|
On July 22 2010 14:21 Divinek wrote:
you know i feel bad for the people like bc that are gonna have to sift through all this shit tomorrow. I hope bc starts posting more i dont like how quiet he is being
It honestly feels like pushing a damn rock up a mountain when i come back and see a thread like this after work, its insanely long and filled with so much just ugh.
|
 I hope you enjoy reading.
|
On July 22 2010 15:22 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
FoS tree.hugger, bumatlarge, darththienan, chaoser
[/QUOTE]
Was quite a while ago, would you like me to un-FoS them?
Un-FoS tree.hugger, bumatlarge, darthienan
I will still be voting chaoser D3.
|
On July 22 2010 15:22 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
Pandain similar reasons, alot of finger pointing, lots of arguing leading to derailing the thread into the spiral of what the day ran into.
Sadly that's true. Eventually it got to the point where even though most of us knew that there was a chance none of the 3 main targets were mafia we couldn't do anything because the votes were so stacked. *sigh*
In my defense however, at the time I felt I was contributing because I felt neither of the proposed canidates then (BB or Subversion I believe) were likely. I felt I offered at least a more likely candidate.
As for Pyrr, it seems to me that a mafia wouldn't have invested that hard in attacking Darth. I mean, Pyrr kept on debating Darth up to his lynching. Perhaps previous mafia experts can elaborate on whether that is a common mafia technique but from what I understand it is unlikely.
That does not eliminate the chance however.
Youngmini.... undecided. Still have faith in him(secret alliance ftw), but I need to investigate more.
With all that said, I am simply noting two players especially that have not been as active as they perhaps should. Jayme/Zeks. Zeks to me is more worrisome because while Jayme at least has been appearing to help the town, Zeks has clearly contributed in 1 post or so.
With that being said I
##Vote Zeks
NOT because I believe he's mafia, I do not have enough information yet, but it's simply a tool to get him to be more active. A threat, if you will  . I understand this is common in mafia.  .
|
When the hell did I say "I think chaoser isn't mafia"? I said DTA/Subversion weren't, I was all out against chaoser and oh no everyone went ahead and lynched DTA. What's the point of that, seriously.
|
On July 22 2010 15:35 youngminii wrote:
When the hell did I say "I think chaoser isn't mafia"? I said DTA/Subversion weren't, I was all out against chaoser and oh no everyone went ahead and lynched DTA. What's the point of that, seriously.
Whenever you post I cower in my chair  .
So scary .
Also, where art thou reffering to?
|
pandain its not daytime, you can't vote right now....
|
On July 22 2010 15:45 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
pandain its not daytime, you can't vote right now....
Oh... hehe.
##Unvote Though I guess I never had it in the first place.
Stil, zeks, be more zctive!
|
|
|
Actually even more pressing than Zeks' short amount of posts is Tricodes amount, with the grand total of 6! Holy crud, talk about inactive.
|
On July 22 2010 15:52 Pandain wrote:
Actually even more pressing than Zeks' short amount of posts is Tricodes amount, with the grand total of 6! Holy crud, talk about inactive.
Hmm he's usually more active than that, but not super active, probably less than average. Could be due to some distraction / bored townie. Worth looking into, though.
Voting Zeks on inactivity didn't make too much sense to me though, I think there are more inactive people, though I haven't been scientific about it, yet. Like how many posts does Jayme have? Or lakrasmamma, who couldn't even be bothered to figure out who to vote for?
|
Hmm I tried searching "Jayme" in both the username bar and the keyword bar, and in the username bar with mafia in the keyword bar and it didn't work.
|
On July 22 2010 16:03 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 15:52 Pandain wrote:
Actually even more pressing than Zeks' short amount of posts is Tricodes amount, with the grand total of 6! Holy crud, talk about inactive.
Hmm he's usually more active than that, but not super active, probably less than average. Could be due to some distraction / bored townie. Worth looking into, though. Voting Zeks on inactivity didn't make too much sense to me though, I think there are more inactive people, though I haven't been scientific about it, yet. Like how many posts does Jayme have? Or lakrasmamma, who couldn't even be bothered to figure out who to vote for?
Oh I just wanted to vote him into getting him to talk more. Unless he did some crazy slip up I wasn't going to keep it there.
