Shadows

This is absolutely amazing, I it! You are clearly a very talented artist and I hope to see more of your work around here in the future. You also have an appropriate tag for your profile...

Introducing Lord Shadows, a gentleman of leisure and dashingly handsome ladies man who manages to find an occasional spare moment to hunt down evildoers and bring them to his own personal brand of justice. Don't ask. A better picture may follow, but it's hard to get him to stay in one place long enough to take one.

Wasn't that like day 4, when Captain Pegleg (?) was covered in dragon crap during one of our illustrious hosts rambling sessions? Or maybe he did it to himself, I just remember it had something to do with food and it was disgusting and yes, perhaps we can do that. If not, we'll destroy the host, that's just about as good.

Dolores, yeah. You created her as an unnamed note writer and then named her on the next page. And giant megablocking carrots. Speaking of megablocking carrots, I'm not sure if you ever knew that I got revenge on our dear Lord Dragonator during the PoP Bloodbath where I had someone kill him by giant carrot in the megablocks. Oh, and he was playing Mustafa at the time. megabluck 'em, megabluck 'em all. With giant carrots. IN THE megablocks. Here we go again. Oh look, a note... Hmmm. I would like to vote for lord Stinklepants the stinkiest lord of pants and kumquats and imaginary note writing (there were actually votes in the game that were written like that ... AND ACCEPTED!)

You're much further along in September, it seems Lady Dolores sprung forth on day 2 (the earliest posts weren't ascribed to her, she appears a little later), back in June. JUNE. JUNE TO SEPTEMBER. It's almost like Red Moon or MotEE. Perhaps one of them was hit by a certain Greek Armor... Oh, here's another note: Who's writing these notes? Is it me? Where's me hand? *locates hand* I'm keeping my eye on you... And yes, inline quoting of locked topics is a bitch now. Seriously, it's like a whole different world in there, an insane world of noobs and weirdos and those are just Draggy. It's scary to read that now... Good times.

All confirmed, it won't be allowed at any point, there are just too many potential problems.

This looks like a lot of fun and looking at my avatar, I realise I don't qualify since I'm probably mostly considered a villain (by those who don't have the sense to know any better) and this isn't villain month. And it isn't new. I'll have to make something shortly. It's still going to have my normal head and probably dress in black. Or wear a hat. Thanks for running this!

I'm not sure I've ever commented in here before but I have to say I do check in often and keep up with the new work as it appears and I'm quite impressed by the depth of talent exposed by this topic. It's just amazing to me and I want to thank all of you for sharing it with us and for adding a little more art to a world that desperately needs it.

Shadows fears not the internet and it's oddities. Magical girls. It looks like an interesting genre.

People were asking? They should have checked the tutorial, it's already there, but thanks for trying to help.

Interesting. Shows I never go to my profile, huh?

Taun Taun.

No. I don't think we've ever had that. You can figure it out yourself, naturally.

And then what do you do when it's a Friends modular, or a firehouse with a really nice vehicle, or ... see the problem?

Since no one knew or something, I just tossed a 70x70 EB logo into that file. It should do for now, but as there was no link, I can't actually check it.

The number one complaint I see in the IPB forums is the inability to switch to the old standard editor and they refuse to listen. It's the biggest reason we waited so long to update and sadly, there is nothing we can do about it.

Thanks to TPRU and everyone except the bastard who killed me for a fantastic but decidedly short game. I will now resume my dream of leading a cult in the name of Tohstre. Might I interest any of you in a little tasty salvation? Plenty of time left.

Anyone happen to know what size image it wants?

Pinned. Thanks for organizing this.

