Mafia 72: Peril in Panama - Game over!

[vollkan]

I dont understand why people (Gage, pete d, Albert B. Rampage) re still voting for our claim doc..any reason why those voting for him want to do the mafia work for them?

Why are you assuming that mafia will automatically take him out? When I was scum and there was a suspicious claimed doc, we left them alive for day 2 to screw with everyone (but they got vigged anyhow).

but I would be more inclined to lynch him tomorrow to see if mafia bags him tonight.

With statements like this, why would mafia get rid of BM if he was a doc?

I'm really tempted to vote for pete d based on this. It looks to me like an excuse in advance for Battle Mage not being nightkilled.

The reason for Mafia to get rid of doc-Battle Mage is the same as for any other doctor... because they don't want their nightkill interfered with. That doesn't change just because Battle Mage is likely to be lynched tomorrow. Additionally, if Battle Mage is scum, you've just provided an excuse for him when he's not nightkilled.

Why would you suggest the scum-strategy you employed in a previous game if you're town, pete d?

I have to agree with ABR on this.

Pete makes a good point about the possibility of scum not killing BM to wifom the town (a fairly ordinary strategy) and you turn what is pretty much innocuous into something scummy.

It doesn't look like an excuse - it looks like him pointing out a scum strategy to rebut something that CKD just assumed. It only looks like an excuse if you approach it with preconceived ideas.

As for suggesting strategies, it isn't scummy. At all. I personally think it is helpful, since it can raise awareness of potential scenarios arising - which can only help the town.

FoS: Bookitty

[Patrick]

Votecount

Battle Mage (2) -- Gage, pete d
Setael (1) -- Mastermind of Sin
Dragon Phoenix (1) -- Lowell
Bookitty (2) -- Albert B. Rampage, Dragon Phoenix

Not Voting: Unright, Setael, Porochaz, Battle Mage, curiouskarmadog, Bookitty, volkan, Streeflo
14 alive, 8 to lynch.

[Setael]

When townies start doing joking uber-scummy posts, nothing can really be learned from it.

I think this was a slip. It was hashed out, and then the wagon seems to have ended basically due to distraction. So I took a close look at how that wagon ended.

It starts when CKD calls Unright on it. ABR disregards it, Nekka’s response is hard to judge - it’s like he’s explaining it away as a newbie error; Jordan calls him on it and votes Unright; CKD then votes Unright for it. We then get an unmistakable defense of Unright from DP who says

I agree [with Unright] completely. I would lynch those doing this day one on principle because they are counterproductive - and may well be scum.

Major FOS to those voting Unright based on his post.

DP completely ignores the scumtell being discussed of Unright calling them "townies."

BM then focuses on Jordan saying

I'm not sure i like how you latched on to someone elses argument completely in order to validate a BW vote.
Unvote, Vote: Jordan”

ABR then calls out BM; BM defends himself; Unright then says

Albert B. Rampage is right. JordanA24's suspicion and vote were his own and were first. He wasn't latching onto anyone else's train of thought or jumping on any bandwagons.

unvote
vote: Battle Mage

This is inaccurate, and is a poor excuse for a vote. Looks pretty obviously like his goal is to distract from his scum tell. Looks like panicky scum flailing to get out of the spotlight. CKD calls Unright on this and says “Seems pretty close to me...I think Jordan was agreeing with me. Why are you putting words into ABR's mouth? ABR didnt say that Jordan's suspicions was his own, he only said Jordan didnt bandwagon...” ABR agrees and votes Unright.

Post 48 Nekka once again disregards what is being pointed out as a scumtell and gives Unright a peptalk about the usefulness of the random stage. Gage agrees with Nekka and says he thinks Unright would come up town, while undermining this by saying his scumdar is borked. We then get distraction by the masons as ABR and Gage discuss where Gage has played. DP follows this up with “I'm fine with lynching any of the self-voters on day one.”

Jordan calls him on it and votes DP. ABR agrees and votes DP.

Unright then manages to further distract with a bunch of questions about self voting, the random stage, green/blue etc.

MoS, who has yet to weigh in on Unright at all, ignores the issue entirely and votes Jordan for his DP vote and FOSes ABR for agreeing. I didn't like this post at all. MOS clarifies in post 62 that his reasons for this are meta re: DP's play. Odd that in post 58 he gave no indication that he had meta reasons for his argument. Rather, he spoke as though it was something Jordan and ABR should know. Here's the post:

Jordan is stretching like a mother----. It is *NEVER* too early to be serious about lynching. Just because DP is willing to lynch a self-voter does not mean that he's trying rush the day, nor does it mean that he's willing to let everyone blindly bandwagon without giving their own opinions. You're bullshitting us this early? Nice try.

