|
so it's
oneplus = town for defending me when a mafia never would
zealos mafia for setting up for tomorrow to hit maju
draco may be trying to do the same thing, I tried to look at the exact sequence of events but im getting tired now. his defense of me was pretty genuine
and mutant suspicious because he is a manic and tunneling really hard and shutting down discussion of anything but me. but I don't think mafia play quite this aggro.
af is prob town, but I dunno I think he is a pretty good player who could hide it really well and try to play this town leader mafia style. that's really risky though I don't think beginners do that.
|
I have many things to say about that long post. I'll address some now and some after the lynch.
That quote *was* originally mine btw. It keeps getting credited to nreekay and I don't appreciate it. >.>
On April 25 2012 10:07 yomi wrote:
you are being way way way way too passive right now. post. a lot more. don't let anyone lurk. make them just post whatever's on their mind. this is SUPER stressful for mafia. mafia have to re-read their posts 10 times before posting and are super super careful about everything. making them have to give an opinion on everything is awful for a mafia. so punish (really punish, not just threaten) the lurkers hard and anyone that won't come out with near-constant lists of their reads on everyone and why. mafia hate hate hate that environment. on the other hand don't let it get super cluttered. just make everyone come out with frequent clear posts. last game you guys really almost had us on day 2. it was super scary how the posting was going. very organized, very clear, very concise. I just managed to discredit xatalos to win it but otherwise you guys had us made, many of the lists had 3 or 4 players picked of which 2 were mafia.
firm, aggressive, but reasoned and frequent posting is mafia's enemy.
Really good advice that I don't want to go unnoticed. Our last game had over twice the amount of posting by this time, and it's hard to scumhunt when half the thread is inactive.
On April 25 2012 10:07 yomi wrote:
I'll excuse it in AF b/c he played the last game w/ me and I am playing this one very similarly and he has a little grudge against me I guess from last game.
No grudge, but the pattern is eerily similar. My primary point was that, yes, it was similar to your scum posting, but more importantly, a town has no reason to act that way. If all your posts were as useful and reasoned as these past few, nobody would even be thinking of lynching you.
The problem I have is now you've already acted this way, and now *this* is an inconsistency.
I'm curious to see how this turns out now. 35 minutes to lynch. If you survive, I wouldn't be surprised, but I would need an effort much more like these past few posts before I started trusting you as town.
|
Let's hear some more from the lurkers in the thread on the next day. I guess we shall see if yomi is town or not.
## unvote
## vote yomi
|
On April 25 2012 10:38 insectoceanx wrote:
Let's hear some more from the lurkers in the thread on the next day. I guess we shall see if yomi is town or not.
You're one of the lurkers, you know. Is this all you have to say about it?
|
yomi, I've just re-read your filter for about the 30th time today. Gah. I have the same problem with you that I had with willz in the last game -- I just can't see a townie acting like that for so long, but then you act like this for the last few posts and make me go "wtf?" in my head. If that was your way of establishing town cred for the first 40~ hours, calling people stupid and antagonizing everyone, it was an awful way to go about it. =/
I guess we'll know for sure in a few minutes. I'm going to be extremely disappointed in your play if you flip green.
|
I think that kills me right? 7 total
you are the only other active player lol so it's up to you to no-lynch. no other target is possible obv. this thread is too passive to do any last minute shenanigans like we did last game. maybe that will be a good thing in the future who knows.
not much I can say to convince you, you were the player I thought would FOR SURE vote me if I played this way but I thought I could prob survive it and come out with a lot of good info based on how people reacted to a real "event" instead of how day 1 is, normally where people talk about talking about things. my plan was:
get people to post if they had played a game before or not. I am genuinely too lazy to search everyone and see what games they played, I'm not even sure how to do this. filter by subforum I guess?
If they HAD played a game and also were suspicious of me, that would put them on my suspicious list because an experienced player would know that mafia don't play how I'm playing now. Except for me last game. But last game I was always thinking "what would I do if I was town". And I thought hey, if I'm town, I come out here swinging and get in a fight and see what happens. That will get something real going.
Then do what I was just doing in my last post, see who miraculously "knew" I was going to flip town. The way I, in a panic last game, made some vague allusion to not lynching willz on day 1 because I thought it would build town cred.
