Official USMB Mafia Game #4: Friends and Enemies

[tn5421]

I have nothing further to add.

 

[tn5421]

I do wish Grandma would stop trying to spread the WIFOM butter around though, because its not like we believe its not butter anymore.

 

[Grandma]

I do wish Grandma would stop trying to spread the WIFOM butter around though, because its not like we believe its not butter anymore.

Sorry.

I'm just trying to get Town to work together and actually think things through instead of guessing and being paranoid.

I'll leave you all to it.

 

[RosieS]

And this is exactly why I say you are playing and do play anti-town. Past game behavior should NOT influence voting this time.

Too bad. Policy lynches are legit. Complaining does nothing but waste photons. Again.

Regards from Rosie

I think you have it confused what a policy lynch is. A policy lynch is not getting revenge for past game play.

This is one reason you read scummy to me one of my last reads. It does nothing but hurt us if you are playing in the past.

Bullcrap. What did I say about your lack of discernment?

A Policy Lynch is one that is done for arbitrary reasons.
Most commonly, it describes the lynch of a player who is not found to be particularly scummy, but because the player's bad play will hurt the town later on. However, policy lynches can be requested on other players - for instance, players who claim Vengeful under duress will generally be lynched.
The efficacy of policy lynches is a hotly debated topic in almost any game in which it comes up due to the fact that the town arguably loses an opportunity to lynch a scummy player.
See also: Lynch All Liars

Scum who bus Scum are inherently untrustworthy and are PROVEN non-team players.

A Policy Lynch is one that is done for arbitrary reasons.
Most commonly, it describes the lynch of a player who is not found to be particularly scummy, but because the player's bad play will hurt the town later on. However, policy lynches can be requested on other players - for instance, players who claim Vengeful under duress will generally be lynched.
The efficacy of policy lynches is a hotly debated topic in almost any game in which it comes up due to the fact that the town arguably loses an opportunity to lynch a scummy player.
See also: Lynch All Liars


Thus, when they are Town in FUTURE games they need to be looked at closely - being untrustworthy and not being a team player are reasons for policy lynchings. I think it saves time to routinely lynch bussers until they change their ways.

Your 'duh' posts mislead and those who mislead Town are also inherently Scummy.

Thus your rightful place near the top of my Scum list.

Regards from Rosie

 

[Mertex]

Well, it looks like we're heading for a NL, and that certainly is not good for Town. And why Because Grandma, when she saw the predicament her partners were in, they either had to vote along with her and that would make it easier to figure out Scum were it to be true that Avatar is indeed Town, or they would have to vote for her. She couldn't risk that, so she jumped off. She would rather be a "no vote" and have a NL than to make it obvious who her partners are.

Pay attention, Shiatra and Aye (Aye, because I'm still not sure you are part of Grandma's team) you're not helping Town by not voting. I think Grandma is Scum, but I'm not saying you have to vote for her, but there's only 2 wagons, a vote for either one will get us closer to a lynch, unless of course you're Scum and would rather see a NL.

 

[CaféAuLait]

Too bad. Policy lynches are legit. Complaining does nothing but waste photons. Again.

Regards from Rosie

I think you have it confused what a policy lynch is. A policy lynch is not getting revenge for past game play.

This is one reason you read scummy to me one of my last reads. It does nothing but hurt us if you are playing in the past.

Bullcrap. What did I say about your lack of discernment?

A Policy Lynch is one that is done for arbitrary reasons.
Most commonly, it describes the lynch of a player who is not found to be particularly scummy, but because the player's bad play will hurt the town later on. However, policy lynches can be requested on other players - for instance, players who claim Vengeful under duress will generally be lynched.
The efficacy of policy lynches is a hotly debated topic in almost any game in which it comes up due to the fact that the town arguably loses an opportunity to lynch a scummy player.
See also: Lynch All Liars

Scum who bus Scum are inherently untrustworthy and are PROVEN non-team players.

A Policy Lynch is one that is done for arbitrary reasons.
Most commonly, it describes the lynch of a player who is not found to be particularly scummy, but because the player's bad play will hurt the town later on. However, policy lynches can be requested on other players - for instance, players who claim Vengeful under duress will generally be lynched.
The efficacy of policy lynches is a hotly debated topic in almost any game in which it comes up due to the fact that the town arguably loses an opportunity to lynch a scummy player.
See also: Lynch All Liars


Thus, when they are Town in FUTURE games they need to be looked at closely - being untrustworthy and not being a team player are reasons for policy lynchings. I think it saves time to routinely lynch bussers until they change their ways.

