def

More diary strips in the last few weeks, but I see no need to spam this thread. Rather I post this: Where I live is full into winter, but it hasn't stopped the girls from looking fashionable. I marvel at it. I've been working on a multi-page piece as well, hoping to have it ready this weekend. Fingers crossed!

That PM in full: There's an emoticon or two I couldn't copy. I wrote that early in the day assuming Daisy was town. The only thing that pointed to her being town was that she seemed to fish in thread about the lunch thing. I think scum would avoid first mention of it. So, the two things that Daisy has to support her towniness are that, and the fact that the rest of the town members have established she's half-donkey on her father's side. About the point that Trisha didn't get in that PM, "I have experience, and with that, I know not to put myself that far in front as scum." 'as' signifies the use of the subjunctive form in English, meaning that if I were scum, it's unlikely I would want to be up front. A little up front. But not a lot. 0==============================================0 Trisha, I think I already said, I took it the wrong way when you claimed you had a lie detector in thread. It was a mistake of ignorance on your part, that, should you be reincarnated in the future, you won't make again. I thought my first PM was clear enough that you would have set me straight. But, I apologize for attempting to mobilize the town without knowing 100% what you were claiming. And I apologize for the part I had in putting the spotlight on you this way. I'm sorry.

Daisy had been the top PM in my box before the forum went down, and it was lost in the glitch, putting Trisha at the top. I quickly realized and resent it to Daisy. If she's honest and not bitter, she can verify that.

No, I was assuming Daisy was town at that point, until she decided to try to sabotage the potential testing of lies for her special reasons. Now I'm very unsure.

What's wrong with you? Are you, like, five years old? In private, I told you I could show you an example of it, you replied you wanted to see it, so I showed you. Now you're going to bitch about it? I showed you what you wanted, and you act like more of a dick. If you're town, god help us all :cry:

Trisha offered me her lunch to show she was town (and would only know that if she had actually received one). I simply didn't reply because I didn't have the time to deal with it (among the other craziness here). I didn't decline (I think, I'd need to check).

No Daisy, I'm suspicious that you wouldn't give the lie detector a chance when I gave you good reason to. It's that simple. That was a scummy move. Not particpate, and call it stupid in order to muddy the water. Even after I gave you evidence of it in use. Now don't be pissy and whine about shite, or mega blocks, or whatever.

I did not deny it. You did not read it. I said "conspicuous people". You said "conspicuous townie". Those are very different things. You are wrong. Reread it all and come back. I know you're pissy because I made a case against you, but being bitter and making stuff up isn't the way to deal with it. Chill out, count to 10, and get back to us. A) Are you really a vet? Can you get me ketamine? All vets can. I know the brick wall is a heavy thing to give you, but trust me, everyone else is doing that as they read that point. B) I quoted what I wrote. Nothing about giving you one. You misunderstood. It's unfortunate. Good luck.

I unvoted Billie and voted for Daisy. At the very least, this day should prove rich for the town in the days to come. At least one of the people being voted for should be scum, meaning there are others who could be said to be saving them. And Daisy, chill out. I'm not flinging megablocks everywhere, just at you and your entirely unreasonable behaviour

Already did, you missed it http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=76647&st=75#entry1449697 Way too late for that. No meaning now (I think, unless someone else wants to claim a lie detector). But your complaining is noted. As for your "conspicuous" rant, go back and review what was said. I said we were the most conspicuous people, meaning we were likely townies. Not that we were the most conspicuous townies. You were wrong. And then rude about being wrong. I'll await my apology from you I did, you missed it. http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=76647&st=75#entry1449697

Tammy, if only townies had lunch, then it would be a way to cheat (not that I would.). I've blown that for the town, but it's for the best, as it'll remove the temptation. The knowledge of it shouldn't help scum. As for the case against Tammy, well, I still think Daisy's a better choice, but they could both be scum for all I know. Regardless, a split vote is for the best, as we can get more from it in future days. I'm thinking I should just use my lunch today on someone today, since if scum have a thief or kill me, town will lose it. Does anyone object? I'll make a call after my nap. Sweet dreams. Sorry, in that second paragraph, Tammy should be Trisha.

