[ENDGAME]: Film Directors.

[Mongoose]

RIP Llama. Don't fully understand if the Lucas part is for story flavour or not, but I assume the former.

Just flavor.

[Canucklehead]

Perhaps unsurprisingly, I am fully on board with a TH lynch today as I have been uneasy of him since Day 1. I don't need to vote right away and will wait to consider any further responses/reactions/cases/etc, but at this point it would take a pretty big push to get me off this particular lynch train.

[Dom]

When LC is bad, he has this faux hearty, hail fellow well met kinda feel to his posts, which is totally absent here.

I think of it as LOST Season 1 baddie Sawyer vs. Season 5 upstanding Sawyer. They sound different because they have different motivations. Even if they are saying the same thing. Does that make sense to you?

I completely agree with you-- I usually tell Bad LC from Good LC almost completely by his tone. But, I'm feeling a bit of a griminess to him this game. Maybe I just am reading it poorly this game, but it makes me nervous.

[Long Con]

I'm definitely a Civvie here.

[birdwithteeth11]

Day 1 Part 2: Votes MP. Says it's because of his "maximum frustration", but suggests "something really feels off about you here". Mentions AP and Vomps as well as potential vote-getters.

I never mentioned considering a vote for Vomps or AP. That's just not true. It's even in one of the quotes you put in your post:

TH: You still around? Who are you voting for?

I'm thinking MP but I'm not feeling 100% about it. But I don't think the cases on Vomp or AP are very strong.

Okay. I'll give you that one. I mis-read it as that you were also considering Vomps or AP. The part that doesn't change for me is how the entire sequence with MP is you going after him for a behavior I feel he exhibits in every game he plays. Which paints an easy, lazy target on him.

Day 2 Vote: Votes Made. Says he wants "the real story" for his Day 1 part 2 vote. I won't pull all the quotes (feel free to go back and examine them yourselves), but it really feels like a good opportunity to throw away one's vote here.

I voted for Made because, after mulling over an MP vote all day, he came into the thread with a really genuine sounding defense that made me not want to vote him. I wasn't trying to throw away my vote like you claim. I explicitly tried to start a counterbandwagon because I suddenly found myself not wanting MP lynched. Nobody joined my vote, so I guess looking only at voting records makes it look like a "throwaway vote" eh? But my explanation here is all stuff I said in the thread, so I don't know why you're ignore those relevant quotes.

I was tired last night and didn't feel like pulling huge pyramid quotes at the time. You may have felt MP's defense was genuine, but you moved your vote to Made because of his crazy, zany reasoning? Seems like a fairly similar reason you went after MP.

Day 4 Vote: Votes Roxy. But wait. I thought you said the whole Roxy vs. llama thing was civ vs. civ?

Yes, I said her argument with Llama sounded like civ vs civ to me. But as it came down to the end of the lynch I ended up being the only one left to vote and there were three people tied with the lead in votes: MM, Bloops, and Roxy. Upon rereading I really wasn't feeling an MM or Blooper vote, and I saw a few small things in some of Roy's posts that reminded me of her baddie game, and so out of the three of them I chose Roxy.

Fair enough. But it seems like a big swing to me to go from "I think Roxy vs. llama is a civ" to voting for Roxy in that period of time.

But this here is the real nail in the coffin for me:

Rest in peace Timmer hope your hand feels better.

MM, we cannot look at voting patterns, we cannot look at who voted for civvies, because we haven't lynched a baddie yet. So none of those data points have enough context. That is why it's so important we get a baddie, like RIGHT NOW. Otherwise we will be flailing around aimlessly all game until one by one we're all put out of our misery.

With everything I've gone back and read, this translates IMO to: We can't look at voting patterns. Because it will reveal that I have a not-so-good one. Including 2 obvious throw-away votes.

Translate it however you want BWT, but I stand by my philosophy that voting records are useless without lynched baddies, I've said it before in other games. You can design a narrative around practically any vote at this point. You made up your own narrative of my votes, so that definitely proves my theory

I did because your voting record is incriminating. And then you jump in and say we shouldn't look at voting records because we haven't lynched a baddie??? I don't understand that logic. I think you can still gather useful info from looking at 5 days' worth of voting records.

[birdwithteeth11]

Anyways this reminds me of the infodump post that BWT made (as a sock account) against k4j in the X-men game, so I'm pretty sure he thinks he knows something about my role (because this comes out of nowhere)... but he would be wrong to think it.