So that was my amazing plan and I still think it will work as you guys will now be able to read back and see how it all played out. who defended, lurked, and bandwagoned.
|
maybe you can see the turnaround AF when I back off maju? It's not 40 hours of me acting crazy. It's like 24 at most, and I never really go at maju. Read it in that context you will see it is a trap for mafia.
|
Night 1:
The assassinations were to be kept secret, while trusted deputies and undersecretaries quietly scrambled over the weekend to reallocate duties and fill empty posts. No one had been permitted to leave the building, and no one had been permitted to enter the eighth floor.
In a large, well-furnished conference room, twelve men drank their tea. They knew that the traitors stood among them, and beyond that, they still had a country to run. Some stayed quiet, while others made grand accusations in rising tones, levelling charges of treason and murder against former colleagues.
One of those was yomi, an acerbic fellow with deep ambitions and a dwindling power base. "I know it's you!" he pointed at the man to his left, "With the support of the Western imperialists and counterrevolutionary elements within the Party, you are to blame! I'm not sure if we should have you executed, but if we did, then we should have you executed!"
The man shrugged, and several others frowned. They soon decided that in fact, yomi was the most suspicious of those present. The Minister of Security nodded solemnly, and yomi was dragged out of the room, kicking and screaming his innocence, ranting about a vast rightist conspiracy whose members would surely go on to kill them all.
Half an hour later, the phone rang. The men hesitated to answer, until one inventive soul put the caller on speaker-phone. "He was telling the truth." the Minister of Security reported. "It is a pity that he is dead."
The Vice President sighed deeply, and a few others cursed. "We'll recess for the night," he announced. "I want better results tomorrow."
yomi, Vanilla Town, has been lynched!
Please PM your night actions to both me and GMarshal. Day 2 will begin in 24 hours, at 19:00 PDT on April 25, 2012.
Gossemerr is replacing St.Daniel.
Final Vote Count:
MajuGarzett: 2
yomi
Dracolich70
Zealos
yomi: 7
ArcticFox
ForTheDr3am
mutant
MajuGarzett
imallinson
St.Daniel
insectoceanx
Zealos: 3
insectoceanx
nreekay324
oneplus
imallinson: 1
yomi
|
gg lol  
|
LOL btw great post midnight
|
@ yomi- "mafia play to survive, town plays to win" right?
|
*sigh* gg As promised, I'm extremely disappointed in your Day 1. I see your thought process, but it's too antagonistic to get people to trust you.
Unfortunately, the result of that is that we've lost an extremely active townie, in a game where most people are lurking like it's the Brood War.
Going mostly silent for the Night. I'll post something close to the deadline, in case I'm shot.
|
On April 25 2012 11:03 nreekay324 wrote:
@ yomi- "mafia play to survive, town plays to win" right?
Speaking of lurkers....why the hell were you silent until just now?
I will be coming after all the lurkers on Day 2. Be ready.
|
That is all I have to say about changing my vote to yomi, I think zealos is the greatest chance of being scum at this point but yomi is close behind and I changed my vote to him for the sake of getting a lynch.
While I have not posted often, what I have posted is a collection of my thoughts from everything going on. These thoughts have not been one liners or contentless.
imallinson does make me a little suspicous with his last post being a little recap of what everyone else has discussed without adding anything of substance, he then votes for yomi, which i don't know if he is just jumping on the bandwagon at the end or not.
I agree with imallinson's assement that fox is not scum.
I am unsure of everyone else besides that zealos seems really scummy.
Maju is hard to read as most of what he said is in defence to yomi's erratic voting towards him.
|
I just woke up, it's 10 AM here. I wanted to check the deadline to see what happened so I could think about it when I had time during the day.
|
Damn, sorry yomi.
This changes some of my suspicions. I am less suspicious of Zealos now as if he was mafia he would have probably had voted yomi to ensure the lynch. Instead he left the possibility that the lynch would not occur. If he's mafia, voting for me would have been a wasted vote.
