GoT Mafia Game 70.5 - Jingle Hell

[House Tully]

I had a quick reread of the thread already, but I think I have to read it again - otherwise I'm afraid I'm going to switch dwarf names again. :worried:

What I can say so far is that I'm torn between voting Durin or Gimli. Durin's contradiction is weird, and his explanation is even more so. I am that fascinated that he is apparently reasoning about everything he is posting in this thread. I mean, it's only day 1 and as an innocent without a clue you usuallly post some stuff without thinking through very detail. That's what FM or symps do, especially when they don't know each other.

And Gimli - well, I still think that he tried to signal his masters with a blatant symp clue. I basically agree with what Grumpy has said so far. I disagree with Sleepy, who thinks that symps never signal on day 1 and that this game ain't not that special that they suddenly would. Yes, this game is special, because a blatant symp clue is almost the only possibility for a symp to signal his masters. He is not able to defend them, to flirt with them etec, because he doesn't know them. Add to this that he has some gifts for us in his bag, some of which could harm his masters. That's why I as a symp would try to let my masters know me ASAP. The risk for Gimli had only been small, because he could expect that no one would actually believe what he was saying, but he could gain a lot. That's why I think it's reasonable to think that Gimli might be a symp.

[House Redfort]

I had a quick reread of the thread already, but I think I have to read it again - otherwise I'm afraid I'm going to switch dwarf names again. :worried:

What I can say so far is that I'm torn between voting Durin or Gimli. Durin's contradiction is weird, and his explanation is even more so. I am that fascinated that he is apparently reasoning about everything he is posting in this thread. I mean, it's only day 1 and as an innocent without a clue you usuallly post some stuff without thinking through very detail. That's what FM or symps do, especially when they don't know each other.

And Gimli - well, I still think that he tried to signal his masters with a blatant symp clue. I basically agree with what Grumpy has said so far. I disagree with Sleepy, who thinks that symps never signal on day 1 and that this game ain't not that special that they suddenly would. Yes, this game is special, because a blatant symp clue is almost the only possibility for a symp to signal his masters. He is not able to defend them, to flirt with them etec, because he doesn't know them. Add to this that he has some gifts for us in his bag, some of which could harm his masters. That's why I as a symp would try to let my masters know me ASAP. The risk for Gimli had only been small, because he could expect that no one would actually believe what he was saying, but he could gain a lot. That's why I think it's reasonable to think that Gimli might be a symp.

I agree that Gimli might be a symp. I should have reread my post to make sure that my point was clear and I can understand why people find me suspicious. I really thought I was onto something and I was eager to get it out there.

The only point that I was making was that

1) Tyrion made a valid suggestion for exposing a possible symp

2) Sleeppy decided he was suspicious for it

3) I found this suspicious

I really wish I had made myself clearer. Yes, I said Tyrion seemed less suspicious because he was focused on one target with a valid reason. Sleeppy was also focused on one target, but his reasoning was suspicious to me. That was my feeling, I worded it poorly, I hope it doesn't get me lynched.

[House Redfort]

I apologise. After rereading I can see that it wasn't aimed at me. In the particular sentence I assumed "he" applied to the wrong person.

This is pretty much the argument I was making against you. You're the one who said it was suspicious that I hadn't pursued your suspicion of Bashful. You're certainly entitled to your opinions, I'm just saying that it isn't especially suspicious if other people disagree with them. I did have some suspicion of Bashful, you may note, but then got distracted arguing with... someone, during which time Bashful clarified his statement. On reviewing what he said in light of this new information I didn't find it any more suspicious than anything anyone else had said.

My original post (to you I believe) about symp clues was intended as a furtherance of the discussion on the subject and a statement of my own opinion on the matter. It was not intended to halt that line of inquiry entirely. If you think Gimli was giving a symp clue, well and good, but you're going to have to flesh out the case beyond that.

Until other people explored it, you did halt that line of inquiry, and your refusal to contemplate things from that angle whatsoever was obstructive. I don't expect you to agree with me about everything, but turning a blind eye to a potential symp is suspicious behaviour in my eyes. I don't find you suspicious because you aren't agreeing with me, but because of the above.

The case against Gimli is pretty plain and doesn't really require fleshing out. Gimli may have been signalling. Instead of showing why he wasn't he continues to joke about it and worse, continues on with it, as seen in his 'hypothetical' discussion about how he would react as FM.

