|
On July 05 2012 08:38 TMG26 wrote:
It's a 13 player game, and only 3 mobsters, so there is still a room for a litle mistake on day1
With a random vote on day 1 the probability of hitting scum is low, but missing wont be that dangerous, the question that i want to make is: With this low ratio of scum, does the nolynch becomes more or less viable?
I'm still a newbie in mafia games, thats one of the reasons of asking this questing
And sorry about my bad english, i'm not a native speaker
About what being happening here..
Lazer was not clear on what he said, Hopeless stated that, and yourHarry immidiatly voted Hopeless for that
So, in my opinion if we want to catch the scum we have to confront them, so i Hopeless did the right thing...But so did yourHarry, what i find funny was JingleHell jumping in to declare FoS on yourHarry
In my opinion Hopeless and yourHarry did almost same same thing
My main suspects right now fall to yourHarry and JingleHell, because your acusations seammed more like a counter acusation after a "scum teammate" being acused
But is all still too light, a lot of people still havent spoken
Wait, so my actual reasoning is supposed to be an OMGUS, and Harry's suggestion that 23% is gambling odds is only equally suspicious as my case?
When my case was based purely off of suspicious behavior, and my defense was based on the lack of substance, which was the grounds for my accusation? Not only does that not make any logical sense, it also feels like exactly what you just accused me of doing.
|
On July 05 2012 08:35 JingleHell wrote:Well then, consider yourself under pressure, and unconvincing, since you just basically admitted to being disinterested in making substantial cases, and said Funny, when it's 3/13... 23% chance. That's not good odds in my book. You sound scummy.
Heh. It's actually 3/12 since I am not scum. WOOT! Townslip?? or WIFOM??
Yes, we do hope that after carrying out D1's worth of substantial discussions that our probability of lynching a scum would increase from 25%. But how much? Maybe to 30%?
Do remember that I admitted to voting Hopeless1der to pressure him... to see his response and others'. I am willing to take part making substantial cases. So far, I have not been able to find one. As this game goes on and there are more posts to analyze, if I still fail to come up with substantial cases that falls short of reasonable standard, then it will be due to my shortcomings. At this time in the game, I think I adequately explained myself and am suspicious why you are suspicious of me 
|
On July 05 2012 08:41 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 08:38 TMG26 wrote:
It's a 13 player game, and only 3 mobsters, so there is still a room for a litle mistake on day1
With a random vote on day 1 the probability of hitting scum is low, but missing wont be that dangerous, the question that i want to make is: With this low ratio of scum, does the nolynch becomes more or less viable?
I'm still a newbie in mafia games, thats one of the reasons of asking this questing
And sorry about my bad english, i'm not a native speaker
About what being happening here..
Lazer was not clear on what he said, Hopeless stated that, and yourHarry immidiatly voted Hopeless for that
So, in my opinion if we want to catch the scum we have to confront them, so i Hopeless did the right thing...But so did yourHarry, what i find funny was JingleHell jumping in to declare FoS on yourHarry
In my opinion Hopeless and yourHarry did almost same same thing
My main suspects right now fall to yourHarry and JingleHell, because your acusations seammed more like a counter acusation after a "scum teammate" being acused
But is all still too light, a lot of people still havent spoken Wait, so my actual reasoning is supposed to be an OMGUS, and Harry's suggestion that 23% is gambling odds is only equally suspicious as my case? When my case was based purely off of suspicious behavior, and my defense was based on the lack of substance, which was the grounds for my accusation? Not only does that not make any logical sense, it also feels like exactly what you just accused me of doing.
Sorry, dont know what OMGUS is, i will search
About the 23% odds, i didnt read that..... because of the time that it took me to type, i'll will make sure to check new replies before i post something that took a litle bit of time to type
|
TMG, Welcome!
I am not sure if you missed it, but I explained my reasoning for placing my vote on Hopeless1der. I will summarize here:
1. Hint of motivation to start a band wagon against a player who may have contradicted himself. (slightly scummy)
2. To see his and others' response (not related to scuminess)
Jingle is telling me that I should not have done that. In fact he is saying that I am scum because:
A. He thinks I am trying to mislynch. (False)
B. I am not participating in case based on substantial evidence (True, but not my fault probably)
|
I think YourHarry is Grush's new alias.
