Mini 520 - Triumvirate Mafia - ABANDONED

[Mastermind of Sin]

MoS is using the "I don't have to because I've wasted time already excuse."

That never fails to annoy me.

Sucks to be you, then.

@MoS: I'm not sure how anything scummy can be determined by a lot of people unvoting from the random stage. A whole bunch of one vote here one vote there situations dosen't really get anything done. I think the best idea is to try and get peoples minds out of that stage and into a stage where a vote is placed for some actual reason even if there isn't much to go on. I'd like to hear though how you or anyone else who thinks we can would deduce any scum tells from it, perhaps I'm missing something.

Getting out of the random stage is good. However, I really don't like it when people just decide to say "the random stage is over", like it's some sort of boundary that can be defined, and you can just cut off all random voting at a specific point. I much prefer that people *do* something to get out of random voting, rather than just say it's over and do nothing.

For example, look at me. Instead of just saying "oh, random voting is done!", I actually did something, I made an attack on SirT, and I started a lot of serious discussion.

That

is how you end the random voting stage. It's bullshit to think you can just say it's over. Actions speak louder than words, my friend. Although in this case, words are your actions, I suppose.

And sometimes you *can* pick up scumtells during random voting.

Not much to go on but I'm going to

FoS: Mastermind of Sin

because so far I find that he pushed something on some very fishy logic then after people disagreed dropped the I've put too much into this to do anymore line. However, we don't want to start bandwagoning over something so small, so I'd love to hear some of the more quiet give their points of view.

Erm, I never said I was going to drop my argument against SirT. I said that I've done enough that I don't really feel like spearheading

other

arguments at this point in the game. Just because people disagreed with my point against SirT does not mean I think they're right. It's certainly not a strong tell, but it's something, imo.

[Phate]

However, I really don't like it when people just decide to say "the random stage is over", like it's some sort of boundary that can be defined, and you can just cut off all random voting at a specific point. I much prefer that people *do* something to get out of random voting, rather than just say it's over and do nothing.

Sucks to be you then. =P

[Spider Jerusalem]

When I say translation, I think it's fairly apparent that I mean, "The following is my interpretation of the last post." If anyone is distracted or confused by that, they should speak the fuck up and ask me to clarify. I'm really not seeing that as a viable tactic to "confuse the town."

I agree that in your specific post there was nothing seriously misleading, and if my statement came off that way I'll clarify. I was trying to speak in a more general tone, largely because I felt you intended a clear response but I have seen posts done that way get muddied up very quickly. Perhaps it's just a difference in opinion but I think it's much clearer to the town as a whole if you avoid the use of witty devices.

Getting out of the random stage is good. However, I really don't like it when people just decide to say "the random stage is over", like it's some sort of boundary that can be defined, and you can just cut off all random voting at a specific point. I much prefer that people *do* something to get out of random voting, rather than just say it's over and do nothing.

For example, look at me. Instead of just saying "oh, random voting is done!", I actually did something, I made an attack on SirT, and I started a lot of serious discussion. That is how you end the random voting stage. It's bullshit to think you can just say it's over. Actions speak louder than words, my friend. Although in this case, words are your actions, I suppose.

I don't disagree with most of this. However, if you'll note your discussion with SirT started shortly before the large amount of unvotes. In my mind and perhaps in others, that discussion was worthy of the end of random voting whether we agreed with your stance or not. This in addition to the other discussion about claims gave us something in game to discuss and analyze.

Erm, I never said I was going to drop my argument against SirT. I said that I've done enough that I don't really feel like spearheading other arguments at this point in the game. Just because people disagreed with my point against SirT does not mean I think they're right. It's certainly not a strong tell, but it's something, imo.

I definitely didn't mean to say you thought people disagreeing with you were right, or that you were dropping your argument against SirT completely. Though I do think you may have been trying to change the topic. I could see how I was a little unclear though.
I meant that after people disagreed with your point about SirT that you dropped another topic and then backed out of the potential discussion. I thought your lack of an explanation as to why unvoting would be a scum tell as well as what appeared to be a lack of desire to participate in the discussion of that topic seemed a little scummy. It seemed it could be a way to redirect people from looking at your earlier argument against SirT much more and for you to be able to stay out of the new discussion from there on in.
I'll admit that all this is not a particularly strong tell either, but I'd still really like to have you explain how we could decipher a scum tell from a handfull of people unvoting once some minor discussion had started.