As to what I said:

What I said:

) I am of the opinion that it's worth exploring and you disagree. That's fair enough. I am not twisting anyone's words, I am pointing out things that I have noticed and one of those things is your unwillingness to consider the possibility that something was going with Gimli's comment and Bashful's reaction to it. I think their exchange looks very dodgy and it surprises me that you are so willing to overlook it.

Apart from the first line, which is not really an argument, I don't recall you accusing me of anything to do with Gimli/Bashful which is what that post is all about. If you're referring to the fact that I have said we disagree then yes, but that's a pretty ineffectual argument imo.

[House Corbray]

Gah. I'm really struggling to make myself understood. Further input was actually referring to future behaviour from Bashful that raised suspicion. Admittedly my wording is less than stellar in its precision, but by equal measure you seem to be guilty of some sort of confirmation bias yourself as you take something you yourself have noted as literal and come out of it with something that is just as subtextual as what I said and then you complain about literal meanings. :worried:

Right. You were waiting for someone else to say something about Bashful before you put your vote down. It's pretty simple. I don't understand what you're talking about with confirmation bias.

I am seeing where Tyrion's wishy-washy post came from. By itself it is a fair case. I am having a hard time seeing where a FM or symp would call out Gimli like he did. The only case I can see it is if he were the symp and wanted to get Gimli lynched so the FM could see he wasn't and they should keep looking. I find that scenario more far-fetched than Gimli actually being the symp.

I am also now seeing why people dislike Durin, but I'm not sure I agree with the arguments against him. Doubt I would vote for him today.

Doc Happy - it's fine if you like Sleepy. I don't and can't see how you find him trustable when you don't explain it. (if I missed it, I apologize) I'm just trying to understand your thinking.

Two things with this. First, I'd like to know why you're not sure you agree with the arguments against Durin. I think they're pretty straightforward, especially with his blatant contradiction.

Second, I'd also like to hear from Happy about why he finds Sleepy trustworthy. I think Alberich did a fine job of pointing out oddities in Sleepy's post that raise questions and I wonder why, even after he pointed them out, Happy still finds Sleepy trustworthy.

As for my vote, I'd be willing to vote Gimli, Durin (for the blatant contradictions) or Sleepy (based on Alberich's points). I need to reread Tyrion again as I don't really recall the arguments against him. Will vote for Gimli now as I still think he's incredibly worried as he had to dig into each individual word to defend his point and that really bothers me.

[House Stokeworth]

*sigh*

I'm really sorry for being such an utter flake. I fell asleep on the couch in the middle of writing the post I was working on last night.

To be entirely honest, although I happen to be innocent (*gasp* I said it, so it must be true!), I feel like I'm forcing myself to contribute the way FM do. It's really not fair to the other players for me to disappear without giving any clues to my alignment or thoughts on anything that's happened all day, but I'm so tempted to just screw Mafia and go to sleep. I'm also kind of overwhelmed by everything I've missed. Apparently I'm too stupid to figure out what the hell is going on unless I'm around to spam the thread all day.

But anyway, I think I'll do a stream-of-consciousness thing and just go through the thread and comment on random things that stick out. I'll do this a couple of pages at a time, since it might take a good few hours for me to complete the whole thing because...

...

...

...no particular reason.

--

First of all, the main conclusion I reached after rereading the first few pages is that cases based on symp clues should be taken about as seriously as cases based on avatars. Particularly in a game in which any clues are as understandable to the innocents as to the baddies. Because of confirmation bias, any bad RP joke can be construed as a symp clue. And since most RP jokes are bad, that means you can make a case against virtually anyone being a symp. In fact, talking about symp clues just gives Santa and the elves more opportunities to drop their own. You're all enablers. I refuse to vote for anyone based solely on a symp clue unless he gives a terrible defence for it.

Seriously. If anyone dropped a real symp clue or FM clue, then I hate you. You're the reason games disintegrate into stupid decoder exercises.

Sorry, I thought it was my cue. I admit to feeling a little possessed at the moment and not quite myself. These are strange days indeed.

Gimli, did you ever explain what you meant by this post? See above for my thoughts on symp clues, but I don't get the joke. Why are you feeling possessed? People are still voting you for that post, yet you don't seem to have ever explained yourself. Why is that?

Gimli then. I know Santa can be rescuscitated or whatever, but still, if i understand correctly, the innocents steal his sack if he dies, so it's a good day one lynch, imo.

This is weird. Gimli's post contained both a :P and a ;), so I have no idea how Tyrion could have misread it. The strangest part is how nonchalant Tyrion comes across to me--he seems to take an evil revealing on Day One perfectly in stride. Could be an antsy FM looking for an excuse to park his vote somewhere, although it seems like a ridiculous conclusion for someone of any alignment to make.