And then the conclusion from TPRU. Vote Tally Bergulf (badboytje88)- 3 votes (Etzel, Pandora, Palathadric) Danr the Dragon-Slayer (Dannylonglegs)- 17 votes (Hinckley, Sandy, CallMePie, Rick, CorneliusMurdock, Capt. Redblade, JimButcher, Bob, Scubacarrot, Scouty, DarkDragon, Sisco, Shadows, Chromeknight, badboytje88, Captain Genaro, Dragonator) Cranebeinn (Cromeknight)- 1 vote (fhomess) Chief Mursi (CorneliusMurdock)- 1 vote (Dannylonglegs) Sigmund (Sisco) - 1 vote (Fugazi) The einherjar had come to a decision. They believed that Danr the Dragon-Slayer (Dannylonglegs) was a vile servant of Loki. Ragnar called him to the front of the hall, and Danr stepped forward. Harald tried to pull Ragnar aside and talk him out of this. "We can't start killing members of this hall without concrete evidence! This case would never hold up in a thingstead. What is Odin going to do when he hears about-" ... But Ragnar wasn't listening. A bloodlust had already taken hold of him, and with one stroke he chopped Danr's head clean off. "Aha!" Ragnar beamed, "See how he bleeds! Only scum bleed like that!" "I think that only works for witches," Harald corrected him. "Oh." said Ragnar. "So what was his allegiance?" "I don't know. What am I, a mind reader?" "See, this is what I was talking about. We can't just go around executing someone every day, It's absurd!" Ragnar turned to the crowd, "Fear not, my fellow warriors!" he reassured them, "I shall look into this matter and inform you whether or not Danr was a traitor tomorrow morning." "Yay!" cheered the warriors "Now..." Ragnar began, "Let us drink!" It is now night-time. Please don't PM me your night actions now, because you've probably already done that. Unless you haven't - in which case, yes, please do send your night action to me.

Because the site lost 5 days of posts. You didn't notice a tiny bit of downtime?

And on that note, I've replaced the Day 1 topic with a fully inline quoted version so we can see who is replying to whom, which makes the discussion a lot easier to follow.

