|
Post by Sister Coyote on Apr 13, 2011 14:08:48 GMT -5
And, for the moment, I am going to: Unvote: Septimus [/color] Vote: Suburban Plankton [/color] Not because I find the Princess Bride WiFoM thing completely over-the-top, because I think it's pretty in-character for SP, but for all the reasons discussed back on pages two and three, I think, of toDay. And yesterday's situation with FCOD. And basically all the reasons I voted him earlier toDay.[/quote] That explains voting SP the first time; it doesn't explain unvoting Septimus. What's persuasive to you that led you to do that?[/quote] This is one of those situations where I'm running on strictly a gut feeling, not on anything I could successfully articulate to anyone else. I am still suspicious of Septimus, please don't get me wrong.
|
|
|
Post by special on Apr 13, 2011 14:09:49 GMT -5
@sp who was suggesting that you get vig'd? there are no attributes to many of your quotes
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Apr 13, 2011 14:11:30 GMT -5
SP -- But that's not the right question. The evidence suggests that Bill did do *something* to Septimus, and absent a great deal of scummish cleverness, that something would be what Septimus says it is. Your argument is approaching things from the wrong direction. YOu're saying "Bill could not have known Ed was town, therefore he would not have done this." I'm saying "of everyone in the game, Ed was the best choice, so if Bill did this at all, he'd very likely have chosen Ed". "Bill could not have known Ed was town" is a strawman. He doesn't need to have believed that in order to have done what Septimus says he did. Again you're about 25 degrees off of accurate, in the direction that supports the point that *you* want to make. Your question was "why is Septimus so sure Bill's advice was sound"? I reply that his reaction, to do nothing despite the advice, indicates that he wasn't sure. Somehow you manage to take his opinion of dead-town-Bill the *next day* and use that to cast doubt on my opinions of his actions from teh *previous night*? This makes no sense at all, SP, except inasmuch as it allows you to bring up Septimus' "oh look how town I am" nonsense again. As for your last point, I put it that way because there are other options, like tracking and roleblocking, that might be useful as well.
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Apr 13, 2011 14:12:26 GMT -5
@sp who was suggesting that you get vig'd? there are no attributes to many of your quotes That was I. All of those points were mine.
|
|
|
Post by Idle Thoughts on Apr 13, 2011 14:25:34 GMT -5
furthermore, aren't cap, idle and joanie anti-town for hardly if at all contributing? Are you skimming? In case you didn't know, there's usually a "Going to be away" thread so posters can say when they're going to be away for a long period of time. I said, in this thread, I was going to be very, very busy until Wed (tomorrow), with only minutes to come on here and there. Really, all I have time, right now, to do is to catch up.
|
|
|
Post by guiri on Apr 13, 2011 14:41:07 GMT -5
I would have thought that the mechanism for sending snacks, for being able to send snacks during the Day and for receiving advice would be pretty important things to ask the mod about. I think he's only sharing a part of what he knows. This objection I don't understand, really. FCOD's mechanism issue was a real problem. For Septimus, the default assumption would be "PM the mod with your request", which doesn't really require to be spelled out. Maybe a teeny-tiny issue with him not confirming that he doesn't send them directly himself, but that's *very* teeny. I agree about the first point and suggested that it was probably obvious. I wasn't questioning the PM itself but his understanding of the PM and the mechanics of his role. However his only comment on that, the other 2 points, and the comment about not wanting to be unfair to scum, was to post the same thing over and over in increasing font size. Oh, but that's not all! You also have the ability to transfer Scooby Snacks during the Night, something no other player can do. It may be obvious that you needed to send a PM to the moderator with the name of the recipient and the quantity of Scooby Snacks you wished to send sometime before the end of each Night. Did you get instructions on how to use your power? Did you ever ask about this? How/when is it possible? Again, no mention of the mechanism. Did you ask how you were going to receive advice? If Bill was the sender of the advice, I wonder if he had a Day power (considering Julie sent the N1 advice less than an hour after Night fell). Why would it be unfair to scum? I think it's important to have a chance to evaluate a claim, especially when it affects the case made against him and the likelihood of me unvoting him. His response made me reluctant to reconsider my vote.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Apr 13, 2011 14:44:32 GMT -5
