Party Lines Mafia - Day Two: Veto

[Tamamono]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

January 19, 1994

New Brickland

Midnight

Representative J. Leroy King (jluck) from the great town of Silver City picks away at New Brickland mountainside. There's obviously no gold to be found there, but like that would stop him!

"Gosh, a stuffy government job really can get you down!" he muses aloud, "I'm finally back in my element - illegally mining for valuable minerals!"

As he goes back to his grueling work, he's apporached by a dark figure in white gloves...

"Say cheese!" says the figure as it captures the dastardly deed on camera.

"W-wait, no!" King stammers.

Now I ain't sayin' he's a gold digger...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

January 20, 1994

New Brickland

The wee hours of morning

A very cool looking old lady skates into the town plaza.

It's Representative Winnifred Karchevsky (Walter Kovacs)!

"Another wonderful night as the adventurous Madame K~! Hyahaha!" she cackles. "And none of my silly subordinates know about this wonderful second life! I could never be satisfied with that stuffy desk job - I need some adrenaline in my life!"

She is approached by a figure in white gloves.

"Hey, sorry to bother you like this, but do you have a camera on you? I need to take a picture of this bird over there." the figure says, holding out its hand gingerly.

"Hm?"

"Oh, sure." Karchevsky pulls a large camera out of only God knows where.

She hands it to the figure. "So where's this bird of yours??"

The figure begins to laugh slowly and leaps back.

"Say cheese, "Madame K!""

"WAIT - NO!" Karchevsky yells.

She's still the coolest cucumber in town.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

January 20, 1994

New Brickland

Mid-morning

J. Leroy King holds a press conference to adress his recent actions.

"My fellow countrymen... I feel absolutely terrible for what I've done. I assure you that I will be paying back the New Brickland Parks Department in full for any damage I've caused. Additionally... I will be resigning from my post as Representative from Silver City. I just want you all to know that I was always Loyal, even if my priorities weren't straight.

I'm very sorry, everyone. Very sorry."

His press secretary does not look amused.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

January 20, 1994

New Brickland

Mid-morning

Winnifred Karchevsky also holds a press conference - for obvious reasons.

"Yeah, I did it. So what?" she scowls, "It's better than serving you daft lot anyhow. All that time as a Loyal representative and this is how you repay me?? Now I'm free to be Madame K all I want. I'm done being your Representative. You hear? Done!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

January 20, 1994

New Brickland

Noon

The door to the legislature swings open and two familiar faces step inside.

The security guard steps aside for Justice Montgomery. He doesn't look happy.

"I expected better out of you all..." he begins...

"Carol Nottingham (Calanon) was as Loyal as they come! She did admit to having a bit of a pill problem, though, and will not be able to return to work until after her ethics trial in three weeks.

"I expect a crooked rep in cuffs by tonight! Octan cannot take our government hostage like this! Get to work."

Representative Dixon slams the gavel down. "This session has convened!"

In office:

The Speaker:

Siegfried Dixon - Representative from New Brickland: played by Speedy

The Old Dogs:

Maurice Teichman - Representative from Technic Valley: played by mostlytechnic

"Tiny" Peter Rutherford - Representative from Brickshire: played by TPRU

The Legislative Veterans:

Addie Tremain - Representative from Galactic City: played by adventurer1

Lloyd Spalding - Representative from Super City: played by Lego Spy

Bobby Benedict - Representative from New Brickland: played by Bob

Bjorn Borchard - Representative from Owlville: played by badboytje88

Bryant Laughlin - Representative from Brickshire: played by Brickelodeon

Sinclair Viola - Representative from Puesta del Sol: played by Scaevola

Gerald Hatley - Representative from Silver City: played by Goliath

The Freshmen:

Jacob Palacios - Representative from Galactic City: played by JackJonespaw

Pierce Davy - Representative from Puesta del Sol: played by Piratedave

Archie Matthews - Representative from Galactic City: played by Adam

Molly Callaghan - Representative from Brickshire: played by Mencot

Stanley Figurelli - Representative from the Mesolithic Farmlands: played by Stickfig

Out of office:

Douglas London - Impeached Day One - Octan

Carol Nottingham - played by Calanon - Impeached Day One - Loyal

J. Leroy King - played by jluck - Photographed Night One - Loyal

Winnifred Karchevsky - played by Walter Kovacs - Photographed Night One - Loyal

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Rules

1. Each player will be given a character to play, who will be aligned with either the Loyal Representatives or the Octan Corporation. To win the game, the Representaties must remove from office all the Octan Lobbyists, while the Octan Co. needs to outnumber the Reprsentatives. Third-Party (neutral) characters have their own win conditions as outlined in their roles.

