The Syndicate

Dom wrote:That's not my beef with Quin.
I despised the way he tried to be my "friend" at the end of day. I have repeated myself several times on this. You are the one making it about Quin's vote. Don't sip tea while you misrepresent my suspicion.

If this is your beef, then I don't know what to tell you. It was quite blatantly a joke.

Dom wrote:
Jackofhearts2005 wrote:@Dom

Suppose a townie sees what they think is a 13 vote train on a fellow townie. What is the proper action to take?

Should they vote for the townie, elsewhere or nowhere?
If they think someone is a townie then they should not vote for them and actively try and flip those votes.
Not just tell that townie at the end that they are that townie's "friend".

I literally posted in this game that I was ill again. I gave my reason for not being here. I don't have the time or energy to read from page 24 onward. That's the point where I had last read. So, now, seeing people say that they were my "friend" etc... yeah that rings rather false to me. If Quin actively defended me, can you point me out to where? I don't think he did. I think he washed his hands of my blood by conveniently voting elsewhere. My goose was cooked by evil people. Remember that.

I never said I thought you were town. You said it yourself, you weren't here to defend yourself, so how do you expect me to form a civ read on you and go out of my way to defend you for that?

I suspected DDL, not you. I voted DDL, not you. You were almost completely irrelevant to my thought process during that day.

Dom wrote:
Quin wrote:My only counter to the assumption that he's indy is that he could be a member of the Troupe and was given a bulletproof vest by Violet, assumedly after the Glorfindel lynch.

None, Dom. Can we be friends now?
why didn't you vote ddl after my lynch

I've got a whoooole lotta interactions with the guy if you want to have a look.

Or he could be town.

My only counter to the assumption that he's indy is that he could be a member of the Troupe and was given a bulletproof vest by Violet, assumedly after the Glorfindel lynch.

None, Dom. Can we be friends now?

Golden wrote:
Quin wrote:
Golden wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Mr. Poe is on fire.
He made a good choice today I think! That takes care of that one.
I'd like your insight on my thoughts about sig, if you have time.
Just did so! I agree with your assessment that there is no reason to assume he isn't Indy, but if so he seems to be trying to help the town.

I have no intention on lynching him if he's indy. If he can win with town, I'm cool with that. It's one person who I can confidently say I can rule out in my scum-hunting. But it's better to discuss it so I'm not just giving him a free pass.

Golden wrote:
sig wrote:Also there would be no reason for me to waste a kill if i was part of a mafia team, I'm basically already safe from a lynch, due to early contributions.
I agree with this. I was about to say it myself. A good idea in some situations, unnecessary here.

I agree that he's not a ghastly guardian, but this isn't why I agree with it. Sig was the GG's target tonight, and with two other kills out there I don't think sig would have risked such a stunt if he was bad.

Golden wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:Mr. Poe is on fire.
He made a good choice today I think! That takes care of that one.

I'd like your insight on my thoughts about sig, if you have time.

sig wrote:The sequence that Quin's then yours post went made me think that's what you were referring to.

I don't see how talking about why I survived or narrowing down a potential civ power role helps the town at all.

It helps because right now I've narrowed you down to being one of three potential indie roles, or else Violet has given you a bulletproof vest.

In a game where night kill and lynch protected roles are made public to the thread, I don't think it's very reasonable to assume that the roles with secrets attached to them would have the same protections unknown to us. So I'd rule out sig being any of those, but I wouldn't rule them out completely.

sig wrote:I never hinted at being indy? I said that I'd like to see the mafia try to kill me, which they did, which makes me very unhappy.

I'm coming for you mafia. Try not to waste another night kill?

Why'd you jump at the mention of you being indy, specifically? There are a whole bunch of town and scum roles that could have been responsible for your survival.

sig wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:I kill Sboq sig!!
Tell me how killing sig will work out for ya.

If it's this, then it at least confirms that he'd know that he'd survive. It doesn't rule out any of the possibilities, though.

Dom wrote:
Quin wrote:Dom, if my vote for DDL was a 'told you so' vote, show me where the 'told you so' moment was in my posts.

Is it not more likely that I voted for DDL because I thought he was bad?
Who'd you vote for yesterday? That might clarify my beef with you.
Quin wrote:hey sig what's that about
he hinted at this.

I voted Eloh.

