[Tiamatha]

Shadow, on 05 June 2013 - 08:33 PM, said:

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 08:28 PM, said:

Shadow, on 05 June 2013 - 08:20 PM, said:

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 08:02 PM, said:

And distracting from what, you might counter? Why does there have to be something to distract from? If there isn't a lynch, meh, more WIFOM for tomorrow. If there is a lynch, meh, another townie down. Doesn't matter much to scum.

This likewise doesn't really make sense.

If it makes no difference to scum, why not just leave my vote on Desra?

Limits to the amount of speculation flying about. Plus, no one was biting on the Desra case, so you needed another tack.

Please clarify the first sentence, I'm unsure what you mean. Do you mean I just wanted there to be more speculation on thread? How awful!

Why would it matter to scum if people were biting the case?

Think about it a bit more.....



ok, well might as well clarify for the willful misunderstanding. Towards the end of the day, peoples' convictions need to crystallize to obtain a lynch. This is why vote hopping, listing several scummy people at once, offering to switch votes, and voting for someone new can be construed as scummy. Speculation is good, but as we all know, it can be used at certain times more as a weapon of distraction than a thoughtful discussion of scummy behavior.

And as for biting on a case, why would scum want to be blathering on about something people have discounted or ignore when scum can be actively helping town along in the wrong direction.

[Shadow]

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 08:38 PM, said:

Shadow, on 05 June 2013 - 08:30 PM, said:

It's also kind of funny that yesterday after reading the thread you went for Skintick, when you could've put vote 4 onto me. And yet now you're finding me scummy on stuff from day one. Talking of turnarounds...I mean, it's great under the guise of a re-read and all, but did you totally miss the posts you're now calling signalling yesterday?

And then there's this:

Tiamatha, on 04 June 2013 - 05:12 PM, said:

I think discussing the OP is an indeterminate method of differentiating scum or town. D-Day discussions and arguments over scum/town role dynamics are par for the course. I will not be throwing my attention on that case.

Well, considering I was voting skintick before all the other posts of yours I have quoted, it makes sense that I would vote for you after a reread and after having more information on you. As for missing the posts of signalling yesterday, no I did not miss those. But without the supporting evidence that has built up since day one, I could not be convinced that atrahal and yourself were linked. That's why I built the case today and not yesterday. Yesterday, it was a weaken, Day 1 case. Today, with the added information from newer posts, I am feeling more confident that I did witness signalling (hence the timing of my reread followed by a case on you).

I still agree with what you quoted, however out of context it is. In the first day, cases built on people discussing OP mechanics seems premature and silly. Without more information, such cases are just as weak as signalling cases. Which is why the gestalt of day 2 cases often hold more water. I do not dispute my statement, but I do believe that as part of a gestalt, such information can be useful in supporting a case. You seem to indicate that I consider any tone or information within such discussions useless, which is patently different from what I said.

Would you contend then that the majority of your case is relying on posts that were not available yesterday? I would have to disagree.

Your case is doing a lot of what you criticised yesterday.

I personally think that calling something an "an indeterminate method of differentiating scum or town", "par for the course" and saying "I will not be throwing my attention on that case" is not nearly as open to interpretation as you seem to.

Is it the same as calling it useless? Not quite.

But it is pretty unambiguous.

It's just interesting to notice expedient changes in attitude, and inconsistent behaviour.

Your accusation that no town player would start a new train so late, when you in fact had done so even later, for example. This suggests that you do not actually have an underlying opinion on the matter, and are just trying to push a lynch with anything you can get to start.

[Gamelon]

Read up. Nice productive town play, thank you all.
I have no idea what's going on because despite the fact that I just read all the above, I'm sleep deprived.

[Tiamatha]

Hood, on 05 June 2013 - 08:41 PM, said:

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 08:27 PM, said:

2 ) So you disagree that stating the obvious, especially in regards to OP mechanics, can be used a means of communication, even when responding to such posts with long explanations resembling said mechanics speculation? Interesting:

Quote

It's not helpful for town, it just tries to pretend it is. It could be useful for scum though.

3 ) No conflict. As I said the votes were primary votes, practically harmless statistically speaking (as opposed to the middle votes of a lynch train). Now if Atrahal pushed a lynch train over the halfway point on you, that would be a separate matter entirely.