That was way different. In that game, I made a case, but made it incredibly obvious it was based off of info I had gotten in a PM from the host on a previous night. If you feel like it came out of nowhere, it's because I spent almost 6 hours yesterday reading up on you and several other people I've been wondering about. So yeah, re-reading that much in a mafia game might change my mind a bit.

As to how you think I have info on you, you're going to have to explain to me how that one works. Because I'm lost.

[DFaraday]

I haven't gone over the case on TH just yet (I'm about to), but is everyone just ignoring that Llama said he intended to vote for LC today and then gets killed that very night? I doubt LC would be that unsubtle, but I think it strengthens the need to look into his posts/votes more closely.

[Long Con]

I haven't gone over the case on TH just yet (I'm about to), but is everyone just ignoring that Llama said he intended to vote for LC today and then gets killed that very night? I doubt LC would be that unsubtle, but I think it strengthens the need to look into his posts/votes more closely.

So you're the one.

[Ricochet]

I haven't gone over the case on TH just yet (I'm about to), but is everyone just ignoring that Llama said he intended to vote for LC today and then gets killed that very night? I doubt LC would be that unsubtle, but I think it strengthens the need to look into his posts/votes more closely.

Not ignoring, but it's something to be careful about, since we've been fooled before the same way (FZ's night kill).

Except if you intentionally want us to pursue this.

[thellama73]

I haven't gone over the case on TH just yet (I'm about to), but is everyone just ignoring that Llama said he intended to vote for LC today and then gets killed that very night? I doubt LC would be that unsubtle, but I think it strengthens the need to look into his posts/votes more closely.

Not ignoring, but it's something to be careful about, since we've been fooled before the same way (FZ's night kill).

Except if you intentionally want us to pursue this.

Hey, why are you appropriating my Minimalism Mafia banner? You didn't play that game!

[Ricochet]

As a joke.

[thellama73]

As a joke.

You have violated my intellectual property.

[Ricochet]

As a joke.

You have violated my intellectual property.

Sue me.

[Marmot]

I haven't gone over the case on TH just yet (I'm about to), but is everyone just ignoring that Llama said he intended to vote for LC today and then gets killed that very night? I doubt LC would be that unsubtle, but I think it strengthens the need to look into his posts/votes more closely.

Certainly not. And I'm glad I didn't discuss it last night because that may well have been why llama met his fate. I know this doesn't clear llama as civ, but the odds are much higher, even than before.

I also don't trust you one bit DF. You were speculating on whether we should trust BWT several days ago for dying and coming back twice, and now I get the feeling you are diverting attention from his case on TH. You also never answered my question from a couple days ago.

[Marmot]

RIP Llama

Hey guys-- I'm here, but I'm going to have a busy couple of days. :/


TH-- "See, there you go BWT, looking simply at voting records and not at all looking at the context those votes were made in." was the first thing you said upon BWT's case against you. You then said nothing until SVS pointed out how poopy of a response that was. Why so dismissive?


MM-- who should we lynch today?


SVS-- if LC is not bad, can you still draw some similarities in his tone to the Monty Python game, or is that something I'm imagining? That's the reason I'm on the fence about him-- I feel like his tone is similar here. Maybe I'm misremembering or wrong, but that was my initial reaction.

TH is an obvious choice since BWT came in with a massive case against him, and I agree with BWT here. I still feel there's something to the Roxy/SVS relationship, but since Roxy hasn't posted recently, I feel like the general attention on her has faded. We should still be watching her though.

Also, I agree with llama about LC. DF is on my radar now too.

Who would I vote today? TH or LC, or possibly DF.

[DFaraday]

I haven't gone over the case on TH just yet (I'm about to), but is everyone just ignoring that Llama said he intended to vote for LC today and then gets killed that very night? I doubt LC would be that unsubtle, but I think it strengthens the need to look into his posts/votes more closely.

Certainly not. And I'm glad I didn't discuss it last night because that may well have been why llama met his fate. I know this doesn't clear llama as civ, but the odds are much higher, even than before.

I also don't trust you one bit DF. You were speculating on whether we should trust BWT several days ago for dying and coming back twice, and now I get the feeling you are diverting attention from his case on TH. You also never answered my question from a couple days ago.

