's not true, and there's no real defending yourself from a coincedence.

I didn't think that the think I picked up on Kise's post was inconsequential. If you're just going to attack me for that, what can I do? I can't make future cases or ask questions in case you decide it was not worth questioning about and therefore scummy.

Somebody post.

[Hoppster]

Thanks VPB, although it seems to have been unnecessary.


Still @ KK: "I didn't think that the

think

I picked up on Kise's post was inconsequential." Should be 'thing', obviously.

I had plenty of other opportunities for attacking Chesskid had I wanted to hop on a wagon that I could have percieved as 'easy'.


"@ Chesskid: I'd like to know what you hate so much about VPB's style of play." <-- An answer would be great.


@ Scott Brosius: That's it? A comment on a post basically just above yours, nothing else?

@ VPB: I find it hard to believe that you have no read on me following you labelling me as coasting scum before.

@ Mod: I've noticed a slight discrepancy in word-counting systems. My last post was 200 words by KK's online post-count site, but MS Word reckoned it was 203. How strict/pedantic are you on this?

[Hoppster]

Oh dear, Furc.

People in the game who haven't used parentheses at all:

Bella
Chesskid
Furcolow
Lowell (-ish)
Nero Cain
Scott Brosius
Trendall
VasudeVa
vezokpiraka

So, um. Excluding yourself, you have indirectly (but still nonetheless) called everybody else scum (with your so-far 100% accurate scum-tell), apart from eight (of which some are lurkers). Of course, there may be one or two more that I have missed. Feel free to point these out.

I'd also advise you to look through your post history. It doesn't take long to find a post where you use parentheses as town. If you want, I'll gladly point out some.

I look forward to your future reads. I'm sure they will be incredibly enlightening.


I don't think Baby Spice has been playing scummy. While mis-directed with the attack on Chesskid, everything else has been okay with me (this feels like I'm regurgitating what somebody was saying about

me

>.<)


I didn't actually realise I was still voting chesskid. Anyway, at the moment, the Scott Brosius wagon looks the best to me. Incredibly selective reading on his part. I could go for a Trendall wagon as well, but I somehow think Trendall is less likely to even post and acknowledge its existence.

Unvote
Powerslam: Scott Brosius

[Hoppster]

@ bristep: From your post (#799) I'd say that you have more of a 'case' on Trendall than Scott Brosius. Why the vote on SB?


Changed my mind about Trendall's wagon since his reappearance. His first post (#0) comes immediately after VPB making a post of his desire to eliminate chesskid, and guess what, Trendall's first post involves him attacking chesskid... but no further comment. Doesn't say whether he agrees with VPB or not, he just looks like he's sheeping. When he returns from V/LA and realises he's getting eliminated, he takes the "appease your attackers" option and tries to make himself appear as compliant as possible.

His more recent posts seem to me to just invite more people to apply pressure to him. Trendall, why only comment on Baby Spice's wagon? Why do you think the people on your wagon are town?

Scott just seems a bit... apathetic, but right now Trendall is looking scummier.

Unvote
Backbreaker: Trendall

Unvote
Spinebuster: Trendall

Unvote
Reverse Piledriver: Trendall

MOD FLAVOUR IS FUN.

Thor isn't coming across as scummy to me (although I will admit at being at a loss with what the hell he is on about recently).

[Hoppster]

@ bristep: Fair enough. Makes sense.

@ Thor: Right here. Last sentence.

[Hoppster]

@ Vas: Regarding your GMan 'case', I'm not convinced that a wagon based on a single post is the way to go. It could well be a scumslip, but it could as well just be a stupid mistake from town. Doesn't seem like a reliable basis for a lynch imo.

@ Trendall: Thor doesn't actually ask why you're scummy, he asks why you're scummier than IS. Big difference.

@ IS: "all sorts of scum jumped on his wagon. I would even guess that two scum were sitting on that wagon." The first part implies there were several scum. The second part implies that there were, at

most

, two scum. You're contradicting yourself. I also don't see why Thor would abandon the Trendall wagon if he was so desperate to get any lynch.

@ Thor: Why do you feel the need to confirm the non-randomness of your vote on IS?

[Hoppster]

@ jediknight: "I didn't call it a policy lynch originally. I was asked if that's what it was and I said sure why not." No, you agreed it was a policy lynch. Your phrasing makes it sound like you're trying to squirm out of/brush off the responsibility for saying it was a policy lynch, when actually you agreed that it was a policy lynch.

Regarding the recent Trendall hoo-hah: "I think there's a case for both of them, however Trendall is the more popular choice." (#979)

I agree that this is scummy, but for slightly different reasons. What I found scummy was that he refused to take a firm stance on which of the two he actually thought was scummier.

He's done this earlier as well, as in post #799, he makes a semi-case on the two of them (Trendall and SB), and votes for SB, without saying one is scummier than the other. When I pushed him on this, he said that the two both needed pressure, and he only voted SB because he had less votes. And then he contradicts himself by leaving the SB wagon because it doesn't have enough votes.

