Day One

[sinjin]

Sorry for not posting for a while. totallost has been pinging my scumdar but I couldn't really put my finger on why so I went back for a reread of the entire thread. I hope I can explain this so that it is understood by others. The goofy part is I'm in agreement about a lot she is saying.

She comes out hard against moley's claim as being anti-town in these two posts. I fully agree that his claim was anti-town. It has already potentially caused FCOD to be outed as a town power role (or scum which would be cool).

Then in this response to molefan's,:

First thing: "mmouse" and "mitey mouse" - are they actually the same person?

Second thing: I've barely heard from people like Santo and Hockeyguy as yet. Others as well. You guys are usually pretty talkative. Any ideas about this game? I've put the few I have on the table.

totallost's response seems way over the top, post time noted for later comparison, 11/23 4:14pm:

Right now I'm so ready to vote for you for being just too rude!

Mmouse and MiteyMouse are different players - would it have been possible for you to ask without sounding insulted (oh, wait a minut... YES It was possible!!)

As for the players not being in the game yet... we started in a weekend! Not everyone get to spend every living hour with internet access!

Please tell me - did your PM ask you to insult everyone in Day1 or you would get MOD-killed?? Doesn't sound like Idle... but right now I don't see anyother reason for you to play like this!

Two items bother me about this post. The first, what is so insulting about asking if the two players are the same? A lot of the stuff molefan was saying was insulting to all of us, but this, not so much. It seems sort of contrived outrage to me.

Second, she chastizes him for seemingly calling out lurkers with an over-abundance of !!!!!'s. I didn't get the impression he was doing that though, I took it as more of a "Let's change the subject, guys" sort of post.

Then only 13.5 hours later, Nov. 24 5:45am she posts this:

Might be about this time of Day 1 where I start talking about lurkers... but we just had a weekend so it might be a bit early for that

Then, this at 11:09am, Nov. 24:

I might go back to my random-vote-a-lurker-theory. It will be a random vote placed semi-early on a lurker giving this person a chance to come out and make some decents posts.

24 hours after chastizing moley for calling supposedly out lurkers, 11/24 5:29 pm, she posts her first list of player post counts with "game content" to call out lurkers, but lets Squid off because he subbed in. Votes miteymouse

Squid is a special favorite of mine and will never vote for him (J/K - he was subbed in and deserve a change to read all before he can be held accountable for not saying much)

Later, nvotes MiteyM as a lurker because of one post.


About 24 hours later, 11/26 3:24pm, she posts another list of player post counts to again call attention to lurkiness. This one is even more interesting. She specifically calls out people with less than five content posts, including me even though I have five content posts by her count (I don't agree with her count btw) and Cookies who has 6. However, pedescribe is not called out because he said he was traveling, but he did make two fluffy posts during that time. Squido (0)*, DBI (1), MrBlocky (1) and MHaye (3) are not singled out either. She then asks who is scummiest Cookies (6) or miteymouse (2). WTF? What kind of a skewed analysis is this? Toss out the data you don't like?

Then she flip-flops:

I'm not sure the lynch-a-lurker-thing can bring anything really worth while - but I would like to draw attention to those not posting that much or posting without really saying anything.

So this whole post is just sort of a shotgun smudge of a bunch of people? I'm not liking it.

vote totallost

*Numbers in () are content posts according to tl.

I hope this makes some sense, I've been rereading and typing in between my Guitar Hero turns.

[Santo Rugger]

Nov 27, 2008 13:43:35 GMT -5 Total Ullz said:

Nov 27, 2008 11:18:16 GMT -5 Santo Rugger said:

Sorry, I was getting a blowjob while typing that, so I was trying to get off (line) as quick as possible. The meat was definitely getting respected.

What a strange coincidence!! I'm giving a blowjob while I'm typing this, so I'll try to get it over with (the typing) as soon as I can...

Then why did you bother to... oh! I get your point now!

Happy Thanksgiving to everybody, hope everybody was able to spend it with people that made their lives complete.

Special thanks to peeker, I thought of you when I was about half an hour west of Albuquerque and the rain/sleet/snow/hail was coming down I had to slow down to 35 mph on the interstate (where the usual speed limit is 75 in NM). I was driving my little brother's truck instead of my Charger, and the back end was wagging like a dog's tail. Pretty scary, but I used to drive like an idiot on purpose on the ice by my parent's house, so I was able to keep everything together. I was glad I was driving and not my little brother, since I think my history of aggressive driving has given me a lot of experience now that I don't drive like an asshole any more as often.

