Mafia 64: The New "C9" - Game over!

[Albert B. Rampage]

As a mafia, I tend to attack my scumbuddies and go hard after them. So in this case, probably Stcevhen(whatever his name is) or AE.

[Glork]

Shteven's first post is a "wow, quick start to the game" post. His second one is a random vote for Albert. Nothing to see here, really.

His Post 160 really provides nothing. Albert not in risk of being lynched, his vote on Albert "is feeling correct" (not explained why, though). A wishy-washy non-comment towards Glork... does call Glork "subversive." Hard to read lurkers.

Post 167: In response to Glork's inquiry about Shteven's gut feeling, Shteven points to the big red text (when I yelled at BM). He also mistakenly asserts that I left my vote uselessly on MBL while making posts regarding other things.
The second one bothers me. Supposing I

had

kept my vote on MBL (just for the sake of making the premises of his point true)... he behaves hypocritically here; that is, he is claiming that "Glork leavin his vote on MBL while poking around elsewhere" is scummy, yet he leaves a final comment that he would still like to keep his vote on Albert -- again, with no explanation as to why he is happy to have it there. I don't get it... I really don't.

I already explained why I didn't like Shteven's Post 262 (in my own Post 289). Like I said, he seems to go "welp, we'll probably lynch a townie today, but I'll just keep my vote on Albert."
Still no explanation as to why he was happy about his Albertvote

earlier

.

He sortof backtracks in his next post, Post 293. Aside from his misreading me about "resigning to" Albert being town/scum, he decides that though he doesn't like the claim, "it's not truly a horrible one." He kindof ignores the fact that if Albert is town, Townie is the only thing he could claim.
But here's the real kicker. Shteven says this:

but my vote was on him before the claim, and it will remain there for the same reasons.

You never gave any reasons to vote Albert as far as I can possibly tell. And yet now you're stating that you want to keep your vote there for those reasons. What on God's green earth are you *TALKING* about?

Post 375, he affirms his unexplained Albert suspicion, cites Battle Mage as a second, and Guardian as a third. He changes to Glork possibly being town.
What I find interesting here is that though he's got BM listed as his #2 suspect, he agrees with me that there were likely ~2 scums on the wagon.

Shteven:

Do you feel that there were probably 2 scums on BM whether he is scum, town, or regardless of his alignment? Explain your answer, please.

Thirdly:

I also didn't forget that there was a request for my reasons, although I've listed them before, and I believe more than once.

No. You didn't. The closest you came was complaining that Albert expected us to meta him even though few of us have actually played games with him. That hardly sounds like a reason to suspect somebody, much less be this happy with your initially-random vote.

Seriously, Shteven. Look through your own posts ("Find all posts by: Shteven" at the bottom center of the thread, right below the Quick Reply box) and tell us how you've listed your reasons. If indeed you have listed them, I don't understand your reasoning one bit.

Post 581... responses to posts directed at him.
1) Not really "lurking" per se -- the thread is just moving at an incredible rate. I agree fully with this. I would not take "lurking" as a legitimate point against Shteven here.
2) Responding to AE, he again affirms his suspicion of Albert. I am trying to decide whether Shteven is trying to push through an Argument from Reptition or whether he truly doesn't realize how underexplained his vote is.
3) He cites his earlier post to Albert. Let's quote what he says to explain himself:

So I'm saying that despite random voting, all the things going on since then have reinforced it. It's becoming, over time, a serious vote. I also raised some suspicions of Glork in this post.

He asserts that "things" have happened to reinforce his random-vote. Yet he

STILL DOES NOT EXPLAIN WHAT THOSE THINGS ARE

. This looks like a *textbook* case conjured out of thin air by scum.
His other point is the Albert-claim thing, which he actually backed down from a bit. Is he reaffirming his initial stance here?
4) Aha. Something resembling an actual reason/explanation. While I will agree that it is unreasonable to expect us to read several games to examine his playstyle, using playstyle as a defense is not "completely worthless" as Shteven indicates. Hell, I use playstyle as a defense all the time. Suffice to say, I patentedly disagree with Shteven's reasoning here.

Still, in this post, he decides that "there are better targets" around, and that he will "pick someone else" for whom to vote. Maybe I'm reading too much into his word choice, but it the words "targets" and "pick" bother me in that context. Meh.