Your 'duh' posts mislead and those who mislead Town are also inherently Scummy.

Thus your rightful place near the top of my Scum list.

Regards from Rosie

I can read wiki too Rosie, I read the above quote verbatim.

Scum, who lynch scum are playing towards their win condition, especially if their team has been compromised. The way I read game 2, if they removed their votes after your planned show, they would have exposed themselves, thus your bussing by Mani and dblack.

LOL "my lack of discernment"? What is it they say about glass houses? Perhaps you need to reread the bolded part of the Wiki quote. Not to mention past games do not come into play because you are still ticked about being bussed by your former scum team, 2 games ago.

And since you say people need to be looked at in 'future' games due to past games then of course your own lying in game 2 -pretending to be town- surly must come onto play in future games, right? How freaking silly!

 

[Grandma]

Well, it looks like we're heading for a NL, and that certainly is not good for Town. And why Because Grandma, when she saw the predicament her partners were in, they either had to vote along with her and that would make it easier to figure out Scum were it to be true that Avatar is indeed Town, or they would have to vote for her. She couldn't risk that, so she jumped off. She would rather be a "no vote" and have a NL than to make it obvious who her partners are.

Pay attention, Shiatra and Aye (Aye, because I'm still not sure you are part of Grandma's team) you're not helping Town by not voting. I think Grandma is Scum, but I'm not saying you have to vote for her, but there's only 2 wagons, a vote for either one will get us closer to a lynch, unless of course you're Scum and would rather see a NL.

Mertex, you have an obnoxious way of speaking for others.

I posted a plan to get Town working together to lynch Scum before Sunday afternoon.

Now why would you lie about that and try so hard to mislynch?

The bigger question is why anyone would listen to you instead of thinking for themselves.

 

[Mertex]

Well, it looks like we're heading for a NL, and that certainly is not good for Town. And why Because Grandma, when she saw the predicament her partners were in, they either had to vote along with her and that would make it easier to figure out Scum were it to be true that Avatar is indeed Town, or they would have to vote for her. She couldn't risk that, so she jumped off. She would rather be a "no vote" and have a NL than to make it obvious who her partners are.

Pay attention, Shiatra and Aye (Aye, because I'm still not sure you are part of Grandma's team) you're not helping Town by not voting. I think Grandma is Scum, but I'm not saying you have to vote for her, but there's only 2 wagons, a vote for either one will get us closer to a lynch, unless of course you're Scum and would rather see a NL.

Mertex, you have an obnoxious way of speaking for others.

I posted a plan to get Town working together to lynch Scum before Sunday afternoon.

Now why would you lie about that and try so hard to mislynch?

The bigger question is why anyone would listen to you instead of thinking for themselves.

Grandma....you sure are looking for a way out.

Keep talking, your scummy actions should be obvious, if not, I guess we'll lose yet another game.

 

[CaféAuLait]

Cafe,

Re: Post 871, I'm not asking for reasons why Scarlet was NK'd. Only Scum know why. What I want is the names of the scum that killed her based on the players' interactions with her on Day 1.

SR voted for Avatar and her vote remained there, then she voted for me, ( here she stated this was test votes to see reactions) and then she removed her vote to RD- here she said she thought RD was scum and acting far too townish, however sometime after she voted for mani ( she said she was up for any wagon) but also said it was you she was gunning for.

Those were her some of her statements and votes on day one. NKing SR tells me scum was afraid of her or maybe I may not recall something or may have missed something somewhere. I believe she and avatar had a few words, you questioned her on her vote for RD IIRC, it may have been Aye too, I can't recall exactly at this point. That's what I recall for now.

 

[Grandma]

Thank you!

You figure out who Scum are first, then you're able to figure out how they think.

I was visiting the neighborhood threads from Game 3. No one had a clue. Sometimes they'd have a clue, but they wouldn't pursue it. Working together, all too often the more clever ones let themselves be influenced by the ones that guessed wrong.



Don't forget to vote - the deadline's 4pm Sunday.

 

[CaféAuLait]

Thank you!

You figure out who Scum are first, then you're able to figure out how they think.

I was visiting the neighborhood threads from Game 3. No one had a clue. Sometimes they'd have a clue, but they wouldn't pursue it. Working together, all too often the more clever ones let themselves be influenced by the ones that guessed wrong.