Unvote, Vote: Jordan

FoS: ABR for following him.

If his reasons for thinking it’s a nulltell are meta, why would he assume Jordan and ABR should know this to the point that it merits a vote? And why wouldn't he mention that at the time he voted? Then, when he has to explain that his argument only holds water if you have the meta he has, why doesn't he unvote? Not only does he not unvote, he holds the vote until now and is still voting Jordan. For what, exactly? For not having the meta on DP that MoS has?

BM brings it back to Unright in Post 70 saying

wow buddying up ftl! and even better, you managed to completely misinterpret someone's comments in the process.
gg defensive-you are blatant scum.

Unvote, Vote: Unright

The masons (ABR and then Gage) disagree with BM and start a bandwagon on him.

^This was the post in which you blatantly misinterpreted not only what ABR was saying, but also you completely misconstrued the situation. Its interesting how you don't like it when i point out your scummy play, but don't bat an eyelid when CKD and ABR himself attack you for the exact same reason.

These are valid arguments and while reading I'm thinking "Good! Finally someone brings it back to Unright who managed to slide out from under the microscope."

But then in the next post we get MoS again, telling BM to cool off. Totally disregards BM's arguments and undermines it by making BM look hot headed.

DP rereads. Says of Unright

4. Unright
I like his posts so far. Reasonable and trying to get things going for the town.

Votes ABR. ABR points out that DP’s analysis of BM was very similar to ABR’s but ABR earned a vote for it, while it was explained away as merely BM’s style. DP's response is that there were differences between his analyses of the 2 players. Yes, but too subtle of differences. The point stands against DP.

Porochaz comes out of nowhere after virtually no content; latches onto this in 99 and votes DP without giving further comment on the game.

DP then explains how easily he can be talked out of his ABR vote

I don't know you. AFAIK I never played with you. The same goes for BM, but I have read a lot about him in various threads. Not about you - at least not that I remember. Howver, if the other players confirm that you are just as loose a cannon as BM, I will downgrade you on my list of suspects.

CKD unvotes Unright with a hearty “not feeling it right now”; BM appears to obey MoS' order to drop it, and the wagon is forgotten, never to be revisited.

My feeling about the whole thing is there were good, legitimate reasons to suspect Unright and if he was a townie, scum would've made sure that wagon succeeded (and it wouldn't have been hard). It only makes sense for it to successfully be swept under the rug if Unright is scum.

vote: Unright

Continuing on, 111 & 168 Gage and ABR claim masons. I see no possibility that it was a scum gambit (mostly because I cannot fathom ABR bailing out Gage in this case if they were scum buddies. Rather, I think he'd have let him go down in flames). So I believe both of them are protown masons.

244 Nekka comes off pro-town. Can’t see scum saying they like someone for thinking they’re pro-town.

249 MOS declares BM protown and says those voting him are idiots

256 ckd follows mos; unvotes BM

333 Vollkan extremely noncommittal – nearly everyone at 50% (neutral) Highest he goes is 65% on BM, while giving several reasons to think he’s town. Seems too safe – no real stand on anyone. 341 calls pete d noncommittal. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

372 vollkan votes BM to “kickstart” the game. He’s careful to not give real reasons or take a stand – it’s a vote that’ll be easy to back out of. Then fosses Bookitty rather than voting. Looks self conscious, noncommittal – playing extremely safe and not taking a firm stand on anyone.

I also think there's a good chance that Porochaz is scum. Has posted practically no content. When he has voted, it's only after latching onto someone else's argument. He has done no scum hunting and has been lying low, not accusing anyone or stating his suspicions.

