Survivor: The Second Age

[Diamond18]

Originally Posted by Anguirel

Firstly, democracy is ludicrous.

Then why are you playing a game where a democratic vote decides who goes? Because that is what the game of Survivor is. Nowhere in the initial post did Form detail any of this stuff about to-count-or-not-to-count, it was of course only when phantom challenged someone's vote (Elu's, to be precise) that the first set of guidelines was stated, and the moderator hasn't even followed those.

Secondly, I can't see how what has occurred is in breach of it. Formendacil warned he might adopt more stringent criteria for vote inclusion if he felt like it.

Well if you'll read the post, and read my above post, you'll see that his warnings and actions haven't matched up. Besides, doing something if "he feels like it" means that only he ever actually knows exactly how the game is being played. Which does indeed makes him all powerful, and power corrupts.

Besides, as long as you include Tolkien-based rationale, you're alright. Seems simple to me.

And again, I'll say that pure-Tolkien-based rationale belongs in The Books, not a Mirth game based on a TV Game that in its very nature requires something more complicated, especially when this "only Tolkien all the time" attitude has been a new development over the course of the game and has not always been followed. Khamul. Camel.

Alliance, League, whatever, just vote

I shall wait to see what the morrow brings.

[littlemanpoet]

++ Celeborn

He didn't deserve his wife. He was complacent, calling himself lord while letting her rule. Not that letting her rule was the problem, she was better at it anyway. Calling himself lord is what's the sham, if we're going to talk about shams. Celebrimbor was the better Elf.

[Firefoot]

As to Oropher, he lost 2 votes. Yet all 5 of Oropher's votes cited the exact same reason, save perhaps lord-of-dorlomin's initial reason.

This is the part that confused me the most. I completely fail to see where any line can be drawn through the votes that were made for Oropher. So even though I did vote for Oropher, I see no logicality and fairness to the way the votes were counted. The reasoning behind the votes for Oropher were hardly better than those for Elrond, so why were so many more of the Elrond votes discounted? I think if Formen is going to be selective, he needs to be objective...

[The Saucepan Man]

This is becoming more and more like a real Reality Show as time wears on, what with accusations now being made that the game is being rigged by the producer ...

But I rather agree with Diamond18. At least when Ang rigged his game, he gave justifiable, credible and ejoyable reasoning. Here, unlike in Ang's game, we just don't know where we stand. Apparently, it's OK to vote for someone because their name sounds like a desert-based beast of burden, but not because one perceives personality-faults in a contestant, real or imagined.

To be honest, this contest has become somewhat pointless because those voting have no real control over it. So I am inclined to withdraw my labour, and recommend (not order, note, a phantom ) that my fellow Alliance members do the same. That may suit the purposes of some, but it will most certainly remove a lot of the fun and intrigue (and audience figures will plummet).

At the very least, the moderator should give firm criteria on the basis of which the votes will or will not be counted, commit to end the day at approximately the same time, and give a full explanation as to which votes were not counted yesterday and why they were not counted. I would also agree with Diamond's suggestion that either Khamul be reinstated and Celeborn evicted or Oropher be reinstated and Elrond evicted.

[Lalaith]

I may be misremembering, but I've got a feeling that Ang didn't actually discount votes, didn't he just evict people in addition to those voted out by the players?

Anyway, I don't want to put backs up, or make anyone feel like they've been painted into a corner, by issuing threats and ultimatums....
....but at the same time, this game had become a lot of fun on a lot of levels....advocacy, persuasion, diplomacy, deal-making and negotiation, bluff and double-bluff - and now it just isn't anywhere near as much fun, because to in order to play at such a level we need basic gaming parameters, eg having a rough idea about when days are going to end, and just what people have to say and do to get their votes counted.

So if it isn't going to be fun, there doesn't seem much point....

[Anguirel]

And in the midst of the controversy, my Case Against Elendil, work of a morning's diligent ranting, gets no love?

Honestly. This mass-boycotting is uncalled for...

I would suggest that Formendacil lay down his rules and reveal his criteria clearly, since you're all being so stuffy about this; but I don't see any need for throwing out or dragging in candidates. It'll send us scrabbling over old material.

On the other hand, if there must be a choice due to you all being revolting peasants, Elrond not Celeborn must go, Oropher not Khamul return. If we're going to revise one candidate by stringent-mode, we'll have to revise all the other non-stringent votes-completely warping the game as it has enjoyably proceeded so far.

