Newbie 922: Day 3

[Furry]

Trying to read D2 is super painful. You guys need to realize one thing, too much posting and too many walls o text actually can be anti-town. It causes problems for people since some lose interest, and cause problems for people like me catching up.

Also, when stuff is nice and short, people are going to read it more then once. I forget who has it in their sig but its true "succinctness is pro-town"

Give me another day-ish to catch up given that I have a midterm wednesday, but after that its clear.

Votecount
Nachomamma8 - 2 (havingfitz, Ellibereth)
havingfitz - 1 (Acosmist)

Not Voting - 4 (Furry, Nachomamma8, Panacea, Elementary Fermion)

With 7 alive, it's 4 to lynch.

[Acosmist]

"It is true that Abbot

Terrasson

tells us that if the size of a book were measured not by the number of its pages but by the time required to understand it, then we could say about many books

that they would be much shorter if they were not so short

."

-

Critique of Pure Reason

A xix

[Furry]

law majors...

I tend to like things nice and short in the writing department, engineering has hammered that into me fairly well. I can get long winded when needed, but when I write more in an average game then in a semester of classes, with even almost all of that coming in GEs, you see where im going with that.

[havingfitz]

Havingfitz, I dunno about Acosmist, but I'm still waiting for this:

Once Cojin claimed Doc his fate was most likely sealed, so not being the D1 lynch was a moot point that ended up being the best outcome for town (though I am somewhat surprised he survived N1).

what

What don’t you understand? I elaborated on the comment in the very next line of the post, shown below, which neither of you included:

If Cojin had been the D1 lynch I’m certain Lawls would have been kept around to distract town on D2. Now we have a clean slate with the top two D1 bandwagons gone.

In addition to the top two scum suspects being removed, which is detrimental to scum as they like to have scummy town in the game, we have the bandwagons to mull over. Which there seems to be a significant lack of (ie consideration of the mislynch bandwagon) with respect to the townie that actually got lynched D1.

All of these quotes from Day 2 weren’t solid enough?

Not... necessarily, against the way you've been firing at him.

How have I been “firing at him?” By responding to his excruciating painful and inaccurate posts towards me?

Your question was do I feel Acosmist is scum?
No. I do not think Acosmist is one of the two Mafia in this game. He is playing a cr@p game from a town perspective and batting 0% in his scum targets for the game. If he is scum I'll have to congratulate him but with the way he tunnelled town on D1 I have a hard time believing he would be scum. I also feel like our wallpost exchanges are more town vs town. I do think a lot of his play is not in the best interest of scumhunting though, but despite that he is still further down my list than Nacho, you, and probably EF at this point.

Oh, and about that. See, your case on me is virtually assembled from the same stuff as the one on him. Which logically reduces his weight on the Nach-Fitz balance and dips you a little lower on my scumdar.

My case is more gut than anything but I have made several posts (HF ISO 2, 3, 36, 41, 54) where I discuss my suspicions of you. The late hammer would only be a small part of those suspicions. You and EF are close to each other in my mind. His play has dropped a good deal since the middle of D1. I did have the BaB/Elli spot high on my list but it has moved down my list a bit since Elli took over. Ray did so little that any thoughts on that spot will need to wait until Furry has been involved longer.

What does the fact he’s voting me matter? Scum still have to be loving the exchange (whether Acosmist is among them or not).

... ... Er. I don't think I'm being clear enough, maybe? Acosmist is voting you, as in you're his prime suspect. As in he's

going

to investigate you, and it smells funny that you're trying to dismantle said investigation on the grounds of saying scum are enjoying it.

Er...uhmmmm, maybe I wasn't clear. Regardless of what Acosmist is trying to achieve with his posts...voting, investigating, rehashing the same points over and over again, etc...as I'm currently inclined to think it is town on town, scum have to be enjoying this debate (especially since there is no reason for them to read through it) and I would argue it is doing scum more good than town. Ask them when the game is over.

Coming out of D/N1 I'm leaning against Acosmist being scum

...

slightly against EF as scum.

TBD on Ray. ATM, I'm thinking scum are within the BaB, Pan and Nacho group. Really don't like how Nacho handled the end of D1 though.

Vote: Nacho

You actually

said

that you thought Acosmist had a decent chance of being scum

, then you voted Nacho. Since then, you've been embarking on a novella against Acosmist and having fits on Elementary without moving your Nacho vote. Then you somewhat abruptly decide Acosmist is town and (along with yourself) distracting the rest of town from the hunt. This feels... weird...