As for the matter at hand, ABR and Gage could be scum together... more likely newbie silliness and albert saving lives. However Im in heaps of games and I still know exactly is going on in each and Ive been here all of about 6 weeks. If not read then post or do wha I do read whilst posting. This conbined with the over reaction early on unvote vote Battle Mage

This post is one of his most content filled. A bad argument that ABR and Gage could be scum buddies, then disregarding his own opinion and saying "more likely newbie silliness and albert saving lives." He then places an odd, unjustified BM vote. Not long after, we get:

oh and unvote With me making a mistake about the over reacting and allowing for a mistake in the reading I think it would be a mistake for me to continue voting BM

He then gives several nothing posts, lurking in plain sight while saying he needs to read. After his reread we get:

K having read over I feel BM is most scummy, however he is now at L-2 and I really dont have much more than a "feeling" that he is scummy... and in my book that isnt enough to lynch him so I won't vote unless theres some sort of deadline that I totally overlooked.

So the entire game he hasn't given a good reason to think anyone is scum. Even when he latches onto someone else's argument, it's weak.

Scumlist

Unright
Porochaz
DP
vollkan
MoS

I'm leaning town on Bookitty. I got several protown reads from Nekka and don't think his part in distracting from the Unright wagon was intentional. Looks more like he thought Gage was making newbie errors rather than scum coaching scum. Bookitty's play has felt town, and the arguments against her right now are pretty weak.

Everyone else is on my town list, with ABR, Gage and BM the most confirmed.

[Albert B. Rampage]

Bookitty is pretty scummy-looking right now. Maybe you could offer more of a defense instead of sweeping it under the rug, Setael ?

[Setael]

A defense of what exactly? Are you asking me to defend Jordan (who I replaced) or Bookitty?

Please clarify what you think I've swept under the rug.

[Albert B. Rampage]

Bookitty's play has felt town, and the arguments against her right now are pretty weak.

Not Jordan, Bookitty.

[Setael]

Why should I offer a defense of Bookitty? I'd much rather find scum and let Bookitty defend herself.

By the way, ABR what are your current thoughts on Unright? If you no longer think he's scum, what changed your mind? You had good reasons to vote him once upon a time. Are they no longer valid?

[Albert B. Rampage]

Right, I voted him in my 5th post and unvoted him on the 7th. Bookitty is extremely scummy though:

1) Scum need to look like they are trying to catch scum.
2) Scum fabricate excuses to claim that they find someone suspicious. These excuses can be pinpointed using common sense.

Bookitty defies common sense by trying to distort a very clear thought process* and disparages pete D who I don't think anyone has even attacked yet.

3) Scum try to look suspicious of someone that is in no danger of being lynched so they are uninvolved with the lynch of a townie.

Then she "paces" my reality, a subtle manipulation technique studied in NLP:

But I can see on a reread how you would think that pete d was saying we should just lynch Battle Mage now.

IOW she feigns agreeing with me to make me think we are on the same page even though she logically claims to be on opposite sides from me. AKA appeasing me and sweeping it under the rug, as you might say.

Still, your weird "framer" thing is just beyond me. Maybe you can explain better who the town framer is, in your scenario. And why town would frame someone, in the first place.

Then she deviates the attention on something else in a quick ninja move to gtfo from the attention on her.

5) Scum uses manipulation and deceit to achieve their nefarious ends.

There you go. I can understand that you didn't make a big deal out of what seemed at first as an innocent mistake on Pete D's intentions, but I hope I have exposed my reasons clearly enough.

*if we say we will lynch BM tomorrow, the scum won't NK him, which is an very relevant point that the mafia would think of regardless of whether we say it or not

[Albert B. Rampage]

Looking at my post, it doesn't seem much. And TBH I am not in my most lucid state right now. However this is the scummiest looking post in the entire game:

I'm really tempted to vote for pete d based on this.

If you're tempted to vote, then why don't you do so ? Looking for town approval ? Trying

It looks to me like an excuse in advance for Battle Mage not being nightkilled.

This makes no sense. What does bookitty expect, that Pete D arrives on the morning of day 2 and go "SEE I TOLD YOU THEY WOULD KEEP HIM ALIVE!!" ? PUH-LEASE. That is a terrible misinterpretation of his post.

The reason for Mafia to get rid of doc-Battle Mage is the same as for any other doctor... because they don't want their nightkill interfered with. That doesn't change just because Battle Mage is likely to be lynched tomorrow. Additionally, if Battle Mage is scum, you've just provided an excuse for him when he's not nightkilled.

Again spouting things that look good on paper but actually don't make sense. Why would the mafia need an 'excuse' to kill or not to kill someone ?

Why would you suggest the scum-strategy you employed in a previous game if you're town, pete d?

Gross misrepresentation of the situation - one that can only be done deliberately.