2. Each day you will be able to vote to impeach a player. Voting should be done in the following format; Vote: Character (Player). Similarly, unvoting is to be done in the format; Unvote: Character (Player). No other format will be accepted. A majority vote is required to lynch a player.

3. A game day will last a maximum of 72 hours. You may not vote in the first 24 hours. The day will end when a majority vote has been reached. After the day has concluded, a night stage will commence, which will last a maximum of 48 hours. Night actions must be sent to the host in the first 24 hours of the night stage.

4. The alignment of impeached players, as well as those who are removed from office, will be revealed at the beginning of the following day.

5. You may not quote or pretend to quote anything sent to or from you in PM with the game host. This includes all the details of your character and role, as well as any night action results. Role claims and reporting of night action results are acceptable, but in your own words only. Do not attempt to use the structure of your role PM to your advantage.

6. Do not play the game outside the thread. Similarly, do not post out of character inside the thread; you must always play the role given to you. Game tactics and roles may only be discussed in the game thread or via PM with other players. Private discussion is done at your own risk and should be treated as part of the game.

7. If you are out of office, you may not post in thread or discuss the game with any of the players. Any information you had becomes void, and may not be passed on.

8. You may not edit your posts.

9. You must post in every day thread.

10. If you encounter a problem or have a question, please contact the host via PM.

11. Violation of the above rules will result in a warning from the host on your first offense, and a removal from the game on your second.

12. Violation of rule 7 will have a heavier penalty, made at the discretion of the Games Moderator.

[def]

Mmmmm. I was leaning scum on Winnifred. And Carol. No read on Leroy. Bad scumdar. Must be on the fritz.

[Lady K]

Well, this is depressing! Three of our own, how is that even possible?

[Piratedave84]

I was about to say that about Winifred; I had a scum read on her.

I'm surprised that Leroy was targeted; rather than Bjorn, Jacob or Addie who have contributed little to nothing on day 1.

I'm curious to see what these 3 have to say today.

[Bob]

I'm not surprised about Carol. Day One lynches are often unpredictable, and the accusations against her were not exactly the best. Leroy was an odd kill, as was Winnifred. Since so many people had a scum reading on Leroy, it's possible that a vigilante photographed him, meaning an Octan guy photographed Winnifred.

Well, this is depressing! Three of our own, how is that even possible?

More fluff from you. I'm not that surprised. Care to analyze anything? Perhaps voting patterns from yesterday? Anything other than a generic bland statement?

[Lady K]

There is always very little to contribute on Day 1. I said required fluff and was deemed suspicious for it, rather than say more fluff or restating, I simply kept quiet till I had something worthy to say.

As for Day 2, look to the voting pattern. I had suspicions on Rep Laughlin more so than Rep Nottingham so I kept my vote on him. He was the first to vote for Rep Nottingham and then said nothing after. There were others that posted fluff or fewer posts than me, we should see what they have to say.

I'm not surprised about Carol. Day One lynches are often unpredictable, and the accusations against her were not exactly the best. Leroy was an odd kill, as was Winnifred. Since so many people had a scum reading on Leroy, it's possible that a vigilante photographed him, meaning an Octan guy photographed Winnifred.

More fluff from you. I'm not that surprised. Care to analyze anything? Perhaps voting patterns from yesterday? Anything other than a generic bland statement?

Would you care to contribute something meaningful?

[Bob]

Would you care to contribute something meaningful?

I pointed out who possibly photographed each person, something that's slightly more important than who you voted for and your rationale for voting for them, which has nothing to do with voting patterns. You should have said why you voted for him yesterday when you cast your vote.

Your attempt to turn this around and cast suspicion on me is noted, though.

[Lady K]

I pointed out who possibly photographed each person, something that's slightly more important than who you voted for and your rationale for voting for them, which has nothing to do with voting patterns. You should have said why you voted for him yesterday when you cast your vote.

Your attempt to turn this around and cast suspicion on me is noted, though.

How could you possibly know who photographed who unless you had inside knowledge. Voting patterns are always important and should be looked at carefully. You started the votes against me and I consider that, and the fact you are trying to throw suspicions on me again, as worth watching you very carefully.

And I did state yesterday my reasons for voting for who I did.