As for Jayme.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/profile.php?user=Jayme
That's her/his public profile. Just go to posts from there. His posts are better quality at the least though, which is why I'm more suspicious of Zeks/Tricode.
|
Roffles
Pitcairn19291 Posts
Yawn, all you had to do was ask.
+ Show Spoiler [Jayme's Posts] +On July 08 2010 07:37 Jayme wrote:
/in
On July 17 2010 07:16 Jayme wrote:
YEAA lets get this started!
On July 17 2010 10:30 Jayme wrote:
Yea is there gonna be a day post or what? On July 17 2010 11:23 Jayme wrote:
No day post? Alright I ...
vote:Amber[light]
because I want to and the random number I picked from excel from 1 to 30 landed on him. So the cookie crumbles. On July 18 2010 05:51 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 05:29 Divinek wrote:
I think voting inactives at the start to be among the better options. While it seems reasonable that people who get mafia go omg cool role, and want to post, some of them may want to lurk cause they think that's a good way to avoid attention or something.
So the only way to get substance out of these people is to call them out and pressure vote them. I'd think by now voting on an inactive is just about as likely to yield results as RNG...which is to say you have about a 1/5 chance of nailing a Mafia, and if we don't due to a crazy vote swing at least we have something to go on for the next day. I would believe that most people that are new would read other mafia games on this forum and realize the whole "Lynch INACTIVE day 1" policy TL has. I don't think any red would not post at all but i'm willing to go with either. On July 18 2010 07:36 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 06:25 SiNiquity wrote:On July 18 2010 06:08 tree.hugger wrote:On July 18 2010 05:39 XeliN wrote:
I'm not entirely sure on the inactive thing, if there is someone who doesn't post whatsoever they are dead anyway, and it encourages people to spam simply to not be case as inactive. Depends how things work out, if there is someone who at the end of day 1 has only posted one thing that is about as useful as typing "lol mafia!" then I'd agree but it depends on circumstance.
This only really applies for the first day, after that lynching for inactivity if there is not a more obvious choice seems like a universally very good idea, but I'm surprised more people arn't considering the idea of using a RNG to decide our first kill.
And OpZ just lol @ immediately claiming 3 people seemingly randomly as mafia. So much spam in the first couple pages. Get a hold of yourselves people, you're not witty. Also, our inactive lynches always end up being townies, but every time when we look back at the game, there's always a mafia member or two who was inactive at the beginning, or posted and spammed just enough to clear the inactivity bar. I propose we make a list of FIVE players who are inactive, and then RNG them to determine a lynch candidate. That way we either force mafia into the open, or catch that one newbie mafia who doesn't know how to post properly. At the very least that would make the town's move a little harder to gauge. If you narrow the list down to 3 I'm down with it. If you put it at 5 people and only get 1 mafia correctly on the list, then you've only done just as good as a blind RNG (20%). You narrow it down to three and conversely you have a chance to have a list full of greens and nothing else, which is likely because you're only using 10% of the player list assuming a red is playing inactively. Either go full RNG or go full inactive because a mix of the two is liable to get us a list with only greens on it which is even more pointless than just picking a random number. On July 18 2010 08:12 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 08:03 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:
RNG lynch is dumb because you have more of a chance to land on a townie, and then he could be a helpful townie.
if we lynch an inactive we're killing someone who probably would not have helped us anyway
however, i don't want to lynch someone that would just get modkilled since that's obviously a waste.
Bill, how many votes can someone miss before they get zapped? As far as I know they can't miss any votes at all. We have more of a chance to land on a townie with any day 1 method we choose simply due to the fact that there are 24 townies and 6 mafia...there is no way of avoiding this. As a matter of fact I would say we have a better chance of hitting a good red player through RNG because I mean...who's to say that this "good townie" isn't just a red being a good townie. I understand lynching an inactive is killing someone who wouldn't have helped anyway but you're still doing just that...just about guaranteeing a green lynch which is completely pointless. As I said before I'm willing to go with either, there isn't much we could do. The issue I see with RNG is verifying if it's actually RNG. On July 18 2010 10:16 Jayme wrote:
No-Lynch?
Oh hell no absolutely not.
I don't understand how a no-lynch is beneficial to the town if you're going to kill an inactive anyway. You learn absolutely nothing from it, you don't even have a CHANCE at hitting a red, and you're basically wasting a whole day on nothing.