[Albert B. Rampage]

EBWOP

Trying to seed a future vote ?*

I didn't find it especially clear.

Is ABR right? Is suggesting scum strategies generally considered a pro-town tell, and not to be questioned? I'd like some other people to weigh in on this point.

This is equally horrendous. Seeing this, I would be freaked out if I were her mafia partners. What kind of horror-movie-worthy post is this ? How can you make such a daring attempt at discrediting someone with pseudo-rhetoric and false dichotomies ?

[Bookitty]

Bookitty defies common sense by trying to distort a very clear thought process* and disparages pete D who I don't think anyone has even attacked yet.

This clearly isn't true, and betrays that you haven't even really read the thread. Why is this?

At least two people have attacked pete d. I myself said he was one of my three main suspects quite a while back. I said why. So this is just clearly untrue.

3) Scum try to look suspicious of someone that is in no danger of being lynched so they are uninvolved with the lynch of a townie.

Why are you so certain pete d is a townie? And before that, my vote was on Battle Mage, taken off because of his claim. Are you now arguing that Battle Mage was obviously a townie?

Then she "paces" my reality, a subtle manipulation technique studied in NLP:

What is NLP? I said that I thought I understood your logic. But since you're already arguing that pete d is a townie unsuspected by anyone previously (which is untrue), then I'd ask, why would I move my vote from someone you were arguing was scum in order to START a lynch wagon on someone you claim is a townie?

IOW she feigns agreeing with me to make me think we are on the same page even though she logically claims to be on opposite sides from me. AKA appeasing me and sweeping it under the rug, as you might say.

I have no clue what you're getting at here, either. I thought I might understand your point, but since I wasn't assuming pete d was a townie, I didn't have your automatic "oh, he's obviously town" response. I had ALREADY stated my suspicions of him, which were MUCH less than my suspicions of Battle Mage at the time, but since Battle Mage claimed I felt I had to go back to square one and reread, and I'm in the process of doing that. Something that you might want to do, before you misrepresent the situation any further, as in your statement that no one had attacked pete d all game.

The reason I didn't vote for pete d was that I didn't have time to do a thorough reread. I wanted HIM to answer for his post, something he STILL has not done, and is unlikely to do since you're answering for him.

[Setael]

*if we say we will lynch BM tomorrow, the scum won't NK him, which is an very relevant point that the mafia would think of regardless of whether we say it or not

Agreed. I don't think we should lynch BM tomorrow, either, but that doesn't mean the entire town will agree with me. So scum don't know for sure if we'll lynch BM tomorrow or not since we don't even know yet.

I don't think Bookitty is the lynch for today. I'd much rather lynch anyone on my scum list.

[Albert B. Rampage]

^ NLP is Neuro linguistic programming.

---

Bookitty asks:

Why are you so certain pete d is a townie? And before that, my vote was on Battle Mage, taken off because of his claim. Are you now arguing that Battle Mage was obviously a townie?

Reality hits:

She is taking me out of context as I am not saying BM is 100% townie, I am saying that you are moving from someone who is in danger from being lynched to someone who is not. Even if you previously raised an eyebrow at Pete, this, imo, only shows how much you are hanging on to a random target you gave yourself as mafia. It means that you planted the seeds early. Because you are a manipulative witch (no offense).

Bookitty asks:

why would I move my vote from someone you were arguing was scum in order to START a lynch wagon on someone you claim is a townie?

Reality hits:

You

started

continued attacking a player in an extremely non-committal, uninvolved, unassuming way, showed by your constant seeding: "I'm tempted to vote him", keep asking the town what it thinks, not pushing the wagon, basically not putting your money where your mouth is.



In contrast, look at my case on you. I truly believe it is the be-all end-all of the day, because your posts on page 19

scream

scum (anyone who doesn't believe me can just go back and look).

The difference between you and me is that I BELIEVE in this case I'm making. It is fine for a townie to be unsure of their suspicions, that's not what I'm arguing. But you are making HUGE misjudgments that, if true, would warrant an immediate bandwagon. Someone that suggests scum strategy during the day, that gives excuses for the scum to act with more liberty, etc. deserved an immediate vote from the attacker AND at least several other players from the claims you've made.

But your claims aren't logical.

People don't agree with me. They just disagree with

you

. Of course you would win a popularity poll if we were to go back-to-back, but this isn't about that. I am accusing you of

serious charges

, as serious as your charges on Pete D. But mine are closer to reality and hit home with players and a bulb lit within them that said "A-ha! I saw that too!"