The people you were putting pressure on during your pissing matches were already involved. You were playing with the talkers who already were above and beyond in their post counts. Getting players involved would have meant dedicating yourself to pushing the lowposters and low-content-ers. Pissing matches =/= encouraging play.

Trains failing is often scummy. This is due to the fact that the remaining members of the scum team don't push a few votes into a lynch train and instead either wait it out or redirect the focus. Also, considering that the standing case was on you and SR makes me wonder why SR took the fall instead of you when initially SR had less votes than you.

any chance the train was redirected?

I looked for that, but did not see any overtly suspicious behavior. The train started to break down when Desra removed her vote in response to a post and vote for Shadow by Kara. Subsequently, two votes were placed on SR and Kara switched over to SR herself, bringing Shadow back down to 1 vote.

[Shadow]

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 08:43 PM, said:

ok, well might as well clarify for the willful misunderstanding. Towards the end of the day, peoples' convictions need to crystallize to obtain a lynch. This is why vote hopping, listing several scummy people at once, offering to switch votes, and voting for someone new can be construed as scummy. Speculation is good, but as we all know, it can be used at certain times more as a weapon of distraction than a thoughtful discussion of scummy behavior.

Except according to you it doesn't matter to scum one way or another. For what reason then am I trying to distract people? And is my vote really that distracting? You are being awfully vague.

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 08:43 PM, said:

And as for biting on a case, why would scum want to be blathering on about something people have discounted or ignore when scum can be actively helping town along in the wrong direction.

If scum want to be helping town along, why start a new train instead of hopping on someone elses? Karatallid for example had a vote at the time.

Or would that not have been "distracting" enough? Even though at the time it would've leveled his train and mine, a rather useful move for scum you'd think.

[Tiamatha]

Shadow, on 05 June 2013 - 08:46 PM, said:

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 08:38 PM, said:

Shadow, on 05 June 2013 - 08:30 PM, said:

It's also kind of funny that yesterday after reading the thread you went for Skintick, when you could've put vote 4 onto me. And yet now you're finding me scummy on stuff from day one. Talking of turnarounds...I mean, it's great under the guise of a re-read and all, but did you totally miss the posts you're now calling signalling yesterday?

And then there's this:

Tiamatha, on 04 June 2013 - 05:12 PM, said:

I think discussing the OP is an indeterminate method of differentiating scum or town. D-Day discussions and arguments over scum/town role dynamics are par for the course. I will not be throwing my attention on that case.

Well, considering I was voting skintick before all the other posts of yours I have quoted, it makes sense that I would vote for you after a reread and after having more information on you. As for missing the posts of signalling yesterday, no I did not miss those. But without the supporting evidence that has built up since day one, I could not be convinced that atrahal and yourself were linked. That's why I built the case today and not yesterday. Yesterday, it was a weaken, Day 1 case. Today, with the added information from newer posts, I am feeling more confident that I did witness signalling (hence the timing of my reread followed by a case on you).

I still agree with what you quoted, however out of context it is. In the first day, cases built on people discussing OP mechanics seems premature and silly. Without more information, such cases are just as weak as signalling cases. Which is why the gestalt of day 2 cases often hold more water. I do not dispute my statement, but I do believe that as part of a gestalt, such information can be useful in supporting a case. You seem to indicate that I consider any tone or information within such discussions useless, which is patently different from what I said.

Would you contend then that the majority of your case is relying on posts that were not available yesterday? I would have to disagree.

Your case is doing a lot of what you criticised yesterday.

I personally think that calling something an "an indeterminate method of differentiating scum or town", "par for the course" and saying "I will not be throwing my attention on that case" is not nearly as open to interpretation as you seem to.

Is it the same as calling it useless? Not quite.

But it is pretty unambiguous.

It's just interesting to notice expedient changes in attitude, and inconsistent behaviour.

Your accusation that no town player would start a new train so late, when you in fact had done so even later, for example. This suggests that you do not actually have an underlying opinion on the matter, and are just trying to push a lynch with anything you can get to start.

I was wondering when you were going to bring that up. I noted that myself just after accusing you of the same thing.

I thought about it for a bit, and decided that it was still different. I was doing my reread for a couple hours before coming to the conclusion on Skintick and other low-posters. Before then, I had not laid down a vote (unlike yourself) nor built a case (unlike yourself). So while my vote was indeed late, I was not bouncing from case to case, vote to vote. I was stating my convictions and putting a vote down to back them up.