[Zeriel]

...
Santo, you never cease to amaze me.

[Santo Rugger]

Why's that?

[Santo Rugger]

Or rather, which part?

[Total Ullz]

Nov 27, 2008 17:10:19 GMT -5 sinjin said:

Later, nvotes MiteyM as a lurker because of one post.

Incorrect: It was two posts

Nov 27, 2008 17:10:19 GMT -5 sinjin said:

She then asks who is scummiest Cookies (6) or miteymouse (2). WTF? What kind of a skewed analysis is this? Toss out the data you don't like?

Then she flip-flops:

I'm not sure the lynch-a-lurker-thing can bring anything really worth while - but I would like to draw attention to those not posting that much or posting without really saying anything.

I think we're back to the different style in the way we play on FB and in here. I was a typically "Think-out-loud"-post. I went back and counted the posts (and sorry if you think I got it wrong - but I didn't see the Cookie posts about the Muchrooms as relevant to the game - we disagree - that's all).
Then I started on the post and saw (what I also later said) that the teory is insufficient and don't really tells us anything.

I have an idea that in here normally - you would not make the post then. On FB we think out loud a lot and I made the mistake of doing it in here too.

[Chucara]

Almost Human has a nice structure to her arguments, so I’ll just use her post to try to explain myself. First of all, I’ve been under the weather since Monday, so my head hasn’t really been in the game.. I’m a bit better now, and now that I reread my own posts, I understand the votes. Anyway, I’ll try to translate my thoughts into English – hopefully they’ll make more sense.

Nov 27, 2008 6:41:37 GMT -5 Almost Human said:

OK so chucara pinged me right from the start but he did in the last game too (yes I know I was scum then but he still pinged me) and proved to be town so I didn't take too much notice. But seeing as it isn't just me here are my thoughts:

Nov 24, 2008 6:31:31 GMT -5 Chucara said:

That being said, I don't think we can determine "real" lurkers yet, as we're just coming out of a weekend. However, given a few days, I'd be all for voting of someone from the lurker pool, as the chances of a scum-slip on day one is pretty low. Then again, a no-lynch would also be okay with me if we really don't have a good target, and we stand to gain no information from lynching a person. I'd rather lynch a townie that gives us information about five other players than hope to randomly select a scum member by means of random.org. Sure, we might get lucky, but the odds just aren't that good.

Bleh, I don't know if a good day one strategy exists, but I don't see any better option than to lynch a lurker right now.

(bolding mine)

This was the first thing that struck me. Not only advocating a no lynch which in my opinion is a very bad idea almost always and especially on the first Day. But then he follows with the statement that he'd rather lynch a townie that gives us information about five others. Yes, lynching town is common on the first Day but I don't get the "five players" part at all. Maybe I'm just not understanding the Danish/English translation but it struck me as odd.

First off, the no-lynch.. I had the same thought last game. I’ll take the votes as a sign that I should reconsider my posting style, which is more or less just posting whatever ideas pop into my head. Maybe I should just start posting my conclusions rather than the train of thoughts in between. A No-lynch seems to a rookie like a good idea because there is a high probability of lynching a townie. On the other hand, by lynching a townie, we might gain information on the scum. This is the reason for the “…and we stand to gain no information from lynching a person” bit. As in, I only support a no-lynch if we gain nothing from a “real” lynch. I hope that makes more sense. Now that I reread, I realize that I probably should’ve left out that part, as it isn’t really relevant.
And the five players bit.. LOL.. Man I must’ve been worse than I thought. I don’t even think I can explain that in the same words, so I’ll just try it again. What I meant was: I prefer a lynch vote to be based on suspicions rather than random.org. A normal lynch could possibly give us information about 5 (or any other number) players, while a random.org lynch would give us none, and have a 80% (or whatever the good-evil ratio) chance of lynching a townie.
What I should’ve written with my first many posts was:
As for the discussed strategies, my order of preference is:
1. Lynch a lurker
2. No-lynch
3. Random.org
With several unmentioned strategies residing between 1 and 2. I was being completely obtuse, and I apologize.

(bolded and snipped)

Again perhaps this is just my interpretation of his wording but this seems to read as though he supports a no lynch if it gives us no information. It makes no sense.

