Mini 973: "Bawhston" Brawl (WHAT A WIN!)

[q21]

Vote Oso

-snip-

To answer your point as to why I random voted after Hoopla's RC it is because

I am more interested in seeing others reactions to her than I am about being worried if I am coming off pro-town or scummy.

Mafia is - at its most fundamental - a game about perceptions. The fact that you are so glib on not being worried (or at least not very worried) about how you are perceived rings an alarm bell for me, all be it a small one.

-snip-

As for trying to divert attention, that wasn't my point at all (although on re-reading my post it does seem that is what I was doing). What I wanted to point out to Radical Hijinx was there there are some minor signs that are setting of some bells for me other than your RC. Granted your RC is the biggest thing happening in the thread right but not the ONLY thing nor do I think it is the most important. I got the impression he thought I meant that I was going to go “hide and watch”

(*)

how other reacted to your RC and I do plan on watching reactions about that, but I'm not not going to focus exclusively on it nor am I going to lurk while doing it. That was the point I was trying to get across. You came into the room and set off an almighty big bell, I'm trying to hear other noises that may be using that loud bell as cover, hoping to pass unnoticed.

-snip-

To be fair I must say that I agree with the first half of this post (28). We have no sure way of interpreting hoopla's RC until we have some context (in the form of a body of posts) to view it in. That said, I fail to see these other issues you are talking about in this post, please enlighten me.

Well Mr. Hijinx, I believe that scumhunting (or townhunting, in my case) is more reliable than investigative roles anyway.
I don't see why a PGO should have an effect on our day play anyway.

Clarify the term 'townhunting' please.

[q21]

I guess that's a reasonable playstyle.

[q21]

@ havingfitz - PGOs usually kill anyone who targets them with any night action. Its not policy lynch in my book because it is, as you said, a town affiliated role. The problem stems from it being almost completely uncomfirmable. There are better ways to play the role, but if she is town the route she has chosen isn't necessarily a bad one. Oso is correct in his statement that her claim is a null tell - at least until we can put it into come context.

As to Oso, I agree with some of his most recent conclusions, but the fact of the matter is that his initial reaction to the RC was to sit back and wait to see everyone else's reactions. That combined with his somewhat blasé attitude toward the town's perceptions of him irk me enough that I am happy with my vote for now.

[q21]

I am patiently awaiting Furry's promised explanations and would like to note that that is one long meal.

[q21]

I didn't like Furry's "More fishing for a policy lynch" comment until it became retroactively accurate with fitz Hoopla vote ('justified' by yet more inane rambling) in the very next post. I'm starting to like fitz pressure.

InflatablePie, if you dislike fitz for doing something Oso also did one could infer that you also dislike Oso. Would you please give a clear statement on your like/dislike of Oso at the moment.

[q21]

Looking back over the thread I have to point out that Hoopla's fitz vote is a little jarring. There is no reason given for it, there is no previous interaction with fitz. Just a vote out of nowhere. A possible reason might be fitz "Unvote since we appear to have moved on from RVS." That however, doesn't validate a move from Oso to fitz as she was, as far as I can tell, voting fitz for exactly that reason - an unvote 'cause RVS is finished. What made fitz seem scummier than Oso?

There is the possibility that Hoopla is dancing to Furry's tune. Furry votes fitz, and an hour and twenty later Hoopla, with no reasoning of her own, follows suit on the promise of an explanation that only arrived half a day later.

[q21]

q21: Which do you find more "scummy"? Hoopla's reasonless vote of fitz or fitz's countervote of Hoopla?

Other people can answer this, too.

Prior to Hoopla's explanation I viewed the two as about the same. Post Hoopla's explanation her actions make sense to me and therefore I view fitz vote a scummier.

-snip-

If my role is true, and I can manage to convince the players here I am town, I can be a ridiculously powerful weapon against scum. Town doesn't know if I am truthful or not, though. Scum does. Which provides ample information for early on D1, because scum's natural position will be somewhere from in the middle to pro-policy lynch, because they cannot afford to keep me alive. havingfitz and possibly someone like q21 are good character models for what I expected from scum, and would make delicious D1 lynches (from my perspective).

-snip

This paragraph (contextualised by the one's before, obviously) explains your vote for fitz. I would, however, like to question why you have included me as a good character model for scum. I have not been any way interested, even mildly, in a lynch of you - policy or otherwise. In fact I stated that I was against a policy lynch of you.