Don't forget to vote - the deadline's 4pm Sunday.

Yup, no problem. I've voted, my vote will stay where it is on Avatar. I believe part of my issue is I was wishy washy the first game and did not go with my first instinct. I may be wrong, but ALL of us witnessed the weirdness Day1 , claimed crumbling, mason stuff, etc, attacking everyone, misstatements, etc. It's not have Avatar plays, except his subtly wagoning people. Exactly the way he did in game 1.

Either way, recall you are on my scum list though. and I'm not sure if that confbias because of the beginning of the game or other issues we have discussed.





With that said, What is also highly confusing/ suspicious me is the Avatar/ Mertex thing Day 1- they were down each other's throats on Day one, insisting each other were scum and trying to start wagons and in fact did start wagons and voted the other, Avatar ended up with 4 votes on Mertex, then got many to flip to Mani. Yet, all this drama and suspicion is suddenly gone Day 2 start.

Mertex, RD and you, Grandma- all stated Avatar would be number on on their/your lists day 2, but I did not see much of anything said by Mertex about Avatar, or him saying much of anything about Mertex. maybe I missed it? This seems very weird to me and I wonder if it may have been manufacture drama Day 1.

 

[RosieS]

I think you have it confused what a policy lynch is. A policy lynch is not getting revenge for past game play.

This is one reason you read scummy to me one of my last reads. It does nothing but hurt us if you are playing in the past.

Bullcrap. What did I say about your lack of discernment?

A Policy Lynch is one that is done for arbitrary reasons.
Most commonly, it describes the lynch of a player who is not found to be particularly scummy, but because the player's bad play will hurt the town later on. However, policy lynches can be requested on other players - for instance, players who claim Vengeful under duress will generally be lynched.
The efficacy of policy lynches is a hotly debated topic in almost any game in which it comes up due to the fact that the town arguably loses an opportunity to lynch a scummy player.
See also: Lynch All Liars

Scum who bus Scum are inherently untrustworthy and are PROVEN non-team players.

A Policy Lynch is one that is done for arbitrary reasons.
Most commonly, it describes the lynch of a player who is not found to be particularly scummy, but because the player's bad play will hurt the town later on. However, policy lynches can be requested on other players - for instance, players who claim Vengeful under duress will generally be lynched.
The efficacy of policy lynches is a hotly debated topic in almost any game in which it comes up due to the fact that the town arguably loses an opportunity to lynch a scummy player.
See also: Lynch All Liars


Thus, when they are Town in FUTURE games they need to be looked at closely - being untrustworthy and not being a team player are reasons for policy lynchings. I think it saves time to routinely lynch bussers until they change their ways.

Your 'duh' posts mislead and those who mislead Town are also inherently Scummy.

Thus your rightful place near the top of my Scum list.

Regards from Rosie

I can read wiki too Rosie, I read the above quote verbatim.

Scum, who lynch scum are playing towards their win condition, especially if their team has been compromised. The way I read game 2, if they removed their votes after your planned show, they would have exposed themselves, thus your bussing by Mani and dblack.

LOL "my lack of discernment"? What is it they say about glass houses? Perhaps you need to reread the bolded part of the Wiki quote. Not to mention past games do not come into play because you are still ticked about being bussed by your former scum team, 2 games ago.

And since you say people need to be looked at in 'future' games due to past games then of course your own lying in game 2 -pretending to be town- surly must come onto play in future games, right? How freaking silly!

You say you can read it but totally ignore -again- what a Policy Lynch is for.

Yes, you vote in future games in part based upon what a player did in past games.

One can only hope in future games that you actually begin to comprehend entries in the Mafia wiki glossary.

Based on this pathetic performance you demonstrate here - that sure is dubious.

Very poor discernment. Just as I have stated. Those who Scum bus are prime candidates to be Policy Lynched in future games.

Your pitiful attempt to mislead is more than "freaking silly".

And very Scummy, too.

Regards from Rosie

 

[RosieS]

I think you have it confused what a policy lynch is. A policy lynch is not getting revenge for past game play.

This is one reason you read scummy to me one of my last reads. It does nothing but hurt us if you are playing in the past.

Bullcrap. What did I say about your lack of discernment?