SP -- But that's not the right question. The evidence suggests that Bill did do *something* to Septimus, and absent a great deal of scummish cleverness, that something would be what Septimus says it is. Your argument is approaching things from the wrong direction. YOu're saying "Bill could not have known Ed was town, therefore he would not have done this." I'm saying "of everyone in the game, Ed was the best choice, so if Bill did this at all, he'd very likely have chosen Ed". "Bill could not have known Ed was town" is a strawman. He doesn't need to have believed that in order to have done what Septimus says he did. Again you're about 25 degrees off of accurate, in the direction that supports the point that *you* want to make. Your question was "why is Septimus so sure Bill's advice was sound"? I reply that his reaction, to do nothing despite the advice, indicates that he wasn't sure. Somehow you manage to take his opinion of dead-town-Bill the *next day* and use that to cast doubt on my opinions of his actions from teh *previous night*? This makes no sense at all, SP, except inasmuch as it allows you to bring up Septimus' "oh look how town I am" nonsense again. As for your last point, I put it that way because there are other options, like tracking and roleblocking, that might be useful as well. The "evidence" you speak of doesn't suggest anything, because it doesn't actually exist. We have no evidence that tells us Bill did anything on Night 1; we have only septimus claim that "Bill advised him to help Ed". I'm saying that I don't see anything that suggests Bill thought Ed was trustworthy, so it seems strange to me that he would advise septimus in that manner. And as for your last point, there are other options besides Vigging, as you point out. There are indeed several actions Town Powers could take to "exert some force" on me. Vigging would kill me. Roleblocking and Tracking would be useless on me. None of the options you mention would net the Town anything at all except possibly a dead Townie. Which would be excellent for the Scum, as it would ensure that Town Powers don't do anything useful. I notice one option which you left off your list which would have a concrete benefit for Town, which is to Investigate me. I suppose you wouldn't want that, would you? unvote septimus vote RenataIn defending my position against septimus I found myself less convinced of his guilt than I was before. And your last post, combined with your weak case against me earlier, and the fact that you seem intent on voting for everyone in the game at least once, makes me suspect you. Call it OMGUS if you like.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Apr 13, 2011 14:45:48 GMT -5
NETA: Yes, I am making a claim of sorts. My claim is exactly as it appears in the preceding post, and at this point I have nothing more I wish to share.
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Apr 13, 2011 14:53:23 GMT -5
Guiri --
I wish Septimus would do a better job of answering things for himself given my current opinion of his alignment, and I don't think I will answer for him, but I do think I know what he was trying to say there.
More grist for the mill, the late lamented Storyteller on Septimus:
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Apr 13, 2011 14:54:38 GMT -5
I notice one option which you left off your list which would have a concrete benefit for Town, which is to Investigate me. Unless, of course, you're a Godfather-type role and an Investigation is exactly what you want Town to do with you.
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Apr 13, 2011 15:02:18 GMT -5
The "evidence" you speak of doesn't suggest anything, because it doesn't actually exist. We have no evidence that tells us Bill did anything on Night 1; we have only septimus claim that "Bill advised him to help Ed". I'm saying that I don't see anything that suggests Bill thought Ed was trustworthy, so it seems strange to me that he would advise septimus in that manner. Right. Whatever. Except for him saying he *does* believe him. But I suppose that doesn't count since it's only "just barely". I did think of including that. But with my preference that you wind up dead-of-vig it seemed just a bit of an unfriendly thing to suggest. (snip votes) Why? I'm pretty much the only one defending him, and you're voting me. What changed your mind that's sufficient to overcome the suspicion you say you have against me? Happy to. At least I have a case, SP, "weak" or not (I think it's anything but). You have ... I've voted for a lot of people? Well OK. That must be scummy. It sure is different, right? Also, your claim. You've basically said you're doing nothign tonight. Then you wouldn't mind a roleblocker or a tracker ensuring/confirming that, right?
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Apr 13, 2011 15:02:41 GMT -5
I notice one option which you left off your list which would have a concrete benefit for Town, which is to Investigate me. Unless, of course, you're a Godfather-type role and an Investigation is exactly what you want Town to do with you. True, but I wasn't suggesting that Town investigate me. I was pointing out that Renata suggested all of the 'normal' Night actions except the one that might actually be beneficial to Town.
