EPTNewbie Mini Mafia IV
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 25 2012 11:16 DoYouHas wrote: Oh dear gum, I was just making fun of myself for my 1 action that set the dominoes falling that killed me and made slOosh look like scum. I'm feeling pretty good about this game. Dreamflower/Qatol are quick to quell bad manner. I think you have gotten some of the kinks out of your posting style gumshoe. I now know what Alderan is capable of. Good mix of the new and semi-new. Hope this fills up fast. Yeah, though I *intended* to essentially do the same thing with my day 1 vote, since I thought there was NO WAY that so many people would vote switch such last minute. I just didn't come out and say it in as many words. I was barely even called out on it except by the scum ironically. All I know is, this game's gonna be better than last one. I don't see how it's possible for it to be worse, at least from my perspective  | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 25 2012 11:39 Alderan wrote: My predictions of how this game is going to go. metametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametametameta busbusbusbusbus? | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 25 2012 11:50 DoYouHas wrote: Yikes, it seems there is some bitterness coming out of that last game. Not from me, I'm just laughing about that particular post that Matt made. But Alderan is right, coming directly off of a full game with each other, we don't really even need to read up on each other's styles. Which actually makes me think of something. Will any of ya'll be intentionally trying out a different style like DYH was last game? If so, tell us now before we start so we don't lynch you because of it. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
As far as an artificial early deadline, I personally really like the idea. Obviously, if we absolutely NEED the extra time to come to a consensus we can take that time, but I really don't like the idea of last minute vote changes. They're almost always feeding off of emotion, not logical thinking, and that is just too easy for scum to direct to a mislynch I think. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 26 2012 12:14 Chocolate wrote: This is also my third game. (My first game was bad and my second was even worse so don't look at those lol, trying to play better this time). I agree that the early deadline could be a good idea but I think we should still be aware of and responsive to any scummy play after the deadline. I don't want us to harm ourselves by trying to make a decision with 25% less information to work off. Our vote will probably end up being a lurker and I urge you all to change it away from him if he begins to contribute and makes good points after the initial "lynch". Of course, I don't think anyone is suggesting that we give anyone a free pass after our early "deadline", but I still think that it's good to encourage people to think about their vote, and make what cases they can before the actual deadline happens. That way we aren't scrambling just to try to prevent a mislynch. I'm interested that you assume we'd only be lynching a lurker on Day 1. Do you think that it's not possible to find enough scummy play on Day 1 to make a decent case against someone? | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 26 2012 12:26 NightFury wrote: Greetings! This is my first full game of mafia (excluding my temporary replacement into SNMMVII). I agree with the soft early deadline concept, but I would like to add a bit more. A general consensus is nice to have and provide extra time for new information. But to dampen last minute switches, maybe we should impose a "lock in vote" within the last 30 - 60 minutes to the deadline. This gives everyone sufficient time to think and be confident in their choice and casually inform the rest that they are firm in their choice. Thoughts? I don't know if that's really neccesary. That close to the deadline, people won't usually change vote unless either something major comes up or we were already headed toward a no lynch. It's possible, though. Thoughts, Chocolate/DYH/anyone else out there? | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 26 2012 12:54 gumshoe wrote: are we agreed on no no lynch? Yeah, I'm down with that. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 26 2012 13:29 k2hd wrote: I think I'm gonna agree with a 2 round early deadline system as suggested by NightFury, with perhaps a longer period before the 2nd deadline (30-60 minutes seems quite short to me, but this is my very first mafia game so I don't know how often vote changes backed by solid reasoning can occur within this time). I just think that having only one early deadline would discourage first time townies from changing votes past the deadline if they have legitimate reasons, for fear of being lynched for not following these "rules". BassInSpace (responding to bold) Very rarely, honestly. Or at least, that's what I've been told by vets of mafia. How do you feel about lynching lurkers? | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 26 2012 13:57 Steveling wrote: About this deadline thing I'm not too sure. Sure it may help in the first day, but when we will have multiple cases and people posting defenses and whatnot from different timezones, I don't think it will be too practical. That's basically why I'm more inclined to just have a single deadline. The point to me is just to prevent people from not thinking about their vote until close to the deadline. My fear with having a second deadline is that if someone doesn't do it, people will freak out about that and immediately call them scum or start looking with confirmation bias. I just think that could create some chaos in the town later on. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 27 2012 02:32 ghost_403 wrote: @alderan I really don't see any time where it would be advantageous to the town to not lynch. The town should first be lynching scum. If we can't find scum, we should instead lynch people who are not useful to the town. Lurkers fit the second criteria perfectly. By lurking, you are providing cover for the scum to hide, which is in every case bad for the town. @fourface That's not how you apply pressure on someone to post. This is how you apply pressure on someone to post. ##vote JekyllAndHyde To Ghost and fourface, what is your reasoning for pressuring JekyllAndHyde specifically? There's plenty of other non-posters, or people posting nothing but 1-2 sentence fluff posts. Any specific reason for Jekyll? | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 27 2012 05:26 gumshoe wrote: Would you like me to make another poll XD any questions anyone? Haha, yeah, a poll would be great, why don't we get started on that right away (not really....)The problem is no one really seems to want to talk, and asking general questions about the game, lynching lurkers, early deadlines, etc can only get us so far. I'm not sure how best to proceed right now to get everyone talking. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 27 2012 05:32 FourFace wrote: @Janaan why JekyllAndHyde and not some other lurker? I don't know, lynch me Not an attack, I was just wondering if there was a certain reason why you picked him. If not, fine. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 27 2012 05:34 NightFury wrote: + Show Spoiler + Okay! I propose that we resolve the most pressing issues today and worry about the less vital ones for night 1 if needed. It seems like the lynch or no-lynch day 1 is the most pressing issue at hand. I'm beginning to think that a time based voting system won't be critical on day 1 if we can all agree to a specific day 1 strategy. This way we can focus on the task at hand and get good discussion and worry about the finer details of other issues during the night so we can all be ready for day 2. It appears, in general, that the consensus for lynching a lurker for day 1 is acceptable. Looking at risk/reward - lynching a mafia on day 1 has great rewards whereas lynching a lurker townie isn't the biggest loss (still a loss nonetheless). Therefore, I'm still on board for no no-lynch day 1 and going after a lurker. I propose we set a soft deadline today for confirming a lurker target. The game has been going for less than 24 hours and I know people's weekends can be a bit random when it comes to availability. I think, at most, we should give a full in-game 24 hours to at least post a) anything and b) some form of contribution. Once again, great for getting discussion rolling and looking at how people interact with each other. In the event everyone is present and participating, we can have a full discussion on how we handle day 1 as well. While this can be discussed later on if needed, I am still a fan of one or two stage soft deadline voting. I know there are caveats, but I personally think everyone should have some responsibility in the game. It'll keep players active which is always great. Janaan, I know you mentioned that a second deadline may cause chaos is there is a bandwagon for not following the system. But if we can get everyone to agree to the system, it will be everyone's responsibility to follow it and they will be responsible for their own actions should they break it. If people are going to be busy (which is completely valid), they should at least inform everyone in advance. I would prefer people communicating with everyone rather than just falling off the face of the planet (although shit does happen which can be unfortunate). Thoughts/Opinions? I think I've already made my position clear on this. I also think that setting any kind of deadline 24 hours before the actual vote deadline is too soon. As already stated, I'm fine with somewhere around 8-12 hours before, but any earlier, any vote we end up agreeing on, especially if it's a lurker lynch, is bound to change. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
To Phagga: The town should only be lynching scum. Lynching town lurkers hurts us more than it helps. You of all people in this game should know this after the werewolves game (remember mderg and rgTheSchworz?). But then again, perhaps you're scum in this game as well? Sure, in a perfect world we'd lynch scum the first 4 days, win the game, and go home. Sometimes, though, you can't be 100% sure someone is scum. We can't just no lynch until we KNOW someone's mafia, sometimes we have to take calculated risks. Lynching lurkers, if there's no better target, is one of those risks. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 27 2012 10:50 JekyllAndHyde wrote: You say that DYH and gumshoe made "good observations", that you were waiting for FF to defend himself, and now you say that wasn't a very good start to defending himself. ....so? What do you think about it? Did that convince you he was scum or not? At the moment, I'm leaning toward noob townie, much like my read on Gumshoe last game, but I'll probably keep a close watch on his posts. I was really hoping that FourFace would post again, maybe try to clarify his post at least, but he's still nowhere to be found. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