For myself, I continue to regard this game and Formendacil's modding as the most enjoyable Survivor so far.

[Diamond18]

Originally Posted by Anguirel

And in the midst of the controversy, my Case Against Elendil, work of a morning's diligent ranting, gets no love?

Depending on what happens with the Elrond/Oropher matter, I assure you I will look over the whole Elendil argument again (apparently looking backing over old posts ad nauseum is "my thing") -- though seeing as I have a soft spot for Amandil and his broken remains gathering barnacles at the bottom of the ocean that may bias me for Elendil. Or not.

On the other hand, if there must be a choice due to you all being revolting peasants, Elrond not Celeborn must go, Oropher not Khamul return. If we're going to revise one candidate by stringent-mode, we'll have to revise all the other non-stringent votes-completely warping the game as it has enjoyably proceeded so far.

I would tend to agree with that. I'm more in favor of letting camel reasonings stand, even if I wouldn't have voted that way myself.

At any rate, I have long RPG posts that need writing and a Werewolf game that may or may not be starting soon, so I go now to expend my energy elsewhere.

[Formendacil]

Okay, let’s being this… starting from the top:

Originally Posted by Lhunardawen

++CELEBORN

He's just a silver-haired shadow of his gorgeous golden-haired wife. (Telperion and Laurelin, anyone?)

Come on! You know you love him...not!

Lhuna makes a direct reference to Celeborn’s state in life: his marriage to Galadried (and then includes details of their appearance).

This vote is COUNTED.

Originally Posted by Anguirel

Rather than breathing new life into the Amandil campaign, (because I appreciated that defence of him earlier) I wish to examine a new candidate: Elendil himself.

Look at his overwhelming arrogance!

Et Eärello Endorenna utúlien. Sinome maruvan ar Hildinyar tenn' Ambar-metta

"Out of the Great Sea to Middle-earth I am come. In this place will I abide, and my heirs, unto the ending of the world."

Says who? He clearly doesn't know about Elessar XIII getting turned into a frog by Alatar in the Fifth Age...

Seriously, the man's bombast and presumption is far more staggering than Ar-Pharazon's (who was merely fighting the age-old struggle against overweening Valar Nanny Statism).

What this fellow is doing is landing-as a refugee, an immigrant seeking asylum-in lands held by fellow men.

There are two ways of dealing with being an immigrant.

The Parsee way, where you put yourself at the disposal of the local government and form a useful part of the existing community.

And the American Colonists way, where you declare the land yours and cripple the existing cultures.

Elendil, as his words show, clearly employed the second. Because of some notional Eru-given right, he drove out the indiginous "Twilight Men", ancestors of the Rohirrim, Dunlendings et al., forcing them to submit to vassalage under him or Sauron. Do not forget that many of these were Edain, just Edain who'd chosen to resist the Valar-coddling enterprise of Numenor! And all were Men! He should have respected their existing rights.

You damned Gil-Galad for far less (for no reason at all, as far as I can gather) when his tribe was in no especial dominating position.

But these Elendili are now running the show.

These genocidal interlopers must be stopped.

Alliance, League, whatever, just vote

++ELENDIL

Okay, do I even need to explain why Anguirel’s vote is going to be COUNTED? Anguriel ties his argument directly in to what Elendil did or did not do.

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

++ Celeborn

He didn't deserve his wife. He was complacent, calling himself lord while letting her rule. Not that letting her rule was the problem, she was better at it anyway. Calling himself lord is what's the sham, if we're going to talk about shams. Celebrimbor was the better Elf.

LMP directly references Celeborn’s history, and the apparent dominance of Galadriel in their relationship. His final line about Celebrimbor being better would probably have discounted him for me, had it been the only reason given, since “better” is a highly opinionated word to use- although one could make the case that it would still be a Tolkien-rationale. However, LMP has already given a reason I’m counting as valid.

COUNTED.

Originally Posted by Celuien

The Elendili are currently the strongest tribe and in need of thinning to keep balance. I'll go with Ang's argument that Elendil's hubris is beyond excuse.

Besides that, shouldn't he have done a little better job teaching Isildur to avoid things like shiny rings forged by Dark Lords? Would have saved Middle-earth tons of trouble if he did.

++ELENDIL

Had Celuien only posted her first line as her criteria (about the Elendili leading) this vote would have been discounted. Had we stuck with the first paragraph, it would have been dependent on Ang’s reasoning (and referring to other people’s reasoning, while not outright banned, is something I’m iffy about, though I allow it for now).

