EPTOn March 25 2010 12:00 Abenson wrote:
Note: I hereby confirm that I am indeed in a mason with ~OpZ~
Note: I hereby confirm that I am indeed in a mason with ~OpZ~
Thank you for confirming.
He's been active in terms of defending L early on in the game, when we were bickering whether or not to kill him day 1
Also, he seems to be quite intent on pushing for a lynch of random people, jumping from one person to the next
This is after ~OpZ~ saved my ass and managed to convince many that I am town.
It should also be noted that he voted for me, L, RoL, nemy off the top of my head.
JSpazz's post count has been near the middle. He may be active, but he hasn't posted anything that I would count as extremely helpful. The only thing he has posted is his opinion on the matter and nothing analytic.
Conclusion: Like ~OpZ~, I am hereby suggesting JSpazz as a lynch victim.
Also, he seems to be quite intent on pushing for a lynch of random people, jumping from one person to the next
This is after ~OpZ~ saved my ass and managed to convince many that I am town.
It should also be noted that he voted for me, L, RoL, nemy off the top of my head.
JSpazz's post count has been near the middle. He may be active, but he hasn't posted anything that I would count as extremely helpful. The only thing he has posted is his opinion on the matter and nothing analytic.
Conclusion: Like ~OpZ~, I am hereby suggesting JSpazz as a lynch victim.
I am a bit suspicious of his L vote. In fact, I’m a bit suspicious of people who voted L. Yeah, he was inactive, and was going to be for the whole first day had RoL not launched a nuke, but we knew he was going to back and contributing (though I suppose this is debatable).
On March 25 2010 12:00 johnnyspazz wrote:
even if caller turns up mafia, we should lynch RoL for being dumb. he's obviously shown that he has no self control and there's a chance he has more than one nuke. we shouldn't give him the opportunity to launch another one.
also i think if his nuke is a dud, we should lynch him anyway.
even if caller turns up mafia, we should lynch RoL for being dumb. he's obviously shown that he has no self control and there's a chance he has more than one nuke. we shouldn't give him the opportunity to launch another one.
also i think if his nuke is a dud, we should lynch him anyway.
This is what I’m worried about. RoL launched a nuke simply because he was getting majority votes. What’s to prevent him from launching another one if we end up voting him again, ie
On March 25 2010 12:10 Zona wrote:
RebirthOfLegend. Awesome player.
And worse - you seem to stop caring about winning (helping your side win) the moment your "life" is in danger by making boneheaded moves
RebirthOfLegend. Awesome player.
And worse - you seem to stop caring about winning (helping your side win) the moment your "life" is in danger by making boneheaded moves
There’s nothing to prevent him launching another nuke – worse yet, if we don’t establish his side tonight and he lives, we’re going to be having the same argument again the next time he does it [Though admittedly, it’s going to be heavily stacked against his favor for launching 2 nukes when he’s about to die].
I’m not even going to respond to BM’s attempt with real life countries.
Funny video fishball.
On March 25 2010 12:38 johnnyspazz wrote:
yeah i have no idea why people like xelin are abstaining. no matter how innocent RoL might be, we can't excuse play that's anti-town. i'm using the FoS on Xelin because i think he's just trying to skate under the radar by abstaining.
yeah i have no idea why people like xelin are abstaining. no matter how innocent RoL might be, we can't excuse play that's anti-town. i'm using the FoS on Xelin because i think he's just trying to skate under the radar by abstaining.
On March 25 2010 12:41 XeliN wrote:
I'm trying to skate under no radar, I'm not going to vote for someone I believe to be innocent, and what is the FoS?
I'm trying to skate under no radar, I'm not going to vote for someone I believe to be innocent, and what is the FoS?
This. I’ll say this right now. At this point, anybody who abstains is suspicious. There may be a variety of roles that interact with vote lists, and if you’re not on a votelist, then that information isn’t out there. We have no information about how many scum is out there. If there is a vote list checker, we can use that information to narrow down and figure out who’s scum.
If you believe RoL is innocent, that’s fine, but may I add that you agreed to the lynch nukers plan especially since you did not want the nukers to get counter-nuked, unless you believe your optimal plan isn’t optimal. What I find even more funny, is that you’re fine with lynching him on the basis of inactivity, but retract your lynch when he launches a nuke? It’s not because he has no support from anybody – it’s because he launched a fucking nuke which is what we’re trying to avoid.