[Hoppster]

Post.

[Hoppster]

"jasonT's gotta be scum, surely? That's the second time he's taken something somebody's said, and manipulated it so as to make them look scummy.

He said that Gobots found me scummy

and then questioned why he was voting for me, despite the fact that Gobots never actually said that he found me scummy."

- Trendall


Say whaaat?

"I could really go for a GoBots wagon also... here

he says Trendall is

not

scummy

, then says how can he even have a read on him, yet is voting Trendall.. Has actually added very little and seems to be sliding this is the post I am talking about

http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 5#p2845125"

- jasonT


He's not saying Gobots found your scummy. He's saying Gobots

didn't

say you were scummy, and then questioned why he was voting for you. Underline added by me FOR EMPHASIS!

You are the only one taking something somebody has said and manipulating it to make them look scummy. (Possibly Furc as well, depending on who the hell he is talking about.)


@ Furc: Whose wagonjump was OMGUS? Snake has

never

voted Sottyrulez.

[Hoppster]

Regarding the DDD-vezok issue: Both town, I think. DDD, after denying being Davari, would also likely deny coming from Davari's hometown (if he were scum). Even if DDD were scum who did come from Davari's hometown, I don't think he'd admit to coming from Davri's hometown (as it narrows down any fakeclaims avaliable to him). vezok's confidence in nailing scum also strikes me as towny.

@ Empking: Did anything catch your eye from D1/Rumble?

[Hoppster]

@ KK: Is that a genuine question, or a suspicion/statement phrased as a question? If it was a question, then I assume it was regarding my most recent post, which was just a quick catch-up post, as there had been a crap-load of posts.


Anybody else think there's a bristep-Snake connection? A terrible attempt at bussing here, where bristep tries to find a reason to hop on the Snake wagon and totally fails.

This post as well, to a lesser extent: not really sure why Snake bothers to call out bristep.

jediknight's post #1224 strikes me as odd. He's asking vezok for a name claim despite having a town read? I really don't see how the name claim helps much other than give scum information. Also, he hasn't addressed the issue of him getting all flustered regarding wording here.

Dropkick: jediknight

@ EA: Why did you ditch your whole "FURC IS SCUM" thing here? Before that you're like "FURC NEEDS TO DIEEEEEE" but then you decide to hop on the IS wagon for something that doesn't strike me as a relatively scummy post?

[Hoppster]

@ VPB: Yeah, I was thinking similarly, but it doesn't make a great deal of sense for the 'Dudley Boyz' bit to have been included were it not relevant in any way. And they're all TLC maniacs.


@ jediknight: No, you haven't addressed it. Here you agree it's a policy lynch. Here and here you're trying to deflect the blame for agreeing it was a policy lynch.

"If you had to put a name to it,

yeah, that's what I'm saying

DDDP." = Yes, it is a policy lynch.

"I said that if you had to put a name to it that

policy lynch is the best wording

in response to someone else." = 'Policy lynch' is just an approximate equivalent.

"I didn't call it a policy lynch originally. I was asked if that's what it was and

I said sure why not

." = It wasn't

really

a policy lynch, but I agreed that it was FOR THE LULZ.

Why are you squirming so much about the specifics of how you agreed it was a policy lynch? "Oh, its the 'best wording'," etc.

[Hoppster]

HAPPY SCUMDAY MOD!

jediknight seems to be deliberately ignoring me now. (This is a reminder you haven't addressed my points despite insisting that you have.)


@ Gobots: Why is bad to attack people for scummy behaviour on D1 that was never addressed (as you seemed to imply in your post)?

@ GMan: Apologies if it's already been brought up (and I've missed it), but your vote here confuses me terribly. No criticism of Thor pre-vote or post-vote.

@ Furc: Why are you abandoning the EA wagon?

[Hoppster]

Okay. From what I read, you understood that bit, VPB, could you break it down for me? I am really not seeing it

at all

.

I am horribly, horribly confused. Is he being sarcastic?

[Hoppster]

@ VPB: Reading your post through again just confuses me more. It didn't help that I just realised I'd been looking at Thor's #454 rather than #444, but I'm still just as confused, if not moreso. Vas doesn't post between Thor's #444 and Gman's post (#455?). Who is GMan agreeing with if not Thor?!

If I'm just being an idiot, don't bother responding. I'll have another look tomorrow when I'm not so tired.

[Hoppster]

jediknight, ignoring me is not going to make me go away.

@ Furc: Really, is it ignore Hoppster day? I repeat - why did you abandon the EA wagon?

More people should pay attention to jediknight. His post here is a bit of a ramble... he seems to be attacking GMan and sottyrulez, but doesn't outright call either of them scummy. At the end of his post, he seems to have come to the conclusion that sottyrulez is suspect, but then votes GMan. Why the GMan vote over sottyrulez?