[Phate]

Again, I'll use any witty devices I damn well want to, and if someone doesn't understand, they can ask me to clarify. Also,

FoMS: Spider Jerusalem

for being way too agreeable. That always makes me suspicious. Also for his name, which I can't figure out.

[Miztef]

@Phate: I don't agree that unvoting = scum. Basically, I felt like moving some stuff forward in this game and didn't like the way/tone you were posted, so I just send a vote out there to see what happens.

I absolutely agree that Spider Jerusalem is looking scummy as well.

Not much to go on but I'm going to

FoS: Mastermind of Sin

because so far I find that he pushed something on some very fishy logic then after people disagreed dropped the I've put too much into this to do anymore line. However, we don't want to start bandwagoning over something so small, so I'd love to hear some of the more quiet give their points of view.

Agreeing with the majority view here.

I agree that in your specific post there was nothing seriously misleading, and if my statement came off that way I'll clarify. I was trying to speak in a more general tone, largely because I felt you intended a clear response but I have seen posts done that way get muddied up very quickly. Perhaps it's just a difference in opinion but I think it's much clearer to the town as a whole if you avoid the use of witty devices.

I don't disagree with most of this. However, if you'll note your discussion with SirT started shortly before the large amount of unvotes. In my mind and perhaps in others, that discussion was worthy of the end of random voting whether we agreed with your stance or not. This in addition to the other discussion about claims gave us something in game to discuss and analyze.

Again, more agreeing.


I'll

unvote vote: Spider Jerusalem

on just these minor tells only because no one else strikes me as scummy.

Also, besides a random vote on me, Spider has not voted on any of his suspicions. To me, being non-committal, especially in an early phase in the game, is scummy because it leaves no real tracks to follow for inspection on later days.

[Flyinghawk]

@Phate: I don't agree that unvoting = scum. Basically, I felt like moving some stuff forward in this game and didn't like the way/tone you were posted, so I just send a vote out there to see what happens.

I absolutely agree that Spider Jerusalem is looking scummy as well.

Not much to go on but I'm going to

FoS: Mastermind of Sin

because so far I find that he pushed something on some very fishy logic then after people disagreed dropped the I've put too much into this to do anymore line. However, we don't want to start bandwagoning over something so small, so I'd love to hear some of the more quiet give their points of view.

Agreeing with the majority view here.

I agree that in your specific post there was nothing seriously misleading, and if my statement came off that way I'll clarify. I was trying to speak in a more general tone, largely because I felt you intended a clear response but I have seen posts done that way get muddied up very quickly. Perhaps it's just a difference in opinion but I think it's much clearer to the town as a whole if you avoid the use of witty devices.

I don't disagree with most of this. However, if you'll note your discussion with SirT started shortly before the large amount of unvotes. In my mind and perhaps in others, that discussion was worthy of the end of random voting whether we agreed with your stance or not. This in addition to the other discussion about claims gave us something in game to discuss and analyze.

Again, more agreeing.


I'll

unvote vote: Spider Jerusalem

on just these minor tells only because no one else strikes me as scummy.

Also, besides a random vote on me, Spider has not voted on any of his suspicions. To me, being non-committal, especially in an early phase in the game, is scummy because it leaves no real tracks to follow for inspection on later days.

So you are talking about agreeing with other's views as being a scum tell. While in some cases this is true, I usually find that over-agreeing is a scum tell only if the person whose views are being agreed with is scummy himself. MOS, in my opinion, hasn't been acting all that scummy. Grasping at straws perhaps, but not scummy. Furthermore, there are a Finite amount of views that are able to be had in this game. It is not impossible that by coincidence SJ and MOS have simliar views on certain things(and you can see the Spider is NOT saying "I agree with MOS" but rather "I agree with part of what your saying, but not this:...")but not on other things.

Finally, Miztef, if you are so worried about people agreeing with each other, what say you about the fact that you are just adding on to what Phate said in post 103?

[Phate]

FlyingHawk, SJ, not to call the kettle black, but you guys are new here. And thus it might stand to reason that you'll make mistakes, especially in the area of keeping things hidden if you have them to hide. And it strikes me as interesting that while you've been quiet all game, you both fairly well jump to defend MoS. This might (indeed, probably) be nothing, but I think it's worth mentioning.