Until I see a better plan to deal with nukers, I’m going to auto-lynch every person who launches a nuke that the town doesn’t support and that won’t change at all as unsupported nukes are dangerous to the town.
On March 25 2010 13:30 Zona wrote:
Okay. "The mafia and the town have to avoid nuking because..." and "saying that nuking is anti-town is fucking dumb." Am I the only one to see the contradiction here, in two sentences right next to each other? The town has to avoid nuking, but saying nuking is bad is dumb? In any case the town has gone through the reasoning very thoroughly already, and has come to the conclusion that nuking first is not a good idea for town members.
Okay. "The mafia and the town have to avoid nuking because..." and "saying that nuking is anti-town is fucking dumb." Am I the only one to see the contradiction here, in two sentences right next to each other? The town has to avoid nuking, but saying nuking is bad is dumb? In any case the town has gone through the reasoning very thoroughly already, and has come to the conclusion that nuking first is not a good idea for town members.
To summarize: Caller's worth nuking because he was inactive, but you're NOT worth lynching because you were inactive.
I am a bit confused about this too. If you had produced content prior to being lynched, then this wouldn’t have happened. The fact that people have 48 hours in total to provide content for the day means a lot.
On March 25 2010 13:48 Zona wrote:
Hey, if you're a medic, please read this:
Hey, if you're a medic, please read this:
I don’t necessarily like this for various reasons, mainly a centralization of medics, not necessarily so much the ego of players. But I do agree that you have been generating a lot of good stuff and are a valid person to protect. Just keep in mind though that don’t go purely off post count for future possible protection as some people may post not a whole lot in terms of count, but can produce good points within a few. And some people just have different styles of posting, as I’m sure BM is going to be top poster coming soon tt
On March 25 2010 13:51 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
Just to respond to this real quick. It wasn't some amazing revelation. You must of clearly thought of the possibility that I was indeed scum or third party, but that adding an extra player for balance sake would most likely be a weak townie since it would have much less of an effect on the game. Since a simple pointing that out statement changed your mind it was just kind of like... like you didn't think of that already? Moment. Seemed like you might of regretted saying it. Maybe I was just thinking about it too much, who knows.
Just to respond to this real quick. It wasn't some amazing revelation. You must of clearly thought of the possibility that I was indeed scum or third party, but that adding an extra player for balance sake would most likely be a weak townie since it would have much less of an effect on the game. Since a simple pointing that out statement changed your mind it was just kind of like... like you didn't think of that already? Moment. Seemed like you might of regretted saying it. Maybe I was just thinking about it too much, who knows.
It’s just that people have different hosting styles and he may not be accustomed to how much of a fgt Ace is when he doesn’t ward the jungle ;3
You missed the point, I said why are you lynching me for being inactive on a whim of sorts and I said that the reason caller was suspicious was NOT because of inactivity, but because of the content of his posts and what I would normally expect. He never mentioned being distracted by anything else like school, etc. He was just posting noncontent which is generally considered mafiaish behavior but he usually gets away with it because he is one of the players who works more behind the scenes.
I suppose your claim is a bit more legitimate, though don’t other players too? It’d be nice to look at the other people who post in similar manners in addition to Caller.
On March 25 2010 14:59 meeple wrote:
I've said before that I don't agree usually with lynching most inactive, I mean it tells us nothing about the person or possible ties.
I don't know why Zona was so pushy for it, since there are obviously some better targets when we consider that we have two basically confirmed townies and a better choice would be to sift through the votes for Abenson(yes I know I'm on that list...) and see who tried to push the bandwagon.
I've said before that I don't agree usually with lynching most inactive, I mean it tells us nothing about the person or possible ties.
I don't know why Zona was so pushy for it, since there are obviously some better targets when we consider that we have two basically confirmed townies and a better choice would be to sift through the votes for Abenson(yes I know I'm on that list...) and see who tried to push the bandwagon.
The main premise behind lynching inactives is to generate discussion which gives us more tells to look at. If people aren’t posting, and we allow them to remain that way, then mafia can lurk amongst them and then we have to decide ‘Well, it could just be an inactive townie’ or ‘That guy’s scum’. If everybody’s posting content and such though, we have more to look at sort of like ‘here’s where you fucked up’.