@Hoopla, I believe your RC just enough at the moment to change this vote and put my vote on fitz if you want to L-2 him and get a claim out of him or pressure cook him a bit more. His play so far hasn't been town in my opinion but I'm not completely convinced that he is scum. My money for Day 1 is on Radical Hijinx.

I dislike the way you seem to be offering your vote to Hoopla here. If you think fitz deserves a vote, voe for him. Otherwise don't. That said the rest of this post is a good reasoned argument which I happen agree with on rereading.

Enough so that I think a vote change is in order.

vote: Radical Hijinx

I specifically don't like the way he's admitted that his vote on Hoopla was a poor reaction but hasn't unvoted.

[q21]

Hoopla - this is my first game in about a year... not quite up to my old form yet. Give it time.

Nikanor - Doesn't there have to be a badwagon for a vote to be bandwagonny? One vote does not a bandwagon make, two votes barely does. Please explain how it is that you consider my vote bandwagonny in a bad way.

[q21]

The ratio of inane comments to worthwhile game content in your posts is disconcerting, xRECKONERx.

[q21]

Nikanor - Doesn't there have to be a badwagon for a vote to be bandwagonny? One vote does not a bandwagon make, two votes barely does. Please explain how it is that you consider my vote bandwagonny in a bad way.

It's opportunistic.

What opportunity was I scummily taking advantage of?

[q21]

And why is that Reckoner; because to me it seems either lazy or scummy... or possibly both.

I'm waiting to Nikanor to appear and call Pie's RH vote an opportunistic bandwagon vote.

As I've already stated, in what I am sure is not an all inclusive break down, I see it benefitting scum more than town because if the claimer is town and telling the truth:

- Keeps other PRs from touching you at night

(Good for town)

- As long as you are alive it continues to cast suspicions on validity of your claim and motives behind the early claim

(IMO bad for town)

- I don't think it improves your chances of staying alive any more than town players who have not claimed

(Null advantage)

- Keeps anti-town roles from touching you at night

(Bad for town)

- It tells scum who you are and allows them to look elsewhere for other possible PRs.

(Bad for town)

Whereas if the claimer is an anti-town role fakeclaiming:
- Keeps town PRs from touching you at night

(Bad for town)

- It forces town PRs to look elsewhere for other possible anti-town...however...the advantage of narrowing the field for town to affect anti-town with their night actions is less (assuming 2-3 remaining anti-town roles) than anti-town's advantage mentioned above in finding town PRs.

(Bad for town)

- As long as you are alive it continues to cast suspicions on validity of your claim and motives behind the early claim

(IMO bad for town)

- I don't think it improves your chances of staying alive any more than town players who have not claimed

(Null advantage)

Taken as a whole...I see the PGO claim to be overall more beneficial to scum which is why I am voting you. Not on policy....because I think your claim was scummy. Additionally...the fact it has not gotten more support tends to make me think scum are supporting it.

Notice that to make this explanation of why Hoopla's RC means she should be lynched you didn't actually have to mention her name. Not once. This indicates that your reasoning has nothing to do with Hoopla's play other than the fact of her RC. It is, in essence, an explanation of why all early Day 1 PGO claims should be lynched.

Whether you're willing to admit it or not, what you are advocating is a policy lynch of Hoopla.

[q21]

What opportunity was I scummily taking advantage of?

Oso's case & vote. It looked like you were trying to get on a wagon early.

I guess you could see it that way. Or, as the case actually is: I read Oso's case which caught my attention and prompted a reread of RH. That reread culminated in posts like this:

Policy lynch was perhaps a bit silly on my part. I can see now how claiming it can seem better than not. I saw a giant "Never target me with night actions" sign and failed to recognise the the possible protown motovations based therein. The role, particulary when claimed does spook me a bit.

and this:

@RH - Why policy lynch PGO?

I felt that its dangers as a lie outshone its benifits as a truth. Since then Hoopla has acted well and I was probably too quick in calling for a policy lynch. PGO was pretty new to be and I reacted poorly.

Which seem to indicate that he viewed his reaction vote to the PGO claim as a bad idea, yet there is no unvote in evidence. This is a direct contradiction between words and actions, which is scummy hence my vote.

I state all of that again in detail because Oso just had and I dislike redundancy.

-snip-

I'm waiting to Nikanor to appear and call Pie's RH vote an opportunistic bandwagon vote.