I must admit, I actually kinda like Post 649. The first part is kinda general thoughts on post quality vs quantity, which is very "meh" to me. But he's interested in people's thoughts on YB and Billy/Joe. He's still sticking to "the 5" whom he mentioned earlier -- Albert, BM, Glork, Guardian, and... er... Haut/Autumn and HungryJoe. Six. He also openly asks for people to explain their concerns to him. A sincere-sounding post, but not enough to sway me based on his earlier behavior.

His EBWODP, Post 350, is mostly him defending against Autumn and defending lurkerhunting. He does state that he finds Billy to be pro-town.

Post 789: HH/Albert connection, and he opens the door to attack HH later for HH's comment about Albert. He also adequately invalidates Autumn's "BM is probably town" argument.
(By the way, I don't think I mentioned this -- but I am not fond of the way AE meta'd that. I think that Battle Mage is town for completely unrelated reasons, but I don't think that LmL would accidentally almost compromise the game. If Shea/TSQ never saw a role PM, then he never saw a role PM. The mod's word is law in this case.)

Post 800 could be telling -- thoughts on several players.
TCS may be good for another day, Albert scummier than TCS, unsure about Glork, Huck his "hero" (ha, alliteration here!), AE "too dedicated" to scumhunting; reminds her to breathe -- I guess he's calling her pro-town here... anywho, BM like Albert/TCS, BT done nothing to bring doubt, IGMEO Yogurt, eventually votes Guardian for vote-hopping.

All in all, a very unrevealing "analysis." What do you think of players such as MBL? MoS?

His last three posts are two comments about Glork possibly being targeted (if there was an active Vig N1) and a nonsensical response to MBL's nonsensical question.


So.... yeah, I think that Shteven

severely

overstated his case against Albert, claimed to an unreasonable degree that he had adequately explained himself (He certainly had not, in my mind.), and has provided a lot of noncommittal analysis.

I just don't like his play. At all. I think he's scum.

[Albert B. Rampage]

I don't see the HH/ABR connection.

HH sounded like he wanted to lynch me instead of vouching for keeping me alive.

Unvote, vote: Shteven

[Shteven]

It's not that hard to come up with a hypothetical set of scumbuddies, if you think about it.

Not in the least. But then you're basically just saying "hello other player. Please name 3 people you'd like to vote for, I know the game only gives you one, but I'm going to let you target 3 people and not even look half as scummy as you normally would!"

Strikes me as a very odd thing to do, as it makes it seem like they're working together.

[Guardian]

Glork, you make a good case. I never stated my case on Shteven, but I agree with some of your reasoning there.

I am not convinced that Albert is not a better play though...

I am tempted to post "I'll show you vote hopping!" and vote Shteven, lol, but like I said, I still like my vote where it is.

[Shteven]

Shteven's first post is a "wow, quick start to the game" post. His second one is a random vote for Albert. Nothing to see here, really.

His Post 160 really provides nothing. Albert not in risk of being lynched, his vote on Albert "is feeling correct" (not explained why, though). A wishy-washy non-comment towards Glork... does call Glork "subversive." Hard to read lurkers.

A fuller quote from 160:

Jack already beat me to it, but I also feel that Glork's being slightly subversive. Of course, he may just be on a whole other level, but take it for it's worth. In most games it seems like everyone's scum to me.

Ask yourself if Glork's description of the post matches your reading of the post.

Post 167: In response to Glork's inquiry about Shteven's gut feeling, Shteven points to the big red text (when I yelled at BM). He also mistakenly asserts that I left my vote uselessly on MBL while making posts regarding other things.

Apparently I was wrong. Glork won't tell you why I'm wrong, but he is Glork, so he's probably right.

The second one bothers me. Supposing I

had

kept my vote on MBL (just for the sake of making the premises of his point true)... he behaves hypocritically here; that is, he is claiming that "Glork leavin his vote on MBL while poking around elsewhere" is scummy, yet he leaves a final comment that he would still like to keep his vote on Albert -- again, with no explanation as to why he is happy to have it there. I don't get it... I really don't.

The point being that you were attacking others, while I stayed with my one choice. Granted it was an early vote and didn't have much to go on, but I don't recall attacking anyone more than albert until after I had unvoted him.

I already explained why I didn't like Shteven's Post 262 (in my own Post 289). Like I said, he seems to go "welp, we'll probably lynch a townie today, but I'll just keep my vote on Albert."
Still no explanation as to why he was happy about his Albertvote

earlier

.

He sortof backtracks in his next post, Post 293. Aside from his misreading me about "resigning to" Albert being town/scum, he decides that though he doesn't like the claim, "it's not truly a horrible one." He kindof ignores the fact that if Albert is town, Townie is the only thing he could claim.
But here's the real kicker. Shteven says this:

but my vote was on him before the claim, and it will remain there for the same reasons.