On July 05 2012 06:39 Lazermonkey wrote:
YOYO GUYS. I AM Vanilla Townie
On a more serious note, we want this ship rollin' as fast as possible. Discussing policy is not scumhunting but it does at least help us get the discussion going. First off, something we want to avoid as town is Vanillas claiming blue roles. In both my last game and Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII there were Vanillas who claimed blue roles(DTs). Both times town ended in an bad spot (although not as bad as it could've been due to luck). But this should still be avoided at all costs as it can cause massive damage to town. Why? Well let's say a vanilla townie claims DT, and then the real DT claims because the vanilla is lying. As it doesn't make sense for vanillas to claim blue roles, we must assume that one of theese players is scum and the other one is the real DT.Two following scenarios can occur here
1). The townie gets lynched. which means that the other person is probebly the real DT, this must however not be true.
2). The DT gets lynched, which means that the vanilla townie will 100% get lynched the next day.
While 2 is far worse than 1 they are still both very bad for town. There really isn't a situation you want to fakeclaim as a townie. If you don't agree with this please let me know. If noone disagrees I will assume that no townie is ever fake claiming a blue role. Obviously there are situations where you might want to claim as blue.
I will also copy a part of my first post from my last game(where I was DT) since I am lazy.
Regarding lynches: I really really dislike nolynching for three reasons.
1. because the information that we are able to get out of it is very limited. Yes, we avoid a potential misslynch but on the other hand scum will score a more or less a free-kill during night. Essentially, we are back on D1 but this time we are in a 6-2 instead of a 7-2.
2. If we agree to nolynch then what is there to discuss? It's like asking for people to lurk even more.
3. With no vigilante in the game the only way we can win is to lynch scum. Kinda obvious but still.
We require 5+ votes in order to get a lynch done. With that in mind I hope that people are willing to vote for someone who isn't their top 1 scum. Obviously, if you REALLY don't think there is any chance that the person that is about to be lynched can be scum, then sure, don't vote him. But if it seems like your target hardly gets any votes and your second highest scumread is at 4 votes with 30 minutes untill deadline, then I think you should swap your vote onto him.
Lurkers!: There are two types of lurkers. The ones who doesn't post anything and the sneaky ones, who posts ALOT but nothing of value. The first category could either be bad town play or scum play. But the second category is almost exclusivly scum play. If you are a townie, speak your mind, don't make a super duper long post when you could've said it on just a few lines. Keep it simple. With that being said, post!
Ignoring the copy-pasted policy stuff for now,
Why on earth did you even post that scenario stuff about a VT fake-claiming a DT or blue? There was absolutely no indication that anyone had even planned on that (especially considering you had the first post). If anything, you have just shown people something they can do (to the detriment of the town). And why go through the casework? It's just fluff and you know it. This is very much a post looking like a contribution, while being a non-contribution, or even an anti-contribution.
Im pretty sure, again, that no one was even remotely close to voting in a way to force a nolynch.
I love the bolded line; you could have kept this post simple and concise. But you decided to make it "super-duper long."
##vote: Lazermonkey
Yourharry, you should do more than OMGUS. You are definitely rivaling, for scumminess, against lazer.
Fos: yourharry
Fos: lazermonkey
|
Jingle, it feels like you're buddying up to/ defending Hope quite confidently...
|
On July 05 2012 08:53 YourHarry wrote:
A. He thinks I am trying to mislynch. (False)
B. I am not participating in case based on substantial evidence (True, but not my fault probably)
Thanks for the welcome
A: We cant know for sure what you are trying to do, a statment like "i'm not trying to mislynch" is worth notting... scum wont say they are trying to mislynch
B: Well, there no eveindence that he wanted to start a bandwagon, there was only a acusation of lazer's contradiction, BUT you told us what you tought about it... thats your opinion, so its recorded now
What i believe he condemns you most is for the "early" vote...
And then you came with the odds not being bad.....................
|
since the deadline is 6PM on the western coast of the states, i will have 10-15 minutes to check in before the deadline (due to annoying schedule. This deadline is still better than XVIII), i ask that you try to avoid the ridiculous quote every post in someone's filter type of post right before the end of the day/night
|
Release, I am not Grush.