However, Celuien moves on in her second paragraph to give a firm, fine basis for a vote. She references Elendil’s relationship as to Isildur, as father, and references the events that took place in Tolkien’s world just after his death, laying the blame, right or wrong, at Elendil’s feet.

This vote is, therefore, easily COUNTED.

Originally Posted by lord of dor-lomin

I say we get rid of Treebeard. He didn't do anything of note in the Second Age.

I think the ents might be better off without him. Maybe a younger, more "hasty" ent would take charge, like Quickbeam.

+ + Treebeard

Again, this vote is COUNTED, in this case because of a direct reference to the fact that Quickbeam is hastier than Treebeard- and thus a better leader. Rather sorry logic regarding hastiness/leaders in my opinion, but it’s Tolkien-based, so the vote stands.

Originally Posted by the Phantom

Ooo, Eomer isn't going to like this, but I simply must, since I've been given an easy opportunity to bump him off.

+ + Fangorn (Treebeard)

I hate people who take to long to get to the point, and so I am very much anti-ent to begin with. And then consider, how much good do ents really do? Except for once every few thousand years they don't do anything of value. And they aren't even decent enough chaps to travel with their wives, but instead they just let them wander off to meet their fate alone.

If posted with only that first line, this vote of the Phantom’s would note have been counted. While ticking off other players is a noble and wise pursuit in and of itself, votes to evict candidates must be related to the candidate being voted for.

Hence, it is the second paragraph here that allows this vote to be counted. The Phantom directly refers to the unhastiness of Ents, the fact that they generally remain aloof, and their separation from the Entwives.

I must say, though, that did we not know that Treebeard was guilty of all these general Entish tendencies, I probably wouldn’t count this vote, since it isn’t directly related to Treebeard himself. However, we DO know that Treebeard was personally guilty of all these Entish faults, and so the vote is COUNTED.

Originally Posted by Lalaith

++ELENDIL

Reasons:
a. Too many Elendili
b. He got the Faithful out of Numenor, he'd done his bit. Why put him through the rigours of Survivor as well?
c. Ang's right. WHY don't we know his wife's name? Kept barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen, was she, when the census taker came to call? For shame.

Again, this vote is COUNTED.

Lalaith’s first reason, too many Elendili, on its own, would discount it. What has this to do with Elendil himself? From an in-Middle-Earth perspective, the Elendili were vastly outnumbered anyway.

Her second reason is valid, since it refers to something that Elendil actually did. Although voting people off out of mercy seems a bit counter-intuitive, it’s Tolkien-based, so I’m more than willing to let it stand.

Her third reason would also be valid. Tolkien DIDN’T ever give us Mrs. Elendil’s name. Illogical speculation related thereto is a permissible rationale for voting.

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

And for old time's sake, I shall contribute towards Lalaith's parting gift, adopting wholesale her immaculate reasoning (if that's allowed ).

+ + ELENDIL

As with Part A of Celuien’s vote, whether or not SPM’s vote is counted depends on whether or not Lalaith’s is counted. Since Lalaith’s was counted, and since I have not discounted rationale-by-direct-reference-to-another-‘Downer’s-list proxy- despite misgivings-, this vote is also COUNTED.

Originally Posted by Tuor of Gondolin

+ + Treebeard

If you leave him in some movie maker will make him out to be a doofus easily tricked by a couple of immature hobbitses.

Sorry, Tuor, but yours is the first vote to be disqualified. There is no reference to anything that Treebeard actually does, or fails to do, or has happen to him- not even a connection to etymology of his name.

This vote is NOT COUNTED.

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Ang has convinced me.

++Elendil

Plus, I've never been an Elendil-fan.[/b]

Much like SPM’s this vote would not be counted if I had not already counted Anguirel’s.

COUNTED, albeit a bit grudgingly.

Originally Posted by Elu Ancalime

Lommy........<sigh> (I like Elendil)

++Treebeard

He really didnt do anything, and besides, he could've prevented the attack on the Entwives. If the Ents checked up the Wives more regularly, maybe the Wives would have stayed West of the ANduin, and Sauron might have left them alone.

Again, a direct reference to Treebeard’s lack of action, as well as a reference to the Ent/Entwife issue, laying the blame (rightly or wrongly) at Treebeard’s feet.

COUNTED.

Originally Posted by Eonwe

++Ohtar

If you think the Elendili need some thinning out, choose this guy. Once again, I don't know who he is. That should say it all.