You never gave any reasons to vote Albert as far as I can possibly tell. And yet now you're stating that you want to keep your vote there for those reasons. What on God's green earth are you *TALKING* about?

Post 375, he affirms his unexplained Albert suspicion, cites Battle Mage as a second, and Guardian as a third. He changes to Glork possibly being town.
What I find interesting here is that though he's got BM listed as his #2 suspect, he agrees with me that there were likely ~2 scums on the wagon.

Shteven:

Do you feel that there were probably 2 scums on BM whether he is scum, town, or regardless of his alignment? Explain your answer, please.

Thirdly:

I also didn't forget that there was a request for my reasons, although I've listed them before, and I believe more than once.

No. You didn't. The closest you came was complaining that Albert expected us to meta him even though few of us have actually played games with him. That hardly sounds like a reason to suspect somebody, much less be this happy with your initially-random vote.

Seriously, Shteven. Look through your own posts ("Find all posts by: Shteven" at the bottom center of the thread, right below the Quick Reply box) and tell us how you've listed your reasons. If indeed you have listed them, I don't understand your reasoning one bit.

The reason I voted Albert started out as a feeling. I got a lot of inspecific queasy feelings from each of his post. Then, he said that we should all read his past games to understand his playstyle. This is not a scumtell. However, it vexed me on a personal level. Not the best reason to vote for someone, I realize. However, the main reason I was so glad to leave it there was because it's the early pages of day 1. If I misrepresented the strength of my convinction (which I believe I did) then it's an error on my part. Attacks such as your post on me don't spring up on page 6. My attack on Albert was much weaker because it was much earlier. I am no longer voting him for this, and while I'm still not very fond of him, it's not worth much anymore. See one additional reason below the next section.

Post 581... responses to posts directed at him.
1) Not really "lurking" per se -- the thread is just moving at an incredible rate. I agree fully with this. I would not take "lurking" as a legitimate point against Shteven here.
2) Responding to AE, he again affirms his suspicion of Albert. I am trying to decide whether Shteven is trying to push through an Argument from Reptition or whether he truly doesn't realize how underexplained his vote is.
3) He cites his earlier post to Albert. Let's quote what he says to explain himself:

So I'm saying that despite random voting, all the things going on since then have reinforced it. It's becoming, over time, a serious vote. I also raised some suspicions of Glork in this post.

He asserts that "things" have happened to reinforce his random-vote. Yet he

STILL DOES NOT EXPLAIN WHAT THOSE THINGS ARE

. This looks like a *textbook* case conjured out of thin air by scum.
His other point is the Albert-claim thing, which he actually backed down from a bit. Is he reaffirming his initial stance here?

Most of the reasons are just above this section. The part I want to add here is the suspicion over his townie claim. This is another thing that hit me fairly strongly on the first read. It's probably because I didn't hold him in high regard. I have backed off this point, because I thought about what would happen if I was in his place. First, I'd wait for the 8th vote at least, but sooner or later, I'd have to claim. And really, there's not that many other things to claim. So while I still hold his early-claim to be fishy, I don't fault him for claiming townie. I don't want to get into more meta discussion, but if someone wants to briefly summarize the courage vs sacrificing a townie choice, I wouldn't mind the info.

4) Aha. Something resembling an actual reason/explanation. While I will agree that it is unreasonable to expect us to read several games to examine his playstyle, using playstyle as a defense is not "completely worthless" as Shteven indicates. Hell, I use playstyle as a defense all the time. Suffice to say, I patentedly disagree with Shteven's reasoning here.

Still, in this post, he decides that "there are better targets" around, and that he will "pick someone else" for whom to vote. Maybe I'm reading too much into his word choice, but it the words "targets" and "pick" bother me in that context. Meh.

"Steven decides his feelings about Albert aren't as strong as he once thought and rationally stops voting for him. But wait, that would kill my case. Oh, I know, he used the word target. Let's lynch him, am I right guys?" ...As for the word target, I like it, I play world of Warcraft, and it's nifty.

I must admit, I actually kinda like Post 649. The first part is kinda general thoughts on post quality vs quantity, which is very "meh" to me. But he's interested in people's thoughts on YB and Billy/Joe. He's still sticking to "the 5" whom he mentioned earlier -- Albert, BM, Glork, Guardian, and... er... Haut/Autumn and HungryJoe. Six. He also openly asks for people to explain their concerns to him. A sincere-sounding post, but not enough to sway me based on his earlier behavior.