I agree with insect on imallinson as allin only voted when it seemed there was a high chance of yomi getting lynched as 4 votes had already been cast for yomi. He's now my leading candidate for mafia.
|
On April 25 2012 02:09 ForTheDr3am wrote:
@Dracolich70
Since you apparently like highlights so much, I will try to summarize our conversation to you. After your first post, I call out to you claiming that it is empty, and that town needs not be afraid of vivid accusations. I thought you would respond either by posting analysis of other players, with an actual case against me or with the newbie card. Instead, you actually answer by insisting that your post was fine. I do clarify about why "highlight" lists are pointless/scummy while asking a few more questions about your stance as well as for analysis. Your response is yet another defensive one absolutely insisting that your first post was fine, while evading all questions and trying to fling a bit more mud at me. A few quotes which I want to point out:
Going for a third on an opening post? I didn't find it productive to write analysis on you or any of you, especially since some of you had already started, without half the players present in a thread few hours old. I had written an analysis on the little you had written, but I found it counter-productive, when some had already taken the "scum-hunt"-cap on. 12 scumhunters makes it easy for Mafia to hide in the "I said, you said. I find you scummy". For the most part I have spent time trying to explain an opening post to you.
On April 24 2012 05:59 Dracolich70 wrote:The list was trying to draw a picture of how I feel the events thus far. Which is either guided by paranoia, or as a initiator for debate(?). I am not sure if this is the right way, as it can clutter the thread mightily quickly.
On April 24 2012 05:59 Dracolich70 wrote:The highlights are pretty accurate, I believe. Highlights don't muddy threads, but clearify. I bet mafia likes obfuscation, what do you think?
Inconsistency speaks for itself, and for me that shows that you did not want to "clearify" anything but rather struggled to find an explanation for writing it afterwards. To respond to your question, yes, mafia does like obfuscation. However, what mafia likes even more is an inactive thread where they barely ever have to defend themselves and everybody basically only lurks. They especially like a town that is afraid of making accusations, something that you still propose. Where is the in-consistency? I cannot find it it isn't so just because you say it.
Mafia likes either no- activity or mass-activity that clutters the thread and confuses people. I liked for people to take a step back. I wasn't talking in black( or white; meaning no analysis should be made, but people easing off a bit. Furthermore it contained topics I found odd, ie "Dunce is valid for targeting".
You didn't ask me to clarify the highlights, you didn't show any care for them, but you all about it was scummy, useless and empty, whether it being fear of manipulation or obfuscation. The fault is not mine, but someone like you that has used three posts without asking the questions you apparently had, but you spent more time telling most people that you think their posts are empty and scummy, simply because you say so, and makes me wonder if this is really about something entirely different, like you thinking I was belittling your playstyle. I don't know - yet. Maybe you are a person who thinks that what you do it the right thing for all, and how you see it the same. Maybe you are just a scum trying to divert attention away from you.
"Certainly, the fear of the thread going down in confusion from having too many people making too many accusations is a valid one. if that was actually happening.". I don't know if you are a megalomaniac or what.
On April 24 2012 05:59 Dracolich70 wrote:Show nested quote +When you say manipulate, who will manipulate what? The mafia the general flow of the thread? Other people? Yes, scum will sometimes try to control the thread and always try to appear as town. Saying that is just as empty as your list. Do you just post to post? Town/"town" can play in a lot of different ways, as can mafia. I hope you realize the dynamism of people having played before. If you find it empty, then so be it. I think of it making people aware, especially when people accused, then got counter-accused. Right now you are trying to dictate how I should play. I am not in the know of what people know, as this is labeled newbie game.
Rather than clarify what exactly you are afraid of, you throw together another bunch of sentences that look like an answer. You still haven't said what it is exactly you are afraid of due to what I assume is meta-play. I don't even know what "I hope you realize the dynamism of people having played before." is supposed to mean. You claim you are making people aware - of what? That accusations are bad? Why would scumhunting be bad? Which is something I asked you already and you refused to answer. I was answering your questions, or were trying to clarify that you are totally unable to comprehend the most simple things. Maybe you should read your own posts once again. You should be happy I gave them the time of day, since your questions were meaningless, and only added to cluttering up the thread with nothing of use.
a: I was afraid that accusing left and right would clutter up the thread; obfuscation It has been answered.
On April 24 2012 05:59 Dracolich70 wrote:Show nested quote +Certainly, the fear of the thread going down in confusion from having too many people making too many accusations is a valid one - if that was actually happening. However, it isn't, and you preemptively tried to discourage people from making advances at a time where not too much has happened yet in first place. How, in your eyes, should town be productive at all if not by analyzing posts? If everybody posted like you did, we would have no suspects at the end of the day, no information to build on later. Why do you still refuse to put forth any sort of opinion apart from unsubtly hinting that I am cluttering up the thread? Can you make up your mind? If I pointed out this is what has transpired, and it is valid, then my posting is valid. I was the first to say it. If people have jumped onto the right track, then I have been of more use than you have thus far with your guns blazing at shadows. So far I have spent most time explaining a post that is pretty self explanatory in the first place - twice now. I have already given a name and accepted d1 lynch. I can still change it.