I'll have a look to see if I can find the post you're referring to.

I have no reason to rule out or reinforce the idea of sig being indy.

Sig isn't Carmelita, because the the guardians kill every even night, and I think sig pulling this stunt as a member of the Guardians is pointless and risky.

I kind of don't want to clear sig of being Count Olaf, although he was one of the front-runners in the lynch against Glorfindel. He replaced out, and I still refuse to believe that it's because he wasn't able to handle the pressure of being bad. He didn't do that in Mad Max even though he was suspected relatively heavily for the majority of the game.I read in another thread (or maybe it was this one) that Glorfindel had timing issues that kept him from signing up to games. If that's true for his reasons for subbing out here, I'm open to the possibility that he asked his team to bus him before subbing out.

Basically, I'm not ruling out Glorfindel and sig being teammates.

Quin wrote:hey sig what's that about

Town roles which might account for sig's night kill survival:

Violet Baudelaire – Violet is a brilliant inventor. She will create a new device every night and send it to a player of her choice.

Kit Snicket - SECRET

Scum roles which might account for sig's night kill survival:

Count Olaf – He is obsessed with the Baudelaire fortune, and will stop at nothing to get it. Olaf is a master of digsuise, so if role checked he will come back as a random civvie. SECRET

Esme Squalor – Esme is obsessed with fashion and high society. She won't allow herself to be lynched unless she gets at least two-thirds of the votes. SECRET

Carmelita Spats – Carmelita is a spoiled, obnoxious rich kid. Her wealth allows her to buy a player off every night. If that person attempts to target Carmelita, it will fail on the first attempt.

Indie roles which might account for sig's night kill survival:

THE VILLAGE OF FOWL DEVOTEES (2) – The Village of Fowl Devotees are a reclusive, authoritarian society with a strict code of laws. However, they are not actively malicious. They will win by surviving to the end. Each night the VFD has a block and a protect to use between them.

Ishmael – Ishmael is the leader of a peaceful island community. Every night he will attempt to recruit a player. He will have a 50% chance of bringing them into his fold. Ishmael's team will win if they outnumber the other living players at any point. He will also survive the first NK and lynch attempt on his life.

hey sig what's that about

Dom, if my vote for DDL was a 'told you so' vote, show me where the 'told you so' moment was in my posts.

Is it not more likely that I voted for DDL because I thought he was bad?

Golden wrote:
Spacedaisy wrote: @Golden

Just so you know, I read your responses as very similar to the game in which you were civ and called for a kill on Epi. You seem genuinely aggravated by him, which is a very civ look on you. Just my two cents. I was undecided on you until this exchange.
Exactly. As far as it concerns me, epi staunchly refuses to learn from his mistakes, lest I use them against him. I never will, because phoning it in always brings heat on you and let's your baddie teammates down as a result.

I can agree with this. I don't think Golden's the type of guy to half-ass a game as a *anything* strategy.

Quin wrote:I'm following Epi's case against Golden. I think he's coming across as half-hearted in his opposition to a Snow Dog lynch. I don't recall him explaining why he thought the lynch was bad even after that initial post, which doesn't look good to me. 'Oh well, better luck next time' is the vibe I'm taking from that, and I don't like it.

And when I say this, I mean while Snow Dog was still alive. You know, when it mattered.

I'm following Epi's case against Golden. I think he's coming across as half-hearted in his opposition to a Snow Dog lynch. I don't recall him explaining why he thought the lynch was bad even after that initial post, which doesn't look good to me. 'Oh well, better luck next time' is the vibe I'm taking from that, and I don't like it.

Epignosis wrote:
Jackofhearts2005 wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Golden wrote:
Golden wrote:Another runaway. I like the people on it but not the fact of it. Pretty hard to keep it close now though.
What do you call this epi? Not an objection?
No. It's an observation followed by what you like followed by another observation.

No objection.
So I heard you like to argue semantics
I put the "man" in "semantics."

There's just not enough letters for me to tell you what I'm bringing to the table.

a2thezebra wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
Quin wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:Would you agree Quin that we are not team mates?
I would.

This is something that I would enjoy doing with a teammate in a game, and I can't be the only one.

I agree, but that's not exactly an interaction I need in my life right now given that people have been baring their teeth at me since Day 2.