With apologies to Eonwe, this vote is discounted.

The only rationale offered is that the Elendili need thinning (see my comments on Lalaith’s Reason 1 for why this is discounted) and that Eonwe doesn’t know who Ohtar is.

NOT COUNTED.



Okay, now, here we are at the end of all votes... for toDay...

The official records post will be up with these results momentarily.

[Anguirel]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

++ Celeborn

He didn't deserve his wife. He was complacent, calling himself lord while letting her rule.

Has it occurred to you that we don't know the names of most of the wives of "great lords"? Elendil's wife, for example, is a complete mystery.

The fact that we have more material on Galadriel is a sign that Celeborn was indeed a loving and appreciative husband.

Unlike the bigoted murdering culture-crushing hubristic Elendil. His wife was just his chattel...

[Lalaith]

I think it's all got a bit grumpy for me. Sorry.

But here's a parting gift for Anguirel,

++ELENDIL

Reasons:
a. Too many Elendili
b. He got the Faithful out of Numenor, he'd done his bit. Why put him through the rigours of Survivor as well?
c. Ang's right. WHY don't we know his wife's name? Kept barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen, was she, when the census taker came to call? For shame.

[The Saucepan Man]

At the risk of flogging a dead Khamul, let me try to explain further the reasoning that has led me to the position in which I now, reluctantly, find myself. Hopefully, this will enlighten those knuckle-headed types who refuse to accept any position which does not neatly conform to their own world-view (mentioning no names ), although I don’t hold out much hope on that score.

The problem is that, even with Formendacil’s explanation, we are still left with no clear understanding of the basis upon which votes will be counted or discounted. He has not explained which votes from yesterday were discounted and which were not. Even had he done so, the position would be far from clear.

To take a phantom’s ever so unbiased ( ) analysis as an example, I fail to see why votes for Elrond because of perceived character flaws (mormegil’s and Elu Ancalime’s, for example) should be discounted. Those personality flaws are necessarily Tolkien-based because they are based upon the voter’s perception of a character invented by Tolkien, albeit a perception undoubtedly (and, in my view, legitimately) skewed for game/humour purposes. They could, I suppose, have said something like “based on his behaviour in Middle-earth, he comes across to me as a sissy”, but what is the point of that? The first part of that sentence is surely implied by the context. Calling a vote into question simply because no specific reference is made to Tolkien or Middle-earth necessarily requires a value judgment to be made by the mod (as to whether he agrees with the reasons given by the voter). That is unacceptable as it brings the mod’s partiality into question and leads to far too much uncertainty.

If these votes are to be discounted, then why not also discount the votes for Oropher which simply relied on the fact that he is not mentioned by Tolkien much and so, by implication, did not do much? There is hardly any more intelligent reasoning involved. I can think of better reasons to give for evicting Oropher, such as that his rash charge in the War of the Last Alliance imperilled his side’s victory and got a lot of his people unnecessarily slain. So, if the votes of morm and Elu are to be discounted, then all of the votes for Oropher should also be discounted, leading to Elrond’s eviction.

But I would count all of those votes. On that basis, the only votes for Elrond which might arguably be discounted are those which were cast by Diamond and Gil-Galad as they did not relate to the character in question but to game events. That would leave Elrond and Oropher on five votes each and lead to a double eviction. Possibly a fair result.

Or one might take a different approach. A phantom discounts TORE’s vote because it refers back to spawn’s reasoning. On that basis, the votes of Celuien and (particularly) lord of dor-lomin would also need to be discounted, leaving Elrond with four votes and Oropher with three, resulting in Elrond’s eviction.

You see the problem? Even with a vague indication that only Tolkien-based votes will count, the game is still riddled with grey areas. Too much scope for mod partiality and too little certainty to make the game enjoyable. As I have said, the way that this game has been played involves a fair bit of effort and it all seems rather pointless when that effort comes to nothing on the whim of the mod.

Formendacil, you have said that you have not been rigging the votes. I fully accept that you did not act in bad faith. Nevertheless, the fact that you chose to count the votes for Khamul, even though this issue was raised (by me) during that day of voting, but discount certain votes for Elrond does not give me any comfort in this regard. Even though you may not have consciously have rigged it and thought that you were acting fairly, it is clear to me that there was a degree of partiality involved in the manner in which you exercised your discretion.