Another way to look at that is if you are still left during day 3 after 2 mislynches. There are 6 townies and 4 scum. The scum are either (1) forced to work together to stay alive, and are pretty easy to spot or (2) are going to sacrifice one of their own. Unless something goes horribly, horribly wrong, the worst case scenario for day 4 is 5 townies to 3 scum. No problem. He seems to think that it's perfectly fine for us to go 3 days without lynching a mafia, which would put us in a MYLO situation. Not exactly what I'd call a pro-town position to be in. His justification for saying this is pretty weak I think. 1. If the game gets to this point, scum obviously haven't been easy to spot, and it doesn't really get much easier. Sure, the "odds" might be more in your favor, but if you're in this situation, scum probably are pretty good at hiding in plain sight. 2. Yeah, scum might sacrifice one of their own. But 5 town/ 3 scum is still MYLO. I don't see how a townie could say that this is "no problem". | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 27 2012 14:04 FourFace wrote: Janaan you really don't like statistics do you? Noone is gonna not lynch for 3 days it's stupid, it's pretty jumpy of you to attack him like that. I figure you really don't like statistics That's not not-lynching, that's mislynching. It looks to me like he's saying that it's ok if we mislynch 3 times in a row, and I don't like that. This has nothing to do with statistics. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 27 2012 14:06 Alderan wrote: + Show Spoiler + On February 27 2012 13:59 Janaan wrote: One thing that stands out most to me about Ghost's posting is this gem right here He seems to think that it's perfectly fine for us to go 3 days without lynching a mafia, which would put us in a MYLO situation. Not exactly what I'd call a pro-town position to be in. His justification for saying this is pretty weak I think. 1. If the game gets to this point, scum obviously haven't been easy to spot, and it doesn't really get much easier. Sure, the "odds" might be more in your favor, but if you're in this situation, scum probably are pretty good at hiding in plain sight. 2. Yeah, scum might sacrifice one of their own. But 5 town/ 3 scum is still MYLO. I don't see how a townie could say that this is "no problem". Janaan, talk to me about Chocolate. I agree that Chocolate does seem a little wishy washy, saying stuff like Our vote will probably end up being a lurker then he seems to say at least slightly differently in his next post I'm not sure we will lynch a lurker on Day1 It seems to me that for the most part, though, his posts are fairly consistent with the idea of lynching lurkers in mind. I don't really know what That sounds like a good idea. I really can't see any problems with that tbh, and it works well for me because in the event of a massive vote swing I probably won't be online to provide input. was about, and it does seem like he could be just trying to cover for himself so he can justify not being active near the voting deadline. Particularly when he did say that he'd most likely be online 7:30 EST 17-21 EST . 17-21 EST is the hours before the deadline, so he may've contradicted himself there. There's not really enough for me to call him scum right now, but he looks like he could be potentially. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 27 2012 14:19 FourFace wrote: Oh so you don't like .. ok, that's another story. ##Vote Janaan BAM! I figure I'd come back to change my vote from the hydra. Then I thought but it did him good.. his first post was ok, but since I'm here I figure I vote for the guy with the most fing around in his posts. Janaan, tell me again about your contributions to this game. No case, just a summary of what you have achieved. And don't expect me to reply until about 7-8 hours later. This is like a monologue, your big chance to prove that you are town. So....you want me to read you my Filter? I don't really know what you want me to say, since you didn't give me anything to respond to. A "monologue to prove that I'm town" doesn't help anyone, honestly, because it doesn't prove anything. You say I had alot of f-ing around in my posts? Tell me what you're talking about and I'll respond to that, but I'm not gonna just make a giant fluff post if that's what you want. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 27 2012 15:00 FourFace wrote: "I'm not gonna just make a giant fluff post if that's what you want." Silly question, the he would have figured it out by himself though.. I think it's a scum post icebraker, someone asks a silly question and the answer is give. Like saying look at me I'm active 1. Hey what's your opinion on whatever. Same thing as the first 2. players lurking is an issue .. WOW i didn't see that one coming. What a revolutionary point of view 3. believe it or not .. people are going to check your posts to see when you were active (if it really comes down to that) and the way you said it .. well maybe then but wait it might be then and then and then till then. I personally don't care 4. then asking for an opinio again. Who exactly are you condescending here. It seems like you're just talking to youself.. I'm the crazy one here you can't have that it's taken 5. On and off about statistics etc. "So please do I'm not gonna just make a giant fluff post if that's what you want" Yeah I want you to post fluff THIS TIME lol + Show Spoiler + reverse psychology Thank you. Now that I know what you want me to respond to, I can actually address your post. 1. The man asked a question, I answered it. I don't know why you have a problem with that. I did the same thing when Steve asked about hydras. 