Golden wrote:
Quin wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:I kill Sboq sig!!
what
Snow dog. Sboq sig is snow dog. I think.

Good to know my drunk translation skills are still up to scratch.

I kill Snow Dog, I think he said.

Nachomamma8 wrote:I kill Sboq sig!!

what

Been out and about all day, going out again after this post to buy a new desk fan because it's swelteringly hot and my fan finally kicked it today.

Voted Eloh. She's been jumping on existing wagons without an acceptable reason for doing so. She didn't suspect any of the people she voted the past two phases. She comes across as disingenuous in her dealings with me. Posts like this:

Elohcin wrote:
Quin wrote:Guess who I'm voting for?

Not Dom.
If Dom is bad, this is strike 2 for you.

She's quantifying reasons to point the finger at me without considering the quality of each aspect. Plus, this specific post is just blatantly illogical.

linki: Good thing you waited, huh?

Long Con wrote:
Jackofhearts2005 wrote:Third, Eloh goes off on Quin for not following the Dom train, which is hilarious to me for several reasons. Eloh doesn't know why we're voting Dom. Several players have expressed concern that the Dom lynch is too easy. Some asked for other suspects (LC) or provided them (Epi) but most just said they were worried and nobody strongly went after anyone. Quin still votes DDL, which I disagree with but it draws unnecessary attention no matter how Dom flips and won't save Dom if they were w/w so I don't see why a scummer would bother. As town, it at least gets an opinion on record and as indy, it might be nightkill insurance. Whatever Quin's reasons for voting DDL, I think Eloh's response is way off mark. It's a bad look.
It is a bad look. So, I chose Eloh to ISO.

Post #1: Checks in on Day 0. Votes for North on the Day 0 poll.

Post #2:First real post. Agrees with Jack that Snow Dog's unread rolecard would be a good ploy for a baddie to use, and disagrees with Zebra, who saw Jack as not being sincere about his Snow Dog opinion. My opinion here is that Jack was being less-than-serious, which, to me, indicates that he understood what was really going on, on some level, and responded appropriately. "What was really going on" being that Snow Dog was just joking around about not reading his rolecard. Which would also mean that zebra was correct, in a way.

Eloh believes Snow Dog is lying about not reading his role PM, and agrees with DDL that if Snow Dog is lying, he's likely bad.

Post #3: Curtly reiterates that she believes Snow Dog is lying.

Post #4 and #5: Finds out that Snow Dog's thing was a joke and is dismayed at the time she spent on it. She still originally intended to press consequences on Snow Dog for lying, for what it's worth. That gives a slight baddie tick mark in my opinion.

Post #6: Gives a list of names, but I'm not totally sure what it represents - "discussing the subject" but which subject? Laments again about wasted time on Snow Dog, and says she will "try to give him a fresh start in my book". (Post #7 clarifies she was talking to Epi in Post #6, Post #8 she derps, Post #9 she jokes, Post #10 she OT's, Post #11 she corrects).

Post #12: Asks Sorsha about her request for a Day 0 poll record. What she asks about here is not likely to be very relevant, but that's just my opinion. This is her last post for three days, on Dec 20th.

Post #13: Dec 23rd, comes back with a reasonable explanation for her absence.

Post #14: Dec 25th. Just catchup questions, poor quarantine procedures. Not a suspicious post to me.

Post #15: Joke post.

Post #16: More questions

Post #17: Starting to get into the game a little, asks two game-pertinent questions that can lead to a better read of the game.

... that's where I am so far, I come away from this with a slight baddie lean for Eloh. I believe there are other things along the way, in the future of this ISO, that I found suspicious when I read them. I'm just adding to it when I can, but I have other things to do today as well.

The part about Eloh agreeing with Jack about whether Snow Dog's shtick is interesting. I recall she played Monkey Island, and although she did sub out, it was well after the discussion about Wilgy's claim, so she ought to have made the connection between games, whether she thought that was what was going on this time or not.

Spacedaisy wrote:
Quin wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:
Quin wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:There are people who are posting less/scumhunting less than they would otherwise because they are afraid of dying by the other team via nightkill.
Who are they?
You're missing the point; I'm getting bored.
Why did you think that Snow Dog and DDL were partners based on the Snow Dog posts you quoted?
I didn't like how Snow Dog put a vote on DDL 'randomly' at first, but then came back to justify that he was considering two specific people. I don't buy that it was a simple reference to Vompatti because he felt the need to justify it beyond that. His change in mindset about DDL's alignment was sudden and I don't see the posts in his history that would support that change of opinion.