*stores away the possibility that there might be a link between flyinghawk, MoS, and SJ*

[Mastermind of Sin]

Getting out of the random stage is good. However, I really don't like it when people just decide to say "the random stage is over", like it's some sort of boundary that can be defined, and you can just cut off all random voting at a specific point. I much prefer that people *do* something to get out of random voting, rather than just say it's over and do nothing.

For example, look at me. Instead of just saying "oh, random voting is done!", I actually did something, I made an attack on SirT, and I started a lot of serious discussion. That is how you end the random voting stage. It's bullshit to think you can just say it's over. Actions speak louder than words, my friend. Although in this case, words are your actions, I suppose.

I don't disagree with most of this. However, if you'll note your discussion with SirT started shortly before the large amount of unvotes. In my mind and perhaps in others, that discussion was worthy of the end of random voting whether we agreed with your stance or not. This in addition to the other discussion about claims gave us something in game to discuss and analyze.

Fair enough, point taken.

Erm, I never said I was going to drop my argument against SirT. I said that I've done enough that I don't really feel like spearheading other arguments at this point in the game. Just because people disagreed with my point against SirT does not mean I think they're right. It's certainly not a strong tell, but it's something, imo.

I definitely didn't mean to say you thought people disagreeing with you were right, or that you were dropping your argument against SirT completely. Though I do think you may have been trying to change the topic. I could see how I was a little unclear though.
I meant that after people disagreed with your point about SirT that you dropped another topic and then backed out of the potential discussion.

The thing is, the topic didn't really exist until I brought it up. ooooh, nvm, I see what you're saying. You mean "dropped" as in "presented", not "dropped" as in "dropped the case". Got it.

*shrug* I was just responding to other people saying there wasn't much to pursue atm.

I thought your lack of an explanation as to why unvoting would be a scum tell as well as what appeared to be a lack of desire to participate in the discussion of that topic seemed a little scummy. It seemed it could be a way to redirect people from looking at your earlier argument against SirT much more and for you to be able to stay out of the new discussion from there on in.
I'll admit that all this is not a particularly strong tell either, but I'd still really like to have you explain how we could decipher a scum tell from a handfull of people unvoting once some minor discussion had started.

You can't, really. I just get annoyed when people do that.

Again, I'll use any witty devices I damn well want to, and if someone doesn't understand, they can ask me to clarify. Also,

FoMS: Spider Jerusalem

for being way too agreeable. That always makes me suspicious. Also for his name, which I can't figure out.

Bullshit.

@Phate: I don't agree that unvoting = scum. Basically, I felt like moving some stuff forward in this game and didn't like the way/tone you were posted, so I just send a vote out there to see what happens.

I absolutely agree that Spider Jerusalem is looking scummy as well.

Everyone, check out the start of a two-pronged attack from Phate/Miztef.

Not much to go on but I'm going to

FoS: Mastermind of Sin

because so far I find that he pushed something on some very fishy logic then after people disagreed dropped the I've put too much into this to do anymore line. However, we don't want to start bandwagoning over something so small, so I'd love to hear some of the more quiet give their points of view.

Agreeing with the majority view here.

He's not really agreeing with the majority. SJ actually put a lot more thought and reasoning into his posts about me than anyone else in this game. He's actually

useful

, as opposed to most of the "majority" that he was "agreeing" with.

I agree that in your specific post there was nothing seriously misleading, and if my statement came off that way I'll clarify. I was trying to speak in a more general tone, largely because I felt you intended a clear response but I have seen posts done that way get muddied up very quickly. Perhaps it's just a difference in opinion but I think it's much clearer to the town as a whole if you avoid the use of witty devices.

I don't disagree with most of this. However, if you'll note your discussion with SirT started shortly before the large amount of unvotes. In my mind and perhaps in others, that discussion was worthy of the end of random voting whether we agreed with your stance or not. This in addition to the other discussion about claims gave us something in game to discuss and analyze.

Again, more agreeing.

This isn't even agreeing at all. SJ is the first person to explain in detail what was wrong with my argument, and he caught something that I hadn't. Just because everyone else unvoted and he speculated on a reason for it does not mean that he is agreeing with the majority. He's the only person to post this logic, he didn't copy what anyone else said.

I'll

unvote vote: Spider Jerusalem

on just these minor tells only because no one else strikes me as scummy.

Also, besides a random vote on me, Spider has not voted on any of his suspicions. To me, being non-committal, especially in an early phase in the game, is scummy because it leaves no real tracks to follow for inspection on later days.

Agreed.