Having said that I'm rather glad that RoL launched the nuke... since it gives us a little more time to consider what the hell just went on here. There's no reason to lynch him for "being dumb" or not reading the rules to their fullest extent. It's kinda a weird game, and not really that similar to traditional mafia so of course there will be miscommunications.
I’m a bit confused – I do hope that the *only* reason you’re glad is because it gives us more time to talk and not because we’ll have two people die today, both of which could’ve been avoided had the expected lynch target posted content earlier. If you’re glad that a nuke is in the air and is about to kill someone, then you know that we’ll have a few words as I seriously hope that you do not expect people to launch nukes everyday just so we can have an extra 24 hours of discussion.
On March 25 2010 15:12 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
Just to respond to you, I never agreed to that policy. It seemed really retarded. The town will never be on a 100% consensus for a lynch, let alone a nuke that [could] lose us the game. It seemed like a real bullshit cop out to me. and no lynching period was even dumber. Its a power we should utilize.
Seriously? Who the fuck ever expects even 55% of the town to agree on nuking a single person?
Just to respond to you, I never agreed to that policy. It seemed really retarded. The town will never be on a 100% consensus for a lynch, let alone a nuke that [could] lose us the game. It seemed like a real bullshit cop out to me. and no lynching period was even dumber. Its a power we should utilize.
Seriously? Who the fuck ever expects even 55% of the town to agree on nuking a single person?
I think this is bullshit. It’s not that we need 100% or anything, nuke applications are almost the same as a lynch. If we need majority vote for the lynch, then we can apply the same mechanics to the nuke. We were going to get majority on Abenson until OpZ came in with a role claim, and although I may have been a bit hasty in saying that we should lynch Abenson and that would clear OpZ, as Vers said that mainly applies more to DTs who claim red, and since Abenson has posted confirmation, I’m willing to believe those two as truly being Masons.
On March 25 2010 15:36 meeple wrote:
Well... as this game goes on, that much is becoming more clear. It took some desperation to get a majority vote, so getting everyone to agree on a nuke is tough in any case.
Well... as this game goes on, that much is becoming more clear. It took some desperation to get a majority vote, so getting everyone to agree on a nuke is tough in any case.
The issue with this though is that this is day 1 where we just throw out a lynch basically. While nukes are definitely put with more deliberation.
For me... I'm going to change my vote to ##vote tree.hugger
He has very few posts in the thread, and they center around lynching L because he'll be inactive. More than anything, I want him to step up and post more and defend himself.
He has very few posts in the thread, and they center around lynching L because he'll be inactive. More than anything, I want him to step up and post more and defend himself.
I do agree that this is something to look at and I’ll be looking through the thread as I go through the last 4 pages to see if he has posted. But this is a major thing – a nuke has gone off and people aren’t posting about it. This just shows that many people are equally inactive; at least L had a reason. I’ll take a look into people who had voted for L on the basis of inactivity and have not even put one original idea in their posts about the recent events.
On March 25 2010 15:43 meeple wrote:
I say I'm glad that the nuke is launched because it gives me more time to read and catch up and post before my ill-advised vote for Abenson goes through, but that was just kind of a selfish statement. I didn't mean that its better for the town if people nuke, and I've always been against early nukes so I don't support RoL's decision.
I say I'm glad that the nuke is launched because it gives me more time to read and catch up and post before my ill-advised vote for Abenson goes through, but that was just kind of a selfish statement. I didn't mean that its better for the town if people nuke, and I've always been against early nukes so I don't support RoL's decision.
Thank you for clarification, I’ll keep this in mind.
On March 25 2010 15:52 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
Anyway if you also act stingy with nukes you allow the Mafia to be more liberal with them later on, since there is no radiation threat yet.
Anyway if you also act stingy with nukes you allow the Mafia to be more liberal with them later on, since there is no radiation threat yet.
I’d just like to point out that, like Zona said, we have antinukes to deal with late game mafia nukes. On top of that – you seem to forget about the possible existence of a third party that wins if radiation threshold gets reached. If we use nukes in an effort to bump up ToD so that mafia can’t use nukes, then that allows a third party to be all ‘sup fgts, we win’
On March 25 2010 16:04 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
Your whole argument seems to be based upon the idea that
A) ToD is something that nobody wants to reach, so
B) We should get the ToD up as fast as possible so that scum can’t use it to their advantage
The problem with these two assumptions is that A) there may be in fact a third party that wants ToD to be reached, and B) scum can use *this* to their advantage, and claim “well, we are trying to forcefully rise up ToD to its max, right?”
