193 replies to this topic

[PsyKater]

Zachary (zakura), on 26 September 2012 - 12:14 AM, said:

"Ahh, I see sausages on the ground, the murderer must be a sausage eater ."

Hey Zachary, is that everything you have to contribute? Don't you have to say anything more?

Kendra (Stormblessed), on 26 September 2012 - 12:42 AM, said:

Now I have arrived, and are ready to take down some scummy scum.

Kendra (Stormblessed), on 26 September 2012 - 03:23 AM, said:

I'm still here, and I feel like TrumpetKing isn't adding anything to the conversation.

Kendra (Stormblessed), on 26 September 2012 - 04:04 AM, said:

I wo'l ike to ay tha the'r might no be nothing to sa', but tha' no reason to waste time. I sho' know, I've recieved hero of the year awads.

(I would like to say that there might be nothing to say, but that isn't a reason to waste time. I should know. I've received hero of the year awards.)

Kendra, why are you so superficial? You seem not be willing to look into this case really deep. You made an early very random accusation and now you said that you do not feel comfortable to vote yet. That's ok, as this fits to me as well, but the way you explain it seems so indifferent to this whole situation. Aren't you aware of the fact that we could get killed this night already?

Amelia (TheBoyWonder), on 25 September 2012 - 07:09 PM, said:

It seems the chief is dead. A good start today could give us an advantage in the days to come.

Amelia (TheBoyWonder), on 26 September 2012 - 03:23 PM, said:

Can we please stop all this talk about coffee? I. Hate the stuff.


May I just point out, there is no facts today to explain. Although I find your behavior quite odd.

Amelia (TheBoyWonder), on 26 September 2012 - 04:04 PM, said:

I have to agree, a lot has happened does seem suspicious.

Amelia (TheBoyWonder), on 26 September 2012 - 09:05 PM, said:

Vote: Isaac (TrumpetKing67)

He seems suspicious to me, and his comment that a lot has happened makes me feel suspicious.

Sorry, Amelia but you have to explain your odd behaviour to me. Look at what you said so far. Your first statement is as stale as possible. Then you rumble around stating that there is nothing to argue about today (!!?!). Suddenly a lot has happened what (?) seems suspicious. And then you take up the first opportunity to vote for someone randomly. Please explain!

Isaac (TrumpetKing67), on 27 September 2012 - 03:08 AM, said:

Mark, this saying is what caused my suspiscion. This now leads me to believe both Jean and Ian are scummy.

You got a point here that raised to me as well. The argument could really be made up. But perhaps only one of them is scum and tries to manipulate us with his votes.

Isaac (TrumpetKing67), on 27 September 2012 - 06:22 AM, said:

Well, since I don't think he will how up soon:

Unvote: Ian (Tazmaniac)

Vote: Jean (Endgame)

What do you try to achieve by switching your votes without awaiting responses, Isaac? Did you slip here once again? You never explained you behaviour to us. Staying here and swiping around, raising accusations as you like and all. Kind of frightens me.  

Ian (Tazmaniac), on 27 September 2012 - 07:29 AM, said:

I promise you, my sleepy eyed friend, that I am not scum.

Oh, well, now all of my suspicions about you fall away.  

[badboytje88]

Endgame, on 27 September 2012 - 12:10 AM, said:

So YOU can make completely unfounded claims to "get the ball rolling", admitting we have nothing to go off of but microscopic and probably insignificant details, and now you want me to pull out a 100% validity of my innocence? Bah, lawyers.

I'll play your game. Your very scummy action was directed at me - in other words, to lynch me. This would point to you being scum. A scum would never point the finger at his own. Therefore, I am innocent.

You're hounding me for absolutley no good reason, and I will use these attacks against me to prove my innocence.

I have to say, the case they have against you Jean isn't very strong at all. Weak one might say. But your reaction, the one I quoted above, strikes me as very odd.

First of all day one lynches are always based on very insignificant details. We haven't got any real evidence so all we have to work with is what people say and sometimes a insignificant detail actually leads to a successful conviction.

Secondly, if someone votes for you you can't just say you voted for me, I've done nothing wrong thus you must be the scummiest of scum! You stay calm and try to defend yourself. You do not start pointing fingers. Scum wants to blend in not to stand out in the crowd. The first persons to vote stand out enormously. If you are the first one to vote against someone, people expect you to have a very good reason to do so. If it ends up in a lynch and the lynched person turns out to be one of the good guys, the first person people look at are the ones who lead the lynch.