You do two things here. Firstly, you completely misunderstood (be it by purpose or owing to my overly creative writing style) my post. I said being afraid of confusion resulting in too many people pointing fingers is alright if that was happening (hypothetical scenario). At that point it wasn't happening and I read your post as an unnecessarily angstly one. Secondly, you claim you are the first one to point that out, but in your next post And there we differ in our styles(amongst many other things). No one holds you back from doing what you are doing, nor anyone else. I spoke of my fears. You immediately told me that it was empty, and scummy. And I explained why it wasn't. You just refuse to listen, or at least try to comprehend.
On April 24 2012 05:59 Dracolich70 wrote:I am conflicted on yomi. On one hand he offers some of the same fears that I have with not giving away too much information, when it comes to roles, but more importantly it was this that caught my immediate attention on him: " it makes perfect sense if you don't play like maniac day1 townies who read way too much into things. there's nothing contradictory or unusual about what I said.", which is something I myself have tried to avoid, and thought was happening right off the bat.
you basically say that he said that first, assuming that the fear of too many accusations and of maniac townies is the same. You still did not answer how you think town should catch scum, if not by accusation and analyzing. Yes, it is the same things. But finally a good question.
When I say it "that caught my immediate attention..." it was from my in-depth analysis perspective, which I have done in the second half of the day. What caught my immediate attention with Yomi from a non-analysis perspective was him thinking that being a dunce was alright for targeting, second was he was both unhelpful, and not 100% sold on lynches. When I said I was the first, I thought I was, since you were on me for saying it, and calling it empty. If he said it first, then we are just two who were afraid of the same things, which I found out, when reading/analyzing in-depth.
Next, you finally deign yourself to make an analysis, with your prime suspect being Maju (despite only mentioning yomi in an earlier post while Maju had already made basically all the relevant posts you build your case on). The information is there. This is how I sometimes work. I observe, then make in-depth analysis. Yes, most of the information was already there, but I want to wait it out to see which one I pin-point as most likely, with all the information that lies, when I have to vote. To me most of you are scummy for one way or another. But we only need three, not 9, 12, or whatever.
On April 24 2012 05:59 Dracolich70 wrote:I see a problem with this on multiple levels. First off, he offers consensus as the most important thing, but doesn't register that yomi is willing to bow down for this very consensus if it is as such. He asks for reasonable things from yomi - things he himself does not offer in return, when it comes to st. Daniel for the weak reason of him asking for help in a newbie game, much like he even did before Daniel, and I am "dumbfounded" as to why he did this. Lastly, that on one hand he offers to Zealos that we should lynch someone, but then uses the exact same reasoning against yomi as suspect. If we should suspect yomi on these things, then it should be more so with Maju. At best Maju is hypocritical.
Firstly, wanting an consensus on lynch all lurkers is a few lightyears different from yomi "offering a consensus" by putting an unfounded vote into the room. He is asking yomi to at least give reasons (or anything more than half-flame oneliners) for the vote without giving reasons himself - because he wasn't the one randomly voting. When it comes to St.Daniel, I do agree that it was a questionable post, but what sort of reason would he need to give if the reason why he thought that St.Daniel might be suspicious is that he needed help that early in the game? You say that he is hypocritical for agreeing with the general fact that somebody should be lynched on day 1 while pointing out that yomi is putting an unfounded vote on him, making it more likely that someone is lynched - in the context that yomi said that he wasn't sure whether a day 1 lynch is good himself. Where is the issue? Maju talks about a consensus how we should do things, which includes d1 lynch, lynching lurkers, etc - all that can be agreed upon. When yomi says, "I'm not 100% convinced that we should lynch day1. but if we do". He is referring to this consensus. Maju not only objects to being targeted, but also: " He says he isn't sure about lynching someone then votes when no one else has."
Concerning St. Daniel, yomi and Maju, I think i have pointed it out it my analysis. Maju finds yomi suspicious for something he himself did before yomi. a) "I agree that we should lynch someone", b) and then he targets St. Daniel for the same reason, "asking for help", something he did before St. Daniel; weak reason, just like being dunce.