[StickFig]

I do believe there should be a lynching but there are still 3 people who haven't voted yet. I could change my vote because I do respect the fact that Addie has made better defenses than Carol has. I'm not sure what timezone she's in though so there's that to consider as well. Nonetheless, I still trust neither one.

I said something like this early on - I didn't want to vote for a scum in the nominations, and now I don't want to be deciding vote. There's a possibility that Carol could be scum, yes, but also a possibility that she could be Loyal...and being the deciding vote on a Loyal's lynching...it's a terribly suspicious position to be in.

I want to hear from Gerald Hatley (Goliath) and Jacob Palacios (JackJonespaw) - both of them refused to work towards a lynch in the late hours of Day One.

[mostlytechnic]

<thumping the podium for effect, because I'm old and like to thump things>

I want to hear from EVERYONE! We had a terrible day 1 and things need explained. Why was our vig killing off taking pictures of a loyal townie? And which one did the vig go after?

The old timers are dropping like flies and I'm afraid for what day 2 will bring.

And some specific questions:

Molly Callaghan, why did you not vote? I'm disappointed in Carol not voting before she was impeached, but you? Shirking your duties? That should be impeachment right there!

Addie Tremain, why did you waste your vote like that? Especially with you having been the second potential impeachee, I would have expected you to jump on the Carol train!

Hrumph.

</thumping>

[Lady K]

I am sorry for my wasted vote. I really, really had a worse feeling about Bryant than Carol. I assumed we had a lynch and all would vote. I felt we needed to have a vote on him. I had no idea we would actually have three people abstain from voting and two that refused to cast the final vote.

I had retired for the evening by the time the voting had ended so I could not switch my vote.

[Bob]

How could you possibly know who photographed who unless you had inside knowledge. Voting patterns are always important and should be looked at carefully. You started the votes against me and I consider that, and the fact you are trying to throw suspicions on me again, as worth watching you very carefully.

And I did state yesterday my reasons for voting for who I did.

The key word in my statement is possibly. I used logical deductions in my reasoning as well. Yes, voting patterns are important. I never said they weren't. What I did say is that explaining your voting patterns as not important or really helpful.

Your attempts to twist my words around are also noted.

[Adam]

Molly Callaghan, why did you not vote? I'm disappointed in Carol not voting before she was impeached, but you? Shirking your duties? That should be impeachment right there!

Seconded. Molly (Mencot), I reiterate my poking from yesterday.

I'm not surprised about Carol. Day One lynches are often unpredictable, and the accusations against her were not exactly the best. Leroy was an odd kill, as was Winnifred. Since so many people had a scum reading on Leroy, it's possible that a vigilante photographed him, meaning an Octan guy photographed Winnifred.

Are you sure about that? Maybe I'm ignorant of some back-room-chatter (I am a freshman, after all), but I've been going through the transcripts from yesterday, and I haven't found many people claiming to be suspicious of either Leroy (jluck) or Winnifred (Walter Kovacs).

The most notable "motive," if you could call it such, that I've found for the bad press is Winnifred's (Walter Kovacs) antagonization of Gerald (Goliath). Her vote on him was merely a poke, but it got him quite riled up, and I can imagine that a less-experienced politician like Gerald (Goliath) might force her resignation in retaliation. I don't strongly believe that this is the case, but it is something to consider.

Winnifred (Walter Kovacs) was the more experienced of the two, and her poking of Gerald (Goliath) made her one of the leaders of the day. To me, that suggests that she was more likely a victim of the scum than the vigilante.

I'd be interested to hear other people's theories on the bad press from last night. I'd also like to hear more from Jacob (JackJonespaw), who at the end of the day delivered one of the shadiest statements I have ever heard in assembly. From the transcripts:

Apologies, apologies, the drink and lack of sleep caused me to pass out in this comfy corner over here for quite some time...

I said something like this early on - I didn't want to vote for a scum in the nominations, and now I don't want to be deciding vote. There's a possibility that Carol could be scum, yes, but also a possibility that she could be Loyal...and being the deciding vote on a Loyal's lynching...it's a terribly suspicious position to be in.

He ended up not voting because he didn't want to look scummy by possibly lynching a Loyal. Jacob (JackJonespaw), care to explain this remark and your refusal to work with the town during the impeachment processes? Not to mention your general lack of contribution yesterday?

[badboytje88]

Wow 3 loyals down already... Let's discuss the photographers. Who do you recon got captured by a vigilante and who got their photo taken by an Octan member.

I have to agree with Archie. Jacobs statements look and feel wrong. Care to explain Jacob?