FlyingHawk, SJ, not to call the kettle black, but you guys are new here. And thus it might stand to reason that you'll make mistakes, especially in the area of keeping things hidden if you have them to hide. And it strikes me as interesting that while you've been quiet all game, you both fairly well jump to defend MoS. This might (indeed, probably) be nothing, but I think it's worth mentioning.

*stores away the possibility that there might be a link between flyinghawk, MoS, and SJ*

Can I just say that I nearly feel out of my chair laughing at this?

Phate, regardless of saying that you aren't doing it, you are

totally

calling the kettle black here. Even worse than that, FlyingHawk has been a member of this site since the end of

May

, and he even played mafia elsewhere before joining. So he is definitely *not* new here. And SJ joined this site before you did, Phate, so you have no business acting like you know what you're talking about when it comes to newbies here. That's just ridiculous.

[Phate]

*grins ruefully*

Phate, regardless of saying that you aren't doing it, you are totally calling the kettle black here. Even worse than that, FlyingHawk has been a member of this site since the end of May, and he even played mafia elsewhere before joining. So he is definitely *not* new here. And SJ joined this site before you did, Phate, so you have no business acting like you know what you're talking about when it comes to newbies here. That's just ridiculous.

I may very well be full of shit. That is a theory that has been proposed more than once. I've played Mafia elsewhere (physically) as well - in fact, I didn't even know it existed online until I noticed it on a M:tG forum I frequent. SJ joined a total of one day before I did, and because he is classified as "townsperson" and I as "goon," I can conclude that I have posted more than him - I am involved in multiple other games. So SJ's one day worth of seniority means nothing, IMO.

And rather than stating that I have no business acting like I know what I'm talking about, why not tell me why I'm wrong? Why not address the issue, rather than the ad hominem? Because if I am full of shit on this, which is very likely, I'd like to know, that I might become another player. But if I'm not, than your response, which doesn't actually address the issue, is to be expected. So yeah, if I'm full of shit, tell me why, not just that.

Bullshit.

Bullshit to you too.

Everyone, check out the start of a two-pronged attack from Phate/Miztef.

That's funny, because I've had the impression that he switched from attacking me to going with the flow when I pointed out someone else. He's indecisive. Might be scum.

[Mastermind of Sin]

And thus it might stand to reason that you'll make mistakes, especially in the area of keeping things hidden if you have them to hide.

This sentence is just fluff. It doesn't actually mean anything, unless you can explain what the point of saying it was.

And it strikes me as interesting that while you've been quiet all game, you both fairly well jump to defend MoS. This might (indeed, probably) be nothing, but I think it's worth mentioning.

People *do* tend to defend others when they are being attacked with crappy cases.

[FaerieLord]

@Phate Post 94. I don't consider it to be a scum tell, but I've seen others who do, so I pointed it ou. Also, not adding content is not meaning less. For starters it can make the person over defensive, it can create initiative for the players to read the post, it can create a wagon which there would surely be scum on since it is an easy wagon. So yeah...I doubt its useless. Also, it was mostly what other people said. But if I don't say something, don't try to rinse it out. I probably didn't say it for a reason. And I hope that originality thing is a joke.

@Someone 95. What is scummy about them? Read other games, I lurk just as much in other games.

@Phate Post 103: Too agreeable? Didn't he say that he didn't agree with MoS a page or two back?

@Miztef Post 104: Does that make me scummy aswell? I rarely vote...very rarely. Also if being agreeable is a scum tell, you need to read your post. "I agree that agreeing is scummy."

@Phate Post 106: That post sounds wrong in so many ways. I read that post as "I know you are mafia because you cannot hide your mistakes, since you are new."

@Phate Post 108: Are you playing seriously? You shift from calling SJ scummy to calling Mitz scummy, then say that your argument is full of shit. Then make a really awful joke in the middle of your post, which I find really scummy. I'll even give you the reasoning. When you quote just the word bullshit, you are giving the town a general impression that his post just contained that, bullshit. Now since you only quoted that to make a bad joke, you are trying to give the town an impression that his post is bullshit

[FaerieLord]

Addition. In this page you have either subtly or openly called the following people scummy

Flying Hawk, Spider Jerusalem, Mitz, MoS. (FH and SJ in the newbie thing, Mitz just after you post and MoS by assosciating him with FH and SJ)

This game does not have 4 scum.

[Phate]

EBWOP: Oh, btw. "might become another player" = "might become a better player."

94 - What do you mean by rinsing it out?