No lynch is a terrible idea. On July 19 2010 07:53 Jayme wrote:
The whole mini Hyperbola bandwagon was rather funny. He comes in and says a few lines and then 3 people just jump on him like a pack of wild dogs.
Initially this bandwagon looked rather harmless but now he's got 7 votes on him and unless a miracle happens it looks like he's being lynched.
That being said anybody who advocates no lynch as much as Youngminii has is crazy sketchy while at the same time ignoring why people have said it's a terrible thing to do. In the end it's rarely the blues that actually win you the game and it's a few good analytical townies that save the day. If a sudden bandwagon comes up and all of a sudden a detective gets killed you have yourself at the very least a strong suspect list.
SO yea
##Unvote
##Vote: Youngminii
Even if you're townie your discussion sidetracked us like crazy. On July 19 2010 23:29 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 22:44 chaoser wrote:Vote Count:
6] Hyperbola (Divinek, Pandain, SiNiquity, bumatlarge, BB, Subversion)
4] YoungMinii (XeliN, Amber[LighT, Roffles, Infizzleundibulumizzle)
2] DarthThienAn (d3_crescentia, Pyrrhuloxia)
2] ketomai (citi.zen, lakrismamma)
2] Amber[LighT] (jayme, DarthThienAn),
2[ BloodyC0bbler (~OpZ, Foolishness)
2] LaXerCannon (Misder, citi.zen)
1] citi.zen (rastaban)
1] SiNiquity (Hyperbola)
1] Pandain (BC)
1] Infundibulum (youngminii)
5] abstain (LaXerCannon, tricode, SouthRawrea, Chaoser, protactinium, zeks) Voting ended at 10:10Subversion votes for Hyperbola at 9:16 - "No other clear choice" zeks unvotes Hyperbola, abstains at 8:58 - "Unvote like I promised" Misder unvotes Hyperbola, votes for LaXerCannon at 8:38 - "His posts don't have substance" Fooliahness votes for BC at 8:25 - "Bad vibes" Jayme unvotes Hyperbola, votes Youngminii at 7:53 - "Youngminii has is crazy sketch" BrownBear votes for Hyperbola at 6:30 - "oops mistake, didn't know you could absain, oh well, nothing I can do now." Those were the votes of people in the last 4 hours, starting with BrownBear's vote for Hyperbola Just putting the info out there Okay that told us absolutely nothing besides the fact that BrownBear apparently doesn't like to rectify mistakes and that Foolishness gets vibes. So at least Hyperbola turned up green and not blue, that would have made that freak miniwagon almost humorous On July 20 2010 12:58 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 10:27 Misder wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 20 2010 07:15 LaXerCannon wrote:Resources (fixed) + Show Spoiler +Jayme -> Amber[light]
Pandain -> abstain
DTA -> Abstain -> d3_crescentia
d3_crescentia -> DTA
DTA -> Unabstain
citi.zen -> DTA
rastaban -> citi.zen
youngminii -> Pyrrhuloxia
Pandain -> Incognito
SouthRawrea -> Abstain
~OpZ~ -> Chaoser
BloodyC0bbler -> Abstain
bumatlarge -> Divinek
Pandain -> BloodyC0bbler
Hyperbola -> SiNiquity
LaXercannon -> Abstain
Youngminii -> Abstain
Divinek -> Abstain
Tricode -> Abstain
Misder -> Hyperbola
Divinek -> Hyperbola
Pandain -> Hyperbola
Pyrrhuloxia -> Abstain
zeks -> Hyperbola
SiNiquity -> Hyperbola
Roffles -> Abstain
tree.hugger -> LaXercannon
Foolishness -> Abstain
lakrismamma -> LaXercannon
lakrismamma -> Subversion
BloodyC0bbler -> Pandain
~OpZ~ -> BloodyC0bbler
Pyrrhuloxia -> DTA
XeliN -> Brownbear
iNfuNdiBuLuM -> youngminii
youngminii -> iNfuNdiBuLuM
citi.zen -> ketomai
XeliN -> youngminii
chaoser -> abstain
Amber[LighT] -> abstain
treehugger -> DTA