A Policy Lynch is one that is done for arbitrary reasons.
Most commonly, it describes the lynch of a player who is not found to be particularly scummy, but because the player's bad play will hurt the town later on. However, policy lynches can be requested on other players - for instance, players who claim Vengeful under duress will generally be lynched.
The efficacy of policy lynches is a hotly debated topic in almost any game in which it comes up due to the fact that the town arguably loses an opportunity to lynch a scummy player.
See also: Lynch All Liars

Scum who bus Scum are inherently untrustworthy and are PROVEN non-team players.

A Policy Lynch is one that is done for arbitrary reasons.
Most commonly, it describes the lynch of a player who is not found to be particularly scummy, but because the player's bad play will hurt the town later on. However, policy lynches can be requested on other players - for instance, players who claim Vengeful under duress will generally be lynched.
The efficacy of policy lynches is a hotly debated topic in almost any game in which it comes up due to the fact that the town arguably loses an opportunity to lynch a scummy player.
See also: Lynch All Liars


Thus, when they are Town in FUTURE games they need to be looked at closely - being untrustworthy and not being a team player are reasons for policy lynchings. I think it saves time to routinely lynch bussers until they change their ways.

Your 'duh' posts mislead and those who mislead Town are also inherently Scummy.

Thus your rightful place near the top of my Scum list.

Regards from Rosie

I can read wiki too Rosie, I read the above quote verbatim.

Scum, who lynch scum are playing towards their win condition, especially if their team has been compromised. The way I read game 2, if they removed their votes after your planned show, they would have exposed themselves, thus your bussing by Mani and dblack.

LOL "my lack of discernment"? What is it they say about glass houses? Perhaps you need to reread the bolded part of the Wiki quote. Not to mention past games do not come into play because you are still ticked about being bussed by your former scum team, 2 games ago.

And since you say people need to be looked at in 'future' games due to past games then of course your own lying in game 2 -pretending to be town- surly must come onto play in future games, right? How freaking silly!

You say you can read it but totally ignore -again- what a Policy Lynch is for.

Yes, you vote in future games in part based upon what a player did in past games.

One can only hope in future games that you actually begin to comprehend entries in the Mafia wiki glossary.

Based on this pathetic performance you demonstrate here - that sure is dubious.

Very poor discernment. Just as I have stated. Those who Scum bus are prime candidates to be Policy Lynched in future games.

Both those Scum morons should not have gotten themselve stuck as they did. Bad gameplay
and being bad players in general are reasons for a policy lynch.

Your pitiful attempt to mislead about policy lynches is more than "freaking silly".

And very Scummy, too.

Regards from Rosie

 

[RosieS]

LOL Oh, well. Perhaps saying it twice will make it sink in?

Regards from Rosie

 

[CaféAuLait]

Bullcrap. What did I say about your lack of discernment?

A Policy Lynch is one that is done for arbitrary reasons.
Most commonly, it describes the lynch of a player who is not found to be particularly scummy, but because the player's bad play will hurt the town later on. However, policy lynches can be requested on other players - for instance, players who claim Vengeful under duress will generally be lynched.
The efficacy of policy lynches is a hotly debated topic in almost any game in which it comes up due to the fact that the town arguably loses an opportunity to lynch a scummy player.
See also: Lynch All Liars

Scum who bus Scum are inherently untrustworthy and are PROVEN non-team players.

A Policy Lynch is one that is done for arbitrary reasons.
Most commonly, it describes the lynch of a player who is not found to be particularly scummy, but because the player's bad play will hurt the town later on. However, policy lynches can be requested on other players - for instance, players who claim Vengeful under duress will generally be lynched.
The efficacy of policy lynches is a hotly debated topic in almost any game in which it comes up due to the fact that the town arguably loses an opportunity to lynch a scummy player.
See also: Lynch All Liars


Thus, when they are Town in FUTURE games they need to be looked at closely - being untrustworthy and not being a team player are reasons for policy lynchings. I think it saves time to routinely lynch bussers until they change their ways.

Your 'duh' posts mislead and those who mislead Town are also inherently Scummy.

Thus your rightful place near the top of my Scum list.

Regards from Rosie

I can read wiki too Rosie, I read the above quote verbatim.

Scum, who lynch scum are playing towards their win condition, especially if their team has been compromised. The way I read game 2, if they removed their votes after your planned show, they would have exposed themselves, thus your bussing by Mani and dblack.

LOL "my lack of discernment"? What is it they say about glass houses? Perhaps you need to reread the bolded part of the Wiki quote. Not to mention past games do not come into play because you are still ticked about being bussed by your former scum team, 2 games ago.