Continuing this theme:

Yeh it's serious - i thought you admitted to being Santa. A vain hope, maybe, but i'm not embarassed - sarcasm doesn't travel over the internet.

On a gut level, I don't like the tone of the last sentence. He's utterly non-apologetic about having voted someone on false pretenses. Besides, Gimli used both a :P and a ;). How did his sarcasm not travel? You'd think there'd be a little "oh, right...I'm an idiot, sorry" moment. Also, note that Tyrion never removed his vote, even after realizing his mistake. His vote is still on Gimli.

I will grant him that his reasoning for believing someone would reveal as Santa is somewhat plausible. I know that I was dreading drawing the Santa role once I saw the updated rules, since it's almost unplayable.

I start to like Gimli despite him being a, uhm, foreigner. Better said, I like his way of thinking. :thumbsup:

Like I said - that he was watching for symp clues.

*twitch* I don't think I like Bashful's way of thinking.

If we're getting onto the more serious stuff now, I'm moving towards moving my vote to Bashful. I don't buy into the "mistake" of confusing me and Tyrion. Especially coming as it did after I'd pointed out that he looked a better FM fit than Tyrion because of it. The mistake just doesn't seem at all plausible to me.

(underlining mine)

Much as I find Bashful's approval of Gimli/Tyrion/whoever-the-hell-he-meant's symp clue hunting weird, this is a pretty textbook scumtell. Being reluctant to place a vote when the serious phase has already begun is strange. Why do you need to move toward moving your vote to Bashful? Why didn't you just move it? Not damning, but enough to make me keep an eye on Gimli.

Tyrion is one of the less likely bad guys atm because he's shown himself willing to pick a potential FM and stick to his guns. Because of this he's an excellent choice for FM/symp to lynch as its fairly unlikely he's an ally.

I find Sleeppy far more suspicious than Tyrion atm. He's made some funny claims, icludinf finding a comment that was clearly a joke suspicious and is targeting the player who appears most innocent.

I also have concerns about Bashful. The timing of his comment about liking Gimli/Tyrion was odd since the main point of discussion at the time was his suspicion of Gimli, and not looking for symp clues

I see Sleeppy already addressed these, but several problems with this post:

1) I fail to see where Tyrion was aggressively attacking a potential FM. He voted for Gimli on false premises, and then didn't remove his vote, but he wasn't all that aggressive in attacking him. On the contrary, at the time this was written, he hadn't followed through at all on Gimli (I need to reread the more recent pages to see if this still holds).

2) Durin somehow manages to find Sleeppy suspicious for the same things that made him clear Tyrion. I think someone mentioned that you trusted Tyrion for...um, having a suspect, but Sleeppy had also been pretty focused on Tyrion. But furthermore, you said you suspected Sleeppy for "finding a comment that was clearly a joke suspicious." I take it you're talking about his "I'm suspicious of all those with concrete opinions" post in which he misinterpreted jokes as serious, right? But Tyrion also made a case on someone for a misinterpreted joke...and much worse, didn't back down even when his mistake was corrected. Durin, I see you've explained why you suspected Sleeppy but not Tyrion for tunneling, but why did you have a problem with Sleeppy's offhand comment about a joke, but not Tyrion's actual vote (which he didn't remove once corrected) based on a joke case?

That said, I'm leaning toward thinking that Durin's defence of Tyrion L is genuine (at least if Tyrion is evil), because I don't think even an inexperienced FM would defend his partner that openly early in Day One, when there wasn't serious heat on him. (Disclaimer: I may revoke this opinion after reading recent pages more carefully.)

Sleepy, you're saying that forming opinions on people is suspicious? Nice way to hold up the serious part of the day. :rolleyes:

:rolleyes: Forgive me for going Christmas shopping - everyone's behaviour isn't dependent on how much pressure the amazingness of your insight manages to put on them.

These two posts together--particularly the last one--ring alarm bells. I think it's the :rolleyes: that does it. He seems way too irritable. Yes, it's not his fault that he couldn't watch the thread, but it's not as if someone could read his mind and realize he went Christmas shopping. It sounds a bit forced.

Whee. Now I'm starting to get into things again. More coming up.

[House Redfort]

You know, I failed to notice that Gimli wasn't on Tyrions list. Tyrion, is that because he's your #1 suspect or because you don't consider him at all suspicious now? I took your initial accusation to be serious, was it, and if so why didn't you follow it up?

