Day 5 Challenge

Byrd Man

El Hombre Pájaro
May 25, 2006
Reaction score
Alright, this challenge is a bit of a whopper, but the first things we should do is decide our two chairs, try to cobble together a jury list, and choose our strategy for the challenge.

Does anyone want to volunteer for the two chair spots?
I'd rather not be one of the two chairs simply due to the fact of time restraints. However, if no one else wants to then I will do it.

As for a Jury list I think we need people who are trustworthy not to just side with friends and are willing to have an open ear. Also, perhaps bring in jury members who are familiar with the Mod we're accusing and the crimes we're accusing them of. That part though, I have no idea what to do about yet.

My first thoughts for jury members are:

Specter313 (I think I have those numbers right)

Anyone else to add to the list?
I'd also add Twylight to the list. She's a friend, but she is an olbie and is up to date on mods, and leans a bit to not liking a few of them. Considering the challenge, not a bad stance to have.
Keep in mind, your chairs need not write your argument in it's entirety, they need only state it. This is a team effort. You are a legal team.
I've spoken to Bizarro Aids Spideyville before. Can we add them to the list if they're up for it?
It has to be blind, can't contact them beforehand. So, I guess just add them and see what happens.
I think SuperFerret, Manic, and E-Man would be a great choices too.

We also need to think about our argument and how to interpret this argument into our favor.

"Crimes against the hype". I may be putting too much thought into it, but I'll just leave the definition of crime here to help.

Crime - 1. An action or omission that constitutes an offense that may be prosecuted by the state and is punishable by law.

Also, we need to narrow down who we would go after. Any suggestions?
Last edited:
Oh, Pickles and Spoons would be nice jurors. And enterthemadness since he pops in.
Last edited:

Just had an idea and Jury selection is important for it. I'd like to note first that I don't actualy agree with any of this but I think we could put up a good argument for it.

I've heard complaints in the past about how the mods, I want to say Matt specifically, have banned a lot of old posters that used to "make the hype fun." I'm thinking we narrow it down a bit and focus on their crime being hurting Hype Survivor by getting rid of so many of the early players who used to "make the game great and exciting."

It would take a lot of work but I'm thinking that we'll have to find out, if possible, who banned what former players like Kibobe, Holly, etc. We'll have to focus on how Survivor used to be HUGE but now it's not as big and how that was directly the result of the bannings.

It may not work, you might not like it, but it was just a thought.

Also, as far as Jury selection goes I recommend two things. Get people who are still active hypsters but used to frequent LSP and play Survivor over there (where the banned members went oftentimes). Secondly, find some old threads that talked about the "good old days" when hype was more "fun" and find Survivor players from then who were upset by the bannings, etc. If we can get a good number of Jury members who agree with us on that regard we could have ourselves a chance of winning.

Thoughts? It was just something I thought of and it might not work. We'd have to have a good argument otherwise it's not going to work.

What the defnese would say is:

Survivor has been kept going by two mods: Matt and Spider-Fan. Our defense for that is that the Mods have hurt Survivor so bad with their bannings that they HAVE to keep it going themselves, even having to beg at times to get people to play.

They'd bring up the bannings being necessary and brought on by the posters themselves. Our defense would be that we aren't condemning the bannings themselves, as they have to do their job, but the falling star of Hype Survivor. They chose to ban these people and Hype has lagged as a result of it to the point where we can only have them once or twice a year to keep interest. The crime of the bannings caused that. Not the crimes that caused the bannings.

Anything else? What are your guys' thoughts?
I don't know how much help I would be with that argument, since I've only been around since 2009, and I only played the previous Survivor game before it and was eliminated mid way. If you guys think you can win this, I'm all for it.
I played Hype survivor once before too, & I barely remember who was on my team and all that. I think DP and possibly Dog Lips may have been on my team, but I'm not too sure. I just remember being kicked out at some point.
It's a very solid idea, and it could work if we had a few more Survivor oldbies.

Another way we could go is charge Bamf with crimes against the hype for essentially being a mod that's pretty much a troll. There's tons of evidence to prove that.
Our jury list:

Colossal Spoons

Anybody want to take off or add anyone?
Is Erzengel a mod or member? And in addition to that question, does he still post frequently? He's a survivor legend and would take the Jurying seriously.
Dang. I didn't realize I was the only oldie Member. I guess Kane would actually be close to that time period but he's sorta been awol. Alright, it's probably a good idea to come up with something else.

I think Byrd's idea on Bamf could be good but I'm not familiar with his postings. I'd be little help.
You can always help find evidence, comb through his old posts and such.
Potentially. Sadly though, I'm so strapped for time this week through likely next weekend that I'm not going to be a whole lot of help. I definately promise to do what I can though.
I looked through some of Bamfs posts. While they do have an edge to them, they're not exactly trolling. Hmm. What does everyone think of maybe going after Matt? Saying his antagonistic behavior has made the hype a less fun place, like what JH said but broaden it out to the hype overall?
Also, I'll throw my hat into the ring and be a chair. Anyone else want to be my second?
The lack of participation is starting to get on my nerves. Come on people.
I've been wondering that myself since last night. Where's the rest of our team? :huh:
Here's a rough draft of our opening statement. Read through it and see what you think and where to add or take away.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I am Byrd Man and I represent the People of the Hype. Members of the jury, Matt is a bad influence on the hype. The evidence and testimony we will present to you in this trial will show that. With posts and testimony from hype members, you will see proof that Matt is a mod of the worst order; a mod who antagonizes, a mod who belittles, a mod who uses his position to polarize, divide and cause discourse. And, most damning of all, you will testimony from the accused himself as he fully and flat out admits that he is bitter and angry, and that he think it's his right to be so.
Can we prove any of this stuff? And will we have testionies and all that fun stuff?
I know a few threads where he's stirred up some crap. Getting posts from that is easy. I do need some testimonies from folks. I'm working on getting some people, but I could use some help.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Latest member
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"