@ bristep: Here you're suspicious of IS (causing you to get off a wagon he is on). Here you don't vote because you have no strong indication of either wagon... which includes the IS wagon. If you have no strong indication of IS being scum, why was his prescence on the same wagon as you a reason for you to unvote?

[Hoppster]

@ Furc: Eh, never mind. It doesn't really answer my point but upon re-assessing, my point is stupid anyway.

@ Bristep: Okay. I misinterpreted you then... but still, why would his read on EA affect yours in any way (paticularly if you don't trust his reads anyway)? Or is it that you never had a read on EA at all and just trusted chesskid?

@ jediknight: So why did it take you so long to respond if you thing it's a trivial and non-consequential matter? Why were you ignoring it, and why did you stop ignoring it to answer it at all?

And why aren't you scumhunting VPB? You insinuate that it's scummy of him to discount your reads: "Its interesting to me that... you

[VPB]

discount ask I try to say." However, you then don't follow up on this and back it up with any determination: "Examples of VPB proclaiming town? Chesskid for one. DDD for another. There are others...but those are the ones I can state without going back thirty pages."

You could just ISO him, as you even admit to enjoying.

@ DDD: Why is jediknight's #22 inequatable with scum play? It actually struck me as a borderline scum-post.

[Hoppster]

@ Furc: I said I've dropped my point, I realised I was wrong. It's a stupid point, doesn't matter whether you addressed it or not. (But you didn't FWIW.)

@ SR: How is this trying? Reference my post here for why I find that to be evidence he's in fact either NOT trying, or just not following up any of his scum reads.

He hasn't really been scumhunting at all: he votes based on policy lynches, mass sheeping, a rambly post that doesn't seem to draw any solid conclusions... and for the last two votes as well, he's just hopping on a solid wagon with no convincing reasoning.

And he doesn't seem to pursue anything as scummy: he seems to be suspicious of yourselves, Furc + Empking, Baby Spice, VPB... but doesn't follow up at all.

@ jediknight: I want a link please to when VPB first starts discounting your reads because you don't trust him.

Unvote
Backbreaker: GMan
FoS: jediknight

I agree with VPB's take on the IS wagon.

[Hoppster]

I don't see the reason for scepticism regarding GMan's role. I don't think that with a wrestling theme, roles necessarily have to fit exactly with the wrestler/flavour.

@ BS: Why on earth (if you're town) would you propose yourself to be vig'd? You surely wouldn't propose somebody else you were very confident of being town for vigging, so why yourself - the only person who you can say with 100% certainty is town?


Support for a jediknight wagon now? These three posts contain my points on him.

Unvote
Tiger-Bomb: Jediknight

I think it's a bad idea to nail GMan down to one target. If scum have PRs then they can frame/redirect/whatever. If we have at least 2 or 3 options and let GMan choose one, then it's less likely to suffer from scum meddling/interference.

[Hoppster]

Wow, that's lucky. Just as I log on.

Post.

[Hoppster]

Post!

[Hoppster]

Headlock: jediknight

I claim Mick Foley.
I'm actually all the Four Faces of Foley.

Smells like a badly planned fake-claim.

Also, the different Foley roles weren't all billed from Long Island, NY.


jediknight, full flavour would be great.


I'm suspecting a Furc-Kise link.

[Hoppster]

@ SR: In his first post he claimed Mick Foley, and in the next post he claimed to be the Four Faces of Foley - something I'd probably have claimed off the bat in his position.

While the concept of the claim seems like an unlikely fake claim, I'm concerned about the use of 'mandible claw'. I don't think roles necessarily have to match up with the wrestler, and I would be fine with Mankind being a Roleblocker, but it seems a bit odd that only one of the three has 'flavour', whilst the rest are just 'protect' or 'take out'.

@ jediknight: Is the 'Mankind/Cactus Jack/Dude Love' purely flavour, or would namecop get those results depending?


@ jediknight: You're misrepping me horribly. It was because you were distancing yourself from your previously used wording. Not the actual wording. If you're to be pedantic, I suppose it's the way you've worded yourself that makes you seem like you're distancing yourself from your previously used wording, but 'wording' could be said about a lot of votes.

@ SR: Okay, I'll bite - WHO DID YOU PASS IT TO?!

Unvote

We need to get jedi his 16 votes ASAP (if not already achieved), this will disrupt VCA.

(What's #1?)

[Hoppster]

Hip toss: GMan

VPB, how exactly do you plan to prevent IS from hammering?

Kise: I wanted to see how he'd react. His reaction makes the connection unlikely to be that the two of you are scumbuddies imo.

Primate: AFAIK, the only reason we spared him last night was because his role was confirmable. So when it fails to be confirmed, the reason for sparing him is void.

Gobots: Roleblocked? Do you mean protected?

Vas: With the implication being a mega-bus? Or rival scum forming a voting bloc? Or a combination of the two?

[Hoppster]

Post.

[Hoppster]

@ SZ: Did you and KK extensively discuss who you were both going to pass the belts to?

@ Vas: What happened to you thinking GMan was likely scum regardless of the wagoners here?