Where did I say Acosmist had a decent chance of being scum (bolding by me)? This is a lie (unless I’m overlooking it in my ISO or not recalling it) and is in line with most of this post of yours...inaccurate and misleading.

Er, no it's not. Where you said it (and included in the post to begin with, lol) is bolded, italicized, underlined, and red. I promise you I'm not trying to be rude, but I'm beginning to wonder if Acosmist's jibe about whether or not you read the posts is correct.

So you interpret my saying “I’m leaning against Acosmist being scum” translates to you as Acosmist has “a decent chance of being scum?” We’ll just have to disagree on our interpretations of those comments.

WTH does “embarking on a novella” mean in relation to keeping my vote on Nacho?

It means you've had a vote out on Nacho all Day and you've spared him no attention in the face of constructing a novella of textwalls against Acosmist.

Do you mean I’ve given nacho no attention? Other than his end of D1 actions Nacho hasn’t really done much D2 to sway or firm up my suspicions of him.

And what does my exchange with EF matter re: my Nacho vote?

Same reasons, except you even said you weren't feeling scum-Elementary (violet, lest we lose track of our own quotes again) before you gave him more attention than the recipient of your vote.

Would you rather I did not exchange posts with EF? Does my top suspect and recipient of my vote have to have the bulk of my attention? IMO, no.

Trying to read D2 is super painful. You guys need to realize one thing, too much posting and too many walls o text actually can be anti-town. It causes problems for people since some lose interest, and cause problems for people like me catching up.

Careful not to stifle discussion.

[Furry]

Trying to read D2 is super painful. You guys need to realize one thing, too much posting and too many walls o text actually can be anti-town. It causes problems for people since some lose interest, and cause problems for people like me catching up.

Careful not to stifle discussion.

Oversaturation of material actually can do serious damage to the town, and usually the game ends up going to whatever alignment the most aggressive player is, with a slight advantage to scum. Go look at most 100+ page large themes. Almost every one of them went to whatever alignement the loudest player was.

Just tone it down. Concise is nice.

@everyone - can you summarize the case on whoever you are voting in five sentances or less?

[havingfitz]

Oversaturation of material actually can do serious damage to the town, and usually the game ends up going to whatever alignment the most aggressive player is, with a slight advantage to scum. Go look at most 100+ page large themes. Almost every one of them went to whatever alignement the loudest player was.

Just tone it down. Concise is nice.

@everyone - can you summarize the case on whoever you are voting in five sentances or less?

I agree, I was joking.

Case on Nacho:
1. Voting patterns on D1
2. His reasoning for switching from Cojin to Lawls - no mention of the Doc claim as a reason...simply in support of avoiding a no-lynch despite the fact he hated the Lawls lynch.
3. His admittedly bad attempt to get a cop claim.

[Nachomamma8]

As for the accusation post itself, the cop claim dig is a bit weird, I'll admit, but it isn't scummy. I don't ask for a cop claim, and I don't out any cops. As for the rest of this, what was I supposed to do? Lynch the claimed doctor, don't lynch anyone, or lynch Lawls?

Something you failed to answer.

[Ellibereth]

NACHO: Earlier you mentioned something about fitz/ray team and a good reason for it and you wanted me to find it. I gave up before I started. Tell me please.

[Acosmist]

Go look at most 100+ page large themes. Almost every one of them went to whatever alignement the loudest player was.

Maybe here, other sites can handle it. Star Wars Mafia at MiseTings was awesome. The quietest player (the serial killer) won!

[Panacea]

I forget who has it in their sig but its true "succinctness is pro-town"

Elmo.

What don’t you understand? I elaborated on the comment in the very next line of the post, shown below, which neither of you included

... Okie... Please explain THIS, the bolded:

Once Cojin claimed Doc his fate was most likely sealed, so not being the D1 lynch was a moot point that ended up being the best outcome for town

(though I am somewhat surprised he survived N1).

we have the bandwagons to mull over. Which there seems to be a significant lack of (ie consideration of the mislynch bandwagon) with respect to the townie that actually got lynched D1.

Wonder why we've not been giving appropriate attention to certain things.

[Elementary's] play has dropped a good deal since the middle of D1.

I concur.

So you interpret my saying “I’m leaning against Acosmist being scum” translates to you as Acosmist has “a decent chance of being scum?” We’ll just have to disagree on our interpretations of those comments.

Apparently.