Yeah, that came out pretty far from what I intended.. Hopefully the previous reply in this post made it a little clearer. Sorry for the missing quote, it seems that the board has cut some of the quote pyramid.

His only giving opinions on FCOD being a power role or vanilla and then considering voting for him have already been discussed so i won't go into that but I do agree with them.

Again, some of my internal assumptions were missing from that post. In my head, I was trying to justify FCOD’s slip assuming he was town.

(bolding mine)

Where did you get the idea that FCOD was a likely candidate for a lynch? I didn't see him in any great danger at any point of being voted for.

Well, this is one of the few of my quotes that still makes sense to me. Before I planted my foot so solidly in my mouth, FCOD was receiving a lot of focus. As the only one with a slip, I think he was a likely candidate, even thought the votes hadn’t landed yet. All scum has to do now to avoid a lynch is to lay low, as I, Idiot, have managed to become the center of attention.

Also your opinion that molefan's being subbed should make a difference to how we view shaggy. The role hasn't changed only the player so if you had any actual suspicions about molefan other than a dislike of early claiming then those suspicions shouldn't have changed.

Well, I didn’t actually say that directly, you inferred it. If you read my previous posts, I didn’t think molefan was scum as I thought he was being sincere about being annoyed by the early lynch in the last game.

Nov 27, 2008 3:14:22 GMT -5 Chucara said:

I'm not really getting the votes on me, as I'm playing pretty much the same way as in last game.

Yes, I left out options, but a complete exhaustive list doesn't give any new information. I don't think it was a scum slip. If I really was scum trying to protect a buddy, I'd be an idiot to protect him like that, as it would out us both.

The problem with your dichotomy is that no matter what I do now, it can always be explained by me being scum.. If FCOD is town, I'm scum because I knew he is town, and if FCOD is scum, I was trying to protect him.

And yes, I am aware that FCOD said he made the slip, but he might be lying..

I don't have much time right now, but I'll try to reply to NAF's reasons for his vote when he posts them. Obviously you're making a mistake, but me saying that won't exactly change anything, now will it

(bolding mine)

Damage control or genuine confusion? I really don't know. You could be scum setting FCOD up in the event of your death or really have no idea why people are voting for you. But I don't like the fact that you said "if I were scum I'd be an idiot to protect him like that" - whatever side you're on your words are linking yourself with FCOD whether intentionally or otherwise and right now I don't see a better source of information than your death.

So I'm going to bite the bullet - be the infamous 3rd vote and jump on the chuckwagon.

vote chucara

Well, first of all, I don’t think damage control is a scum thing. I’d expect any other townie to speak his own case if he has votes on him.
And yes, I was genuinely confused and annoyed that you(those who voted for me) didn’t understand what I was saying, but seemed keen to just misunderstand everything. Now that I’ve actually taken the time to reread my posts, I can see that I am extremely confusing to the point of not making any sense at all. However, I must admit that I don’t really see where my behavior is scummy.
I know the benefit of the doubt is much to ask on day one, but like I said, my head really wasn’t in the game.

[Zeriel]

Nov 27, 2008 23:58:07 GMT -5 Santo Rugger said:

Why's that?

Eh, just the way you carry yourself off--I've been accused of creepy pervness for saying stuff way tamer than what you come out with. Probably I need to hang out with more dopers and rugby players and fewer geeks from the prudish end of the spectrum. ;D

[sinjin]

Nov 28, 2008 3:11:21 GMT -5 Total Ullz said:

Nov 27, 2008 17:10:19 GMT -5 sinjin said:

Later, nvotes MiteyM as a lurker because of one post.

Incorrect: It was two posts

Sorry about that, in the post where you unvoted MiteyM, you only referenced one post by him/her.

[sinjin]

Now onto the rest of totalloss's response, with fixed coding, I hope:

Nov 28, 2008 3:11:21 GMT -5 Total Ullz said:

Nov 27, 2008 17:10:19 GMT -5 sinjin said:

She then asks who is scummiest Cookies (6) or miteymouse (2). WTF? What kind of a skewed analysis is this? Toss out the data you don't like?

Then she flip-flops:

I'm not sure the lynch-a-lurker-thing can bring anything really worth while - but I would like to draw attention to those not posting that much or posting without really saying anything.

I think we're back to the different style in the way we play on FB and in here. I was a typically "Think-out-loud"-post. I went back and counted the posts (and sorry if you think I got it wrong - but I didn't see the Cookie posts about the Muchrooms as relevant to the game - we disagree - that's all).