2. Early, when the game first started, I was trying to get people to talk. Asking them questions is a way to do this, even if it's about basic town policies like lurker lynching or having a fake vote deadline. You'll notice that I tried to do this with most people early game, because I wanted them to post more than two sentences on a subject. It's probably not the BEST way to get people talking, but that's what I was trying to do. 3. In my experience, lurkers are a huge problem, particularly in newbie games. You bet that I'm gonna address it, and early in the game is the best time. It's not a revolutionary viewpoint, but I'd prefer to get it out on the table as soon as possible than have it go completely unsaid. 4. Gumshoe asked when people are available. So I told him. Yeah, my schedule is a bit wierd, so the post looked a bit wierd. But that's my basic schedule. You may not care, but he asked, so obviously he does. 5. I admit, this does look odd since I didn't quote what I was replying to and there's another post and a page break inbetween mine and Gumshoe's post. But I wasn't talking to myself, I was talking to Gumshoe. As far as statistics, I made one post about them. That post was replying to your post that had a bunch of statistics that I think don't really help anyone, and don't really inform the decision that you came to. I made a second post about Ghost that you assumed had to do with statistics, but as I already said, doesn't. I haven't been "on and off about statistics" at all. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
## Vote: Ghost_403 | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 28 2012 04:10 JekyllAndHyde wrote: You should have mentioned that before though, since it didn't seem you implied that at all. /Hyde Yeah, maybe I should've mentioned it before, but my original response to FF defense was primarily to say essentially "hey, what you just said won't convince anyone that you're town, you should maybe try again". I really wanted him to post again about the evidence against him. I think adding "but I don't think you're scum" to my post could have taken away some of the pressure for FF to post again. Once he didn't post, and you asked for my read on him, I gave it. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
## Unvote: Ghost_204 | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 28 2012 06:32 Chocolate wrote: + Show Spoiler + On February 27 2012 14:22 Janaan wrote: I agree that Chocolate does seem a little wishy washy, saying stuff like then he seems to say at least slightly differently in his next post It seems to me that for the most part, though, his posts are fairly consistent with the idea of lynching lurkers in mind. I don't really know what was about, and it does seem like he could be just trying to cover for himself so he can justify not being active near the voting deadline. Particularly when he did say that he'd most likely be online . 17-21 EST is the hours before the deadline, so he may've contradicted himself there. There's not really enough for me to call him scum right now, but he looks like he could be potentially. Saying something is probable and that I'm not sure of it doesn't seem contradictory to me at all. Isn't that what you mean when you say probably? 17-21 EST is right before the deadline except the last hour, so I'm notcontradicting myself. Honestly if your case on me is because of these that's pretty fishy, either you're sheeping or you're voting along with the mafia (possibly both). To me Probable is more strong than saying you're not sure of it. But I could just be arguing semantics here. Also, if I was merely sheeping/voting with mafia like you suggest, I would've voted for you. As it is, I just found a couple things I felt were a bit odd and commented on that. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 28 2012 07:55 Alderan wrote: Janaan where would you place your vote if deadline was in 5 minutes? Right now, I'd say it has to be between Chocolate and igabod. Igabod since he's lurking heavily and it'd send a message not to lurk. Chocolate, of all the people with cases against them seems the most scummy to me, and I can't quite put my finger on why exactly. But it doesn't make him scum. I think DYH makes a good point about how it's coming together a little too nicely when I can see all of Chocolate's posts from a town perspective. Unless something else comes up, I think I'll be sticking with ##Vote: igabod | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 28 2012 08:32 Alderan wrote: Reason I don't vote for igabod is as of now he stands to be modkilled, correct? If he doesn't show up in the next 3.5 hours and votes, yeah, he'll get modkilled or replaced. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 28 2012 08:29 gumshoe wrote: + Show Spoiler + On February 28 2012 08:26 Janaan wrote: Right now, I'd say it has to be between Chocolate and igabod. Igabod since he's lurking heavily and it'd send a message not to lurk. Chocolate, of all the people with cases against them seems the most scummy to me, and I can't quite put my finger on why exactly. But it doesn't make him scum. I think DYH makes a good point about how it's coming together a little too nicely when I can see all of Chocolate's posts from a town perspective. Unless something else comes up, I think I'll be sticking with ##Vote: igabod Janaan I ask that you consider voting for ghost, I really don't like how drastically sloosh's style has shifted, even alderaan who seems like he's playing a convincing town hasn't changed that much in terms of tone from last game when he was scum, sloosh sounds like a different person and I would like to put pressure on him by attacking his potential proxy, ghost. The problem that I have with this is that if SlOosh and Ghost were both scum, I doubt that SlOosh would be the first to call Ghost out. Maybe it's a bit WIFOM to say that, but all it did was bring more scrutiny to Ghost on Day 1, which is something that no scum team would want to inflict to themselves. I do agree with SlOosh's change in posting style, though. It's a pretty big change from his previous two games. I can understand him wanting to be a bit less aggressive this game, but it does seem a bit out of character. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 28 2012 10:20 Alderan wrote: I see... I don't like to get into that kind of stuff, and urge the rest of you not to either. Task at hand, lynch, 1:45 minutes. 3 options in my mind are: Chocolate igadob Steveling I think a good compromise between my last post and the people on igadob/ We vote Steveling, we're killing a lurker that we don't know, and he's voting with the others that I find suspicious. I would be ok with Steveling personally. To me, there's not much reason to vote for one over the other, my only concern is that there's not enough time to get enough votes on Steve to actually lynch. As it is, we seem to be at a deadlock between Chocolate and igabod. DYH, I'm sure at least one replacement will be found, so I don't think that we're in any danger of two people dying here. The only difference is that if we lynch Steve, the replacement would be for igabod, where if we lynch igabod the replacement would be for Steve. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 28 2012 10:33 ghost_403 wrote: Remind me again, why are we voting for igabod? Because he's not posting at all, which isn't a pro-town thing to do. | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On February 29 2012 05:35 TestSubject893 wrote: + Show Spoiler + Ok guys, I've caught up on the thread now. Like I said before, this is my first time playing online, so you'll have to bear with me if I'm a little slow with any acronyms (although after reading the thread, I think I've gotten most of them), or otherwise am unfamiliar with some nuance of online play. Anyway, on to my thoughts.. Thoughts on Day 1 Voting I was torn between thinking that all of the push to vote igabod was useless and counter-productive, and thinking that it was a good alternative in to a no lynch in a spot where we didn't have a lot of information. When I had only read up to the end of Day 1, I was definitely suspicious of Chocolate, but knew his case was far from 100%. As such, I want to look back and say a no lynch was clearly the right move, but if I had had to cast a vote, it probably would have been for Chocolate, since he seemed to be the most likely to be scum at that point in time. Current Reads + Show Spoiler + Some of these are dependent or conditional on my thoughts of other people, so I'll try my best to order them in the way that's easiest to consume in order. Alderan - He is definitely the player I'm most suspicious of right now. In addition to the other points mentioned in the recent cases against him, his attempts to get players to move from igabod to steveling make me think he has some information about igabod that everyone else doesn't. nttea (igabod) - I really wish I had more information here. Right now its basically a null read, but if Alderan flips red, my suspicion of him goes up drastically. Janaan - Someone suspicious, but he seems to be getting a decent amount of scrutiny right now, so I'm confident we'll have the information we need before the next lynch comes around. I think he also looks scummier if Alderan turns out to be mafia. Chocolate - As has been noted, he's been pretty aggressive and someone willing to target anyone. This makes me want to keep an eye on him. gumshoe - For as active as he has been he hasn't really said that much meaningful. I think he probably deserves more scrutiny than he has gotten, although I'm far from ready to lynch him. sloosh - His early inactivity had me suspicious, but I'm back to a null read on him after his posts lately. zelblade (FourFace) - I feel like he may have been put in a hard spot here. FF's posts seemed pro-town to me, but I don't know how much to trust that info given the crazy/troll nature. I'm definitely leaning townie on him, but new info could change my opinion quickly. I wish I had more information on: JekyllAndHyde, phagga, k2hd Some of these are time zone/RL issues, but the jury is still out on these 3 for me. I could definitely still go either way. Basically neutral reads: DoYouHas, NightFury, ghost_403 Early suspicions of ghost seemed to get cleared up pretty well. I'm not ready to call pro-town on anyone this early, but these three are on the right track. I'd like to hear a bit more from TestSubject if possible. I just have a couple questions for him about his reads post. First, you say that before the vote, you would have voted for Chocolate if you were given the chance. Now, you just say you're keeping your eye on him. So you went from "most likely to be scum" to maybe scum, maybe not scum. What changed? Second, you find me scummy. Why not pressure? As of yet, there aren't even any formal accusations, just a couple people posting reads on me. What do you find scummy about me? I'm also a bit confused about why Alderan flipping red makes me more scummy. Considering that he's the one who first said that he found me scummy, I would have thought the opposite. What's your logic here? Now that JekyllAndHyde and phagga have posted a bit more, are you getting anything from them, or do you still need more information? | ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Janaan
United States381 Posts
On March 09 2012 05:49 EternaLSC2 wrote: As a person who was spectating the entire game, i was a bit dissapointed by how things ended, so i want to try to top this. @dreamflower&Qatol, will you be hosting another newbie mini mafia or? i got on too late for SNMMVIII. Also sloosh, im very surprised that you werent lynched, but that was some brilliant play on your part. There's a spot open in SNMM8 if you still want to join. | ||
| ||