Amber[LighT] -> youngminii
Roffles -> youngminii
lakrismamma -> ketomai
DTA -> Amber[LighT]
bumatlarge -> Hyperbola
BrownBear -> Hyperbola
Jayme -> Youngminii
Foolishness -> BloodyC0bbler
Misder -> LaXerCannon
zeks -> abstain
Subversion -> Hyperbola
BloodyC0bbler -> Abstain -> Pandain
bumatlarge -> Divinek -> Hyperbola*
BrownBear -> Hyperbola*
Chaoser -> Abstain
citi.zen -> ketomai
d3_crescentia -> DTA
Divinek -> Abstain -> Hyperbola*
DTA -> Abstain -> Amber[LighT]
Foolishness -> Abstain -> BloodyC0bbler
Hyperbola -> SiNiquity
iNfuNdiBuLuM -> youngminii
Jayme -> Amber[Light] -> youngminii
lakrismamma -> LaXerCannon -> Subversion -> ketomai
LaXercannon -> Abstain
Misder -> Hyperbola* -> LaXercannon
~OpZ~ -> Chaoser -> BloodyC0bbler
Pandain -> Abstain -> Incognito (?) -> BloodyC0bbler -> Hyperbola*
Protactinium -> Abstain
Pyrrhuloxia -> Abstain -> DTA
rastaban -> citi.zen
Roffles -> Abstain
SiNiquity -> Hyperbola*
SouthRawrea -> Abstain
Subversion -> Hyperbola
Tricode -> Abstain
tree.hugger -> LaXerCannon
XeliN -> Brownbear -> youngminii
youngminii -> Pyrrhuloxia -> abstain -> iNfuNdiBuLuM
zeks -> Hyperbola* -> abstain
What interests me is this block of voting: Misder -> Hyperbola Divinek -> Hyperbola Pandain -> Hyperbola Pyrrhuloxia -> Abstain zeks -> Hyperbola SiNiquity -> Hyperbola and these people: Misder -> Hyperbola* -> LaXercannon zeks -> Hyperbola* -> abstain My head hurts so I'll just give a couple one liners for now (I've been digging through this damned thread for like an eternity) The Hyperbola bandwagonMisder @ 10:43 Divinek @ 10:51 Pandain @ 10:56 zeks @ 11:22 SiNiquity @ 11:37 Within an hour, Hyperbola gets bandwagonned and is in first place: Show nested quote +5] Hyperbola (Misder, Divinek, Pandain, Zeks, SiNiquity)
2] DarthThienAn (d3_crescentia, citi.zen)
1] Amber[LighT] (jayme),
1] d3_crescentia (darthThienAn),
1] citi.zen (rastaban)
1] chaoser (~opz~)
1] Divinek (bumatlarge)
1] SiNiquity (Hyperbola)
6] abstain (BloodyC0bbler, LaXerCannon, youngminii, tricode, Pyrrhuloxia, Roffles) @ 11:37 (after roffles' vote) Definitely suspicious considering how fast and compact the votes were together Misder -> Hyperbola* -> LaXercannon zeks -> Hyperbola* -> abstain Misder -> starts bandwagon, jumps off when Hyperbola's screwed zeks -> fourth voter for bandwagon, jumps off when Hyperbola's screwed attempts at lowering suspicion? I already said why I unvoted for Hyperbola. + Show Spoiler +On July 19 2010 08:38 Misder wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 19 2010 08:08 Hyperbola wrote:Guys, really? Okay so I'm pretty much lynched because you people can't take a joke. So I'm leaving this as my legacy: People I think are mafia or atleast seem fishy:Brown BearShow nested quote +On July 19 2010 06:29 BrownBear wrote:
Ahhhh shti!
I am back, sorry. Is it too late to avoid modkill? Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 06:31 BrownBear wrote:
Whew, looks like I got back in time. Sorry about that. Time to go read the thread. Really dude? Jumping on a bandwagon before even reading the thread? youngminiiShow nested quote +On July 18 2010 21:01 youngminii wrote:
Actually, I'm not going to overlook it. Why would you place a vote on me 'just in case'? Especially after you heard BC say I was a strong player (which citi.zen evidently disagrees with)? You have these two guys criticising my post when it's not even serious, you jump on this bandwagon and then put a placeholder vote on me just in case?