103 - You could be right; I'm about due for a readthrough... but if so, it escaped my attention.

106 - That is exaggerating my argument. I pointed it out as a possibility. I was careful to point out that I WAS only counting as a possibility. I didn't say "I KNOW you're scum," and my reason wasn't "you're new."

108 - Maybe I'm a jester. *eyebrow waggle* No, seriously, I was out on a limb with post 106. I accepted MoS' ridicule (because I wasn't at all sure my theory was correct), but quibbled a bit on the details. Then I asked WHY the post was so preposterous, which he'd failed to address.

As for the bullshit, quote, you're way over-analysing; I meant no such thing. My only point is that a one-word expletive does not an argument make. It wasn't even a joke, per se, it was basically a "see how unhelpful this is"? If I meant his post was bullshit, trust me, I'd say it. And then I'd explain why.

As for the multiple suspicions, let me tell you how I operate. As far as I'm concerned, everyone starts out scum, and I narrow it down to who's the scummiest. The opposite of innocent 'til proven guilty. And those four people are people that I consider it at least a minor possibility that they're scum. But those are just suspicions. We're too early in the game to have an immovable scumlist, and I wouldn't support anyone's lynch yet.

[Miztef]

@Miztef Post 104: Does that make me scummy aswell? I rarely vote...very rarely. Also if being agreeable is a scum tell, you need to read your post. "I agree that agreeing is scummy."

I will admit I was a little off the mark with that. However, it's not so much the "agreeing" part that makes SJ scummy, it's the idea that he puts very little extra input on things, basically trying to blend into the town. His arguments seem weak to me, in addition to his lack of voting, is another scummy act to me.

I'm not calling for an immediate lynch or anything, he just tops my scum list at this point.

EBWOP: Oh, btw. "might become another player" = "might become a better player."

94 - What do you mean by rinsing it out?

103 - You could be right; I'm about due for a readthrough... but if so, it escaped my attention.

106 - That is exaggerating my argument. I pointed it out as a possibility. I was careful to point out that I WAS only counting as a possibility. I didn't say "I KNOW you're scum," and my reason wasn't "you're new."

108 - Maybe I'm a jester. *eyebrow waggle* No, seriously, I was out on a limb with post 106. I accepted MoS' ridicule (because I wasn't at all sure my theory was correct), but quibbled a bit on the details. Then I asked WHY the post was so preposterous, which he'd failed to address.

As for the bullshit, quote, you're way over-analysing; I meant no such thing. My only point is that a one-word expletive does not an argument make. It wasn't even a joke, per se, it was basically a "see how unhelpful this is"? If I meant his post was bullshit, trust me, I'd say it. And then I'd explain why.

As for the multiple suspicions, let me tell you how I operate. As far as I'm concerned, everyone starts out scum, and I narrow it down to who's the scummiest. The opposite of innocent 'til proven guilty. And those four people are people that I consider it at least a minor possibility that they're scum. But those are just suspicions. We're too early in the game to have an immovable scumlist, and I wouldn't support anyone's lynch yet.

In the bold Phate states that everyone is guilty until proven innocent. Why is his top 4 only "minor possibilities" then? Is everyone else even more "minor possibilities"?.

Phate's consistently odd, somewhat scummy posts have been keeping him at the near top of my scumlist. Although, you can argue that it's just a playstyle issue, I'm not really sure yet.

As far as I'm concerned, everyone starts out scum, and I narrow it down to who's the scummiest. The opposite of innocent 'til proven guilty. And those four people are people that I consider it at least a minor possibility that they're scum.

[Flyinghawk]

*grins ruefully*

Phate, regardless of saying that you aren't doing it, you are totally calling the kettle black here. Even worse than that, FlyingHawk has been a member of this site since the end of May, and he even played mafia elsewhere before joining. So he is definitely *not* new here. And SJ joined this site before you did, Phate, so you have no business acting like you know what you're talking about when it comes to newbies here. That's just ridiculous.

I may very well be full of shit. That is a theory that has been proposed more than once. I've played Mafia elsewhere (physically) as well - in fact, I didn't even know it existed online until I noticed it on a M:tG forum I frequent. SJ joined a total of one day before I did, and because he is classified as "townsperson" and I as "goon," I can conclude that I have posted more than him - I am involved in multiple other games. So SJ's one day worth of seniority means nothing, IMO.