PAGE 7 The fact that his first defense was shrugging off the accusation and his second defense was more solid could indicate he had some coaching in the iterim. What caused him to go from the goofy defense of making more jokes and blowing off the accusations to taking it seriously and making a more sound defense? Was the Scum team unavailable for help during his first attempt at a defense? Are they hampered by time zones? Did his defense improve because they all woke up and saw what was going on and gave him some advice? The same could be said of either of them. Either one or both of them could have made slip-ups and had to move forward with better advice from teammates. Sorry, what was Bergulf's more solid second defense? I fear I am missing something. He stopped shrugging it off and was engaged as opposed to being flippant. Oh, I see. I'd disagree with you there. Apparently, so would you: Are you saying everything you want to say, Petrus? Bergulf responded to the accusations from me and Sveinn by being flippant and joking it off. When he was asked for more confidence and came back claiming to have been under the influence of ale, he was more engaged, at that time. He gave a second defense that was more engaged compared to his first couple of jokes. Since the voting swayed towards Danr, he has mostly disappeared. Bergulf was flippant, engaged and is now disengaged. Each of my comments came after each of his subsequent phases of behavior. Yes, his behavior seems Scummy. Would Danr have behaved the same way if the vote would've swayed towards Bergulf? I have absolutely no idea how Danr would have behaved, is that pertinent? You agree with Danr's assessment of Bergulf (at that point, I accept that opinions do change) but it was with the same breath that you voted for Danr, despite sharing the same opinion. I'm just making sure I hear every single one of your words clearly, as you were concerned I may have listened too hastily. That sentence you’ve pulled out of context isn’t even in the same paragraph as my vote for Danr, let alone the same “breath”. Danr is right about Bergulf’s behavior. As I ask in the sentence you quoted, why were the two defenses from Bergulf present? The first one being typical, the second one so different from his first. It seems I’ve already explained that recently. Besides, I doubt Danr would use a defense for Bergulf that didn’t have a ring of truth in it. Danr can be right and Scum at the same time. I’m starting to wonder why you’re blatantly pulling my statements out of context. It isn't out of context and anyone can go back and see that that's the case, and I apologise, by same "breath" I meant same post, which it was. It seems I was being too metaphorical. Again, I'm not, anyone can check. You were concerned I hadn't listened to you carefully enough (or had read too quickly), and I'm just trying to make sure I am crystal clear about your views and opinions. As cruel as it may sound, I suppose that lynching wrongly is still more informative than not lynching at all. I admit that I am not convinced of Danr's innocence so there's a chance something good will come out of this lynch. If we're wrong, whether the information gained will make up for the loss of Danr remains to be seen. Our main alternative right now is Bergulf, and the whole case against him is based on a slip-of-the-tongue that may or may not be significant. It's as good evidence as any we're likely to get on a first day, in other words we're still just shooting blindly. As for other targets, I don't have any strong opinions right now. You could be right, pudding. I hope you're right, because right now it looks like Danr is on it's way to the next Valhalla. Yeah, that was quite unbelievable! Still, the said scum only pulled it off through a combination of talent and luck, and I'm sure he wished he had kept his mouth shut instead of defending that townie! It's probably not advisable to pull out from this lynch unless we have a more solid target. So the only thing we can do -- if we're unhappy with the current vote, that is -- is obviously to keep thinking about what has been said today. Maybe something will come up. Hi. What would you like to hear? That my last vote wasn't well thought out? Sure. I can say that. It wasn't. I saw there was already a majority on Danr and with no other live options for spreading the vote and encouraging defence and discussion I moved the vote to Danr without a lot of thought, especially since I was busy at the time. I wasn't going to unvote and stay unvoted for in a previous life I saw a day end at majority vote and those who had not voted punished. Your feelings serve you well and you have the response you need. Make of it what you will. Do Ithink Danr is straight up guilty? Nope. It's day one, I'm still working things out. Would I like another option? Sure. I think that was made clear by my vote for someone else. Am I paying more attention now? Since it's a moon-day, you bet. Any other questions to lob my way? Gods damnit! This is what I've been saying this entire time and the only reason there's a mountain of vikings toppling me over! Get some perspective people! The only reason I'm being voted off is that I said pretty much this before Bergulf made a good counter-argument! It does make sense, because that's exactly what reverse psychology is. You count on us assuming that you would not use the same strategy that that one bear in that one legend did. We assume that you don't, then you go ahead and do the "unexpected". Reverse psychology works all the time in these games... of life. So much, in fact, that there's a name specifically for a certain form of it. Wine in front of me. Circular reasoning and reverse psychology are exactly what the scum are depending on. Now, I recognize that you bring up some good arguments. In turn, you have to realize that if you are not lynched today, we gain nothing. And I don't just mean Bergulf. Like you said, the scum are probably hiding within the bandwagon, maybe one or two who have split off and accused other people. It's these reactions that we will be looking at tomorrow. If you're innocent, it will be unfortunate that we've lost a townie, but at least we will have something to base our next move off of. Everyone will be examined closely, and hopefully we can make some deductions. And if you're scum, well, we're one