Mini 579 - The Plagues of Egypt Mafia - Over

[lord_hur]

Of course, phrases such as "tvod turns up as scum" kinda assumes we will find out his alignment if/when we lynch him

We didn't get the info for kabenon007, there's no reason to think we'll get it for the next one.

This is evil.

[Guardian]

Mr Stoofer: I see how it could be interpreted that way. (shrug).

[Mr Stoofer]

Yes, that was my point.

[Mr Stoofer]

My post 127 was directed at lord_hur's post 125.

[PyroDwarf]

@Hur: If your speculations came out to true, then I would be inclined to agree with stoofer. At this point I'll continue to call it harmless speculation.
Anyways, I don't think my speculation harms the town in any way. It was speculation on something all players were made aware of and I was just wondering how it comes into play.
I agree with people suspicions of TVoD. Early in the game he FoS'es Stoofer for "overburdening". I thought that if we see something we think is odd we should point it out. This seems more logical that "throwing out FoS's till I'm suspicious." Also, he calls Lord_hur's Request for a prod suspicious and said that Hur was trying to get out of the spot light. I don't think this is the case, as I have stated already. It could be just his early game style and yes, you can be hard to understand sometimes.
Lets see what slysly has to say. In any case, should we not replace a non-active player before we lynch them?
I don't know about guardian's PBPA on cow. Why do you want to kill slysly? Why kill nonactive players, why not replace.

[hasdgfas]

hasdgfas is scum. At the bottom of the thread, where it says 'display posts by previous', click hasdgfas, and view his posts in isolation:

Post 0 -- he random votes for HH because he doesn't want to get hacked. He is showing care for his own well being, even in his joke.

Post 1 -- he addresses a question posed to someone else (tvod, conveniently), and talks about how "we" shouldn't do "x" because that would help "them" -- the scum. This post is trying to be helpful but isn't, and interjects so tvod can't answer the question untainted.

Post 2 -- Similarly appears to be helpful but isn't really. 'Why not play mafia?'. ...

Post 3 -- hasdgfas is definitely directing tvod here; my most probable read is scum directing scum (partner, why do you act suspiciously? act better!) but I think that scum directing new town to look nice a pro-town is an almost as probable scenario.

Post 4 -- Casts minor suspicion and comments on how 'he doesn't like' something.

*sigh* my problem with these type of PBPAs is that you're not actually quoting the post or part of the post that you find suspicious.

0: Wait,

seriously?

You're accusing me for my reasoning in my arbitrary vote? While I understand and believe that you can take more out of the "random stage" than most people think, this really seems to be stretching for a reason.

1: I gathered that question as not just to VoD, but to the town, which is why I answered it, even though it might not have been the most eloquent response.

2: How is what I said there not helpful? VoD FoSed Stoofer for playing mafia. Why should that not be commented on?

3: Again, this is a bit out there. I can see where you're coming from, but questioning someone for what they say is how mafia is played. Why shouldn't I do that?

4: I hate people who jump in and say nothing at all. This was one of those posts that said nothing. While I don't always have a huge post each time I say something, I try to say something regarding what's gone on in the game.

[Mr Stoofer]

Someone's hunch is without merit. Pretty much been on unexpected V\LA, will contribute more soon after a read through.

I interpreted that to mean that you were going to do a read through now. If not, then I think we should just have you replaced, or lynch you, now.

[Singing Librarian]

@Singing Librarian : more activity please (only 4 posts, and your only attack had been following someone else). Also, you qualified Guardian's attack as interesting, could you tell me in which way ?

lord-Hur is right, my contributions have been lacking. So here's what I think of everyone's play in librarianic alphabetical order (I don't know everyone well enough to sort into subject-based categories...)

Guardian

Builds a case against hasdfgas in his first contentful post (post 92), which feels wrong after reading the whole thread through again (see my comment on hasdfgas below). In particular, I really don't see how hasdfgas is supposedly leading tvod. The most interesting thing about this post, though, although I disagree with it, is that it's probably the most clearly set-out case in the whole game so far.