I think that it's unlikely that they're teammates now, because DDL proposing that the vig policy kill him would be a risky move, because it's something that I could see a vig might actually get on board with early on.
So you think that Snow Dog is bad but not a teamie with DDL, correct? Does that mean you are thinking DDL is good, or possibly bad on the other team?

That's where my thoughts are right now for the both of them. I'd lean towards the latter regarding DDL, but I admittedly feel like my judgement is somewhat clouded there. Since he's all but cleared of being troupe, I'm not interested in voting him today.

Nachomamma8 wrote:
Quin wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:There are people who are posting less/scumhunting less than they would otherwise because they are afraid of dying by the other team via nightkill.
Who are they?
You're missing the point; I'm getting bored.
Why did you think that Snow Dog and DDL were partners based on the Snow Dog posts you quoted?

I didn't like how Snow Dog put a vote on DDL 'randomly' at first, but then came back to justify that he was considering two specific people. I don't buy that it was a simple reference to Vompatti because he felt the need to justify it beyond that. His change in mindset about DDL's alignment was sudden and I don't see the posts in his history that would support that change of opinion.

I think that it's unlikely that they're teammates now, because DDL proposing that the vig policy kill him would be a risky move, because it's something that I could see a vig might actually get on board with early on.

Nachomamma8 wrote:There are people who are posting less/scumhunting less than they would otherwise because they are afraid of dying by the other team via nightkill.

Who are they?

Nachomamma8 wrote:
Quin wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:
Quin wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:
Quin wrote:
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:My case is that you used language which allows you to state suspicion on someone without commiting to it. The fact day 1 was already done for you doesn't undermine that, because the game has more than one day. Long term planning exists. What exactly was going over your mind if you were bad is something I won't bother to speculate on, because that's too difficult for me to determine. I'm just pointing out that your posts could be part of a bad agenda.
As I said; there's no motivation for me to be non-committal in my scum-hunting when there's two scum teams. I'd need to eliminate them as a priority, because they'd have two opportunities to kill me versus the townie's one. Long-term planning indeed.
But the other baddie team would have more incentive to kill you when you're murdering all of their friends.
And? I've got three other teammates I'm also actively trying to set up for success in that case.
Your initial argument is that non-committal scumhunting wasn't a baddie tell because the other scum team had two chances to kill you versus a civilian's one, which is an argument that doesn't exactly hold water.
No it wasn't. My initial argument was that nobody is being non-committal in their scum hunting because there are two baddie teams.
Doesn't really fix the argument; the flaw exists whether it's you or everyone.

Yes it does, because the concept is entirely different. If it's your interpretation, there are baddies that aren't scum hunting. That doesn't make sense because for starters, one team deciding if they want to leave the other team alive, lynch them, or night kill them is definitely on the table. If it's mine, that's not an issue because all baddies are scum hunting.

Nachomamma8 wrote:
Quin wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:
Quin wrote:
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:My case is that you used language which allows you to state suspicion on someone without commiting to it. The fact day 1 was already done for you doesn't undermine that, because the game has more than one day. Long term planning exists. What exactly was going over your mind if you were bad is something I won't bother to speculate on, because that's too difficult for me to determine. I'm just pointing out that your posts could be part of a bad agenda.
As I said; there's no motivation for me to be non-committal in my scum-hunting when there's two scum teams. I'd need to eliminate them as a priority, because they'd have two opportunities to kill me versus the townie's one. Long-term planning indeed.
But the other baddie team would have more incentive to kill you when you're murdering all of their friends.
And? I've got three other teammates I'm also actively trying to set up for success in that case.
Your initial argument is that non-committal scumhunting wasn't a baddie tell because the other scum team had two chances to kill you versus a civilian's one, which is an argument that doesn't exactly hold water.

No it wasn't. My initial argument was that nobody is being non-committal in their scum hunting because there are two baddie teams.

