|
Well, since I'm most likely going to be dead anyways, I think I will give you my reads and feelings on everyone. I'm claiming town, as is what everyone is doing, so I can tell you my reads on everyone so far in the quest to be rid of the scum.
Shz- Most of his posts have been containing little to no pertinent information. He has made one or two posts which have continued discussion, and has started a bandwagon to take out Mocsta. Seems like he does not really care who is being lynched as long as it is him. Could just be afraid to make any bold moves, or could be afraid to move into the spotlight for fear that the town will turn on him. Possible scum, but of course we need to see more information to make any further reads.
Omnieulogy- One of the first people to propose getting some discussion going, however, he is being a sheep by joining the lynch Corazon bandwagon without any new reason other than I am a target, and evidence off of one post. However, he could possibly be mafia as well, as he is playing it safe, possibly refusing to get in the spotlight on fear that he will be made a target as well.
Cakepie- Has made some very good reads, and has contributed the most on every single player out of everyone. It shows that he knows what he is doing. He could either be a master townie, or very good at blending in as Mafia. I'm leaning toward town, but we will have to wait and see what his next move is, as he is from Australia and most likely formulating a way to deduce the mafia as we speak.
Kickstart- Has only made three worthwhile posts so far. Possible mafia lurking? Maybe so. He seems to be playing just enough to get under the radar without being singled out as a lurker. I'll be watching out for him as the day progresses.
Chromatically- Has been persecuting me primarily from the start. Former shepherd of the sheep, until Threesr came into the picture. Seeing as he has been obsessed on seeing me lynched primarily so far, I have my suspicions on him. Persecuting someone just for not giving full answers seems like he is just trying to reach for candidates to lynch and get credibility with the town, when in fact he is trying to deceive them by murdering an innocent townie.
Mocsta- One of the few people that has made sense over this short game. He knows that being a sheep is basically being as bad of a townie as Threesr is claiming to be, and is trying to get you guys to make decisions for yourselves. He seems to be a smart lad, and I think we should rally around him as the game goes on.
Orangeremi- Is utterly uncommitted as to what bandwagon he is joining on. Has only made 1 or 2 real posts during the whole game. A lurker in disguise, but of course, we're not lynching lurkers. Or are we?
FatChunk- Has defended me in the hopes that you all won't vote me off. To me, he just seems like an uninformed townie who is trying to be a hipster and use reason and logic to make his voting decisions. Or he could be another mafia not wanting to get in the spotlight for fear of being put on the spot. He's 50-50 for me right now, but like with anyone else, that can change in a heartbeat.
Sphagettius- Another person who is using their brain. We don't have enough Sphagettius' in this game. Asking me for defense before coming to any conclusions. Why should I not trust this guy? He's here to get the job done the most methodical way possible. I like this guy and believe he is town, or a good maf.
Threesr- The new shepherd on the block. Able to use short answers and sarcastic responses to win over the hearts of the sheep and become their master. Doesn't care who gets lynched, as long as it is not him. He is either a bad town, a mafia, or a lone wolf. All are bad to town. Needs to be removed before he causes town to lynch all of their own members.
Aquanim- If this game was based off of the French Revolution, he would most certainly be Robespierre. The first to go head -hunting (which in my eyes is still a bad strategy) to start some sort of discussion, instead of FOS-ing and being a peaceful person. If I get lynched, who will be the next victim in his Reign of Terror (see what I did there?). Most likely a Mafia trying to get any pressure off of him and gain credibility with the town early.
Sylencia- Has not posted much, but that can be excused because he is from Australia. The few posts I have seen from him have been thoughtful and discussion-creating. I'm 50-50 on him so far, but I hope he can make a contribution to the town in the near future, in which time my opinion about him might swing one way or the other.
Well guys, I said I wasn't gonna jump to conclusions, but I've learned that jumping to conclusions is the logical thing to do on Day 1. Does this make me a Mafia pro now?
|
I'm going to bed now, I will check the thread in the morning.
I would also like to point out that Sylencia is the only one who has accused me when it's been obvious I have an immediate chance to defend myself, 2 or 3 of you have voted me on the premise of not giving straight answers. Now that I believe I have done that, can I get an updated opinion of me? Aquanium and Chromatically.
|
On December 20 2012 17:51 Spaghetticus wrote:
I want responses particularly from those people voting for him. I also want activity that is centered around someone other than Corazon and Threesr. It is that are avoiding the dispute that you need to look for.