step closer to our goal and we will possibly have more information as well. It's how the game... of life (death?) is played. We cannot simply sit back and lynch no one. And since no one has brought up a better argument, at least in my eyes, I think you are the best option for today. Oh, ok. I'm glad we've settled that then. I'll just lay down and die then.... Oh, wait. No I won't. The point you made though about me using Sveinn's move during Forest is simply ridiculous! That wasn't a play to be used and then explained as, "why would I repeat his move?" that was a mistake that he regretted immediately and only survived by luck and a little grease work from his team. Where is my team now then I ask? Would they abandon me in a snap because I stood up against a stupid argument? Yes you say? Are you stupid says I? That's not how a team works! Now, I'll move onto important things, like actually figuring out who the bloody scum are! Stake me if you will but I'm bloody well not going down without a fight! Let me turn attention to who I believe, after looking back over today's events may very well be a scum... I vote: Chief Mursi (CorneliusMurdock) He fits my expected actions of the scum pretty well. Starting with his statement of suspicion of Bergulf, his replies have not been the first, and have been rather un-incite-full re-hashings of the arguments made before. They were not first. They were not offensive. they were not last. They were perfectly timed to avoid detection. He said this after a few had already spoken about Bergulf's lack-luster response. He spoke against me in a non-accusatory manner when I spoke out for Bergulf. The things he says are quite generic and sound like he's searching for things in my statement that make me sound bad. He was the fourth to vote for me, and his argument is essentially him twisting my words. And finally his response to my defense is allot of him twisting my my words. His behavior matches what I'd expect a scum's to be. You're damn right Townie's should fight! They should think too! (And I only censured my response because so many people had accused me, and the post without would have been immense. Sorry if that inconvenienced anyone.) Of course you can't help it if others post like comments before you, but it doesn't help if you're just agreeing with the herd as you seem to have been doing this entire day. You established your agreement with others, and went along with the ride. You never made a comment which someone else hadn't already. This is classic Scum behavior. Avoiding attention by speaking "your opinions" which just happen to align with those of those who have already voiced theirs ensures that others will think you are "one of them." To quote the words of a bard, "You're talking allot, but you're not saying anything." I might just have an overly high opinion of my arguing skills, but I am not sure how every statement I made confused you. And it looks like in some cases, you made up confusion just to incriminate me. You didn't attack me when you didn't know I'd be focused on, and when you did, you made up the bogus argument that it looked like I was "back-peddling". Normal behavior includes language, and even if I didn't say the "one word" it was obvious what I meant. When I said something logical but unexpected, you jumped on it like a dragon to a sheep, saying you "can't tell my intentions." I appreciate your consideration, more folks should take up this model. Ughhh, I'm really struggling here. Your cooperation with us is admirable and if you're not scum, we will most certainly have a lot to reflect on. Of course, there's always the hope that the first lynchee is indeed scum... Aye, I'm aware. And that's evidence enough that I'm not scum I think. When a scum's on the frying pan, the scum through other meat in too, and see which tastes best before feasting. *throw I don't see where he said this. The feeling I get from him is he's saying he doesn't know what side Bergulf is on and that we should look more at the voting pattern. As a matter of fact, one statement he's made insinuates he believes they are both Einherjar. I saw you posting and I admire your consideration. I can't agree with you that I'm the best target because I know I'm Town, but I can't deny that there aren't many other viable options. It'd be hypocritical of me to advocate Lynching Bergulf, even though it could save my hide, because I'm really not convinced he's scum. Like many other day ones past, a Townie will see his end today. That doesn't mean I'll give up though. If I can help you any way I can I will. If that really means dying, then so be it. I am not convinced yet though that I do have to die. It's really close to hopeless, but if others see what I think I see in the Chief, then maybe we can catch a scum and I won't have to sacrifice myself to help. If you all disagree then you'll see in the morning you were wrong about me and maybe that'll help you catch the real scum. Well, at this point, I'm not the most objective on the case of Bergulf. I don't know if he's scum, and I don't know if he's town. I just don't think the things he said before I began arguing his case were scummy, but that they were, rather, his normal behavior. Here: It really doesn't make sense, even objectively. Of course it doesn't make sense to me because I know I'm Town, but it shouldn't make sense to anyone else who thinks about it either! I never ever ever ever ever mentioned a language difference! Ever! That was Snotrag! Get your facts straight! Well now that I called you out, you don't have a herd in which to hide, so the trope is bust. You're out of your comfort zone. I'm aware that not everything I say makes sense, but in your case, you're either not reading my words, or you're making stuff up! This refers to the language barrier argument. I quoted it before. Yes, it was Snotrag's argument first. That's why I thought you saying it was yours was backpedaling. You admit that what everything you've said didn't make sense. Stop saying I'm twisting your words. I merely pointed out where you weren't being consistent. PAGE 8 That does not refer to the language barrier argument! It means that 'you interpret the word as a scum-tell and not simply his way of talking.' It has nothing to do with a miss-translation. Sorry I've annoyed you. Note: And that, unfortunately, is where the backup ends.