Do you mean I’ve given nacho no attention?

Yes. Well, almost no attention, anyway, for someone with a vote on him.

Other than his end of D1 actions Nacho hasn’t really done much D2 to sway or firm up my suspicions of him.

And you haven't really done much to express those suspicions of yours, either.

Would you rather I did not exchange posts with EF?

Nope. Neither did I say anything of the sort. That's just twice now you've given more attention to players on whom you're "leaning" town than the one on whom you're "leaning" scum.

Does my top suspect and recipient of my vote have to have the bulk of my attention?

If you're a townie, yeah. Your win condition says find scum, lynch scum. Your vote says Nacho is most likely scum in your eyes. You should have been trying to convince us of this for days now, not exchanging low-blows with Acosmist.

Just had a bit of an idea. Havingfitz, are you Nacho's scumbuddy?

[Furry]

Go look at most 100+ page large themes. Almost every one of them went to whatever alignement the loudest player was.

Maybe here, other sites can handle it. Star Wars Mafia at MiseTings was awesome. The quietest player (the serial killer) won!

Not something to brag about... its supposed to be investigative/vigs jobs to get rid of lurkers if town wont man up to lynch them. Betting the last few lynches were led by vocal players.

Oversaturation of material actually can do serious damage to the town, and usually the game ends up going to whatever alignment the most aggressive player is, with a slight advantage to scum. Go look at most 100+ page large themes. Almost every one of them went to whatever alignement the loudest player was.

Just tone it down. Concise is nice.

@everyone - can you summarize the case on whoever you are voting in five sentances or less?

I agree, I was joking.

Case on Nacho:
1. Voting patterns on D1
2. His reasoning for switching from Cojin to Lawls - no mention of the Doc claim as a reason...simply in support of avoiding a no-lynch despite the fact he hated the Lawls lynch.
3. His admittedly bad attempt to get a cop claim.

No offense, but unless he has a town read on lawls, that was the right move, and even if he did its still debateable as to being the right move. Ive somewhat tried to cause no lynch once, and that was due to being a vig and wanting the second highest wagon dead instead, and was planning to do that by NK.

Small elaboration request on 1 though?

[Panacea]

EBWOP:

Your vote says Nacho is [out of all of us, the player] most likely scum in your eyes

[Acosmist]

Which there seems to be a significant lack of (ie consideration of the mislynch bandwagon) with respect to the townie that actually got lynched D1.

Yeah what was with your half-hearted attacks on Lawls and then jumping off just when his wagon got dangerous?

It's funny how you keep pushing people to concentrate on the Lawls voters, even saying that you think scum has to be on the wagon - convenient when you jumped off the way you did (to get on the doctor's wagon, good show that!). I mean, I'm awesome with talking about Lawls, too, because your interactions with him were scummy - not "hey dudes let's lynch a doctor" scummy, but up there!

So, by all means, let's talk Lawls.

[Elementary Fermion]

And I am not using ad-hom attacks to discount his points. I'm pointing out where and why I disagree with the points he is making and including any ad-hom comments for free.

So you do not know what an

ad hominem

attack is, then? That fits with your meta of not knowing what words mean and consequentially being afraid of them. For instance:

Fact => if you [Acosmist] didn’t post like such a pompous ass with an obsession to prove yourself right when you are wrong, the walls of text wouldn't have been quite so large.

In this game, where figuring things out is important (and being right therefore likewise important), you accuse Acosmist of being a “pompous ass.” This does not help town. What it does is attempt to discredit what he has to say because you do not like the way he says it. That “reasoning” is so juvenile that most school children would not fall for it.

EF...what is the purpose of your post above? How is it benefitting this game at all? I know what an ad hominem attack is. How are my comments on Acosmist’s posting style taking away from what he is saying?

My comments were based on posting style and had no bearing on post content or validity, which were both addressed without using any ad hominem attacks.

I would say a better example of an ad hominem attack would be your meta statement above regarding me. Or you calling Ellibereth a tool and a clown. Don’t you agree? Another good example would be saying someone is posting like a moron.

"My comments were based on posting style and had no bearing on post content or validity" – ummm, yeah. That is what I said you were doing. You go to extreme lengths to avoid any sort of discussion of your inconsistencies or any other logical debate, based on "posting style." Not helpful, that approach.