In past games, the rule, I believe, has been, not that Tolkien-based reasoning was required, but that reasoning of some kind at least was required. In other words, votes for a character without more were not allowed. That works well, because it forces people to give some sort of reasoning (and therefore provokes discussion), but does not require value judgments on the part of the mod. In other words, it avoids the grey areas that my analysis above has highlighted and is easily enforceable in a non-partial way. Applying that rule, all of the votes yesterday, for both Elrond and Oropher, should have counted.

I don’t expect any response to this, nor any concessions. I just wished to make my position crystal clear before politely withdrawing from the game.

It was fun while it lasted.

And for old time's sake, I shall contribute towards Lalaith's parting gift, adopting wholesale her immaculate reasoning (if that's allowed ).

+ + ELENDIL

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Phantom and Lord, you weirdos.

Ents take too long to get to the point, eh? Did it ever occur to you that Ents live far longer than you do? 'Hasty' and 'Takes too long' are both relative descriptions. Considering how sweet and wonderful Treebeard was to Merry and Pippin even though they were on the opposite end of the scale, I think it's downright nasty and despicable to hate the poor Ent based on that.

He could just as easily hate you for being unlike him but he's not like that. He's nice.

As for not doing anything of value, was it not Johnny T. himself who said that it would be better if more of us valued the simple things in life. Just because Treebeard wasn't always going around picking fights in some foreign land you want to kick him out? He just wanted to take it easy!

Plus, with the exception of Sauron, Treebeard could defeat anyone in that list in a fight – including your precious Elrond and Isildur.

Treebeard is awesome. Case closed.

[Tuor of Gondolin]

+ + Treebeard

If you leave him in some movie maker
will make him out to be a doofus easily
tricked by a couple of immature hobbitses.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

The problem is that, even with Formendacil’s explanation, we are still left with no clear understanding of the basis upon which votes will be counted or discounted. He has not explained which votes from yesterday were discounted and which were not. Even had he done so, the position would be far from clear.

I agree. I've admitted that keeping which votes were accepted and which ones weren't (although some can be deduced) was a mistake. It is, however, a mistake that is over and done. All the records I've kept are the ones that you see on this thread.

For that reason therefore, I am not going to go back and list all of yesterday's votes and explain which ones are acceptable, and which ones aren't- because with the eyes of everyone on me, and being in a different frame of mind, I may well count differently and I have no desire to be further accused of bias.

What's done is done.

I shall, however- AND ALL YE TAKE HEED- be counting votes today based on Tolkien-related criteria. I shall analyse each vote and give a verdict. I should have done this before, but I didn't, I apologise, and at least I am doing it now.

To take a phantom’s ever so unbiased ( ) analysis as an example, I fail to see why votes for Elrond because of perceived character flaws (mormegil’s and Elu Ancalime’s, for example) should be discounted. Those personality flaws are necessarily Tolkien-based because they are based upon the voter’s perception of a character invented by Tolkien, albeit a perception undoubtedly (and, in my view, legitimately) skewed for game/humour purposes. They could, I suppose, have said something like “based on his behaviour in Middle-earth, he comes across to me as a sissy”, but what is the point of that? The first part of that sentence is surely implied by the context. Calling a vote into question simply because no specific reference is made to Tolkien or Middle-earth necessarily requires a value judgment to be made by the mod (as to whether he agrees with the reasons given by the voter). That is unacceptable as it brings the mod’s partiality into question and leads to far too much uncertainty.

The Phantom's analysis was not perfect- it was not MY analysis. However, I will say that it came close on some points...

Mod's partiality?

My dear SPM, have you completely forgotten the Silmarillion Survivor? Anguirel was partial to certain parties- very partial to certain parties.

He gave several characters a free bye into the later rounds by not introducing them till then, and (probably faulty) memory seems to recall him summarily killing off some of the characters simply because their "time had come".

If these votes are to be discounted, then why not also discount the votes for Oropher which simply relied on the fact that he is not mentioned by Tolkien much and so, by implication, did not do much? There is hardly any more intelligent reasoning involved. I can think of better reasons to give for evicting Oropher, such as that his rash charge in the War of the Last Alliance imperilled his side’s victory and got a lot of his people unnecessarily slain. So, if the votes of morm and Elu are to be discounted, then all of the votes for Oropher should also be discounted, leading to Elrond’s eviction.

But I would count all of those votes. On that basis, the only votes for Elrond which might arguably be discounted are those which were cast by Diamond and Gil-Galad as they did not relate to the character in question but to game events. That would leave Elrond and Oropher on five votes each and lead to a double eviction. Possibly a fair result.