Nachomamma8 wrote:
Quin wrote:
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:My case is that you used language which allows you to state suspicion on someone without commiting to it. The fact day 1 was already done for you doesn't undermine that, because the game has more than one day. Long term planning exists. What exactly was going over your mind if you were bad is something I won't bother to speculate on, because that's too difficult for me to determine. I'm just pointing out that your posts could be part of a bad agenda.
As I said; there's no motivation for me to be non-committal in my scum-hunting when there's two scum teams. I'd need to eliminate them as a priority, because they'd have two opportunities to kill me versus the townie's one. Long-term planning indeed.
But the other baddie team would have more incentive to kill you when you're murdering all of their friends.

And? I've got three other teammates I'm also actively trying to set up for success in that case.

Nachomamma8 wrote:
Quin wrote: If I read a post saying 'Hey, I intend to vote for Quin today', I'd feel pretty confident that they'd have something to talk about.
If you have something to talk about, why not just say it?

I just didn't. I figured he'd just show up and talk, so I got lazy.

Nachomamma8 wrote:
Quin wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:
Quin wrote:I keep getting murdered. Have mercy, baddies.

I'm gonna put my vote down on Luffy. I've got other plans for this afternoon that don't involve waiting around to talk to someone who might not even show up.
So far the entirety of your DDL suspicion that I can see is nothing, unless I missed something. I don't like how you're resigned to vote him early in the day but put no effort in convincing others/selling your case; I think we talked about this earlier, but I don't think it's the mindset of a town Quin.
I stated quite a few times I intended to vote for him on Day 1. It was an invitation for him to come in and have a conversation. He simply wasn't around. As for not selling my case, I didn't have one at the time. It was a fair level of distrust that I thought was deserving of a Day 1 vote.

I'm playing the burglary, so this is it for me for now.
I don't see how saying that you're going to vote for a person is somehow inviting them to come have a conversation.
Bringing up what's bothering you specifically, sure, but the only real response to a bare "I'm going to vote you" is "have a good time, see you after I flip green".

If I read a post saying 'Hey, I intend to vote for Quin today', I'd feel pretty confident that they'd have something to talk about.

Nachomamma8 wrote:
Quin wrote:I keep getting murdered. Have mercy, baddies.

I'm gonna put my vote down on Luffy. I've got other plans for this afternoon that don't involve waiting around to talk to someone who might not even show up.
So far the entirety of your DDL suspicion that I can see is nothing, unless I missed something. I don't like how you're resigned to vote him early in the day but put no effort in convincing others/selling your case; I think we talked about this earlier, but I don't think it's the mindset of a town Quin.

I stated quite a few times I intended to vote for him on Day 1. It was an invitation for him to come in and have a conversation. He simply wasn't around. As for not selling my case, I didn't have one at the time. It was a fair level of distrust that I thought was deserving of a Day 1 vote.

I'm playing the burglary, so this is it for me for now.

Nachomamma8 wrote:
Quin wrote:
Nachomamma8 wrote:Quin, I expect my opening will be a bit lower volume than Monkey Island due to vacation and preparing for vacation - hence the whole "I shouldn't join but I love you guys too much to do anything else" thing.
That's all good. I wasn't calling you suspicious for it or anything, it was just an observation I felt needed to be made.
I let it go at the time, but I don't understand where you're coming from with this. If it wasn't suspicion, why was it an observation that needed to be made?

I make observations all the time. If it's something that I think it's significant, it's something I put in my back pocket so I'm able to either come back to it or put it in the thread so others can discuss it.

Quin wrote:
sprityo wrote:
Quin wrote:
sprityo wrote:What I'm getting at is the situation isn't this huge conflict. It's a statement, a joke, and it's only purpose as of now is generating content that we can't even use, it's more so being used to setup boundaries/groups of people for whatever reason
Why do you think we can't use it? I've taken quite a lot out of the discussion so far.

What have you taken away, since I just see it as filler
Off the topic of my head:

- I don't trust DDL. I'll probably vote for him today.
- I recall Epi pulling up the names of people who took part in the discussion that also played Monkey Island, so I can analyse their content to see if it's compatible with that.
- Epi put some blind trust for Day 1 in Jack and (someone else), so that's something we can look at in hindsight if one of them flips bad later on.
One of my big focuses this reading session other than who Spyrito 1.0 suspected and how Spyrito 2.0's reads differed is where the hell Quin's case on DDL comes from - one of the few things that I always saw get brought up no matter how deep into the ether I dove was Quin-DDL conflict.