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on Apr 13, 2011 15:11:04 GMT -5
Real Life, as opposed to life online. I tried to go outside once, but nothing happened when I double clicked on my door I do so enjoy your humor! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Apr 13, 2011 15:13:51 GMT -5
Why? I'm pretty much the only one defending him, and you're voting me. What changed your mind that's sufficient to overcome the suspicion you say you have against me?. As I was typing up my response to your last post, defending my case against septimus, I found that it didn't hold water nearly as well as I thought it did. I still find his play 'suspicious', but on further reflection I'm no longer convinced it points to him being Scum. As for the fact that you are defending him, you realize that says absolutely nothing about your alignment. Trying to build Town cred, perhaps? When you unvoted him, he was still leading the vote count 5-1 over Greedy Smurf, by my count. I would prefer that any Town Roleblockers/Trackers look elsewhere, because they will waste their efforts on me. If there are Scum with those powers, then I hope they do target me, for the same reason.
|
|
|
Post by julie on Apr 13, 2011 15:27:20 GMT -5
Vote Count:
*septimus: 4 (guiri 136, MentalGuy 151, Special Ed 158, septimus 161)
Suburban Plankton: 3 (gnarlycharlie 184, BobArrgh 190, Sister Coyote 191)
greedy smurf: 1 (LightFoot 149)
Joanie: 1 (Renata 170)
Renata: 1 (Suburban Plankton 216)
*Current lynch leader
Snack Transfers:
Suburban Plankton: +1 (Special Ed 5)
Idle Thoughts: +1 (Special Ed 5)
gnarlycharlie: +1 (Special Ed 5)
Joanie: +1 (Special Ed 5)
Renata: +1 (Special Ed 5)
BobArrgh: +1 (scuzzlebutt 80)
gnarlycharlie: +1 (BobArrgh 105)
septimus: +1 (BobArrgh 190)
Corrections always welcome.
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Apr 13, 2011 15:29:38 GMT -5
What points do you think don't point to Septimus being scum, and why?
I should think I'd have enough town cred to be going on with for a time from starting yesterday's wagon on FCOD. In a general sense your observation there is correct; specifically in my case, I don't believe it applies.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Apr 13, 2011 15:48:09 GMT -5
What points do you think don't point to Septimus being scum, and why? I should think I'd have enough town cred to be going on with for a time from starting yesterday's wagon on FCOD. In a general sense your observation there is correct; specifically in my case, I don't believe it applies. You voted early D2.22 said he was not your top suspect and you may change your vote you changed your vote Not full on bandwagon to me?
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Apr 13, 2011 15:51:37 GMT -5
gnarlycharlie, Day One15 or thereabouts – confirm 113 – lot going on, hard to follow, wasn’t expecting sniping and illogical voting, is in trouble now 163 – (to SisC) meant sniping based on events outside the game 184 – semi-fluff, includes asking peeker if something was a threat 192 – wanted to know if he was in peeker’s sights 196 – asks Special Ed why he claimed so early; and if he had to, why not at the start Smallish issue with this post. If it was part of a larger context of participation it would be fine; standing out as GC’s first post of any value it strikes me as the sort of easy challenge that scum might make to a townie197 – whoops, posted before seeing explanation 259 – why would Ed want to be lynched? Some possibilities: no daphne/ed is jester; there is a daphne/Ed is jester; Ed is daphne, lynch=kidnap, and kidnap is necessary; he’s telling the truth. Conclusion, Ed is third party or weird town, not scum. This is some weird logic, but it doesn’t look scummy to me. The only thing that bothers me is the lack of action on Ed – no vote, no comment that addresses the issue of lynch or don’t lynch.270 – if daphne can be kidnapped, how does that happen, and how does it help town? Is daphne town? This on the other hand, feels very townie to me if I’m interpreting it right. Problem is I may not be. Here’s the quote: “assuming the daphne can be kidnapped, how can this be executed? is this a night action? i still don't see how this helps town?” Does this seem to imply that GC is suggesting that kidnapping might be a necessary thing for the town (as also implied in one of his options from the last post?) That he’s assuming necessary = beneficial and struggling to figure out how that can be the case? If he is, then that mindset is completely wrong for scum. Just utterly backwards.431 – fluff 471 – I have no issues whatsoever with this post beyond its timing.Day Two16 – ohnoes, 2 dead, sorry to see them go 17 – good move special ed outing himself 29 – looked for what town adviser is, couldn’t find it, asks the mod. Asks if anyone knows where peeker is and if they could check up on him. 52-3 – comment about gloating, another on who Ed didn’t give Scooby snacks to. In response to guiri, says it was good that ed outed himself since he wasn’t kidnapped. Strange mental guy wasn’t scared away (GC actually says *was*, but corrects it in next post), would’ve figured he’d be a target. Is mental fred? Maybe someone protected him, so good move there too. Post 276 @bob: welcome! @idle: good to have you. now i get to see you in action. to more serious matters: i see that most of the votes are for FCOD. i presume this is because "there has to scum" among those