HackerHuck

I don't really follow the reasons for the Guardian vote, but I do agree that a prod of SlySly would be more helpful than lynching the lurker after a relatively short time of play.

hasdgfas

Is very clear (post 23) about the reasons for avoiding too much speculation and discussion of town roles without throwing suspicion around, which makes me think that he genuinely wants to help the town. Continues to speak sense whenever he speaks (see eg post 50).

lord_hur

Received a lot of attention for speculation early on, but it definitely reads in a pro-town, excited to be playing sort of way rather than a scummy sort of way (trying to flush out power roles or the like). Others were right to call him on the speculation, to put a stop to anything that could potentially give scum an advantage. I find nothing scummy in his desire to speculate, even if it's not the best idea at this point. Gets a little over-defensive, but again not in a way that reeks of scum, but in a way that suggests relatively-new-at-this town.

Mr Stoofer

I don't really get his post no 30, as the things he talks about were public knowledge. However, it seems clear from continued discussion that he believed his case. He reacts calmly to the attacks from tvod, asks useful questions and generally makes sense.

Musher333

Has made 12 posts, but none of them make me form any opinion at all.

PyroDwarf

Received a lot less attention for speculation than lord-hur, but speculated less, so that makes sense. His few posts read on the pro-town side of neutral to me.

Shin Hatsubai

Has been very cautious, but I appreciate the statement (post 117) that he'd "rather mill things over and read the discussion before making the final decision as to who to vote for". That's definitely better than being blindly trigger-happy.

Singing Librarian

Is me. My contribution has been lacklustre, but I don't suspect myself, strangely enough.

SlySly

Was lurking, or away from keyboard, impossible to tell which.

thevampireofdusseldorf

I've already said I don't like his style, so I really ought to go into more detail.
***Post 31 - FoSes Mr Stoofer for "trying to add more weight to an already suspicion laden person. Not that there is anything wrong with that" - if there's nothing wrong with it, there's nothing to FoS, surely, and pointing out things that are suspicious is good town play, worthy of (if there is such a thing) an anti-FoS if anything.
***Post 39 - "I also viewed your overburdening of him with more suspicion suspicious" makes no sense. If something is suspicious, it should be pointed out, and not necessarily just once. If voicing a suspicion of someone who has already had suspicion voiced about them was suspicious, we'd never have any discussion.
***Post 51 - appears to find Mr Stoofer even more suspicious for repeating a question which tvod had not answered. (i.e. does tvod view Mr S's suspicion of lord_h as merited?). One thing you can almost guarantee in this game is that if you do not answer a question, it will get repeated either by the original questioner or someone else, so that shouldn't be surprising. Also, "I find it strange he needed me to coment on this first before he could say for himself he believed it merited." What? No, Mr Stoofer wanted a response. It was quite evident that he already believed the suspicion was merited, or he wouldn't have voiced it. What it looks like he wanted to know was whether tvod thought he was throwing out baseless accusations or jumping on a pointless bandwagon. It was evident to me that right or wrong, Mr Stoofer believed his suspicions had a basis in reality.
***Post 63 - Twists my hope to move discussion on to something fruitful into an attempt to stop it completely. Ditto for Musher333, who explains his reasons better than I did.
***Post 83 - Among the reasons for his vote on lord_hur is "asking for prods". Prods can only benefit town, not scum, as more involvement in the game means more information for said town and a better chance for discussion, debate and accurate lynching.
***Post 99 - Certainly seems to be suspecting Mr Stoofer more than lord_hur, even though he's still voting for lord_hur. Talks without actually answering any of the questions pointed his way.

TVOD is the one player where postings stand out as suspicious to me. Others have not posted enough to allow me to form an opinion either way and the remainder read as pro-town - so far, at least.

[thevampireofdusseldorf]

I have already explained that Mr Stoofers comment re lord_hur was not adding anything new to the discussion and my interpretation (aided by Mr Stoofer) shows this was a mere "I think you are scum and I am town".

Do people understand this?

If somebody adds to a bandwagon in a way you find suspicious is it then reasonable to find them suspicious also?

This is why I FoSed Mr Stoofer.

I guess my explanation for the comment "if it is merited" I have not explained too well. So I will try to give it plainly.

If you are town and add to a bandwagon then you obviously believe your suspicion is merited because you do not know if that person is scum or town.
If you are scum then you have to add suspicion when it

seems

merited.

Is this clear to people?

So from what I have gathered Mr Stoofer added a rather pointless comment to the anti lord_hur movement and then was overly interested in if his suspicions seemed merited in my eyes.

Is this clear enough for people to understand?

Now lord_hur has gone down in my suspicion list so

unvote:lord_hur

Now I dont hold what I think to be evidence enough to say Mr Stoofer is scum but I am suspicious of him and if he is scum I see a link between him and Singing Librarian.