I feel like this is the best course of action right now. Why don't you guys search for someone who is good at hiding their true and pick out their post instead of trying to lynch the noobs Day 1. You guys should vote us off when the time is better, and get rid of the true threats before they have a chance to be a true part of the game (because remember, it is only Day 1). For now, I would still like to go the pacifist route.
##Unvote
##Vote: No-Lynch
|
On December 20 2012 19:36 Aquanim wrote:A real case: SpaghetticusSpaghetticus is posting reasonably and being nice. In fact, he's being too nice. He hasn't accused anyone at all of anything. He hasn't expressed any suspicions of any other player, or posted any analysis. In fact, he hasn't done anything useful for the town at all, while still looking active, and that is textbook scum. - Spaghetticus has been posting rationally... on defending other players, instructing other players, policy, and Mafia theory. THIS IS NOT A TOWNTELL.
- Spaghetticus has not made any cases on scum.
- Spaghetticus keeps telling everyone else to make cases on scum.
- Spaghetticus has not searched for scum. He has applied no pressure and asked almost no questions.
So using your brain automatically makes you mafia? You have been posting rationally with your last couple of posts, does that make you Mafia.
If you think he hasn't suspected anyone, read his long post in my defense. He said that I was still probably Mafia, but that you guys should not pursue me Day 1, as there were better Mafia players hidden in the shadows that you should have tried to confront to prevent them from having a bigger influence on the game.
Lecturing other players isn't all that useful. Nobody has said anything useful at this point though.
So no one has said anything useful at all? Then why am I on the chopping block? Are you guys admitting that there is no good reason that I'm up here? (Disregard this if that post was in the quoted one, I wasn't sure).
More fluff, and inviting other players to clog the thread. An unsubtle buddy to Cakepie for good measure.
So you are proposing that cakepie is another scum? I would like to see you investigate that further. In the beginning the thread was all fluff, and if I don't recall, I got 2-3 votes because I did not answer the "fluff" question to a satisfactory degree.
Some serious hypocrisy here:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 12:51 Spaghetticus wrote:
Cheers Omni and Chroma.
Things seem to have died down, I might head to the gym.
We still have three people with no posts, if you are one of them I suggest you make a big and informative post after reading through everything that has been posted this game. Try and have questions for the players that have been posting, and develop a theory of who is town and scum. You are late to the part y but you can still be valuable and productive town. So he wants people to "develop a theory of town and scum" without doing anything of the sort himself? This is what first set off my alarm bells.
He has developed a theory of town and scum. It is day 1, you're not going to catch all of the scum in Day 1. He doesn't want to be the only one making reads, which since then most of us have made reads.
Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 20:34 Spaghetticus wrote:
I just looked though everyone's filters and took some notes. I have a terrible memory and find it gives some context to the names I try so hard to remember. If you find it difficult to associate a person's name with their actions so far, I suggest you look through their filter in order to put a face to the name, and prevent them lurking past you.
I will now try and compile a synopsis before bed. Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 21:02 Spaghetticus wrote:
Lurkers:
Threesr: He seems to want to defend lurking, which is really weird. Only contribution to date is disputing LAL.
Cakepie: One very solid post. Would like to see more, though I think you have contributed more than a few other people here.
Orange: Very little substance so far.
Fatchunk: One post.
Kickstart: Two posts.
Sylencia: Seems to want to contribute, but is struggling.
Corazon: One post.
Shz: low contribution, attempts to stimulate discussion have been weak.
So we have a bit of a lurker problem. Some of you I think will have no problem increasing production, but some others seem reluctant. If all you have done is discuss LAL policy up to this point, you need to contribute more. Give us your scummy reads if you have any. I would put money on the day1 lynch being one of the names I just mentioned, please try and make sure it’s not you. At this moment in time my prediction is that either Corazon, Shz, or Threesr will get bandwagoned.
Anyone can compose a list of lurkers. Still no town motivation here.
Why are you analyzing his first posts. This was before you started head hunting and turned this into the French Revolution, so I believe noting who has not posted is not a useless thing to do, and could definitely be a town action in my eyes.
I would analyze more, but I need to get to school.
|
On December 21 2012 00:09 Chromatically wrote:
Actually, after looking at Corazon's defense again, I don't like it. His reads are terrible. He puts half the people as possible scum to make sure that he can keep his options open.