Let us compare your actions to my disgust of shoddy research methods. Ellibereth shows up and starts throwing his magical numbers "research" around. When he is asked for his premises, his methods, and his statistical analysis (all of which he claimed to have), he refused, having since dropped the charade entirely. Abusing statistics in this fashion is every bit as ludicrous as wearing clown shoes and a big red honking nose. So, based on his arguments and actions, he was a clown. His contribution to the game was worthless. (Hey Ellibereth, we are all still waiting on those statistics!) The way he has completely backed off that line of reasoning (sic) confirms this. Now, contrast this (an argument that is shown to be gibberish to the point where its proponent backs off) with your criticizing of Acosmist because he uses words you cannot pronounce. That is quite a bit different. You are afraid of “estoppel” because you do not know what it means but do not want to allow yourself to look stupid by asking, and so you say Acosmist cannot possibly be right

because of the way he communicates

.

@everyone - can you summarize the case on whoever you are voting in five sentances or less?

The above response to havingfitz is precisely why he is my number one suspect. He claims to hate "wall posts" or whatever, claims they are scummy, and yet continues to engage in the same. He does so while failing to respond to arguments and instead quibbling over vocabulary. And, HE WANTED TO LYNCH A CLAIMED DOCTOR. His reasoning for this was TERRIBLE, bordering on inexcusable.

Ellibereth is my second suspect at the moment, again for the reasons I outlined above as ancillary to explaining to havingfitz the difference between taunting stupid people and actual

ad hominem

attacks. He shows up, claims he cannot bother to read the things that have been written in this game, but finds the time to go through and make up some elaborate spreadsheet of every vote cast. He then claims that his numbers tell him exactly who is who in this game, except (a) he would not open his methods up to peer review or even describe them at all, (b) he incorrectly maintained an existential instantiation of a universal generalization based on existential instantiations when such premises were debunked, (c) he very quickly flipped his claimed results from his "numbers research" with no explanation, and has been reduced to posting at my frequency (which has been criticized as of late), and (d) has dropped his "numbers research" altogether without answering any of the questions put to him about it. To me, this seems like scum that replaced in and tried to throw a load of feces in our faces.

Finally, I am finding that I do not have the time to go through and put together posts the way Acosmist or havinfitz apparently do. I read everything that is posted, usually multiple times, and consider it all. When I feel I have something to contribute, some insight unnoticed by everyone else, I will respond. I am sorry that I cannot give you five thousand word articles every time.

[Panacea]

Finally, I am finding that I do not have the time to go through and put together posts the way Acosmist or havinfitz apparently do. I read everything that is posted, usually multiple times, and consider it all. When I feel I have something to contribute, some insight unnoticed by everyone else, I will respond. I am sorry that I cannot give you five thousand word articles every time.

My only real problem with your activity right now is the lack of questions. While observation is obviously crucial, more observation than contribution (remarks, comments, arguments, questions, etc.) generally gives off a more scummy vibe, whatever the game. Wasn't dissing you if that's how it sounded, my apologies.

[Elementary Fermion]

Finally, I am finding that I do not have the time to go through and put together posts the way Acosmist or havinfitz apparently do. I read everything that is posted, usually multiple times, and consider it all. When I feel I have something to contribute, some insight unnoticed by everyone else, I will respond. I am sorry that I cannot give you five thousand word articles every time.

My only real problem with your activity right now is the lack of questions. While observation is obviously crucial, more observation than contribution (remarks, comments, arguments, questions, etc.) generally gives off a more scummy vibe, whatever the game. Wasn't dissing you if that's how it sounded, my apologies.

Oh no no, that makes great sense. That does not change what I have going on in the real world though. But you do make a good point, so I will ask everyone:

What do you think of the way Ellibereth flipped on his own "research" and has not mentioned it again, despite numerous requests for his methodology?

[havingfitz]

What don’t you understand? I elaborated on the comment in the very next line of the post, shown below, which neither of you included

... Okie... Please explain THIS, the bolded:

Once Cojin claimed Doc his fate was most likely sealed, so not being the D1 lynch was a moot point that ended up being the best outcome for town

(though I am somewhat surprised he survived N1).

D’oh! ‘survived’ should read ‘did not survive’.

we have the bandwagons to mull over. Which there seems to be a significant lack of (ie consideration of the mislynch bandwagon) with respect to the townie that actually got lynched D1.

Wonder why we've not been giving appropriate attention to certain things.

General inactivity...those helpful wallposts...convenient to scum?

So you interpret my saying “I’m leaning against Acosmist being scum” translates to you as Acosmist has “a decent chance of being scum?” We’ll just have to disagree on our interpretations of those comments.