[Bob]

Are you sure about that? Maybe I'm ignorant of some back-room-chatter (I am a freshman, after all), but I've been going through the transcripts from yesterday, and I haven't found many people claiming to be suspicious of either Leroy (jluck) or Winnifred (Walter Kovacs).

The most notable "motive," if you could call it such, that I've found for the bad press is Winnifred's (Walter Kovacs) antagonization of Gerald (Goliath). Her vote on him was merely a poke, but it got him quite riled up, and I can imagine that a less-experienced politician like Gerald (Goliath) might force her resignation in retaliation. I don't strongly believe that this is the case, but it is something to consider.

Winnifred (Walter Kovacs) was the more experienced of the two, and her poking of Gerald (Goliath) made her one of the leaders of the day. To me, that suggests that she was more likely a victim of the scum than the vigilante.

Is the second part about Winnifred being a victim of the scum not what I said earlier? I might not have explained the reasoning behind my deduction other than simply saying that if the vigilante likely targeted Leroy, then the scum targeted Winnifred. The scum likely targeted Winnifred due to her experience. However, your accusation about Gerald does warrant some further consideration.

Wow 3 loyals down already... Let's discuss the photographers. Who do you recon got captured by a vigilante and who got their photo taken by an Octan member.

Are you even reading the rest of the thread? That's pretty much all we've been talking about today.

Speaking of talking, nobody is speaking at all. Where are you all? Do you have anything to say? Who do you find suspicious? So far eight out of the fifteen remaining representatives have spoken today. Not speaking only helps the scum, you all should know that.

[JackJonespaw]

He ended up not voting because he didn't want to look scummy by possibly lynching a Loyal. Jacob (JackJonespaw), care to explain this remark and your refusal to work with the town during the impeachment processes? Not to mention your general lack of contribution yesterday?

I'm trying to get the point across that I feel like there are scum out there who are trying to manipulate us loyals into lynching our own, which happened yesterday. Your reasons for voting and lynching her are logical, and there was little to none evidence or leads or trails, and the assembly had to lynch someone. All I'm attempting to do is avoid lynching our own. I've repeated this multiple times at this point - abstaining is better than reducing our loyal numbers.

As for the lack of contribution - many people were throwing accusations at many others, I didn't want to add anything to it that would have made it even more complicated.

Now as for my own personal suspicions, I agree that something about Gerald's strange defensive nature due to just a poke and a nod was a bit...strange. No need to be that defensive unless one has something to hide.

[MagPiesRUs]

I'm trying to get the point across that I feel like there are scum out there who are trying to manipulate us loyals into lynching our own, which happened yesterday. Your reasons for voting and lynching her are logical, and there was little to none evidence or leads or trails, and the assembly had to lynch someone. All I'm attempting to do is avoid lynching our own. I've repeated this multiple times at this point - abstaining is better than reducing our loyal numbers.

As for the lack of contribution - many people were throwing accusations at many others, I didn't want to add anything to it that would have made it even more complicated.

Now as for my own personal suspicions, I agree that something about Gerald's strange defensive nature due to just a poke and a nod was a bit...strange. No need to be that defensive unless one has something to hide.

But we're not going to learn anything from no-lynches. Also, now you seem to be acting as if you knew Carol was going to turn up as a townie. If you were getting a strong town read from Carol, that would have been fine. Instead, you said it's possible she's scum, and it's possible that she isn't. If you have no strong feeling one way or the other, I'm not sure why you'd be so reluctant to vote. Besides, you said it is a "terribly suspicious position to be in", which sounds like you're more worried about how suspicious your vote might look than what is good for the town as a whole.

Speaking of suspicious votes...

Addie Tremain, why did you waste your vote like that? Especially with you having been the second potential impeachee, I would have expected you to jump on the Carol train!

Agreed. It strikes me as an attempt to avoid drawing suspicion for voting for a rival lynch candidate. Addie, I'm not sure why you would leave the lynch in the hands of others just to point out that Laughlin was suspicious.

[badboytje88]

Are you even reading the rest of the thread? That's pretty much all we've been talking about today.

Of course I read the rest and indeed it was mentioned before but only by you and a few who reacted on your statement. But I'd like to hear from the others what their view is on the situation.

Winnifred looks like a more likely vigilante victim to me.

Due to her problems with posting.

[Yzalirk]

I want to hear from Gerald Hatley (Goliath) and Jacob Palacios (JackJonespaw) - both of them refused to work towards a lynch in the late hours of Day One.