Thirdly, you say that since a scummy scumbag voted for you that this proves your innocence? The only thing that truly proves your innocence is a investigation or if you pee in this cup.

To sum this all up. Someone voted on you based on nothing just to get the ball rolling. You freak out, start pointing fingers and claiming that person must be scum and that you are now proven to be as clean as fresh bed sheets.

To me this is not enough to vote for you. To me this means you are either very eager to root out the scum but a bit inexperienced, or you are a very very stressed out member of the mafia.


To lighten this all up I shall end this with a song:

I got you in the palm of my hand
Wanna put something hot in you
So hot that you can't stand.

Gonna take you to my lips
Empty out every last drop
So thirsty for what's in you baby
That I can't stop

In the middle of the night, I'm in bed alone
Don't care if you're glass, paper, styrofoam
When I need some water, baby
Coffee or urin
You're the only thing, I wanna put them in
My cup, my cup
(Ahh)

PsyKater, on 27 September 2012 - 08:07 AM, said:

Oh, well, now all of my suspicions about you fall away.  

I think I love you  

[Tazmaniac]

PsyKater, on 27 September 2012 - 08:07 AM, said:

Oh, well, now all of my suspicions about you fall away.

The first words of sanity I've heard all day.

[Ferrik]

Tazmaniac, on 27 September 2012 - 07:29 AM, said:

I promise you, my sleepy eyed friend, that I am not scum.

Assurance that you're not scum simply isn't enough. What we need is evidence and reasoning...

[Tazmaniac]

Ferrik, on 27 September 2012 - 09:48 AM, said:

Assurance that you're not scum simply isn't enough. What we need is evidence and reasoning...

I thought I made it pretty clear that all I did was throw a vote out there and see what reactions I'd get, and as our friend with the great hair (Adam) pointed out, a very jumpy Jean was all to ready to vote against me rather then keep his cool and dismiss my false claims.
When I first started the voting we had nothing to go on, nothing, I think the reactions from you lot and the direction questioning has taken has my kick start to thank, It might not seem like the nice guy thing to do but I wanted answers and I wasn't going to get anything without some prodding.

Bad form? maybe
Scummy? No

[TheBoyWonder]

Andrea, my second comment was quite early on, when nothing had really happened.

As from the early vote, I felt Isaac was suspicious.

And my third comment was a response based on one of Isaacs comments.

[Superficial Username]

Scorpiox, on 26 September 2012 - 09:55 PM, said:

Another one who has earned themselves a note in my books, is Phyllis. While her ideas may seem innocent, I've seen very many times like this before where the mobsters have tried to stop a lynch. It's all very nice for her to sneak in a little suggestion for us, we've got to be careful of things like this. Just consider yourself under my watch, girl.

Fair enough I suppose. I'm not trying to stop a lynch though. I was only suggesting that if nothing substantial comes up, then I might use my vote that way, not that everyone do that. I don't want the town to go without a lynch, you are right that it is our best weapon, Phil.

Anyway, the argument that came up while a was away makes me think I can use my vote well, though I'm still not ready to vote.

Endgame, on 26 September 2012 - 10:12 PM, said:

"Time to borrow something I saw from that old Nebula Battle movie, Space Monk Monastery:

Finger of Suspicion: Phyllis (Supercficial Username)[/b]

No lynches are suspicious. What say you? This finger may become a vote if your defense doesn't seem sincere."

I'm not saying don't lynch.

Tazmaniac, on 27 September 2012 - 01:05 AM, said:

I was just trying to gauge a response from our bearded friend, I still have plenty of time to retract my vote.
The fact no one jumped on the band wagon when I started a vote would seem to suggest I have no accomplices , but now that Jared has piped up in defence of Jean, one has to wonder if they may be in kahoots..... It warrants mention.

Yes, but what if all the scum jumped on at once and "our bearded friend" flipped town?

[PsyKater]

Well, Ian, to be fair, this is the first proper statement you made about your approach.

As I am still unsure about who to vote for but seeing that we have still a lot of time left to find some more evidence against someone (the afternoon just started), I'd like to post my list of suspects (again) to give them the chance to response. Alphabetical order  

Amelia, just have a look at my notes about you and go into them!

Ian, your accusations against Jean in particular seemed very strange, but they make much more sense to me right now. But you are not yet off my list. I just don't like lawyers. I'll keep my eye on you.