Having a suspicion is diverting attention? Don't you want to explore every possible avenue? Having looked over it, I actually think BWT's case is pretty good, and I'm more inclined to vote TH than LC. I just don't want people to ignore what could be a brazen baddie move.

And I did post re: Rico, wherein I concluded that I had no particular read on him. I'm feeling more civ than not on him now.

[Turnip Head]

TH-- "See, there you go BWT, looking simply at voting records and not at all looking at the context those votes were made in." was the first thing you said upon BWT's case against you. You then said nothing until SVS pointed out how poopy of a response that was. Why so dismissive?

SVS said something only moments after my initial post. I always meant to respond properly to BWT's case, and as I alluded to in my next reply to SVS, I was just waiting until I could get home to do so. Dismissive because the case is baloney.

Not sure I fully understand how BWT's role could help him find out info about certain players, either. Doesn't he simply adopt a power from the roles still active, without finding out who is using it?

I should probably ask about this to find out for sure, but my understanding is that he targets a player and then gets to use that player's power? Maybe that's wrong.

Thanks for your input, BTW, btw (nice anagramming, there). If voting record is the main criteria, then I would agree TH is worth re-reading (and will do that myself) and that his remark on voting record being pointless till the point of nailing a baddie pinged me, too. However, if the voting record is the main criteria, then I also think BR and Dom are worth re-reading. What to make, however, off the case TH's built on Made? Yesterday many felt it was compelling. Does a baddie TH usually make a more purposefully convincing hunt than a civvie TH?

Thank you Rico for taking to time to think through your thoughts about me. Not something I see anybody else doing, so it's refreshing.

Perhaps unsurprisingly

Perhaps indeed I can't make heads or tails of you this game Canuck, I'm lost as fuck, just a turnip down on his luck. But it's quite the caper you pulled with me this game. You have clung to suspicion of me from the very get go, but you haven't said why you're suspicious of me since Day 1. You've echoed your own thoughts from Day 1 re: me, but never bringing up any new points. So whether you're bad or civ, I'm positive you are relishing this opportunity to lynch your dear old pal

I did because your voting record is incriminating. And then you jump in and say we shouldn't look at voting records because we haven't lynched a baddie??? I don't understand that logic. I think you can still gather useful info from looking at 5 days' worth of voting records.

BWT, ALL of our voting records are incriminating. We have all voted for civilians, and none of us have helped lynch baddies. Do you see that that's my point? That you could make any individual's voting record look bad at this point? You yourself have thrown away your vote onto Ricochet every single lynch until today. Couldn't someone make a case that your voting pattern looks bad, like you've done here for mine? Until we lynch baddies, we don't have enough context. The irony is real.

That was way different. In that game, I made a case, but made it incredibly obvious it was based off of info I had gotten in a PM from the host on a previous night. If you feel like it came out of nowhere, it's because I spent almost 6 hours yesterday reading up on you and several other people I've been wondering about. So yeah, re-reading that much in a mafia game might change my mind a bit.

The circumstances might have been different but the end result is the same. You posted your case on me like 5 minutes into the Day phase, voted for me right off the bat in a game where we can't change votes, didn't wait to hear my response or anything, after having NEVER brought up my name before this... in a game where your role is outted thread info... my mind immediately went to certain conclusions as to what you could be doing. I'm sure the baddies' did as well. That's why this is so brilliant. All the baddies can hop on this bandwagon guilt-free. I wonder why no one's defending me?

[Turnip Head]

I guess BWT's vote could also be forced, maybe an Emmerich thing? That's another possibility for sure.

[Marmot]

You may have concluded that, but I could find no such statement that said what you thought of him. Your post that you mention was a summary of his gameplay up until now. Thanks for answering. What changed your mind from indifferent to civ?

[Marmot]

^^^That post was directed at DF.

[Turnip Head]

Also, what does everyone think of my response to BWT's case? Nobody even commented on it

[Marmot]

I guess BWT's vote could also be forced, maybe an Emmerich thing? That's another possibility for sure.

What do you mean an Emmerich thing?

Linki: I'll take a look TH.

[Turnip Head]

So you haven't even read it?

[Marmot]

So you haven't even read it?

No. You just posted it and I was looking up DF posts.

[Marmot]

Or are you talking about your earlier one?

