How does painting a player as scummy for erroneous reasons translates into scummy? Gee, I don't know.
I stand by my reasons. I think it's perfectly possible for LP to have been using that post to set up something later. However, "naive and shortsighted" - as you earlier said - does not equate to "painting someone as scummy". Naive and shortsighted implies that I am honestly mistaken about a situation and my reasoning is bad out of naivety or shortsightedness. Painting some as scummy implies that I am using false reasoning to deliberately make someone look like scum.
How so? What do you expect yourself to do if he's caught in a lie, and if you expect the town to act differently, what do you expect it to do (and why)?
Now that we've had this whole conversation, I would lynch him just the same. However, if no one had brought it up he could easily have point back at the post where he said he might be lying.
You even voted him.
...oh wait, you didn't, you didn't even FoS, and you showed clear signs of wanting to vote players other than LP while never showing any sign of wanting to vote LP.
I didn't want to vote LP because I was already voting for Heartwork who was way scummier! I don't use FoS or anything similar so that point can't be valid either.
Let's admit you did. Did you miss Seppel's vote as well (which had no justification other than barning Syrenz's case)? If you didn't, why didn't you question it? If you did miss Seppel's vote, surely you must have at least seen mine (otherwise you wouldn't know there was a wagon). Since my vote would have been the only vote on Guardman you'd have seen, shouldn't it have occurred to you to check which wagon I was talking about? Or did you think I was a one-man wagon?
Waaaay too many raised questions here.
I saw Seppel's post with the assortment of quotes (in which he makes no reference to the earlier Syrenz post) and figured that was the basis for the wagon. Admittedly I was a little distracted from the during the beginning of D2, and thus I just wasn't following all that well.
In your hurry to discredit me, you mistook me for Seppel.
My bad.
As I've already said, you still haven't proved he acted any different than a large portion of the town.
It's not simply the lack of attention paid to Heartwork (as opposed to attention paid to other things), it's the attempts to look like he's adding something to the wagon.
I used the word "simplistic", not naive. They do not have the same meaning, or the same implications. "Naive and shortsighted" means you have no clue what you are talking about. "Simplistic and shortsighted" means you could have used better logic instead but chose not to.
Nice misrep.
What world do you live in where "simplistic and shortsighted" means "could have used better logic instead but chose not to"? Shortsighted/shortsighted means unmindful of future consequences. What sort of "consequences" did my logic have that did I not foresee, and how does that equate to painting LP as scummy? That other people would think I was acting like scum?
For the last time (hopefully), explain how this statement he made will make a scummy lie any less scummy. Use logic instead of weaselling your way out with "maybe"s and "it could"s.
I almost don't want to answer this, because I've repeated myself over and over and over, and yet you're not listening - and you add on an ad. hom to boot.
I'll say it one more time. If LP is lying scum, then he could refer back to the post where he said he might be lying. That's definitely less scummy than just lying alone. It's not a total out, but it's better than nothing.
So that confirms you never intended to vote LP Day 2?
Are we even talking about the same thing anymore? I attacked LP for answering for Heartwork ONE TIME and now I'm expected to vote him D2 for it? Also, we seem to have gotten away from the original accusation, which is that I was trying "to attack LP without actually attacking him" - maybe you'd like to finally tell me how I was doing that?
In #467, you respond to #458, where I vote Guardman and mention the wagon on him. You also quote and comment on Guardman defending himself from an accusation.
The Seppel-post you are talking about is #491. Before this point, you saw players claim there was a wagon on Guardman (even when he should have, by your personal count, only been at one or two votes), you might have seen players refer to a post you clearly must have missed or else they are talking nonsense (eg: Seppel's #457), and you saw Guardman defend himself against an invisible accuser. And you want the town to swallow that this is all true and you never realised you had been missing something?
All I expect the town to swallow is that I really wasn't paying very good attention at the time.
Sure. Which attempts? Please provide quotes or links and, more importantly, explanations.