I didn't switch my vote until the end, when I felt that my vote was needed to get a day 1 lynch with a possibility of some useful information and the need to prevent arguments on SR bleeding into Day 2.

These are subtle differences, granted, but I think your behavior was entirely different from mine, despite the overly general accusation against you concerning voting late on a player with no votes.

[Tiamatha]

Shadow, on 05 June 2013 - 08:53 PM, said:

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 08:43 PM, said:

ok, well might as well clarify for the willful misunderstanding. Towards the end of the day, peoples' convictions need to crystallize to obtain a lynch. This is why vote hopping, listing several scummy people at once, offering to switch votes, and voting for someone new can be construed as scummy. Speculation is good, but as we all know, it can be used at certain times more as a weapon of distraction than a thoughtful discussion of scummy behavior.

Except according to you it doesn't matter to scum one way or another. For what reason then am I trying to distract people? And is my vote really that distracting? You are being awfully vague.

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 08:43 PM, said:

And as for biting on a case, why would scum want to be blathering on about something people have discounted or ignore when scum can be actively helping town along in the wrong direction.

If scum want to be helping town along, why start a new train instead of hopping on someone elses? Karatallid for example had a vote at the time.

Or would that not have been "distracting" enough? Even though at the time it would've leveled his train and mine, a rather useful move for scum you'd think.

Gods, what have I gotten myself into. Arguing with you is like playing an endless game of tennis, back and forth. Be here all day.

Objective: Distract players from solidarity on a lynch train such that the lynch doesn't happen or that the lynch happens with a lot of confusion requiring a WIFOM-fest the next day, possibly obscuring scummy behavior.

Methods (several different types can be employed for the same results, some of which are listed below):
1 ) Vote for an entirely new person, both removing one's vote from solidarity and throwing a burgeoning lynch train into question.
2 ) Vote for a person with a minority of votes already on them for same reasons as #1.
3 ) Remove vote from lynch train to throw validness of train into question. Can be followed by 1 or 2.
4 ) Throw out several different lynch candidates all at once at the last second and stick with one that is not mainstream.


Is that more clear. This is about as clear as I can get.

[Tiamatha]

To conclude and summarize, before taking a break:

My accusations against Shadow are a gestalt of scummy behavior. None of the accusations alone are enough to be convincing, but together they cast aspersion on Shadow's game and warrant investigation via lynch. A lynch of Shadow should illuminate the potential linkage between himself and Atrahal in addition to providing information towards Atrahal and Gamelon indirectly.

Currently, the only other cases I see are upon lowposters (particularly Skintick and Gamelon). These are harder cases to build, but I also believe that our second killer is among them. I think we can get the most millage, however, from lynching Shadow, but I will not stall a lynch on the lowposters, which is evidenced by my votes on Skintick.

Edit: again --> against

This post has been edited by Tiamatha: 05 June 2013 - 09:14 PM

[Shadow]

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 08:56 PM, said:

I noted that myself just after accusing you of the same thing.

Well isn't that great, good to see you are paying attention to the consistency of what you're saying after all...

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 08:56 PM, said:

I thought about it for a bit, and decided that it was still different. I was doing my reread for a couple hours before coming to the conclusion on Skintick and other low-posters.

Yeah, your post saying you were reading up comes a whole 12 minutes before my vote.

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 08:56 PM, said:

Before then, I had not laid down a vote (unlike yourself) nor built a case (unlike yourself). So while my vote was indeed late, I was not bouncing from case to case, vote to vote. I was stating my convictions and putting a vote down to back them up.

Congratulations on not having any prior content.

What makes it worse that I'd already laid down a prior vote, and put pressure on other people? Are you saying that past a certain time, it's distracting if people who've already voted make a new train, but someone who hasn't been involved doing it is a totally different thing?

If the problem with new trains is that they are distracting, there is no difference who is doing it, subtle or otherwise.

"Bouncing" is another fun piece of language...Is it so beneficial to the scum to put pressure on a few people and try and draw them into the game?

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 08:56 PM, said:

I didn't switch my vote until the end, when I felt that my vote was needed to get a day 1 lynch with a possibility of some useful information and the need to prevent arguments on SR bleeding into Day 2.