[House Baratheon]

Second, I'd also like to hear from Happy about why he finds Sleepy trustworthy. I think Alberich did a fine job of pointing out oddities in Sleepy's post that raise questions and I wonder why, even after he pointed them out, Happy still finds Sleepy trustworthy.

Do you really want me to defend Sleepy directly? :)

I suppose he is perfectly able to explain those oddities by himself. Let's wait for tihs. There is decent chance that you will be satisfied with his answers and agree with me about his trustwortyness. If not, I'll gladly explain you why I have found Alberich's points to be weak.

[House Tully]

Shit, I slept in and now I'm tired and dizzy. <_<

To add more fuel to the Gimli case: I don't like his explanation for the symp clue at all. It sounds fabricated to me. I don't buy that this was a trap for an FM. I don't even know what he expected the FM to do to get them caught. "Hi, symp, I am your master! And my pal here, too!"

What I don't like about Hurin is that he attacked me. Well, it's not that he attacked me, but that he attacked and voted the player that he was being linked to by some others. He surely would gain some credit if I came up innocent.

I have mixed feeling about Alberich. I'm gald that he returned and made some effort to introduce some new line of thinkings. OTOH he concentrated most of his thoughts on Sleepy. Sleepy would be nice lynch target for an FM, for he is 1) most likely not going to be lynched* and 2) most likely not a symp, for he is playing too aggressive.

Other than that, I like his contribution, although I don't agree with everything he said.

* I guess in this game especially the FM wouldn't be too unhappy if we would miss a lynch on day 1

[House Corbray]

Do you really want me to defend Sleepy directly? :)

I suppose he is perfectly able to explain those oddities by himself. Let's wait for tihs. There is decent chance that you will be satisfied with his answers and agree with me about his trustwortyness. If not, I'll gladly explain you why I have found Alberich's points to be weak.

No. I don't need you to defend him. What I want is for you to explain why you find him so trustworthy. Is it impossible for you to do that without going point by point from Alberich's post? You obviously felt he was trustworthy before the post and it seems it hasn't changed since the post so why don't you explain it to me. Your evasion of this question is getting tiresome.

[House Dondarrion]

I growing really tired of having to explain the meaning of posts that seem perfectly clear to me. Maybe I'm not being as clear as I thought I was, but the paranoid part of me is seeing a massive FM conspiracy to misrepresent me. :uhoh:

I found this a very strange thing to say, especially as I didn't see much evidence of people taking particularly strong stances yet. It's only page 3 for goodness sake and RP was barely over. Apparently others thought so too, because he was called out on it and replied:

I want you to go back to my post and underline the word "strong". Don't worry too much if you fail because it isn't in there. What I said was that I don't really understand how people formulate a particular opinion (strong or otherwise) out of RP since an FM would have to be either very new or very careless to screw up a couple of pages of jokes. What I was noting was that more opinions existed at that point than I would expect, on further clarification it turned out that I was right since one was a joke a second was based on a serious comment (which wasn't clear at the time due to a name mix up).

So he admits that 2 of the player's strong reactions could be banter. He emphasizes that he doesn't like Tyrion's vote on Gimli because it's reaching. (not saying Tyrion thinking Gimli confessed isn't something to think about, but I much prefer Tyrion's thinking to Sleepy's at this point)

Again with the word "strong", though at least in this post I did say "opinions they [they're] particularly attached to". And I never said that Tyrion's vote on Gimli was reaching I said I didn't know what to make of the vote on Gimli, but that he was reaching in attacking me. The words in between the words that you want to see are important too. You even had the quote in your bloody post!

Honestly, I feel that Durin was misrepresenting me at times, but at least we sometimes had our wires crossed. You're either not reading what you're responding to, or trying to make it say what you want it to.

And yes, I admitted that I could see a way that Gimli and Bashful's comments were banter, I have no interest in misrepresenting what they said. As it turned out Gimli's was and Bashful's wasn't.

He mentioned in an earlier post that he was struggling to see if something made someone more suspicious (can't remember now, didn't tag it) but what I'm looking at is not the actual suspicion he had, but his language. 'I'm struggling to decide if ...' ' still trying to decide if ...' Way to non-committal. Just waaay too non-committal and non-confrontational

.