And you want me to swallow that you haven't been paying attention? /Sarcasm. I've already noted two posts (one in the original post where I brought up Syrenz, one on the last page) and provided explanations.
So basically, we've got three points. For some reason the first one (concerning LP's potential lie) still isn't clear to ZDS, despite the fact that I've repeated myself at least five times now. The second point was purely a case of my not reading the thread, and ZDS is insistent that because I wasn't really paying attention to what was going on vis-a-vis Guardman I'm scum. The third point is his dislike for the Syrenz case.
I used the word "simplistic", not naive. They do not have the same meaning, or the same implications. "Naive and shortsighted" means you have no clue what you are talking about. "Simplistic and shortsighted" means you could have used better logic instead but chose not to.
Nice misrep.
For the last time (hopefully), explain how this statement he made will make a scummy lie any less scummy. Use logic instead of weaselling your way out with "maybe"s and "it could"s.
So that confirms you never intended to vote LP Day 2?
In #467, you respond to #458, where I vote Guardman and mention the wagon on him. You also quote and comment on Guardman defending himself from an accusation.
The Seppel-post you are talking about is #491. Before this point, you saw players claim there was a wagon on Guardman (even when he should have, by your personal count, only been at one or two votes), you might have seen players refer to a post you clearly must have missed or else they are talking nonsense (eg: Seppel's #457), and you saw Guardman defend himself against an invisible accuser. And you want the town to swallow that this is all true and you never realised you had been missing something?
Sure. Which attempts? Please provide quotes or links and, more importantly, explanations.
---
My vote is really sad to be all alone when TheIceMan is getting scummier and scummier. Please, vote TheIceMan.
Ok, you've convinced me with this recent back-and-forth.
Why did you decide to question me on this instead of responding to ZDS' latest post?
I already responded. Once I'm lynched (which it seems like is going to happen), look into Manders. This is the worst justification for jumping on a wagon.
I already responded. Once I'm lynched (which it seems like is going to happen), look into Manders. This is the worst justification for jumping on a wagon.
You lying through your teeth is the worst justification? Really?
ZDS has emphasized how there's no possible way you're being truthful. I see no reason for you to lie about what you did, except that you were pulling ☺☺☺☺ out of your ass and messed up your story.
You lying through your teeth is the worst justification? Really?
ZDS has emphasized how there's no possible way you're being truthful. I see no reason for you to lie about what you did, except that you were pulling ☺☺☺☺ out of your ass and messed up your story.
Ergo, you are scum. Have a nice swing!
Yep, it's pretty bad.
And of course there's absolutely no way someone could just not pay very good attention to the thread...oh wait.
Have fun calling me scum all you want. I hope you're satisfied when I flip town.
I already responded. Once I'm lynched (which it seems like is going to happen), look into Manders. This is the worst justification for jumping on a wagon.
In a game where we have a high chance of not experiencing a nightkill, TheIceMan's reaction is not a town reaction.
Where's the connection?
Keifru, please do the honors and recalibrate our night actions for TheIceMan's lynch.
Should be 4 blockers targeting 4 remaining, with you being unblocked and stealing a point from one of Jobie/Guardman. My only preference for pairings is not putting ZDS and Jobie together.
I suppose it's important to create circles of points trading as well, and I also suggest that the circles have the roleblockers giving their points around the group, and the higher numbers attempting and failing to take points around the group.
I suppose it's important to create circles of points trading as well, and I also suggest that the circles have the roleblockers giving their points around the group, and the higher numbers attempting and failing to take points around the group.
That screws things up to much.
A blocks B
B blocks A
A submits first. B gets blocked; A's point modification will go through, B's won't. I don't think leaving anything up to timestamps, or trying to even coordinate who submits what first during the night is feasable. (Even if being able to do so would be incredibly beneficial.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTG: The RPG Character: Zenith RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
A blocks B
B blocks A
A submits first. B gets blocked; A's point modification will go through, B's won't. I don't think leaving anything up to timestamps, or trying to even coordinate who submits what first during the night is feasable. (Even if being able to do so would be incredibly beneficial.)