Why is keeping my options open bad? If I dismiss everyone as town or scum, that just gives the chance of someone flying under the radar later and going unscathed while we kill each other off.
|
On December 21 2012 00:37 Chromatically wrote:
To any townies: no lynch is a terrible idea. If we have a no lynch, we are just at d2 in the same position that we are now, minus one nk. Put your vote on a scum read instead of a no lynch.
Well you know who my scum read is then.
##unvote
##Vote: Threesr
Let's get rid of him now before you let him fly under the radar. I'm going to stay on the radar, I guarantee that, he won't.
|
On December 19 2012 23:21 cakepie wrote:
cDgCorazon: you need to justify your stance on why lurkers should be handled on a "case to case basis" as this is a point of disagreement between you and several other players, myself included.
Q1. How much time should someone be allowed in order to "sit back and figure things out?" A day phase is 48 hours long. What do you think is a reasonable expectation in terms of productive contribution from each player within that time frame? Is two to three substantial posts too much to ask?
Q2. threesr openly condones lurking, and claims a lurking playstyle (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=17239117). He was banned elsewhere, and modkilled in his last game here on TL. How do you propose we approach this situation, from your standpoint of handling on a "case to case basis" ? Where would you draw the line for unacceptable behavior, if his effort does not improve?
I do apologize for not answering your questions, which I will do so now in the little time I have before going to work.
In terms of figuring things out, I would say between 24-36 hours should be allowed for someone at the beginning of the first day phase. That way, others can put some pressure on and make other arguments, and instead of focusing on the case of one person, they can sit back and see things from a wider perspective to make their reads. However, I do feel that they should come forward with at least their reads on Day 1, even if they do not vote for anyone. Contributing all at once with a great amount of information all at one place is a lot more convenient for all of us than make several reads as the day goes on. We know more information than we did 24 hours ago, and everyone has posted enough to get off the "lurker label", someone making a smart evaluation here would most certainly more than make up for 24 hours of not posting much detail.
Unacceptable behavior would be coming to conclusions too fast, as in threesr's case. He likes to lurk, and besides a few posts here and there, and his self-defense from my attacks, he has mostly been in the shadows. He has openly accused multiple people of being scum, which signals something is not right. Why would you pursue multiple cases within a few hours when the focus is on one or two people. To figure that out, we must ask ourselves two questions:
What would be a possible Mafia lynching policy?
The mafia knows who the other mafia are, so they should be looking to defend fellow mafia that are under attack. On offensive lynching policy, they should all look to communicate with each other to be on the same page voting wise, and as long as a member of the mafia does not get lynched, they are content to see anyone and everyone get lynched, because it would be the town just killing themselves off and playing the game for them. Hypothetically, the mafia could not kill anyone and still win the game if the town manages to argue themselves to death. Of course, this is unlikely.
What would be a possible SK lynching policy, assuming that we have an SK?
The SK policy is similar to the mafia's lynching policy, except the only one they have to defend is themselves. They are ok with anyone and everyone getting lynched, as long as it is not them. Along with the Mafia, they could hypothetically win without killing anyone, as long as the town lynches each other, and he never get targeted.
If you would like more detail, do not be afraid to ask. I will gladly be able to help you after work.
|
On December 21 2012 08:16 Mocsta wrote:
@corozon
im disapointed you raised the issue of sk.
the pessimist in me things this is a distraction ploy..
But im optimistic today and instead ask of you... Why you think its relevant to raise this item 1hr before lynch. I assume you will respond in night phase
I responded to these things the first moment I could when asked for clarity. I did not intend to time it with any lynch, and the issue of spag did not even include the sk issue.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On December 21 2012 07:39 cDgCorazon wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 23:21 cakepie wrote:
cDgCorazon: you need to justify your stance on why lurkers should be handled on a "case to case basis" as this is a point of disagreement between you and several other players, myself included.
Q1. How much time should someone be allowed in order to "sit back and figure things out?" A day phase is 48 hours long. What do you think is a reasonable expectation in terms of productive contribution from each player within that time frame? Is two to three substantial posts too much to ask?
Q2. threesr openly condones lurking, and claims a lurking playstyle (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=17239117). He was banned elsewhere, and modkilled in his last game here on TL. How do you propose we approach this situation, from your standpoint of handling on a "case to case basis" ? Where would you draw the line for unacceptable behavior, if his effort does not improve?