Why are you trying to defend Maju? And so weakly? If you don't find Maju suspicious then don't vote for him. I do, and therefore I put him on top, and I gave reasons that are all documented, not made up.
On April 24 2012 05:59 Dracolich70 wrote:Maybe the best answers can be found here: "Yes, I guess I was posting defensively. I did this not because I was mafia, but because yomi's was the first vote, and Zealos, one of the only others who had posted at that point, was accusing me of being scummy. I was fearful that yomi's ideas may gain traction early on so I was trying to highlight that your vote had no substance.". Why would he be fearful 1) as a townie. 2) That yomis near no-reason posts would gain traction?
2) Yomi.
Let's play the "ask yourself that question" game. Why are/were you, too, fearful of accusations in general (while the thread is/was too inactive) and spent two posts being defensive by the means of insisting that your first post was fine? Justifying yourself is fairly natural even for a townie when being pressured (especially with a vote), but why would you use that as a case against Maju when you are doing that yourself? (While also saying that he is hypocritical.) I am not fearful for myself, but for Mafia to win. I don't think the thread was inactive. On the contrary, half the players had yet to show up, and some were already playing the Scumhunting game right off the bat.
Your case against yomi isn't really a case, you agree with him on one fact, then say he is of little use while saying yourself before that ? I know my case against yomi wasn't as in-depth as with Maju, simply because the most relevant thing is my vote. Yomi was my first suspect, as said earlier, but after doing an in-depth analysis, I thought Maju was on top. I am not static. You seem to be.
Yomi doesn't really answer questions and doesn't try to hide it, nor willingness to alter it. My case against yomi should be relatively clear. I empathize with his stances; not trying to give scum too much, hope to avoid crazed out scumhunters, whom like all of us are suspicious, but fearful that it clutters the thread and give mafia a good place to blend in, making it harder to find scum, and since some had already started, it "forced" at least me to not do it.. These are the only things I agree with him on.
On April 24 2012 05:59 Dracolich70 wrote:If people have jumped onto the right track, then I have been of more use than you have thus far with your guns blazing at shadows.
the pointing out what you agreed with him on is at least potentially useful. Yeah, but the deficits are not useful, and they carry the most. And apparently not only to me.
To me, all that reeks of inconsistency and scumminess. However, I am aware of the fact that I might be suffering from tunnel vision or confirmation bias, so I'd like to hear other people's response to this for now. It's always something that you realize tunnel vision can be involved. At least there were a few good questions in there in the end.
|
Hi everyone. I will get caught up to speed and be posting tomorrow. I did read a little bit though, and just want to comment on this:
On April 25 2012 11:03 ArcticFox wrote:*sigh* gg As promised, I'm extremely disappointed in your Day 1. I see your thought process, but it's too antagonistic to get people to trust you. Unfortunately, the result of that is that we've lost an extremely active townie, in a game where most people are lurking like it's the Brood War. Going mostly silent for the Night. I'll post something close to the deadline, in case I'm shot.
Please don't do this. Post as much as you can. We need to be active if we want to make an accurate assessment on people's alignments. NOBODY should be worried about dying or saying anything that might get them killed. An active town discussion is what we need. Not posting allows the scum to just sit around without having to contribute.
So, lets get the discussion's, analyses, and POST-based cases going starting this night.
|
On April 25 2012 04:15 MajuGarzett wrote:On Dracholich70's accusation Show nested quote +
I see a problem with this on multiple levels. First off, he offers consensus as the most important thing, but doesn't register that yomi is willing to bow down for this very consensus if it is as such.
You being confused as to why he both talks about "not 100% sold on lynch", but adds "in case this is the consensus then I vote for Maju". You: " He says he isn't sure about lynching someone then votes when no one else has". Show nested quote +He asks for reasonable things from yomi - things he himself does not offer in return, when it comes to st. Daniel for the weak reason of him asking for help in a newbie game, much like he even did before Daniel, and I am "dumbfounded" as to why he did this. The only thing I asked for from yomi was for his reasons why he voted for me. I explained why I said what I did about Daniel, did not vote for him, and am now not at all suspicious of him being mafia. He did, "I'm voting for you because you are stupid or mafia but you cannot be a good townie."; . You both gave weak reasons. Yours even weaker, because you target St. Daniel for the reasons of asking for help. Something you yourself did before him. You project your own actions onto others who do what you do, and call them suspicious, hence you would find yourself very suspicious. I do too.