[DFaraday]

You may have concluded that, but I could find no such statement that said what you thought of him. Your post that you mention was a summary of his gameplay up until now. Thanks for answering. What changed your mind from indifferent to civ?

His posts feel sincere to me, and the more I think about the thing with Dom, the more it feels like just a random squabble than something shady.

[Turnip Head]

Or are you talking about your earlier one?

I was talking about my earlier one, but your thoughts on both would be cool too

[Marmot]

Half of your response reads as legitimate while half of it reads as a baddie looking for a chance to turn the tables.

I agree with your reasons about vote records. It's really difficult to push on one single person for votes when everyone has an equally miserable record. I'm not saying we should throw them out the window right now. We've talked about this before. We can still look at who dead players have voted for (like llama's vote plans today) or we can look at other circumstances, such as who voted before the thread was locked on Day 5.

But your reactions to the case in general is what has me convinced. I agree that the case is not super solid, but you jumped to the conclusion that BWT knows your role and made the case for that reason.

I did because your voting record is incriminating. And then you jump in and say we shouldn't look at voting records because we haven't lynched a baddie??? I don't understand that logic. I think you can still gather useful info from looking at 5 days' worth of voting records.

BWT, ALL of our voting records are incriminating. We have all voted for civilians, and none of us have helped lynch baddies. Do you see that that's my point? That you could make any individual's voting record look bad at this point? You yourself have thrown away your vote onto Ricochet every single lynch until today. Couldn't someone make a case that your voting pattern looks bad, like you've done here for mine? Until we lynch baddies, we don't have enough context. The irony is real.

How can anyone make a case that BWT is bad right now? There aren't any secret roles. There aren't any secrets to any roles. I don't see a good explanation to spin this back onto BWT.

That was way different. In that game, I made a case, but made it incredibly obvious it was based off of info I had gotten in a PM from the host on a previous night. If you feel like it came out of nowhere, it's because I spent almost 6 hours yesterday reading up on you and several other people I've been wondering about. So yeah, re-reading that much in a mafia game might change my mind a bit.

The circumstances might have been different but the end result is the same. You posted your case on me like 5 minutes into the Day phase, voted for me right off the bat in a game where we can't change votes, didn't wait to hear my response or anything, after having NEVER brought up my name before this... in a game where your role is outted thread info... my mind immediately went to certain conclusions as to what you could be doing. I'm sure the baddies' did as well. That's why this is so brilliant. All the baddies can hop on this bandwagon guilt-free. I wonder why no one's defending me?

Why would you jump to the conclusions you did if you think you are innocent?

[Turnip Head]

Your impression that I'm trying to turn the tables is wrong, I'm not pulling a Jane Southworth here. I don't think BWT is bad. The point I was trying to make is that if you took his voting record in a vacuum, as he has done for me, his looks as bad as mine does, confirmed civ status notwithstanding.

And I'm afraid I was forced to jump to conclusions. Here I am, a civvie, and the confirmed civ with (potentially) role-deducing powers makes what by all rights reads like an infodumpy post on me. I have no choice but to try and figure out what's happening

[Marmot]

Then who should we lynch instead? I've looked over your recent posts, and every single player you talk about you think is either civ or don't have a read on, Roxy being the one exception.

[Turnip Head]

I don't know MM. I'm lost as fuck. I honestly don't mind being lynched today... As a civvie, this game has been a miserable existence. (Not that I haven't enjoyed it immensely Mongoose, because I have!) Being lynched would validate my thoughts on voting records, for one. It would also be a fun exercise in how discovery roles can be healthy for the game because of how easily they can be misinterpreted.

[Marmot]

Supatown.

Also, no.

RULES.

11. No one is Supatown.

llama should be modkilled.

[Marmot]

I don't know MM. I'm lost as fuck. I honestly don't mind being lynched today... As a civvie, this game has been a miserable existence. (Not that I haven't enjoyed it immensely Mongoose, because I have!) Being lynched would validate my thoughts on voting records, for one. It would also be a fun exercise in how discovery roles can be healthy for the game because of how easily they can be misinterpreted.

Why don't you ask for interpretation on the role then?

I need to go study now, but I'll be back on later.

[Turnip Head]

I'm saying that the info that those roles obtain can be misinterpreted... what did you think I meant?

[Turnip Head]

Seems like you're trying to push my buttons, MM.