I do apologize for not answering your questions, which I will do so now in the little time I have before going to work. In terms of figuring things out, I would say between 24-36 hours should be allowed for someone at the beginning of the first day phase. That way, others can put some pressure on and make other arguments, and instead of focusing on the case of one person, they can sit back and see things from a wider perspective to make their reads. However, I do feel that they should come forward with at least their reads on Day 1, even if they do not vote for anyone. Contributing all at once with a great amount of information all at one place is a lot more convenient for all of us than make several reads as the day goes on. We know more information than we did 24 hours ago, and everyone has posted enough to get off the "lurker label", someone making a smart evaluation here would most certainly more than make up for 24 hours of not posting much detail. Unacceptable behavior would be coming to conclusions too fast, as in threesr's case. He likes to lurk, and besides a few posts here and there, and his self-defense from my attacks, he has mostly been in the shadows. He has openly accused multiple people of being scum, which signals something is not right. Why would you pursue multiple cases within a few hours when the focus is on one or two people. To figure that out, we must ask ourselves two questions: What would be a possible Mafia lynching policy?The mafia knows who the other mafia are, so they should be looking to defend fellow mafia that are under attack. On offensive lynching policy, they should all look to communicate with each other to be on the same page voting wise, and as long as a member of the mafia does not get lynched, they are content to see anyone and everyone get lynched, because it would be the town just killing themselves off and playing the game for them. Hypothetically, the mafia could not kill anyone and still win the game if the town manages to argue themselves to death. Of course, this is unlikely. What would be a possible SK lynching policy, assuming that we have an SK?The SK policy is similar to the mafia's lynching policy, except the only one they have to defend is themselves. They are ok with anyone and everyone getting lynched, as long as it is not them. Along with the Mafia, they could hypothetically win without killing anyone, as long as the town lynches each other, and he never get targeted. If you would like more detail, do not be afraid to ask. I will gladly be able to help you after work.
Was this a good enough answer for you?
|
I hate to ask, but what is OMGUS? It feels like it is when you vote someone because they voted for you.
|
Mocsta- I've said before that Mocsta is not afraid to create discussion, he has warned us before not to just sheep and make baseless accusations on someone just because there is a lynch train going on.
On December 19 2012 20:01 Mocsta wrote:
For all of the lurker discussions going to and fro. I think its disconcerting to throw accusations without either evidence, or bringing any new thought process to the table.
I agree with this sentiment, and do not want to discourage people from making comments. We need a town environment where people are willing to speak up (CONSTRUCTIVELY!)
I feel like he is creating too much discussion and trying too hard to get people to join in on the discussion that he appears to be very un-scummy. He is also advocating patience, which a mafia member would not advocate as long as the person who the lynch-train is going for is a mafia. He does not seem to want to jump to conclusions, which I applaud and see as being non-scum.
Read: Good Town, or Really Good Mafia. Leaning toward Good Town.
Aquanium- Very hasty to make a lynch instead of a FOS or telling the town what direction they should try and head in.
On December 19 2012 17:40 Aquanim wrote:
I'm not stuck in the middle. This has been largely useless so far.
As for the way discussion starts... someone throws down a vote.
##Vote: cDgCorazon
His posts have been particularly useless so far. Hasn't really responded to anything unless directly asked.
While this is a good way to start discussion, I feel like less dramatic measures could have been taken, so overall, I really think he should have done that better instead of automatically coming to the conclusion that I should be lynched.
He also attacked a member who flipped town:
On December 20 2012 19:36 Aquanim wrote:A real case: SpaghetticusSpaghetticus is posting reasonably and being nice. In fact, he's being too nice. He hasn't accused anyone at all of anything. He hasn't expressed any suspicions of any other player, or posted any analysis. In fact, he hasn't done anything useful for the town at all, while still looking active, and that is textbook scum.- Spaghetticus has been posting rationally... on defending other players, instructing other players, policy, and Mafia theory. THIS IS NOT A TOWNTELL.
- Spaghetticus has not made any cases on scum.
- Spaghetticus keeps telling everyone else to make cases on scum.
- Spaghetticus has not searched for scum. He has applied no pressure and asked almost no questions.
Well for all of the actions Spaghetticus has apparently shown that were scummy, he flipped town. It could have been a very bad misread, but it could have also been a ploy from a mafia member to get a productive and knowledge townie off the board after the first day.