Isaac, what's the matter with you? It seems you are drunk and stumble across your mobp and bucket. Don't you know how to hide your scumminess or why are you acting like this?

Jean, nice that you are participating so much at our conversation and discussion. But Isaac and Adam mentioned a very strong case against you, I think. How do you defense?

Kendra, you did not go into my former questions. Could you please answer?

Samantha (DarthPotato), on 25 September 2012 - 10:30 PM, said:

This is horrible.    Out of all the times I could've been locked up here it had to be now.    You better reveal your selfs, Mafiosos, or you're gonna get it.  

Samantha (DarthPotato), on 26 September 2012 - 01:42 PM, said:

Sorry if you found the wink odd, but that was a response to Jean because I thought my sexuality frightened him.

I may not be a cop, but I'd like some coffee too.

Samantha, You say this wink was meant for Jean as he could be frightened by your sexuality. Even though he did not realize you until that moment? Or did you have conversation in private before? Then again I don't see why the wink at the end of the sentence adressing the scum should refer to someone you have not been spoken to yet. The wink on itself might not be a big deal, but your reaction is very strange.

Zachary, please wake up and contribute at least a little. Won't be easier the longer you wait! Or do you have something to hide?

Quite a long list and not meant to be complete.
I am very curious about your responses. Please dispel my suspicions! I do not want to be responsible for anyone innocent being harmed.  

[Endgame]

A very nice case? Let us go over the timeline a bit.

-Ian ponts a finge aat me for no apparent reason.
-It seems like he was trying to start a bandwagon on me. His future words "Well, it seems that I have no accomplices" would seem to make this all a bit more likely, only stating he was probing me after.
-No town in their right mind would point a finger at someone for a reason like that.
-Thus, I was very suspicious of Ian being a scummy scummeroo.
-I made the arguement that, since Ian was appearing very scummy at the time (in my eyes) if he was pointing the finger at me, I was townie by proxy. (Which I am!)
-Now, my reverse vote was a bit angry, I admit. Ian's accusation was baseless and he appears a bit fickle at the time, though Isaac is acting like a drunkard with a mop.

Now everything is confusing, with votes being flung around for no apparent reason! I'll Unvote: Ian Tazmanaic for now.

Also, I misread Phyllis's words, going back. I thought she was suggesting a no lynch.

Any other questions?

[Endgame]

Gakk, forot to mention a few things.

-Reading back, Ian was obviously not voting to probe from the start. He explicitly said "well, nobody has hopped on the bandwagon" and later says he just likes to probe people. (In the same post, no less) He obviously wanted more votes against me.

-This leads to my "scum wouldn't vote for their own." It was a hypothetical situation. Ian's attempts seemed like he wanted a bandwagon at the time, bandwagonning me for no good reason. My scumdar goes barking mad. Thus? I said that if I was scum, he was appearing far more scummy than I and it wouldn't make sense for him to point the finger at me if I was apparently oh-so-scummy. The main reason I retracted my vote was to see more from Sweepy before I place it again. I in no way meant that I was scum.

[Tazmaniac]

Endgame, on 27 September 2012 - 12:30 PM, said:

Gakk, forot to mention a few things.

-Reading back, Ian was obviously not voting to probe from the start. He explicitly said "well, nobody has hopped on the bandwagon" and later says he just likes to probe people. (In the same post, no less) He obviously wanted more votes against me.

-This leads to my "scum wouldn't vote for their own." It was a hypothetical situation. Ian's attempts seemed like he wanted a bandwagon at the time, bandwagonning me for no good reason. My scumdar goes barking mad. Thus? I said that if I was scum, he was appearing far more scummy than I and it wouldn't make sense for him to point the finger at me if I was apparently oh-so-scummy. The main reason I retracted my vote was to see more from Sweepy before I place it again. I in no way meant that I was scum.

"Scum wouldn't vote for their own" is a catchy little saying but remember I don't know who's town and who's scum so me pointing you out and you being a townie, doesn't make me a scum by default.

[Endgame]

Tazmaniac, on 27 September 2012 - 12:37 PM, said:

"Scum wouldn't vote for their own" is a catchy little saying but remember I don't know who's town and who's scum so me pointing you out and you being a townie, doesn't make me a scum by default.

"But do you or do you not admit to trying to bandwagon me?

The court demands an answer, dagnabbit!"