PAGE 6 I think he was trying to eat too many at once. A valuable lesson for all of you, if you can't handle one, don't even think of trying two at once. I learned that once with Valkyrie twins in Gamla Uppsala. Wait. You do want us to lynch him or not? Dude, stop stealing my special blend. Get your own. Dude. Huh? I'm really confused as to your intentions. You keep saying how you think Bergulf just doesn't strike you as scummy but that he's an easy lynch because he acts so scummy. You're flailing around more than that dude that ate too many almonds. And if you've had trouble chewing on the last few you've eaten, definitely don't put two in your mouth at once. Almond advice, very important. Um, hello? And if you've had trouble chewing on the last few you've eaten, definitely don't put two in your mouth at once. Almond advice, very important. Um, hello? You too. Right, which is why I don't think you would do such a foolish thing. Still, it is possible that you did have to come out to defend him after his lackluster replies to our questions. Maybe you hoped that you were so obvious, it'd almost rule you out (which seems like a risk that could work to save one of your friends on Day one). You'd have to come out to defend your fellow, so instead of doing it subtly, you do the opposite and go the extreme. Maybe you thought the case against Bergulf was so weak that it wouldn't stand, so you tried to help it die and that would be the end of that. Little fuss. A lot of possibilities (and I'm certainly making a lot of hypotheticals), including options where you're einherjar, but any position as an einherjar makes much less sense to me of your behavior than you as a servant of Loki... Also as a matter of fact, the other one of those two was a good guy. Just saying... While this is quite possible, why not get the rest of the Loki followers in on the action? Surely 4, 5, or 6 Loki followers spurtin' subtle messages in defense of their brother Bergulf would be more effective than just a singular Danr standin' up for him. As a warrior who has often strove to see the best in people, I can say that I have stood in Danr's shoes before. Yes, you want to find the evil in your midst, but if somethin' doesn't sit well with you, like the accusation against Bergulf and you think people are going off in the wrong direction, then it's your duty to say somethin' about it. Honestly Danr's behavior has struck me as consistent with past fights I've had with him. However, there has been a lot of conversation around him and with him, statements and conversation that could potentially prove useful in the future. I am as of yet undecided whether the benefit of having so many thoughts and statements confirmed by Danr's allegiance is worth lynching a warrior I do not yet see as guilty. I have been wondering about Danr's behaviour. Assuming Bergulf is scum, I can't well imagine the Servants of Loki asking Danr to step up and help Bergulf wiggle his way out of trouble. I would imagine that the rule in those situations is that scum should keep from defending one of their own -- because if the lynch goes through anyway, they will be the next to be pointed fingers at. So what are the options: Bergulf and Danr are both scum: It is unlikely in my opinion that Danr would put himself at risk in order to save Bergulf -- more likely that scum would have tried to shift the focus to someone else instead. Unless this was an impulsive reaction of Danr's that wasn't discussed with his group first. Then we have Bergulf quickly pointing fingers at Danr in response to the latter's defence, which is a normal reaction regardless of Bergulf's allegiance. Bergulf is Einherjar, Danr is scum: Even less likely. Defending a townie without any sort of proof is really not a good strategy for scum. It's risky and it doesn't prove anything. Did you ever hear anyone saying: "Oh, he was defending a townie so he can't be scum?" Bergulf is scum, Danr is Einherjar: Possible, but the evidence for Bergulf's scumminess is slim. Bergulf and Danr are Einherjar: Also possible. So for Danr to be scum, he must have acted impulsively without advice from his group. Given that I have heard Danr is his previous life was very mindful of his fellows' advice, I doubt that he would have come up with this sort of plan to save Bergulf or make himself look innocent. How about you just go back to making pig noises? I was so focused on Magnus dying that I didn't even hear the news about Wilhelm. Although my vote is solely symbolic at this point, I will Unvote: Wilhalm