But I like him. I think he's town, so I'm not going to waste my time attacking him.

And that is a double standard. Which is a little scummy.

And why is that Reckoner; because to me it seems either lazy or scummy... or possibly both.

About that... I'm actually fairly sure that Reck is town as well. Sorry.

Unvote. Vote: Slepz.

Because a) I don't want symmetry in a mafia game. It's just bad.
and b) Slepz is lurking, which is scummy.

So Slepz is scummy for lurking (a point I don't specifically disagree with) but reckoner, who is active lurking, is town? Active lurking is, in my view, scummier than just plain lurking. Do you not agree.

[q21]

It's coherent and reasonable and it raises a valid point. On the very rare (I think twice so far) occasion that you post content it is generally worth reading. That's why I am content to chalk your bulk of generally useless posts to playstyle rather than scum trying to make their presence felt without contributing much.

[q21]

I only work by process of elimination now.

Nikanor
q21
Hoopla
Oso
xRECKONERx
Slepz
TheButtonmen Radical Hijinx
havingfitz
Furry
JacobSavage
Gwynplaine
InflatablePie

q21
Slepz
havingfitz
JacobSavage
Gwynplaine

Three of those five are scum. I suggest we lynch some of them and see where it gets us.

I can see where most of your town reads come from, even if I don't agree with them all. But, please explain how the hell you get a town read from RH - now TheButtonmen.

[q21]

WAIT, WHY HAS THE HAVINGFITZ WAGON DISINTERGRATED?

UNVOTE, VOTE: SLEPZ

Complains about the disintegration of the fitz wagon... and then continues that disintegration with a second reasonless vote of the game. Your words contradict your actions. fitz's analysis of you - which is beginning to move his vote away from unadmitted policy lynch - is starting to look like it has a point.

Because you're the only one distancing from him, obv.
I think we can happily lynch Slepz now.
q21: RH's isos 1 and 2 come across as town-like enough for me to stop reading him in iso, and I think that's enough.

So you read him town from only partial evidence? Try reading his iso 8 and 9 and tell me if you still think he's town.

Three more votes on Slepzlurkerscum.
Gwynplaine, would you be opposed to changing your vote over to Slepz today?

fitz, how about this: I'll answer your question when you vote Slepz. Sound fair?

The underlined statement is... well simply put its scummy. Trying to buy someone's vote with the promise of answering their questions? fitz, just like every player, is free to ask questions. As a towny it is your duty to answer questions directed to you to the best of your ability. You are a towny right?

[q21]

@Nika

You have yourself a deal

Unvote; Vote:Slepz

Seriously. Nikanor's suggestion of the set up lynch was scummy... but the eagerness with which JS agrees to it screams scum at me. I suddenly find myself violently opposed to a Slepz lynch and would much prefer a JS lynch.

-snip-
3. THIS IS A DEAL, this entire game (by that I mean of Mafia as a whole) is about winning votes, in this case I vote Slepz to lynch xRecknonerx tomorrow/renegotiate if he flips scum.

-snip-

8. Personally I see this as a win/win situation, if Slepz is scum, thats good. If he's town we lynch Recks. I seems like a good deal

3. Winning votes by killing someone you think is more townie than scummy. In deal making and compromise there is a line, you crossed it.

8. And if recks is town? How can you be so sure that you're willing to lynch a possible townie for it? AND... you only have Nika's word that he'll help with that lynch, no one else. Which means you're willing to be complicit in what might well be a townie lynch on the promise of ONE vote tomorrow.


Even taking the RC into account I want to hammer him. Its too easy a cover for a SK. If there's only one kill then there's wifom surrounding the possibility of a scum RB. The idea that you have to be scummy to get an action tonight is flawed, even if you were to get nightkilled your own action should still go off.

And even on the very small chance that you're telling the truth about your role I find that Vigs tend to hurt the town more than help it so your claim does nothing to convince me not to do this.

Vote Jacob Savage

[q21]

lol... apparently not a hammer. I still think he should be lynched.

[q21]

Considering we have a vig (I find his claim highly belivable) and a lurker I'm agianst lynching Slepz. Instead we have JS kill him tonight (I don't trust JS to use his gun responsibly if left to his own devices) thus making sure we get the best possible value from our vig and we don't waste our lynch today.

Thoughts?

Why do you find his claim believable?

Right, reasoning time:
Lets step into the world of xReckonerx, by a ISO:

Vote: LlamaFl...