I don't know if you are scum, but you are as close as it gets without the mod telling us.

[Bookitty]

ABR:

You've thought every case you've had, in this game at least, to be the "be-all end-all". You were convinced enough that Battle Mage was scum to try to wagon him despite his claim, and now you're saying "I am not saying BM is 100% townie"... what happened to "lynch him anyway"?

You've been wrong about your facts already in attacking me. Maybe your certainty isn't all it's cracked up to be, when it can change so radically without any explanation.

[Albert B. Rampage]

ABR:

You've thought every case you've had, in this game at least, to be the "be-all end-all". You were convinced enough that Battle Mage was scum to try to wagon him despite his claim, and now you're saying "I am not saying BM is 100% townie"... what happened to "lynch him anyway"?

AGAIN WITH THE NINJA MOVES. My point is not that I am always right, my point is that I back up what I say with my reasoning and

my vote

. Like with Unright, like with BM, whenever I said something I pushed the wagon. Something you've failed to do. You fail at even appearing like you want Pete D lynched. Nowhere do you say you want him lynched. You are too cowardly a mafia to try that.

[Albert B. Rampage]

And don't you straw man me with the 'your facts are wrong'. Let's take a look at the

ONLY

place where I got a fact wrong:

Bookitty defies common sense by trying to distort a very clear thought process* and disparages pete D who I don't think anyone has even attacked yet.

At least two people have attacked pete d. I myself said he was one of my three main suspects quite a while back. I said why. So this is just clearly untrue.

The argument is that she clearly misrepresented Pete D - no one is arguing that now. And I mention that "I don't think anyone has attacked yet", meaning he wasn't under the kind of scrutiny that other players were.

Please, your argument is pathetic. You refuse to answer relevant points and instead focus on details that I am vaguely recalling, and then present that as my position in an attempt to fool someone who would only quickly skim through the debate.

You are an abomination of scumminess.

Setael, please help this young grasshopper defend herself ???? Clearly you think she is town, and yet you have mysteriously withheld all your thoughts on the matter, so why don't you dignify us with a response to posts 482, 483 and 484.

[Albert B. Rampage]

Sorry for jumping from 3rd person to first person perspective, I am at a loss for words in front of this titanic monument of scumminess.

[Bookitty]

I wanted Battle Mage lynched during the posts where I previously expressed my suspicions of pete d. To my knowledge, I have but one vote, and I put it where I felt most certain of hitting scum. I VOTED for Battle Mage, and I said exactly why. I pushed the wagon I was sure of. You go from "lynch Battle Mage anyway" to "not saying BM is 100% townie" without any explanation of this change at all.

Right now, I am STILL in the process of a detailed reread, and I am not someone who just puts a vote on someone randomly and decides to lynch them based on one post. Your playstyle may be oriented toward lynching someone regardless. Mine is NOT. I look at the evidence, I present it, and I vote where I feel some degree of confidence, as opposed to just assuming things and stating them as fact, the way that you have done, and then placing a vote based on your incorrect assumptions.

I'm not going to place a vote just because you call names and use impressive sounding acronyms. I'm going to do it when I feel I have a decent case against someone, and if I see something I disagree with, I'm going to ask for an explanation for it. From pete d, from you, from anyone. And AFTER they've had the chance to respond, I might vote for them, but I'm not going to do it as my first response, and then make up a lot of reasons that in retrospect, you had this to say about: "Looking at my post, it doesn't seem much."

[Setael]

Setael, please help this young grasshopper defend herself ???? Clearly you think she is town, and yet you have mysteriously withheld all your thoughts on the matter, so why don't you dignify us with a response to posts 482, 483 and 484.

So odd. You'd think I was the only one not voting Bookitty. How about, instead, we ask for ALL players' take on this exchange between you and Bookitty?

[Albert B. Rampage]

Setael, please help this young grasshopper defend herself ???? Clearly you think she is town, and yet you have mysteriously withheld all your thoughts on the matter, so why don't you dignify us with a response to posts 482, 483 and 484.

So odd. You'd think I was the only one not voting Bookitty. How about, instead, we ask for ALL players' take on this exchange between you and Bookitty?

Yeah I sounded harsher than I meant to on Bookitty (I'm sorry Bookitty).