Trisha is unlikely to help solve this mess, but she seems unlikely to turn up scum. Daisy has a real stink on her. I exposed Trisha as someone who doesn't know what the hell is going on. That's something different. Actually, I wasn't even asking her to trust me, just to trust the lie detector thing. That's not asking much at all. That was all, and she couldn't. It a real clear case of **** ** ****.

She should trust me because I came to her about lunch, not fishing for info, urging her not to to speak to others about it (like she apparently did with you ), giving her lots of into about the Lie Detector role (including an example of it in use)... Jeesuz. Does that sound like she should be trusting me because of "past friendships or allegiances" or because my interaction with her was distinctly unscummy? Listen, please, we'll all get further faster that way. Are you officially defending Daisy? Let us know, please.

No, it's a relatively solid claim. Daisy had more reason to believe in the lie detector than others here. I went out of my way to personally show her an example of it in use in the past. And all the same, she refused to make the claim. It wouldn't have hurt, she could even have made it while she called it ridiculous. I suspect she believed me, and that's why. Maybe she was just being stubborn, but that's for her to consider in the future. I honestly think the case against her is more legitimate than against anyone else here today. The lunch makes little difference. Maybe scum have a thief and we lose one. Or I die tonight. But it's better for me to sacrifice my weak one-shot ability in hopes of taking out a potential scum than to hold on to it. One scum conviction is worth three townies lives, and I am but an innocent townie. Or you could call that a personal case against her

Please don't BS the crowd. It's unbecoming. We may not quote PMs from others, but we apparently can quote our own (I minored in law... rules are rules). This is what I told you: Bolded this time by me to show the points which implied I figured she had one, and nothing there implies I was giving her one. Trisha, as I already told you in private, it was misunderstanding, but if you're going to push it further, you misunderstood that private message, and didn't set me straight when you got it. Tiresome.

That wasn't an innocent claim. It was a joke on your part. "won't claim" stays.

I'd like to turn this lynch around and focus on Daisy (and woe be me if Daisy is town and Trisha scum).... Here is my day one so far... I have a thing called "lunch". It gives me a one off ability, a weak ability, but it's a one-off ability all the same (town won't win with it, so scum, feel free to make me your night one kill ). So when Trisha claimed to have food that gave her a lie-detector, I assumed she knew what the Hell she was talking about, since I have a one-off food based ability of my own. Shortly thereafter, Daisy asked if people were having lunch. I saw this and realised Daisy had something. So I contacted her and asked her not to mention it in thread, nor tell people what the action was, since scum would eventually get clued in. I further didn't dig for details, saying that if God is fair, scum might have "lunch" too. That would be fair. I then explained all I knew about the Lie Detector, and after that, that's when Scumba Daisy started getting real uppity about the possibility of a Lie Detector. So I sent her info about my own personal history using one, and she got more uppity. Around this point, Trisha independently told me she had "lunch" too in her off her rocker way (I suspect she has partaken the ketamine). That was the thing that set a trigger off for me. I suspect a lot of us have "lunch"... and if God is fair, then the scum do too. Of all the people in Heartlake who should trust me, Daisy should, and she's just gotten worse. I approached her asking nothing of her, and urged her to hold her info. Then, I gave her more info on the lie detector than I gave anyone publicly. With that, she thought saying anything to be lie-detected ridiculous. Why? Because she believed me more than the rest of you. Either that or she has no understanding of how this situation should be handled, which is a definite possibility. But I think it's best to put our eggs in Daisy's basket. Daisy for lynch! Unvote: Billie (hey, try showing up!) Vote: Daisy (Scuba) I'm around for another hour or two before my evening nap, so drill me if you need to!