Apparently.

I’ve made it clear Acosmist is lowest on my ranking of suspicions...that you can not see that and would infer my position on Acosmist has been inconsistent and therefore should have had priority over my vote on Nacho is misleading.

Other than his end of D1 actions Nacho hasn’t really done much D2 to sway or firm up my suspicions of him.

And you haven't really done much to express those suspicions of yours, either.

Huh? You mean aside from voicing my suspicions and then actually placing a vote on him?

Does my top suspect and recipient of my vote have to have the bulk of my attention?

If you're a townie, yeah. Your win condition says find scum, lynch scum. Your vote says Nacho is most likely scum in your eyes. You should have been trying to convince us of this for days now, not exchanging low-blows with Acosmist.

Just had a bit of an idea. Havingfitz, are you Nacho's scumbuddy?

I don’t make it a habit of talking people into voting for others. I will state my case on players and place my own votes. I may on occasion encourage people to make a vote but I assume everyone in here is capable of making their own decisions on where to place said vote.

No I am not. Are you?

[havingfitz]

Case on Nacho:
1. Voting patterns on D1
2. His reasoning for switching from Cojin to Lawls - no mention of the Doc claim as a reason...simply in support of avoiding a no-lynch despite the fact he hated the Lawls lynch.
3. His admittedly bad attempt to get a cop claim.

No offense, but unless he has a town read on lawls, that was the right move, and even if he did its still debateable as to being the right move. Ive somewhat tried to cause no lynch once, and that was due to being a vig and wanting the second highest wagon dead instead, and was planning to do that by NK.

Small elaboration request on 1 though?

He said he hated the Lawls lynch (which I see as - oh whoa is me...I really hate to do this) and as I said...did not even use the doc claim as justification for his move off Cojin.

1. Iirc, his vote was all over the place, which...as a matter of opinion, strikes me as suspicious. Especially in conjunction with the last vote and reasons provided for it.

[havingfitz]

Which there seems to be a significant lack of (ie consideration of the mislynch bandwagon) with respect to the townie that actually got lynched D1.

Yeah what was with your half-hearted attacks on Lawls and then jumping off just when his wagon got dangerous?

It's funny how you keep pushing people to concentrate on the Lawls voters, even saying that you think scum has to be on the wagon - convenient when you jumped off the way you did (to get on the doctor's wagon, good show that!). I mean, I'm awesome with talking about Lawls, too, because your interactions with him were scummy - not "hey dudes let's lynch a doctor" scummy, but up there!

So, by all means, let's talk Lawls.

My change of vote from Lawls to Cojin was no more “convenient” than any other player’s change of vote throughout the game. I voted Cojin (for the last time) over a week prior to his claim so at the time it wasn’t “the doctor’s wagon”...it was “the cr@p player who was my top suspect” wagon.

How were my interactions with Lawls scummy or half hearted? It’s easy to throw a comment like that out without supporting it. Was the fact I didn’t lynch a townie scummy? Are the people who did vote out the townie scummy?

[havingfitz]

”My comments were based on posting style and had no bearing on post content or validity" – ummm, yeah. That is what I said you were doing. You go to extreme lengths to avoid any sort of discussion of your inconsistencies or any other logical debate, based on "posting style." Not helpful, that approach.

Ummm...you accused me of making ad hom attacks against Acosmist. I did not. The fact that I do not care for his posting style does not discredit the points he was trying to make. No where did I say, “Acosmist...you are longwinded and use uncommon words and therefore the points you are making are not valid.” That would be an ad hominem attack. Any points Acosmist made that I disagreed with were discussed without using ad hominem attacks.

You should not call people out for making ad hom attacks (erroneously) when you in fact have provided some excellent examples yourself (against Ellibereth and I). Insinuating I’m afraid of words and can’t pronounce them is a ridiculous assertion and serves no purpose to the game...especially when you obviously have no way of supporting either of those comments. Very schoolyard as you put it.

And the line I have bolded below is an outright lie. Show me where I have said anything to that effect.