But look at it this way, you have again and again said that you don't find her scummy, and since you are a replacement we don't have a clear idea on your methodology yet. Tell me why you think 482 to 484 is not sufficient. Tell me the loopholes. Tell me something,

anything

, just don't go around trying to drown an argument before everyone has acknowledged based on absolutely nothing.

[Bookitty]

Yeah I sounded harsher than I meant to on Bookitty (I'm sorry Bookitty).

No offense taken.

[Setael]

But look at it this way, you have again and again said that you don't find her scummy, and since you are a replacement we don't have a clear idea on your methodology yet. Tell me why you think 482 to 484 is not sufficient. Tell me the loopholes. Tell me something, anything, just don't go around trying to drown an argument before everyone has acknowledged based on absolutely nothing.

Hmmm... my intention is not to drown your arguments. I just think there are better places for my vote. You could be right about Boo, but one reason I think you're wrong is I think vollkan might be scum and he's supporting your wagon in a non-bussing kind of way. In my mind, that undermines the Bookitty wagon.

What do you think of vollkan ABR? Do you agree that he's been wishy washy?

As for your 482, you've listed several things "scum do" and then fit Boo's play into them. You could take any player in this game and find something they've done that fits under those. I agree that Bookitty's point against pete D wasn't strong. I don't agree with her. I don't think pete D is scum. However, the fact that her point isn't strong does not make her scum.

So then in 483 you admit it doesn't look like much, but then say that the scummiest post in the game so far is when Bookitty said she was tempted to vote pete D for it but didn't. I very much disagree that this statement is the scummiest thing in the game. How is that different from FOSing? How is it different from the FOS vollkan put on Bookitty in post 475? He's saying he thinks she's scum, but isn't voting her. What's the difference? I actually think vollkan's is worse, since it's more noncommital and allows him to hide behind your argument. It feels like he's trying to stay on everyone's good side to avoid negative attention. Bookitty's pete D points, on the other hand, as you said yourself were on a player no one had stated suspicion of. Town is more likely to do that than scum because it's not as safe.

As for 484:

I didn't find it especially clear.

Is ABR right? Is suggesting scum strategies generally considered a pro-town tell, and not to be questioned? I'd like some other people to weigh in on this point.

This is equally horrendous. Seeing this, I would be freaked out if I were her mafia partners. What kind of horror-movie-worthy post is this ? How can you make such a daring attempt at discrediting someone with pseudo-rhetoric and false dichotomies ?

Where you see this as a scum tell, I think it's more likely to be said by town who isn't worried about "freaking out their partners."

So anyway I have a town read on Bookitty, and I think the case on her is weak. I could be wrong about her, but I think there are scummier people to be focusing on right now, one of which is Unright. He's gotten all quiet now that he's out of the spotlight. Maybe he's worried he'll slip up again. I'd really like to see what happens if he gets pressured again. WHO'S WITH ME?!

[pete d]

Post 453 was a direct response to ckd's fallacious argument. Granted, I didn't actually answer his question.

Ah. Well, apparently nobody else wanted to vote Nekka, and I'm not so sure about ckd anymore. Regardless, something needed to happen, the game was dragging, so I joined the BM wagon in preference to the Jordan wagon.

The reasons I based my vote off were: his WIFOM post, the early exaggerations (these points I already brought up); also working from my Nekka suspicions, I disagreed with his conclusions on Nekka being "probably protown", and Nekka was seemingly reluctant to vote BM. bookitty wagoned BM later, but this could easily have been bussing, and the unvote seemed to agree with this possibility.

Unvote, Vote: Gage btw. Giving up scumtell, and licence to lurk, rolled into one.

This post didn't strike me well, it seemed a bit wagonny.

So there it is. As for the doc claim, I don't think it warranted an unvote (eg if he claimed cop I would have unvoted straight away).

unvote, vote: bookitty

. The bookitty wagon makes me happy.

The reason I didn't vote for pete d was that I didn't have time to do a thorough reread. I wanted HIM to answer for his post, something he STILL has not done, and is unlikely to do since you're answering for him.

Or maybe I just haven't been on as much lately.

That said, I think what Pete D didnt say could be viewed as scummy. I said I didnt understand why people are still voting the claim doc...instead of answering me (like you blatantly did ABR) he came back with this response...

Fair enough, however I had previously addressed this

[Gage]

Picking up my prod. Will reread later.

[Dragon Phoenix]

It is later.