This post was in the early stages of my DDL suspicion. I recall he accused me of something without researching it first. I felt as though he was backpedaling when he defended his mistake by saying he accused first and researched later. I made a post recently where I covered my thoughts for around Days 0/1/2, if that's what you're further referring to.

Dom's ability matters. If he's a lie detector and I've made no detectable statements, he's just another civ who pointed his finger at me in his scum hunting. He can be wrong. He is.

Since I'm not on the poll today, spend your time looking at the people you actually can vote for. I'm going to be talked about enough anyway.

@Daisy and Golden

You're definitely misinterpreting my intentions when I continued to question people to find a lie detectable post in my ISO. I'm not trying to suggest that I'm making sure that I'm not making statements that can be checked, what I'm trying to do is refute bad cases founded on poor logic. I'm pushing people to find a post that supports the the idea that Dom checked me so that a bunch of people don't just say 'Well, he could have checked him' and pile on votes for me without putting in the effort. There won't be anything to read into once I'm dead otherwise.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Hey Quin

Sorry for saying I'd ignore you. I realized that's a jerk thing to do. No point in that.

Please link three posts from you/anyone else you want me to respond. No more than that. I will not respond everything people asked me in the entire game, don't bother.

I don't know what value I can get out of talking to you about things that have already happened, because my question to you in all cases would just be 'What was your thought process?'

But for the sake of it, talk about these behaviours as best you can (not quoting posts, I've got enough tabs open already):

1) You were a significant player in the Day 0/1 discussion about Snow Dog's not reading his role shtick. I think you took it too literally (though admittedly I'm projecting my own Monkey Island experience on you here), and your proposition to policy lynch/vig him was concerning. Golden made a point that I agreed with in that you were quick to assume that he wouldn't be scum-hunting even if he hadn't read his role. I also find it interesting that you didn't seem to be open to considering the possibility that he was joking, although that possibility had already been discussed.

2) I feel like you abandoned a discussion that we were having where you accused me of being non-committal to a sprityo lynch. I don't know where your thoughts are now, so I'm bringing it up again so you can provide them.

Ideally I'd just like to see you engage in discussions concerning yourself more. I just don't think you've been inquisitive enough for me to trust you. I feel strongly enough that you're not on sprityo's team, so maybe I'll back off for a phase and explore some other options.

I'm actually considering switching DDL and Eloh on my shortlist. Shocker. I earlier described Luffy's strategy in this game as 'kamikaze' and that I wasn't sure how to read that. I'm opening up to the possibility that he's just sticking with an offensive strategy and letting his reads and contributions speak for him. Can't say that's a great strategy, but I can appreciate it coming from him.

Snow Dog wrote:
Quin wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:Who wants to go first on who gets lynched in this shortened list?
At this point I'll probably be voting between DDL, Eloh, Epi and you. That's my order of preference as well.

This reminds me I owe DDL some posts, so I'll get that out there before I go to bed.
Any thoughts on Soneji?

I recall he was strongly against Glorfindel before he subbed out and the wagon against sprityo2.0 became gross, so I think he looks good to not be one of his teammates. Otherwise I'd call him a low flier at this point, so a proper read is warranted.

Snow Dog wrote:Can you tell me Quin, why do you think Epi thinks we may be team mates?

Epi thinks that Dom's accusation towards me before he died was based on him having information on me. He pulled a post I made (which is very very unlikely to actually be check-able) where I stated that there are potential teammate interactions between you and DDL, claiming that if it were checked, I'd be caught as a baddie because either you or DDL are my teammate.

Snow Dog wrote:Who wants to go first on who gets lynched in this shortened list?

At this point I'll probably be voting between DDL, Eloh, Epi and you. That's my order of preference as well.

This reminds me I owe DDL some posts, so I'll get that out there before I go to bed.

Snow Dog wrote:Would you agree Quin that we are not team mates?

I would.

The fact that I have to ask other people to fill in the details of another persons case should be evidence enough that his case is full of holes.

Want to pick up Epi's slack, Long Con? If you agree completely, then you'll tell me which of DDL or Snow Dog is my teammate. Now.

As for Dom's accusations towards me, I don't think he even checked me. His accusation felt more 'heat of the moment' based on the fact that I was the lone off-wagoner than it was built on information. He never even interacted with me before he died, as far as I can recall.

Search found 337 matches