Let us compare your actions to my disgust of shoddy research methods. Ellibereth shows up and starts throwing his magical numbers "research" around. When he is asked for his premises, his methods, and his statistical analysis (all of which he claimed to have), he refused, having since dropped the charade entirely. Abusing statistics in this fashion is every bit as ludicrous as wearing clown shoes and a big red honking nose. So, based on his arguments and actions, he was a clown. His contribution to the game was worthless. (Hey Ellibereth, we are all still waiting on those statistics!) The way he has completely backed off that line of reasoning (sic) confirms this. Now, contrast this (an argument that is shown to be gibberish to the point where its proponent backs off) with your criticizing of Acosmist because he uses words you cannot pronounce. That is quite a bit different. You are afraid of “estoppel” because you do not know what it means but do not want to allow yourself to look stupid by asking, and

so you say Acosmist cannot possibly be right

because of the way he communicates

.

The above response to havingfitz is precisely why he is my number one suspect. He claims to hate "wall posts" or whatever, claims they are scummy, and yet continues to engage in the same. He does so while failing to respond to arguments and instead quibbling over vocabulary. And, HE WANTED TO LYNCH A CLAIMED DOCTOR. His reasoning for this was TERRIBLE, bordering on inexcusable.

Stop exaggerating what I have said and making shit up. I have not claimed I hate wallposts or called them scummy, and have reluctantly participated in them while NOT “failing to respond to arguments.”

The fact I dislike wallpost exchanges and think they cloud legitimate scumhunting does not eliminate the need to engage in them on occasion.

Quibble over vocabulary? I guess I have to give that one to you...is that a scum tell? More than making ad hom attacks and making up accusations? And my vote on Cojin is what it is and has been explained in detail more than once. I guess the one good thing about my suspicions against Cojin not resulting in his lynch D1 is that I don’t have a townie mislynch to my credit like you do.

[Acosmist]

My change of vote from Lawls to Cojin was no more “convenient” than any other player’s change of vote throughout the game.

No more convenient? OK, champ.

I voted Cojin (for the last time) over a week prior to his claim so at the time it wasn’t “the doctor’s wagon”...it was “the cr@p player who was my top suspect” wagon.

We don't lynch players for playing like crap, we lynch them for being scum. But you'll deny up and down that it was a policy lynch.

And you don't get any points for having your vote on Cojin before he claimed doctor if you subsequently failed to get off him when it was the manifestly town-optimal thing to do.

How were my interactions with Lawls scummy or half hearted?

Lawls was going down (four votes on him before you got off the wagon) and you didn't want to be on the town wagon. You keep saying scum had to be on that wagon, so it's easy to infer a conscious strategy to leave Lawls alone, but let others lynch him, so you can bolster your townie cred. It's clumsy, but you didn't expect this much backlash in a newbie game. Either you really thought you could get away with lynching Cojin instead (you really think your pretexts were solid, and you regarded me as a lone voice in dissent who could be taken care of at any time) or you just thought getting rid of the doctor day 1 was too tempting to pass up.

It’s easy to throw a comment like that out without supporting it.

hey in that vein (not supporting things), don't you owe me a reply to my actual post rather than the strawman you aimed at (the summary)?

Was the fact I didn’t lynch a townie scummy?

Yes.

I think you asked that question thinking it was absurd, but

of course

not lynching a townie can be scummy.

Are the people who did vote out the townie scummy?

Not all of them, and certainly not merely because they did it. Five votes to lynch, and only two scum in this game. Do the math.

[Acosmist]

I guess the one good thing about my suspicions against Cojin not resulting in his lynch D1 is that I don’t have a townie mislynch to my credit like you do.

Oh, it

was

a conscious strategy.

vote: havingfitz

[Nachomamma8]

NACHO: Earlier you mentioned something about fitz/ray team and a good reason for it and you wanted me to find it. I gave up before I started. Tell me please.

Not until havingfitz flips scum.

PS:

Vote: havingfitz

[Furry]

He [nacho] said he hated the Lawls lynch (which I see as - oh whoa is me...I really hate to do this) and as I said...did not even use the doc claim as justification for his move off Cojin.

1. Iirc, his vote was all over the place, which...as a matter of opinion, strikes me as suspicious. Especially in conjunction with the last vote and reasons provided for it.

Do you think town-nacho would have not voted for lawls for the no lynch? Like I said, ive seen two scenarios over 40-50 games here where I would have prefered a no lynch to a lynch, and both of those were due to me being a PR in very specific situations where a no lynch would have given town a slight edge with my ensuing action.

Also you are at L-1 and should claim, especially given that I am leaning to a vote of you over nacho right now.

[Furry]

Oh and ~72 hours to deadline, will get up key points tonight or after classes tomorrow, will likely lay pseudo-vote claim dependent. We need that claim ASAP