who voted for archangel. since Special Ed and MentalGuy are believed to likely be Town, FCOD is considered suspicious. since this has been covered by others, i won't bring comment more on this. i see a lot of votes for Lightfoot. i have recently played with her and i'm guessing her volume of posts including her claims of being Town stem from her experience in that game. she was Town and was taken out very early mostly for not outright stating she was Town. of course, it's no guarantee she IS Town. those points made, i'd like to focus my interest on voting after it seemed that Archangel would likely be lynched. obviously there are potentially suspicious votes before that but for now i'll try to cover those who had a safe vote including those who unvoted Archangel. this does NOT include all the posts, just the ones where votes were made and their reasoning for Day 1. these are: 1. Renata - voted several times for different players including Archangel. did unvote later but that move may not have mattered as Archangel still was leading after it. ended up for a Town ( Paranoia). in Day 1 this may mean nothing but i consider it worth noting. makes my scum-detection sense tingle slightly. 2. Captain Pinkies - after his initial "skirmish" with Special Ed, he was mostly quiet. ended up voting for BillMc who was Town. again, may or may not mean anything in Day 1. feeling neutral. 3. Inner Stickler - voted for Lightfoot for her flurry of posts. i find this very questionable reasoning. actually there's a lack of reasoning by noting the flurry and not the content of her posts. i would consider this possible Scum but it's so unsubtle that it gives me pause. 4. Lightfoot - voted for Inner Stickler with what seemed to be an OMGUS vote. later voted for FCOD who now top Scum suspect. this and my earlier comment about her make me think she's Town. 5. Septimus - like Lightfoot voted for FCOD. not much here. feeling neutral at the moment. 6. Romanic - drops in votes Septimus. says he doesn't agree with his logic for voting FCOD but doesn't explain why and never does. some Scum vibes here. 7. Sister Coyote - mistakenly votes for Scuzzlebutt because another player had her name due to the April 1 prank. neutral here. 8. GnarlyCharlie - no comment as it will be just considered self serving. i will reserve my judgment on Bob (Mahaloth) and Idle (Peeker) for now. i hope i have time to go over Day 2 voting to see if i can find clues there. while FCOD is a safe vote, just as i focused on the safe voters, i will make one for a safe voter. (i realize this is ironic because this can be considered a safe vote too.) Vote Romanic There is a lot in this post that I don’t like. (I touched on a lot of it in post 295 that day, and there’s more to see now. First, in the light of FCOD being scum, the unwillingness to comment on the FCOD case (which he characterizes incorrectly at that) is striking. (And he does it again in his next post.) Second, there’s a high proportion of “but then again” wording throughout. Lightfoot’s posting style probably stems from previous experience as town, but of course that’s no guarantee she is town. Captain Pinkies may or may not be scum. Inner stickler looks bad, but maybe it’s too unsubtle. Not much on Septimus. Neutral on SisC. He does ultimately come down on LightFoot as town, but the two people he says he gets scum pings on (Romanic and me) are both town.
Finally, he lampshades his undeniably safe vote for Romanic by calling it safe himself, not to mention pointing up the irony of voting for someone on the basis of making a safe vote when that vote itself is safe in the circumstance. As I said at the time, this feels overly self-conscious to me.
289 – this was in response to SisC, part of whose reaction to FCOD’s claim was to say it came very late Hooboy, not a good post. Completely fails to come down on any side of the issue, and the vig comment is sort of out there. I’m really pinged by all the “we” business as well. “We” don’t do anything as regards FCOD. You do, or don’t. There are two potential scum mindsets at play here: subconscious desire to blend in with the townies (we-we-we), and also waiting to see how the townies react before jumping in.312 – “left the room” might have been more believable, story gets worse as time goes by Why no vote change? I know why I didn’t change my vote, why didn’t you? Note Storyteller chimes in with “vote stays” in the next post.314 – maybe late claim is hope the investigator wasn’t online If anything I’d be thinking they were hoping to catch the investigator (or maybe watcher, if FCOD was not visiting Mental Guy), but whatever.329 – (in response to me) was only looking at day one posts with votes, wasn’t noncommittal since did place a vote, others have also not committed on specific people, do you have a problem with them? Someone would have mentioned it if did not comment on the irony in his vote. SummaryWhat I see so far is a pattern of staying aloof from what’s going on until very late in the day and then casting a one-off vote. It happened day one and day two, and looks to be heading that way today as well. Add to some signs of self-consciousness and potential reluctance to take a stand for or against FCOD, and it doesn’t look good. Against that is only one possible interpretation of one sentence from day one, plus a decent day one vote on Bill. I’m definitely going to have to think about this one some more.