[Guardian]

*sigh* my problem with these type of PBPAs is that you're not actually quoting the post or part of the post that you find suspicious.

why is this a problem? tabbed browsing for the win.

[SlySly]

The Meaty Post...

I apologize to all for my absence. Real life has been throwing me some curveballs as of late and I have been doing my very best to get a good bead on each and everyone of them. Unfortunately, having to bat these unwanted and unexpected pitches, these balls have severely eaten in to my ability to post and stay on top of my Mafia games. In fact, I requested to be and was replaced in a game just last week due to my time constraints at the time. Things have lightened up tremendously and I should now have the time required to contribute to my games as is expected.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@Lord hur

I am not a fan of early role speculation. It appears you are of the newbie variety so you not understanding how early role speculation gives the scum a great advantage might be somewhat understandable.

Lurking is sometimes not lurking. This is very much the case for a player who has never posted in the game. You have absolutely no way of knowing if that player is lurking or just not around to contribute therefore is a null tell. I would find a player that popped in every now and then just to throw down a quick vote or FoS then fall back into lurk mode much more suspicious than I would a player that has never posted.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@Mr. Stoofer

I find your Post 30 suspicious. This post puts the pressure on a newb to elaborate on role setup very early in the game. This action, IMO, is one only scum would partake in. Taking your legendary mafia status into consideration, which I am drawing on from the posted context of some of your apparent fans in this game, I find the action even more scummy than I would from a newb or relative newb. If your legend is well earned, you are well aware that early role speculation is very anti-town and pro-scum.

You are overly defensive in Post 32 and top it off with an OMGUS vote on tVoD.

In post 89, you falsely accuse tVoD of jumping on a bandwagon, a bandwagon that only exists in your scummy imagination, that only he was a part of, seeing how he was the ONLY person voting on that person at that time. He very clearly pointed this out to you. I couldn't help but notice how you have conveniently avoided commenting on it.

I like how in Post 96 you buddy up to Guardian and then continue on in Post 105 to make it known that you support your new buddy's idea of voting off someone that hasn't posted. That is rather oppotunistic, especially how you had called for such in depth investigations and reasoning behind each of tVoD's FoS's. You gave absolutely no reason for your voting suggestions. Then again you call for my lynch in Post 131 still having no reason for it. I'm sure it will be very entertaining watching you "try" to convince everyone that your actions so far have been in any way pro-town.

I hope I read through fast enough for you.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@tVoD

Other than your early heat on Mr. Stoofer, I have not seen major contributions from you in this game. I initially got pro-town vibes from you but as the game goes on, I get the feeling that you may be breeding confusion. Confusion breeding is not pro-town. I am not convinced you are purposely doing this, but the possibility remains.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@hasdgfas

I agree with your Post 50. Pointing out scumminess is pro-town.

Your Post 82 is right on. Shin does redeem himself later, though. Ah, the power of discussion.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@Guardian

Have you played a game with me before using a different name? You seem awfully fixated on me, from your very first post all the way up to your very recent, and very insistent that I am scum with absolutely no reason for such claim.

Your Post 92 is among the most ridiculous posts I have ever read. You go so far as to actually try to build a serious case against someone for an obvious joke from the random stage. It was seriously entertaining but I hope you don't seriously think you have convinced anyone of such ridiculousness.

Could you please point out the scummy behaviour of mine that lead to your FoS on me in Post 92?

I hope rubbing up to your scum buddy in Post 97 was all you had hoped it would be.

The only group I am a part of is the town. I had nothing to do with 007's death and I assume no one else in the town did either.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@HackerHuck

Your initial defense of Mr. Stoofer in Post 58 had me a little suspicious. Your posting since then, especially your Post 100, have seemed much more pro-town. As mentioned earlier in this post, more discussion is a very pro-town thing. Things have a tendency to work themselves out in a mix.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@Shin

Your Post 117 is very pro-town. How can anyone argue with wanting to further discuss things to make the most informed voting decision?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@Musher33, Singing Librarian, PyroDwarf

From all of your posts combined, not one thing jumped out at me from any of your posts worth commenting on. If I have missed something important, please point it out to me and please don't take this post as my dismissing any of your contributions as I am not intending it that way.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After reading the discussion, it seems obvious to me that the following are well justified.

vote: Mr. Stoofer

HoS: Guardian

[Guardian]

Have you played a game with me before using a different name? You seem awfully fixated on me, from your very first post all the way up to your very recent, and very insistent that I am scum with absolutely no reason for such claim.