And since you say people need to be looked at in 'future' games due to past games then of course your own lying in game 2 -pretending to be town- surly must come onto play in future games, right? How freaking silly!

You say you can read it but totally ignore -again- what a Policy Lynch is for.

Yes, you vote in future games in part based upon what a player did in past games.

One can only hope in future games that you actually begin to comprehend entries in the Mafia wiki glossary.

Based on this pathetic performance you demonstrate here - that sure is dubious.

Very poor discernment. Just as I have stated. Those who Scum bus are prime candidates to be Policy Lynched in future games.

Both those Scum morons should not have gotten themselve stuck as they did. Bad gameplay
and being bad players in general are reasons for a policy lynch.

Your pitiful attempt to mislead about policy lynches is more than "freaking silly".

And very Scummy, too.

Regards from Rosie

Misleading and scummy, seriously? <insert gigantic rolly eyes>

Policy lynch is for the current game, not past games months old, I suppose dblack and mani could argue it was your poor game play ( returning after you stormed off and stated you would not come back) put them in the position of bussing you. Then they should lynch you based on your poor decisions in old games. See? Silly. Moreover, it's terrible for our town lynching based on months old game play.

As I said, its petty and PL is used for current games, what is happening in the here and now, not games from the past where you seek revenge to lynch those you think slighted you in some way.

Fini, done, ///

 

[Shaitra]

Thank you!

You figure out who Scum are first, then you're able to figure out how they think.

I was visiting the neighborhood threads from Game 3. No one had a clue. Sometimes they'd have a clue, but they wouldn't pursue it. Working together, all too often the more clever ones let themselves be influenced by the ones that guessed wrong.



Don't forget to vote - the deadline's 4pm Sunday.

Yup, no problem. I've voted, my vote will stay where it is on Avatar. I believe part of my issue is I was wishy washy the first game and did not go with my first instinct. I may be wrong, but ALL of us witnessed the weirdness Day1 , claimed crumbling, mason stuff, etc, attacking everyone, misstatements, etc. It's not have Avatar plays, except his subtly wagoning people. Exactly the way he did in game 1.

Either way, recall you are on my scum list though. and I'm not sure if that confbias because of the beginning of the game or other issues we have discussed.


With that said, What is also highly confusing/ suspicious me is the Avatar/ Mertex thing Day 1- they were down each other's throats on Day one, insisting each other were scum and trying to start wagons and in fact did start wagons and voted the other, Avatar ended up with 4 votes on Mertex, then got many to flip to Mani. Yet, all this drama and suspicion is suddenly gone Day 2 start.

Mertex, RD and you, Grandma- all stated Avatar would be number on on their/your lists day 2, but I did not see much of anything said by Mertex about Avatar, or him saying much of anything about Mertex. maybe I missed it? This seems very weird to me and I wonder if it may have been manufacture drama Day 1.

I noticed this as well.

I want to take a look at my notes again and check a few things. I also have to go into work this morning. I will try to have my vote and thoughts posted before noon though.

 

[Avatar4321]

Vote Count: 2.6​

Avatar4321 (4): CafeAuLait&#9792;, R.D.&#9792;, tn5421&#9794;, FA_Q2&#9794;
Grandma (3): Mertex&#9792;, Avatar4321&#9794;, RosieS&#9792;

Not Voting (4): AyeCantSeeYou&#9792;, MeBelle60&#9792;, Grandma&#9792;, Shaitra&#9792;

~ With 11 alive, it takes 6 to lynch!
~ Deadline is 8/3/14, @ 4pm central.
~ Aye, take as much time as you want with your son.

1.1 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 1.9 | 1.10
2.1 | 2.2 | 2.3 | 2.4 | 2.5
​

Did rd switch from grandma back to me and I miss it?

 

[AyeCantSeeYou]

Thank you!

You figure out who Scum are first, then you're able to figure out how they think.

I was visiting the neighborhood threads from Game 3. No one had a clue. Sometimes they'd have a clue, but they wouldn't pursue it. Working together, all too often the more clever ones let themselves be influenced by the ones that guessed wrong.



Don't forget to vote - the deadline's 4pm Sunday.

Yup, no problem. I've voted, my vote will stay where it is on Avatar. I believe part of my issue is I was wishy washy the first game and did not go with my first instinct. I may be wrong, but ALL of us witnessed the weirdness Day1 , claimed crumbling, mason stuff, etc, attacking everyone, misstatements, etc. It's not have Avatar plays, except his subtly wagoning people. Exactly the way he did in game 1.