So? What is the problem with someone not simply focusing on one person? Is it now the scum who look at multiple people, try and put pressure on and get people playing?

Backtrack, backtrack, backtrack.

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 08:56 PM, said:

These are subtle differences, granted, but I think your behavior was entirely different from mine, despite the overly general accusation against you concerning voting late on a player with no votes.

I fail to see how your argument that it is distracting is any different regardless of any sort of past activity.

You either think starting a new train with little time is either scummy because it is distracting - in which case why did you do it? - or you think no such thing - in which case your accusation is simply grasping at staws trying to get something to stick.

[Galayn Lord]

Ok, just starting a proper re-read.

first Day 1 shenanigans crap:

Cast, on 03 June 2013 - 12:47 PM, said:

Atrahal, on 03 June 2013 - 11:40 AM, said:

Fax. Shadow Fax. Faxed Shadow. Max Ammo.



See what I did there?

I just read Dr Seuss so this makes perfect sense.
Cast is fast. Fast is Cast.Cast will blast past fast!

If anything can be called shitty Day 1 signalling, than this is it.

Then we had several pissing matches--Atrahal v Kara, then Shadow v Desra (listing the antagonists first)

Then Desra brings out the noob case, Kara backs him up. Argument about meta grows, untill it is mod-smacked. More pissing ensues, with HP being tossed into the mix,

Bunch of people,check in, but not much is happening. Atrahal votes SR, for not contributing.
Korlat votes Shadow, because of the Noob case.

Shadow picks on HP and Karat for not being useful.

3 votes on shadow (Desra, Korlat, Karat)
Tiam votes Skin--to kill off a low-poster.

Thgolen comes back, gives thoughts votes SR. 2 votes on SR:

Tholen, on 04 June 2013 - 06:32 PM, said:

OK, caught up and here are my thoughts. (to those who didn't like my modkill avoidance post...fuck off. I have time to play this game, I just didn't have it until now. It does town no good to have me lynched so I wanted to make sure I got on and avoided the modkill. You're welcome)

Signaling cases are shit. I don't agree with them, and think they are usually a smokescreen case for scum. How often does signalling actually work? How often does the person being signaled even know what to look for. Think on your Mafia career. How many times has it worked or someone being caught in a signal case actually been scum? I just don't think they have any merit and I think the people that use them are either using them as a screen or just can't think of anything better to write.

The Shadow/Desra thing seems over the top and contrived. Shadow going on about unnecessary posting benefiting scum...wtf is that. Someone posted a D-day scenario on thread, and Shadow says thats a worthless post that really contributes nothing...seriously? It seems like according to you, only posts that definitely point out scum should be allowed. That ain't happening. The way we find scum is to post, post a lot, point fingers, be abrasive, get info that others might not have thought of on the thread. I know you are a super genius and all but some people like to have things like D-day scenarios on thread for reference, or because they haven't thought of them. Trying to limit the flow of information on thread IS scummy. That is what you are trying to do.

regarding Desra, I actually think his case/observation had some merit...It doesn't add up that one vet, let alone two, haven't finished the series... but as for it being signalling.. well, I don't think so. But something doesn't seem right there.

There were a ton of people that popped on have like 3-4 posts and bailed.It's a bit early but based on last game, these people need to step up and start posting more. (I know, rich coming from my third post and first of substance...I'll be around much more from here on). We seem to have a posting problem and hopefully it can get fixed. I don't mind low posting, as long as the posts are content filled and constructive. Gaylord stuck out as good in this regard.

I think Atrahal's case on Silchas didn't have much behind it. But it is day 1 and you need to take stabs in the dark. What interests me is the reply that Silchas gave. See Below.

Silchas Ruin, on 04 June 2013 - 12:57 PM, said:

Atrahal, on 04 June 2013 - 08:53 AM, said:

For now I am going to



Vote Silchas Ruin



The only content he provided was the joke vote and a few one liners in response to me. Since then he hasn't done anything to engage in conversation. I am not sure where I place Desra and Shadow at the moment. One of them could be a symp muddying the waters. I want to focus on the people that don't want to stand out and coast along.

The only conversations going on to engage in when I was around yesterday was either meta to the threat of modkill and the pissing match between Desra and Shadow which I found ridiculous but had nothing to share that wouldn't be parroting someone else. And now I had 15 minutes to check the thread before I leave for my day, which resulted in no more insight than the fact that you have a massive rage boner that you're directing my way today.. Anyhow, that's my thoughts.