Thanks for giving me some credit, I appreciate it

His EBWODP, Post 350, is mostly him defending against Autumn and defending lurkerhunting. He does state that he finds Billy to be pro-town.

Post 789: HH/Albert connection, and he opens the door to attack HH later for HH's comment about Albert. He also adequately invalidates Autumn's "BM is probably town" argument.
(By the way, I don't think I mentioned this -- but I am not fond of the way AE meta'd that. I think that Battle Mage is town for completely unrelated reasons, but I don't think that LmL would accidentally almost compromise the game. If Shea/TSQ never saw a role PM, then he never saw a role PM. The mod's word is law in this case.)

Post 800 could be telling -- thoughts on several players.

TCS may be good for another day, Albert scummier than TCS, unsure about Glork, Huck his "hero" (ha, alliteration here!), AE "too dedicated" to scumhunting; reminds her to breathe -- I guess he's calling her pro-town here... anywho, BM like Albert/TCS, BT done nothing to bring doubt, IGMEO Yogurt, eventually votes Guardian for vote-hopping.

All in all, a very unrevealing "analysis."

She's not the only one who needs to breathe. That's all one sentence. I don't mean to attack grammar, but it would be more clear if it was spaced out. I can't be sure what the sentence fragment "BM like Albert/TCS" means.

What do you think of players such as MBL? MoS?

MBL I haven't been able to get much of a read on, which is odd, since he has been active. I'd have to reread. MoS strikes me as town, plus I like his avatar.

[/quote="Glork"]
His last three posts are two comments about Glork possibly being targeted (if there was an active Vig N1) and a nonsensical response to MBL's nonsensical question.
[/quote]

Mu is an excellent response. If you read the wiki, it explains why. Basically, I'm using it to mean that the question cannot be answered because it based on false assumptions. In other words, "ITS A TRAP LOLZ".

So.... yeah, I think that Shteven

severely

overstated his case against Albert, claimed to an unreasonable degree that he had adequately explained himself (He certainly had not, in my mind.), and has provided a lot of noncommittal analysis.

I just don't like his play. At all. I think he's scum.

If any of this is unclear, or something needs more explaination, let me know. I read it all once, and responded to the chunks, but it's possible missed something.

[Shteven]

EBWOP: One thing about the first point above:

His Post 160 really provides nothing. Albert not in risk of being lynched, his vote on Albert "is feeling correct" (not explained why, though). A wishy-washy non-comment towards Glork... does call Glork "subversive." Hard to read lurkers.

Jack already beat me to it, but I also feel that Glork's being slightly subversive. Of course, he may just be on a whole other level, but take it for it's worth. In most games it seems like everyone's scum to me.

Ask yourself if Glork's description of the post matches your reading of the post.

I agree on the charge of wishy washy, it was his claim that I called him subversive which I thought was grossly misleading.

Jack had previously posted (posts 150, 152) that:

I said I "didn't find you pro townie" so it was more of a feeling based on your posts. It's not more than a feeling because I can't reread (at work). Same goes for those other questions. I got the feeling you were faking your suspicions like scum do.
----
I also get a scum distancing feel from Albert and Glork.

Don't you just love gut based accusations Razz

I was agreeing, but I don't have much to base it on, and at least this time, I wasn't over representing myself much

[Mastermind of Sin]

It's not that hard to come up with a hypothetical set of scumbuddies, if you think about it.

Not in the least. But then you're basically just saying "hello other player. Please name 3 people you'd like to vote for, I know the game only gives you one, but I'm going to let you target 3 people and not even look half as scummy as you normally would!"

Strikes me as a very odd thing to do, as it makes it seem like they're working together.

No, because if you name three people you are scumbuddies with and vote them, you're sorta admitting to being scum yourself, unless you've already laid out a case against them that doesn't involve you.

[MrBuddyLee]

I realize I'm not supposed to be answering other people's questions for them, but MBL's question is so horribly stupid I figured I'd take a crack at it.

Mu.

Shteven, my question to Albert and Yogurt is only mu if they are town. Do you have some inside information that this is the case? If not, would you care to revise and extend your remarks?

[Mastermind of Sin]

It's not a bag question, per se. Rather, a highly unconventional and confusing one that still can serve some sort of purpose.

[YogurtBandit]

unvote,Vote:johhan

Any reason why?

[Mastermind of Sin]

Also, YB is scum because he hates kittens.