Either way, recall you are on my scum list though. and I'm not sure if that confbias because of the beginning of the game or other issues we have discussed.


With that said, What is also highly confusing/ suspicious me is the Avatar/ Mertex thing Day 1- they were down each other's throats on Day one, insisting each other were scum and trying to start wagons and in fact did start wagons and voted the other, Avatar ended up with 4 votes on Mertex, then got many to flip to Mani. Yet, all this drama and suspicion is suddenly gone Day 2 start.

Mertex, RD and you, Grandma- all stated Avatar would be number on on their/your lists day 2, but I did not see much of anything said by Mertex about Avatar, or him saying much of anything about Mertex. maybe I missed it? This seems very weird to me and I wonder if it may have been manufacture drama Day 1.

I noticed this as well.

I want to take a look at my notes again and check a few things. I also have to go into work this morning. I will try to have my vote and thoughts posted before noon though.

The spat between Mertex and Avi bothered me as well. Both are voting for Grandma. Was the arguing between them intentional game play meant to throw town off? I don't know. I've mentioned before that Mertex's responses this game are highly antagonistic towards those that question her on pretty much anything. Avi has been much the same way up to the point where he said he'd back off (which he has done). It seems anti-town to attack those that question you and to also claim those people are acting scummy because of it. It creates more tension, negativity, and fighting, which isn't what we need. How can town work with each other when too many are trying to divide us?

VOTE: Mertex

 

[R.D.]

Vote Count: 2.6​

Avatar4321 (4): CafeAuLait&#9792;, R.D.&#9792;, tn5421&#9794;, FA_Q2&#9794;
Grandma (3): Mertex&#9792;, Avatar4321&#9794;, RosieS&#9792;

Not Voting (4): AyeCantSeeYou&#9792;, MeBelle60&#9792;, Grandma&#9792;, Shaitra&#9792;

~ With 11 alive, it takes 6 to lynch!
~ Deadline is 8/3/14, @ 4pm central.
~ Aye, take as much time as you want with your son.

1.1 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 1.9 | 1.10
2.1 | 2.2 | 2.3 | 2.4 | 2.5
​

Did rd switch from grandma back to me and I miss it?

No. Not yet

 

[R.D.]

Yup, no problem. I've voted, my vote will stay where it is on Avatar. I believe part of my issue is I was wishy washy the first game and did not go with my first instinct. I may be wrong, but ALL of us witnessed the weirdness Day1 , claimed crumbling, mason stuff, etc, attacking everyone, misstatements, etc. It's not have Avatar plays, except his subtly wagoning people. Exactly the way he did in game 1.

Either way, recall you are on my scum list though. and I'm not sure if that confbias because of the beginning of the game or other issues we have discussed.


With that said, What is also highly confusing/ suspicious me is the Avatar/ Mertex thing Day 1- they were down each other's throats on Day one, insisting each other were scum and trying to start wagons and in fact did start wagons and voted the other, Avatar ended up with 4 votes on Mertex, then got many to flip to Mani. Yet, all this drama and suspicion is suddenly gone Day 2 start.

Mertex, RD and you, Grandma- all stated Avatar would be number on on their/your lists day 2, but I did not see much of anything said by Mertex about Avatar, or him saying much of anything about Mertex. maybe I missed it? This seems very weird to me and I wonder if it may have been manufacture drama Day 1.

I noticed this as well.

I want to take a look at my notes again and check a few things. I also have to go into work this morning. I will try to have my vote and thoughts posted before noon though.

The spat between Mertex and Avi bothered me as well. Both are voting for Grandma. Was the arguing between them intentional game play meant to throw town off? I don't know. I've mentioned before that Mertex's responses this game are highly antagonistic towards those that question her on pretty much anything. Avi has been much the same way up to the point where he said he'd back off (which he has done). It seems anti-town to attack those that question you and to also claim those people are acting scummy because of it. It creates more tension, negativity, and fighting, which isn't what we need. How can town work with each other when too many are trying to divide us?

VOTE: Mertex

This made sense so I reviewed. She claimed both as her scum picks here http://www.usmessageboard.com/9506954-post382.html and here http://www.usmessageboard.com/9505549-post371.html

Could it be you're going for a no lynch?