Read: Either looking into everything too much, or a mafia trying to direct the town to kill each other off. Suspicious.
Chromatically- He is, in every single aspect of his recent play (last 12 hours or so), a sheep. He's jumped on the Corazon and FG lynch bandwagons, and has only made arguments recently about why lynching players already under pressure.
On December 21 2012 00:09 Chromatically wrote:
Actually, after looking at Corazon's defense again, I don't like it. His reads are terrible. He puts Aqua as probable scum and says that Spag is the best player this game? He puts half the people as possible scum to make sure that he can keep his options open. He says that FatChunk is probably town?
I'll keep my vote on FC right now, but any of these three (Corazon/FC/Spag) has a good chance of flipping scum.
Well now that Spag has flipped town, and with the knowledge that he did not defend me because we were both scum, he now has to reevaluate his opinions before proceeding. Jumping on bandwagons does not make you scum, but it is a very scummy move. What would be better for a mafia to continue to beat up on one person that everyone else has beaten up on? It would be seen as contributing to the scum hunt, but also being safe from being turned on should the person flip town. I'm 50-50 on Chrom right now, but that could change.
Read: 50-50, but leaning every so slightly towards scum, so maybe 51-49 scum.
@Cakepie- I feel like you are another one of those people who are making sense in this game. You are patient with reads, do not seem like a fellow who likes jumping on bandwagons, and seem like you know what you are doing. You are either a
good town or a good mafia. One is good, one is bad. While I do feel like your scum/town status should be evaluated at some point in this game, I feel like we should worry about people who have more holes in their game who are more likely to be Mafia.
Read: 50-50, but if it swings one way or another, it will be a huge swing. Either good Mafia or good Town. Good at the game either way.
Shz- I'm sorry to say, but his analysis so far in this game has been substandard. He has been very thorough in his argument about why I should be lynched, and he also attacked Spag a little bit when he tried to defend me. He seems to be getting "Mafia Tunnel-Vision", and can only see reasons for me being lynched, instead of contributing more to the town. Afraid to open up new accusations for possible fear of being called out on them.
Read: I challenge you Shz, to share your opinions like I have. How do you feel about the players in this game? How does Spag flipping town change your opinions on anyone? Until then, I am mildly suspicious of Shz.
Fatchunk- I still feel like Fatchunk is using his head in the game, and he has stayed cool under pressure, and has even thrown out reads of his own, which I feel we not taking so seriously by everyone else. I feel like these are really solid reads.
On December 21 2012 04:03 FatChunk wrote:
Town reads:
Mocsta - clear concise posting , good leadership, asks the right questions to promote discussion. I agree with his read of threesr. His argument against spag needs work but I think his head is in the right place.
Spag - I felt I should elaborate on this one since he's getting lynched tonight. While I agree that he has not shared a lot of his own analysis, neither have a lot of people. Also, he mentions that his analysis is in the background and will present findings as they arise. If he is not lying, this could be very useful to town. He has at least been active in trying to promote discussion, and defending people under pressure comes as a sideaffect of good judgement and rational thinking, something I respect. While I don't clear him completely of being mafia, I think it is more than likely he is town and we gain nothing from voting out Spag.
Possible scum:
threesr - derailing town thinking, being useless. I stand by previous comments.
chromatically - I have noticed that he pressures too hard to the point of almost lying and skewing my words and overanalyzing small reactions in order to further his agenda. Faint vibe that I think should be looked into. Also, he seems like an experienced player which is scary if hes mafia.
Aquanim - I believe aquanim, the driver behind lynching both spag and corazone, could be mafia trying to control town direction or at least direct discussion away from his mafia mates.
I feel like his reasons have been justified, and are not shots out of the blue to try and get someone lynched, which has been the majority of accusations so far. However, I do not agree with this statement.
Also, he [Threesr] seems like an experienced player which is scary if hes mafia.
I was asked to not talk about Threesr, so I will keep this brief. I do not agree with this opinion. I feel like it is mis-constructed and Threesr has not really done anything to prove this. I do feel a little bit suspicious with this reaction, but I do feel that his head is in the right place for this town by advocating patience. His vote for threesr was to pressure him to stop lurking and to defend himself. He did not feel like Threesr did a good job of doing that, so he stuck with his vote.