I meant a,b,c,d roleblockers stop e,f,g,h, with Seppel left over.
Do we really need that many more roleblockers? Wouldn't massblocking and stopping kills now be better?
Eh, I guess we could; but if one of the role blockers becomes lynched, we'll fall below the threshold. I was just setting it up so we can not have to worry about role blocker threshold for the rest of the game (dividers could just divide each other into MacGuffins; either way, they're 'roleblocked' via PoE with this composition.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTG: The RPG Character: Zenith RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
Okay I guess that's a tell for any scum on the ropes, but because we should have less to worry about, I don't see a point in mudslinging and trying to deflect onto nearly all of your attackers.
Okay I guess that's a tell for any scum on the ropes, but because we should have less to worry about, I don't see a point in mudslinging and trying to deflect onto nearly all of your attackers.
I...don't understand this sentence. Who's doing that again?
Eh, I guess we could; but if one of the role blockers becomes lynched, we'll fall below the threshold. I was just setting it up so we can not have to worry about role blocker threshold for the rest of the game (dividers could just divide each other into MacGuffins; either way, they're 'roleblocked' via PoE with this composition.)
Fair enough, I suppose.
I do believe, however, that dividing takes precedence on giving/taking points, and so Shalako giving to Syrenz will make Syrenz a 3 by end of night.
Quote from Rules »
Once a night, a player can give a point or take a point from another player. When a player gives a point they drop down in value by one, and their target gains one point in value. When a player takes a point they gain one point in value, and their target loses one point in value. This action takes place after any roles associated with their values, and these abilities are performed in order of timestamps.
The divider's ability has the exact same wording as the multiplier's ability, therefore it isn't possible for a divider to both give or take points and divide during the same night.
The quoted point was referring to what would happen if a player was divided and had a point given to them in the same night, and more specifically that dividing would always happen first.
With respect to the plan, Keifru's idea was to give Syrenz a point and then divide him twice making him a 2, but in reality the two divisions would happen first, then the point would be added turning him into a 3.
Seppel: 2 Roleblocker
MandersHex: 2 Roleblocker
Lost Profit: 2 Roleblocker
Keifru: 2 Roleblocker
ZDS: 2 Roleblocker
Shakalako: 4 Doctor
Syrenz: 4 Doctor
Guardman: 8 Mason
Jobie: 9 Divider
The thing is, we still are pretty points heavy; Mk IIa would get us to a point where our points pool is light and later in the game we will not have to worry about making more roleblockers to ensure lockdown.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTG: The RPG Character: Zenith RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
Most especially in such a flavour-light game as this, I don't think using flavour as a basis is strong.
Indeed, I'm confused as well as to why ZDS has flavor about Jobie's number and not his, but as claimed by ZDS it creates a sort of flavor masonry - which is why they are likely to be the same alignment.
Seems simpler to just have them take from their blocker- that way, if we end up with someone dying we don't get missing points. That would be annoying.
Seems simpler to just have them take from their blocker- that way, if we end up with someone dying we don't get missing points. That would be annoying.
TheIceMan
Syrenz
Lost_Profit
Shalako
THE SAVED
Keifru
MandersHex
Jobie
Guardman
ZeDorkSlipeur
Seppel
If there were still scum left alive after the wipe, I would have such a better understanding of this game if the first four were dead.
Jobie? That seems like an interesting choice.
Why Jobie over TIM, Shakalaka, or Syrenz?
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
Which games did you read (solely out of curiousity)?
<--- for putting me on the save list.
Unvote Keifru has dropped off my scumdar.
Random Mafia 2 Town MVP
'08 MTGS Fantasy Football Overall Champion
Best Non-SK Neutral Performance (Individual)
I stand by my reasons. I think it's perfectly possible for LP to have been using that post to set up something later. However, "naive and shortsighted" - as you earlier said - does not equate to "painting someone as scummy". Naive and shortsighted implies that I am honestly mistaken about a situation and my reasoning is bad out of naivety or shortsightedness. Painting some as scummy implies that I am using false reasoning to deliberately make someone look like scum.