|
|
|
Post by Renata on Apr 13, 2011 15:59:33 GMT -5
What points do you think don't point to Septimus being scum, and why? I should think I'd have enough town cred to be going on with for a time from starting yesterday's wagon on FCOD. In a general sense your observation there is correct; specifically in my case, I don't believe it applies. You voted early D2.22 said he was not your top suspect and you may change your vote you changed your vote Not full on bandwagon to me? *shrug* Whether I stuck with it or not, I started it. I went through several players' posts, including him and SisC, and decided the case was even stronger after I had (and said as much). It was only quite some time later that I got around to looking at Septimus and changed my vote. My point is not so much exactly how much town cred I deserve or don't deserve for that; it's about the validity of Suburban Plankton's statement that it is likely I first persecuted, then backed off on,then persecuted again, then backed off on again a townie Septimus in an effort to get yet more town cred. I think that's nonsense. I'm fully aware of how much like a lunatic I must look, changing my vote every thirty seconds. I just don't care. And that's why it's not a bid for town cred or whatever else might be dreamed up or speculated on. It's just me being me.
|
|
|
Post by septimus on Apr 13, 2011 16:18:12 GMT -5
Corrections always welcome. BobArghh transferred one Snack to me in post #190. Thank you, Bob. Do you want it back? Day or Night? As he has admitted Suburban Plankton is holding at least five Snacks. Hey, planks: Couldn't you pass at least 4 or 5 of these to a Town team player, like right now? If you give them to me, I might make the same offer as I just made to Bob. If you're unwilling to save these Snacks into some Town bank(*), that will seem very anti-Town to me, and I will probably move my vote. (* I continue to think it a very likely assumption that Snacks will have some value for Town; if not now, later.) This ended up more rude than funny. A great woman, still very young, and one of my wife's and my dearest friends passed away a week ago. My wife, usually the stronger of us, was devastated. I should have waited until under less stress to post.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Apr 13, 2011 16:32:51 GMT -5
As he has admitted Suburban Plankton is holding at least five Snacks. Hey, planks: Couldn't you pass at least 4 or 5 of these to a Town team player, like right now? If you give them to me, I might make the same offer as I just made to Bob. If you're unwilling to save these Snacks into some Town bank(*), that will seem very anti-Town to me, and I will probably move my vote. (* I continue to think it a very likely assumption that Snacks will have some value for Town; if not now, later.) If you can point out someone who you can guarantee is Town, then I'll be happy to. I may no longer be voting for you, but that doesn't mean I trust you. This is the second time you have threatened to vote for me if I don't move some Snacks. I'll tell you plainly right now that I haven't decided what, if anything, to do with the Snacks currently in my possession. I may or may not move some or all of them before the end of the Day. If you are going to vote for me on that basis, you might as well go ahead. What exactly would be the point of me giving 4 or 5 of them to you, just to have you give them back to me?
|
|
|
Post by julie on Apr 13, 2011 16:36:34 GMT -5
BobArghh transferred one Snack to me in post #190. Thank you! Vote/snack count corrected.
|
|
|
Post by BobArrgh on Apr 13, 2011 17:02:16 GMT -5
@Septimus: You may keep the Snack or pass it back, either way won't be no flak. I think I've got Snacks aplenty ... ten or more but less than twenty. What they're for is a mystery, but I don't care if you give 'em to me. When I'm confused or when I'm down, I'll probably hand 'em out to who I think is Town.
|
|
|
Post by BobArrgh on Apr 13, 2011 17:03:21 GMT -5
Probably time for me to go home and take my meds! ;D
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Apr 13, 2011 19:30:06 GMT -5
Bloody quiet in here
|
|
|
Post by Joanie on Apr 13, 2011 19:52:27 GMT -5
I'm sure I'm sounding like a broken record but I'm back again (another hospital trip, plus both babies are sick now). Again, I only have a moment but will try to be back later(my little, little should be in bed in a couple of hours). Until then, I just wanted to say that my comment about Lightfoot wasn't really about annoyance, it's more that I don't understand the need to repeatedly say that anyone is town and Lightfoot seemed to need to repeat it a lot. Also, I think I recall Renata saying something D1 about having to vote an equal amount of times that other people did. Just wanted to mention it cause she seems the most TOWN to me and kinda has all along. Still not ready to vote yet but my gut feeling says probably SEPTIMUS will be my choice. I really do have a hard time telling who is being truthful and who is not, to the point where I have pulled names from a hat so I could get a vote in, caught a lot of flack for that one. Anyways, I do really hope to be back in a couple of hours.