[inHimshallibe]

MoS, I see you wandering off to start a wagon that no one has showed much interest in, which prompted my statement.

From what I've seen of Shteven in another game as scum, I just don't get the same read this go-around. Yeah, it's been awhile, but hasn't he just recently made a return to the site?

[Mastermind of Sin]

So, if I see someone who seems to be clearly scum, in my opinion, I should instead follow the opinions of the crowd and jump on a bandwagon?

Also, I've never heard of Shteven before this game.

[Jack]

I don't see the HH/ABR connection.

HH sounded like he wanted to lynch me instead of vouching for keeping me alive.

Unvote, vote: Shteven

Why did you vote Shteven?

[YogurtBandit]

Also, YB is scum because he hates kittens.

Those rumors are lies.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Longest. Day. One. Ever.

Will be voting after reread.

[Guardian]

Btw, I take full credit for the activity/length of day one. The only game I am in which is falling inactive is my newbie game ;(.

[YogurtBandit]

Btw, I take full credit for the activity/length of day one. The only game I am in which is falling inactive is my newbie game ;(.

Guardian is teh popular!

[Shteven]

No, because if you name three people you are scumbuddies with and vote them, you're sorta admitting to being scum yourself, unless you've already laid out a case against them that doesn't involve you.

That's the it's a trap part. You implicate yourself if you're scum, or if you're town, you're over-implicating 3 people about whom you have no additional information. Yet the question implies that do you have addiational information, hence making it misleading. Even if there is a second cop, on day one, he doesn't really have much of an information lead.

It's possible that useful information could come out of the question. If you asked someone who really had been beating his wife if he's since stopped, and he said he has, that's certainly good news and useful information. The problem is there's more direct and clear ways to get this information. If you want to know who he suspects, just say "name 3 players you suspect the most and want to see thrown under a bus" and you don't have any of the strange implications. Of course, put directly, other players may wonder why he's asking for 3 votes. I see it as basically looking for leadership from someone else, with the implication that we should all be following whatever response is given. Hence, they seemed to be working together, trying to boost credibility. This may be a bit of a stretch, but I just don't like the way the question was phrased.

Shteven, my question to Albert and Yogurt is only mu if they are town. Do you have some inside information that this is the case? If not, would you care to revise and extend your remarks?

First question: No.

Second qustion: It's mu both ways. I believe the above explaination should help. In short, you're asking two players who many people have felt are scummy to lead the town in selecting the entire scum team. In a way, it's kind of like guardian saying to Glork "go find us the 5 scum (counting SK)". And then I suppose we're all intended to follow albert and Yogurt for the next 3 days, with the added credibility that you asked them to be our glorious leaders.

Also, I've never heard of Shteven before this game.

I thought we had played together before? Not sure, but your name did seem familiar. In any case, I played 2-3 games here before, but the last one ended about a year or so before this one started. I don't play often, but LML is a friend of mine and every once in a while he sends me a message that he's about to moderate a game, and I'm usually foolish enough to sign up. It's been fun so far. You should be able to find some of my past games, if you are interested.

[BillyTwilight]

@Glork:

Your basic argument against Shteven comes down to his vote staying on Albert for a long time without explaining his reasons for the vote, and at the same time constantly stating that his vote would remain on Albert for the "reasons" that he had already given. I agree that this is suspicious, but I can see it coming from lazy town as much as scum. Your second main point is the rest of his analysis has been weak. Again, that could be lazy town.

I've already talked about his post #262, which is by far his scummiest post. He seems to me to be trying to talk Albert into "letting himself go", giving up so to speak. Maybe he thought Albert with a little coaxing would say something that would give the town serious incentive to lynch him, I don't know. I don't really get post #262 at all anyway; he goes back to a topic that didn't need to be readdressed IMO, and he then addresses that topic in a scummy way, to me.

I am getting a scummy read on Shteven, but not enough for me to change my vote. I still think both YB and TCS are better lynches for today.

Secondly, your post #699 about Guardian to me is a stronger case than the one you bring against Shteven. Both are in my list of scummiest players, but I don't understand why you find Shteven

scummier

than Guardian, and I certainly can't understand your reason for wanting him lynched out of hand, as your post #794 indicates.


@MBL:

I agree pretty much with your player list (so far). I find your question to Albert and YB to be... interesting. I've never used that kind of questioning as a scum-hunting technique before. I wonder (since now it seems neither are going to answer it - don't know how I feel about that) what you would expect the answers to be from a town player or from a scum player. When I first read it, I got a bad vibe from it, because I didn't see a way that the players could answer that without seeming scummy, and thus felt that it could be opportunistic on your part, but I can't really figure out if there is any kind of read here, in the question or in the answers (or lack thereof).