No, I haven't. I had a hunch, that was my reason.

Your Post 92 is among the most ridiculous posts I have ever read. You go so far as to actually try to build a serious case against someone for an obvious joke from the random stage. It was seriously entertaining but I hope you don't seriously think you have convinced anyone of such ridiculousness.

Don't use the same adjective (seriously, here, and almost ridiculous) in the same couple of sentences. It makes you look like you are just employing rhetoric, when you have legitimate concerns. Your concern aside, however, aside from your prodigious use of adjectives, you haven't really made anything nearing an objective, holistic, analysis of my case, instead isolating and twisting the admittedly weakest part of it.

Could you please point out the scummy behaviour of mine that lead to your FoS on me in Post 92?

No. I had a hunch.

I hope rubbing up to your scum buddy in Post 97 was all you had hoped it would be.

You later accuse Stoofer of buddying up to me. That means scum is trying to make friends with town -- not a scum-scum interaction.

Do you think he is buddying up to me, or me to him, or that we are scum buddies? If you want to avoid giving a definitive answer, rank them in probability, and explain why.

The only group I am a part of is the town.

That's a silly thing to say.

I had nothing to do with 007's death and I assume no one else in the town did either.

Noted.

[HackerHuck]

@HackerHuck, whose only 2 meaningful posts before his attack on Guardian had been attacks on me for reasons I qualified as quite defective. You just wrote off your first attack, but do you still think the second was justified ?

Do I really come off that mean?

I didn't really think I was attacking you the second time, so I'm not sure what to say. When I read your quote of PyroDwarf, it made him sound scummy. Rereading your post I'm not feeling it as much as I did the first time, but that doesn't discount my initial impression. I think you're overreacting to a rather minor point I made.

I would like Mr. Stoofer and Guardian to explain why they said that SlySly should be lynched when he had yet to post. I'm also curious why Lord_Hur implied that SlySly was lurking when he had yet to post.

[lord_hur]

Lurking is sometimes not lurking. This is very much the case for a player who has never posted in the game. You have absolutely no way of knowing if that player is lurking or just not around to contribute therefore is a null tell. I would find a player that popped in every now and then just to throw down a quick vote or FoS then fall back into lurk mode much more suspicious than I would a player that has never posted.

This is a good thing I asked your opinion *in general* because otherwise I would be stuck with this type of reply. I wanted to ask you a question like the others, but the only noticeable thing about you is that you were away (which I personally believe is the truth). So I asked this.

I think your attack on Mr Stoofer is very interesting, as no one explored this lead before. However, your linking of Mr Stoofer and Guardian is a bit of a stretch in my opinion. and looks like confirmation bias (you found scummy - to you - behavior regarding Mr Stoofer and Guardian, so you looked for a link, and as this is the main one...).

Overall, good post.

[lord_hur]

@HackerHuck, whose only 2 meaningful posts before his attack on Guardian had been attacks on me for reasons I qualified as quite defective. You just wrote off your first attack, but do you still think the second was justified ?

Do I really come off that mean?

I didn't really think I was attacking you the second time, so I'm not sure what to say. When I read your quote of PyroDwarf, it made him sound scummy. Rereading your post I'm not feeling it as much as I did the first time, but that doesn't discount my initial impression. I think you're overreacting to a rather minor point I made.

"I really don't like this post" IS an attack. I accept your answer though, as I have myself done the same thing before (as town).

[lord_hur]

I have already explained that Mr Stoofers comment re lord_hur was not adding anything new to the discussion and my interpretation (aided by Mr Stoofer) shows this was a mere "I think you are scum and I am town".

You are wrong. Everyone, including SlySly who is currently attacking Mr Stoofer, thinks that he actually added to the discussion (but not necessarily in a town way, according to SlySly).

If somebody adds to a bandwagon in a way you find suspicious is it then reasonable to find them suspicious also?

This is why I FoSed Mr Stoofer.

I guess my explanation for the comment "if it is merited" I have not explained too well. So I will try to give it plainly.

If you are town and add to a bandwagon then you obviously believe your suspicion is merited because you do not know if that person is scum or town.
If you are scum then you have to add suspicion when it

seems

merited.

The difference is not enough to be used as an argument (in my opinion).

So from what I have gathered Mr Stoofer added a rather pointless comment to the anti lord_hur movement and then was overly interested in if his suspicions seemed merited in my eyes.

Hmm, SlySly raised this point too; I'd like to see Mr Stoofer's answer about it.