I said all of those things, and all of them were about the same point. Namely whether Tyrion's belief in Gimli's confession was suspicious or not. As an update, I'm still trying to work out whether that's suspicious, but I think I'm just going to have to file it under "too weird to quantify". I see that Oompah's already said it, but that episode makes no sense coming from anyone on either side of this game, and anyone who doesn't think it's weird is a little weird themselves quite frankly.

Also, if I'm being non-confrontational then apparently I'm mild mannered beyond any hope of redemption since I consider a couple of my posts to have verged on obnoxious in this game.

Easy way to place a vote I think. His only point against Tyrion really is the stretch he made for a day 1 case and that he 'did a runner'. Yes, it can be a valid tactic, but it doesn't bother me in this instance.

It's not difficult to place a vote in the first page or two after RP ends. Tyrion did a couple of things that bothered me and that's all I need to vote in the first part of day one.

[House Dondarrion]

The only point that I was making was that

1) Tyrion made a valid suggestion for exposing a possible symp

2) Sleeppy decided he was suspicious for it

3) I found this suspicious

Which would be fine except that that chain of events never occurred. Number two, in particular, is an out and out fabrication.

1) Tyrion made a valid suggestion for exposing a possible symp and accused Gimli

2) Gimli confessed in a posted dripping with sarcasm

3) Tyrion took Gimli's confession at face value and voted for him

4) Gimli and I both expressed shock that Tyrion would think Gimli serious

5) Tyrion admitted that he'd misunderstood but maintained the vote without any further backing of it

6) Tyrion accused me of trying to delay the end of RP and then vanishes mid scandal (scandal over his vote, not his accusation of me)

7) I call all of that suspicious and vote Tyrion

...

...

...

19) You say you are suspicious of me

That is a more honest explanation of events thought it probably still misses a few points. My vote on Tyrion had nothing to do with his suggestion about symp clues. I'm am, separately, skeptical of their value, but that didn't enter into my suspicion of him.

[House Redfort]

Shit, I slept in and now I'm tired and dizzy. <_<

To add more fuel to the Gimli case: I don't like his explanation for the symp clue at all. It sounds fabricated to me. I don't buy that this was a trap for an FM. I don't even know what he expected the FM to do to get them caught. "Hi, symp, I am your master! And my pal here, too!"

What I don't like about Hurin is that he attacked me. Well, it's not that he attacked me, but that he attacked and voted the player that he was being linked to by some others. He surely would gain some credit if I came up innocent.

I have mixed feeling about Alberich. I'm gald that he returned and made some effort to introduce some new line of thinkings. OTOH he concentrated most of his thoughts on Sleepy. Sleepy would be nice lynch target for an FM, for he is 1) most likely not going to be lynched* and 2) most likely not a symp, for he is playing too aggressive.

Other than that, I like his contribution, although I don't agree with everything he said.

* I guess in this game especially the FM wouldn't be too unhappy if we would miss a lynch on day 1

Sorry if you felt I was attacking you. I voted you because of your possible link to Gimli. Your response made you suspicious to me running on the theory that he was a symp looking for a response and you provided one. I thought the days were shorter and wanted to make sure I had a vote in place that could go somewhere. I don't think I'd look very good if you were innocent and I voted you, the fact that I changed my vote could look bad. I'm changing my vote to Gimli. I can give you the benefit of the doubt for today, because while your response was odd it may have been a genuine mistake. Gimli's initial post was concerning and his later posts only add to my concern because his attitude doesn't fit and he still throws in odd comments that could be flags for the FM (as seen in the post that ending with something about killing to be understood in the way he wants to be). I'm placing a vote now cause I'm about to go to bed, but I should be around tomorrow before crunch time.

Edit: removed double post (again)

[House Corbray]

6) Tyrion accused me of trying to delay the end of RP and then vanishes mid scandal (scandal over his vote, not his accusation of me)

Why do you still maintain this as a point against him? He already said he went out Christmas shopping and you said that if he said he went out shopping, then he went out shopping.

So do you think he left because of pressure or do you think he left because of Christmas shopping? Choose one and stick with it.

[Magic Mirror]

Apologies for today, I've been travelling so won't be around much, although I will be back for the deadline. And hopefully I have time to re-read the other top suspects too. For now, i'm still suspicious of Durin and Gimli.

I don't think what I have said is so unreasonable. My defense of Tyrion has been strong, but that's only because I think there are a few candidates (Sleeppy, Bashful, Gimli) who are far better choices for todays lynch.

I really don't get this. When I made my attack on you all but one of your posts had been defences of Tyrion. If you'd honestly thought that several people were far better candidates for a lynch, surely you should have been spending that time attacking those players?