As for your claim about naming one suspicious thing besides not posting – this is mafia, isn’t this what early lynches are really based upon? Isn’t this what we *always* advocate in an effort to get people to post content and put their thoughts out there for us to look at?
On March 25 2010 18:15 meeple wrote:
Voting for RoL initially was based on the exact same logic as voting for L... they were both rather inactive, although L for different reasons. Why would you defend L so much, and yet when the idea came up to lynch RoL on the basis of inactivity you were all for it.
Voting for RoL initially was based on the exact same logic as voting for L... they were both rather inactive, although L for different reasons. Why would you defend L so much, and yet when the idea came up to lynch RoL on the basis of inactivity you were all for it.
The reason why people defend L is because exactly what you stated – he had a different reason out of his control (though I suppose it was his fault) that he couldn’t post while others who are inactive do not. How many situations come up that you do not know in advance that would require 48 hours of your time?
On March 26 2010 01:03 ~OpZ~ wrote:
Thoughts on Nemy/Jspazz versatile?
Thoughts on Nemy/Jspazz versatile?
I don’t have much to say about nemy other than that I can’t remember offhand any useful posts he’s made actually. If someone would like to point this out to the contrary, go ahead. As for johnny, it’s a bit iffy. But that’s mainly because of his early vote. To be honest, I don’t quite remember him that much either in terms of posts, so I’ll go back and try to see if I maybe forgot something out of these two players.
On March 26 2010 01:20 haster27 wrote:
My position is that unless there are clear suspect, we should maintain our vote on RoL. This is solely because of his nuke launch; had we not discussed that showing unwillingness to punish the player from non-consensus lynching will quickly collapse this Town into state of Wild Wild West? If we let him go off free, what prevents any random Townie or random Mafia from suddenly nuking someone with somewhat convincing reasoning?
My position is that unless there are clear suspect, we should maintain our vote on RoL. This is solely because of his nuke launch; had we not discussed that showing unwillingness to punish the player from non-consensus lynching will quickly collapse this Town into state of Wild Wild West? If we let him go off free, what prevents any random Townie or random Mafia from suddenly nuking someone with somewhat convincing reasoning?
I agree. We have to construct order. We are day one, and we have a nuke in the air, and people still aren’t in agreement with each other in terms of how to handle this nuke. If we set down a solid foundation that remains flexible early on, we can always refer back to it and lynch/put suspicion on people who don’t follow this. I’m not necessarily saying we all need to act like sheep in this respect, but at the very least, I’d like to see a set of rules that we can all agree to follow, especially concerning nukes. If we have a policy that states “no nukes just because you are about to be lynched” that everybody agrees to follow, then when someone nukes when they’re about to be lynched, then we can just shoot it down without worry and lynch that person. We won’t have to devolve into 5 page discussions about someone’s innocence or guilt if we just follow these rules.
On March 26 2010 03:13 Caller wrote:
Having just returned from the task of overseeing the new construction of a Peace Plaza, I have returned to see my advisers frightened of this incoming missile. While I must return to finish the celebration of its opening (to which you are all invited to attend), I strongly recommend that one of our peaceful neighbors shoot down this abomination of peace with a lance of antinuke. If my people are able to survive this nuclear horror, then perchance you mayth see whyth I requestedth this so and why it is in all of our best interest to prevent the detonation and spread of the radiation.
May God be With Us.
Having just returned from the task of overseeing the new construction of a Peace Plaza, I have returned to see my advisers frightened of this incoming missile. While I must return to finish the celebration of its opening (to which you are all invited to attend), I strongly recommend that one of our peaceful neighbors shoot down this abomination of peace with a lance of antinuke. If my people are able to survive this nuclear horror, then perchance you mayth see whyth I requestedth this so and why it is in all of our best interest to prevent the detonation and spread of the radiation.
May God be With Us.