Erm

Vote: Furry

That entire post just rubbed me up the wrong way, it just seems to me like he has a clear plan already of how he is going to play this.

Everyone target Hoopla tonight

gg

I found this post surprisingly town-ish to be honest, but the fact that he posted this after his first, reinforces my view that he has a pre-laid plan.

...

WTF?! Seems to me like he is so shocked that someone might dare vote for him.

.........

Same again

Anyone who took this post seriously should do the human gene pool a favor and go kill themselves.

Ad Hominem in post 19, ??

Halfway into p.1? Lol.

Anyway, there's no way to confirm Hoop's claim, but I think her claim is legitimate. PGO claim prevents PR deaths and also wifoms scum into the risk of killing her. However if scum has a redirect then we're screwed ish.

Immediatly starts accually doing something usefull, but most of it is very obvious and slightly specultive, if he does flip scum, then I would expect either him or scum to be/have a redirector.

STOP DOING THIS SHIT

Ad Hominem again

Tempted to vote Slepz.

You only ever don't vote when it is lylo/Hammer or very close to a Hammer

Gladly -snip- This whole post basically flips back and forth on "It's town. It could be pro-town. It's risky. It's not pro-town. It's SK or scum. Lemme vote the PGO claim." The majority of this post is spent rationalizing how Hoopla's claim could be pro-town, then Slepz slaps down a vote without explaining why he thinks SK or scum seems more likely. Probably because, were he SK or scum, getting the PGO lynched would be beneficial for him so that he wouldn't have to worry about not being about to NK her.

Unvote; Vote: Slepz

Finally he votes who he said he would vote. However he did make some valid points her, but his late vote, and very little reasoning on it, makes me question quite a lot.

No, Hoop, you don't understand.

I'm a jackass.

Not helpful at all. Tries to explain his actions using a meta...

Fitz kinda annoys me.

ditto above

Cry moar.

ditto again

This is a nothing case. A list of generally inane comments on someone else's posts. There is no conclusion, no commitment to an idea. This post does nothing but fill space and I think that's exactly what its intended to do. Fill space so it looks like he's contributing to scum-hunting without actually doing so.

At this moment the only way I'd settle for a lynch other than JS is if he agrees to shoot himself tonight.

[q21]

q21

, can you explain your reasoning for 'hammering' Jacob in a little more depth? I'm finding it hard to understand why on earth you would do it so quickly, rather than waiting for other reactions first. Were you afraid the wagon would fall away?

Yes, my "hammer" was fast. Yes, it was because I figured that given time the wagon would deteriorate as a result of the claim. Why, you ask? Because I don't think it should have. I don't think a vig claim should save the scummiest player in the game. Cop and Doc and other similar roles, those claims should save the scummiest player in the game, but not vig.

Vig is the single most dangerous role that can be given to a town player. In the hands of a very good player it can be effective, but it is quite often still detrimental to the town. Based on his play I don't trust JS to be effective with the role. I barely even trust him to shoot who the town directs him to if we take that route.

And that's presupposing that he is, in fact, town aligned - something I find very doubtful. I believe that not lynching JS today would be a mistake, I was willing to trade in the extra bit of discussion to assure that he was lynched. Sadly, I was 3 minutes too slow.

I can already here you shouting, "But discussion is important!" It is, but lets be honest here, what exactly has the last two pages of discussion achieved? Not much. This exchange, dealing with the unusual speed of my hammer, is the first real point of interest to come out of the last few pages. If my hammer had been successful we could just as easily be having this discussion tomorrow. (That of course presupposes that I would still be alive.)

I'm not going to write responses to each of the other paragraphs before the question as they are perfectly reasonable conclusions to draw from my actions. Without concrete knowledge of the alignments of any of the players involved its liable to turn into a textwall battle that won't actually achieve anything.

Suffice to say that I "hammered" so quickly because I felt that ensuring a JS (who I am as convinced as I'll ever be on day 1 is scum/SK) lynch was worth the extra bit of discussion we might get before, potentially, lynching someone else.

[q21]

What do you mean by provable?

[q21]

I don't get a particularly townie vibe from Slepz, but I was, and still am, very uncomfortable with the way Nikanor was pushing that wagon. Not once did he give a valid reason we should be lynching Slepz, but rather tried to get him lynched because of lurking.

Some examples.