Huh? I linked to it twice. http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Lie_Detector Read it. It's usually a one-shot move. Whether Trisha has one or not, your reason to vote is terrible. Noted. What about that is ridiculous? Nothing at all. And why would using it be a bad idea? Bad idea to catch scum lying? Even if it were wrong, what would the harm be in making a claim of innocence on the slight chance she was telling the truth? Well, it's a Pfff idea if you're scummy. For a townie, it's an easy shot in the dark. A very easy one. That you repeatedly refused to do. Noted. And as for what I said about us being conspicuous townies? I said what? Oh, you just made that up. No, I said we were the most conspicuous people, which made us unlikely scum, since scum don't like to get out front. If you want to put out the hypothesis that scum usually like to be front and center day one, by all means, illuminate us. So, you're claim here is about as lame as, the one I quoted before who has no name or face and might well not even be playing If you want to make claims, for the sake of the town, make them accurate ones. But, yeah, I've seen your stubbornness since the day began, and I'm starting to realise I'm wasting my time being reasonable with you.

Yes, it's almost worth it for a Townie to lie about it. Daisy was certainly unreasonably stubborn about the whole thing. Even when faced with the fact that it is a legitimate role for town. Daisy, Daisy, what are we gonna do about that... http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Lie_Detector I'm fine with my vote on Billie right now. She hasn't done anything to show she's interested in getting anything done.

It's come to my attention from Trisha that I have no idea what she's talking about, and didn't really have a lie detector, or something. I don't know. It seems I mistakenly thought when she had something that served as a lie detector that she had something that worked as a lie detector She has now asked me in private if I gave her a lie detector No, I didn't, and never offered to. Now I want to know what the heck she was talking about. Sorry, I've been baffled by a n00b vet. Why did you say you had something that worked as a lie detector in the first place?

While it's hard to sort through all that went out last night this afternoon, I read this in Trish's words: That says to me a lie-detector claim. And, since she's new to Heartlake, she wouldn't know how to approach it. I find it fully plausible that abilities be given out through items, like with cookies. I've seen it before a dozen times. I remember a case some 25 years ago with a crazy German doctor where everything was based on items. Here's the list. I get tired of the suspicion that the two most conspicuous people in the town are the possible scum, when law enforcement history has told us this is just about never the case. Certainly, if one is going down in flames, other, more experienced scum, aren't going to hitch a ride on their wagon, if you know what I mean. ================================== The Heartlake lie detector test: Oscar (Hinckley) claimed Wild Dragon (Dragonator) Dansmith IV (Dannylonglegs) claimed Patty (DarthPotato) claimed Carl (CallMePie) claimed Walter (WaterbrickDown) Dave (Piratedave84) Fred (def) claimed Cece (Cecilie) claimed Daisy (Scubacarrot) won't claim Trisha (TrumpetKing67) claimed lie detector Ginny (Captain Genaro) Tammy (Tamamono) Penny (VolcanicPanik) Shadell (Shadows) Claimed Billie (badboytje88) won't claim Amy (iamded) Katie (PsyKater) Zara (zakura) Heather (fhomess) claimed Matilda (Zepher) Sara (TheBoyWonder) claimed Jane (JackJonespaw) Jimmy (JimButcher) Mike (Bob) claimed If you guys disagree with the wording of I'm innocent, and want to make it, I'm Town, go ahead. My experience with the Lie Detector was that "I'm innocent" was good enough to separate the town from the rest. But, as I said, it's the first time showing up in Heartlake, so maybe it'll work different here. I'm Town. You guys decide how you want to work things. I've given my perspective based on my experience, and the apparent lack of experience Trish has, and frankly I'm surprised at some of the reactions. You've heard what I had to say, if you have any more questions, I'll be around.

I think what Trisha might be talking about is a thing called a one-shot lie detector. How she got her hands on police equipment, I can't say. If that is what she has, all town should make a statement she can verify. It's easy, just say this: I'm innocent. If that's what she has. Otherwise, she's just talking crazy.