Does this not strike you as scummy at all? Overly scummy but scummy nonetheless? In fact, I think this is the scummiest post I have seen all game (not that long). However, I don't think you're really that bad at this game and even a mediocre scum wouldn't do that kind of mistake. Will need confirmation on other more experienced TL mafia players on your meta. You are entirely too defensive when a person puts a vote on you as a placeholder. Either you are scum or a very nervous blue. You also endorse no lynching on the first day to appear to be "pro-life" and "for the town". I really don't see your reasoning behind this because a random shot in the dark of inactives or suspicious players can in fact nab a red. And if it doesn't you only lose a green because a blue would at least roleclaim or try to join up with trust circles to avoid getting lynched in this manner. (Divided blues that don't make connections are really hindering the town). SiNiquityI had absolutely no evidence against you before but now you are starting to stink of scum at first you took my accusal of you as a joke and brushed it off, but when people started accusing me of being mafia you saw an opportunity and went into action to provide as much evidence as you could find against me by even looking into past games. Then you just completely shut your mouth and is now waiting for the situation to close to start talking again (afraid you'll say something to bring attention to you and me being the perfect scapegoat). Also your previous posts were really try-hard in my opinion. You contributed absolutely nothing by typing up lengthy posts that just summarized what everyone said. Besides that you clarified and discussed some rules of the game and such. You want to make it seem like you are contributing and keep a neutral and non aggressive stance like a reporter so no one would suspect you. This could just be your playstyle but it seems like a very cautious red one to me. LaXerCannonShow nested quote +On July 18 2010 09:30 LaXerCannon wrote:On July 18 2010 09:04 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
If we randomly pick someone, we have a better chance of getting a blue then a red. Why don't we try voting for who we think is red? It's not like the game will automatically get easier for us as it goes on, since there aren't any clues. Also, at this point everyone's votes are spread out so we are nearly guaranteed an innocent lynch. Getting everyone to agree to vote for the random could be awfully tough.
IF we wanted to do the random thing, we could tie it in advance to something numerical in one or both of the playoff games tonight. Like number of factories made by WeMade players, or that number divided by two, or taking the number of letters in each winning player's ID and looping back to 1 if it goes over 30. It wouldn't be random, but we could independently agree on it, and none of us could influence it in advance. We don't know the distribution of red/blue/green in the list so it is almost as good as random unless the reds get us to agree on a bad number (like maybe they get us to agree on something times 2, which would never land on the first person on the list). We can take this step further by listing inactives in reverse order and numbering them from 1-X, use a number we obtain from the second paragraph and count through the list, looping when needed. I'm getting carried away here... I think lynching an inactive player is the best course of action. I also think we should get a list of players who are new to this mafia game so we know who they are. A new player who's scum can easily hide under that mask; I think it's best we can monitor them from the get go. Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 09:33 LaXerCannon wrote:
##Abstain in case I can't find it within myself to wake up early tomorrow to post (no other time >_>) Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 11:38 LaXerCannon wrote:On July 18 2010 10:40 youngminii wrote:On July 18 2010 10:13 SiNiquity wrote:On July 18 2010 09:59 youngminii wrote:On July 18 2010 09:51 Bill Murray wrote:
EVERYONE abstaining? I guess it'd no lynch. Didn't expect that to happen! Okay so everyone should abstain imo. If you have any objections to this idea, please raise it asap because we need everyone to switch their vote to abstaining. Even one vote = lynch and that will be very suspicious of the person who left their vote by 'accident'. ##Unvote Pyrr
##Vote Abstain I'm not sure I like it. The inactives will get modkilled, no one gets lynched, the mafia kills 2 more people, and then we're back at square one, no? On July 18 2010 10:16 Jayme wrote:
No-Lynch?
Oh hell no absolutely not.
I don't understand how a no-lynch is beneficial to the town if you're going to kill an inactive anyway. You learn absolutely nothing from it, you don't even have a CHANCE at hitting a red, and you're basically wasting a whole day on nothing.