And rather than stating that I have no business acting like I know what I'm talking about, why not tell me why I'm wrong? Why not address the issue, rather than the ad hominem? Because if I am full of shit on this, which is very likely, I'd like to know, that I might become another player. But if I'm not, than your response, which doesn't actually address the issue, is to be expected. So yeah, if I'm full of shit, tell me why, not just that.

Bullshit.

Bullshit to you too.

Everyone, check out the start of a two-pronged attack from Phate/Miztef.

That's funny, because I've had the impression that he switched from attacking me to going with the flow when I pointed out someone else. He's indecisive. Might be scum.

I don't really have a problem with him calling me a newbie. Misinformation runs rampant throughout today's soceity, if he is another hapless victim, thats fine. What I do have a problem is with him considering the status of 'Being a newbie' as a scumtell. In all honesty, if someone is a confirmed newbie of this game, wouldn't perhaps that give them MORE wiggle room in he scumtell department rather than less? A newbie is bound to make mistakes, so that must be taken with a grain of salt, rather than a newbie made a mistake, so he/she is mafia.

I really don't like any of Phate's reasoning or acusations(especially the hypocritical ones)

for now, a tentative:

Vote:Phate

[Phate]

No, FlyingHawk, you misunderstand. I'm not saying that because you're new, you're scum. I'm saying that because you're new, there is a possibility that you'll let something slip if you are scum, and I'm noting what I find slightly odd behaviour in the attempt to find a connection.

[Flyinghawk]

No, Phate, YOU misunderstand. I never implied that I thought you said that newbies are scum. Rather, that you imply that Newbie's will make mistakes that will uncover them as mafia. I'm saying that in fact, if a Newbie makes a mistake that appears to be a scum tell, we have to take into account that he is new and that he might make that mistake even if he is protown.

Furthermore, I think its pretty clear that I am now a newbie, as i'm working on 5 months on this website.

However, this point is moot, as I didn't vote for you because of previously stated argument. Rather, because of some of your craplogic. And i AM taking into account that you are a newbie, which is why i'm saying a 'tentative' vote for you, rather than a definite vote for you.

[Flyinghawk]

ugh, i meant "not a newbie" not "now a newbie"

If anyone says "freudian slip" i'll cut 'em

[Phate]

No, Phate, YOU misunderstand. I never implied that I thought you said that newbies are scum.

O RLY?

What I do have a problem is with him considering the status of 'Being a newbie' as a scumtell.

That aside, though, I see your point. Ok, let's drop the newbie angle, then - I thought it lent evidence to my point, but obviously not. The core of what I thought was interesting was that two relatively quiet players suddenly popped back up to defend MoS. Even if that turns out to be nothing, I thought it was worth noting.

[FaerieLord]

@Mitzef 113. Then you still find me scummy as I also lack in voting. That's the hole I'm finding in your argument. Also, what would you say about the beginning of the game when he analyzed the lynch scenario? That was his analysis wasn't it? So he may be blending in at certain point (I can see from where you are getting this thought) but he hasn't been doing it everytime. He has taken initiative

Also, the bolding is good posting.

@Phate 115. But you are making a connection "Pro mistakes = could be not scum" and "Newbie mistakes = scum mistakes". That's what makes your argument flawed

@Phate 118. Ding Ding. Round 2

[skitzer]

People who look scummy to me

MoS-Overexplains a lot. Maybe just overeager, like I said before
SJ-someone said that he was too agreeable. I agree (heh heh, too ironic)
Phate-seems as though he is looking for the opportunity to lynch someone and get to night.

Those are my opinions, not really big on anyone at this point. But dere ya go.

[FaerieLord]

I really think that most of the people on this SJ things are either over ambitious or complete hypocrites.

Looking at your post skitzer, what's new in it?

[skitzer]

I didn't have input on SJ or Phate.

[Flyinghawk]

No, Phate, YOU misunderstand. I never implied that I thought you said that newbies are scum.

O RLY?

What I do have a problem is with him considering the status of 'Being a newbie' as a scumtell.

That aside, though, I see your point. Ok, let's drop the newbie angle, then - I thought it lent evidence to my point, but obviously not. The core of what I thought was interesting was that two relatively quiet players suddenly popped back up to defend MoS. Even if that turns out to be nothing, I thought it was worth noting.

by "being a newbie" i meant "acting like a newbie" rather than "new players", but your right, i mispoke. i apologize.

[FaerieLord]

@Skitz. I meant, hwat have you said that other player's haven't said?