Now that we've had this whole conversation, I would lynch him just the same. However, if no one had brought it up he could easily have point back at the post where he said he might be lying.
I didn't want to vote LP because I was already voting for Heartwork who was way scummier! I don't use FoS or anything similar so that point can't be valid either.
I saw Seppel's post with the assortment of quotes (in which he makes no reference to the earlier Syrenz post) and figured that was the basis for the wagon. Admittedly I was a little distracted from the during the beginning of D2, and thus I just wasn't following all that well.
My bad.
It's not simply the lack of attention paid to Heartwork (as opposed to attention paid to other things), it's the attempts to look like he's adding something to the wagon.
What world do you live in where "simplistic and shortsighted" means "could have used better logic instead but chose not to"? Shortsighted/shortsighted means unmindful of future consequences. What sort of "consequences" did my logic have that did I not foresee, and how does that equate to painting LP as scummy? That other people would think I was acting like scum?
I almost don't want to answer this, because I've repeated myself over and over and over, and yet you're not listening - and you add on an ad. hom to boot.
I'll say it one more time. If LP is lying scum, then he could refer back to the post where he said he might be lying. That's definitely less scummy than just lying alone. It's not a total out, but it's better than nothing.
Are we even talking about the same thing anymore? I attacked LP for answering for Heartwork ONE TIME and now I'm expected to vote him D2 for it? Also, we seem to have gotten away from the original accusation, which is that I was trying "to attack LP without actually attacking him" - maybe you'd like to finally tell me how I was doing that?
All I expect the town to swallow is that I really wasn't paying very good attention at the time.
And you want me to swallow that you haven't been paying attention? /Sarcasm. I've already noted two posts (one in the original post where I brought up Syrenz, one on the last page) and provided explanations.
So basically, we've got three points. For some reason the first one (concerning LP's potential lie) still isn't clear to ZDS, despite the fact that I've repeated myself at least five times now. The second point was purely a case of my not reading the thread, and ZDS is insistent that because I wasn't really paying attention to what was going on vis-a-vis Guardman I'm scum. The third point is his dislike for the Syrenz case.
Ok, you've convinced me with this recent back-and-forth.
Unvote Vote TheIceMan
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Because Jobie I'm reading as town.
The other three are unknowns that I should probably reread.
I went through roughly three as town and one as scum (Red Dwarf, I think?)
I'm down. Very lovely!
The part involving your mom.
OH SNAP
Unvote, vote TheIceMan
The part where you're lying through your teeth.
Why did you decide to question me on this instead of responding to ZDS' latest post?
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
I already responded. Once I'm lynched (which it seems like is going to happen), look into Manders. This is the worst justification for jumping on a wagon.
You lying through your teeth is the worst justification? Really?
ZDS has emphasized how there's no possible way you're being truthful. I see no reason for you to lie about what you did, except that you were pulling ☺☺☺☺ out of your ass and messed up your story.
Ergo, you are scum. Have a nice swing!
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Yep, it's pretty bad.
And of course there's absolutely no way someone could just not pay very good attention to the thread...oh wait.
Have fun calling me scum all you want. I hope you're satisfied when I flip town.
We have found scum, hooray.
Keifru, please do the honors and recalibrate our night actions for TheIceMan's lynch.
Where's the connection?
Should be 4 blockers targeting 4 remaining, with you being unblocked and stealing a point from one of Jobie/Guardman. My only preference for pairings is not putting ZDS and Jobie together.
I suppose it's important to create circles of points trading as well, and I also suggest that the circles have the roleblockers giving their points around the group, and the higher numbers attempting and failing to take points around the group.
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
Seppel: 1 Vanilla
TheIceMan: 2 Roleblocker
Jscolton: 2 Roleblocker
Lost Profit: 2 Roleblocker
Keifru: 2 Roleblocker
ZDS: 2 Roleblocker
Shakalako: 4 Doctor
Syrenz: 5 Macguffin
Guardman: 9 Divider
Jobie: 9 Divider
Actions
Seppel takes from Shakalako
Shakalako give to Syrenz
Jscolton roleblocks Lost Profit
Lost Profit roleblocks Jscolton
Keifru roleblocks ZDS
ZDS roleblocks Keifru
Guardman divides Syrenz
Jobie divides Syrenz
Next Day Looks Like...