I lol’d
On March 26 2010 05:14 Bill Murray wrote:
I would also like to propose Nikon as a next lynch candidate. He hasn't posted for about 10 pages, his ~4 posts have a combined less than 100 words, it is good to put the FoS on someone, and we can see if his Conspiracy buddies will come out of the woodworks to protect him and defend him.
I would also like to propose Nikon as a next lynch candidate. He hasn't posted for about 10 pages, his ~4 posts have a combined less than 100 words, it is good to put the FoS on someone, and we can see if his Conspiracy buddies will come out of the woodworks to protect him and defend him.
I am a bit surprised seeing this. I do feel that this is something to keep in mind. Though I believe the reasoning behind the lynching of RoL was because Abenson was Mason as per OpZ’s claim which was his previous vote. An attempt to save one mafia while revealing two is a very poor idea so it can be assumed that Abenson and OpZ are valid in their Mason claim. Since Nikon doesn’t believe L is scum, and that Abenson is more or less cleared of suspicion, I believe the only other thing he had to go with is RoL as I think he may have had 3 or 4 votes on him at that point? Keep in mind that you also had voted for RoL after Nikon voted, 7 minutes after too.
On March 26 2010 05:42 L wrote:
The simplest way is to use say something in the open that is qualified by something only Opz would know.
Then again, I guess most people don't know anything to use in that manner. Granted the fact that this is a sc site, ask him to play some games, then develop a conditional based on the results of the games.
If we went 5-0 i'm a dt
if we went 4-1 i'm a townie
if we went 3-2 i'm USSR and i have a billion nukes.
You can easily get by the restrictions on PMs if you know you can code your information based on something that only the other player would know.
The simplest way is to use say something in the open that is qualified by something only Opz would know.
Then again, I guess most people don't know anything to use in that manner. Granted the fact that this is a sc site, ask him to play some games, then develop a conditional based on the results of the games.
If we went 5-0 i'm a dt
if we went 4-1 i'm a townie
if we went 3-2 i'm USSR and i have a billion nukes.
You can easily get by the restrictions on PMs if you know you can code your information based on something that only the other player would know.
I’m going to say that this is going against the spirit of the game. The whole point “No PMing” isn’t to simply avoid PMing. It’s to avoid outside communication *entirely*, whether it’s through methods of games, HoN lobbies, SC2 beta lobbies, shit like that. If Ace has a different opinion, then I’d like to see it, but I just feel that this is going against the whole no communication thing.
On March 26 2010 05:46 L wrote:
Oh yeah, ##Vote tree.hugger
Kid clearly wanted to wagon me. I'd much prefer that we nuke the shit out of RoL and use anti-nukes on any retaliatory strikes. If he's town he shouldn't throw extra nukes out. If he's mafia, good. 2 seems like a good number of missiles.
Oh yeah, ##Vote tree.hugger
Kid clearly wanted to wagon me. I'd much prefer that we nuke the shit out of RoL and use anti-nukes on any retaliatory strikes. If he's town he shouldn't throw extra nukes out. If he's mafia, good. 2 seems like a good number of missiles.
His reasoning was to vote you to “avoid the eventual abrasive spam that will descend on this thread in two days time.” Second vote in? I’m surprised you haven’t said anything about Amber who initiated it saying you’d be an easy target. Although I feel he is suspicious as I’ll mention a bit later, I’m just concerned that you don’t talk about Amber at all, though I suppose it’s because you think he’s garbage.
On March 26 2010 06:50 L wrote:
So essentially nuking RoL allows us to ask, as a town, a question to him: Are you green and believe Caller's red? If so, take the nuke in the face, die, and that's that. If you're red and retaliate? We will shoot down ALL your missiles, including the one directed at Caller.
So essentially nuking RoL allows us to ask, as a town, a question to him: Are you green and believe Caller's red? If so, take the nuke in the face, die, and that's that. If you're red and retaliate? We will shoot down ALL your missiles, including the one directed at Caller.
This seems to have claim, though I think if you truly believed this, you would’ve launched the nuke yourself and prolonged the day by another 24 hours, either that or you’re afraid that you’ll get killed like RoL.
Lynching RoL and nuking tree.hugger is precisely what I do not want to do; checking if we can change votes is a barometer of activity, for one. Additionally, if tree.hugger is indeed mafia, then he's likely to throw off as many retaliatory nukes as possible. Note how the lurker responds nearly immediately when called out. RoL by contrast might even be out of nukes by this point; between him and tree.hugger you need to assess if you believe RoL is town. If you do, your plan is concretely inferior by miles.