Exactly what is it that you want to hear? That I didn't want to contribute to the lynching of a possible Loyalist? Look, now there's three Loyalists out, which is no good as of now. I still truly believe Addie could be Octan due to her fluff posts, even on Day Two! I don't think that should slide anymore. All I can suggest as of right now is to look back, collect some evidence, and find out some possible suspects who where against J. Leroy and Winnifred. Or there could be the possiblity of them choosing those two without any real motive.

Well, since your so curious to hear from me, what do you think, Stanley?

[mostlytechnic]

1. Why did our speaker get so many votes so fast? Would the Octanites really have thrown themselves together like that? Or was it just a case of sheep following a known name? I'm sorta leaning towards the second.

2. A potential theory. If our Speaker be Octan, then I'd suggest that J Leroy King was the Octan victim and Winifred was the vig's target. Early on, King was not supportive of our Speaker and cautioned people against trusting too much. So it could be that they wanted to silence his voice of reason and caution.

[Adam]

Is the second part about Winnifred being a victim of the scum not what I said earlier? I might not have explained the reasoning behind my deduction other than simply saying that if the vigilante likely targeted Leroy, then the scum targeted Winnifred. The scum likely targeted Winnifred due to her experience. However, your accusation about Gerald does warrant some further consideration.

I wasn't disagreeing with you, I was just curious where you got the idea that a number of people suspected Leroy (jluck).

I'm trying to get the point across that I feel like there are scum out there who are trying to manipulate us loyals into lynching our own, which happened yesterday. Your reasons for voting and lynching her are logical, and there was little to none evidence or leads or trails, and the assembly had to lynch someone. All I'm attempting to do is avoid lynching our own. I've repeated this multiple times at this point - abstaining is better than reducing our loyal numbers.

As for the lack of contribution - many people were throwing accusations at many others, I didn't want to add anything to it that would have made it even more complicated.

But we're not going to learn anything from no-lynches. Also, now you seem to be acting as if you knew Carol was going to turn up as a townie. If you were getting a strong town read from Carol, that would have been fine. Instead, you said it's possible she's scum, and it's possible that she isn't. If you have no strong feeling one way or the other, I'm not sure why you'd be so reluctant to vote. Besides, you said it is a "terribly suspicious position to be in", which sounds like you're more worried about how suspicious your vote might look than what is good for the town as a whole.

I agree with Pete (TinyPiesRUs) here: you're contradicting yourself. The language of your original statement made it seem like you were more focused on covering your megablocks than trying to prevent the impeachment of a townie. If you felt that Carol (Calanon) was town, you should've said so and tried to suggest someone more appropriate.

Also, you just said that the "assembly had to lynch someone," but followed it up with the idea that "abstaining is better than reducing our loyal numbers." You can't have your cake and eat it too. One final point: if you're ever worried that you might overcomplicate things by contributing, don't be. More people talking means more information and intelligence that the town can analyze.

[Bob]

I wasn't disagreeing with you, I was just curious where you got the idea that a number of people suspected Leroy (jluck).

My apologies, actually. I misread both Siegfried and Pierce's posts, reading that they both thought that Leroy was suspicious rather than Winnifred. I admit my mistake and own up to it.

I'll be voting for Addie again today. Between fluff statements towards the end of Day One and now the start of Day Two and the attempts to twist my words around. Add to that her wasted vote yesterday and an attempt to cast potential suspicion on someone else. Some other people to watch out for, I think, is Bjorn and potentially our Speaker.

Hey, Representatives Callaghan, Viola, Laughlin, and Spalding. Care to speak up?

[Scaevola]

Ugh...Day 1 was not a successful day

I'm trying to get the point across that I feel like there are scum out there who are trying to manipulate us loyals into lynching our own, which happened yesterday. Your reasons for voting and lynching her are logical, and there was little to none evidence or leads or trails, and the assembly had to lynch someone. All I'm attempting to do is avoid lynching our own. I've repeated this multiple times at this point - abstaining is better than reducing our loyal numbers.

As for the lack of contribution - many people were throwing accusations at many others, I didn't want to add anything to it that would have made it even more complicated.

Now as for my own personal suspicions, I agree that something about Gerald's strange defensive nature due to just a poke and a nod was a bit...strange. No need to be that defensive unless one has something to hide.

I'm to understand you'd prefer another dizzied, paranoid, and altogether discombobulated Day 1? Any lynch gives us information and it was a necessary risk to take. Even so, seems you're very concerned about the integrity of your own reputation over the well-being of the Town, a very scummy attribute indeed.