I didn't particularly find lazer monkey's post scummy. This is a newbie game. He is simply providing some guidelines on what townies should avoid - since (I assume) that his previous games have been tainted by vanilla towns claiming power roles.
BTW, I am not OMGUSing Jingle. I just find it difficult to understand why he finds me scummy, since I think I explained myself and answered all of his questions. When someone is focusing his accusation on a player based on reasonable evidence, that someone could be town or scum.
But when someone is stubborn about his accusation on a player, even after the accused player adequately explained himself, I think that someone is likely to be scum. Maybe he is not satisfied with my answers. If so, Jingle, please tell me what you still think I am scum.
Here, someone may question whether my initial vote against Hopeless also makes me scummy for above reason. But as I explained, I don't particularly find him scummy and my initial attempt to incite responses from him and others did partially succeed - mostly in the forms of accusations toward me.
##Unvote
##Vote Jingle
|
On July 05 2012 08:58 Release wrote:I think YourHarry is Grush's new alias. Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 06:39 Lazermonkey wrote:
YOYO GUYS. I AM Vanilla Townie
On a more serious note, we want this ship rollin' as fast as possible. Discussing policy is not scumhunting but it does at least help us get the discussion going. First off, something we want to avoid as town is Vanillas claiming blue roles. In both my last game and Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII there were Vanillas who claimed blue roles(DTs). Both times town ended in an bad spot (although not as bad as it could've been due to luck). But this should still be avoided at all costs as it can cause massive damage to town. Why? Well let's say a vanilla townie claims DT, and then the real DT claims because the vanilla is lying. As it doesn't make sense for vanillas to claim blue roles, we must assume that one of theese players is scum and the other one is the real DT.Two following scenarios can occur here
1). The townie gets lynched. which means that the other person is probebly the real DT, this must however not be true.
2). The DT gets lynched, which means that the vanilla townie will 100% get lynched the next day.
While 2 is far worse than 1 they are still both very bad for town. There really isn't a situation you want to fakeclaim as a townie. If you don't agree with this please let me know. If noone disagrees I will assume that no townie is ever fake claiming a blue role. Obviously there are situations where you might want to claim as blue.
I will also copy a part of my first post from my last game(where I was DT) since I am lazy.
Regarding lynches: I really really dislike nolynching for three reasons.
1. because the information that we are able to get out of it is very limited. Yes, we avoid a potential misslynch but on the other hand scum will score a more or less a free-kill during night. Essentially, we are back on D1 but this time we are in a 6-2 instead of a 7-2.
2. If we agree to nolynch then what is there to discuss? It's like asking for people to lurk even more.
3. With no vigilante in the game the only way we can win is to lynch scum. Kinda obvious but still.
We require 5+ votes in order to get a lynch done. With that in mind I hope that people are willing to vote for someone who isn't their top 1 scum. Obviously, if you REALLY don't think there is any chance that the person that is about to be lynched can be scum, then sure, don't vote him. But if it seems like your target hardly gets any votes and your second highest scumread is at 4 votes with 30 minutes untill deadline, then I think you should swap your vote onto him.
Lurkers!: There are two types of lurkers. The ones who doesn't post anything and the sneaky ones, who posts ALOT but nothing of value. The first category could either be bad town play or scum play. But the second category is almost exclusivly scum play. If you are a townie, speak your mind, don't make a super duper long post when you could've said it on just a few lines. Keep it simple. With that being said, post!
Ignoring the copy-pasted policy stuff for now, Why on earth did you even post that scenario stuff about a VT fake-claiming a DT or blue? There was absolutely no indication that anyone had even planned on that (especially considering you had the first post). If anything, you have just shown people something they can do (to the detriment of the town). And why go through the casework? It's just fluff and you know it. This is very much a post looking like a contribution, while being a non-contribution, or even an anti-contribution. Im pretty sure, again, that no one was even remotely close to voting in a way to force a nolynch. I love the bolded line; you could have kept this post simple and concise. But you decided to make it "super-duper long." ##vote: LazermonkeyYourharry, you should do more than OMGUS. You are definitely rivaling, for scumminess, against lazer. Fos: yourharry
Fos: lazermonkey
But yet both in our last game plus Newbie XVIII there were people claiming DT when they were vanilla townies. This is ULTRA BAD play, and I really don't know why you would ever do that. Still both of them did that. The reason the post became long is that I really wanted to emphasize and explain how terribly bad it is for someone to claim blue when they are VT and argue why that is instead of just saying, ''don't claim blue when townie''. I don't see how my post is anti-contribution.
|
Jeez all willy nilly with the voting over here. YourHarry, its like you don't give a damn who gets what votes as long as you're seen voting. While I'm all for voting to generate discussion, you're already in an argument with Jingle and he's pretty damn active. I don't see the point in actually voting him at this point, it just makes it look like an even more trivial argument.