[Tazmaniac]

Endgame, on 27 September 2012 - 12:44 PM, said:

"But do you or do you not admit to trying to bandwagon me?

The court demands an answer, dagnabbit!"

I'm not sure what to "Bandwagon you" would be? I'm guessing you thought I was trying to get you lynched, this was not the case I just wanted to see who would say and do what. sorry for any inconvenience.

[Endgame]

Tazmaniac, on 27 September 2012 - 01:00 PM, said:

I'm not sure what to "Bandwagon you" would be? I'm guessing you thought I was trying to get you lynched, this was not the case I just wanted to see who would say and do what. sorry for any inconvenience.

Harumph.

I'll be keeping my eye on you, but currently, it seems that Isaac is the better target at the time being. I'll wait for his respone before I place a vote, but right now it's probably between you and Sweepy.

[TrumpetKing]

PsyKater, on 27 September 2012 - 08:07 AM, said:

You got a point here that raised to me as well. The argument could really be made up. But perhaps only one of them is scum and tries to manipulate us with his votes.

What do you try to achieve by switching your votes without awaiting responses, Isaac? Did you slip here once again? You never explained you behaviour to us. Staying here and swiping around, raising accusations as you like and all. Kind of frightens me.  

PsyKater, on 27 September 2012 - 11:46 AM, said:

Isaac, what's the matter with you? It seems you are drunk and stumble across your mobp and bucket. Don't you know how to hide your scumminess or why are you acting like this?

Endgame, on 27 September 2012 - 12:01 PM, said:

-Now, my reverse vote was a bit angry, I admit. Ian's accusation was baseless and he appears a bit fickle at the time, though Isaac is acting like a drunkard with a mop.

Endgame, on 27 September 2012 - 12:30 PM, said:

-This leads to my "scum wouldn't vote for their own." It was a hypothetical situation. Ian's attempts seemed like he wanted a bandwagon at the time, bandwagonning me for no good reason. My scumdar goes barking mad. Thus? I said that if I was scum, he was appearing far more scummy than I and it wouldn't make sense for him to point the finger at me if I was apparently oh-so-scummy. The main reason I retracted my vote was to see more from Sweepy before I place it again. I in no way meant that I was scum.

Note 1: I changed my vote because I didn't think he would have a worthy response Amelia. that doesn't mean I'm scum.

Note 2: Well, considering I'm not scum, I've got nothing to hide.

Note 3:How am I acting drunk? Care to explain? If it is because of my voting choices, I have explained every one of them.

Note 4: I'm still not understanding this situation. If it was a hypothetical statement, you surely would have said that when you first mentioned it, not when you are being bombarded with questions.

[PsyKater]

Henrietta (Masked Builder), on 27 September 2012 - 01:41 AM, said:

My my boys, you are quite hasty.  We need to look at all of the evidence, which I agree there isn't much, before we come to a decision.

Henrietta, did you already look? I am quite curious about your thougts as you did not contribute that much until now.   Remember that this always draws attention to you especially on day one, when there is nothing else than our statements is there to go after.   Quite suspicious, I think.  

I guess I will make me a cup of tea now. Maybe then I will be less frightened about the things that are going on here.

[Stormblessed]

I will admit that what I have said would be scummy, but this is the first day. And, more importantly, I know nothing. Accusing someone at this stage was to see their reaction, not necessarily to get a lynch. A scum wouldn't admit to being scum, so accusing him like that seems pointless. It might revel that he might be scum, for otherwise he wouldn't have made the connection, but at least right now, it seems unlikely.

That was a good nap I had.

[Scorpiox]

Endgame, on 27 September 2012 - 12:01 PM, said:

A very nice case? Let us go over the timeline a bit.

-Ian ponts a finger at me for no apparent reason.
-It seems like he was trying to start a bandwagon on me. His future words "Well, it seems that I have no accomplices" would seem to make this all a bit more likely, only stating he was probing me after.
-No town in their right mind would point a finger at someone for a reason like that.
-Thus, I was very suspicious of Ian being a scummy scummeroo.
-I made the arguement that, since Ian was appearing very scummy at the time (in my eyes) if he was pointing the finger at me, I was townie by proxy. (Which I am!)
-Now, my reverse vote was a bit angry, I admit. Ian's accusation was baseless and he appears a bit fickle at the time, though Isaac is acting like a drunkard with a mop.

Now everything is confusing, with votes being flung around for no apparent reason! I'll Unvote: Ian Tazmanaic for now.