Or one might take a different approach. A phantom discounts TORE’s vote because it refers back to spawn’s reasoning. On that basis, the votes of Celuien and (particularly) lord of dor-lomin would also need to be discounted, leaving Elrond with four votes and Oropher with three, resulting in Elrond’s eviction.

You see the problem? Even with a vague indication that only Tolkien-based votes will count, the game is still riddled with grey areas. Too much scope for mod partiality and too little certainty to make the game enjoyable. As I have said, the way that this game has been played involves a fair bit of effort and it all seems rather pointless when that effort comes to nothing on the whim of the mod.

Perhaps then, having made thorough analysis of the whole "Tolkien criteria" issue, you will see why I wanted to keep whose votes were in and whose votes were out a secret?

Formendacil, you have said that you have not been rigging the votes. I fully accept that you did not act in bad faith. Nevertheless, the fact that you chose to count the votes for Khamul, even though this issue was raised (by me) during that day of voting, but discount certain votes for Elrond does not give me any comfort in this regard. Even though you may not have consciously have rigged it and thought that you were acting fairly, it is clear to me that there was a degree of partiality involved in the manner in which you exercised your discretion.

I don't deny there was a degree of partiality- I think I have admitted to that a long time ago. I also don't think that's necessarily a bad thing.

As for you raising "the issue" on the day of Khamûl's eviction, I maybe should have cracked down then on non-eligible voting. In my mind, I didn't want to be overly dictatorial: in other words, I didn't want something overblown like this to occur. My original intention in stipulating Tolkien-based rationale for votes was to discourage one-liner posts. Therefore, I didn't want to be putting the Mod's boot down on the necks of the players so eagerly. I wanted, rightly or wrongly, to wait a couple days and see if a trend towards greater post length/reasoning developed.

It didn't...

That I chose yesterDay to put my foot down was, I thought, a somewhat politically astute choice. Neither the Elrond party nor the Oropher party was winning by a landside (one vote's difference, I believe). Nor did I REALLY care to save either character, so I hoped to avoid accusations of bias. I PREFERRED Elrond, but not with the passionate drive of the Phantom.

In past games, the rule, I believe, has been, not that Tolkien-based reasoning was required, but that reasoning of some kind at least was required. In other words, votes for a character without more were not allowed. That works well, because it forces people to give some sort of reasoning (and therefore provokes discussion), but does not require value judgments on the part of the mod. In other words, it avoids the grey areas that my analysis above has highlighted and is easily enforceable in a non-partial way. Applying that rule, all of the votes yesterday, for both Elrond and Oropher, should have counted.

Alas, but perhaps I was doomed to problems in this field... When I say "Tolkien-based criteria", what I MEAN is "rational reasons", and since all of these characters come, in their entirety, from Tolkien, the word Tolkien has been used. It is perhaps not the wisest choice of words on my part, but I don't think that I've been unreasonable in expecting them to interpreted as intended. Show me where Elrond, Oropher, Khamûl, or any other is shown to us by anyone other than Tolkien (or Tolkien Jr.) and I'll gladly rescind the rule.

I don’t expect any response to this, nor any concessions. I just wished to make my position crystal clear before politely withdrawing from the game.

It was fun while it lasted.

I'm truly sorry to hear that. You have been, and I wish you could continue to be, one of the more entertaining players: you get drawn into the alliances, but you avoid getting entrenched too deep in them, as some do. You have always included a rationale for your votes. You are erudite and witty, and you have the value-adding gift to this game of inspiring grudges and revenge among those less fortunate.

If however, you feel that this game is rigged, unfair, and unjust, or that there is too much bad blood here to continue, then yes, you ought to leave. No sense in prolonging this pained situation longer...

And, regarding prolonging this pained situation, is there even a consensus that I should bother trying to keep running this game?

I don't want to step down. As Mod, I thought I had a pretty good game going. I was proud, in a parental way perhaps, of the alliances and petty grudges the players had developed. I thought I had put a pretty good cast of characters together, and that I doing a good, clean job of keeping my Moderator's Nose clean and unbiased.

I have been more than a little offended by the accusations against me, and although I don't bear any one particular 'Downer, or even a particular four or five 'Downers any ill will outside of this thread, I am irked at how large an issue this has grown into.

I remain,

~Michael A. Joosten - Survivor: The Second Age Moderator~

P.S. Analysis of votes coming up in the next post, to be followed by the official Day End. Any votes cast after this post will be counted towards tomorrow's tally.