I was not quibbling about how you counted Cookies' "content posts". I did not go back and audit your data (except for my posts and yours), and I do believe we disagree what counts as a "content post", but that is neither here nor there. You're creative quote snipping leaves out the substance of my problem with your second "call out the lurker" post. The complete version of what I posted:

Nov 27, 2008 17:10:19 GMT -5 sinjin said:

She specifically calls out people with less than five content posts, including me even though I have five content posts by her count (I don't agree with her count btw) and Cookies who has 6. However, pedescribe is not called out because he said he was traveling, but he did make two fluffy posts during that time. Squido (0)*, DBI (1), MrBlocky (1) and MHaye (3) are not singled out either. She then asks who is scummiest Cookies (6) or miteymouse (2). WTF? What kind of a skewed analysis is this? Toss out the data you don't like?

The data you are tossing out is all of those you didn't single out who had fewer "content posts" than those you did call out.

Nov 28, 2008 3:11:21 GMT -5 Total Ullz said:

Then I started on the post and saw (what I also later said) that the teory is insufficient and don't really tells us anything.

I have an idea that in here normally - you would not make the post then. On FB we think out loud a lot and I made the mistake of doing it in here too.

My final point was that even though you concluded your theory was insufficient you still posted it and then went on to include a final bit of smudging:

but I would like to draw attention to those not posting that much or posting without really saying anything.

I find that scummy, I have no idea how it would play on FB.

*I hope I did the quote coding right*

[peekercpa]

On quick re read after way too much turkey.

You know what this feels like to me? A bunch of townie on townie nonsense. The scum are probably sitting back licking their collective chops at this point. At most this feels like one bad guy in the most recent exchanges and most likely zero. The real bad guys are hanging back letting us townies do their work for them. Ah, Day one. And I do agree that chuc seems to post off the top of her (his?) head. That don't feel scummy to me. The one time that I was scum I worried over every post I made. Top of the head shit is what townie does.

Of course the tequilla inflamed false detec claim was a little less well reasoned.

[Santo Rugger]

Nov 28, 2008 10:16:44 GMT -5 Zeriel said:

Nov 27, 2008 23:58:07 GMT -5 Santo Rugger said:

Why's that?

Eh, just the way you carry yourself off--I've been accused of creepy pervness for saying stuff way tamer than what you come out with. Probably I need to hang out with more dopers and rugby players and fewer geeks from the prudish end of the spectrum. ;D

You'd be amazed at how many times I heard from a girl when I was in college, "If anybody else would have said that to me, I would have slapped them." I dunno what it is, either, and some of the things that come out of my mouth shock me, too. Who knows?

[peekercpa]

Hey, guys be carefull. The hall fluff monitor is overdue for an appearance. Kind of like a John Dean character.

Get it.

Ok, for KidV. You are the hall fluff monitor. John Dean was the inside job that eventually brought down the Nixon White House.

Nixon was a President. He got embroiled in what, at the time was called Watergate. Their were plumbers bu that they didn't have jack to with pipes and water.

And the "White House" is a building in Washington DC (just north of Virginia - it's a state on the east coast) where the President lives. And it really isn't all that white, more of an eggshell color, don't you know.

Peek

[Merestil Haye]

Apologies first.

I was busy all day Tuesday, and so whacked in the evening that I couldn't concentrate. Things got a little ahead of me, and I had to labour through the thread again before I felt I had a grip on what was going on.

The reread has left me with a couple of nagging worries, mostly about our bacon-brand nationals.¹ I'm going to spend some time tomorrow (Saturday) trying to chase the worries down and get in a vote.








¹One of the most widely advertised brands of bacon in the UK when I was younger was Danish bacon.

[Almost Human]

Nov 28, 2008 18:43:53 GMT -5 Merestil Haye said:

Apologies first.

I was busy all day Tuesday, and so whacked in the evening that I couldn't concentrate. Things got a little ahead of me, and I had to labour through the thread again before I felt I had a grip on what was going on.

The reread has left me with a couple of nagging worries, mostly about our bacon-brand nationals.¹ I'm going to spend some time tomorrow (Saturday) trying to chase the worries down and get in a vote.








¹One of the most widely advertised brands of bacon in the UK when I was younger was Danish bacon.