Now I dont hold what I think to be evidence enough to say Mr Stoofer is scum but I am suspicious of him and if he is scum I see a link between him and Singing Librarian.

A link with Singing Librarian ? What link ?


Overall, it's better on the clarity, but not perfect. Look at SlySly's arguments agianst Mr Stoofer for example. Quick. To the point. Efficient (just judging the form, not the content).

[lord_hur]

Of course, phrases such as "tvod turns up as scum" kinda assumes we will find out his alignment if/when we lynch him

We didn't get the info for kabenon007, there's no reason to think we'll get it for the next one.

This is evil.

Well, it seems the mod has decided to show us that he will give more info about the dead in the future. Look at post 0 now.

[Guardian]

I had a hunch SlySly was scum. I'm not going to continue voting him when I find other's actions scummy, though.

Except for the part attacking me and my case, I generally approve of SlySly's post.

I'm really tired. If this post doesn't make any sense, that's why.

[thevampireofdusseldorf]

Now I hope people are begining to understand me a little better but if not please speak up as I am more than happy to answer questions and there is no need to just blatantly ignore me........(Mr Stoofer).

Do people understand my "if it is merited" comment?

Also I ask again why are people voting for me at this stage beyond the "you are the most scummy looking" or "I don't like your style"?

I generally play by focusing on a few people at a time and since I mentioned Singing Librarian earlier then a few things stand out at me as a bit scummy.

I think we need to move on, though it is interesting that other early bits of speculation on the setup (e.g. PyroDwarf's) went unmentioned.

Here I find it odd he states an incorect fact, maybe not paying attention to the game or perhaps needing to throw some created suspicion somewhere. Also I find it a bit strange saying lets move on from this speculation while at the same time casualy pointing out someone who was also speculating. I dont really understand the need to point this out (at least not in a post asking to move away from speculation discussion).

thevampireofdusseldorf, I wasn't trying to hush discussion. it seemed that particular thread of thought had reached the end of any usefulness, and moving on to something else would help a heck of a lot more.

This is the reply to my FoS. Ok so SL wished to change the discussion topic. If you wanted discussion to move away from that topic then I would assume you wouldn't want people to comment about PyroDwarf so thus it was pointless posting. As with Mr Stoofer pointless posting I believe to be perhaps a very good scum tell if you can correctly spot it. A scum has to post but he is posting for very different reasons than town, thus he will frequently post to seem active and bring up points which in fact have no benifit to town at all.

Post 132

TVOD is the one player where postings stand out as suspicious to me. Others have not posted enough to allow me to form an opinion either way and the remainder read as pro-town - so far, at least.

So it seems I am the only possible scum to you. It would be in your best interests (perhaps) and towns to let day one progress further so you can get opinions on other players.
I do find it a bit odd you make a full player analysis when you obviously dont have any opinion on many players when it comes to scum or town except me. Is this posting out of need not desire?
They seem to be mainly plain observations of a few things each player has done.
I'm strongly now getting the feeling of a post thats first aim is to push a bandwagon on myself and secondly to appear as if you are doing some contribution to the town without saying a lot. I may be wrong on this but it is just the feeling I get when reading that post.

Also I just looked at Musher333 and besides quoting he has only ever posted one or two sentences per post. So twelve post but not a great deal of contribution.

(Note: I previewed this three times and that is enough for me to be happy with it) heh once more!

[thevampireofdusseldorf]

You are wrong. Everyone, including SlySly who is currently attacking Mr Stoofer, thinks that he actually added to the discussion (but not necessarily in a town way, according to SlySly).

The one line of his did not bring up any new points at the time of its posting but if you see this as a valid point:

if the person brings up new points, which Mr Stoofer did (the fact that I might know more than him).

Then you are right. But I do not see it as any point at all as all it means is "You might be scum because you might know more than me." Informed majority/uninformed minority. And after I asked Mr Stoofers explanation of the post (given on page 4):

What I meant was this: Scum inevitabley know more about the game than the Town. They are the informed minority. And they often cannot stop themselves from showing how clever they are by successfully "guessing" aspects of the setup. As JEEP said in the wiki:

we have a point made. But alas this to me is something kinda obvious and is why people don't speculate about the game set up and why those that do are told not to and are found suspicious.
Also I dont give Mr Stoofers credit in adding to discussion (in an active scum hunting manner) apart from the fact of his post being there and others commenting about it.