Three more votes on Slepzlurkerscum.
Gwynplaine, would you be opposed to changing your vote over to Slepz today?
fitz, how about this: I'll answer your question when you vote Slepz. Sound fair?

This says that Slepz is a lurker and therefore scum. The request to Gwyn is reasonable, but the proposition made to fitz is not. Its scummy.

Slepz is lurking. So he needs to die. End of story.
Vote Slepz for Mafioso 2010.

Slepz must die, simply because he is a lurker?

You are aware he's V/LA right?

...
No, I actually wasn't.


DIE SLEPZ DIE ANYWAY. The May long weekend ended on Monday. Why aren't you back yet?

Even when a possible explanation is put forward for Slepz lack of post... he has to die because he's a lurker. And lets not forget the bargain he tried to make with JS. Pushing as hard and insistently as this for a lynch makes sense when you have a genuinely good case for their lynch. Nikanor, unless he cares to explain in retrospect, has no such case, just a burning desire to lynch Slepz. Its very scummy.

I'm still suspicious of TBM for exactly the same reasons I spent a large portion of yesterday voting for him. I can very easily see Nik and TBM as scum together based on how easily Nikanor "reads" TBM as town based only on 2 iso posts, ignoring the scumminess that come thereafter. I am fairly confident in a Nik/TBM as scumbuddies.

Since one page is much much too early in the day for L-1 on TBM today.

Vote Nikanor

[q21]

@q21 - Which on Nik-TBM is a better lynch

At this point neither is specifically better or worse than the other. Both are scummy to me. I'll make my choice which I think is a better lynch based on how the day unfolds.

Aw, I got voted by q21. How cute.

And lets not forget the bargain he tried to make with JS.

No, I won't forget. I'm going to remember that as the most ridiculous way to catch scum ever.

q21: I have a burning desire to lynch Slepz because I like lynching lurkers. There's no way to get a read off them other than by lynching them. And if we show scum that lurking isn't safe on day one, then maybe they'll actually be active for a change, unlike every other game which seems to have the scum lurking to victory.

Is dsister a lurker? (because I feel its a little early in his participation to to make that judgement.) If not, why are you voting him? And I'm not going to repeat yesterdays statements about policy lynches, which is what you seem to be suggesting for lurkers.

q21 makes a solid case on Nik, however I'd like to add that his Nik/TBM theory would only apply if TBM is scum, no? If Nik is scum, then it doesn't show much off of TBM, I don't think.

I don't see a point in worrying about such a dilemma when both players happen to look scummy on their own. They are two players I feel are scummy individually and who I can spot something of a link between - hence I believe that they're scumbuddies.




On a completely separate note... I was reading through the site pretty much at random. From the Best Role Ideas thread.

Proactive Paranoid Gun Owner

At night you're a nervous, shaking wreck. You hate the dark, the unknown lurking out there in the shadows. Fueled by paranoia, and liberal gun laws, you wait anxiously to defend yourself from unwanted visitors. Although a small amount of paranoia can be healthy, you realize in the safety of daylight the potential consequences of your destructive, indiscriminate ways and feel morally obliged to fix them.

During the day you may dispose your bullets to effectively disarm yourself. Once disarmed, any person who visits you at night will not be killed by you.

~~

I personally love PGO's, but they can be awfully swingy and difficult to play. Having the option of disarming can prevent a Day 1 claim, and also gives options to the player on which way they want to use the role. Having the option to re-arm later in the game could also be a possible variant.

It may be nothing, but the PGO claim she made at the beginning of this game seems a little skewed when viewed in light of the fact that this is the first normal game she's started alone (there was a large normal she played as a hydra) since making this post.

Thoughts?

[q21]

EBWOP - First closed setup normal game she's started.

[q21]

Furry - Right now I don't particularly want there to be any lynch. One and bit pages is too short for a Day. If there was a gun to my head and I had to pick one, though... it would have to be Nik as he's the current object of my attentions.

[q21]

Hoopla, voting me because why?

[q21]

I feel like I've hit a nerve, but I'm not sure if its a scum nerve of a personal one. The flip onto, then off of me is a possible reaction to exposing a fakeclaim.

[q21]

Nik - How much does Midnight's Sorrow have to post before you forgive the previous players for lurking, and eventually opting out? Just, you know, wondering.