While his case against you was non-existant, it is your reaction that intrigues me. If you've got nothing to hide, why the frantic reaction and retaliation vote? He himself votes for you, and you frantically vote back and shout around 'help help! He's trying to bandwagon me!'? Wow, looks like the early stages of flailing to me. I do not see how one vote is attempting a bandwagon, and even so, what has an innocent member of our community got to fear from such a thing? It does not look to my eye how he was 'attempting a bandwagon' like you look to fear, but that he was trying a poke you guage your response, which you have shown of so beautifully. I'm surprised that you apparently cannot see that his vote on you was little more than a 'sting', like we used to do back in the days. I'f you'd smiled and told us all how his 'accusation' was bollocks, we'd thought nothing of it, but how you reacted has raised a few of my well-experianced eyebrows. You seem mighty jumpy, Sir.

And he is so very suspicious is he, and only because he voted for you? What if it had been someone other, would you have been so curious? I doubt it, because a member of the Mafia would love to sit back and watch the good guys vote each other off. And now, Ian lurking with his dastardly plans, you choose to unvote him, despite your suspicions? Another great trip there, choosing to abandon your go when the others do. It's quite obvious now that his little prod did yield results after all, as we've got ourselves a potential mobster here. Let's see what happens, shall we?

Vote: Jean (Endgame)

[JaseTJ]

I find 'I know nothing' to be an interesting defense to attempt proving that you're not mafia, because the mafia do know a lot, and it sure would be easy to act clueless... (Ian and Kedra)

[Rick]

Lesson Four: Night Actions

Some members of the Town and possibly also some members of the Mafia have Night Actions. Generally, the number and type of Night Actions in a game are not known in advance. In most games, the Town at least have a Cop and a Doctor and the Mafia have a Roleblocker. Every Night, the Mafia have a chance to kill a member of the Town. Depending on the setup of the game, the Mafia either have a dedicated killer or can decide every Night who performs the kill. If the Mafia have a dedicated killer, the kill action passes on to another member of the Mafia when their killer is killed.

As soon as the Day phase ends, the Night phase starts and the game host will ask for Night Actions to be sent in. Within the first 24 hours of the Night phase, players with Night Actions have to send a PM to the host. The other players do not have to do anything. Use the Role PM you were sent by the host for sending in your Night Action and clearly specify your target (specify both the player and the character name to avoid misunderstandings). If you decide to not use your Night Action on any given Night, be sure to also let the host know. The sooner you send in your Night Actions, the sooner the new Day phase can start.

Remember to send in your Night Action through your Role PM during the first 24 hours of the Night. Don't post them in the thread and, as always, when in doubt, PM the hosts using your Role PM.

[Rick]

Vote Tally

Isaac (TrumpetKing67): 1 vote (TheBoyWonder)

Jean (Endgame): 2 votes (TrumpetKing67, Scorpiox)


24 Hours remain in Day 1

[Endgame]

Scorpiox, on 27 September 2012 - 04:44 PM, said:

While his case against you was non-existant, it is your reaction that intrigues me. If you've got nothing to hide, why the frantic reaction and retaliation vote? He himself votes for you, and you frantically vote back and shout around 'help help! He's trying to bandwagon me!'? Wow, looks like the early stages of flailing to me. I do not see how one vote is attempting a bandwagon, and even so, what has an innocent member of our community got to fear from such a thing? It does not look to my eye how he was 'attempting a bandwagon' like you look to fear, but that he was trying a poke you guage your response, which you have shown of so beautifully. I'm surprised that you apparently cannot see that his vote on you was little more than a 'sting', like we used to do back in the days. I'f you'd smiled and told us all how his 'accusation' was bollocks, we'd thought nothing of it, but how you reacted has raised a few of my well-experianced eyebrows. You seem mighty jumpy, Sir.

And he is so very suspicious is he, and only because he voted for you? What if it had been someone other, would you have been so curious? I doubt it, because a member of the Mafia would love to sit back and watch the good guys vote each other off. And now, Ian lurking with his dastardly plans, you choose to unvote him, despite your suspicions? Another great trip there, choosing to abandon your go when the others do. It's quite obvious now that his little prod did yield results after all, as we've got ourselves a potential mobster here. Let's see what happens, shall we?

Vote: Jean (Endgame)

I believe I voted for him on the suspicion of him being scum, that and I'm currently conflicated between he and Ian. I belive the other bailed on Ian too because of this same reason, unless acting on a similar logic as someone is scummy.