@AE:

I don't like post #839. It seems like you are stretching for a way to contribute to the discussion. Why did you pick those players to ask those questions to and about? When you first entered the game you had a lot to talk about with all of the post previous to your entrance. Since then you have attacked me, but when that didn't get traction with the other players you have kind of dropped out of the picture. Your read on BM is just wrong, and I want to know if you still hold to the fact that he is town, as post #792 indicates. Do you simply not believe LML's clarification post #762? I don't know if you realize this, but when you PM someone on the boards, the PM stays in your outbox until they read it, then it gets moved to your sentbox. If LML says that TSQ didn't read the PM, that means he deleted it out of his outbox before TSQ picked it up, and thus he knows that TSQ did not read the PM and has no idea what BM's alignment is. This means that your reasoning for clearing BM is wrong.

I will make an analysis post about YB sometime this evening or tomorrow, if I get time.

[YogurtBandit]

Mod: Am I being replaced?

[AutumnEvenings]

@AE:

I don't like post #839. It seems like you are stretching for a way to contribute to the discussion. Why did you pick those players to ask those questions to and about? When you first entered the game you had a lot to talk about with all of the post previous to your entrance. Since then you have attacked me, but when that didn't get traction with the other players you have kind of dropped out of the picture. Your read on BM is just wrong, and I want to know if you still hold to the fact that he is town, as post #792 indicates. Do you simply not believe LML's clarification post #762? I don't know if you realize this, but when you PM someone on the boards, the PM stays in your outbox until they read it, then it gets moved to your sentbox. If LML says that TSQ didn't read the PM, that means he deleted it out of his outbox before TSQ picked it up, and thus he knows that TSQ did not read the PM and has no idea what BM's alignment is. This means that your reasoning for clearing BM is wrong.

When I first replaced in, I had lots to say as like 15 pages of posts had been made without me commenting. Now I comment on things as I go.

Yes, I still think BM is town. No, I don't actually believe LoudmouthLee. And no, I don't want to talk about it anymore. I've tried to drop this subject at least twice. I'm not trying to change anyone else's minds, I'm just saying what I think, and I'm a stubborn bitch at times and this point is likely to be one of them.

I picked MrBuddyLee and Glork for several reasons. First, they're the two players who are driving me the most crazy in the "he's pro-town, no wait, he's scum, damn it, he's town, fuck, he's scum!" way. So I want to pin them down on issues, such as each other, as I feel that helps me get a better read, and if they

are

evil, it's nice to force them to take stances.

I asked Glork about InHim vs. MBL because I have zero read on InHim and had nothing on Coron either, and Glork seems to go back on forth on MBL. MBL, voted Glork but also seems to go back and forth on him. They've both suspected Guardian and Albert. It could be they're scum-buddies, but I really have no idea, and I do so love asking one scum what they think of another. :p (Neither of their answers made me conclude that they

weren't

partners.)

And finally, honestly, I'm under the impression they both know each other rather well, so if one of them is evil and the other is not, they might be able to spot tells/tendancies/whatever. *shrug*

And also, yes, I

was

trying to contribute to the discussion. I hate when people come in and go "this is boring" and don't say anything real, or who just don't post at all. I didn't think MrBuddyLee's question to Yogurt and Albert was going to bear fruit but didn't have much else to say (Albert didn't respond to my "defense" (using quotes because that would be a generous term to the paragraph I wrote), and nothing much else had happened since my last post except MBL's question).

I'm also waiting to hear from Pless, as I suspected BeanBagBoy and want to see if that was just playstyle or if he's an evil, evil killer, and I also expect Pless to throw up loads of stuff for us to talk about (we've played together before, elsewhere).

I don't know about Glrok's case...it's pretty much what I was feeling, but I don't know that it's all that superstrong. I do find it interesting that Shteven came out to defend himself with some big huge posts. I wish he'd write some big huge posts about his opinions on other players (and please don't go any further down the "too townie" path on me, k?).

Actually...Shteven, if Albert and Guardian ceased to exist, who would you vote and why?

[Guardian]

I don't understand why you find Shteven

scummier

than Guardian

It's cuz I'm town, and Shteven might not be.

[YogurtBandit]

I don't understand why you find Shteven

scummier

than Guardian

It's cuz I'm town, and Shteven might not be.

Guardian claimed town!