I do think it’s a bit suspicious that tree.hugger comes out shortly after his name is mentioned by L. When Meeple or Zona [I believe it was Zona] mentioned him, I would’ve expected for tree.hugger to at least acknowledge something other than holding some type of grudge against L for any previous game. And from what I can see from the next page or two, he hasn’t even posted anything else other than having a hatred for L which can be solved by discrediting him.
If I'm 99% certain that you're mafia, but I can't get the town to listen to me, its actually in my best interest to nuke against the town's will and then take the lynch in the face. That is NOT the type of incentive scheme we want going. We need to concretely dissuade ANYONE from throwing a nuke by making the penalty as close to "everyone loses" as possible.
Except there may be a third party out there that relies on this as mentioned before.
I do agree with the general nuke RoL sentiment and lynch tree hugger, though I don’t believe we could get enough swing for it barring another nuke and some time to discuss. It is a very solid plan and it seems you’ve given good thought into it.
On March 26 2010 08:29 L wrote:
Nope.
And since I see no rules against this:
##nuke: L
I have no nukes, sup. While I'd love to keep the fact that I have no nukes a secret to dissuade morans from throwing nuclear bomblets at my precious face, I will have to do what I have to do.
If we ever need a day extended, I can now bomb myself.
Nope.
And since I see no rules against this:
##nuke: L
I have no nukes, sup. While I'd love to keep the fact that I have no nukes a secret to dissuade morans from throwing nuclear bomblets at my precious face, I will have to do what I have to do.
If we ever need a day extended, I can now bomb myself.
Oh wow. This is pretty ballsy. I wish it were on someone else because I’m not sure if Ace will allow it like haster has said, though I do believe that you do in fact have no nukes and we can use that to our advantage to extend the day if needed.
On March 26 2010 09:04 tree.hugger wrote:
There will be consequences for stupid bandwagon votes.
Also, seriously, L comes back and the everybody immediately goes down on bended knee and swears fealty to our returned savior? Good grief.
This unwavering loyalty to the second coming of L is nauseating. The bro got banned for being annoying and unhelpful, as per the usual, and if anyone needs evidence otherwise, checking the last few mafia games he's played should prove this quality beyond a shadow of a doubt. And yet, L comes back, full of the typical self-righteous revenge, and immediately his word becomes gospel.
If anything, those who jumped so readily on L's bandwagon of confusion are to be most distrusted.
There will be consequences for stupid bandwagon votes.
Also, seriously, L comes back and the everybody immediately goes down on bended knee and swears fealty to our returned savior? Good grief.
This unwavering loyalty to the second coming of L is nauseating. The bro got banned for being annoying and unhelpful, as per the usual, and if anyone needs evidence otherwise, checking the last few mafia games he's played should prove this quality beyond a shadow of a doubt. And yet, L comes back, full of the typical self-righteous revenge, and immediately his word becomes gospel.
If anything, those who jumped so readily on L's bandwagon of confusion are to be most distrusted.
He was banned for being a douche in the healthcare reform thread. Hardly related to mafia.
On March 26 2010 09:06 Ace wrote:
General! The nuke from Rebirthoflegend heading towards Caller has been shot down! We do not know who did it, but we know that the shot came from Japan!
General! The nuke from Rebirthoflegend heading towards Caller has been shot down! We do not know who did it, but we know that the shot came from Japan!
This is something to keep in mind.
L(2)
tree.hugger
RebirthofLegend
Abenson(1)
Amber[LighT]
Rebirthoflegend(15)
Zona
haster27
Elemenope
Nikon
Bill Murray
~OpZ~
Iaaan
JeeJee
Abenson
Fishball
johnnyspazz
d3_crescentia
iNfuNdiBuLuM
Versatile
nemy
Bill Murray(1)
Caller
tree.hugger(2)
Meeple
L
Also something to keep in mind with these vote lists. If you are a role that can make use of this, use it obviously when night comes.
RebirthofLegend (Mexico, pro town, Vengeful Townie) now dead!
However, due to his role abilities he has one last action he can perform! We move to night after he decides! (6 hour deadline)
I’m going to lawl if he kills Caller.