Flailing implies I have not put any thought behind my actions, lad: which I have done.

Aren't you saying this a bit after the fact, detective? All of your reasoning is based off of my previous actions, which I have explained. You seem to also enjoy force-feeding words into my mouth. If Ian did that to someone else, a similar fiasco would most likely occur.

Besides, your arguement boils down to "he is jumpy".

-It is day one.
-At the time we had virtually nothing to go by.
-Someone randomly throws a vote at me for no apparent reason.
-I retaliate, he basically outright states he was trying to start a bandwagon (later light was shed on the fact that it wasn't just a probe to me either)

My vote placement makes sense that early in the day before Isaac started mucking up this entire process (rather uncahracteristic janitor). You said it yourself, detective: a lynch is imperative. With nothing to go by except Ian's incredibly hasty and seemingly scummy actions at the time, I fail to see how my vote was that scummy.

Isaac: is it my fault if I say "cat" and you thought "dog"? It was pretty obvious it was hypothetical.

[Masked Builder]

PsyKater, on 27 September 2012 - 03:25 PM, said:

Henrietta, did you already look? I am quite curious about your thougts as you did not contribute that much until now.   Remember that this always draws attention to you especially on day one, when there is nothing else than our statements is there to go after.   Quite suspicious, I think.  

No, not really.  I've done it now though.  I was talking seeing if I could get one of the scum to slip up.  

Endgame, on 27 September 2012 - 12:01 PM, said:

-Ian ponts a finge aat me for no apparent reason.
-It seems like he was trying to start a bandwagon on me. His future words "Well, it seems that I have no accomplices" would seem to make this all a bit more likely, only stating he was probing me after.
-No town in their right mind would point a finger at someone for a reason like that.
-Thus, I was very suspicious of Ian being a scummy scummeroo.
-I made the arguement that, since Ian was appearing very scummy at the time (in my eyes) if he was pointing the finger at me, I was townie by proxy. (Which I am!)
-Now, my reverse vote was a bit angry, I admit. Ian's accusation was baseless and he appears a bit fickle at the time, though Isaac is acting like a drunkard with a mop.

I really don't like this, it didn't seem like he was bandwagoning him to me, so I will.

Vote: Jean (Endgame)

[Scorpiox]

Endgame, on 27 September 2012 - 08:56 PM, said:

I believe I voted for him on the suspicion of him being scum, that and I'm currently conflicated between he and Ian. I belive the other bailed on Ian too because of this same reason, unless acting on a similar logic as someone is scummy.

Flailing implies I have not put any thought behind my actions, lad: which I have done.

Aren't you saying this a bit after the fact, detective? All of your reasoning is based off of my previous actions, which I have explained. You seem to also enjoy force-feeding words into my mouth. If Ian did that to someone else, a similar fiasco would most likely occur.

Besides, your arguement boils down to "he is jumpy".

-It is day one.
-At the time we had virtually nothing to go by.
-Someone randomly throws a vote at me for no apparent reason.
-I retaliate, he basically outright states he was trying to start a bandwagon (later light was shed on the fact that it wasn't just a probe to me either)

My vote placement makes sense that early in the day before Isaac started mucking up this entire process (rather uncahracteristic janitor). You said it yourself, detective: a lynch is imperative. With nothing to go by except Ian's incredibly hasty and seemingly scummy actions at the time, I fail to see how my vote was that scummy.

Isaac: is it my fault if I say "cat" and you thought "dog"? It was pretty obvious it was hypothetical.

If you're so suspicious of him being one of the Mafia, then why unvote him? Isn't that a little unusual thing to do for a good guy?

So you 'thought' properly about your actions before enacting them? Yet you said yourself that you voted back for him partly out of anger, contridicting yourself again? And a retaliation vote is far from what I would call a measured reaction.

It is not my fault that this all happens while I'm asleep or at work typing up the case notes, and the time difference doesn't make the points any less relevent. Or would you have us just forget, Jimmy?

I remain unconvinced, sir.

[DarthPotato]

The case against Jean is pretty interesting... he does seem pretty jumpy. And Jean, I don't think Ian was accusing you to start a bandwagon, wasn't it because he wanted to see who would join him? Or what the reactions would be? At the moment, this seems like the best case to me, but you can still convince me otherwise.
Vote: Jean (Endgame)