Seppel: 2 Roleblocker
Jscolton: 2 Roleblocker
Lost Profit: 2 Roleblocker
Keifru: 2 Roleblocker
ZDS: 2 Roleblocker
Shakalako: 2 Roleblocker
Syrenz: 2 Roleblocker
Guardman: 9 Divider
Jobie: 9 Divider
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
I'm Manders, but you're right on the points.
Didn't Syrenz get given a point by Guardman last night?
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
That screws things up to much.
A blocks B
B blocks A
A submits first. B gets blocked; A's point modification will go through, B's won't. I don't think leaving anything up to timestamps, or trying to even coordinate who submits what first during the night is feasable. (Even if being able to do so would be incredibly beneficial.)
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
Eh, I guess we could; but if one of the role blockers becomes lynched, we'll fall below the threshold. I was just setting it up so we can not have to worry about role blocker threshold for the rest of the game (dividers could just divide each other into MacGuffins; either way, they're 'roleblocked' via PoE with this composition.)
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
...I'm going to go punch some babies real quick.
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
Uh, no. Don't do that.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Hi I'm Seppel.
I don't see anger, I see fearmongering.
Okay I guess that's a tell for any scum on the ropes, but because we should have less to worry about, I don't see a point in mudslinging and trying to deflect onto nearly all of your attackers.
I...don't understand this sentence. Who's doing that again?
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
He's attacked you and ZDS. He hasn't attacked me for whatever reason (he's a scaredy cat).
I do believe, however, that dividing takes precedence on giving/taking points, and so Shalako giving to Syrenz will make Syrenz a 3 by end of night.
Important lines highlighted.
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
Razzlefrazzledazzle
I'll fix it tomorrow- SotG and GSTL ro4 tonight.
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
You're such an obedient ponymouse.
Syrenz was giving a point to Pale Mage- so he is still a 5 it seems and all we did was 'lose' a point from Seppel in the end.
Seppel takes from Shakalako
Guardman takes from Shakalako
Syrenz gives to Guardman
Jobie divides Syrenz
MandersHex blocks Lost Profit
Lost Profit blocks Manders Hex
Keifru blocks ZDS
ZDS blocks Keifru
Next day becomes...
Seppel: 2 Roleblocker
MandersHex: 2 Roleblocker
Lost Profit: 2 Roleblocker
Keifru: 2 Roleblocker
ZDS: 2 Roleblocker
Shakalako: 2 Roleblocker
Syrenz: 2 Roleblocker
Guardman: 10 French Vanilla
Jobie: 9 Divider
How does this one look?
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
Blueprints "TheIceMan Lynched Mk II" is based off of:
Seppel: 1 Vanilla
MandersHex: 2 Roleblocker
Lost Profit: 2 Roleblocker
Keifru: 2 Roleblocker
ZDS: 2 Roleblocker
Shakalako: 4 Doctor
Syrenz: 5 Macguffin
Guardman: 8 Mason
Jobie: 9 Divider
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
With respect to the plan, Keifru's idea was to give Syrenz a point and then divide him twice making him a 2, but in reality the two divisions would happen first, then the point would be added turning him into a 3.
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
I'm ok with the blocks.
Lots of roleblockers is good, yes?