Read: Being patient, which is not a characteristic of scum. Prefers to make the right lynch instead of the one the is most popular. Probably a hipster, but anyways, 60-40 town is my feeling on him.
If you guys expect me to have reads that cannot be changed with one or two good posts, you are kidding yourself. It is always good to leave options open, especially in an unpredictable game like this one.
|
On December 21 2012 23:47 Mocsta wrote:
(1)
Consider a townie point of view:
-What is a scum read
-What is a scum tell
(2)
Consider a mafia point of view:
-What is a scum read
-What is a scum tell
From a town perspective, a scum read is when someone has not contributed enough new information to the discussion, and has only repeated one or two weak arguments over and over again. They refuse to see the error of their ways. Their arguments are mis-constructed and are without reason. They are afraid to call people out (a mistake I have made that might have made you all think I was scum, but I already have 2-3 people I would like to question once the Day cycle starts again) in fear of being called out themselves. That is why they are more likely to bandwagon.
I kind of jumbled the town perspective into one, so here is the mafia side:
When you ask "From a mafia point of view, what is a scum read/tell?", I'm going to assume it means ways that they have to paint others in a negative light to keep them from getting lynched. Remember, if the mafia have to accuse someone who is town of being scum, the townie has to make a ridiculous error, or their case has to be a very good lie in order to sway the town to vote for them. So they would need to have a logical post, but it would also need to turn a lie into a really strong argument. They need to convince the town that this person is scum, but they cannot go too far, for fear they are trying to push a lynch and get a townie voted. Another thing they have to worry about is pushing too hard for a lynch of a townie. If someone is a driving force behind a lynch, and that player flips town, they're going to have an immense amount of suspicion put on them. To them, a scum tell (which would be a reason to accuse a townie of being scum) would be someone who is lurking, someone who has only done things to anger others, and people who have already been given suspicion. These people are either easy targets, or have already been pressured upon (which would make them a bandwagoner).
|
On December 20 2012 19:36 Aquanim wrote:
##Vote: Spaghetticus
I'm not messing around with pressure votes anymore, this is a vote with intent to lynch. All aboard!
@Everyone: If you're not on this wagon you'd better have a really good reason why.
I would like to say, in Aqua's defense. He did call for a lack of sheep and bandwagons on his vote for spag. He would have been fine with one vote. While this does not change my opinion of him, I think he deserves to have this reminded to you guys.
@Aqua On the issue of voting me without really meaning it: What did a vote do that a FOS would not have done? Did you need to react that hasty? There were other measure you could have come back to.
|
I do agree with many of your points, I believe it is kind of fishy when you say someone is 100% scum and then turn back when someone has been defended by a town and pretend like it never happened. That is why you never say you think someone is 100% scum or 100% town. When you say something is 100%, that should mean it is absolutely true, without any doubt, that someone is scum/town. You cannot say someone is 100% scum and then go back on that statement. Not only does it look scummy, it also removes your credibility.
Aqua also raises a good point when he says:
He doesn't provide any reasons for switching off, he just says that he "read through everything again". How do you go from "100% scum" to a town read by just "thinking about it for a while"?
If you claim something is 100% scum, you better know they are 100% scum. You should have read all the posts and "thought about it for awhile" before you give a scum read, not after. Switching your point-of-view just because the one you were currently on is not something a townie does.
|
On December 22 2012 07:40 cDgCorazon wrote:
Switching your point-of-view just because the one you were currently on is not something a townie does.
EBWOP: ...just because the one you were currently on loses popularity is not something a townie does.
|
I would also like to say that I have a case against another person written up, but I would like to let this case settle with everyone else before we move on to someone else.
|
On December 22 2012 07:45 threesr wrote:
This is gibberish, and you are 100% mafia fmpov.
Threesr, we all know you think FC is Mafia. Please give us some of your other reads and go on the offensive for once instead of only playing defensive and OMGUS(OMG You Suck)-ing.
|
I would also like to see your thoughts on Aqua's accusations on Omni. Right now it seems like you are not looking at the big picture, and are only seeing possible cases about people who are accusing you.
|
Oh wow I'm so sorry Chrom, complete mistake by me.
|
On December 22 2012 09:03 Chromatically wrote:
##Vote: OmniEulogy
Well, let's hear it.
Trying to distance yourself from Omni? Why are you in such a panic to do so?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