I'm still suspicious of Rep. Tremain as well due to her lack of contribution and scummy voting tendency. I fail to understand why you wouldn't attempt to make a difference and vote for one of the major candidates as opposed to contribute to and ensure a Day 1 lynch.

Rep. Laughlin, I'm still waiting for you to explain your crummy justification for your speaker vote (and your abstinence from voting).

[Lego Spy]

Well, overall, I'd say Leroy was more likely a scum "photograph" than Winnifred, as he was mentioned much less, and made for a more "undercover" kill.

(Keep in mind that even if a member of the scum were to accuse a town player that didn't get lynched by the end of the day, it would be a pretty terrible decision for them to also photograph that person during the night.)

Assuming this is the case, the reasons for a vigilante pic of Winnifred are somewhat unsubstantial, so there are still questions to be asked there.

What I find odd is that the scum didn't target Siegfried. If he isn't scum, then why wouldn't the scum target him? The only reasons I can see are these:

1. Siegfried is scum himself.

2. The scum are worried that the town would catch on to the photographer of Siegfried by looking at those who accused him on day one.

[Lady K]

I am sorry for my wasted vote. I really, really had a worse feeling about Bryant than Carol. I assumed we had a lynch and all would vote. I felt we needed to have a vote on him. I had no idea we would actually have three people abstain from voting and two that refused to cast the final vote.

I had retired for the evening by the time the voting had ended so I could not switch my vote.

Here is my explanation, again, for those of you still questioning me. How can I change my vote after I went to bed?

But we're not going to learn anything from no-lynches. Also, now you seem to be acting as if you knew Carol was going to turn up as a townie. If you were getting a strong town read from Carol, that would have been fine. Instead, you said it's possible she's scum, and it's possible that she isn't. If you have no strong feeling one way or the other, I'm not sure why you'd be so reluctant to vote. Besides, you said it is a "terribly suspicious position to be in", which sounds like you're more worried about how suspicious your vote might look than what is good for the town as a whole.

Speaking of suspicious votes...

Agreed. It strikes me as an attempt to avoid drawing suspicion for voting for a rival lynch candidate. Addie, I'm not sure why you would leave the lynch in the hands of others just to point out that Laughlin was suspicious.

See above.

Of course I read the rest and indeed it was mentioned before but only by you and a few who reacted on your statement. But I'd like to hear from the others what their view is on the situation.

Winnifred looks like a more likely vigilante victim to me.

Due to her problems with posting.

I agree. Winnifred may have been the victim of our vig due to those being suspicious of her.

Exactly what is it that you want to hear? That I didn't want to contribute to the lynching of a possible Loyalist? Look, now there's three Loyalists out, which is no good as of now. I still truly believe Addie could be Octan due to her fluff posts, even on Day Two! I don't think that should slide anymore. All I can suggest as of right now is to look back, collect some evidence, and find out some possible suspects who where against J. Leroy and Winnifred. Or there could be the possiblity of them choosing those two without any real motive.

Well, since your so curious to hear from me, what do you think, Stanley?

I already explained my fluff, which was no more than others fluff. What did you want me to do, make baseless accusations? Argue with other players? Winnifred poked at you and you got very defensive. Maybe you are the one we should watch today. I had nothing useful to contribute.

My apologies, actually. I misread both Siegfried and Pierce's posts, reading that they both thought that Leroy was suspicious rather than Winnifred. I admit my mistake and own up to it.

I'll be voting for Addie again today. Between fluff statements towards the end of Day One and now the start of Day Two and the attempts to twist my words around. Add to that her wasted vote yesterday and an attempt to cast potential suspicion on someone else. Some other people to watch out for, I think, is Bjorn and potentially our Speaker.

Hey, Representatives Callaghan, Viola, Laughlin, and Spalding. Care to speak up?

I am not twisting your words around. But you are sure trying to keep attention of yourself. Any reason for that?

Ugh...Day 1 was not a successful day

I'm to understand you'd prefer another dizzied, paranoid, and altogether discombobulated Day 1? Any lynch gives us information and it was a necessary risk to take. Even so, seems you're very concerned about the integrity of your own reputation over the well-being of the Town, a very scummy attribute indeed.

I'm still suspicious of Rep. Tremain as well due to her lack of contribution and scummy voting tendency. I fail to understand why you wouldn't attempt to make a difference and vote for one of the major candidates as opposed to contribute to and ensure a Day 1 lynch.

Rep. Laughlin, I'm still waiting for you to explain your crummy justification for your speaker vote (and your abstinence from voting).

Already explained before and above.