[quote]Lastly, that on one hand he offers to Zealos that we should lynch someone, but then uses the exact same reasoning against yomi as suspect. If we should suspect yomi on these things, then it should be more so with Maju. At best Maju is hypocritical.
[quote]My case against yomi was that he stated he was unsure of lynching then proceeded to be the first one to vote, and then did not give reasons for his vote. I would have had no problems with his vote if he had given reasons.
[quote]Yes, I guess I was posting defensively. I did this not because I was mafia, but because yomi's was the first vote, and Zealos, one of the only others who had posted at that point, was accusing me of being scummy. I was fearful that yomi's ideas may gain traction early on so I was trying to highlight that your vote had no substance.". Why would he be fearful 1) as a townie. 2) That yomis near no-reason posts would gain traction?
[/quote]
[quote]To the first point, no one wants to die whether they are mafia or townie. Not only would dying be less fun on my part, dying on the first day would result in me losing experience in playing this game. Also, me dying as a townie would just be conducive to mafia victory. On the second point, two of the only people who had posted at that point were accusing me so I didn't want a bandwagon effect to occur. Because of this I pointed out yomi's lack of a substantial accusation as early as possible.[/quote]1)Mafia plays for survival, town plays for doing their part for as long as they can. You being afraid of your own survival, speaks volumes of you being a scum. Of course no one wants to die right of the bat, but being fearful of it, is another thing entirely. You even identify it as mafia play, when cornered, but try to add, but I am not doing it because I am mafia.
2) First off it is pretty funny considering, you were first to play the suspicious card of anyone, and on St. Daniel, and only giving the reason for not doing the Vote: St. Daniel, was due to it being a newbie game: "The only person who's shown signs of being something other than vanilla townie so far is St. Daniel as I'm unconvinced that a townie would need help so early. I don't want to vote yet though as since its a newbie game he might just want general help and has shown no distinct signs of being mafia.". There are two possibilities here: You really want to vote for St. Daniel because he either has a townie role, or you suspect him of being mafia for wanting help, without having shown anything mafia-like. Second reason is mumbo-jumbo. First reason is the mafia in you talking. Freudian slip? Anywhich way, it is pretty weak.
Secondly, apparently you showed no fear for St. Daniels life, when you were willing to throw him in front of a bus, and with you not having faith in other peoples judgments, on behalf of weak reasons(at least so soon), it seems like you hoped people would jump onto St. Daniel.
[quote]Soon after we find statements such as this: "Furthermore, you're pressuring people to lynch someone who you so far have proposed no case against and when many people have not yet posted. To me this hints at you being mafia as you just want to get someone who you know isn't mafia lynched as fast as possible.", "It is, I just wanted to get clarification on the source of Daniel's statement since it could help tell if dr3am is mafia.", "I just meant he might be mafia or he might be a detective or medic or something."(concerning lurkers, something he doesn't consider is on yomis mind), ": I realise I may have phrased that poorly earlier", "Yeah, I realise now that I didn't really think that through."
[/quote]
What was the point of listing my posts if you were'nt going to analyze them.[/quote]Yeah, you are right, I should have analyzed those as well. I was stupid in thinking they were self-explanatory. Here goes.
1. This is exactly what you did, when trying to throw St. Daniel in front of the bus, without most people having appeared in the thread. You even wanted lynch d1.
2. You don't trust a new players statements, hence not trusting your own, unless they can back it up with knowledge of the game from someone, then you do. Basically you are saying we shouldn't trust you.
3. You are giving away that you want to know if St. Daniel has a bluerole or not.
4-5. Is you trying to do damage control, realizing you have slipped up.
[quote]Actions of mine that you have used to say I am mafia have rightly been interpreted by others as my being an overzealous townie. I would also like to point out that Dracholich did not post any suspicions on me until I mentioned I was slightly suspicious of him and then proceeded to formulate a case against me.[/quote]I didn't really post anything on anyone, until it was time to do so.
I haven't made this up, you have said these things. I bet you are happy they think you are merely an overzealous townie, for your slip-ups. Well, I don't. And I think I have given very good reasons. If people want to use it or not, is up to them. I have done my part in explaining my vote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/O5hmo.jpg)