[Marmot]

I'm saying that the info that those roles obtain can be misinterpreted... what did you think I meant?

You and Rico have different ideas of how the role works, and my understanding was the same as yours.

Linki: I'm definitely not trying, but as I suspected, you are looking for ANY chance to turn this case against you on someone else.

[Turnip Head]

No I am not, so you can put but that smiley face back in PassiveAggressivesville where he came from. I know that civvies and baddies alike can easily rationalize a vote for me today. That's why I've basically thrown in the towel.

[S~V~S]

[Long Con]

I don't know MM. I'm lost as fuck. I honestly don't mind being lynched today... As a civvie, this game has been a miserable existence. (Not that I haven't enjoyed it immensely Mongoose, because I have!) Being lynched would validate my thoughts on voting records, for one. It would also be a fun exercise in how discovery roles can be healthy for the game because of how easily they can be misinterpreted.

I'm already seeing this game as a lesson in going after quiet players as baddies, given our record so far. I definitely plan to study the baddies after this game is done and their roles are revealed, and I will be far quicker to accuse those players FOR quiet play based on this game.

[Marmot]

Penny for your thoughts SVS?

[S~V~S]

Just at work, enjoying the show.

I need to finish reading TH and you.

[Marmot]

Just at work, enjoying the show.

I need to finish reading TH and you.

This should be interesting.

I just did a reread on myself and TH, and I interacted with him just as little as I thought.

[S~V~S]

I wasn't talking about the two of you interacting with each other, I just forgot to put a comma in.

But good to know you felt it important to check up on how much you two had interacted. Something civvies worry about all the time

[Canucklehead]

Daaaaammn! Today got good! I've got lots to say, but I just had a meeting with my scariest committee member (it went great! I didn't cry! He didn't even attempt to eat me alive!) so I've gotta have a drink to calm my lingering jitters and have a romp with my pup to work off my excess adrenaline (yes, meeting with my committee literally turns me into a anxious, hyperventilating wreck. Isn't grad school grand?), but once I'm done those things I'll be back to add my thoughts!

[Black Rock]

I'm not sure about a TH, in recent days I thought he had been sounding more like his civvie self. Unless he's tricking me again.

I'm going to read MM this day, his recent posts are rubbing me the wrong way and I want to make sure my gut is telling me what I think it is.

[Dom]

I don't know MM. I'm lost as fuck. I honestly don't mind being lynched today... As a civvie, this game has been a miserable existence. (Not that I haven't enjoyed it immensely Mongoose, because I have!) Being lynched would validate my thoughts on voting records, for one. It would also be a fun exercise in how discovery roles can be healthy for the game because of how easily they can be misinterpreted.

This feels really sincere to me...


I'll be voting for MM or TH-- but I'm leaning MM right now

[birdwithteeth11]

I did because your voting record is incriminating. And then you jump in and say we shouldn't look at voting records because we haven't lynched a baddie??? I don't understand that logic. I think you can still gather useful info from looking at 5 days' worth of voting records.

BWT, ALL of our voting records are incriminating. We have all voted for civilians, and none of us have helped lynch baddies. Do you see that that's my point? That you could make any individual's voting record look bad at this point? You yourself have thrown away your vote onto Ricochet every single lynch until today. Couldn't someone make a case that your voting pattern looks bad, like you've done here for mine? Until we lynch baddies, we don't have enough context. The irony is real.

Not really. I've given clear-cut reasons why I've voted for Rico and continued to do so. And I've already stated I felt like you went after certain people because they were easy cases (Made and MP). Maybe I shouldn't say you threw away other votes. Rather, you threw a vote onto someone you knew wouldn't get lynched so you could come back later and say, "Sure. I have a bad voting record. But then again, EVERYONE ELSE DOES! (:P)

That was way different. In that game, I made a case, but made it incredibly obvious it was based off of info I had gotten in a PM from the host on a previous night. If you feel like it came out of nowhere, it's because I spent almost 6 hours yesterday reading up on you and several other people I've been wondering about. So yeah, re-reading that much in a mafia game might change my mind a bit.

The circumstances might have been different but the end result is the same. You posted your case on me like 5 minutes into the Day phase, voted for me right off the bat in a game where we can't change votes, didn't wait to hear my response or anything, after having NEVER brought up my name before this... in a game where your role is outted thread info... my mind immediately went to certain conclusions as to what you could be doing. I'm sure the baddies' did as well. That's why this is so brilliant. All the baddies can hop on this bandwagon guilt-free. I wonder why no one's defending me?