Bloodaxe (WhiteFang) and Vote: Danr the Dragon-Slayer (Dannylonglegs). I'm sorry for that little tirade addressing the scum, what I mean is, We, the town, shouldn't loose our members over silly things, even if it's day one. They, the scum, find individuals such as Bergulf, who just don't survive lynches, a useful pawn if they need a lynch and don't want one of their own to die: today was a day wherein they'd find such a pawn useful, but now they've got me instead. Lucky them. Thank you, I see someone here is literate. I love you too sweety! I was wondering what you were doing with that poor absent man, but now I'm glad to see you've decided switch your vote. What was the point of targeting William again? Let me spoil the surprise for you: You are, and I will, and it's quite possible you will too. Killing me proves nothing about your affiliation, and one of these days, unless you're scum, the scum'll use you to get a lynch, or to convince the vig to kill a Townie. Honestly at this point I'm shocked so many of you think it's even possible that I'm scum! Everyone has voted for me! There hasn't been an attempt to split the vote, there haven't been several people who are on the fence about me. Really, if I was scum, the scum'd probably be advocating Bergulf right now, and it'd be closer to half and half, because the scum love to set up the next day's lynch even if they can't save me. Also, If I was scum and I'd have made a solid argument against literally anyone who's not scum (preferably someone who wouldn't be a total pain to argue with) I might have had a chance to survive. We don't know who's Town or not, so we need to be careful. Maybe that's not as practical as I thought on day one. Screw logic, let's kill someone! We need death for the death gods! We won't know a thing until we kill anyone! Anyone at all! His hair sucks! Death to the bad-hair! I'm really disappointed in all of you, and myself as well for getting in this bloody mess. I just hope my death'll help the Town actually analyze the arguments that have been made with the knowledge that I'm Town. I don't think it's impossible for such a situation to have happened, but I must admit I have my doubts. This vote is looking more and more wrong to me as it continues, but I'm having trouble finding an alternative, and not accomplishing a lynch is bad, it'd only leave us speculation. I'm less convinced of Danr's scumminess, but I don't want to "let that one fish get away". Do we vote for Bergulf instead and hopefully somebody can find somebody to trust to tell any information they find about Danr? Or do we vote for somebody else who, among this, has raised suspicion or acted the part of the "lowly" scum? We have some time to still turn things around, but not much. As I stated earlier, I've seen it in the past where Scum take the risk of defending each other because it's the first day, and before voting starts. They take the risk because it's early and they want to err on the side of swaying attention away from their teammate. And yes, to metagame, I've seen Danr do both: wait a long time to hear feedback and just move forward with a plan or idea, even if it is a bad one. Perhaps you've read my response too hastily (and yes, I'm aware I'm now responding to pig-boy, ) Nowhere do I explain Bergulf's behavior away. I still think his behavior is concerning, even for him. Particularly the timing between his "brush-off" defense and his "real" defense. Furthermore, as others have pointed out, he has mostly disappeared since voting started which also doesn't inspire confidence. Oink oink oink! I do understand where you're coming from here, Danr. It can be frustrating when a day one lynch goes away on a person can't defend himself well against accusatory fingers. I've been there before, as town, defending those who were under pressure whom I felt weren't scum, and also being the one to lead myself to an early lynching, but before one does such a thing they have to be aware that fingers will be pointed at them. Sometimes it is best to just "waste" the lynch otherwise the question will always be hanging over everyone's mind: Scum or dumb? Scum or dumb? I don't understand this. Are you trying to tip the scum off as to what they should do? Or are you trying to tell the vig to kill Bergulf? Who exactly are you trying to help by saying this, I wonder. I have to agree with you on this point. For scum to "use a strategy" of defending a town in order to clear themselves is, frankly, ridiculous, unless one is a really scum. Danr was blatant in