Also, I'd like to point out that its plurality lynch, so if you aren't really serious about your vote and its just for "pressure" make sure you're around at the deadline. As an example, if a 3 of people end up with 3 votes each, the first one to have gotten to 3 gets lynched.
And Release, regarding the huge posts close to deadlines:
- Just before the End of Night/Start of Day posts should be okay, especially if you're blue with info and think you're about to get NK'd. Claiming during the Night would almost be suicide so a late post is the best way to make sure your info gets out there just in case.
- During the day leading up to a lynch though, I completely agree, we need that info to make our lynches count. Post your reads early if you have them during the day.
|
I'm getting suspicious of Jingle.
On July 05 2012 06:43 JingleHell wrote:
So, since Lazer already opened with the pre-requisite long-winded "Please don't lynch me" post, I'd feel silly making a similar one, so instead, I'm going to open by asking Evulrabbitz why his name references a sex toy. After that question, of course, it suddenly feels awkward, but unless he can answer it well, FoS Evulrabbitz
1st post. Instead of commenting on my post he starts to ridicule it, effectivly killing discussion about it. Instead he is the first one to start shit up the thread with sex-toy w/e. Also, instead of posting his own reads he says I'd feel silly making a similar one which doesn't make any sense at all. I'd much rather have a post about your thought's on scum hunting rather than sex toys. At least when we are playing mafia...
The next couple of posts he is effectivly fills half the thread with his talk about Evul being a perv and what not.
On July 05 2012 07:56 JingleHell wrote:
Well, Hopeless, since you're at least talking, I don't think you're scum yet. However, if day1 lurkers start causing trouble, I'm all for just throwing the dice and lynching one just to make a clear point.
Also, just as wonky meta, compared to your D1 play in XIX, I'm pretty sure you're town here. You're not afraid of prolific D1 posting, among other things.
Actually, I'm VERY suspicious about YourHarry's lightning fast vote. Could be a throwaway effort to get a bandwagon started, since D1 voting is nonsense in newbie games. In the case of a mislynch, it would be easy to argue away.
If you would write this as a first time player I could be somewhat cool with it. But you are not. We want to lynch scum, not lurkers. And we absolutly don't want to roll the dice.
And I really don't see how you are very suspicious about the vote. There were ~50 hours untill deadline when he threw the vote. How is this even close to start a bandwagon? Like wtf?
On July 05 2012 08:05 JingleHell wrote:
EBWOP: And Harry, don't try to turn my logic around on me, my vote was based on your suspicious vote.
Your quote on Hopeless wasn't what I'd call a real reason to vote for someone who's at least being active, and not particularly suspicious.
Voting for him that way makes you look scummy, considering you've said nothing of real substance yet.
But at this point you only had one minor post of substance as well.
On July 05 2012 08:13 JingleHell wrote:
I couldn't care less how many games you've played on mafiascum. As it turns out, in newbie games on TL, D1 bandwagons have a tendency to be lethal, particularly if there's no substance to the case to defend against. As such, it's better to target someone who's being either actively or passively useless, not somebody who's at least jumping into the deep end.
In particular, compared to his play in a different game, where he seemed painfully scummy, Hopeless1der seems like he's heading for direct contribution.
I don't get this post. I may be missunderstanding this but if there is no substance to the case then why would that even be considered a case? And why on earth would someone ever get lynched by such a ''case''
On July 05 2012 08:13 JingleHell wrote:
I couldn't care less how many games you've played on mafiascum. As it turns out, in newbie games on TL, D1 bandwagons have a tendency to be lethal, particularly if there's no substance to the case to defend against. As such, it's better to target someone who's being either actively or passively useless, not somebody who's at least jumping into the deep end.