His reaction seems pretty wild and defensive for receiving one vote. A "massive rage boner" does not one post make. Based on this over reaction I am going to


vote Silchas Ruin


I would also be willing to vote Shadow for trying to control information flow on the thread, or any of the low posters that isn't me. I will be around until lynch.

Karat promptly switches:

Karatallid, on 04 June 2013 - 06:53 PM, said:

Given that it seems many people are keen on going the low-poster route this game, and given that it ties into my case on Shadow anyway, I will

remove vote
vote Silchas Ruin

I understand the merit of leaving the chatty players around, as they will give us more information to work with later. Day 1 is a perfect day for a low poster lynch. Historically, we rarely hit scum on Day 1 anyway, so if the low poster ends up not being scum, then we can move on. Plus, as I said, I think that it's possible that Silchas was symping Shadow. It's a given that if this is the case, Silchas will obviously show as town, so we won't get much more information, but I'd certainly like to see a lynch today, and if the Shadow lynch won't take off, then Silchas seems a good second choice to me.

'
Desra accuses Karat of vote hopping too eagerly. Karat replies that he likes both SR and Shadow as scum.

Tiam changes to SR "to get a lynch" (4 votes on SR)
SR self-votes
Skin votes SR, to get a lynch (that's 6)
Desra and Karat argue some more

HP says smth about wifom. SR removes vote? (5 votes)

Shadow votes SR "for lynch" (6 votes again)

Hanas votes SR "to avoind wimfom"

Hanas, on 04 June 2013 - 09:56 PM, said:

Silchas Ruin, on 04 June 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:

I've seen the WIFOM shit too often. However, I'd rather keep playing than die obviously.

I'd rather not go through again.
Vote Silchas Ruin

that's 7. I hammer at the minute clock expires, vote apparently doesn't go thru. Shin gets modslain, only need 7 votes to lynch, apparently, so KH dies anyway.

Separate post for Day 2

[Desra]

While the above is fascinating as (only not being in the middle of a pissing match can be) I am taking off and while I am tempted to vote for Gamelon based off the fact that he wants to by lynched. I feel that skintick's drive by votes and low posting is more worthy of a vote.


Vote Skintick.

[Korlat]

Shadow, on 05 June 2013 - 08:18 PM, said:

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 08:02 PM, said:

And for a townie to bring up a new lynch target that late in the day is ludicrous.

I mean, to some extent what you say makes sense, except...

Shadow, on 04 June 2013 - 04:08 PM, said:

Remove vote

Vote Coast Cast

Tiamatha, on 04 June 2013 - 05:12 PM, said:

Vote Skintick

It's totally inconsistent

Ooooh BUUURRRNNN!!


This is a nice little back-and-forth you two have going on, though at the end of it I can't same I'm truly convinced either way. But what I'm getting from Tiamatha's case is essentially the same thing (possible signalling) as why Shadow was being sized up for a lynch on Day 1, only Tiam's substituted Atrahal for Silchas Ruin as the symp. Tiam might use words like 'gestalt case', but it does seem a signalling case at it's very heart. Don't get me wrong, I was willing to place my vote on Shadow for that reason yesterday, so I would not be averse to doing the same today, except it feels like Tiam is trying quite hard to frame this case as something it's not.

[Shadow]

My point is that Tiamatha is being wildly inconsistent here. Saying that "none of the accusations alone are enough to be convincing" is a compliment to them.

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 08:02 PM, said:

And distracting from what, you might counter? Why does there have to be something to distract from? If there isn't a lynch, meh, more WIFOM for tomorrow. If there is a lynch, meh, another townie down. Doesn't matter much to scum.

Tiamatha, on 05 June 2013 - 09:08 PM, said:

Objective: Distract players from solidarity on a lynch train such that the lynch doesn't happen or that the lynch happens with a lot of confusion requiring a WIFOM-fest the next day, possibly obscuring scummy behavior.

Apparently, I'm trying to distract people from solidarity on a lynch train (and at that point, I'd have to ask, what solidarity? Most trains had one vote, and I was prior to the SR train kicking off). And yet at the same time, it apparently doesn't matter much to scum what happens. So what am I even trying to do here? Make sure the lynch happens with lots of confusion? What am I confusing here? Am I just being "distracting" for it's own sake? What, by putting pressure on people? Yeah, traditional scum water-muddying right there.