his defending of Bergulf, and I don't think a scum would react like that, but would be more subtle so that people will clear him subconsciously rather than knowingly. In the end, I have to see if I will go by my head or my gut. My head says Danr is scum, my gut tells me the opposite is true. I don't know for certain which to follow. But one thing I would like to ask of you, Danr, you claim that you desired to defend Bergulf, so that today's lynch would not be wasted on him. Well, then do you have anyone else who you would like to bring up as a better candidate for lynching? You have not voted yet. Why is that? How could you have been "wasting a lynch" on Bergulf, if you end up not voting at all. Personally, I greatly detest the way Bergulf is slipping by now and staying low-key and not helping. Therefore, and also since Danr already has a majority against him, I will vote: Bergulf (badboytje88). At least your scumminess is something that both my head and my gut can agree on somewhat. Now I feel the need to stuff this gut of mine. I have to say that my eyebrows are also raised towards Gerrid and Cranebeinn who followed me in my desire to vote for Wilhalm Bloodaxe. They both voted after Ragnar himself told us that Wilhalm was not around. Of course, the more likely explanation is that they didn't hear what Ragnar said, but it's possible that they did and, realizing that he was not around to defend himself, hoped to build up some pressure against him in an attempt to get a lynch against him going without his being able to respond. It's not a great argument, but it's something... And our dear Bergulf has just appeared and disappeared once again after, surely, he must have seen the two votes recently placed against him. Nothing to say. No serious explanation for your voting for Danr and no thanks for his sticking out his neck to save your sorry one? Don't get me wrong, it's not that Danr is a whole lot less suspicious than you. But your sneakiness is laziness is worth noting. Actually, yes. Have you forgotten about the legend of the Black Forest already? We did end up lynching the scum who defended the townie eventually, but it did serve him well for at least a little while. And as said before, maybe Danr is using reverse psychology on us by predicting that we'd assume that he wouldn't try the same strategy. Yet, the points that you, Gofraid, and several others are making sense. I agree with Sveinn; I too am feeling less confident about this lynch. But he also brings up another good point: do we really want this one to be "the one that got away"? And will we be able to switch a vote to Bergulf quickly enough? The last thing we want is a split vote and no lynch at all, which would give us less than an innocent result on Danr. And actually, I feel even less confident about voting for Bergulf. His actions are pretty typical compared to his past fights, but more importantly, don't you think a follower of Loki would try to defend himself? Maybe he is trying to avoid conflict, but obviously, there are people voting for him. Why is he not speaking up? Then who do you think is a Servant of Loki and was pushing for lynching Bergulf or you? I agree, but what do we do then? Don't vote for anybody? Unfortunately, it's true that we usually don't learn a lot if someone turns out to be innocent. Any other target we pick is likely to be innocent just because we - hopefully - vastly outnumber the Servants right now. The speed at which the votes were piling up is worrying, but with such a big crowd left alive it doesn't even mean the Servants are quickly hopping on the bandwagon against Danr. So you're suggesting we save Danr and lynch Bergulf? If the Servants of Loki have the power to frame people at night and Danr is innocent, he would make an ideal target the coming night. The same can be said about Bergulf if he survives today. No, I really did hear you quite clearly the first time, and somewhere on the list after concocting new and unusual drugs, and torching entire cities, one of the thing's I'm good at is listening to what people say. Repeating most of your speech only further illustrates the number of questions in it, so it's good to hear you clarify slightly and say Bergulf's behaviour is 'concerning', although it really did sound to me that you were shrugging off this 'concerning' behaviour. I am now further confused. In your speech you said that "What he's said since then is a more sound defense" and yet just now you say quite the opposite. Help me out here, do you find him scummy or not?