Again, the complaints wasn't related to sales figures. It was connected to buying a beauty salon for little girls. If parents are likely to do so, or if girls feel the desire to buy "girl" Lego, and they buy a beauty salon, the group was arguing that's a bad message. It's poorly stated, since it doesn't give any credit to what the line does that's fine. The group wasn't stating that sales would be fine as part of City (that wasn't what I was saying either, but that was just me saying I'd have no problem with it as part of a general line). Let's look at was written in the actual TOADY award (a dumb title), and my two-cents: How do you turn one of the all-time great toys into a TOADY contender? Give it a makeover! Introducing LEGO Friends, just for girls and so jam-packed with condescending stereotypes it would even make Barbie blush. (The stereo-types seems to be their key point) Bye-bye square, androgynous figures; hello, curves ‘n eyelashes! (Yes, this is across Friends lines) And at the LEGO Friends Butterfly Beauty Shop, your little princess won’t need to worry her pretty little head about icky boy things like building. (Not true, very misleading. I suppose they're getting at the roleplay aspect, but that holds for all of the lines Lego now sells) Instead, she can “get primped and pretty and have some serious salon fun,” “shop for makeup and hair accessories,” or “gossip out on the bench by the scenic fountain.” (quotes from the Lego company themselves, sounds like a very crappy thing to sell to a six year old.) So, it's up to you as to whether Lyichir had a valid point in saying young girls love getting makeovers (and by extension, gossiping and getting primped) and as to whether it's an appropriate toy for a girl making her way in the world. These groups are guilty of a black-white mentality which undercuts their point by making them seem ill-informed, but I'd argue the members here who simply and suffer the same kind of black-white mentality. I think that article is suffers from hyperbole though. Is that the worst toy of the year? Unlikely. Is it a highly visible toy that might lend itself to articles? Yup. All the same, I think there are valid criticisms there. Parents are out there to guide their kids. Companies are out there to make a buck off of them. Parents should think about what they buy.

Oh my God. All I can think about it horses. Equine dreams and everything. Silky manes flowing in the breeze, and horse muscles massaging my inner thighs. Let's get to the bottom of this quickly so things can get back to normal

People bitching about an article they didn't actually read is not something worth commenting on? I wouldn't call it a complaint, really. But if others are complaining, they should at least get it right, and much of the time here, the defenses of the Friends line are just knee-jerk Lego fanboy ones. I realise girls toys are not as important to the world of Lego fanboys as something like Chinese plastic, but it seems like the fanboys have a desire to smush all criticism, whether they are accurate about their argument, or, as often as not, wrong. There are girls who like fashion and beauty. And there is something questionable about foisting it upon a 6 year old. Seriously. I'm a teacher, and I've taught six-year olds. And I've never seen one with an interest in getting their hair and nails done, except possibly to imitate mom (though I've never actually seen that). It seems like they are placing very stereo-typical "girl" activities and making them for very young girls. Not kids in general. Girls. I would have zero problem with the concept of a salon in the city line as part of a natural town. But, it's part of the "girl" line, and I definitely wouldn't buy that for my daughter. (I did buy the Friends airplane for my daughter for Christmas yesterday, since I'm not a one-sided evil villain of Lego... I actually try discerning the value of each set before passing judgement.) I'm sure the organisation was very careful in choosing the salon, because the laboratory wouldn't get that point across. There is something depressing about getting a beauty salon as a present for a six-year old girl, which is likely to happen this Christmas, all around the world. Regardless of the building involved (which that organization didn't comprehend, and is legitimate complaint about the article), getting a very young girl a present that lets them know girls like to make them selves pretty is questionable. Salons are great places for grown-ups, but carry questionable meanings for young girls, who are already bombarded with media and toys telling them to be pretty. Seriously. There are a lot of women who base their self-worth on being pretty. Maybe they chose it, or maybe that was a message they've consistently heard their whole lives. A toy reinforcing that concept may not be good for them. You know what really makes me want to use the emoticon? Lego fanboys who have zero ability to comprehend why there was ever an issue with these toys, and why the fuss was made. Most countries have guidelines about how things are sold to children, or it's recommended they should (ie. http://www.ftc.gov/speeches/beales/040802adstokids.pdf). Six years old is still a formative time, and when you surround a girl with Barbie, Disney princesses, and now many Lego Friends sets, you're giving them very limited options to view themselves in the world. Twelve-years old, they're pretty well defined and locked in place. But not six. If there was only one toy to get your young daughter, the salon isn't it. If you're getting 20 well-rounded toys, this as one of them, well, it's so-so. All the same, for your vitriol and faux-feminism, and general immaturity of thought, I give you two of these :ugh: and one of these