Chase

Fern..doesn't have a role power. It doesn't say Fern "has" to be a townie that's for the mafia (and he could be, we all know he would.) Thinking back about what Tacos said about Chim and Snap, I would like to see Chim have a reason to vote someone else out of the blue two days from now before I can confirm he's Cain, but it is a suspicious vote.

Fine. You guys want a reasoning? Because I'm ANNA, and that Bagel guy is NOEL! Isn't that right, Nostra? I hope they believe us...

I'm just gonna leave at this. Lynching Bagel isn't going to help the cause ONE. BIT. I can't do anything more to convince you, so the choice is most certainly up to you all to trust me or not.

Are you not dead?....Can you even VOTE?

Felix You guys that are voting for Bagel are going to have to trust me on this one. Change your vote.

Rest assured, town. -MY- lack of activity is largely due to this being my first forum game of Mafia, and my own life getting in the way. Due to my inexperience, if someone WANTS to seem like they want the noose, I am forced to think either those campaigning for votes are the Drunks out there, automatically winning the round, or the Mafia who wants you to -think- he's the drunk and is attempting to induce reverse-psychology on the jury. I don't want to break the rule of giving away my role, be it significant or unimportant. So far I've been lurking and picking up on adequate patterns of discussion. This is my first rodeo, and if I am going to compete, I better know what seems to be working and what isn't. Early in the game, the town has to decide if the ones that talk the MOST are the Mafia, or the ones that are being quiet are. The Townies need to co-operate to lynch the right man, so I would assume a forum discussion, that allows votes to be frozen in time for reference, along with all other discussion, would -hardly- be decisive at all, because the "smartest" play is to follow the crowd in the beginning. My appeal here is this. I'm new at this, and I have a life to attend to outside of the forums. That -shouldn't- tell you ANYTHING about whether I am a friend or a foe to you all. Only that the majority of my actions up to this point are to follow the learning curve.

1. In -my- opinion, the type of language used in forums should always be used with a degree of discretion. If you are being malicious with your language (I.e. name-calling and berating something or someone for whatever reason) then in -most- sub forums you probably shouldn't cuss. 2. Marriland, from my understanding, is a Pokemon help-site that has branched off with it's guides and game walkthroughs into the forum and competitive battle help. Because the original intent of the site was to help out other people, you generally will find good people there. As for people with power, they become more suspect to outside criticism. I haven't been on the forum so I am making all of my statements from my experiences with the site, as well as what information you have provided here. Mods are always "seemingly" a tad harder to converse and get along with. It's probably just becuase they are doing their job, but if -not- then that's unfortunate. 3. So it.....sort of sounds like the Reborn server here, Again, most of the mod power meets criticism in live feeds instantaneously. 4. Good to know, I suppose. Final thought. Marriland is one of those sites I've liked using, specifically for finding hidden items and having video guides for certain events. I think most of their community is very nice, and it's a shame that there are a few questionable people in charge up there.

Today in Hilda's advice column. Don't run from Reborn. Ever. She only hurts you because she loves you.

you got a problem. ASK SHEEP. I'm out. (Hi! I'm Hilda...and you can ask me about gameplay or forum usage. I just thought Jericho needed to know his discernment skills were dependable.)

Sheep

Fine. I'm changing my vote to "ROSESONG"

Zephyr

Hmm. did I?

CARL! ....welcome, Tito. I'm sure someone else will give you the whole scoop, but I'm glad you're here.

Rosesong

Hmm...Huk -does- talk a lot....but then again, I'm new to forum based mafia...I'm gonna suspect Huk for now. --oh, and sorry for not voting yesterday, didn't have any idea what was going on--

...oh, BUTTERS..... Welcome.

Ashes

Welcome, GotWala. I'm Hilda. You can ask me about gameplay advice and forum usage. If you have questions, you can ask them to Sheep, Dan, Vinny, or myself. You may also post a thread and leave it up to the community. Shopping Cart skates are a terrible idea.

Sheep.

For now, I would have to agree. I would definitely support such a thing existing and would contribute to it myself.

Hilda's me, but I'm not a mod. You can ask me about gamplay advice and forum usage. It's seems Sheep's got this covered, so I'll just advice you not to take to many of one medication.

Down here in Texas, there's a trend. If you're a Republican candidate, you state so by putting the word "Republican" in a larger font than your own name. If you're a Democrat, you don't put your party affiliation on the sign at all. You'd think that means the Dems don't have any real foothold in the state, but that isn't true in the slightest. Austin and San Antonio are about as "liberal" as it gets. Governor Perry was forced to turn himself into an Austin police station to have his mugshot taken for taking action against a Democrat on the State Court whom he felt was "unfit" to keep her post after she had obtained a DUI. You can find plenty of liberals on college campuses, high schools, skate parks, etc, as long as you live somewhere on the interstate and can get to a large city within an hour. Texas has the potential to be a blue state, and the future most likely leads to such an event happening. I don't have a preference either which way, as I am a moderate, but if we were to be a Democrat base, that would be fine. Here's the main reason that unnerves me, however. Whenever a high school senior reaches their government class, they are taught that the Constitution is a "living" document. The terminology is loose, and while to an extent the constitution may be amended the "interpretation" of the articles in it is largely up to the discretion of the government, and is susceptible to change largely based on whatever stance the collective government has at the time. Education ITSELF is determined by the government to an extent. Sometimes, the students aren't being "taught" as much as they are having their interpretations of the Constitution limited. An example of this, for intended purpose only and in no way a popular opinion either way, is a student who is taught by a teacher with a problem with alcoholism about the Prohibition article. The emphasis that you would pick up from the teacher is that this action was taken off of the document for good reason that may be conveyed in an opinion as opposed to being a fact. If the student were to disagree, and say so through an assignment or examination answer, he or she is at risk at getting that question wrong or unnerving the instructor. Indoctrination here in Texas is rampant. Everyone here is instructed to be a friendly people. (Texas "means" friendly) Everyone here is instructed that being straight is the most "normal" of the sexual orientations out there, and not because of statistical reasons. I developed my political views not because of my immediate environment, but because it's my freedom to decide what I feel should be major issues and what is a waste of time and money. When people make the note that spending has DRAMATICALLY increased under the Obama administration, they aren't kidding (and it's not Obama's fault too often either) Bills are piggybacked with additional law that benefits specific areas of the country or the issue at hand in certain areas. "ObamaCare" (as it's not so affectionally known down here), when it didn't pass, was filled with messy drivel that was put there so that politicians can satisfy their constituents. You don't have to look very far or too hard to know that spending has indeed increased. Fiscal Conservatism would largely improve this, but we don't have the conservatives that look attractive enough policy-wise to elect over their opponents. On the other end, Social Liberalism is more ideal for a country like America, and not too many conservatives actually realize that this is the thing that matters to the majority of voters today. Those of us who aren't straight would like the freedom to marry our partners. Those of us who can't make it still want to believe their great nation can help them out (and some actually do don't want to live -OFF- of that help). Those of us that may have a different skin color and yet, still face a noticeable threat of increased police brutality over their light skinned counterparts would like to see total lack of discrimination. As a moderate voter, I feel that having a moderate candidate. A -real- moderate candidate, would be ideal for the executive branch. I feel that the bench in the Supreme Court could be less polarized in political opinion. I feel that the Senate and House would bicker and waste valuable time a whole less if people were not "one or the other" on the floor. I feel that from our President to the government student, in a country that is supposedly prideful in the "freedom" department, "freedom" could be more absolute than it is now, and that everyone can define themselves as an American, rather than a REPUBLICAN!...or empty space on a campaign sign.

Hello, Emily.