Create WIFOM by proposing a new candidate? What, on day one? Putting pressure on someone and trying to get them to post, is that really going to create confusion for town? If so, why were so many people doing it?

Me proposing a new candidate creates no more confusion, no more chance of the lynch failing, than Tiamatha's new candidate does, so I have a hard time believing he really has an underlying opinion on this.

He hasn't even really proposed an explanation for why it causes confusion. What sort of WIFOM fest is it going to inspire? You keep saying things like this, but the question is, why are new trains so awfully confusing for town? It's more information to analyse

[Shadow]

Galayn Lord, on 05 June 2013 - 09:22 PM, said:

Desra accuses Karat of vote hopping too eagerly. Karat replies that he likes both SR and Shadow as scum.

Just on this point, it's worth pointing out that in Kara's scenario, SR was signalling me, and thus the symp, so the idea that SR is equally good because he ties into the case doesn't really hold up, especially as lynching SR does absolutely nothing to verify the case one way or another.

[Korlat]

Galayn Lord, on 05 June 2013 - 09:22 PM, said:

that's 7. I hammer at the minute clock expires, vote apparently doesn't go thru. Shin gets modslain, only need 7 votes to lynch, apparently, so KH dies anyway.

Separate post for Day 2

Huh? I think your vote did go through and you were the hammer. Shin wouldn't have been mod-killed until after 36 hours, so after end of day.

[Shadow]

Korlat, on 05 June 2013 - 09:40 PM, said:

Galayn Lord, on 05 June 2013 - 09:22 PM, said:

that's 7. I hammer at the minute clock expires, vote apparently doesn't go thru. Shin gets modslain, only need 7 votes to lynch, apparently, so KH dies anyway.

Separate post for Day 2

Huh? I think your vote did go through and you were the hammer. Shin wouldn't have been mod-killed until after 36 hours, so after end of day.

And also I don't think modkills reduce the number of votes needed.

[Galayn Lord]

Shadow, on 05 June 2013 - 09:42 PM, said:

Korlat, on 05 June 2013 - 09:40 PM, said:

Galayn Lord, on 05 June 2013 - 09:22 PM, said:

that's 7. I hammer at the minute clock expires, vote apparently doesn't go thru. Shin gets modslain, only need 7 votes to lynch, apparently, so KH dies anyway.

Separate post for Day 2

Huh? I think your vote did go through and you were the hammer. Shin wouldn't have been mod-killed until after 36 hours, so after end of day.

And also I don't think modkills reduce the number of votes needed.

Liz didn't list me in the vote update, I don't think. Let me check...

[Hood's Path]

yes, when I looked at the final tally, GL's vote was listed as a self-vote instead of the hammer


I also am unconvinced by the exchange between Shadow & Tiam at this time

@ Shadow - why do you think Tiam is working so hard to get you lynched?

[Galayn Lord]

Hmm, for some odd reason I was apparently voting myself at the end of Day 1. Interesting MM behaviour, I would assume *cough* bug *cough*

[Galayn Lord]

Anyhow, Day 2, for your consideration

people start checking in, seeing the no-kills, everyone's happy. Shadow suggest co-ordinated withhold, questions are asked.

Hanas makes some speculations, Tiam seems a bit lost. Skintick is being sarcastic, Gamelon avoids modkill and doesn't care what happens on htread (proabbly too blatant to be scum, imo)

Atrahal trying to get Game involved in the game. told to try after Fri. is cool to keep Gamelon around till then (possibly sympage?)

Karat suspected SR would come back inno--then why so suspicious?

Atrahal is yet again embroiled in a pissing match--vs shadow and Korlat this time

Atrahal votes Skin-starts a low-poster crusade
More suspicion on Karat--he comes back and defends

Desra comes back and does more math.
There is some discussion of the train end and of myself (by Korlat and atrahal)

then Shadow responds to Desra's math. Fireworks ensue.

THolen comes back and participates. Attacks Shadow

Tiam is back, refutes being a low poster (b/c high content). Votes Skin, goes to make case. Shadow goes after Gamelon, Tiam gives us all some game tips.

Then he starts to link up Shadow +_ Atrahal
Ends up voting Shadow
Shadow is starting to defend