The circumstances dictate everything. After my re-reading and then seeing how the night post went down, you were the first person I looked to. How you think I have certain info is beyond me however. But if you actually ARE curious, you have had chances to ask the host questions about my role and have not...

No one is defending you because I have a fairly solid (albeit not air-tight) case on you. And your baddie teammates are probably prepared to vote for you depending on if there is not a chance to save you.

[birdwithteeth11]

I don't know MM. I'm lost as fuck. I honestly don't mind being lynched today... As a civvie, this game has been a miserable existence. (Not that I haven't enjoyed it immensely Mongoose, because I have!) Being lynched would validate my thoughts on voting records, for one. It would also be a fun exercise in how discovery roles can be healthy for the game because of how easily they can be misinterpreted.

I've been lost for most of this game too. This is the first time I felt like I really had something I could grasp onto. I will admit I do regret voting for you as quickly as I did, and I wish I could have waited for your response. But a done deal is a done deal. I think at the end of Day 6, I will still feel I made a good decision.

I will, however, say this is the first thing you've said that might be sincere. But I'm not sure if you don't mind being lynched because you feel like we'll gain info, or if it's because you feel the need to shrug your shoulders and give up.

[Bass_the_Clever]

Well I'm going to go back and re-read TH but I still think people are over looking MM.

[S~V~S]

My initial read was very interesting. MP/Dom, you're out of control. I can't decide who I'm more suspicious of out of you two but you have both made my radar. Although I doubt I'll be voting for either of them because TH has gotten my eye His posts are reading baddie TH to me. I don't like how he is so dismissive of MP/Dom. Like he's trying to lead eyes away from a teammate.

Look at them if you want. I don't suspect them but that's just me. Other people were just as dismissive about this same issue, so it's weird that you're focused on me. You always think my posts read like baddie TH, you know that.

It's not just the dismissive but your posts in general. I'm not getting the baddie hunting civvie TH from any of them. I know I often (not always) suspect you, you're just that damn evil. I don't know TH I just have a feeling... tell me that I'm wrong and tell me why. I'm still open to new ideas at this point. I felt the same dismissive, baddie feeling from this post.

When I was rereading TH I found this post, and I think BR hit the nail right on the head~ "dismissive" is exactly how TH sounds.

It's primarily tone.

This post:

Sorry, Made, at the risk of sounding cliché, I really thought we had a baddie that time.

I PMed the host, and she told me that Uwe Boll can use the power at will, there doesn't seem to be a triggering mechanism.

We're being really crappy Civvies. I may have forgotten how to be an effective Civvie, after being Black Knight and Gollum and Miles Axelrod, and in the Monopoly game I was LMS very early on... I am just not a good Civvie anymore.

and this one:

TH, fantastic job on the Made research! That's looks like some top-quality analysis to me, and it put Made on top of my list, so I will vote for him now.

*votes Made*

Feel completely hollow and insincere. "We are being bad civvies" is I line I'm sure I've heard baddies say before, and his "goshamagolly, TH! You sure are smart! Made must be bad after all!" felt way too easy.

Combine that with the fact that he was one of the few people to get votes in before the thread was locked, and that is enough for me. I'll be voting Long Con tomorrow, but I would prefer if I were not alone.

You should have listened to me earlier.

Why? So we could lynch even more civvies?

Seems like you're trying to push my buttons, MM.

Now, see, it seemed to me that he was actually giving you a platform to sound sincere & impassioned, while throwing in a light sprinkling of distancing It was a good show.

But I would be happy with a vote for either MM or TH. I think MM was in the crosshairs yesterday, and TH pulled his Made case out of a hat, pushing all of us who had Made as a secondary suspicion over the edge, and pushing MM away from it. But totally apart from each other I don't think either of them is up to any good.

I have to do some stuff, and I am exhausted. I will finish this tomorrow, Blizzard Act 47 is coming tomorrow, so I am all time. I finished most of my reading, and will think on it and put my thoughts together.

Linki~ yeah, see? I bet alot of folks, like Bass, were looking at MM yesterday. And did not vote for him (although the thread locking kinda puts that all into the what if category). Personally, i think TH is more dangerous than MM, but I do think they both are bad.