Hoopla's vote hopping since I brought out the first half-credible evidence against her claim is disconcerting. I'm starting to feel that she may be scum with TBM.
Reason: Bussing your scumbuddy is a perfectly understandable move - even a good one if you do it right - when you're a claimed TPR, not playing overtly scummy and the only doubt is on the SK interaction with PGO. Its another thing altogether to be voting your scumbuddy when someone's just thrown mud at your claim.

Just the one vote hop onto me and then off again I might have dismissed as a knee jerk personal reaction. But the next jump onto IP with no reason given. That's starting to look scummy.

My pick for the scum team is TBM, Nikanor and Hoopla.

[q21]

Nik - How much does Midnight's Sorrow have to post before you forgive the previous players for lurking, and eventually opting out? Just, you know, wondering.

...lulwhut.

Q21 bandwagon is a go!

Vote: Q21

It was a rhetorical question based on the fact that the reason for his vote is now unproven. A lurker vote is something I'd expect to see disappear after a player is replaced.



Midnight's Sorrow - what do you think of voting Nikanor?

[q21]

I think I'm a lot more interested in what your trying to imply TBM.

I'm implying that I think your reason for not wanting to vote someone due to worrying about acusations of OMGUS as opposed to not thinking they are scum; seems quite scummy to me.

Unvote; Vote: Midnight

Not that I'm disagreeing with your conclusion, the fact that MS was more worried about the potential OMGUS accusation isn't townie of him. However, why spend two posts making oblique remarks before making the accusation directly? It looks like you were simply putting some distance between your vote and MS so your's didn't look like quite so much of an OMGUS vote.

Still v/LA. Checking in for a few minutes and not seeing anything worth commenting on other than I'm surprised by the fact TBM has not been lynched yet. wtf?

And why, precisely are you so eager to speedlynch TBM.

[q21]

Still v/LA. Checking in for a few minutes and not seeing anything worth commenting on other than I'm surprised by the fact TBM has not been lynched yet. wtf?

And why, precisely are you so eager to speedlynch TBM.

Do my comments indicate the desire for a speedlynch? How would you define 'speedlynching?'

Not so much that I am eager as I am surprised he is still around. When I went v/LA it appeared momentum was going that direction (and still is with his current L-1 positon). Whether it is speedy or not...I support it because I think he's scum.

You comments indicate that you expected him to be lynched some time between your last post before going v/la (351) and your post which is quoted above (386). Given that the Day started on post 298 it looks like you expected - and since your vote was and still is on him, wanted - him lynched in under 4 pages. That's pretty speedy.

At this point I think the lynch is still premature as I don't like Nik's seeming willingness to hammer a cause he seems not to believe in himself.

[q21]

Vote Nikanor

For all the same reasons I was voting him yesterday, in addition to hammering someone he seemed not to think was scum (and who turned out not to be). Given that two of our dead townies agreed with this read I'm happy to stick with it.

[q21]

Firstly

Unvote

He claimed early and therefore appears to not be worried by a possible counter-claim, it also doesn't seem like he was trying to force one. He got my alignment right, ie he didn't make the attempt to frame me and get mislynch and possible victory on the spot. And yes, that means I'm town and he's sane.

As for a full RC, I don't think I will. At this point the town knows I'm town; any more information than that would, I think, help the scum more.

Finally, I apologise for the low activity. I have a deadline on Tuesday and probably won't be able to make a more than a post or two a day until that's pasted. Thereafter a reread is in order to decide where to stick my vote. Gwyn or fitz look best, but that's just from memory and I'm not trusting enough of that memory to vote on it. Also, still not 100% certain on Hoopla's claim.

[q21]

Deadline got pushed to Thursday... which is good because I need the time and bad because I won't have time to reread properly before such an effort is, I think, too late to make a difference to this day. So...

Vote Gwyn

Hammering on gut is not normally my style... but I'm in that kind of mood today...

[q21]

First game back after a year is a victory! Whoo!

Appologies to the townies watching on, thinking I had gone mental and thrown the game away with a self-vote in lylo. I wish I could have seen your faces.

I was just about ready to reach through the internet and throttle you for a minute... then I saw the Spongebob pic and just laughed for a long time. Very well played Hoopla, very well played indeed.

Yabba, your setup and modding were excellent. I thoroughly enjoyed myself here. Thanks!

[q21]

I probably should have worked out the Vengekill possibility the moment I saw that people were still allowed to post game content after they'd been hammered.

[q21]

It may be something you favour, but its not something I've seem many mods use before.