In particular, compared to his play in a different game, where he seemed painfully scummy, Hopeless1der seems like he's heading for direct contribution.
Once again, there is no threat of a bandwagon at all. Why do you keep saying that?
What I find maybe most intresting is how you start the game by shitting up the thread and literally don't post a single usefull thing. When the first vote get thrown tho, You go ''WTF DUDE, VOTING IZ NOT COOL''. No, I agree that the reasoning behind the vote to begin with was verrrry vauge but I don't really see why you get so upset about it ESPICIALLY since it's not even on you.
##Vote JingleHell
|
|
|
I can't decide what to laugh at first, but at least now people are explaining votes.
If you want to see what showed me that early voting with no rationalization at all is bad, go see D1 XIX. Ridiculous mislynch, because of votes with zero substance.
I won't bother demonstrating what's the difference between my vote on Harry and his vote on Hopeless, because if enough people can't figure it out for themselves to avoid a mislynch on me, I think it'd be the preferable alternative for my sanity, and for the resulting information.
By the way, from within the same post:
BTW, I am not OMGUSing Jingle.
##Vote Jingle
It's like Harry is a stand-up comedian.
|
This will be a good test to see how a bandwagon gets started then I suppose.
Jingle's done this before, just calling someone out based on their name being strange or the icon next to their name. The early posts are just random crap to get people talking. His post about lurkers is suspicious, but if we let people lurk, there's going to be some scum in the pile.
Throwing an early lynch at lurkers forces them to be more active, so there is more chance at scumslips instead of nothing to go on at all for those players. They all look scummy when they say and do nothing. The last couple games I've played/obs'd have been riddled with people being replaced and lurking and it completely screws with town's ability to make consistent reads. However, most of those games were majority lynch so the lurker problem had a much bigger impact.
If we have scum reads we should definitely push them. I don't think a lynch lurker mentality is that beneficial to town given our voting system. Any lurking scum can jump on any suspicion very easily and not look any worse than the next lurker that just follows the pack. Good scum reads will force them out of the woodwork to cast suspicion on someone else.
And I'm still not casting a vote as we're still waiting on 4 players to make a post and for Evulrabbitz and zen_man to do something relevant. The way rabbitz has disappeared concerns me as he ducked out just as we started getting to the not completely useless posts.
|
On July 05 2012 10:19 JingleHell wrote:
I can't decide what to laugh at first, but at least now people are explaining votes.
If you want to see what showed me that early voting with no rationalization at all is bad, go see D1 XIX. Ridiculous mislynch, because of votes with zero substance.
You clearly are not getting the point here. Noone has even been close to getting lynched yet.
|
On July 05 2012 10:34 Lazermonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 10:19 JingleHell wrote:
I can't decide what to laugh at first, but at least now people are explaining votes.
If you want to see what showed me that early voting with no rationalization at all is bad, go see D1 XIX. Ridiculous mislynch, because of votes with zero substance. You clearly are not getting the point here. Noone has even been close to getting lynched yet.
Plurality Lynch must be completely confusing.
7. Whomever has the most votes at the end of the day will be lynched!
Unless that means something entirely different than what it says, we aren't running majority lynch.
|
Even if it is Plurality Lynch, there's still 40 hours left
And its again funny to see that Hopeless jumped on your defence... After you had already voted harry after harry voted hopeless
In my mind, you and harry are the prime suspects..but only a few hours have passed, and i dont want to jump into bad conclusions
|
On July 05 2012 10:49 TMG26 wrote:
Even if it is Plurality Lynch, there's still 40 hours left
And its again funny to see that Hopeless jumped on your defence... After you had already voted harry after harry voted hopeless
In my mind, you and harry are the prime suspects..but only a few hours have passed, and i dont want to jump into bad conclusions
Hopeless is pointing to the meta, feel free to check it, unless you prefer to bandwagon on a case made out of paper mache.