Seppel: 1 Vanilla
MandersHex: 2 Roleblocker
Lost Profit: 2 Roleblocker
Keifru: 2 Roleblocker
ZDS: 2 Roleblocker
Shakalako: 4 Doctor
Syrenz: 5 Macguffin
Guardman: 8 Mason
Jobie: 9 Divider
Seppel takes from Syrenz
MandersHex blocks Shakalako
Lost Profit blocks Syrenz
Keifru blocks Guardman
ZDS blocks Jobie
Jobie attempts to divide Syrenz
Seppel: 2 Roleblocker
MandersHex: 2 Roleblocker
Lost Profit: 2 Roleblocker
Keifru: 2 Roleblocker
ZDS: 2 Roleblocker
Shakalako: 4 Doctor
Syrenz: 4 Doctor
Guardman: 8 Mason
Jobie: 9 Divider
The thing is, we still are pretty points heavy; Mk IIa would get us to a point where our points pool is light and later in the game we will not have to worry about making more roleblockers to ensure lockdown.
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
Due to flavor claims I'm inclined to believe Jobie and ZDS are of the same alignment, and as such should not be partnering up.
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
I just go down the line when doing points/role block stuff since it removes any sort of bias.
Personally, I'm not sold on Jobie being town. I don't know what I'm missing (unless its some meta stuff y'all are goin' by...)
However I've decided I find Guardman scummier than Jobie.
Unvote
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
Yeah, just switch ZDS with me or LP and the blueprint looks good to go.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Seppel: 1 Vanilla
MandersHex: 2 Roleblocker
Lost Profit: 2 Roleblocker
Keifru: 2 Roleblocker
ZDS: 2 Roleblocker
Shakalako: 4 Doctor
Syrenz: 5 Macguffin
Guardman: 8 Mason
Jobie: 9 Divider
Seppel takes from Syrenz
ZDS blocks Shakalako
Lost Profit blocks Syrenz
Keifru blocks Guardman
MandersHex blocks Jobie
Jobie attempts to divide Syrenz
Becomes...
Seppel: 2 Roleblocker
MandersHex: 2 Roleblocker
Lost Profit: 2 Roleblocker
Keifru: 2 Roleblocker
ZDS: 2 Roleblocker
Shakalako: 4 Doctor
Syrenz: 4 Doctor
Guardman: 8 Mason
Jobie: 9 Divider
Most especially in such a flavour-light game as this, I don't think using flavour as a basis is strong.
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
Indeed, I'm confused as well as to why ZDS has flavor about Jobie's number and not his, but as claimed by ZDS it creates a sort of flavor masonry - which is why they are likely to be the same alignment.
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
Needs confirmation that the roleblockers are doing their job.
Add the following lines:
Shalako takes from Syrenz
Syrenz takes from Guardman
Guardman takes from Shalako
TheIceMan: 3 - ZeDorkSlipeur, MandersHex, Seppel
Jobie: 2 - Lost_Profit, Guardman
Syrenz: 1 - TheIceMan
Good idea- I had thought of that when using RB pairs and discarded it for obvious reasons. Forgot using it to check roleblockers.
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
Seems simpler to just have them take from their blocker- that way, if we end up with someone dying we don't get missing points. That would be annoying.
Seppel takes from Syrenz
ZDS blocks Shakalako
Lost Profit blocks Syrenz
Keifru blocks Guardman
MandersHex blocks Jobie
Shakalako attempts to take from ZDS
Syrenz attempts to take from Lost Profit
Guardman attempts to take from Guardman
Jobie attempts to divide Syrenz
Becomes...
Seppel: 2 Roleblocker
MandersHex: 2 Roleblocker
Lost Profit: 2 Roleblocker
Keifru: 2 Roleblocker
ZDS: 2 Roleblocker
Shakalako: 4 Doctor
Syrenz: 4 Doctor
Guardman: 8 Mason
Jobie: 9 Divider
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
*Guardman attempts to take from Keifru
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
Jobie's check is the attempt to divide Syrenz- if it goes through, snazzy, we get another roleblocker. If it doesn't, that's fine too.
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
Still prefer a Jobie lynch since he is pretty scummy though...
*Guardman leaves slightly discouraged that nobody notices how scummy Jobie is
Yes I've already voted but let's hurry this game up. I'm next up for a mini.
EVERYONE VOTE ALREADY
Is there a TheIceKing also?
Honey, you were already voting for TIM.
And, yes, there is a TIK, too. Just not in this game.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!