I think it's very possible we're around the same age as I remember those adverts very well. The phrase "As old as MHaye" may possibly be used to describe me too

If you grew up with Andy Pandy and Trumpton* then it's confirmed.

*Explanation: Andy Pandy was a children's programme with really annoying puppets one of whom, Looby Loo was a complete tease. Trumpton was a fictional puppet town, with characters including a group of firemen called Hugh, Pugh, Barley, Magrew, Cuthbert, Dibble and Grub.

(Peeker explanations are fun)

[sinjin]

Nov 28, 2008 19:50:41 GMT -5 Almost Human said:

I think it's very possible we're around the same age as I remember those adverts very well. The phrase "As old as MHaye" may possibly be used to describe me too

(Peeker explanations are fun)

[FLUFF ALERT]Aloha Almost Human!! If you are of an age with MHaye, we are decade mates as well. Time for old-timers to take over the board, w00t. I also like peekerisms, , all you kids get off my f'ing lawn and I'm putin' naked gnomes in ur blow up xmas domes.[/FLUFF ALERT]*

*This post brought to you by OTAAFPY, inc.

[special]

I had a girlfriend who used to like calling me Andy Pandy. I think it had more to do with the rhyme than anything else. She wasn't so good in bed, but I did love it when she scratched my back and kissed my ear.

I know, not as perverted as Santo, but it's the best I can do. I'm a virgin, after all.

[Zeriel]

Nov 28, 2008 15:38:49 GMT -5 Santo Rugger said:

Nov 28, 2008 10:16:44 GMT -5 Zeriel said:

Eh, just the way you carry yourself off--I've been accused of creepy pervness for saying stuff way tamer than what you come out with. Probably I need to hang out with more dopers and rugby players and fewer geeks from the prudish end of the spectrum. ;D

You'd be amazed at how many times I heard from a girl when I was in college, "If anybody else would have said that to me, I would have slapped them." I dunno what it is, either, and some of the things that come out of my mouth shock me, too. Who knows?

When I was in college, I DID get away with it. Somehow managed to lose my touch when I got the real job. =P

I figure when the holidays are over I'll start posting less fluff.

[shaggy]

Nov 27, 2008 11:18:16 GMT -5 Santo Rugger said:

Nov 27, 2008 10:12:56 GMT -5 shaggy said:

Huh?

I was just saying that with out knowing what specific power role that FCOD has it would be bad to vote for FCOD.

But that's not what you said. You said you trusted him because of it. Not wanting to vote for somebody and trusting them are two distinctly different statements. Here it is again:

Nov 27, 2008 2:52:36 GMT -5 storyteller0910 said:

ok i see what you are saying, I made a poor choice of words. Sorry for the confussion. I did mean that while he maybe SCUM at this point we can not risk it. That may change as this game develops but for now, we need to sit on it. Besides there are a few others I think are pinging me, such as:

Nov 24, 2008 6:31:31 GMT -5 Chucara said:

I'd rather lynch a townie that gives us information about five other players than hope to randomly select a scum member by means of random.org. Sure, we might get lucky, but the odds just aren't that good.

Now i know a few poeple have brought this up, and i do not want to sound like a old broken record but I can not help but ask. How is lynching a fellow town good for the town? I just do not get it, if you suspect someone or you know they are town, then how is it pro-town to lynch them anyways? Also we do not know how many Scum there are, yet you seem pretty sure it is 5? Why is that? also how are you so sure they are town, unless there is a reason you know they are town? As I said I know others have brought this up, but it is the biggest thing to be pinging me right now.

There are a some others such as Totallost who seemed to think Miteymouse was scum for not talking and then is definetly scum for talking now. I know it is not much and I do not want people think it is just cause I am married to her. Even if it was someone else I still would be thinking, this just does not sit right, it just seems odd. It almost seems like your trying to get people suspicous of her. I know it is not much and all, but it is a mild ping.

[shaggy]

woops I made a mistake, that did not turn out so good. the first was a post from you Santos and then this part is me saying it:

ok i see what you are saying, I made a poor choice of words. Sorry for the confussion. I did mean that while he maybe SCUM at this point we can not risk it. That may change as this game develops but for now, we need to sit on it. Besides there are a few others I think are pinging me, such as:

Followed by a quote from Chucara.

[shaggy]

I dunno why it says quote from Storyteller or anything. Sorry for the confusion.