|
On July 05 2012 09:54 Lazermonkey wrote:I'm getting suspicious of Jingle. Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 06:43 JingleHell wrote:
So, since Lazer already opened with the pre-requisite long-winded "Please don't lynch me" post, I'd feel silly making a similar one, so instead, I'm going to open by asking Evulrabbitz why his name references a sex toy. After that question, of course, it suddenly feels awkward, but unless he can answer it well, FoS Evulrabbitz 1st post. Instead of commenting on my post he starts to ridicule it, effectivly killing discussion about it. Instead he is the first one to start shit up the thread with sex-toy w/e. Also, instead of posting his own reads he says I'd feel silly making a similar one which doesn't make any sense at all. I'd much rather have a post about your thought's on scum hunting rather than sex toys. At least when we are playing mafia... The next couple of posts he is effectivly fills half the thread with his talk about Evul being a perv and what not. Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 07:56 JingleHell wrote:
Well, Hopeless, since you're at least talking, I don't think you're scum yet. However, if day1 lurkers start causing trouble, I'm all for just throwing the dice and lynching one just to make a clear point.
Also, just as wonky meta, compared to your D1 play in XIX, I'm pretty sure you're town here. You're not afraid of prolific D1 posting, among other things.
Actually, I'm VERY suspicious about YourHarry's lightning fast vote. Could be a throwaway effort to get a bandwagon started, since D1 voting is nonsense in newbie games. In the case of a mislynch, it would be easy to argue away. If you would write this as a first time player I could be somewhat cool with it. But you are not. We want to lynch scum, not lurkers. And we absolutly don't want to roll the dice. And I really don't see how you are very suspicious about the vote. There were ~50 hours untill deadline when he threw the vote. How is this even close to start a bandwagon? Like wtf? Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 08:05 JingleHell wrote:
EBWOP: And Harry, don't try to turn my logic around on me, my vote was based on your suspicious vote.
Your quote on Hopeless wasn't what I'd call a real reason to vote for someone who's at least being active, and not particularly suspicious.
Voting for him that way makes you look scummy, considering you've said nothing of real substance yet. But at this point you only had one minor post of substance as well. Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 08:13 JingleHell wrote:
I couldn't care less how many games you've played on mafiascum. As it turns out, in newbie games on TL, D1 bandwagons have a tendency to be lethal, particularly if there's no substance to the case to defend against. As such, it's better to target someone who's being either actively or passively useless, not somebody who's at least jumping into the deep end.
In particular, compared to his play in a different game, where he seemed painfully scummy, Hopeless1der seems like he's heading for direct contribution. I don't get this post. I may be missunderstanding this but if there is no substance to the case then why would that even be considered a case? And why on earth would someone ever get lynched by such a ''case'' Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 08:13 JingleHell wrote:
I couldn't care less how many games you've played on mafiascum. As it turns out, in newbie games on TL, D1 bandwagons have a tendency to be lethal, particularly if there's no substance to the case to defend against. As such, it's better to target someone who's being either actively or passively useless, not somebody who's at least jumping into the deep end.
In particular, compared to his play in a different game, where he seemed painfully scummy, Hopeless1der seems like he's heading for direct contribution. Once again, there is no threat of a bandwagon at all. Why do you keep saying that? What I find maybe most intresting is how you start the game by shitting up the thread and literally don't post a single usefull thing. When the first vote get thrown tho, You go ''WTF DUDE, VOTING IZ NOT COOL''. No, I agree that the reasoning behind the vote to begin with was verrrry vauge but I don't really see why you get so upset about it ESPICIALLY since it's not even on you. ##Vote JingleHell
are you outing Jingle as your scumbuddy? or maybe trying to drag him down with you? YOU ARE SO CONFUSING. OMGUS.
Why are you promoting your first post as a discussion starter? It isn't. It is an attempt to brainwash unsuspecting townies and get us talking about useless things. I commend him for shutting your down your post with this authority.
If you are actually using the discussion of sex toys as a reason to call him scum, you really are just grasping at straws for lack of any real substance.
In terms of day1, i don't think setting a tone on lynching lurkers is necessarily a bad thing. should we decide on lynching a lurker, the lurkers will feel a need to speak up in order to avoid getting the lynch. In other words, saying "let's lynch lurkers" promotes discussion. And "to make a point" states exactly that. "speak up or die."
Jingle should probably reply to the next part, but as far as i can see, it goes
- OMGUS OMGUS OMGUS ##vote
-##vote x 10
- no discussion, the guy who got OMGUS'd has nothing to attack/defend. Checkmate. Turns out, he was VT o.O
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
That being said, Jingle has only made very light commitments and commented on very obvious/easy things.
Lazer, you still look worse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