No lynch is a terrible idea. If we lynch someone on the first day without any good reason there's a solid chance (12/15) that we'll hit a townie. That's 80%. There's also a better chance of lynching a blue than there is of scum. A no lynch is a gift that we should utilize instead of RVS. Bad idea, there's no incentive for town to post -> silent town = dead town Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 16:13 LaXerCannon wrote:
playoffs are done for today! my next post will be in....around 16-18 hours. First LaxerCannon recommends lynching inactives but then goes ahead and abstains. Then he goes on again about how we should just line up inactives to lynch and doesn't change his vote. Then he vanishes. This is fishy for two reasons. First the obvious contradiction, and second, the effort to try and direct suspicion away from him. He keeps pushing the idea to lynch random inactive people while the town debates over a few suspects and really does nothing but push the town in the wrong direction: not analysing the game but killing off quiet people. Then he talks about playoffs and keeps endorcing random picking ideas. That is wayy too anti-town to be a blue. And if he's green he doesn't care about the game much. ------------------------------------------------------- this is all I have now and hope I at least contributed to the game before I die sorry about trying to have fun guys :/ j/k ~peace
Vote: LaXerCannonblah. I don't want to abstain... but I don't know who to lynch I vote LaXerCannon because his posts don't have any substance whatsoever. He tries to contribute, but doesn't give any astounding idea. His ideas are based on previous ideas that have been said, and doesn't say anything new. Then he distracts from the conversation. Either Hyperbola is a mafia member that is trying every attempt to get out, by making false accusations, or he is a townie who make a mistake but is trying to amend it by giving analysis. I tend to lean towards the latter. Plus, Hyperbola is now being active, which is good. If he is a mafia member, his activeness may work against him because he will have to dodge a lot to make it seem like he is a townie. If he is a townie, well, good. An active townie a very very good. Hopefully, I made the right decision... Also, as many people already stated, Hyperbola was not screwed all the way. It was 6-5 for Hyperbola, a very close vote. Anyways... ITS 9:27!!!!!! WHERE IS THE DAY POST!!!! The initial miniwagon was enough to REALLY up his chances at being lynched. AT least on TL massive swing votes to lynch someone else in the last few hours is very rare and I've only seen it happen a very few times. I thought that wagon was ridiculous from the start and then people jump on it with absolutely no real reasoning whatsoever and weren't challenged on it....either that or they IGNORED their challenges. So yea Brownbear what the hell dude? Real reasoning for voting for him besides "lol I didn't know I could abstain but I found out later and didn't change my vote" On July 20 2010 20:18 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 15:38 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:
BrownBear i'd like to see more input from the rest of the town but i guess my sentiments on vets claiming boils to this:
1. the town wants the mafia to inadvertently waste hits on vets
2. vets claiming practically guarantees that this will not happen You have to balance the fact that you have a central confirmed townie with which to operate from. Randomly hitting a Vet is so rare as it is that I just don't see a huge benefit in keeping them hidden when one has obviously been hit...or the medic got a really lucky protection on someone. I personally like the vet claiming idea because on their own they are a pretty weak blue role. On July 21 2010 08:20 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2010 06:02 chaoser wrote:
Also, I'm going to put in my vote for Subversion. So far I don't know how I feel about BrownBear. At first I wanted to vote him. He's been playing badly and didn't do anything day one. But then at the same time people jumped all over voting for him in the beginning until just recently when people switched to Subversion, or at least it feels like that.
Subversion's little mafia mistake statement is just weird all in all and was part of that voting block (everyone's already mentioned this) so I'll put my vote on him for now but I'll have to see. Still a full day left.
##vote Subversion I personally understand the brownbear vote because I was thinking about doing the same thing. Subversion's strange comments have been well...strange and I'm really itching to vote for him because his foot in mouth syndrome could get us in trouble later in the game when saying something stupid can have catastrophic consequences. That being said
##Vote:Subversion
|
On July 22 2010 16:05 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
Hmm I tried searching "Jayme" in both the username bar and the keyword bar, and in the username bar with mafia in the keyword bar and it didn't work.
Oh when you search only put the name it in the Username bar. And then make sure you have "content only"
|
|
|
On July 22 2010 16:27 Subversion wrote:
when is night??
Why?
|
On July 22 2010 16:10 Pandain wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 16:05 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
Hmm I tried searching "Jayme" in both the username bar and the keyword bar, and in the username bar with mafia in the keyword bar and it didn't work.
Oh when you search only put the name it in the Username bar. And then make sure you have "content only"
Ok thanks. Looks like way more posts than six.
|
On July 22 2010 16:27 Subversion wrote:
when is night??
Lol now.
|
On July 22 2010 16:27 Subversion wrote:
when is night??
right now
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