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Apr 13, 2011 20:16:24 GMT -5
furthermore, aren't cap, idle and joanie anti-town for hardly if at all contributing? Are you skimming? In case you didn't know, there's usually a "Going to be away" thread so posters can say when they're going to be away for a long period of time. I said, in this thread, I was going to be very, very busy until Wed (tomorrow), with only minutes to come on here and there. Really, all I have time, right now, to do is to catch up. idle: it was thursday when i said that. i didn't consider the time difference.
|
|
|
Post by LightFoot on Apr 13, 2011 20:19:48 GMT -5
@ Joanie In my explaination to Ed I did say that my previous game (my first) players that said they were TOWN were suspect and those that acted TOWN were trusted somewhat more) I never said "I'm TOWN" but as it was pointed out I spent too much time "showing" TOWNness (well that and SCUM tells I have learned) With out hunting SCUM properly.
OOG hug the ones you can reach!
|
|
|
Post by septimus on Apr 14, 2011 1:43:56 GMT -5
What exactly would be the point of me giving 4 or 5 of them to you, just to have you give them back to me? You would deposit them in a sort of distributed overnight Snack bank, to be sure they weren't lost to Town were you to be Lynched toDay, or NK'ed toNight. More importantly, it might build trust that you're Town. (Though "Scum would do that.") I've no understanding of Snacks beyond the PM's of julie that I've already posted. Ed, Bob and I each got ten or more from julie. You got 5 from players; do you now have 15 altogether? If you can point out someone who you can guarantee is Town, then I'll be happy to. I may no longer be voting for you, but that doesn't mean I trust you. I still think suspicion of septimus is a scum-tell, though by that criterion, most of you'd be scum. I'd never have made a good lawyer ([stands up] "It's obvious, your Honor." [sits down]. Come to think of it, many of my previous-life presentations as a developer might have seemed like that. ) Besides myself, I can't "guarantee" any Townie. I think maybe I'm tending to lean slightly non-Scum on renata: If she had a list of players with their alignments and produced the voting record she has, she'd deserve an acting award for sure!! I think guiri's vote against me may just be an OMGUS directed against my own OMGUS, which might be due in part to his earlier OMGUS. His continued voting for me seems so suspicious that I'm tempted to move my vote to him, but that might seem overly ... OMGUS. Hope this helps. So how many Snacks do you have total and who are you going to move them to? If you find five probable Townies, and give each three, most of your Snacks will be saved for Town even if they all aren't.
|
|
|
Post by guiri on Apr 14, 2011 5:35:13 GMT -5
This ended up more rude than funny. A great woman, still very young, and one of my wife's and my dearest friends passed away a week ago. My wife, usually the stronger of us, was devastated. I should have waited until under less stress to post. I'm sorry to hear that. I think guiri's vote against me may just be an OMGUS directed against my own OMGUS, which might be due in part to his earlier OMGUS. His continued voting for me seems so suspicious that I'm tempted to move my vote to him, but that might seem overly ... OMGUS. Neither my Day 2 vote nor my vote toDay were omgus related however the way you reacted but didn't respond to my questions on your PMs only served to encourage my distrust of you. I now see a purpose for your role as claimed, in conjunction with Bill's, that makes sense for Town. This was not in any way obvious to me until you posted your PMs and the discussion that followed. Unvote Septimus@ Septimus: You may keep the Snack or pass it back, either way won't be no flak. I think I've got Snacks aplenty ... ten or more but less than twenty. What they're for is a mystery, but I don't care if you give 'em to me. When I'm confused or when I'm down, I'll probably hand 'em out to who I think is Town. @ Bob, nice, did you miss Renata's question? @ EdRegardless of whether or not Burby was joking, I'm not buying his case on Septimus. I'm also getting seriously pinged Guiri for the same case. What exactly about SP's post (besides the over-the-top silliness) pings you? What about Guiri's?
|
|