[thevampireofdusseldorf]

ebwop: Informed minority/uninformed majority

[Singing Librarian]

Do people understand my "if it is merited" comment?

No, I still don't get it. It's a pointless question for you to ask, because Mr Stooffer's answer would always be 'yes', though it may be a lie. Him asking you whether his suspicion was merited *was* a valid question, which you never really answered (your 'yes and no' was not an answer, because the sentences that followed were not concerned with answering the question).

Also I ask again why are people voting for me at this stage beyond the "you are the most scummy looking" or "I don't like your style"?

Well, I did list six posts of yours which contained things I didn't like, the things that make me think you are scum. I think that goes beyond a five-word accusation.

I generally play by focusing on a few people at a time and since I mentioned Singing Librarian earlier then a few things stand out at me as a bit scummy.

I think we need to move on, though it is interesting that other early bits of speculation on the setup (e.g. PyroDwarf's) went unmentioned.

Here I find it odd he states an incorect fact, maybe not paying attention to the game or perhaps needing to throw some created suspicion somewhere. Also I find it a bit strange saying lets move on from this speculation while at the same time casualy pointing out someone who was also speculating. I dont really understand the need to point this out (at least not in a post asking to move away from speculation discussion).

Yes, I was wrong, I missed the FoS, which was about the only thing. It just struck me as odd at the time that PyroDwarf's comments caused so little reaction compared to lord_hur's - it's always worth noting when different people get different reactions for similar things, though there could be many reasons for it.

Post 132

TVOD is the one player where postings stand out as suspicious to me. Others have not posted enough to allow me to form an opinion either way and the remainder read as pro-town - so far, at least.

So it seems I am the only possible scum to you. It would be in your best interests (perhaps) and towns to let day one progress further so you can get opinions on other players.

This is what will happen, yes - as the day goes on, more people will post more things and everyone can form better opinions of them. That's what happens in mafia. You are not the only possible scum, you're just the only person who stands out to me as being scum. There must be at least one more, but nobody else stands out. Yet. Which is why I said "so far, at least".

I do find it a bit odd you make a full player analysis when you obviously dont have any opinion on many players when it comes to scum or town except me. Is this posting out of need not desire?
They seem to be mainly plain observations of a few things each player has done.

Sometimes plain observations can be helpful if others haven't noticed them. And I have certainly formed opinions on several players when it comes to 'town', which should be obvious from reading my post (eg the fact that I disagree with Guardian's analysis of hasdfgas). Posting a list of 'I believe these players are town' would be unhelpful. If we all did that and certain names appeared on all of them, who do you think the scum would kill? The person we all trust, of course.

Also I just looked at Musher333 and besides quoting he has only ever posted one or two sentences per post. So twelve post but not a great deal of contribution.

That's pretty much what I meant. 12 posts which made me form no opinion either way because they lack content.

[Mr Stoofer]

So from what I have gathered Mr Stoofer added a rather pointless comment to the anti lord_hur movement and then was overly interested in if his suspicions seemed merited in my eyes.

Hmm, SlySly raised this point too; I'd like to see Mr Stoofer's answer about it.

My point about lord_hur was not pointless.

It was a point that nobody else had mentioned before

. That is why tvod's FOS of me was so stupid. I agree that merely repeating points someone else has made is sometimes a scum tell, but my point was

brand new

. That is why I got so annoyed with tvod.

[Mr Stoofer]

Well, it seems the mod has decided to show us that he will give more info about the dead in the future. Look at post 0 now.

I've looked and I didn't see what you are referring to...

[lord_hur]

So from what I have gathered Mr Stoofer added a rather pointless comment to the anti lord_hur movement and then was overly interested in if his suspicions seemed merited in my eyes.

Hmm, SlySly raised this point too; I'd like to see Mr Stoofer's answer about it.

My point about lord_hur was not pointless.

It was a point that nobody else had mentioned before

. That is why tvod's FOS of me was so stupid. I agree that merely repeating points someone else has made is sometimes a scum tell, but my point was

brand new

. That is why I got so annoyed with tvod.

Ah damn, it's my fault, I wanted to quote only the second part of VOD's post, about you being "overly interested...", which wasn't unlike SlySly's accusation of being overly defensive in that same post 32.

The first part of the post is completely wrong in my opinion (and I've always said so).

Well, it seems the mod has decided to show us that he will give more info about the dead in the future. Look at post 0 now.

I've looked and I didn't see what you are referring to...

The three "???" after kabenon007 in the dead section have always been there ?