[Zeriel]

Eh, back to the game a bit. I have been nursing some grumbles about Total Lost (I like lurker lists, they are like big neon signs that say "I'm much more likely to slip if I'm scum" to me). I haven't had inclination to go back and re-read to see if anything crystallizes around that.

Beyond that, I'm not really suspicious of anyone beyond my current vote, so there it is.

[Idle Thoughts]

Chucara - 3 votes (Santo Rugger, NAF, Almost Human)
Mr Special Ed - 2 votes (misterblockey, zeriel)
KidV - 1 vote (Peekercpa)
Peekercpa (DBI)
mmouse - 1 vote (KidV)
Total Lost - 1 vote (sinjin)


I'm back. I was without net access for about a full day and a half. Not TOO long by some standards but for those who know me (and know I'm on every day, without fail, for about 10 hours usually) know that's a long time for me.

[special]

Nothing has crystallized for me. I don't have much to add that I haven't already.

I expressed my displeasure at [b[mole[/b] for his claim and took a bit of crap for that.

I'm not really feeling all that wonderful about the posting of lurking lists. It's already been stated that they're subjective. Perhaps the only useful thing.

Maybe it's because I don't see anything really useful, but it seems there's just a great deal of confusing things. I know it's normal, and most of it has been pointed out, but let me add one thing I haven't seen really stated well.

Mole claimed vanilla early, and took his deserved shit for it. Shaggy took over and hasn't really said anything about it. That, I'm OK with. What puzzles me is how much he's misposted and had difficulty with the system here. What the result has been is lots of people questioning what he's saying and some people just not understanding him. Frankly, I've been puzzled too. I've never had this much trouble understanding him on FB. Why is he having such trouble getting his point across here?

OK, that said, it's not really much, and he still probably wouldn't be my first choice for a vote. I'll have to re-read before voting. but, egad! We've only got 6 days left before the end of Day 1!

[MiteyMouse]

Something is not really sitting right with me in regards to TL. It is a gut feeling with very little else besides her voting for me for not posting and then unvoting but still suspecting me for posting. It just seemed kind of staged to me.

Mr. Sp Ed....My parents' nickname for me is "The Pand" of course, taken from the rhyme originally and then it evolved.

[peekercpa]

Alright. I just did a post Thanksgiving gut check. To aid me in this endeavor I enlisted my daughter's Pom, Paddington Bear, for this scientific analysis. I only used folks with a current vote in developing this post and his reaction to their names. Better than random.org at this point.

chuc he scratched and then went and attacked the cat

ed he licked his nethers and then rolled on his back

KidV no reaction whatsoever

Moi he licked my face

mmouse he licked my face again

tl he started barking like a mad man at a passing cloud

It's times like these that we need the real experts in this game to weigh in with some heavy analysis on what it all means.

When I corral the cat I will be back with an update.

[peekercpa]

And the results from the rest of the peekercpa ark.

Ted has the following observations. ted is one of the cats that has somehow has been caught in the peeker web. His name was supposed to be jet but I played deaf and ted it became.

chuc meows fiercely

ed meows even more fiercely

KidV the meows are now becoming frantic and post trauma in nature

moi bastard claws me

mmouse sumbitch claws me again

tl is released to deal with the Pom from hell that is looking for some Friday night pussy.

And, of course Paddington never had a chance. The cat kicked his ass and scooted over the fence leaving for all intents and purposes what is a twelve pound fluffy sponge to be consoled by grandpa.

Woot the flippin woot. Kind of an analogy of life in general.

[Santo Rugger]

And just when I think I understand pecker, I might as well just throw it all out the window!

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

I'm trying not to play with my usual reactive and self-centered style, and then sinjin has to go and crawl inside my head with respect to TotalLost and her analysis.

My grandmother has been ill, and I've been living out of a suitcase in two different parts of the state, going back and forth to work for the past 9 days. Y'all have been a much needed escape, and I thank you.

This extended Day 1 is going to be very interesting. I'd like to propose a fauxvote to help kill the time, keep the conversations going, and keep people accountable. Engaged and accountable.

Thoughts?

[peekercpa]

Nov 29, 2008 2:04:30 GMT -5 Santo Rugger said:

And just when I think I understand pecker, I might as well just throw it all out the window!

C'mon. That's the most lucid I have been in a while.

Do you really want the full blown explanation? If so, you will have to wait till the am.

There are truly nuggets of wisdom if you look closely enough.