[House Dondarrion]

Until other people explored it, you did halt that line of inquiry, and your refusal to contemplate things from that angle whatsoever was obstructive. I don't expect you to agree with me about everything, but turning a blind eye to a potential symp is suspicious behaviour in my eyes. I don't find you suspicious because you aren't agreeing with me, but because of the above.

Nonsense, neither you nor Tyrion nor anyone else needs my help nor permission in order to follow a line of inquiry. I gave my opinion and then defended it when questioned. I have stayed out of your attacks on Gimli and only commented on Bashful when you made a point about him to me because while I don't feel strongly about either of them I still feel it's useful that they are pressured. I don't discount the possibility that Gimli or Bashful are symps, I just don't see a reason to suspect it strongly at this point.

The reason I am "turning a blind eye to a potential symp" is because I disagree with the logic that makes him any more a potential symp than anyone else. This is what I'm trying to say, I disagree with your line of logic, therefore I don't see your suspects as particularly suspicious.

What I said:

) I am of the opinion that it's worth exploring and you disagree. That's fair enough. I am not twisting anyone's words, I am pointing out things that I have noticed and one of those things is your unwillingness to consider the possibility that something was going with Gimli's comment and Bashful's reaction to it. I think their exchange looks very dodgy and it surprises me that you are so willing to overlook it.

You say it's fair enough that I disagree with you, and then you say suspicious that I don't agree with your suspicions. You can't have both. I don't find Gimli and Bashful's exchange odd. If you consider that it was so odd that anyone honestly analysing it ought to agree with you then I guess you have to suspect me, otherwise you really need to just accept that it doesn't bother me.

Apart from the first line, which is not really an argument, I don't recall you accusing me of anything to do with Gimli/Bashful which is what that post is all about. If you're referring to the fact that I have said we disagree then yes, but that's a pretty ineffectual argument imo.

Yes, I'm referring to the latter, though if you don't get the actually gist of my argument after the post above then I give up.

[House Dondarrion]

Why do you still maintain this as a point against him? He already said he went out Christmas shopping and you said that if he said he went out shopping, then he went out shopping.

So do you think he left because of pressure or do you think he left because of Christmas shopping? Choose one and stick with it.

I was trying to convey to Durin the reasons I voted at the time, since Durin seems to think it had something to do with Tyrion being a symp hunter. I wish to go on record as accepting that Tyrion went Christmas shopping and that is the actual reason that his posting stopped when it did.

[House Tully]

Right now I'm willing to vote for

- Durin

- Gimli

- Oompaah

- darwfthathasonlypostedonce

- Smurf

- Happy

- Doc

The latter three because they're participating but they're still under radar (in case of Smurf and Happy I still fell they tried to misunderstand me deliberatly). Oompah and the other dwarf because they're not here. Durin and Gimli for reasons already stated.

Has anyone thoughts about Smurf?

[House Thorne]

Right. You were waiting for someone else to say something about Bashful before you put your vote down. It's pretty simple. I don't understand what you're talking about with confirmation bias.

:tantrum:

Honestly, you exasperate me.

I have never said that I was waiting for someone else to say something about Bashful. You have INFERRED this based on something that I said, and inferred this INCORRECTLY, as I have pointed out. I have pointed out that I wasn't willing to vote for Bashful on the basis of a fairly weak point, and that I wanted to see more from Bashful before deciding (ie more input). NOWHERE have I said that I wanted some weak-kneed posse of admirers to come and validate my post before voting for him. However, you have not only continued to WILFULLY MISREPRESENT what I have posted, but have seemingly ignored what I wrote, while at the same time quoting it. As for confirmation bias, you obviously had a preconception as to my guilt or innocence which caused you to read much further into something than was there, and to stick your head in the sand when I attempted to explain (a pointless and thankless task I feel).

Doc

:bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:

[House Thorne]

As for the whole symp thing, I believe I have explained myself, and if people don't particularly like my explanation, then tough. I'm fed up of explaining myself, and I'm getting fed up of defending myself from stuff, to the point where I'm actually struggling to coherently think about the other goings on on this thread.

Believe me, don't, to be quite honest I don't particularly care at the moment.

[House Dondarrion]

Has anyone thoughts about Smurf?

I'm actually going to have a look through a couple of people now. I realise that I've mostly been responding to people in this thread so far and need to get a little more pro-active (you know, if I were going to attack me, this is the point I'd focus on, but we all have different tacks I guess).

I'll have a look at smurf as part of that.